| Author |
Message |
|
Lafayette C Curtis
|
 Posted: Mon 27 Dec, 2010 10:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Connor Ruebusch wrote: | | Just another question regarding medieval infantry... The Imperial sergeants mentioned above--what sort of men would troops like this be? |
In terms of equipment or social position? Equipment-wise, they were armoured infantry in kettle-hat and jack, with a sizeable proportion likely being arrayed in mail hauberks as well. Socially . . . now that's where things get a bit complex. At the time of Bouvines we have "serjeants" who were non-noble retainers with specific duties in royal and noble households, and also "serjeants" who were a catchall grouping of professional but non-aristocratic soldiers. The two groups overlapped but were not identical.
| Quote: | | How were feudal societies organized to equip or train heavy infantry that was not of the noble class? Was there a special circumstance with the Imperial Cities, perhaps? Did they employ something like the Norman familia? |
Obviously, things varied widely across the vast temporal and geographical span of medieval Europe. There were professional soldiers paid to guard noble/royal households and garrison castles or towns. There were semi-professional militias made up of middle-class artisans in the larger and richer towns, usually operating under a charter that allowed the town/city as a whole to maintain a military force as long as it was willing to send that force to aid the lord in a nearby military campaign. And there were of course the freelance troops who served as mercenaries when they had willing employers and either retired or went into banditry when they couldn't find any. Useful generalizations are hard to make beyond this point because warfare in Germany was (obviously) not quite like warfare in Spain and so on.
| Quote: | | Also, how would knights (or other mounted men-at-arms) take on the role of light cavalry? What changes would they have made to their armaments or fighting style to accmodate the more mobile role? |
This varied greatly. At the time of the Norman invasion of England (mid-11th century), the "heavy cavalry" kit of helmet, shield, and hauberk wasn't particularly heavy to begin with, so the one figure mentioned as a "scout" on the Bayeux Tapestry was equipped in an identical manner to the other knights. Even then, if I'm not mistaken, some chronicles mention good old William riding unarmoured on scouting expeditions. Later on, provisions seem to have been made for somewhat lighter raiding kit by leaving behind the less-vital elements of the men-at-arms' armour, but then the kind of plate armour actually worn for field duties never got really heavy before the 16th century and I think it would have been perfectly conceivable for a man-at-arms to go raiding in a full harness of plate but riding a fast unarmoured courser rather than a covered destrier.
| Quote: | | How did medieval commanders employ light cav, since we never really hear about its use. |
Never? You can't be serious. If you read primary sources on medieval warfare or even really good overviews (like Verbruggen's), you'll find no end of raids, reconnaissance, and other typically light-cavalry duties. Try the stuff from De Re Militari as an appetizer first.
| Elling Polden wrote: | | Light hit-and-run raiding could be done by mounted infantry, like english mounted longbowmen, but these where not expected to fight on horseback, and would be easily overpowered by men at arms if they did not run away on contact. |
This was not really a problem; light cavalry warfare was largely a matter of avoiding contact unless you had an overwhelming advantage, so it's not a problem if a substantial proportion of your force was composed of mounted infantry with poor horseback fighting capabilities as long as they had the skills to avoid detection by the enemy (which have hardly changed at all down to the present day). Moreover, if there was time to prepare, mounted infantry could be handily dismounted and deployed on foot, preferably in a strongpoint that could not be taken easily with a mounted assault (such as a stone house or a small copse of trees with a healthy amount of underbrush).
| David Sutton wrote: | | English armies at times included 'Hobilars' or 'Scurrers/Prickers' which did perform a light cavalry role. Also in Spain you have Jinetes which use light cavalry tactics. So there were some dedicated light cavalry types on the European medieval battlefield. Although I would not argue that this precludes knights acting in a similar role away from pitched battle. In fact bands of lighter cavalry might well be led or re-enforced by knights on raids etc. |
This was exactly how men-at-arms operated when going light; they'd usually ride in a mixed band with some lighter troops to provide both leadership and a solid core with rather heavier equipment that might come in handy when things got hairy. Interestingly, some of the lighter cavalry types had rather unexpected origins; the mounted archers of the French Companies of Ordinance (Ordonnance), for example, started out as well-armoured mounted infantry armed with bows but soon transitioned into a sort of "medium" cavalry relying primarily on swords and light lances.
| Quote: | | Maybe we should think less of knights/men at arms as being defined purely by their arms and armour, but more as a group of elite martial artists that could and did perform a number of roles on the battlefield |
Elite soldiers, rather, since the better-trained ones would have had some education in military tactics, strategy, and administration in addition to individual fighting skills (what most people today think of when we mention "martial arts"). They're probably best compared to modern special forces sans the focus on covert and clandestine operations.
|
|
  |
 |
|
William P
|
| Posted: Tue 10 Jul, 2012 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
and we have the scene where richard I boxed his cavalry in a square of sergeants in front of crossbowmenin a self supporing fashion of holding the the horse archers at bay and kept the knights from charging at the wrong time
also what about he militia of say.. england in the 12th-14th century compared to sergents what troops might we expect.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
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
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic