Maybe you should cool down for a second, ha?Originally Posted by wulfgar610
We are perfectly aware of this. All I'm saying is that none of us was actually there. We don't even know for sure the origins of their names and you give yourself the right to explain their tactics with 1000000% certainty (that's how it sounds at least). And in all diversity within the Roman army, can you claim with 100% certainty that no cataphract style cavalry used a shield?Originally Posted by wulfgar610
An absence of proof isn't a proof in itself-never forget it. All we know about them are the few scarce sentences from Ammianus, Libanius and Julian.
Besides it sounds appallingly stupid that any cavalryman, even the most heavily armoured, would ever simply chill out on his horse and let the arrowheads hit him all over the torso! Would you do it? I wouldn't. What if an arrow is heading towards his head? I guess that some of you will now say: "Well, what the heck, he's wearing the facemask. There's no reason for worry". Do you really think it's such a cool fun to be hit in your torso by an arrowhead (or 10 arrowheads, or even more...), even if your dear Ammianus & Co. tell you that your armour makes you invulnerable.
In the eastern warfare dominated by archery, it seems quite possible that some of the cataphracts used the small shields wrapped around lower arm or upper arm. An arrow hit may likely produce a kind of shock (due to sudden and likely painful impact) or even displace a rider from a horse.
.....Or, you really, but really, believe there's such a thing as an invulnerability in combat.
Are you aware that a relatively close range impact from the 5.56 (7.62 sniper match grade ammo easily kill) in the best body-armour available to present day infantry is likely to break your chest bone, even if it doesn't penetrate it (believe me, my girlfriend's brother serves in the Serbian military spec force "Cobras")?
Still, no one says to an infantryman: "Don't worry for you're an invulnerable warrior. Just let them hit you from all sides".
The comparison isn't the most accurate, but it gives you a clue that-only because something won't kill you, it doesn't mean you should let it hit you all over your body.