A Horse in Armour Carrying a Man in Armour. Almost Nothing Stopped Them
By the BrainSnail editorial team. How these articles are written and checked, and how to tell us when one is wrong.
Fully armoured cavalry on fully armoured horses dominated warfare from Central Asia to Rome for a thousand years, and the reasons they eventually stopped being worth it are instructive.
What the troops were
Rider and horse were both covered in armour, of scale, mail or lamellar plates, leaving very little exposed. The rider carried a long heavy lance held in both hands and a sword or mace for close work. The horses were large and specially bred, since carrying that weight at speed requires an animal far stronger than an ordinary riding horse. The formation charged in close order at a moderate speed rather than a gallop, relying on mass and on being nearly impervious to what was shot at them.
Why they were effective
The combination solved the central problem of shock cavalry:
- •Armour let them close with formed infantry without losses from missiles
- •Infantry that did not break were ridden down
- •Infantry that broke were pursued and destroyed
- •The armoured horse removed the obvious way to stop a charge
- •Their appearance alone frequently caused a formation to give way
- •Against unarmoured cavalry the contest was one sided
Where they came from
The tradition grew on the steppe and spread outward, which explains its geographical range. Iranian peoples of Central Asia developed it, and the Parthians used it decisively against Roman armies, most famously destroying a Roman force at Carrhae in 53 before the common era by combining these troops with horse archers. The Sasanians made them the core of their armies. Rome adopted the type after losing to it repeatedly, and the Byzantine army fielded them as a standard element for centuries. Similar troops appear in India and in China.
What was worn and what it weighed
The equipment is documented well enough to be specific about, which makes the economics clearer. Rider armour of iron or bronze scales sewn to a backing, or of mail, covered the torso, arms and legs and weighed in the region of twenty to thirty kilograms. Horse armour of similar construction covered the neck, chest and flanks and added considerably more. A helmet with a face covering completed it. Total load including rider, weapons and tack could approach one hundred and fifty kilograms, which is why the horses had to be large and why remounts were essential.
Why they declined
Several pressures worked together rather than one decisive development. The cost was enormous, since a warhorse capable of carrying the weight, a set of armour for it and another for the rider represented the income of a substantial estate, which limited numbers permanently. The horses tired quickly under the load and could not pursue far or campaign in heat. Disciplined infantry with long pole weapons in deep formation proved able to stop a charge, which was demonstrated repeatedly in the later medieval period. And firearms eventually made the armour insufficient while leaving the cost unchanged.
The takeaway
Armouring both rider and horse let heavy cavalry close with formed infantry without being shot apart, and a charge in close order broke most formations that faced it. The type grew on the Central Asian steppe, destroyed a Roman army at Carrhae in 53 before the common era and was adopted by Rome afterwards. Cost, horse endurance, pole weapons and firearms ended it together.