Cataphracts

Knights descended from a totally different development from Cataphracts.

Namely: mounted Germanic heavy infantry who became more and more cavalry because of the multiple invasions to the Frankish Kingdom by 2 Cavalry-competent invaders (Magyars, Moors) and the Viking threat meant they want to be as mobile as possible.

Why are the ears of the horses covered?

You may as well ask why chariots were popular in the bronze age and cavalry weren't used at all. Its down to horse breeding; horses used to be a lot smaller and a rider that's too weighed down to gallop isn't much good.

>Mounted infantry

hum

HUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

>wearing lots of armor makes you a cataphract

>mounted Germanic heavy infantry
>mounted infantry
But even so, this does prove the point that heavy cavalry was adopted by Western Militaries.
>le different developments
So, they still adopted heavy cavalry?

>t. I dont have any idea where knights came from.

Medieval Knight originated from the Frankish "Miles" of the Frankish Kingdom. A Miles was literally a "Soldier." A professional one. Who stood in stark contrast to the part timers that formed the mass of the Frankish army.

Now for the cunts to remain professional, Frankish lords alloted Miles plots of land in order to liberate the Soldier from anything other than professional military service. During this time there was no social difference between the Miles who were stuck in infantry roles and the Miles who served as cavalry. They were equals. Hell initially, tactically there wasnt even any difference: the mounted Miles were less cavalry and more mounted infantry.

However when the combined threat of Magyar, Muslim, and Norse raids threatened Frankish Hegemony, the ones with horses rose in prominence as they were able to ride out quickly and interdict multiple threats. In addition they quickly developed as being dedicated cavalry as merely mounted infantry to be able to stand toe to toe vs. Magyars and Muslims who had good cavalry.

And so the Knightly class was born and their importance rose socially, eclipsing their infantry fellows entirely until they swallowed them completely, with the infantry miles being pretty much tenants/employees of a cavalry miles who became Knights.

It's a separate development from the Cataphract. The only western military that adopted were the Seleucid Hellenes (if you consider them western even) and the Romans.

That literally is the definition of Cataphract. From the Greek word "All Covered in (Armor)." And denoting cavalry in which horse and rider are fully armored.

In addition Asian Cavalry were multirole jocks who also were able to practice mounted archery.

Romans adopted cataphracts in later antiquity. Cavalry was pretty scarce in Roman army because they were either light auxiliaries not worthy of investment by Roman state or equites legionis who were kind of nobility, or knights. They had to be rich enough to get their own equipment, horse armor was pretty expensive plus segmentata would be pretty uncomfortable while riding. Squamata (lammelar) was reserved for centurions, so hamata was only logical choice.

The concept of cataphracts and heavy cavalry predates the Parthians. The late Achaemenid Persian heavy cavalry already resembled what the Parthians and early Sassanians would use.
To be fair, not entirely. Parthian and Persian cataphracts had to be not only freemen but also part of the "lordly" caste of Aztan. They had to have their own estates, bondsmen, and freemen under them and were more or less hugely resembling feudal knights of Europe.

They resemble each other, but again, knights still didn't descend from Cataphracts as I said earlier here .

They weren't even copies of Roman cavalry. They descended from a system where a Germanic lord gives his soldiers land so they remain as soldiers. Except some of the soldiers grew rich and were able to afford horses.

see if you can spot the important thing missing from these riders that would revolutionize heavy horse in later eras, anons

Stirrups

I'm pretty sure the stirrup isn't as revolutionary as it was originally believed to be. Heavy cavalry was still effective, see: Companion Cavalry, the various steppe peoples, the aforementioned Cataphracts. Although I suppose you could say it made it easier for cultures without a heavy horse influence.

I never said knights descend from cataphracts, I said Persian/Parthian/Iranian cataphracts in general show strong semblances to feudalistic European knights. Particularly due to the way the Arsacid Parthians and Sassanian Persians organized themselves in terms of social classes and caste systems.

Turks! Pouring out of the Zagros mountains!

Because it's cute and goofy

>you will never be this Veeky Forums