Cavalry
Soldiers or warriors who fought mounted on horseback are commonly known as
cavalry. The designation was not usually extended to any military force which used other animals, such as camels or mules.
Infantry who moved on horseback but dismounted to fight on foot were in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries known as
dragoons, a class of mounted troops which later evolved into cavalry proper while retaining their historic title. From earliest times cavalry had the advantage of improved mobility, an "instrument which multiplied the fighting value of even the smallest forces, allowing them to outflank and avoid, to surprise and overpower, to retreat and escape according to the requirements of the moment." A man fighting from horseback also had the advantage of height, speed and weight over an opponent on foot.
In some modern armies (especially the
United States Army), the term cavalry is often used for units that fill the traditional horse-borne
light cavalry roles of
scouting,
screening,
skirmishing and
raiding. The shock role, traditionally filled by
heavy cavalry, is generally filled by units with the "
armoured" designation.
Origins
Before the
Iron Age, the role of cavalry on the battlefield was largely performed by light
chariots. The chariot originated with the
Sintashta-Petrovka culture in
Central Asia and spread by nomadic or semi-nomadic
Indo-Iranians
Citation needed. The chariot was quickly adopted by settled peoples both as a military technology and an object of ceremonial status, especially by the
Pharaohs of the
New Kingdom of Egypt as well as
Assyrian and
Babylonian royalty.
The power of mobility given by mounted units was recognized early on, but was offset by the difficulty of raising large forces and by the inability of horses (then mostly small) to carry heavy armor. Cavalry techniques were an innovation of
equestrian nomads of the Central Asian and
Iranian steppe and
pastoralist tribes such as the
Persian Parthians and
Sarmatians. The first cavalry might have consisted of pairs of men, one using a
bow or
javelin while the other guided both of their horses.
Use of chariots in battle was obsolete by the time of the Persian defeat in the hands of
Alexander the Great, but chariots remained in use for ceremonial purposes such as carrying the victorious general in a
Roman triumph and among the Gallic and Germanic tribes.
Ancient Greece and Macedon
Cavalry played a relatively minor role in
Ancient Greece, with conflicts decided by massed armored infantry. However,
Thessaly was widely known for producing competent cavalrymen, and later experiences in wars both with and against the
Persians taught the
Greeks the value of cavalry in skirmishing and pursuit. The
Athenian author and soldier
Xenophon in particular advocated the creation of a small but well-trained cavalry force; to that end, he wrote several manuals on horsemanship and cavalry operations.
The
Macedonian kingdom in the north, on the other hand, developed a strong cavalry force that culminated in the
hetairoi (
Companion cavalry) of
Philip II and Alexander the Great. In addition to these heavy cavalry, the Macedonian combined arms army also employed lighter horsemen called
prodromoi for scouting and screening, as well as the
Macedonian pike phalanx and various kinds of
light infantry. The effectiveness of this combined-arms system was most dramatically demonstrated in Alexander's conquest of
Persia,
Bactria, and northwestern
India.
Roman Republic and Early Empire
The cavalry in the early Roman Republic remained the preserve of the wealthy
landed class known as the
Equites --men who could afford the expense of maintaining a horse in addition to arms and armor heavier than those of the common
legions. As the class grew to be more of a social elite instead of a functional property-based military grouping, the Romans began to employ Italian
socii for filling the ranks of their cavalry. At about the same time the Romans began to recruit foreign auxiliary cavalry from among
Gauls,
Iberians, and
Numidians, the last being highly valued as mounted skirmishers and scouts.
Julius Caesar himself was known for his escort of Germanic cavalry, while the early Emperors maintained an
ala of Batavian cavalry as their bodyguards until the unit was dismissed by
Galba.
For the most part, Roman cavalry during the Republic functioned as an adjunct to the legionary infantry. This does not mean that its utility could be underestimated, though, as its strategic role in scouting, skirmishing, and outpost duties was crucial to the Romans' capability to conduct operations over long distances in hostile or unfamiliar territory. In some occasions it also proved its ability to strike a decisive tactical blow against a weakened or unprepared enemy.
Late Roman Empire and the Migration Period
In the army of the late
Roman Empire, cavalry played an increasingly important role and the
Spatha, the classical sword throughout most of the 1st millennium, originated as a Germanic sword that was adopted as the standard model for the Empire's cavalry forces. The
Eastern Roman Empire itself came to rely increasingly on
Visigothic and
Sarmatian heavy cavalry as the primary shock force of its armies.
The most widespread employment of heavy cavalry at this time was found in the forces of the
Parthians and their
Iranian
Sassanid successors. Both, but especially the latter, were famed for the
cataphract (fully-armored cavalry armed with lances) even though the majority of their forces consisted of lighter
horse archers [
1]. The West first encountered this eastern heavy cavalry during the
Hellenistic period with further intensive contacts during the eight centuries of the
Roman-
Persian wars. At first the Parthians' mobility greatly confounded the Romans, whose excellent close-order infantry still proved unable to match the speed of the Parthian strategic deployments. However, later the Romans would successfully adapt such heavy armor and tactics by creating their own units of cataphracts and
clibanarii [
2].
The decline of the Roman infrastructure made it more difficult to field large infantry forces, and during the
fourth and
fifth centuries cavalry began to take a more dominant role on the European battlefield, also in part made possible by the appearance of new, larger breeds of horses. The replacement of the Roman
saddle by variants on the Scythian model, with pommel and cantle, was also a significant factor as was the adoption of
stirrups and the concomitant increase in stability of the rider's seat. Armored Cataphracts began to be deployed in eastern
Europe and the
near East, following the precedents established by
Persian forces, as the main striking force of the armies in contrast to the earlier roles of cavalry as scouts, raiders, and outflankers.
Asia
In eastern Europe, Russia, and out onto the
steppes cavalry remained important much longer and dominated the scene of warfare until the early
1600s and even beyond, as the strategic mobility of cavalry was crucial for controlling the vast expanses of territory.
Huns,
Mongols and
Cossacks are examples of the horse-mounted peripheral peoples that managed to gain substantial successes in military conflicts with settled agrarian and urban societies, due to their strategic and tactical mobility. As European states began to assume the character of bureaucratic nation-states supporting professional standing armies, recruitment of these mounted warriors was undertaken in order to fill the strategic roles of scouts and raiders. The best known instance of the continued employment of mounted tribal auxiliaries were the Cossack cavalry regiments of Tsarist Russia.
Further east, the
military history of China was a scene of intense military exchange between the powerful infantry forces of the settled empires and the mounted "barbarians" of the north. First introduced by
King Wuling of Zhao.On many occasions the Chinese studied nomadic cavalry tactics and applied the lessons in creating their own potent cavalry forces, while in others they simply recruited the tribal horsemen wholesale into their armies; and in yet other cases nomadic empires have proved eager to enlist Chinese infantry, as in the case of the
Mongol Empire and its sinicized part, the
Yuan Dynasty.
In the Indian subcontinent, cavalry played a major role from the
Gupta Dynasty period onwards. Native Indian cavalry forces proved decisive in the defeat of nomadic invaders such as the
White Huns, and the
Mughal occupation met serious opposition from the excellent
Marathan cavalry. India has also the oldest evidence for the introduction of toe-
stirrups.
Tibet,
Korea, and
Japan, as well as the
Turkic tribesmen of Central Asia, have also been known to develop strong cavalry forces in the past.
European Middle Ages
Although Roman cavalry had no stirrups, their horned saddle allowed the combination of a firm seat with substantial flexibility. But the introduction of the wraparound
saddle during the Middle Ages provided greater efficiency in mounted shock combat and the invention of
stirrup enabled a broader array of attacks to be delivered from the back of a horse. As a greater weight of man and armor could be supported in the saddle, the probability of being dismounted in combat was significantly reduced. In particular, a charge with the lance couched under the armpit would no longer turn into
pole vaulting; this eventually led to an enormous increase in the impact of the charge. Last but not least, the introduction of
spurs allowed better control of the mount during the "knightly charge" in full gallop. In western Europe there emerged what is considered the "ultimate" heavy cavalry, the
knight. The knights and other similarly equipped mounted men-at-arms charged in close formation, exchanging flexibility for a massive, irresistible first charge.
The mounted men-at-arms quickly became an important force in Western European tactics, although it is worth noting that Medieval military doctrine actually employed them as part of a combined-arms force along with various kinds of foot troops. Still, Medieval chroniclers tended to pay undue attention to the knights at the expense of the rank and file, and this has led early students of military history to suppose that this heavy cavalry was the only force that mattered on Medieval European battlefields--a view with hardly any grounding in reality. Massed English longbowmen triumphed over French cavalry at
Crécy,
Poitiers and
Agincourt, while at
Gisors (1188),
Bannockburn (1314), and
Laupen (1339), foot-soldiers proved their invulnerability to cavalry charges as long as they held their formation. However, the rise of infantry as the principal arm had to wait for the
Swiss to develop their
pike squares into an offensive arm instead of a defensive one; this new aggressive doctrine brought the Swiss to victory over a range of adversaries, and their enemies found that the only reliable way to defeat them was by the use of an even more comprehensive
combined arms doctrine as evidenced in the
Battle of Marignano. The introduction of missile weapons that were simpler to use, such as the
crossbow and the
hand gonnes, also helped remove the focus somewhat from cavalry elites to masses of cheap infantry equipped with easy-to-learn weapons.
This gradual rise in the dominance of infantry led to the adoption of dismounted tactics. From the earliest times knights and mounted men-at-arms had frequently dismounted to handle enemies they could not overcome on horseback, such as in the
Battle of the Dyle (891), but after 1350s this trend became more marked with the dismounted men-at-arms fighting as super-heavy infantry with two-handed
swords and
poleaxes.
Renaissance Europe
Ironically, the rise of infantry in the early 16th century coincided with the "golden age" of heavy cavalry; a French or Spanish army at the beginning of the century could have up to 50 percent of its numbers filled with various kinds of light and heavy cavalry, whereas in medieval and 17th-century armies the proportion of cavalry seldom rose beyond twenty-five percent. Knighthood largely lost its military functions and became more closely tied to social and economic prestige in an increasingly capitalistic Western society. With the rise of drilled and trained infantry, the mounted men-at-arms now adopted the same role as in the Hellenistic age - that of delivering a decisive blow once the battle was already engaged by either charging the enemy in the flank or attacking their commander-in-chief.
From the 1550s onwards, the use of gunpowder weapons solidified infantry's dominance of the battlefield and began to allow true mass armies to develop. This is closely related to the increase in the size of armies throughout the early modern period; heavily armored cavalrymen were expensive to raise and maintain and it took years to replace a skilled horseman or a trained horse, while
arquebusiers and later
musketeers could be trained and kept in the field at a much lower expense in addition to being much easier to replace. The Spanish
tercio and later formations relegated cavalry to a supporting role. The
pistol was specifically developed to try and bring cavalry back into the conflict, together with manoeuvres such as the
caracole. These innovations were not particularly successful, however, and soon the charge was revived as the primary mode of employment for European cavalry, although by this time it was delivered in much deeper formations and with greater discipline than before. The
demi-lancers and the heavily armored sword-and-pistol
reiters were among the types of cavalry that experienced their heydays in the 16th and 17th centuries. These centuries also witnessed the high-water mark of the
Polish husaria, a force of heavy cavalry that achieved great success with their lances against
Swedes,
Russians, and
Turks alike.
Eighteenth Century Europe and Napoleonic Warfare
In any case, cavalry still had a role to play. First and foremost they remained the primary choice for confronting enemy cavalry. Attacking an unbroken infantry force head-on was usually unsuccessful, but the extended linear formations were vulnerable to flank or rear attacks. Cavalry was important at
Blenheim (
1704),
Rossbach (
1757), and
Friedland (
1807), remaining a significant factor throughout the
Napoleonic Wars. Massed infantry was deadly to cavalry but also offered an excellent target for
artillery. Once the bombardment had disordered the infantry formation, cavalry were able to
rout and pursue the scattered footmen. It was not until individual firearms gained accuracy and improved rates of fire that cavalry was diminished in this role as well. Even then light cavalry remained an indispensable tool for scouting, screening the army's movements, and harassing the enemy's supply lines until military aircraft supplanted them in this role in the early stages of World War I.
By the
Nineteenth Century, European cavalry fell into four main categories:
*
Cuirassiers, heavy cavalry
*
Dragoons, originally mounted infantry but later regarded as medium cavalry
*
Hussars, light cavalry
*
Lancers or
Uhlans, light cavalry armed with
lances
There were cavalry variations for individual nations as well:
France had the
chasseurs à cheval;
Germany had the
Jäger zu Pferd;
Bavaria had the
Chevaulegers; and
Russia had Cossacks. Britain had no
cuirassiers (other than the
Household Cavalry), but had Dragoon Guards regiments which were classed as heavy cavalry. In the
United States Army, the cavalry were almost always dragoons. The
Imperial Japanese Army had its cavalry dressed as
hussars, but fought as dragoons.
19th century
In the early
American Civil War cavalry regiments were recruited to full capacity very quickly in many states, but the infantry played a much larger role in many battles due to its larger numbers and much easier recruitment. However cavalry saw a role as part of screening forces and in foraging and scouting. The later phases of the war saw the
Federal army developing a truly effective cavalry force fighting as
scouts, raiders, and
mounted infantry.
19th-century Imperial Expansion
Cavalry found new success in Imperial operations (
irregular warfare), where modern weapons were lacking and the slow moving infantry-artillery train or fixed fortifications were often ineffective against native insurgents (unless the natives offered a fight on an equal footing, as at
Tel-el-Kebir,
Omdurman, etc). Cavalry "
flying columns" proved effective, or at least cost-effective, in many campaigns—although an astute native commander (like
Samori in western Africa,
Shamil in the
Caucasus, or any of the better
Boer commanders) could turn the tables and use the greater mobility of their cavalry to offset their relative lack of firepower compared to European forces.
The
British Indian Army maintained about forty regiments of cavalry, officered by British and manned by Indian
sowars (cavalrymen). The legendary exploits of this branch lives on in literature and early films. Among the more famous regiments in the lineages of modern Indian and Pakistani Armies are:
* Governor General's Bodyguard (now
President's Bodyguard)
* Skinner's Horse (now Indian
1st Horse (Skinner's))
* Gardner's Lancers (now Indian
2nd Lancers (Gardner's))
* Hodson's Horse (now Indian
3rd Horse (Hodson's)) of the Bengal Lancers fame
* Probyn's Horse (now Pakistani)
* Royal Deccan Horse (now Indian
The Deccan Horse)
* Poona Horse (now Indian
The Poona Horse)
* Queen's Own Guides Cavalry (now partitioned between Pakistan and India).
The French Army maintained substantial cavalry forces in Algeria and Morocco from 1830 until the Second World War. Much of the Mediterranean coastal terrain was suitable for mounted action and there was a long established culture of horsemanship amongst the Arab and Berber inhabitants. The French forces included
Spahis,
Chasseurs d' Afrique and mounted
Goums.
Cavalry's demise
 |
Italian cavalry officers practice their horsemanship in 1904 outside Rome. |
At the beginning of the
20th century all armies still maintained substantial cavalry forces although there was contention over whether their role should revert to that of mounted infantry (the historic dragoon function). Following their experience of the South African War of 1899 - 1902 (where mounted Boer citizen commandos fighting on foot from cover proved superior to regular cavalry) the British Army withdrew lances for all but ceremonial purposes and placed a new emphasis on training for dismounted action. In 1908 the lancer regiments resumed this impressive but obsolete weapon. Between 1881 and 1910 the Imperial Russian Army converted all its line hussar, lancer and cuirassier regiments to dragoons with an emphasis on mounted infantry training. In 1910 they reverted to their historic roles, designations and uniforms.
In August 1914 all combatant armies still retained substantial numbers of cavalry and the mobile nature of the opening battles on both Eastern and Western Fronts provided a number of instances of traditional cavalry actions, though on a smaller and more scattered scale than those of previous wars. The Imperial German Cavalry, while as colourful and traditional as any in peacetime appearance, had adopted a practice of falling back on infantry support when any substantial opposition was encountered. These cautious tactics aroused derision amongst their more conservative French and Russian opponents but proved appropriate to the new nature of warfare. Once the front lines stabilised, a combination of barbed wire, machine guns and rapid fire rifles proved deadly to horse mounted troops. For the remainder of the War on the Western Front cavalry had virtually no role to play. The British and French armies dismounted many of their cavalry regiments and used them in infantry and other roles (the Life Guards for example as a machine gun corps). Some cavalry were retained as mounted troops behind the lines in anticipation of a breakthrough of the trenches that never came. The German Army dismounted nearly all their cavalry in the West.
In the wider spaces of the Eastern Front a more fluid form of warfare continued and there was some use for mounted troops. Even here though the value of cavalry was over-rated and the maintenance of large mounted formations at the front by the Russian Army put a major strain on the railway system, to little strategic advantage.
In the Middle East mounted forces (British, Indian, Turkish, Australian, Arab and New Zealand) retained an important role, though of the mounted infantry variety.
Post World War I
In retrospect it was clear that by 1918 the advent of modern
vehicles with effective
mobility and
armor such as
tanks and
armored cars had spelt the end of horse troops as the key mobile element of an army. This change was made even more necessary by the development of the
machine gun and other weapons which could easily destroy cavalry formations. Military aircraft had taken over the light cavalry roles of scouting, screening, and harassment at roughly the same time. As a result horses became relegated to
logistical roles, with few exceptions (see
tachanka), and cavalry traditions and insignia were often inherited by the emerging armored formations and air forces.
A combination of military conservatism in almost all armies and post-war financial constraints prevented the lessons of 1914-18 being acted on immediately. There was a general reduction in the number of cavalry regiments in the British, French, Italian and other Western armies but it was still argued with conviction (for example in the 1922 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannia) that mounted troops had a major role to play in future warfare. The 1920s saw an interim period during which cavalry remained as a proud and conspicuous element of all major armies, though much less so than prior to 1914.
The last major cavalry battle was the
Battle of Komarów in
1920. Colonial warfare in Morocco, Syria, the Middle East and the North West Frontier of India provided some opportunities for mounted action against enemies lacking advanced weaponry.
Interestingly the post-war German Army (Reichsheer) was permitted a large proportion of cavalry (18 regiments or 16.4% of total manpower) under the conditions of the
Treaty of Versailles. The US Cavalry abandoned its sabres in 1934 and commenced the conversion of its horsed regiments to mechanised cavalry, starting with the First Regiment of Cavalry in January 1933.
In the
British Army, all cavalry regiments were mechanised between 1929 and 1941, redefining their role from horse to armoured vehicles to form the
Royal Armoured Corps together with the
Royal Tank Regiment.
World War II
Cavalry charges in modern warfare were still seen in the earlier stages of
Second World War, when
Polish and Cossack cavalry regiments operated against invading German forces. A popular myth is that Polish cavalry armed with lances charged German tanks during the September 1939 campaign. This arose from misreporting of a single clash on 1 September near Krojanty, when two squadrons of the Polish 18th Lancers armed with sabres scattered German infantry before being caught in the open by German armoured cars
[Historically, cavalry was divided into light and heavy cavalry. The difference was mainly how much armor was worn by the soldiers, and thus how powerful their mounts had to be in order to sustain the burden.]
Early light cavalry (like the auxiliaries of the Roman army) were typically used to scout and skirmish and to cut down retreating infantry. Heavy cavalry like the Byzantine Cataphract were used as shock troops — they would charge the main body of the enemy and in many cases, their actions decided the outcome of the battle.
During the Gunpowder Age, armored cavalry began to approach obsolescence. However, many units retained cuirasses and helmets for their protective value against sword and bayonet strikes and the morale boost these provide to the wearers. By this time the main difference between light and heavy cavalry was their training; the former was regarded as a tool for harassment and reconnaissance, while the latter was considered best for close-order charges.
Since the development of armored warfare the distinction between light and heavy armor has persisted basically along the same lines. Armored cars and light tanks have adopted the reconnaissance role while medium and heavy tanks are regarded as the decisive shock troops.From the beginning of civilization to the 20th century, ownership of heavy cavalry horses has been a mark of wealth amongst settled peoples. A cavalry horse involves considerable expense in breeding, training, feeding, and equipment, and has very little productive use except as a mode of transport.
For this reason, and because of their often decisive military role, the cavalry has typically been associated with high social status. This was most clearly seen in the feudal system, where a lord was expected to enter combat armored and on horseback and bring with him an entourage of peasants on foot. If landlords and peasants came into conflict, the peasants would be ill-equipped to defeat armored knights.
In later national armies service as an officer in the cavalry was generally a badge of high social status. For instance prior to 1914 most officers of British cavalry regiments came from a socially privileged background and the considerable expenses associated with their role generally required private means, even after it became possible for officers of the line infantry regiments to live on their pay. Options open to poorer cavalry officers in the various European armies included service with less fashionable (though often highly professional) frontier or colonial units. These included the British Indian cavalry, the Russian Cossacks or the French Chasseurs d' Afrique.*Bayreuth Dragoons
*Blues and Royals
*Cataphract
*Cossacks
*Cuirassier
*Dragoons
*Hakkapeliitta (Finnish cavalry of Thirty Years' War fame)
*Governor General's Horse Guards (Canada)
*Hussars
*Kalmyks
*Lancers
*Life Guards
*Light horse (Australia)
*Mamluks
*Polish cavalry
*Savari (Italian North African)
*Savoia Cavalry
*Sipahi (Ottoman)
*Spahi (French North African)
*Uhlans
*United States Cavalry*The term "coalhole cavalry" was sometimes used as slang for "coalminers" in parts of northern England, because they wore clogs which walking over granite setts made a noise like horses' hoofs.* War horse
* War elephant
* Military tactics
* cavalry tactics
* Tent pegging
* Ski warfare
* See List of British Army regiments by year, for cavalry units: 1881, 1962, 1994
* Cavalry in the American Civil War
* Order of the spur
* Charge of the Light Brigade* Cavalry tactics from Francis J. Lippitt's, A Treatise on the Tactical Use of the Three Arms - Infantry, Artillery and Cavalry (1865)
* Cavalry in Mass (U.S. report on Russian cavalry organization and operations in World War II)
* Italian Savoia Cavalry during World War 2
* Society of the Military Horse
* Gesellschaft der Freunde der Kavallerie (German)
