Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Saint George and his rearing horse Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next 
Author Message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 1:11 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for that Pieter,

Although I'm a fair to intermediate jouster for late 15th to mid 16th century purposes I'm by no means a cavalry expert. All my work in the medieval area centres on practical jousting reconstructions, as accurate as possible. So whilst we aim lances at each other in the controlled, or at least regulated, tilt yard, we don't do it at infantry or or other cavalry in large groups or if we do it will be for event/film/tv purposes and will be tightly choreographed and rehearsed.

We do practise melee work with infantry and hand weapons both medieval and later periods (I'm a proud member of www.1stroyaldragoons.org) but the thought of doing practical work with lance or even sword for that matter against standing infantry fills me with dread, just massively dangerous for the people on the ground.

My personal experience of 'combat' when charging other cavalry is that I'm far more worried about getting my ankle, knee or hips broken and dislocated as we pass through each other than what the enemy weapons will do as hopefully they are not really aiming to do me serious injury.

A cavalry 'charge' looks great right up to the point of impact then it becomes a bit of a mess so I doubt that any agreements on who was going for who and what would work. I've done various hairy escapades and at the point of impact I know one of the things the front rank is concerned about is not what target to hit but who is screaming in behind me, where their lance tip is and do they know what they are doing.... That's mainly again due to the fact no one is really trying to kill me in front.

As you would be up to about 20mph or possibly more if the ground and conditions are right it is possible to pick your target pretty well. I'm not aware of any proscribed targets from period manuals pre 17th century, but all I can say is a medieval knight would most likely aim for the body, more chance of a incapacitating blow, and that's the same in later periods. WW1 cavalry were certainly trained to aim for the centre of the torso but it does depend on the weapon. Until the '07 pattern sabre the cut was favoured so you tend to lash out a bit at whatever you fancy.

So sorry I can't answer your question, hopefully someone else will be able to.

Yours,

Griff

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,248

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 9:19 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Writing in 1592, Humphrey Barwick expected lancers when charging to target the face or breast of pikers. Mair's manual has various depictions of riders attacking foes on foot.
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 9:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
Writing in 1592, Humphrey Barwick expected lancers when charging to target the face or breast of pikers. Mair's manual has various depictions of riders attacking foes on foot.


I will look up that source when I have some time but I have a few questions about it. Does he make any mention of the way charge should be executed? In a flying wedge or En Haie, and which person to target. Oh and is 1592 not a bit late to mention lancer tactics?
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 9:48 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Griffin wrote:
Thanks for that Pieter,

Although I'm a fair to intermediate jouster for late 15th to mid 16th century purposes I'm by no means a cavalry expert. All my work in the medieval area centres on practical jousting reconstructions, as accurate as possible. So whilst we aim lances at each other in the controlled, or at least regulated, tilt yard, we don't do it at infantry or or other cavalry in large groups or if we do it will be for event/film/tv purposes and will be tightly choreographed and rehearsed.

We do practise melee work with infantry and hand weapons both medieval and later periods (I'm a proud member of www.1stroyaldragoons.org) but the thought of doing practical work with lance or even sword for that matter against standing infantry fills me with dread, just massively dangerous for the people on the ground.

My personal experience of 'combat' when charging other cavalry is that I'm far more worried about getting my ankle, knee or hips broken and dislocated as we pass through each other than what the enemy weapons will do as hopefully they are not really aiming to do me serious injury.

A cavalry 'charge' looks great right up to the point of impact then it becomes a bit of a mess so I doubt that any agreements on who was going for who and what would work. I've done various hairy escapades and at the point of impact I know one of the things the front rank is concerned about is not what target to hit but who is screaming in behind me, where their lance tip is and do they know what they are doing.... That's mainly again due to the fact no one is really trying to kill me in front.

As you would be up to about 20mph or possibly more if the ground and conditions are right it is possible to pick your target pretty well. I'm not aware of any proscribed targets from period manuals pre 17th century, but all I can say is a medieval knight would most likely aim for the body, more chance of a incapacitating blow, and that's the same in later periods. WW1 cavalry were certainly trained to aim for the centre of the torso but it does depend on the weapon. Until the '07 pattern sabre the cut was favoured so you tend to lash out a bit at whatever you fancy.

So sorry I can't answer your question, hopefully someone else will be able to.

Yours,

Griff


Ah yes the broken knees are mentioned a lot in some of the sources I have read. Most note table a grand Joust with teams of 30 on every side.

Could you elaborate a little on the bit I highlighted?

Thanks in advance, it's always great to hear something from someone with experience Wink

I also have a few questions on horse riding itself (something I have never done) but I will try to find the answers myself first.
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,248

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 9:54 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Pieter B. wrote:
I will look up that source when I have some time but I have a few questions about it. Does he make any mention of the way charge should be executed? In a flying wedge or En Haie, and which person to target.


I don't believe so.

Quote:
Oh and is 1592 not a bit late to mention lancer tactics?


Various English military manuals of the 1590s cover the lance, which still saw use in English and other armies of the period despite being partially displaced by the pistol. (Barwick recommend a pistol as backup for the lancer.) Modernizing advocates of the gun and opponents of the bow like Barwick and Sir Roger Williams considered the lance a serviceable weapon.
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 12:41 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
just massively dangerous for the people on the ground.


I mean when charging at people on foot we have to stop well short or you run them over. You need to give yourself plenty of turning room or your rear end can nudge people and anyone that has experience of that will tell what a horse takes as a barely noticeable collision is a lot more serious than that.

Same with riding through 'broken' infantry, safety first, unlike the real thing. Most periods that expect to have this happen have some kind of training regime to cope with this. I have spent many a merry hour sabreing fleeing ground troops and I doff my hat to them.

Although playing about in battles is good and fun it can't be anything other than historical role play with not a great deal of educational value to an audience except for the spectacle and, if they are lucky enough, the thrill of feeling the ground shake as they pass. Having been in a few hundred plus engagements you get a fraction of an idea of the sheer noise, smell, scale and chaos of a cavalry action might have been like. There is footage of the Scots Greys thundering about on Salisbury plain from over 100 years ago, thousands of them, and even though it's in grainy, jittery, black and white it's impressive. Watch 'lives of a Bengal lancer' to get an idea, similar numbers, although the story is made up tosh.

Trying to live and work out the saddle is of course educational to the rider in many ways although as always a vet, modern transport (or a comfy bed) is only a phone call and a credit card away.

Which is why I favour jousting. The ultimate aim is the same and there doesn't have to be any excuses as to why you can't do it exactly the same as anyone in the late 15th or early 16th cents would have experienced it. Anyone who saw the Sankt Wendel tournament will hopefully attest to that.

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 2:31 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Griffin wrote:
Quote:
just massively dangerous for the people on the ground.


I mean when charging at people on foot we have to stop well short or you run them over. You need to give yourself plenty of turning room or your rear end can nudge people and anyone that has experience of that will tell what a horse takes as a barely noticeable collision is a lot more serious than that.

Same with riding through 'broken' infantry, safety first, unlike the real thing. Most periods that expect to have this happen have some kind of training regime to cope with this. I have spent many a merry hour sabreing fleeing ground troops and I doff my hat to them.

Although playing about in battles is good and fun it can't be anything other than historical role play with not a great deal of educational value to an audience except for the spectacle and, if they are lucky enough, the thrill of feeling the ground shake as they pass. Having been in a few hundred plus engagements you get a fraction of an idea of the sheer noise, smell, scale and chaos of a cavalry action might have been like. There is footage of the Scots Greys thundering about on Salisbury plain from over 100 years ago, thousands of them, and even though it's in grainy, jittery, black and white it's impressive. Watch 'lives of a Bengal lancer' to get an idea, similar numbers, although the story is made up tosh.

Trying to live and work out the saddle is of course educational to the rider in many ways although as always a vet, modern transport (or a comfy bed) is only a phone call and a credit card away.

Which is why I favour jousting. The ultimate aim is the same and there doesn't have to be any excuses as to why you can't do it exactly the same as anyone in the late 15th or early 16th cents would have experienced it. Anyone who saw the Sankt Wendel tournament will hopefully attest to that.


I always had this idea that horses would try to avoid collisions with people. Actually what does happen when a horse has a small collision with someone?

What is this training regime you mention is that for the folks on the ground or for the horse riding folks?
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 3:08 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:


I always had this idea that horses would try to avoid collisions with people. Actually what does happen when a horse has a small collision with someone?

What is this training regime you mention is that for the folks on the ground or for the horse riding folks?


A well schooled horse will push into bodies of men, especially when given impetus. One group of early medieval riders over here have even been practising jumping over obstacles, aiming for gaps between kite shields.

If you slow down before impact you are liable to receive blows at which point the horse becomes angry and scared and will try and fly in any direction, only natural. It will choose the weakest point which is probably still the men in front if it's backed up by more horses. at Waterloo the 1st royal dragoons road/cut straight through several lines of French infantry, capturing their eagle standard. The scots greys did similar, pushing into a mass of men. One sergeant any cut down 4 men in a flurry of blows, again took the standard, turned around and road out again. His account of the action shows what a professional cavalryman armed with a sword can do. There is some argument about how good the infantry were but even so, job well done on his part. In this era riding ankle to ankle and becoming an unstoppable mass was the norm in heavy cavalry training. I can say it works pretty well, even in friendly situations you get the distinct impression you can crush mostly anything in front of you.

Of course when facing hardened well disciplined troops the horse and rider may well fare worse, luck of the draw. It's made worse if you loose control. Get your arms injured, then you are down to your legs. Not impossible but you are no longer much use. There is an instance of a rider returning back to his lines, both arms gone, reins in teeth. In a melee it's perfectly ok to cut reins and anything else of course.

If I knock you with a horse you will be hurt and fall over or at least be jarred badly. A good horse is schooled to turn very fast and a decent side swipe will knock you some distance. Once on the ground you can be trodden on by the horse and your own men. If the the rider is armed with a lance you'll probably end up like the poor dragon in the pics that started this thread but a sword will work just as well if the rider can reach.

We train horse and ground personnel alike to be used to working and fighting around each other. On a media job or event no one wants to hurt anyone but it must look credible. We practice all sorts of drills, actions and combat techniques to get riders, horses and foot soldiers used to each other.

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Sun 02 Mar, 2014 4:49 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Griffin wrote:
Quote:


I always had this idea that horses would try to avoid collisions with people. Actually what does happen when a horse has a small collision with someone?

What is this training regime you mention is that for the folks on the ground or for the horse riding folks?


A well schooled horse will push into bodies of men, especially when given impetus. One group of early medieval riders over here have even been practising jumping over obstacles, aiming for gaps between kite shields.

If you slow down before impact you are liable to receive blows at which point the horse becomes angry and scared and will try and fly in any direction, only natural. It will choose the weakest point which is probably still the men in front if it's backed up by more horses. at Waterloo the 1st royal dragoons road/cut straight through several lines of French infantry, capturing their eagle standard. The scots greys did similar, pushing into a mass of men. One sergeant any cut down 4 men in a flurry of blows, again took the standard, turned around and road out again. His account of the action shows what a professional cavalryman armed with a sword can do. There is some argument about how good the infantry were but even so, job well done on his part. In this era riding ankle to ankle and becoming an unstoppable mass was the norm in heavy cavalry training. I can say it works pretty well, even in friendly situations you get the distinct impression you can crush mostly anything in front of you.

Of course when facing hardened well disciplined troops the horse and rider may well fare worse, luck of the draw. It's made worse if you loose control. Get your arms injured, then you are down to your legs. Not impossible but you are no longer much use. There is an instance of a rider returning back to his lines, both arms gone, reins in teeth. In a melee it's perfectly ok to cut reins and anything else of course.

If I knock you with a horse you will be hurt and fall over or at least be jarred badly. A good horse is schooled to turn very fast and a decent side swipe will knock you some distance. Once on the ground you can be trodden on by the horse and your own men. If the the rider is armed with a lance you'll probably end up like the poor dragon in the pics that started this thread but a sword will work just as well if the rider can reach.

We train horse and ground personnel alike to be used to working and fighting around each other. On a media job or event no one wants to hurt anyone but it must look credible. We practice all sorts of drills, actions and combat techniques to get riders, horses and foot soldiers used to each other.


Oh wow, sounds like you put an amazing effort in making it look good Eek!

Now I don't really want to bother you but I have a few more questions. At what pace would one Push into a body of infantry? Full gallop or something a little slower? How bad is getting hit by a horse? Won't it damage his breast bone or neck? Does a unified line remain after a charge (I mean the horses) or does it disintegrate to a mess where you can indeed make your horse do a full spin? What kind of attack has a preference with a saber cutting or thrusting, I can see that if some sort of a line remains thrusting might be your only option.

Also regarding being trampled I read somewhere to horses have a natural aversion to stepping on bodies since they are an unstable underground.

If these questions did not scare you away already I have one more thing to ask. Do you have any videos of your group performing or training to jump over obstacles in groups.

And again thank you very much for taking the time to answer my questions Happy
View user's profile Send private message
J.-P. Rybak




Location: Munich, Bavaria, Germany
Joined: 03 Jun 2012

Posts: 12

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 4:28 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
Quote:

Mark Griffin replied that in tournaments the equipment was designed to have the lance be the weak point, I have a question:


Not what I said, sorry if that's what came over.
...


Thank you for pointing that out! Nevertheless, designed or not, the lance is the weakest part of the whole combination, thats what I was after Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 7:18 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
Nevertheless, designed or not, the lance is the weakest part of the whole combination, thats what I was after


But only if the arret and a graper on the lance is used. If not, the weakest part is your arm. Most people experience the weakness in the elbow. I'd say shoulder next, then wrist last.

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 8:21 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
At what pace would one Push into a body of infantry? Full gallop or something a little slower?


Depends on many things but mainly the lie of the land and its condition. Despite the 'scotland the brave' painting here

http://s3.amazonaws.com/magnoliasoft.imageweb...100000.jpg

which shows the 'charge of the Scots Greys at Waterloo they probably walked (they had only just passed through a body of their own men and were only yards from their target as they came out into open land) and accelerated only over the last few strides, the ground was too soft to do anything much else, it was wet, soft, ploughed fields and you cant go for it across that.

1RD had slightly better ground and probably went a bit faster, certainly they smashed through the infantry line, then carried on to take some guns and then carried on further again. At which point one of the limitations of cavalry came into play and their horses were blown and so were caught pretty helpless in the open by enemy cavalry and badly cut up, suffering many casualties.

The ground is the thing. Many of the notable cavalry engagements are so due to topography. Bosworth, Flodden, Pavia (where they don't have enough room to manouvre) Agincourt (a combination of ground, obstacles and firepower defeat the French charge)

Quote:
How bad is getting hit by a horse?
From mildly painful and bruising to having the breath knocked out of you to fatal.

Quote:
Won't it damage his breast bone or neck?


Might cut him up a bit if the foot person was armoured but I've never heard of a horse being damaged to any great extent by hitting someone and even so, their have a far superior pain suppression system to ours and even if badly damaged, can take a fair amount of body damage. Leg damage is another matter.

Don't forget that in the 'behord' a large padded buffer is used (of the same name) to prevent horse to horse head on collisions that could damage those areas. The one surviving one is in Vienna. Basically a big stuffed sack that acts as a shock absorber.

Quote:
Does a unified line remain after a charge (I mean the horses) or does it disintegrate to a mess where you can indeed make your horse do a full spin?
Depends on the space available around the animal, whats going on, discipline of unit. No hard or fast answer there I'm afraid, yes and no! A horse has a very good way of making enough space to do things so its not exactly pivoting on a central point without any flexibility.

Quote:
What kind of attack has a preference with a saber cutting or thrusting, I can see that if some sort of a line remains thrusting might be your only option.


The sabre is meant for the cut/slash. But if a thrust is the only option, I doubt a soldier will turn it down. Dont forget that a straight thrust is faster, but it does depend on where you are starting from. A thrust off a horse with any sword downwards can cause you to over extend with nasty conseuences of course so in fact the further into a body of men you are, the easier your job and if they cant bring their arms to bear on you, great.

I own a fair few of both types of cavalry sword and have to say there is not much until the '08 and '12 pattern comes along that beats the 1796 heavy sword for sheer brutal effectiveness. The light sabre is great and dashing but a much weaker weapon.

Quote:
Also regarding being trampled I read somewhere to horses have a natural aversion to stepping on bodies since they are an unstable underground.


Urban myth mainly. If someone is shouting and screaming and writhing about, maybe. But otherwise its just another lump on the ground and that could be tussock of grass etc. Obviously riders who don't want to trample people try to avoid it but in a press there is no way a horse is going to try picking its way around minor obstacles.

I'd sum up by saying that all engagements horse to horse and horse to infantry descend into chaos at the point of contact unless one is routing another. There are no hard and fast rules. What makes the difference overall is the ability to reform and re-organise. Something that cavalry often find very difficult to do. And don't forget that horses kick with both ends and bite with the front, its not just the lance and spear you need to worry about.

Quote:
Do you have any videos of your group performing or training to jump over obstacles in groups.
Sadly its not my group who do the jumping over shields and any practice we do is rarely filmed. I don't have any of that footage
Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 10:56 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Griffin wrote:
Quote:
At what pace would one Push into a body of infantry? Full gallop or something a little slower?


Depends on many things but mainly the lie of the land and its condition. Despite the 'scotland the brave' painting here

http://s3.amazonaws.com/magnoliasoft.imageweb...100000.jpg

which shows the 'charge of the Scots Greys at Waterloo they probably walked (they had only just passed through a body of their own men and were only yards from their target as they came out into open land) and accelerated only over the last few strides, the ground was too soft to do anything much else, it was wet, soft, ploughed fields and you cant go for it across that.

1RD had slightly better ground and probably went a bit faster, certainly they smashed through the infantry line, then carried on to take some guns and then carried on further again. At which point one of the limitations of cavalry came into play and their horses were blown and so were caught pretty helpless in the open by enemy cavalry and badly cut up, suffering many casualties.

The ground is the thing. Many of the notable cavalry engagements are so due to topography. Bosworth, Flodden, Pavia (where they don't have enough room to manouvre) Agincourt (a combination of ground, obstacles and firepower defeat the French charge)

Quote:
How bad is getting hit by a horse?
From mildly painful and bruising to having the breath knocked out of you to fatal.

Quote:
Won't it damage his breast bone or neck?


Might cut him up a bit if the foot person was armoured but I've never heard of a horse being damaged to any great extent by hitting someone and even so, their have a far superior pain suppression system to ours and even if badly damaged, can take a fair amount of body damage. Leg damage is another matter.

Don't forget that in the 'behord' a large padded buffer is used (of the same name) to prevent horse to horse head on collisions that could damage those areas. The one surviving one is in Vienna. Basically a big stuffed sack that acts as a shock absorber.

Quote:
Does a unified line remain after a charge (I mean the horses) or does it disintegrate to a mess where you can indeed make your horse do a full spin?
Depends on the space available around the animal, whats going on, discipline of unit. No hard or fast answer there I'm afraid, yes and no! A horse has a very good way of making enough space to do things so its not exactly pivoting on a central point without any flexibility.

Quote:
What kind of attack has a preference with a saber cutting or thrusting, I can see that if some sort of a line remains thrusting might be your only option.


The sabre is meant for the cut/slash. But if a thrust is the only option, I doubt a soldier will turn it down. Dont forget that a straight thrust is faster, but it does depend on where you are starting from. A thrust off a horse with any sword downwards can cause you to over extend with nasty conseuences of course so in fact the further into a body of men you are, the easier your job and if they cant bring their arms to bear on you, great.

I own a fair few of both types of cavalry sword and have to say there is not much until the '08 and '12 pattern comes along that beats the 1796 heavy sword for sheer brutal effectiveness. The light sabre is great and dashing but a much weaker weapon.

Quote:
Also regarding being trampled I read somewhere to horses have a natural aversion to stepping on bodies since they are an unstable underground.


Urban myth mainly. If someone is shouting and screaming and writhing about, maybe. But otherwise its just another lump on the ground and that could be tussock of grass etc. Obviously riders who don't want to trample people try to avoid it but in a press there is no way a horse is going to try picking its way around minor obstacles.

I'd sum up by saying that all engagements horse to horse and horse to infantry descend into chaos at the point of contact unless one is routing another. There are no hard and fast rules. What makes the difference overall is the ability to reform and re-organise. Something that cavalry often find very difficult to do. And don't forget that horses kick with both ends and bite with the front, its not just the lance and spear you need to worry about.

Quote:
Do you have any videos of your group performing or training to jump over obstacles in groups.
Sadly its not my group who do the jumping over shields and any practice we do is rarely filmed. I don't have any of that footage


So to summarize a charge can also do damage when it does not immediately rout the enemy infantry? It's something that confuses me a lot. From time to time memoirs and other first hand accounts of medieval and renaissance warfare describe how cavalry did an X amount of charges against a target. This always made me wonder if the cavalry just stopped a few meters short of the enemy infantry armed with spear and whatnot to retreat and try again or whether there was an impact each time with casualties on both sides but no side retreating/routing.

But what I've gathered from this thread so far is that during the Napoleonic wars where unarmored cavalry faced bayonets and infantry squares the cavalry would/could make a charge and force their horses to make an impact.

I am looking at this more from a medieval renaissance viewpoint and this information has helped immensely. Yet I still wonder why sometimes even infantry with short spears managed to defeat heavily armored cavalry so absolutely when other times a cavalry charge at the right moment changed the outcome of the battle.


Oh and one thing regarding swords. It appears late medieval and early renaissance heavy cavalry used an estoc sword which I believe is a bit longer than the cavalry saber. Would they risk overextending with this sword since it can only be used for thrust attacks? Again I am unfamiliar with the difference between the saddle and stirrup technicalities of the periods and how those might affect how well you could preform either of those two attacks.
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 12:23 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
So to summarize a charge can also do damage when it does not immediately rout the enemy infantry?


Yes. A good example is Hastings. Many charges, some casualties, one even famously breaking the line and getting in amongst them, but it was hours before they were overwhelmed, and then only with missile support to make holes to be exploited. Hopefully all that's need is a gap to exploit and an infantry until can be broken, or they may choose to turn an run and take their chances. But thats dangerous if you have cavalry all around you.

Quote:

It's something that confuses me a lot. From time to time memoirs and other first hand accounts of medieval and renaissance warfare describe how cavalry did an X amount of charges against a target. This always made me wonder if the cavalry just stopped a few meters short of the enemy infantry armed with spear and whatnot to retreat and try again or whether there was an impact each time with casualties on both sides but no side retreating/routing.


Both. A well disciplined and steadfast unit should be able to hold off horses but in battle stuff happens. The famous British square holds back the French many times but don't forget that Wellington himself managed to jump into one when finding himself outside and in danger. Not something I'd try and he was a consummate horseman and his hunting skills obviously served him well. If the French fox hunted a bit more maybe the square would not have been so useful!

Quote:
But what I've gathered from this thread so far is that during the Napoleonic wars where unarmored cavalry faced bayonets and infantry squares the cavalry would/could make a charge and force their horses to make an impact.


There are no set rules. Columns and squares both get broken, and both are declared unbreakable. Some horse can climb stairs, most not. Some box easily other take forever. One horse I'm familiar with can jump through fire, have a machine guy fired from its back but show it a big fat buzzing bee and thats your lot. They are also herd animals so mass psychology is important as is sex. Mine is a stallion. 20 years old but i have to watch who he is in a paddock with or it can be fun. Having had the warm breath of a horse down my neck in a rather excited mood whilst in a saddle i know what that's like.

Quote:
I am looking at this more from a medieval renaissance viewpoint and this information has helped immensely. Yet I still wonder why sometimes even infantry with short spears managed to defeat heavily armored cavalry so absolutely when other times a cavalry charge at the right moment changed the outcome of the battle.


Its random, there are hinge factors in every battle, but they are usually pinpointable. Its the same for any arm of any military, you just have to know what affects them and hopefuly play to your strengths, trusting the enemy isn't going to play on your weaknesses if he can find them.

Quote:
Oh and one thing regarding swords. It appears late medieval and early renaissance heavy cavalry used an estoc sword which I believe is a bit longer than the cavalry saber. Would they risk overextending with this sword since it can only be used for thrust attacks? Again I am unfamiliar with the difference between the saddle and stirrup technicalities of the periods and how those might affect how well you could preform either of those two attacks.


Again, no hard and fast rules there. As long as a sword has an edge you can cut and slash with it, no-one is going to have a weapon where there is some convention that says you can't do this and that. I'd use anything i can, even if it means grappling your opponent and punching them in the skull with the guard, its a battle so anything goes.

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Pieter B.





Joined: 16 Feb 2014
Reading list: 10 books

Posts: 645

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 2:08 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mark Griffin wrote:
Quote:
So to summarize a charge can also do damage when it does not immediately rout the enemy infantry?


Yes. A good example is Hastings. Many charges, some casualties, one even famously breaking the line and getting in amongst them, but it was hours before they were overwhelmed, and then only with missile support to make holes to be exploited. Hopefully all that's need is a gap to exploit and an infantry until can be broken, or they may choose to turn an run and take their chances. But thats dangerous if you have cavalry all around you.

Quote:

It's something that confuses me a lot. From time to time memoirs and other first hand accounts of medieval and renaissance warfare describe how cavalry did an X amount of charges against a target. This always made me wonder if the cavalry just stopped a few meters short of the enemy infantry armed with spear and whatnot to retreat and try again or whether there was an impact each time with casualties on both sides but no side retreating/routing.


Both. A well disciplined and steadfast unit should be able to hold off horses but in battle stuff happens. The famous British square holds back the French many times but don't forget that Wellington himself managed to jump into one when finding himself outside and in danger. Not something I'd try and he was a consummate horseman and his hunting skills obviously served him well. If the French fox hunted a bit more maybe the square would not have been so useful!

Quote:
But what I've gathered from this thread so far is that during the Napoleonic wars where unarmored cavalry faced bayonets and infantry squares the cavalry would/could make a charge and force their horses to make an impact.


There are no set rules. Columns and squares both get broken, and both are declared unbreakable. Some horse can climb stairs, most not. Some box easily other take forever. One horse I'm familiar with can jump through fire, have a machine guy fired from its back but show it a big fat buzzing bee and thats your lot. They are also herd animals so mass psychology is important as is sex. Mine is a stallion. 20 years old but i have to watch who he is in a paddock with or it can be fun. Having had the warm breath of a horse down my neck in a rather excited mood whilst in a saddle i know what that's like.

Quote:
I am looking at this more from a medieval renaissance viewpoint and this information has helped immensely. Yet I still wonder why sometimes even infantry with short spears managed to defeat heavily armored cavalry so absolutely when other times a cavalry charge at the right moment changed the outcome of the battle.


Its random, there are hinge factors in every battle, but they are usually pinpointable. Its the same for any arm of any military, you just have to know what affects them and hopefuly play to your strengths, trusting the enemy isn't going to play on your weaknesses if he can find them.

Quote:
Oh and one thing regarding swords. It appears late medieval and early renaissance heavy cavalry used an estoc sword which I believe is a bit longer than the cavalry saber. Would they risk overextending with this sword since it can only be used for thrust attacks? Again I am unfamiliar with the difference between the saddle and stirrup technicalities of the periods and how those might affect how well you could preform either of those two attacks.


Again, no hard and fast rules there. As long as a sword has an edge you can cut and slash with it, no-one is going to have a weapon where there is some convention that says you can't do this and that. I'd use anything i can, even if it means grappling your opponent and punching them in the skull with the guard, its a battle so anything goes.


Thanks again for taking the time to explain this to me, it has been really helpful.

I see lots of variables are in play. Do you happen to know what made or broke a cavalry charge during the Italian wars? It seemed they were virtually always up against pike wielding infantry and had terrible losses a few times but at other times they blasted through unbroken formations. Another thing that puzzles me is why it appears the French didn't use their heavy cavalry for flanking maneuvers often.


PS, how does fox hunting factor in exactly?
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,698

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 9:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Pieter B. wrote:
Do you happen to know what made or broke a cavalry charge during the Italian wars?


To repeat something I've repeated ad nauseam in other threads, we don't know. Big Grin None of use were alive then -- at least not that I know of -- and I don't think the few cavalrymen with real combat experience today (deep in Africa and Asia where infrastructure is poor and vehicles hard to come by) have ever faced a solid line of men.


Quote:
It seemed they were virtually always up against pike wielding infantry and had terrible losses a few times but at other times they blasted through unbroken formations.


The one conclusion we can be satisfied with is that the outcome of cavalry charges can be highly unpredictable. Many 19th- and early 20th-century military writers said things like "to be useful, cavalry must be expended" or "one doesn't know whether the enemy would break until one has charged them." There were ways to reduce the uncertainty, such as by firing at the infantry from ridiculously long ranges to see whether they're inexperienced enough to fire back (rather than holding their fire until the cavalry came much closer), but even this wasn't foolproof. Or let me just borrow Jomini's hilarious explanation:

Quote:
Opinions will be always divided as to those amphibious animals called dragoons. It is certainly an advantage to have several battalions of mounted infantry, who can anticipate an enemy at a defile, defend it in retreat, or scour a wood; but to make cavalry out of foot-soldiers, or a soldier who is equally good on horse or on foot, is very difficult. This might have been supposed settled by the fate of the French dragoons when fighting on foot, had it not been seen that the Turkish cavalry fought quite as well dismounted as mounted. It has been said that the greatest inconvenience resulting from the use of dragoons consists in the fact of being obliged at one moment to make them believe infantry squares cannot resist their charges, and the next moment that a foot-soldier armed with his musket is superior to any horseman in the world. This argument has more plausibility than real force; for, instead of attempting to make men believe such contradictory statements, it would be much more reasonable to tell them that if brave cavalry may break a square, brave foot-soldiers may resist such a charge; that victory does not always depend upon the superiority of the arm, but upon a thousand other things; that the courage of the troops, the presence of mind of the commanders, the opportuneness of maneuvers, the effect of artillery and musketry fire, rain,—mud, even,—have been the causes of repulses or of victories; and, finally, that a brave man, whether on foot or mounted, will always be more than a match for a coward. By impressing these truths upon dragoons, they will believe themselves superior to their adversaries whether they fight on foot or on horseback. This is the case with the Turks and the Circassians, whose cavalry often dismount to fight on foot in a wood or behind a cover, musket in hand, like foot-soldiers.


It's not from the 16th century, but 16th-century cavalrymen would likely have experienced a similar uncertainty.

(BTW, what makes you think they were "always up against pike-wielding infantry?" They fought enemy shot and horse pretty often in their own time. In fact, as I've mentioned before, their primary target was usually the enemy cavalry, and only when that was out of the way would they engage the enemy's infantry.)


Quote:
Another thing that puzzles me is why it appears the French didn't use their heavy cavalry for flanking maneuvers often.


Probably because the sources often don't go into that much detail. Who is to say that the thirty charges at Marignano were all made against the Swiss front? Who could say that none of them were aimed against the flanks, rear, or corners of the Swiss formations? We don't have that much detail in 16th- and 17th-century cavalry manuals since they mostly spoke of how cavalry were supposed to engage other cavalry (and that was, indeed, their primary role) but if we can borrow some clues from 19th-century ones then we can see that they told cavalry to charge at the flanks of infantry lines and the corners of squares.

It's also worth noting that cavalry charges in all periods (including the Italian Wars) were often made against an enemy infantry unit that had already been pinned down from the front by friendly infantry. Where else could the cavalry strike in these situations except for the enemy's flanks and rear?


Quote:
PS, how does fox hunting factor in exactly?


This is probably an English quirk. Fox hunting requires considerable skill in cross-country riding, which included jumping over low fences, walls, and banks. As a result of this practice in civilian life, the English gentry was noted as being particularly skilled cross-country horsemen (and their horses were often more skilled in jumping too). Louis Nolan -- yes, the one who was killed just before the Charge of the Light Brigade -- once related an incident where several Austrian staff officers were riding along a fence, looking for a gap or gate to pass through, when he came along and told them "This way!" while jumping his horse over the fence. The Austrians merely looked on in amazement, presumably because they and their horses weren't quite as well-practiced at jumping obstacles like that.
View user's profile Send private message
Ben van Koert




Location: Veenendaal, the Netherlands
Joined: 23 May 2007
Reading list: 14 books

Posts: 120

PostPosted: Mon 03 Mar, 2014 11:28 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Getting back to the original question, it's definitely not rearing we see here, nor is it any kind of levade in most cases of the St. George depictions. In many cased it seem to be a lancade, which can be initiated from collected manoeuvres to launch the mass of horse and rider forward in a spectacular fashion.
I've seen this done from a backwards mezair and when you see a real master at riding perform these kind of tactics, with canter pirouettes all over the place to get a better angle of attack, cantering backwards etc. it totally changes your perspective on cavalry combat.
I'm absolutely no expert on these matters, but hopefully this video gives a bit more perspective: http://youtu.be/xk2Mr6Y-E3w?t=35s
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Tue 04 Mar, 2014 12:07 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I think the phrase 'unbridled chaos' is very apt when discussing anything cavalry related. No hard and fast rules, anything can happen And you can't treat it like a war game with rules, defined outcomes and expectations. It's all extremely unpredictable.

It looks like 'bloody magnificent carnage' as one staff officer remarked about the Heavies at Sevastopol but it's impossible to make predictions or rules as to what will happen. You certainly can't roll a dice, refer to a chart and know what that turn will bring.

As Lafayette says, none of us were alive at the time and we only have scant recollections of centuries ago plus outcomes. What happened in between is a mist.

To take part in 'mass' (about 120 is the most i've been in, a far cry from reality) cavalry is thrilling, evocative, frightening, hard work and exhausting. But at the end of the day, we are just playing at it. Add to the fact that not many modern historical cavalry rider has seen any military service and you remove another part of the psychology.

Above all the noise shouting, cannons and musketry at Albuera a few years back I also sensed a good bit of worry as we ran towards a small group of Polish Lancers, weapons lowered. The first time we had encountered them, exactly as our forebears experienced 200 years prior. We gritted out teeth and hoped that they knew what they were doing and accelerated. On paper we should have lost but for various factors, no one intending to do damage to the other probably the most important, we 'won' in our eyes. But at the start of the run I put an extra twist in my sword knot, doubled checked everything and thought 'bugger, this going to hurt'.

Anyway, back to this dragon......

Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message
Miguel Gade Islund





Joined: 20 Jul 2009

Posts: 1

PostPosted: Tue 04 Mar, 2014 6:59 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Hello everybody!

The reason the horses in medieval art often is shown rearing is NOT artistic license, it is a special move in combat riding and is still used and shown in barock riding exhibitions. It's called a "karriere" jump and has the horse pushing off with both hind legs in stead of just one, which is normal in a gallop. This was used in battle just before impact, as it makes the lance hit that much harder.
View user's profile Send private message
Mark Griffin




Location: The Welsh Marches, in the hills above Newtown, Powys.
Joined: 28 Dec 2006

Posts: 802

PostPosted: Tue 04 Mar, 2014 8:35 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

If it's a Baroque move, where does it descend from and are there actual recorded instances to show this?
Currently working on projects ranging from Elizabethan pageants to a WW1 Tank, Victorian fairgrounds 1066 events and more. Oh and we joust loads!.. We run over 250 events for English Heritage each year plus many others for Historic Royal Palaces, Historic Scotland, the National Trust and more. If you live in the UK and are interested in working for us just drop us a line with a cv.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Saint George and his rearing horse
Page 2 of 3 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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