Posts: 1,524 Location: Sydney, Australia
Fri 16 Sep, 2011 8:23 am
Jean Thibodeau wrote: |
Kurt Scholz wrote: |
I suggest we end this mounted crossbowmen discussion (because we have only nuances of differing opinions and it seems unlikely we convince each other of anything) and refocus on knights. While we're at mounted and dismounted combat, we can also discuss why knights and other memebers of the heavy cavalry also decided to fight dismounted. |
( Bold highlighting not in the original quote )
I agree that it's totally speculative and is only interesting when discussion theoretical tactical usage rather than trying to make a point about historical usage. :D :cool: ( Note, priorities differ at times in these discussions, although I obviously am interested in History, my personal " obsessions " tend towards military tactics and weapon usage, often in the abstract and not 100% related to actual History ..... so a bit of apples & oranges and I completely appreciate your very logical post(s) but with history fully in mind. :D :cool: ).
Just to make a final type of use of crossbow or bow for cavalry would be as back up weapons that would be mostly carried and used if they had to defend themselves from horse archers in a defensive position: A force of heavy cavalry being harassed by horse archers, with their usual attack and retreat tactics, might better dismount and use precision shooting to counter horse archers i.e. chasing horse archers is futile with heavy cavalry, so don't even try, and take a defensive position, and force the horse archers to come to you ! Much better than trying to defend from missile attack without any way to reply in kind or futily trying to chase them down using lance or sword. ;) :?: |
these arnt knights as such.. but mamluks, klibinariphoroi, and heavy cavalry of the kwarazmian shah. were not just heavy lance cavalry they were also frequently equipped with bows. and had barding armour as WELL
Posts: 382 Location: San Antonio, TX
Fri 16 Sep, 2011 1:32 pm
Could we get off the topic of the mounted crossbow debate for a little bit please? I have some questions about some research, Would these points be accurate or inaccurate?
-In England this type of Vassalage and way of supporting the military aspects of things did not come to England until the 12th century (Around 1100-1135)
-In France and Germany when a Lord (Duke, Baron, or Knight) passed on the land went to the person whom it was customary to go to a successor.
-In England This same idea was around, however the King could (if he choose to) ultimately put the land into anyone of his choosing, other than the successor. The King of England was the sole Proprietor.
Posts: 58
Mon 19 Sep, 2011 10:17 pm
Re: Knights History-Correct me if i'm wrong
Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: |
Rome
-4th Century
- Romans took from the Heavy Calvary units from Macedonian rule.
-Heavy Cavalry still only made up a small part of the army.
|
Well the Romans did have well armored Cataphrats I think sense 15 AD or was it 65AD.
Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: |
-We are speaking specifically about Germany and France
Expense of Knights
-Cost was measured in Cows.
-Today a cow 800~900lb Steer cost roughly $1040.00
- Helm =============== 6Cows===== $6,240.00
-Mail shirt =============12Cows=== $12,480.00
-Sword with scabbard == 7 Cows==== $7,280.00
-Leg Armor ============ 6Cows==== $6,240.00
-Lance and Shield ====== 2Cows===== $2,080.00
-Horse =============== 12 Cows=== $12,480.00
- A total cost of $41,200.00 Dollars in todays market.
-And don’t forget about the cost of additional horses for campaigns, and the fact of supplies and food such. |
Well to sleepy now to put all my thoughts; but I personally think many historians put the cost of Medieval military equipment a bit over the top. Yes, military equipment do in fact cost a pretty penny, even today the modern crappy body armor the government gives us is about $1000.oo or $2000.oo with out super heavy ZAPI plates that can maybe stop 4 shots form a assault rifle.
A little off subject: Do not believe the crud you hear in the TV about modern body armor… Modern body armor is a bit of a joke. Today our body armor is so crappy that in the Marines we do not bother calling it body armor LOL we call the helmet Kevlar and body armor flack, and I herd ZAPI pates were called bricks LOL. I called it body armor ones and other Marines were laughing about that like if I made a joke. Armorers from the past are rolling in there graves…
ANY WAYS back on subject, military equipment from any age is not going to cost so much were you cannot arm or equip armies… There is no way a simple mail shirt is going to cost that much. More so a helmet! Is like my flack vest and my Kevlar helmet cost 18 cars! There is no way.
A War Horse, Lance, and Shield is more believable on cost range…
Posts: 1,524 Location: Sydney, Australia
Mon 19 Sep, 2011 11:45 pm
Re: Knights History-Correct me if i'm wrong
Gerald Fa. wrote: |
Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: |
Rome
-4th Century
- Romans took from the Heavy Calvary units from Macedonian rule.
-Heavy Cavalry still only made up a small part of the army.
|
Well the Romans did have well armored Cataphrats I think sense 15 AD or was it 65AD.
Christopher VaughnStrever wrote: |
-We are speaking specifically about Germany and France
Expense of Knights
-Cost was measured in Cows.
-Today a cow 800~900lb Steer cost roughly $1040.00
- Helm =============== 6Cows===== $6,240.00
-Mail shirt =============12Cows=== $12,480.00
-Sword with scabbard == 7 Cows==== $7,280.00
-Leg Armor ============ 6Cows==== $6,240.00
-Lance and Shield ====== 2Cows===== $2,080.00
-Horse =============== 12 Cows=== $12,480.00
- A total cost of $41,200.00 Dollars in todays market.
-And don’t forget about the cost of additional horses for campaigns, and the fact of supplies and food such. |
Well to sleepy now to put all my thoughts; but I personally think many historians put the cost of Medieval military equipment a bit over the top. Yes, military equipment do in fact cost a pretty penny, even today the modern crappy body armor the government gives us is about $1000.oo or $2000.oo with out super heavy ZAPI plates that can maybe stop 4 shots form a assault rifle.
A little off subject: Do not believe the crud you hear in the TV about modern body armor… Modern body armor is a bit of a joke. Today our body armor is so crappy that in the Marines we do not bother calling it body armor LOL we call the helmet Kevlar and body armor flack, and I herd ZAPI pates were called bricks LOL. I called it body armor ones and other Marines were laughing about that like if I made a joke. Armorers from the past are rolling in there graves…
ANY WAYS back on subject, military equipment from any age is not going to cost so much were you cannot arm or equip armies… There is no way a simple mail shirt is going to cost that much. More so a helmet! Is like my flack vest and my Kevlar helmet cost 18 cars! There is no way.
A War Horse, Lance, and Shield is more believable on cost range… |
thing is whole armies weren't equipped with mail, i mean, at agincourt we had a high % of people in plate because pretty much the whole force was composed of noble knights.
but maile? very rare,
did that cost of 12 cows for a hoorse is that just the cost of buying it outright? or is that the cost of it, and enough food for a month for example?
thing is that while maile was quite expensive, it was a 1 time purchase pretty much any further costs would be the cost of abit of oil or something to keep it from rusting.
Posts: 390
Tue 20 Sep, 2011 3:18 am
Arms and armour are an interesting and well-documented topic, due to administrative requirements, unlike "symbolic" battle reports.
In the German speaking regions there was the "Zeughaus" where people living in cities not only had the communal, but were also required to store a lot of their private weapons there. This in turn could also lead to well-documented legal disputes about what weapons one can have at home which in the communal storage.
Same as in the modern military, storing weapons is important because in war there's a tendency of more weapons than men being lost. the Bayeux tapestry is a nice example of shipping weapon stores. Another important issue is how to store weapons and how long this can be done. Because some medieval weapons survived until today, good storage could mean availability for several centuries. I think Islamic sources of the early conquest are a nice source about storing and producing maill and leather armour (and how many victories provided equipment for many men, especially their elite fighters, quite logical in a society that favoured champions to start combat as a kind of religious judgement).
Good sources on availability of armour would be the Brabanzons, who started out as well-armed and trained, unemployed craftsmen, including some with maill armour and the late Scandinavian leidang regulations (on how many men had to provide a fighter with specified equipment.
Concerning armament, I strongly suspect that there were as wide quality gaps back then as today. We are very likely mostly in possession of quality material because cheap stuff was more likely being recycled. Once again, take a look into administrative records, like the Royal Armouries.
I almost forgot to mention, if a town was ruled by a cleric, he had the armament of his heavy cavalry, including knights, also partly stored in his armoury (especially if he wanted to keep them away from Unchristian tournaments).
I had another idea, check about armouries giving equipment to friends. If there are lots of petty wars it might be a reasonable way to safe money by amassing arms and armour that could be sold dear in times of war (including the risk of debt reductions), but possibly for something that was more reliable than debt obligations, like titles, rights, war booty or rents.
You
cannot post new topics in this forum
You
cannot reply to topics in this forum
You
cannot edit your posts in this forum
You
cannot delete your posts in this forum
You
cannot vote in polls in this forum
You
cannot attach files in this forum
You
can download files in this forum