> The association of slashing weapons with cav is natural (if incorrect
Curved weapons were used throughout that ancient and medieval periods, but as you say, by forces that were ill-equipped with armour. Full plate renders slashing weapons rather redundant but full plate or similar armour (say that of the Clibinari or Cataphractoi) is not common when compared to the majority of troops up until the late medieval period. And even then there is always a mix of types in the best armies of history.
Tarnils was trained in cavalry tactics in Yuthuppa which has a strong Pentan heritage in its far distant past that made excellent use of light cavalry. Though a Carmanian Hazar by training, he adapted to the lighter cavalry use for his campaigns in Vethil when he was still part of the Carmanian Empire. Heavy shock cavalry were somewhat useless without a potent screen of light cavalry, as their foes in Velthil were usually swift moving, feint-using Cossacks and Pentans.
When he left Carmania and became a rebel Tarnils excelled at raiding with light forces. Lines of supply and smal garrisons were not usually well equipped with heavily armoured troops and so light cavalry could be very effective against them. Should a heavily armoured force appear, then they simply flee.
The use of the scimitar by Tarnils is both symbolic of his split with Carmania, as the weapon is not used by the Hazars, showing his acceptance of foreign ideas and consequences, and realistic in that the type of warfare he waged and the forces at his disposal meant a small core of heavy troops and a large force of light horse.
As a result of this, it is accepted in the Empire that Tarnils allows the use of any weapon, swords are his preferred choice, but he is flexible and supportive of combined arms and vexilla creation.
Martin Laurie
Powered by hypermail