CAVALRY, term used to designate soldiers trained to fight mounted and sometimes em ployed on foot. The decisive power and value of cavalry lie in its mobility and in opposing infantry. On foot, the cavalry of to-day can attack positions with the same resolution and determination as can infantry. They use the same weapon — the rifle — and the cavalryman of to-day is the rifleman on horseback who can quickly convert himself into a rifleman on foot, ready to receive and repel the mounted charge of cavalry. There are enormous possibilities for the horseman of the future armed with the rifle, with a great extension of modern battle lines modified by the development of mounted infantry ready to throw itself on the rear or flanks of the distant enemy. The cavalry ac tion of the future can be conceived by a com parison of the cavalry of the Civil War, the Boer War and the European War with that of Wagram and Waterloo.
Cavalry as a distinct military organization dates back prior to the Trojan War. Xene phon relates that in the first Messenian War, 743 B.C., Lycurgus formed his cavalry in di visions. In the war 371 Lc., Epaminondas had a cavalry force of 5,000 men, and we know their cavalry contributed greatly to the victories of Philip and Alexander of Macedon. It had an important part in the battle of the Granicus, 334 a.c.; and at the battle of Arbela, 331 s.c., Alexander, who led the Macedonian cavalry of 7,000 men, dashed into a gap of the Persian army, and by this brilliant feat utterly routed the enemy. The Roman cavalry was very in ferior to that of Hamilcar and Hannibal and most of the victories of these two generals were won by cavalry over the splendid infan try of the Romans. Publius Scipio's defeat at the Ticinus, 218 a.c., was due to the superior ity of the Carthaginian horse; and the bitter experience at the Trebia and the battle of Canna:, 216 s.c., taught the Romans the value of cavalry, by which Scipio finally defeated Hannibal at Zama, 202 B.C. Vegetius states that the Roman cavalry was organized into 10 troops or squadrons, forming a regiment of 726 horses, generally attached to some special legion. It is a singular fact that saddles were not in use until the time of Constantine, and stirrups were introduced by the Franks in the 5th century. During the Middle Ages cavalry may be said to have constituted almost the only efficient arm of battle. This was owing to the unwillingness of the nobility in all countries of western Europe to entrust any military power to the serfs; the upper classes went into battle mounted, and both riders and horses had heavy defensive armor. The feudal cavalry con sisted of mail-clad knights with their men-at arms. Their weapons were lances, battle-axes and swords. The infantry was looked down upon during the Middle Ages, being composed principally of serfs and such as had not the means to keep a horse; but with the invention of gunpowder, the introduction of muskets and the use of field artillery a complete change took place,• the infantry gradually rose in repu tation, and the number of this class of troops was augmented. It seems that light cavalry did not exist as a distinct body, with general officers and a staff, before the time of Louis XII. Montluc, however, mentions a general of
12,000 light horse in the time of that monarch; and we hear of Henry II, in 1552, taking a troop of 3,000 cavalry in his expedition to Germany. In 1554 Marshal De Brissac formed a corps of mounted infantry, called Dragoons, trained to fight either on horseback or on foot. Maurice of Nassau, who saw the importance of giving more mobility to this arm, was the first to organize cavalry regiments, each regiment being composed of four squadrons, formed in five ranks, and numbering about 1,000 horses. Gustavus Adolphus was a great cavalry eral, and used his cuirassiers and dragoons to good advantage. His tactics were much ad mired, and were adopted by many European nations. The French, especially, distinguished themselves after his death in the employment of cavalry. Turenne, Conde, Montecuculi and Marlborough were considered excellent cavalry leaders. Cromwell was indebted to his abilities as a cavalry officer for the victories of Marston Moor and Naseby. Defensive armor for cavalry had been abolished in his time, and the cavalry troops were taught to use the carbine. Charges of cavalry were seldom made in battle except by the French. Marshal Saxe made many improvements in this arm, and used guns in connection with cavalry at the battle of Fontenoy, although regular horse-artillery was not introduced till 1762. It was not until the wars of Frederick the Great, however, that the full importance of cavalry was developed; he saw the necessity of training these troops to use swords instead of firearms, and endeavored to make them perfect riders. No firing what ever was allowed in the battle during the first charge ; he claimed that the only two things required to beat the enemy were to charge him with the greatest possible speed and force, and then outflank him. The brilliant victories he obtained from the adoption of these tactics under the able leadership of Seydlitz have prob ably never been excelled. At the battle of Hohenfriedberg the Prussian cavalry of 10 squadrons broke 21 battalions, routed the en tire left wing of the Austrian infantry, and captured 66 standards, 5 guns and 4,000 prison ers. Frederick had learned to appreciate the true principles of mounted warfare through long experience and the occasional disasters which he had met in the first and second Silesian wars; and it was due to the efficient reforms which he instituted in the Prussian cavalry that he was able to win the battles of Rossbach, Striegau, Kesselsdorf, Leuthen and others. One of the first improvements made in the French army by Napoleon was the re organization of the cavalry. He increased the cuirassiers from one regiment to 12, and re introduced the use of the lance and defensive armor. Some of his splendid victories were due to this force, especially at Marengo and Austerlitz; and it was owing to the loss of the French cavalry in the Russian campaign of 1812 that some of his finest achievements in 1813 proved useless; he was well aware of this, and made the statement that had he pos sessed cavalry at the battles of Liitzen and Bautzen the war would then have been brought to an end.