This is basically a survey of all actions by Greek or Macedonian cavalry from the Persian Wars to the battle of Pydna of which the surviving sources provide any detail to speak of. From this Gaebel then tries to synthesize the tactical evolution of cavalry during the period. Somewhat unusually for a book of this kind, there’s very little on recruitment and organization.

While the analysis didn’t convince me at all points, the collected evidence should be useful to anyone interested in the subject.

I was involved in an online discussion that dealt with the evolution of horse cavalry, and since in that thread I made some pronouncements about various things, I thought it might be a good idea to see if I actually knew what I was talking about; hence Cavalry Operations in the Ancient Greek World. It turned out to be fascinating.


Author Robert Gaebel (who is a horse person himself, and includes his horse, Dynamik, in the acknowledgements) actually starts well before what would be considered “Greek” times, going all the way back to the Egyptians and Hittites. It seems like the Egyptians did use chariots as mobile archery platforms; the Hittites partially so (Hittite three-man chariots were heavier and carried a spearman, but Gaebel dismisses the idea that they might have been used for shock charges). The ancient Mycenaean world seems to be singularly unsuited for chariots; however, there’s both physical and representation evidence for them. Mycenaean chariots had the wheels forward, under the middle of the car; this would have made them much less maneuverable than Egyptian chariots, which had the wheels all the way at the back. Gaebel theorizes that they were used exactly as described in the Iliad; you rode them to the battle but not into it.


The very first depictions of horse (rather than chariot) archers show them working in pairs; one holds both sets of reins and the other shoots a bow, adapting chariot tactics to horseback. By classical Greek times, most of the city-states had cavalry of one sort or another, but it wasn’t used very effectively; at battles, hoplites fought other hoplites and cavalry fought other cavalry, with no use of “combined arms” tactics.


(Incidentally, the Spartans had the best infantry and the poorest cavalry; Spartan cavalry troopers didn’t own their own horses but instead were issued horses when they went on campaign. Thus the horse and rider never really got a chance to get used to each other). Although some Greek cities were known to have horse-archers, most Greek cavalry was armed with a sword and javelins. There was even a tactic similar to the late Renaissance caracole; cavalry would ride up in front of an infantry formation, throw their javelins, then go back to their own lines for more.


Everything changed when Alexander the Great came along. Gaebel attributes many of Alexander’s victories to innovative cavalry tactics, in particular “interior envelopment”; the phalanx would punch a hole in an enemy line, and waiting cavalry would pour through the gap. Gaebel concedes that cavalry couldn’t be used a shock arm, but notes from his own experience that it’s not that hard for a good rider to use a sword or javelin or light lance from a stirrup-less horse. One presumes, then, the Alexander’s cavalry, once behind an enemy force, would pick off stragglers and prevent a formation from regrouping – pining it for the slow but deadly phalanx.


One aspect of Alexander’s cavalry remains unclear; there were specific cavalry units called sarissaphorai – “sarissa bearers”. A 20-foot long sarissa is about the most useless cavalry weapons imaginable, yet not only is there the name, there are painted vases showing horsemen with sarissas. Gaebel’s at a loss to explain this. Perhaps they were like dragoons? Riding to a hot spot, jumping off their mounts, and forming a phalanx?


Oddly, Alexander’s successors didn’t retain his cavalry tactics, going back to the traditional Greek cavalry-fights-cavalry and infantry-fights-infantry styles. They were also fond of war elephants, even Gaebel can only find two ancient battles where elephants actually accomplished something useful.


A fascinating book. About the only flaw I can find is that it could use more maps. There are a couple, but they are in the back; they’d be better off in the text. Recommended. ( )