02-28-2013, 05:36 PM
I agree Michael, it is very unlikely that the fully armoured horsemen were in the habit of traveling to the battle field in full panoply, they will probably have carried a sword and a bow, but not armour or lance. The nomad tribes used pack-horses, the Roman army carts and mules to carry equipment. And just like in the early Byzantine period, a unit of principate Roman cavalry seems also to have been supported by grooms and pages.
However, Roman and oriental cavalry are mentioned in later sources as carrying out reconnaissance missions, raiding and preparing ambushes in full equipment, covering their armour with a kind of surcoat, so at least these later suits of armour and lances cannot have been as heavy as is usually assumed for the Roman period.
I have read the article, but the problem is, just as Tacitus does not actually describe how the nomads would have wiped out the Romans, only assumes, Strabo does not really tell us how the nomads did not do the same with the phalanx they encountered. Except for Plutarch and Ammianus, I usually find our sources on Romans against heavilly armoured cavalry rather disappointing.
Regards,
Eduard
However, Roman and oriental cavalry are mentioned in later sources as carrying out reconnaissance missions, raiding and preparing ambushes in full equipment, covering their armour with a kind of surcoat, so at least these later suits of armour and lances cannot have been as heavy as is usually assumed for the Roman period.
I have read the article, but the problem is, just as Tacitus does not actually describe how the nomads would have wiped out the Romans, only assumes, Strabo does not really tell us how the nomads did not do the same with the phalanx they encountered. Except for Plutarch and Ammianus, I usually find our sources on Romans against heavilly armoured cavalry rather disappointing.
Regards,
Eduard