People: act professionally and with respect to the other members of this site.

The French fought on horseback though the terrain was not optimal for charges.

Well that will teach me to post of the hip when I am sitting at home full of pain killers for a compressed nerve in my neck :p

I completely confused that battle with another.

My bad.

It was still great use of tactics by the Flemings. A brook used to break the momentum of the mounted charge and a solid wall of determined defenders. This is important, if the mounted charge slows down or gets bogged down against a wall of determined men then it can become very easy to attack.

The Godendag is also an effective weapon to use against an armoured and mounted knight.

It is an interesting battle, but the Flemish weren't all farmers and militia, it had a small proportion of nobles as well and I believe that some knightings took part on the Flemish side before the battle.

Quote:

I do believe in the power of a Knight in full armour on the battlefield, but not in the role of the broad jousting lance in the battle after the first charge

Ok I see where I lost track.

You need to remove the word 'jousting' from in front of lance. A lance is a lance is a lance right up until the late 15thC as far as we know. In the 16thC that are made hollow and brittle for the joust and as such then they are a 'jousting' lance,

Cavalry, especially heavy cavalry, is most effective when moving at speed with other heavy cavalry. This is why the charge executed at speed with the lance is the main tactic of the mounted knight. Speed of horse and sheer smashing power. The desired tactic is to then disengage, regroup, rearm with a new lance and then charge again. Of course this didn't always happen and if after breaking the line and being in amongst the enemy then the lance would be discarded and other hand weapons used.

And now having strayed a looooooong way off the original question. Justin, I will have those references for you later today,,,,,,,, as soon as I find my books.

Also, on the matter of civility. I didn't think there was any uncivility in this conversations. For my part I may have been a little abrupt, but due to my neck/shoulder and the painkillers I am on I can only sit and concentrate at the computer for very short periods of time.

If I am at fault then I apologise.

Hi Rod,

I also think that there was no uncivility in our conversation.
Grown up people have the right to have a dispute on a forum, as long as they don't
offend eachother. And that was by no means the case. There were no hard feelings
on my side anyway.

Best regards,
Cor

Rod, (I'm coming to this thread late) in your video, that's not a historical saddle is it?

Far be it from me to critic a fellow actually doing it, I merely want to be sure I understand what I'm seeing.

I'm brought to understand that a proper war saddle has a shelf behind the posterior of the man riding Also, I'm brought to understand via Oakeshott, a Knight and his horse, that the technique was to shove your legs almost straight out into the stirrups, and to press your rear against the ... glutaeus maximus supporter, thus more or less clamping yourself into the saddle between the shelf and the stirrups.

I'd be most curious to see what would happen if a man did just that, and hit at the gallop.

But I sure wouldn't be want to be the first to take that hit.

Hi George, from memory it was a stock saddle supplied by the horse owner. The tournament was in Canada so I flew in from Australia and had to use the tack supplied.

Here is a pic of the saddles I use here at home.

My early period (13th-14thC) saddle.
[ Linked Image ]

My (not quite right) 15thC saddle.
[ Linked Image ]

And the first saddle in use. Here I am hitting a shock quintain with a solid lance fitted with a steel coronel.
[ Linked Image ]

This pic I was using a solid lance with steel coronel and using an arret and graper. The impact was huge and the only thing that kept me on was the saddle.
[ Linked Image ]

Initially I didn't pay too much attention to this thread since I haven't ridden a horse in 20 years and it is unlikely I will take up jousting. But when I did look and saw Rod's youtube clip, I said to myself "wow, that makes my "extreme" pastimes look pretty tame!"(actually first I said "ouch"). Anyway I am impressed with the life you put into this topic!

Having said that, I just have to ask; the neck injury, is it related to jousting?

Hey,

I have been following this thread and it's very interesting but I'm afraid I'm a little confused on some of the terminology. What is an arret and graper?

Thanks,
-James

Cor and Rod,
If there was a moderator warning about incivility or like conduct, it was for good reason. Discussion of it in this thread is inappropriate and off-topic. If you have questions or concerns about a moderator's actions, please message the moderator directly.

Let's have no more discussion about this in this thread.

Hi Allen, there may be some damage there from jousting but I turned around to say goodbye to my wife when she was going to work and I compressed the nerve then. Figures doesn't it ;)

Hi James, this is an arret with a lance couched upon it. The graper (missing in the pic) is a small leather, wooden or metal disc that sits behind the hand and in front of the arret. This stops the lance being forced backwards upon impact and transfers the shock to the cuirass.

[ Linked Image ]

[ Linked Image ]

It is more commonly known as a lance rest, though I prefer arret as this better describes what it actually does. It arrests (French, Arret) the lance. The arret is not there to take the weight of a heavy lance, just to arrest its backward movement upon impact.

Thank you Rod, I assumed that it was a "lance rest" but wanted some verification.

Thanks,
-James

Back to the original concept about some knights preferring or choosing to use weapons other than the lance...

At least in fiction and some accounts of 12th century melee tournament the lance was primarily used at the beginning of the melee. Those skilled with it did shatter it (several fictional accounts and couple early 13th century poets that wrote very realistically of what they witnessed at the tournaments.) After the initial mass lance charge, most of the melee period (about one half day) was spent with hand weapons (prevalently sword.) It was recorded by William Marshal's biographer that Henry the Young King observed that the Count of Hainault restrained his forces from participating in the mass lance charge, and then took greater advantage by entering after the initial masses had wounded and weakened themselves. Henry the Young king subsequently copied this strategy. This tactic is what is actually described in the Lagny Sur Marne account if one thinks about it.

The largest boast I have run across of rearming with lance in melee tournament was Ulrich Von Lichtenstein (~1226 Kroneuburg if I remember it right) in his autobiographical account stating he rearmed 9 times in one melee. Ulrich was a notorious boaster in all things related to joust or lance, and this number of 9 lances (probably in one half day of melee) was undoubtedly meant to be extremely impressive.

My apologies for not having posted for some time, but the power was out in this part of Washington State for a few days, and thus my computer fix was out the window for a while... Anyway...

Benjamin, indeed, the lighter lance or spear was not a "one shot weapon", as you point out the Spaniards used it to great effect against their native adversaries in the New World. It was used very much as the Normans were using their own rather light spears, both couched and overhand. (They discovered that thrusting it to the face was the most effective move when things got bogged down, and threatened to become the melée).

Cor, I've not delved into many Medaeval manuscripts, but I'm pretty well versed in Renaissance ones, and yes, the Knight is expected to return to his lines for fresh spears, and a fresh horse if need be. Knights were expeced to keep between three and five Great Horses on campaign for just such a purpose, and a retinue of servants to keep them ready for battle. I guarrantee that this is not a figment of my fevered imagination. :cool: But if you can come up with documentation suggesting that this was not the case and that I am mistaken in this, I will bow to the better research.

As Rod notes, Cavalry was best employed against other Cavalry as a weapon of Shock, but whether against Infantry or Cavalry, getting involved in a melée is not to your advantage.

(BTW, Cor, while the "Battle of the Golden Spurs"/ Courtrai, in 1302 was a huge defeat for the French Gendarmerie, the Battle of Cassel in 1328 was as great a defeat for the Flemmings, who were in turn slaughtered by the French. Defensive Foot tactics have the disadvantage of needing the enemy to attack them, and when the French waited them out, things went poorly).

Rod, as always, your wonderful kit is a pleasure to behold! Thanks for posting the pics of your arrét!

Allons!

Gordon

Dear Gordon,

I don't have to prove my "being right", but I have a bit of a problem with the way that you put things in such an absolute way. For instance, the war of the roses was a British affair, that has nothing to do with Knighhood in the rest of Europe. In the late European Middle Ages there was much more social mobility than in later centuries.There were noble familys of high rank that has never seen a battlefield at all. Rich merchants were having more power and wealth in the flourishing towns of the 15 th. century, than some Knights could ever dream of. A lot of that familys were nobled, for the financial benefits of the "crown", without having to be a Knight (noble mounted man at arms). Every man of means was paying taxes. nothing's changed. I work as an heraldic artist ( and as a genealogist ) for the Dutch High Court of Nobility. so I think that I know what I am talking about.

Best,
Cor

Folks,
Let's remember that we should not adopt a defensive tone when posting.