👟 Step into your spontaneous activities with Vessi! Discover comfort and versatility at vessi.com/historiamilitum for an instant 15% off your first order upon checkout!
We have far less sources for the Byzantine period, but a general video like that can be made! We will likely tackle something similar when we move on to late Roman topics.
Excellent and well researched video. Popular misconception is that Roman cavalry was subpar compared to their infantrymen, but you've detailed why this wasn't the case by the Principate era. Every man serving in the Cavalry alae, whether he was native or foreign, was rigorously drilled and held to a very high standard. On the battlefield, these men were truly a force to be reckoned with when used correctly.
Well, the main focus WAS on heavy infantry. Cavalry was often provided by others, e.g. Caesars famous Germanic cavalry. And when you take a look at big battles, you see that the percentage of Infantry was always quite high and often much higher than that of the enemy. Probably the most famous examples are that of Cannae and Carrhae. Cannae: 70k Inf + 6400 cavalry vs 40k Inf + 10k cavalry. The roman forces had less than 10% cavalry, the carthagians had roughly 20%.
@@wedgeantilles8575 Oh, I'm not dissing the Roman infantryman - these were the core strength of Roman armies after all. But during the late republic and Imperial era, their cavalry was also a core component of their military, and in combined arms doctrine these men often played decisive roles in battle.
11:26 Another reason to stay relaxed is that it is much easier to compensate for bumps or the horse's hesitation, plus if the horse notices that you are nervous or tense, it will be more likely to try to get its way because it thinks it might be the boss
On a didfferent note, I know is not strictly military, but did widows of soldiers get a pension? Regarding the viseo it is absolutely interesting and well done video. Had no idea Romans had such professional cavalry corps.
The Roman army forbid soldiers to marry women so that in case they got killed the army wouldn‘t have to provide the „widows“. But many legionarys had a woman wich they marryed after their service
at least if it's an bow arrow, then it could be shot by an archer who also had a lifetime of training. be worse if it's a crossbows' bolt or musket ball....
Nice! Interesting video to watch, hadn't really thought about this topic since almost all focus is on the infantry. Also commenting for algorithm, but thanks for giving more interesting content about ancient Rome
Are you sure? Special parade uniforms and equipment are a certainty for many military branches. For a parade you wanted to your stuff to look perfect and shiny. It seems quite logical to me that Roman cavalry had similiar stuff, no? And that you use blunted weapons - which you can define as "sport gear" - seems kind of logic too. You don't want to have deadly accidents, do you? Same in training, you do not train with "life" equipment but with wooden swords.
@@wedgeantilles8575 The so called parade equipment was found at the site of the teutoborg forest massacre. Special parade equipment is a modern thing,neither the romans or others had a equipment for parade.The equipment was expensive and the roman soldier had deductions from its pay for the gear it was provided,so to have to pay for special gear that was used very rare is a waste. Stop judging the romans or other ancient people or events using yor modern standards and ideas. The trainig gear was not yours,it was from the unit.Also many live weapons could be use for training with quite simple modifications. A roman soldier used a ornate piece of gear for 2 main reasons:it gave prestance to the soldier(street creed) and it was much simple to have your money in the form of gear who was always close to you then in coins that could be stolen or lost.You could sell either the gear or the gold or silver decorations very easy,if you needed coins.
@@sekyusu Great suggestion! That is a very interesting topic that I have been planning to cover in a full video. Im still compiling evidence, but it will be done in the coming months!
Great. Not talked about very often. Just having a weapon out and waving around is dangerous to the unskilled/experienced rider. Lotta ways to get hurt.
The Romans were the Borg of the Ancient and Medieval world. Saw Hoplites = I want this Saw Celtic Helmet and swords = Ditch hoplon and Xyphos, I want that Saw Parthian Heavy Shock Cavalry = Tactical flexibility is important, I need this Saw Persian, Sarmatian/Hunnic infantry Equipment = Ditch Gladius and scutum, I want those
You know I always had the impression that the Roman Empires military was more infantry Focus they generally get more of the attention then the Calvary of the Roman Army...
Well, the main focus WAS on heavy infantry. Cavalry was often provided by others, e.g. Caesars famous Germanic cavalry. And when you take a look at big battles, you see that the percentage of Infantry was always quite high and often much higher than that of the enemy. Probably the most famous examples are that of Cannae and Carrhae. Cannae: 70k Inf + 6400 cavalry vs 40k Inf + 10k cavalry. The roman forces had less than 10% cavalry, the carthagians had roughly 20%.
@@insanemakaioshin Good question! I dont think elephants and ostriches are noteworthy, but dromedaries definitely are. There is evidence of their bones on the Danube and even in Gaul, implying the Romans really favoured them as mounts. I found so much about them that I decided to exclude them from the video to not make it too long.
So when can you talk about the famed "Macedonian Phalanx" that sources say it protects the whole unit from projectiles like arrows which doesn't make sense how thin their sarissas were & how small shield pelta were
I thought the Patricians were cavalry. In most places the nobility were the cavalry/knights. They supplied own 🐴 did Rome supply the horses and let anyone ride?
Back in the republic part of them yes. The others were given a horse by the state (they were called equites equo publico) which they had to return when the campaign finished and take care of. In the empire generals would have had their own horses but 99.9% of the cavalry would have rode horses purchased, trained and distributed by the army
Ancient horses were smaller then modern breeds yes, but so were ancient men. With that taken into account, i wonder how much our preconception of Romans riding ponies in war can be universally justified. I mean, most of the cavalry would probably look that way, especially during the late republican era. But i just can't imagine a poor pony being forced to take a 175cm tall, 75kg rider, with 20+kg armor and on top of that extra barding for the horse itself. They must have reserved some hardier stock for elite and special use cavalry. Iconography from the period is also all over the place, and we can't always estimate how much is artistic liberty and how much actual proportions of horse and rider. Did Rome ever use Nisean horses for its cataphract units?
What is up with roman tunneling technologies?Roman gold & silver mines plus other metals and minerals? Salt?... Child labor, dwarfs, miniature horses and equipment.... Tommy knockers or Roman equivalent to supernatural stuff digging underground?
Which makes you wonder: how in hell did these guys kept getting buttfucked by others' cavalry? I can't remember a single battle where roman cavalry won vs huns, parthians/sassanids, sarmatians, iberian, numidian and so on
The problem is not the training but the horses and culture themselves. Steppe cultures had large swaths of land to graze their horses and were taught to ride from the moment they could walk. And they basically spend all their life on their horses. Parthians and Sassanids cataphracts had access to some of the best horses of the ancient world and also the heavy cavalry used the finest of them. Is like pitting an average horse against a thoroughbred. For the rest of peoples the difference was not so pronounced
Now, from my research, cavalry was one of the Roman army's weak points. The Huns & Parthians showed Romes weakness with cavalry. The Legionaire was Rome's main strength. Yes, Roman cavalry was somewhat good at scouting or skirmish. But more often than not, were out classed by horse backed armies.
👟 Step into your spontaneous activities with Vessi! Discover comfort and versatility at vessi.com/historiamilitum for an instant 15% off your first order upon checkout!
Finally, a new video once more to unite us fellow Romans. Ave !
👏👏👏👏
Brought to you by Historia Militum. True Roman videos, for true Romans.
Rome for the Roman's.
No Easterners need apply.
You aren't Roman, so this makes no sense.
Amazing work as always. Could you cover Rome’s cavalry evolution from the empire till Byzantine Empire?
We have far less sources for the Byzantine period, but a general video like that can be made! We will likely tackle something similar when we move on to late Roman topics.
@@HistoriaMilitum yes pls. Thank you for producing such great content. Always fun and educational.
Yes, please!
Also, how can we find out more about the Germanic and Gallic cavalry of Julius Ceasar's time?
@@HistoriaMilitumI'm very intrigued by Eatern Rome's Dromedarii units some even heavily armoured.
Bro, relax, no need to make demands ffs.
It’s always a good day when you upload a new video
Excellent and well researched video. Popular misconception is that Roman cavalry was subpar compared to their infantrymen, but you've detailed why this wasn't the case by the Principate era. Every man serving in the Cavalry alae, whether he was native or foreign, was rigorously drilled and held to a very high standard. On the battlefield, these men were truly a force to be reckoned with when used correctly.
Yes, in Total War the Roman cavalry is always a bunch of pussies. Always thought that was strange.
Well, the main focus WAS on heavy infantry.
Cavalry was often provided by others, e.g. Caesars famous Germanic cavalry.
And when you take a look at big battles, you see that the percentage of Infantry was always quite high and often much higher than that of the enemy.
Probably the most famous examples are that of Cannae and Carrhae.
Cannae: 70k Inf + 6400 cavalry vs 40k Inf + 10k cavalry.
The roman forces had less than 10% cavalry, the carthagians had roughly 20%.
@@wedgeantilles8575 Oh, I'm not dissing the Roman infantryman - these were the core strength of Roman armies after all. But during the late republic and Imperial era, their cavalry was also a core component of their military, and in combined arms doctrine these men often played decisive roles in battle.
I guess they were probably outnumbered by their calvary-heavy foes in the late Roman Empire, ie the Huns, Visigoths etc.
11:26 Another reason to stay relaxed is that it is much easier to compensate for bumps or the horse's hesitation, plus if the horse notices that you are nervous or tense, it will be more likely to try to get its way because it thinks it might be the boss
I hope a video on cavarly charge is just over the corner!
My toxic trait is thinking I could make it in the Roman Cavalry.
dated but recognizable avatar pic
No. Ur toxic trait is thinking u cannot do it
@@satanwithinternet2753thank you Satan
They wouldn’t shoot a guy with glasses
😂
On a didfferent note, I know is not strictly military, but did widows of soldiers get a pension? Regarding the viseo it is absolutely interesting and well done video. Had no idea Romans had such professional cavalry corps.
The Roman army forbid soldiers to marry women so that in case they got killed the army wouldn‘t have to provide the „widows“. But many legionarys had a woman wich they marryed after their service
@@GiulianoArturi many thanks!
Absolutely great material. Very informative. Thank you very much!
The height requirement is funny considering how badly the Romans would fare against the tiny little Huns on their little ponies.
The problem with that notion is you generalize 4th century roman cavalry with this earlier empire period.
Absolutely fascinating! (Ex Queens Own Hussars)…I couldn’t do that in my Chieftain or Challenger!
Imagine doing all this training just to die five minutes in your first battle to a stray arrow
at least if it's an bow arrow, then it could be shot by an archer who also had a lifetime of training. be worse if it's a crossbows' bolt or musket ball....
Again Great video and and animations
Always amazing videos, these training ones are awesome.
Thanks for another awesome video!⚔🔥🏹
Thanks! Great video!
Wonderful video, i wonder if there was any difference in the Legionary cavalry compared to the auxiliary cavalry.
Nice! Interesting video to watch, hadn't really thought about this topic since almost all focus is on the infantry.
Also commenting for algorithm, but thanks for giving more interesting content about ancient Rome
2:41 😂great sponsor
So interesting thanks
Good video
Great work as always
Great video!
Ok. There's a reason these guys are overpowered in Rome: Total War. They deserve it!
Amazing video as always! Please do post the horse training asap or I will struggle to get my dose of Roman history ! 😁
Wow it is really wonderful video
Thanks for your great effort
It's our pleasure, thank you for the comment!
Thanks !
All that effort and no one thought to invent a stirrup... they did invent rotating dinning room though
That thing with the sport gear for the cavalrymen is a myth.
Are you sure? Special parade uniforms and equipment are a certainty for many military branches.
For a parade you wanted to your stuff to look perfect and shiny.
It seems quite logical to me that Roman cavalry had similiar stuff, no?
And that you use blunted weapons - which you can define as "sport gear" - seems kind of logic too.
You don't want to have deadly accidents, do you?
Same in training, you do not train with "life" equipment but with wooden swords.
@@wedgeantilles8575
The so called parade equipment was found at the site of the teutoborg forest massacre.
Special parade equipment is a modern thing,neither the romans or others had a equipment for parade.The equipment was expensive and the roman soldier had deductions from its pay for the gear it was provided,so to have to pay for special gear that was used very rare is a waste.
Stop judging the romans or other ancient people or events using yor modern standards and ideas.
The trainig gear was not yours,it was from the unit.Also many live weapons could be use for training with quite simple modifications.
A roman soldier used a ornate piece of gear for 2 main reasons:it gave prestance to the soldier(street creed) and it was much simple to have your money in the form of gear who was always close to you then in coins that could be stolen or lost.You could sell either the gear or the gold or silver decorations very easy,if you needed coins.
Top Video
It seem like cavalry man in Roman and warrior culture were respected in the same way as ace of fighter pilot in the sky.
Beautiful❤
Hello! I'd like an update on how Romans romanized conquered territories. It would be fascinating to know hwo they do it.
@@sekyusu Great suggestion! That is a very interesting topic that I have been planning to cover in a full video. Im still compiling evidence, but it will be done in the coming months!
How come you stopped posting sources in your description?
Can you please tell me what mods you use for the background gameplay?
Hi! Which Game and mod are you using for this video? Thanks!!!
Socii equites extra ordinarii
How hard to invent stirrup and saddle?
interesting video
Nice
Great. Not talked about very often. Just having a weapon out and waving around is dangerous to the unskilled/experienced rider. Lotta ways to get hurt.
The Romans were the Borg of the Ancient and Medieval world.
Saw Hoplites = I want this
Saw Celtic Helmet and swords = Ditch hoplon and Xyphos, I want that
Saw Parthian Heavy Shock Cavalry = Tactical flexibility is important, I need this
Saw Persian, Sarmatian/Hunnic infantry Equipment = Ditch Gladius and scutum, I want those
Salutations
You know I always had the impression that the Roman Empires military was more infantry Focus they generally get more of the attention then the Calvary of the Roman Army...
Well, the main focus WAS on heavy infantry.
Cavalry was often provided by others, e.g. Caesars famous Germanic cavalry.
And when you take a look at big battles, you see that the percentage of Infantry was always quite high and often much higher than that of the enemy.
Probably the most famous examples are that of Cannae and Carrhae.
Cannae: 70k Inf + 6400 cavalry vs 40k Inf + 10k cavalry.
The roman forces had less than 10% cavalry, the carthagians had roughly 20%.
What about non-horse cavalry, like the camels of Roman Egypt, Elephants or Ostriches?
@@insanemakaioshin Good question! I dont think elephants and ostriches are noteworthy, but dromedaries definitely are. There is evidence of their bones on the Danube and even in Gaul, implying the Romans really favoured them as mounts. I found so much about them that I decided to exclude them from the video to not make it too long.
@@HistoriaMilitum okay.
Why is Vegetius dressed like a landsknecht?
So when can you talk about the famed "Macedonian Phalanx" that sources say it protects the whole unit from projectiles like arrows which doesn't make sense how thin their sarissas were & how small shield pelta were
I thought the Patricians were cavalry. In most places the nobility were the cavalry/knights. They supplied own 🐴 did Rome supply the horses and let anyone ride?
Back in the republic part of them yes. The others were given a horse by the state (they were called equites equo publico) which they had to return when the campaign finished and take care of.
In the empire generals would have had their own horses but 99.9% of the cavalry would have rode horses purchased, trained and distributed by the army
Ancient horses were smaller then modern breeds yes, but so were ancient men. With that taken into account, i wonder how much our preconception of Romans riding ponies in war can be universally justified. I mean, most of the cavalry would probably look that way, especially during the late republican era. But i just can't imagine a poor pony being forced to take a 175cm tall, 75kg rider, with 20+kg armor and on top of that extra barding for the horse itself. They must have reserved some hardier stock for elite and special use cavalry. Iconography from the period is also all over the place, and we can't always estimate how much is artistic liberty and how much actual proportions of horse and rider. Did Rome ever use Nisean horses for its cataphract units?
Roman cavalry literally only existed to be chased off the field by actual cavalry thus wasting their time.
Medieval horses are trained to kick and bite
What is up with roman tunneling technologies?Roman gold & silver mines plus other metals and minerals? Salt?... Child labor, dwarfs, miniature horses and equipment.... Tommy knockers or Roman equivalent to supernatural stuff digging underground?
Which makes you wonder: how in hell did these guys kept getting buttfucked by others' cavalry? I can't remember a single battle where roman cavalry won vs huns, parthians/sassanids, sarmatians, iberian, numidian and so on
The problem is not the training but the horses and culture themselves. Steppe cultures had large swaths of land to graze their horses and were taught to ride from the moment they could walk. And they basically spend all their life on their horses. Parthians and Sassanids cataphracts had access to some of the best horses of the ancient world and also the heavy cavalry used the finest of them. Is like pitting an average horse against a thoroughbred.
For the rest of peoples the difference was not so pronounced
Romans didnt preferred cavalry right
14:06 there are less exausting ways to say: "edge alignment"
Now, from my research, cavalry was one of the Roman army's weak points. The Huns & Parthians showed Romes weakness with cavalry. The Legionaire was Rome's main strength. Yes, Roman cavalry was somewhat good at scouting or skirmish. But more often than not, were out classed by horse backed armies.
Shame they were always capable than their enemies
peepee
poopoo