讨论：为何骑兵这么有用？

【来源龙腾网】

正文原创翻译：

Directing this question mostly to antiquity but not only: Why was cavalry units so effective during battles? Dont get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of history and I know that it WAS effective but I can't really imagine why.

这个问题主要是针对古代，但也不完全是针对古代，为什么骑兵部队在战斗中这么有用？别误会，我是历史爱好者，我当然知道骑兵很有用，但我真的想不出原因。

Horses are (in my eyes) quite easily startled/scared. It's harder to fight on a horseback, you are a bigger target and it was hard and expensive to armour up a horse. Shields are not easy to carry on a horse. Most armies was composed of spears and in my eyes that is a good anti-horse weapon. Elephants were quite easily countered with whistles and lines by Scipios armies during second punic war, why was it tougher to face the Numidian cavalry? Horses are not smarter nor braver than elephants.

在我看来，马匹很容易受到惊吓，骑在马背上更难以作战，容易成为目标，给马装上防具又非常贵，在马上也不好带盾牌。大多数军队都是由长矛组成的，在我看来，长矛这种武器能很好的防御马匹。在第二次布匿战争中，大象很容易就被大西庇阿的军队用哨子和队列弄得反戈了，为什么骑兵就更困难呢？马匹并不比大象聪明勇敢。

But even after this, we know for a fact that cavalry was one of the most important factors and many times the reason why you won/lost. Please try to explain detailed but simple to me so I can picture it in my head.

但即使有如此疑问，我们也知道骑兵是战争中最重要的因素之一，很多时候也是导致你胜败的原因。请大家简洁明了的解释一下，以便我能在脑海里想象出来。

评论翻译

Dagonus

In theory, it is easy to counter cavalry by holding formation. Horses do not want to run into you and often will resist charging straight into someone.This is especially useful if you have spears, pikes, or fixed bayonets. If you give the horse space to run past you, it will just alter course slightly into that gap. Unfortunately for you, it will also bump into you, knock you over and the next horse will trample you. In one of my military history class I had years ago in my undergrad, a student asked "so why don't people just hold formation?" The professor climbed on top of the table the student was sitting at and shouts "You're the front line! I'm this much taller than you! I weigh half a ton more than you and I'm charging at you at a run! If you hold formation, the horse will probably fall on you. Do you think you're holding formation?" "Maybe?" "Only if you are really, really disciplined and not overly stressed from the earlier actions." In short, a cavalry charge is terrifying, especially for undisciplined or green infantry.

理论上，保持住队形是很容易对抗骑兵的。马匹不想撞到你，通常不会向人冲撞，如果你有长矛、长枪或固定刺刀的时候会更有效。如果你旁边的空间足够马匹绕过去，它就会稍微改变路线进入这个间隙。然而不幸的是，它还是会碰到你，把你撞倒，然后下一匹马会把你踩死。几年前，在我本科的一堂军事历史课上，一个学生问“既然如此，那人们为什么不保持住队型？” 教授爬到学生坐的桌子上，大声说“你是前线！我比你高这么多！ 我比你重半吨，而且我正在向你冲锋！如果你保持队形，马很可能会撞在你身上。你确认你要保持队型？”“可能…吧？” “除非你真的真的很有纪律，并且没有因为之前的行动而过于害怕才有可能。” 简言之，骑兵冲锋很可怕，特别是对于那些没有纪律的军队或新兵。

Not_A_Sholva

It's worth noting that the further back you go in time, the less the difference in size between a horse and a man is though. Sure, people were smaller too, but horses have been deliberately bred to be bigger for thousands of years. Especially if you go back some 5000 years, a rider would have to think about keeping their feet off the ground.

值得注意的是，时间越早，马匹和人的个子差距越小，当然，人的个子也更小，但马匹一直被有意的往大个子的方向培养。特别是在5000年前，骑手必须考虑要把脚提起来才能不接触地面。

ppitm

Virtually all medi war horses would be classed as ponies today. 14 hands and under.

There is only a single archaeological find of a 15 hand horse in the medi period.

实际上，中世纪的所有战马都会被归类为如今的小型马。高度在14掌以一下。

只有一列中世纪考古发现的马匹是15掌。

MattSR30

I could be misremembering, but I thought their size (and the lack of saddles/stirrups) were the reason chariots were used in the ancient world. They were too small to ride, but they could pull a chariot.

不知道我有没有记错，但我认为它们的尺寸(以及没有马鞍和马镫) 是古代使用战车的原因。因为它们太小了，不能骑，但它们可以拉战车。

_Mechaloth_

You're not going to ride a regular horse into battle; you're going to ride a war horse, meaning it was trained to counter some of its survival instincts (against its own, probably better, judgment). Also, horse bodies are a great way to break a spear line. Expensive, sure, but if sacrificing a horse against polearms means some capable men get inside enemy lines, you can be sure as hell they'll take that opportunity.

Also, carrying a shield may not be easy on a horse, but it's sure easier than walking with it through mud and gore. Same with weighty armors. Put a pointy stick in a guy's hand with the momentum of a charging horse and put that against a regular infantryman; advantage to the cavalry (nearly) every time.

A horse itself can be a weapon. A kick can be fatal, getting stepped on can be fatal. Even if someone just gets knocked over, they become an easy target.

I think you are severely underestimating the utility and "bravery" of horses. The latter is a result of training, even in huge animals like elephants.

骑去打仗的马不是普通的马，是战马，这意味着它被训练过对抗它的一些生存本能。此外，马匹的身体也是打破长矛阵的主要方式。当然，代价很高，但如果牺牲一匹马来对抗长柄武器意味着可以让强力部队突入到敌人的阵线里，那么可以肯定他们会抓住这个机会。

另外，在马上携带盾牌可能不那么容易，但肯定比带着盾牌在泥泞中行走容易。重甲也是这样。骑手拿着狼牙棒骑在马上冲锋对付普通步兵，结果几乎每次都对骑兵有利。

马匹本身就是武器。踢是致命的，被踩也是致命的。某人即使只是被撞倒，也很容易成为目标。我认为你严重低估了马匹的用途和“勇敢”。勇敢是训练的结果，即使是大象这样的大型动物也是要训练的。