Cataphracts are better for the most part, because they get deffensive terrain bonuses and have a -25% against cities instead of -33%.

Cataphracts are better because they have “Logistica” which causes them to have trample damage against adjacent enemy units.

Now that I can play bannerlord this has become relevant to my interests

A cataphract costs 70 food and 75 gold, trains for 20 seconds. The knight costs 60 food and 75 gold, trains for 30seconds But the cataphract has the hidden trample mechanic.

Horses was a thing up to late XX century. My dad was a mounted soldier in war (independence war of Angola) in the 1970's. He is a portuguese and was a true portuguese dragoon in late XX century. Of couse in modern days, the horse almost always is just a veicle, but if you are trapped when mounted you can fight with a rifle from a horse back. Normally you use the advantage of speed of the horse and encircle your foes, get on foot and fight normally (we are talking about gerrilas in central Africa). Cheers from Brazil, folks.

"They're warriors clad in metal. But what metal?" *HEAVY METAL* (Saxon's Crusader starts)

The problem with this video is that you are comparing Hellenistic-roman era cataphracts with 13th century medieval knights. Although a retropespection of the history of cataphracts might be necessary, there were indeed medieval cataphracts that existed in the same timeframe with early knights. The cataphractoi and clibanophoroi of the eastern roman empire that continued till 1453. 1) They did had stirrups, in fact they were the first ones since they had numerous confrontations with Avars. 2) They did not had what we now call knightly high saddles 3) They were far more versatile, because they were trained to use lance, mace, bow and sword 4) They wore many layers of armour. A) Kavvadion, a form of gambeson made of linen or raw silk, stuffed with wool or cotton. B) chain mail C) klibanion or Lorikion lamelar or scale armour D) some times they wore on top of all that an Epilorikion which was something like a light gambeson made of silk with ornaments and designs. That level of protection was unmatched by the average early norman knight. There is a report of Alexios surviving unscathed the simultaneous attack of three norman knights from two sides. 5) The horses were heavily something uncommon among the early norman knights. 6) They carried two swords. One staight edge (Spathion) and one single edge curved one (Paramerion). The Paramerion was probably the first form of what we came to know as the saber. The major difference between the easter roman cataphracts and the frankish knight was that cataphracts were part of a recruiting system in the empire not a chain of feudal allegiances. There was a central authority, centres of military training and specific kind of troops comming from each region. Much like in ancient and imperial Rome. In that sense there was uniformity in equipment and we might say that there were also formal colored coded uniforms for each squadron. Plus the cavalry and infantry were trained to work together and cover each other in actions. They even had medical units and technical stuff like engineers and blacksmith that replaced broken weapons and even had prefabricated scales and chain links to patch up armours. This is more like a classic roman (or even modern) perception of warfare.

Cataphracts also used bows, they always carried it on their horse, when the situation allows it they will rain down arrows to weaken the lines before charging.

Spoiler: the armored heavy cavalryman wins.

Are those Chaos and Bretonnian Knights on the shelf?

the virgin frankish knight vs the chad sassanid cataphract

And now I know why the Cataphractii Terminators are called "Cataphractii." Heavily armored, and slower than their later counterparts.

Byzantium used cataphracts up until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD. Although, yes cataphracts and knights are significantly different. The core similarities are, that, both are heavily armoured, heavily armed, shock cavalry. Through the interactions between “mainland” Europe and the Byzantine Empire, by way of commerce, warfare, and mercenary service in the Byzantine military, the cataphracts of Byzantium could have provided a prototype from which the heavily armoured Medieval European knight evolved. There is some archeological evidence, that, the Sarmatians had stirrups around the 1st century AD, or even a bit earlier.

but what's my gran's eyes got to do with knights?

One very important aspect to consider when comparing late antiquity/early medieval cataphracts with high/late medieval knights is the role they played in society - not just the social station of the men who were cataphracts or knights but the role of the armoured monuted warrior itself. Cataphracts were almost exclusively an arm of the military of a strong state with a centralized government, and their function was almost exclusively military. Knights and men-at-arms were different. Their function was to a large degree to act as a monopoly of violence for the landed nobility, their military duty in service of a king or high nobility was secondary. A knight was most often tasked with protecting and keeping the peace of the land that he or his liege lord owned (and occasionally harrassing the peasants of the neighboring lands) As such he was expected to be quick and mobile (hence barded horses being fairly uncommon) while also being able to fight against a numerically superior opponent with much worse training and equipment (hence the much better armor protection of the knight himself ) The common image of large units of mounted knights charging at other knights in open battle was a rare exception. A much more realistic image of a knight in action would be as part of a much smaller group, riding down rioting peasants, chasing brigands off the land or as part of a chevauche burning down villages and crops and slaughtering the local population. Cataphracts were elite soldiers. Knights were a strange combination of economic elite, riot police and a para-military death squad.

In order to have a mounted warrior, we must first invent the universe.

He Protec He Attac But most of all He's a Cataphrac Edit: Holy Crag it blew up like the twin towers more than expecc Edit Edit: I was a younger man in an age which I did not know it was a meme but Saggy and Rinnzu, your dropping with me to hell boys

It is interesting to see the early medieval Roman cataphracts, circa the 10th century under the Macedonian dynasty, especially in contrast to classical antiquity cataphracts. The armor and weapons were heavier and more advanced (medieval Roman lamellar klibanion is a beautiful thing to see), the tactics were more refined, and the horse breeds were more specialized (Nisean crossed with Thracian and Cappadocian crossed with Arabian). They were trained so well that they could charge directly into a disciplined infantry formation and expect to break it. The tactic became so dominant that the Romans ended up having to develop a counter once the Arabs began to copy them, inventing an entirely new kind of spear and tactical usage for it. Certainly late antique and medieval Roman cataphract formations favored mixed armaments in an integrated formation. The manuals are quite clear that different ranks or portions of the formation would bear different arms. Roman cataphracts had stirrups since the end of the 6th century and good military saddles since even earlier. Interestingly, the most evolved formations (those in the manuals of Nikephoros II Phokas) use spears for the flanks of a wedge (rather than the point, as might be expected), favoring maces for the front of the wedge. I assume that spears for the flanks are to help drive the enemy line apart while the maces at the front bash their way through anyone who tries to stand against the formation, while the center and rear of the wedge would have bow-equipped cataphracts providing supplemental fire (likely supported by lighter horse archers deployed to either side at the same time that the wedge is advancing). The combination of all these factors was designed to inhibit a defensive line and allow the wedge to force a gap, which would be exploited by lighter cavalry (possible less well armored provincial cataphract formations, or even basic medium cavalry without horse armor and with only a lorikion or bambakion for the rider). As for swords, they were distinctly a sidearm for late antique and medieval Roman cataphracts. The standard was a cavalry spatha (with a rounded point to reduce accidents), but over time a second sword was added to the panoply in the form of a paramerion, essentially a saber. Between the spear, the mace (likely with at least one spare), the bow, the sword (or swords if the rider has one of each type), and at least one ax (sized for hand-to-hand and for throwing), a late antique or medieval Roman cataphract would be a veritable walking arsenal.

Cataphracts get hidden bonus vs infantry with trample damage.

The virgin banner knight vs the CHAD IMPERIAL ÉLITE CATAPHRACT

OMG with the level of indepth analisis you go with your videos, you should have already reached earth core....

Is... is that a tv playing a video of a fire? It seems like Metatron would have caught on fire already if it were real...

Lucky kids in Sicily get to sit in a classroom with this guy.... Had I had a teacher like him, my life would have been much different...

16:40 Hold on a second. Cataphracts did use stirrups. They were around until the XI century at least. You can even see them pictured with stirrups at 15:07.

your students are very lucky, man. A+

When I think of the cataphracts it makes me wonder what kind of logistical train that would have followed a cataphract. A 12th century knight has his squire, his riding horse, his destrier and his mule/donkey, but a cataphract has armor over his warhorse and most of his own body, how many beasts of burden is required to carry that armor on and how many slaves/servents does he need to put that armor on himself and his horse.

I always appreciate the extreme detail and work you put into every video

I absolutely love this format for your videos. I enjoy the way you expose the context of the topic and how you present your conclusions. You speak concisely and clearly; add that to the illustrations and your editing and I can keep my attention on the video. Excellent work @Metatron

Great video content. My favorite little piece of info I learned was the attachment on late armor used as a lance rest, very cool!

Omg thank you, thank you, grazie mille for this video, Metatron!!! Man, I've been waiting for ages for a decent video on Cataphracts and you delivered just that! Your students must be the luckiest people in the world. #fanboy

A fellow Highborn Elves player, a man of culture as well ^^ Love how you tell this history its like you were there.

I love your films. You have amazing ideas for content and You speak so fluent in english that helps me to understand these films. My english is not that good as You can see but thanks to You i can learn more about history and this language. As always polish people will say: Greetings from Poland :)

Thanks for educating me as always, Metatron. I never heard about a Cataphract. That's what is amazing about history. There is so much to know and it’s because you can't know everything. Thank you, Sir Metatron!

I think there’s a big difference between Roman cataphracts and knight, for the former being a elite soldier while the latter a noble class, commander can train and control their soldier to fit the army, while knight would have the army revolves around them to do their thing. Such characteristics would mean huge difference on the battlefield and serve as totally different asset.

@Metatron I love your videos! You make medieval history and the like very accessible and in a very interesting and entertaining way. Please keep up the hard work!

Excellent video, as always Metatron

Another nicely informative and well illustrated video. From the the Fourth Crusade 1204 until the fall of Constantinople 1453, about 250 years heavy cavalry still calling itself cataphracts and medieval knights were contemporaneous. Presumably the technology was similar and only strategy and tactics differed. Any comments.

When you say "Roman" cataphract, are you including Byzantine cavalry such as the Cataphract formations under Nikephoros Phokas?

Finally! One of the videos I've been expecing since the creation of this channel! I loved this video!

Great video Metatron! Loved the background on the history of cavalry

Knights have more pierce armour, more HP and are generally stronger. It’s also somewhat slow and costly to upgrade to Paladin but being trained out of stables you can more easily mass them. Cataphracts have an attack bonus vs infantry including special armour against anti-cavalry infantry attacks such as pikes and halberds. The upgrade to Elite Cataphract is also cheaper and quicker, but they are produced out of castles and their use is more situational. They get countered by archers.

“We need some more context.” Matt Easton

Good video and interesting comparison! Also love the addition to the interior (fireplace).

Excellent video! Informative and entertaining. Really loved it!

The Rome - Total War mod "Europa Barbarorum" which is super nerdy and made by actual historians mentions that in nowadays Armenia cataphract archers were established to counter the steppe archers from the east.

Reminds me of age of empires 2... Feelsamazingman

Love your channel !!

Very interesting video again. Thanks, Metatron.

The Medieval Palfrey was always a stallion. Records show that breeding ferocity into horses sometimes meant that after charging and breaking the line it was terribly difficulty pull the animal up. This happened at the Battle of Hastings for example.

You gotta paint your Warhammer models

Wonderful research! Your enthusiasm is inspiring! Thank you very much!

Another great presentation. Thanks.

When I think of cavalry, I usually think of winged hussars... most of the time. The rest of the time, either samurai or knight/men at arms.

What is your opinion on this statement: cataphracts, especially early cataphracts are heavy cavalry, not primarily shock cavalry.

Great video!! Thank you for your time.

Great work you have done and very well explained ty

But the Cataphracts were still used well into the high and late middle ages the Byzantines used them the Seljuks used them even the Ottomans used, so there certainly was an evolution on the equipment used by Cataphracts.

"Cataphracts VS Medieval Knights (And brief History of Mounted Warriors)"

I love the in depth view on the actual history of the mounted warriors. Its so amazing how they have evolved over thousands of years.

Very interesting, well put together and clearly presented. Thank you, good Sir.

One can also note that the Roman cavalry was deeply influenced by Celtic cavalry. In fact, Continental Celts invented the saddle that the Romans used after the conquest of Gaul. This is also opposed to the chariots of Britain, which comes from an earlier Celtic expansion. Gaulish swords were also longer to fit cavalry combat and influenced the later Roman spatha. Interestingly, Celtic cavalry was limited to the nobility, which is similar to what we see in the Middle Ages, but Gaulish cavalry units still couldn't do full on charges like their medieval counterparts for two good reasons: the lack of stirrups and the lack of heavy armour.

nice video of a fire place, mat

I found this video really enjoyable to watch, nice job.

Great video. Thank you sir!

great topic!

i had hoped you would mention the invention of specialised saddles and stirrups earlier in the discussion that allowed knights to couch lances and stay in the saddle on impact. This was obviously key to the difference in ancient vs late classical and early medieval cavalry. This was absolutely crucial for the ability of cavalry to have shock value charging infantry in line. A prerequisite even. Nothing to do with training of horses

I love your videos. So informative.

allways learning something from you， thx mate

"The first thing you think of when talking about calvary is a medieval knight." Me thinking of the rough riders.

I just noticed Metatron likes Warhammer Fantasy :) I see High Elves, Warriors of Chaos and my personal favorite, the Bretonians!

I keep learning from these videos

I'm watching this in December, the fireplace gives this a festive feel. 😊

More emphasis should be made on the STIRRUPS. It was a revolutionary invention for the cavalry. It provided stability enabling the rider to wear heavier equipment and also wield heavier weapons on horseback without losing balance and risk falling off the horse. It allowed easier weight transfer and swift recovery, gave them more maneuverability and carry out shock attacks. During the early medieval period, the Byzantines also knew about the "stirrup technology", so I would not be surprised if the Byzantine cataphracts of that period did use stirrups. You could also have mentioned the different types of horses they used.

I didn't know you were into Warhammer? I love it :)

Thank you for the great video!

Good content - you are passionate about what you do!

The saying isn't "cataphract in shining armor" so I rest my case

Do a video on the Janissaries. I've always been curious about them.

What a great video, very well done.

3:00 I can imagine kids film about society of hunter-gatherers that hunt horses and during one such hunt, human kid finds wounded horse and instead of killing it, he starts treating him, then they slowly develop friendship, horse rescues kid, other people find about horse and try to hunt him, horse rescues entire tribe and then sad scene where horse herd waits for him, and after a moment he decides to stay with the kid, fast forward few months and entire tribe lives in peace with horses (kinda like how to train your dragon).

One of the points that I hear a lot of people who study history argue is tanks are constered calvary forces. General George pot use tactics comparable to what Hannibal used at the battle of Caine. to this day tank crews wear spurs as ceremonial dress.

Nice video Metatron, can your next vid be on the Italian Wars?

Very enjoyable Thanks for sharing!

Excellent video!!! Cheers

Who else has no life?

Regarding the use of cavalry in antiquity. What about the Macedonias? Were they more of an exception with their hammer and anvil tactics?

Thanks. That was interesting. I was generally aware of the differences but the details were nice to have. .

Always in enjoyable my friend. Keep up the good work.

But in Roman republic the equestrians were somewhat nobility if I remember correctly.

That's one nice fireplace lol

Well done, great art work. Informative

Thanks mate I've always wondered this

Are those High Elves over your top right hand shoulder??? It's a little sad that I can still recognise that, God I miss Warhammer Fantasy (you know, the good Warhammer)

Upvote if you're here after starting Bannerlord, & you got all excited when he starts talking about horse barding.....

great videos. Thank you.

After a second cool video, I subbed, cheers and keep it up

What about the medieval cataphracts of the Byzantine Empire? You never talk about the Byzantine Empire...

I have never heard the word "excogitated" before! That my new thing I've learnt for today :) And I've never bought into the whole hunter gatherer concept at 10,000 BC it seems too late. I mean we have the Jomon culture pottery with Rice pollen at 19,000 years ago, which mean they were at least eating wild rice or making crops from it my bet is on the latter, we have the cultures in Pakistan constructing cities over 10,000 years ago. And I don't buy that Göbekli Tepe was built by hunter gatherers without some from of Agricultural prowess and it is known that wheat is found at the site.

I love those ancient military miniatures on the shelves in the back ground. I once made many like them, when young, mostly when shut in for the winters :)

Great video, I learned a lot. 👍