07-26-2010, 02:41 AM
I wasn't saying that Cavalry wasn't useful I was saying they didn't need as much as England was limited in size. A smaller well maintained force of hundreds would be more effective in costs and tactics more than a larger contingent especially in post Roman Britain.
A thought came to mind about mass-transportation of horses and men during Caesar's Invasion. Is there any evidence of Rome using a flat bottomed barge for transporting Cavalry across the channel? I know it is a simple thought but if used for a single crossing I don't think they would make works of art. Although they would be more susceptible to bad weather conditions (as evident). To me it would make sense to ferry them across in that manner... weather permitting.
A thought came to mind about mass-transportation of horses and men during Caesar's Invasion. Is there any evidence of Rome using a flat bottomed barge for transporting Cavalry across the channel? I know it is a simple thought but if used for a single crossing I don't think they would make works of art. Although they would be more susceptible to bad weather conditions (as evident). To me it would make sense to ferry them across in that manner... weather permitting.
Craig Bellofatto
Going to college for Massage Therapy. So reading alot of Latin Terminology
It is like a finger pointing to the moon. DON\'T concentrate on the finger or you miss all the heavenly glory before you!-Bruce Lee
Train easy; the fight is hard. Train hard; the fight is easy.- Thai Proverb
Going to college for Massage Therapy. So reading alot of Latin Terminology
It is like a finger pointing to the moon. DON\'T concentrate on the finger or you miss all the heavenly glory before you!-Bruce Lee
Train easy; the fight is hard. Train hard; the fight is easy.- Thai Proverb
