[gothic-l] Roman Cavalry Weakness

[Bertil Haggman]

These figures are of course only relating to
380 AD. It would be more interesting to have
figure per year for the hundred years to 476 AD.

Well, we all have our opinions on these things
and Adrianople is of course only one example.

Moving now to another battle to illustrate Roman
inability to create strong cavalry and losing out
in the RMA of that age. I am referring to the
Battle of Argentoratum 357 AD, although I think
this battle actually is a little early to show
the lack of ability of the West Romans to organize
their cavalry forces. That they failed is of course
proven correct by the collapse in 476 AD.

The strength of the Roman cavalry at Argentoratum
600 can be estimated at clibanarii 600, horse archers
and light cavalry 900 while the opposing forces had
4,000 cavalry. This fits well with the ratio of
Adrianople. The Romans had only half the strength.
The Romans happened to win this one, as they sometimes
did.

Gothically

Bertil Haggman




> Philippe Contamine gives estimates of the proportions of
> cavalry and infantry in both the Limitanei and the Comitatenses
> of the Eastern and Western Imperial Armies circa 380 AD.
> The total cavalry comes in at 186,500 (30%) and total infantry
> is 411,500 (68%).
>
> Simon MacDowell's very recent book on Adrianople devotes
> some space to the probable composition of Valens army
> and lists the units which are most likely to have been present.
> Of these there are 13 which were almost certainly involved in
> the the battle, of which 8 were cavalry units.  There are a further
> 26 units which are likely to have been involved of which 10
> were cavalry units.
>
> Where are you getting these figures?  Macdowell agrees with
> Burns and most other modern analysts of this battle in that
> Valens probably fielded a force of 20-25,000 troops and
> Fritigern's army was either a similar size or slightly smaller.
> The Gothic allies are estimated to have made up the 4-7000
> man cavalry arm of the Tervingian force (which was substantially
> infantry) and the Roman cavalry force was likely to have been
> somewhat larger.



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Access Your PC from Anywhere
It's Easy. It's Fun. - Free Download.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/BxtVhB/7XkDAA/_ZuFAA/wWMplB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

You are a member of the Gothic-L list.  To unsubscribe, send a blank email to <gothic-l-unsubscribe at egroups.com>.

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/