Parthian and Sassanid Armies

[General Pilates]

I don't really trust those pictures at all. Osprey seems to be the most reliable source, I would assume.

 

[Vinduu]

I could barely imagine Parthian and Persian wear muscle cuirass and pteryges and you're right the illustrator thought this is pteryges but in fact it was a surcoat. But the worst part was the muscle cuirass with skirt, it looks like they adopted Roman fashion but i think it's a mistake made by the artist because the rock relief was too blur for him to illustrate or the artist do it on purpose.

 

[Flying Pig]

Given the difficulties experienced by European troops in the Holy Land during the Crusades, who found heavy armour downright dangerous in the desert heat, I'd be interested to know how those men responded to fighting battles dressed like that. Modern body armour is quite heavy and hot enough for that part of the world, and I've never had to actually fight in the stuff over there - just walking around an FOB is harder work than it really should be.

 

[Phrossack]

Given the difficulties experienced by European troops in the Holy Land during the Crusades, who found heavy armour downright dangerous in the desert heat, I'd be interested to know how those men responded to fighting battles dressed like that. Modern body armour is quite heavy and hot enough for that part of the world, and I've never had to actually fight in the stuff over there - just walking around an FOB is harder work than it really should be.

Heavy armor was used in the Middle East for millenia, starting with the Assyrians. They're used to the heat, and training in armor helps as well. A re-enactor from Australia, Dan Howard, has commented that even when wearing full armor all day in the heat of an Australian summer, it was tolerable. The Crusaders apparently were fine with armor in the Holy Land; in the 12th and 13th centuries, their armor was often actually heavier and more complete than it was in the First Crusade.

 

[Ajidica]

Heavy armour wasn't necesarily a problem. Chroniclers during the First Crusade and later wrote that at a distance it was hard to tell the difference between Fatimid cavalry and European knights because of the amount of armour the Fatimids wore. Although Middle Eastern armour, in most cases tended toward the lighter side, it wasn't universal. The Byzantines used heavy cavalry in the Middle East for centuries and they didn't have a large problem with it as long as the troops were properly supported and conditioned to the heat. Sticking some Europeans in the Middle East in full armour is going to be harder on them then on people who have lived there for along time.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Yes, if Heavy Armor in and of itself was a problem in hot weather there would be large swathes of Europe, mainly Greece, Italy, France and Spain that armor would be used only seasonally at best.

 

[Phrossack]

What I wonder is why cataphracts, who were very expensive to equip, gradually became more widespread across the world over time despite the fact that they seemed to usually lose. Were there a lot of battles we know little about in which they were decisive (other than Carrhae)?

 

[Dachs]

Going off of what I actually remember, cataphracts basically wiped out Antony's Parthian expeditionary force and nearly destroyed Rome's eastern empire in the late 40s BC before being narrowly halted by Ventidius Bassus at Kyrrhestike. They also probably played a huge role in Mithridates I's run of victory against the Baktrians, although there's little direct textual information about that.

Also, and this is an underrated aspect, they look frigging awesome.

 

[Phrossack]

Going off of what I actually remember, cataphracts basically wiped out Antony's Parthian expeditionary force and nearly destroyed Rome's eastern empire in the late 40s BC before being narrowly halted by Ventidius Bassus at Kyrrhestike. They also probably played a huge role in Mithridates I's run of victory against the Baktrians, although there's little direct textual information about that.

Also, and this is an underrated aspect, they look frigging awesome.

Thanks for the info. I do thoroughly enjoy imagining uppity Romans being massacred by super-heavy cavalry. And indeed, cataphracts are arguably the most awesome things ever.

 

[Dachs]

Yup. Although I gotta say, Ventidius Bassus is probably one of the most awesome figures of the late Republican era - more or less single-handedly stopping a Parthian invasion of the Levant and Anatolia after the Parthians and Labienus had already occupied the region and wiped out the replacement army and governor sent to replace the Carrhae losses. He's also one of the most shadowy, and chiefly appears in Ploutarchos of all sources.

 

[Vinduu]

Cataphracts are magnificent but they are extremely vulnerable in close combat because they lack stirrup to balance rider in close combat, Infantry could unhorsed them easily and they are easy prey for infantry due the weight of the armor. Historian like Plutarch and Heliodorus describe how cataphract fell prey to infantry hands.

 

[Dachs]

Oh, sure, but if you're dealing with prolonged combat as a cataphract you're doing something wrong. The main emphasis should have always been on the shock charge, like standard lancer tactics; repeated charges at intervals are much much congenial to the horses and men and preserve the cataphracts' tactical advantages.

 

[Flying Pig]

Also, and this is an underrated aspect, they look frigging awesome.

Worth a note. Seeing a block of men from miles off, impossibly heavy armour glinting in the sun, knowing that they're the men who terrify the Roman Empire and thinking "how the hell do I hurt that?"... They must have enjoyed a huge psychological advantage over their enemies, not unlike in armies of the Napoleonic era where a distinctive quick-march tune signalled which regiment was approaching, and heaven help you if you heard 'British Grenadiers' or 'Auld Lang Syne' floating over the battlefield.

 

[Dachs]

Worth a note. Seeing a block of men from miles off, impossibly heavy armour glinting in the sun, knowing that they're the men who terrify the Roman Empire and thinking "how the hell do I hurt that?"...

Well, the Romans quickly formed their own units of cataphract cavalry. But yeah, I agree.

 

[General Pilates]

To be fair to the Romans Cataphracts were generally only useful against disorganized infantry, and had been defeated by the Romans at Tigranocerta earlier. However, what placed the Parthian Cataphracts apart are the Horse archers which nibbled away at the Roman lines and assisted in the breaking of them.

 

[Dachs]

True. If the Romans had sought to generalize the cataphract experience at Tigranakert, though, they ought to have done better than just say "lol cataphracts suk". Lucullus dealt with the cataphracts by entangling them in a prolonged melee (precisely what made them most vulnerable) then outflanking them with infantry. The cavalry panicked and broke apart the Hai army in the retreat.

 

[General Pilates]

Indeed. The failure of Cannae was obviously due to several factors, including the spies which led Crassus on a goose hunt around Mesopotamia and the loss of the cavalry, including Crassus' loss of stability following the news of his death. Still, Surena used the Cataphracts to great effect. It's a shame Orodes had him killed.

 

[Vinduu]

Yes cataphract are useless when they encounter disciplined infantry with an organized formation. But for a cataphract, auxiliary support was crucial because cataphract wasn't able to act alone and they'll need auxiliary like horse archer to weaken the enemy before cataphract could charge home and dispatch the enemy.

Since cataphract was actually armored lancer and the main role was to repeat the cavalry charge until the enemy rout but for the Parthians and Sassanids there are no stirrup and for cataphracts charging against the enemy could be very dangerous because the rider was mounted on an unstable platform. Due to lack of stirrup the Parthian developed the kontos or contus by the Romans, a lance that require two hands to handle instead of one hand in order to charge home against the enemy.

A second evolution of cataphract leads to clibanarii be it neck guard wearer by the Persians or field oven bearer by the Romans. Clibanarii's main aim is to charge home while able to fight in close quarter for a longer time. 4th century Romans began to deploy clibanarii in the Eastern province as a response to Sassanian clibanarii after Emperor Aurelian retake Levant and Egypt from Palmyrene Empire.

Parthian cataphract rely horse archer to provide missile support, but for the Sassanids, infantry are the auxiliary instead of horse archer and the tactics are different. Trained infantry protecting archers with shields and the archers shower the enemy with arrows until the enemy was weaken and the cataphract or clibanarii could charge against the enemy.

 

[Dachs]

Indeed. The failure of Cannae was obviously due to several factors, including the spies which led Crassus on a goose hunt around Mesopotamia and the loss of the cavalry, including Crassus' loss of stability following the news of his death. Still, Surena used the Cataphracts to great effect. It's a shame Orodes had him killed.

Carrhae, I think.

The reason that the Suren was killed was of course because he won the battle.

 

[Vinduu]

Well, the Romans quickly formed their own units of cataphract cavalry. But yeah, I agree.

Romans formed their cataphract unit or Equites Cataphractarii during the reign of Emperor Hadrian but they have no armored horse for the cavalrymen and they are not Parthian origin.