on which the Romans depended for their conquests was mainly composed of infantry—they were not an equestrian nation. But, by degrees, they began to perceive the advantages of cavalry, and during the period when Rome was mistress of the world, and even before, many of the Roman battles were specially planned with a view to the operations of that arm. We can trace on and on, through the history of the Empire, a growing regard for, and dependence on it. Then it played a most important, and in most cases a decisive, part in their battles, as the number of horses and horsemen began to be increased. ‘A storm of horse’ was the language of Antonius, for the brilliant charge of cavalry against an enemy.[1]
But their country, and particularly their capital, was in general more humid than Greece, and their horses more lax in fibre, consequently softer-hoofed. Their legions, scattered in many regions of the world, were brought into contact with nations of horsemen, living and fighting on the backs of small, agile, hard-footed steeds, inured to incessant fatigue.
Though mounted on stronger animals, the Roman cavalry could make but little impression against that of Persia and Arabia. The faculty of moving quickly, and coming down in a flying cloud of skirmishers, as well as rapid retreating and rallying, always assured the superiority of the Numidian and Parthian horse when contending against the heavy infantry and cavalry masses of the Romans.
Dureau de la Malle offers the following reasonable remarks with regard to this subject: ‘The durability of the
- ↑ Tacitus, lib. iii. cap. 53.
