Romans vs. Normans--Help!

[LCorneliusScaeva]

Let's get back on topic gents and help out Mr. Amt yeah? 8)

Well, I think Arrian's description of his deployment against the Alans would work well against the Normans. Let's hope the Romans defending Senlac Hill where up on their history.

[Matthew Amt]

Well, I think Arrian's description of his deployment against the Alans would work well against the Normans. Let's hope the Romans defending Senlac Hill where up on their history.

Unfortunately, I believe the scenario involved Romans from the Late Republic/Early Principate. Before Arrian was born! Best just stick to the drill, I guess.

"Pointy hats and pointy shields?? What the heck kind of Gauls are these, Lucius?"

[Slamming his pilum through a horse's neck] "The kind that bleed, Gaius, the kind the bleed!"

Matthew

[Antonius Lupus]

Well, I think Arrian's description of his deployment against the Alans would work well against the Normans. Let's hope the Romans defending Senlac Hill where up on their history.

Unfortunately, I believe the scenario involved Romans from the Late Republic/Early Principate. Before Arrian was born! Best just stick to the drill, I guess.Matthew

I guess we can be flexible on that one. I just mentioned that time because it was Rome's heyday as a military power, no other reason.

What about horse sizes?. I think I recall from Colleen McCullough "Masters of Rome" series that Romans were not very good cavalrymen because the local Italian breed was very small. (I may have read/heard it somewhere else, I am not sure).

About the size of the warhorses used by the Normans in the XIth c., I have read contradictory opinions. For some they were massive destriers, for others little more than ponies.

IMO it would have been relatively easy for the Norman knights to rout an equal force of German auxiliary cavalrymen like those Caesar used in his invasion of Gaul. Of course the Romans had better horseback units during their history.

[Steakslim]

Well according to De Re the Normans had seventeen to eighteen hand high horses.

According to Goldsworthy roman cavalry (In the republic) were good... charging, Pretty much useless at anything else

And from the various reliefs and mosiacs Iv'e seen the romans had acsess to large breeds. People around the mediterranean have had acsess to large horses for millenia. Besides I'm sure the romans would have figured out that a larger horse does more damage than a pony

The cavlary would be evenly matched, well the normans had stirrups, in terms of equipment they would be evenly matched

[caiusbeerquitius]

And from the various reliefs and mosiacs Iv'e seen the romans had acsess to large breeds. People around the mediterranean have had acsess to large horses for millenia.

That´s your judgement, however osteology shows a quite different picture there. Consult for a summary:
M. Junkelmann, Die Reiter Roms 1-3, Mainz, 1990-1992.

[Steakslim]

Don't just assume, I never said they didn't have small breeds besides I'm more inclined to trust the data from that time not someone who wasn't there BTW I can't read german also where did this person find said bones?

[caiusbeerquitius]

Don't just assume, I never said they didn't have small breeds

I don´t. Why do you think I would?

I'm more inclined to trust the data from that time not someone who wasn't there

Well, the bones were there... So there´s no reason not to believe how big or small they are when excavated.

BTW I can't read german

So? Then either learn it, or try someone to translate it, or live without the information... :roll:

also where did this person find said bones?

It´s the result of an osteological survey for the whole of the western Roman Empire.

[Steakslim]

I said there were large breeds all over the mediterranean

[fasta]

I said there were large breeds all over the mediterranean

What were they?

[caiusbeerquitius]

I said there were large breeds all over the mediterranean

Yes, and that would include Italy, southern Gaul, the Balkans, and Iberia. But in those areas the bones of large breeds are absent, so your statement seems to be wrong.
Indeed, fasta´s question is right: which breeds would that have been? How large exactly? Where and how are they archaeologically testified
( besides mosaics paintings etc... the Romans were not really good in displaying things to scale... )?

[Magnus]

I for one would love to see you quote some sources Thomas...that would be those things called books. Or give us at least a credible website.

[Steakslim]

What part of all over the med didn't you understand?

And if the romans wern't good at making stuff to scale that would also mean that the horses could easily be be twenty hands

As for sources look at some asiatic statuary sometime or at assyrian reliefs or comitatus

[fasta]

What part of all over the med didn't you understand?

And if the romans wern't good at making stuff to scale that would also mean that the horses could easily be be twenty hands

As for sources look at some asiatic statuary sometime or at assyrian reliefs or comitatus

Are you answering my question for the names of the breed types? :?

If so I was looking for a clue to your source evidence for "non-european" breed stock i.e. North African or Middle Eastern horse types. Please note I haven't made a statement either way on the subject just asked a question.

It helps in locating these types when making an argument.

When mentioning "comitatus" are you taking about the group I'm a member of (which we wouldn't make statements without some sources)or the other group of the same name or the field army of the later period of the Empire.

I've just come into this section of the topic so I'd love to round up the statements so far.Hence the question.

[caiusbeerquitius]

What part of all over the med didn't you understand?

I understood it perfectly. But you don´t seem to understand´that those areas I quoted above are a part of the mediaterranean, in which finds confirming your hypothesis are absent. This then makes your generalizing statement a false statement, or, at least, quite questionable.

And if the romans wern't good at making stuff to scale that would also mean that the horses could easily be be twenty hands

Yes, that´s right. Since that is so, it is not sensible to use these kinds of sources as proof for the size of horses.

As for sources look at some asiatic statuary sometime or at assyrian reliefs or comitatus

What? You claim something. If you want to be taken for serious, quote your sources, and exactly. Which statue are you talking about? Where was it published and when? Anything we can check for validity. If you fail to be able to back up what you say you may find yourself in a position where most people here regard your postings as hilarious. And nothing else.

So, which horse breeds are you talking about? Names?

[Steakslim]

According to Comitatus the horses should be around 14-15 hands, as for names I don't know all I see is the animal there is no name written on the
statuary. BTW whats the source for the romans didn't scale very well?

As for all over the med I meant just about every ancient nation all over the med