4 ms·
Still, chariots did probably retain some advantage over contemporary cavalry, which would have been useful against undiciplined infantry formations. Here is a
by trashtester 4y ago
Still, chariots did probably retain some advantage over contemporary cavalry, which would have been useful against undiciplined infantry formations.
Here is a quote from Ceasar from his invasion of Britain : "Thus they display in battle the speed of horse, [together with] the firmness of infantry; ...."
(Taken from the wiki artikle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot#:~:text=A%20chariot%20is%20a%20type,%2C%20Russia%2C%20dated%20to%20c https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot#:~:text=A%20chariot%20....)
"the firmness of infantry" part meant that the chariots would have an advantage over contemporary infantry in a shock role, to break up enemy formations, even from the front, similar to how cataphracts and medieval knights would do later (and even modern armor, when used as armored spearheads).
But I suppose the Romans were disciplined enough to remain cohesion even when attacked by chariots, meaning that chariots could not be the force multiplier against them that they may have been against other celtic tribes.
- oblio 4y agoThe Romans lead by said Caesar besieged the Gauls while being besieged themselves, and... won. That infantry was tough as nails. They laid siege to a Gaul settlement, by building a wall around their settlement. During the siege a larger Gaulish relief force surrounded them, so they just built an exterior wall to protect themselves against the exterior force, and waited for the inner settlement to starve and sortie. They were outnumbered but they managed to beat both the defenders in the interior settlement AND the surrounding force. We're talking about the same legions that would create a mini-camp like you'd see in Game of Thrones with the Lannisters just to camp for the night (ditches, wooden ramparts, rows of tents, night guards, the works) and a literal mini-town for longer stays, those mini-towns/mini-forts being called castrum and becoming many modern day cities. Large wooden walls, actual buildings inside the walls, their castrums were probably better looking and organized than many actual barbarian towns at the time. I don't know what drove them to all of that, but imagine how impressive everything about that was to the average peasant in the 2nd century BCE or the 3rd century CE, to pick some random time intervals.
- trashtester 4y agoI know. That was the battle of Alesia in Gaul, though (52BC), not in Britain. In Britain, Ceaser did not do quite as well. He was kicked out twice (in 55BC and 54BC). It wasn't until about 100 years later that Claudius' legions returned to Britain.
- trashtester 4y agoBtw, the Roman skills (and discipline) when it came to building marching camps is truely imporessive. I believe they picked up the idea from Pyrrhus around 279 BC. https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2015/07/16/roman-marching-camps-an-essential-element-in-romes-empire-building/ https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2015/07/16/roman-marching-...
- CRConrad 4y ago> those mini-towns/mini-forts being called castrum and becoming many modern day cities. While ethymologically becoming "castle", I think.