Camel cataphracts?

[Robert Vermaat]

Romano-byzantines fighting Vandal Moorish allies had to dismount because they could not controll their horses.

Wot's a Romano-Byzantine? Either it's a Byzantine or a Roman.. But since Byzantines are Romans...

[hoplite14gr]

Romano-byzantines fighting Vandal Moorish allies had to dismount because they could not controll their horses.

Wot's a Romano-Byzantine? Either it's a Byzantine or a Roman.. But since Byzantines are Romans...

To much "Osprey" affects me expressing myself I guess.
I will stick with Byzantine but I think I made a point of what I was trying to say about the effects of a horse-camel fight.

Procopios says that the horsemen had to dismount to attack a laager-type formation that the Moors made using their camels. It was impossible to forse the horses charge against the camels.
Kind regards
Stefanos

[Nicholas Gaukroger]

The catafract camels referred to in Herodian were attacking the Roman infantry so they were hardly being used as a way of disrupting opposing mounted troops. The one reference we have of them (I think it's the only one) has them used in the same way as conventional catafracts.

In fact the possible disruptive effect of camels seems only to have been used as a desperation measure. Kyros allegedly used camels when fighting the Lydians and the Moors used them twice as a form of laager against Romans, although in the latter case they were many tethered camels deep and I suspect the effect was them being a barrier more than them disrupting the Roman cavalry.

It is worth noting that the Arabs switched from Camels to horses as fast as they could when they had a choice even when fighting against the Roman and Sasanid empires whose main troop type was cavalry.

[hoplite14gr]

I wonder if from a zoologist's or a biologist's point of view is a scientific fact that camels upset horses unused to them as Herodotos specified about Kroisos cavalry and the Persian Camels or Procopios stated about Moorish camels and Byzantine cavalry?
Anybody can enlighten us?
Kind regards
Stefanos.

[Nectanebo]

Camels were extensively used by early arab armies in the 7th century AD, but not for combat. Early Arab armies were made up mainly of "mounted infantry", riding to to battles on their camels, then dismounting to fight on foot with shield and spear.

[L. Aufidius Pantera]

Camels and horses, ey?

I know this forum has been inactive for a while, but thought I'd chuck in a pennies worth.

Camel units were again used during the crusades, also for the effect they had on Frankish heavy mounted units - horses unused to camel smell do indeed tend to shy away from them quite spectacularly! (As, indeed, do most humans unused to the smell...)

Unfortunately, no scientific reference available (though I'm sure there are) but practical evidence. We have three horses, and when we lived in Syria had them along, and the absolutely HATED camels. As in, they shyed away, one even ran away. - After a while, however, they got used to them. So I guess the effect would dimish quickly during the course of a campaign in a region where there is more or less constant exposure to these animals...

Will try and find actual proof for this - I know my fiance read up loads of it when we were out there...

Hope all's well,
C.

[hoplite14gr]

Certainly you offer more than a penny here.
You establish the fact that camels can disrupt a cavalry formation.
When Wargaming with WRG-6 rules they stated that non-arabic horsemen are disrupted. You proved there is an element of truth on this.
But are Arabic horses used to them and suffer from no ill-effects?
Which leads to the question if you are Parthian general is it worth to support your Arab vassals against Romans with expensive catafract camelry?
If Arabic horses are ok with camels then in my opinion is ok.
Any thoughts?
Kind regards
Stefanos

[L. Aufidius Pantera]

hmmmm...

as for Arabic horses getting used to Camels, I guess they would be. After all, they'll be growing up with camels all around them. Take a dog and a cat, for example - usually dogs will go after cats, unless, of course, they have gotten used to each other. I guess its the same for all animals. So I reckon that after a few weeks of exposure, even Roman (or whoever's) horses would eventually get used to the smell of camels (which I believe to be the greatest deterrent - at least to me it is!!) and not be scared any more.

As for the upkeep, as far as I am aware, Camels are much more hardy than horses, so in a way Camel cataphracts may actually have been cheaper to maintain than horse-mounted cataphracts... remember also, that horses need shedloads of food and, especially, water. Camels can go without water for days, which is what makes them so attractive as "workhorses" in the region.

Finally, I think the psychological effect on the average Roman soldier alone would probably have been sufficient to maintain such units...

C.

[JP Vieira]

Hello
I am currently researching this topic.
Is there any specific description (or image) of a Parthian Camel (dromedary) cataphract?
Best regards
JP Vieira

[Robert Vermaat]

I have never heard of camel cataphracts. Not Parthian nor otherwise.

[MeinPanzer]

I have never heard of camel cataphracts. Not Parthian nor otherwise.

Herodian IV.14.3 - Nisibis, AD 217:

"Meanwhile Artabanus was upon them with his vast and powerful army
composed of many cavalry and an enormous number of archers and
cataphracts who fought on camels, jabbing with long spears.

15.2-3:

"The barbarians caused heavy casualties with their rain of arrows and
with the long spears of the kataphraktoi on horses and camels, as the
wounded the Romans with downward thrusts. But the Romans had easily
the better of those who came to close-quarters fighting. And when the
size of the cavalry andthe numbers of the camels began to cause them
troublem they pretended to retreat and then threw down caltrops and
other iron devices with sharp spikes sticking out of them. They were
fatal to the cavalry and the camel-riders as they lay hidden in the
sand, not seen by them. The horses and the camels trod on them and fell
onto their knees and were lamed, throwing the riders off their backs.
As long as the eastern barbarians are riding on horses or camels they
fight bravely; if they dismount or are thrown they are easily taken
prisoner because they do not resist in close-quarters fighting. And
further, they are hindered from running away by the loose fodls of their clothes hanging around their legs."

(taken from a post by Duncan Head on the Ancmed message boards.)Some elements may be corrupt, but that is debatable.

[Robert Vermaat]

Hi Ruben,

Nice quote, but it refers only (in my opinion at least) to armoured cavalrymen, not armoured camels. But maybe I misread the original question?

[Graham Sumner]

It is an interesting quote. No mention of the Romans flinging themselves down on one knee hiding behind shields to face the cavalry and how long flowing robes hinder you when you try and run away!

Graham.

[MeinPanzer]

Hi Ruben,

Nice quote, but it refers only (in my opinion at least) to armoured cavalrymen, not armoured camels. But maybe I misread the original question?

Well, the statements "archers and cataphracts who fought on camels" and "the kataphraktoi on horses and camels" seem to indicate to me that these were kataphraktoi (armoured) camels.

In your original question you said you had never heard of a camel cataphract, and yet this passage clearly mentions camel cataphracts using long spears.

[Caballo]

As Graham mentioned earlier, there were Roman camel riders who were used actively- Dura Papyrus 82 mentions two camel riders "sent on missions" (c. AD 233).

In the same papyrus, the roster was " Net number of enlisted men 914, including 9 centurions, 8 duplicarii, 34 camel-riders (including one sesquiplicarius) 223 cavalry (including 5 decurions, 7 duplicarii, 4 sesquiplicarii) XX Palmyrene Cohort of Severus Alexander."

A separate find from Tripolitania in North Africa, c. AD 156, was the register of the First Augustan Praetorian Mounted Cohort of Lusitanians "encamped opposite Apollinopolis Major in the Thebaid" has:-
"Total number of men...505 (includes 6 centurions, 114 cavalry, 19 dromedary riders, 363 infantry)". They had also just recruited a volunteer dromedary rider ("approved by Sempronius Liberalis, prefect of Egypt")

(Fink, Roman Military Records on Papyrus, Cleveland 1971)

The numbers as a proportion of the whole sounds more like a scouting, supplies and messenger role rather than an integral fighting unit?

And theres a challenge for an adventurous re-enactor ...!!

Cheers

Caballo