Training horses for war

[greekwarrior34]

I would recommend to all of you who are interested in cavalry in ancient times to take a look at this topic in totalwar.com forums. I hope it will help you a lot.

[Thiadricus Saxonicus]

Hi,
I completely agree with Justin until he gets into the melee itself.

As for training a horse to stay in the fray of battle, it is actually better to leave a horse untrained, here is where you need to train the rider. A frantic horse is a dangerous horse, horses hate loud noises, fire, things touching them that they can't see, when these things happen they rear up and buck and kick and scream, this is good. Once you are in the fray and you are fighting at close quarters you want your horse to kick and flail as this will keep too many men from surrounding you and taking you off your horse, also a scared screaming horse will enrage other horses, especially if the other horses our from your horses training group and a pissed off horse is worse than a scared horse. But then this creates a new problem in the sense that this horse will be kicking, bucking, biting, swinging around, jumping, and just plain moving about abnormally and you have no stirrups to stand on, and only one hand if that to hold on with.

I do not think that it would be a good idea if you trained your hores to go mad when you are in the thick of melee. There is no point in having a rodeo while around you are hundreds of people trying to get you down and killed.
It would make more sense to train the horse on performing kicks and moves on order and otherwise stay calm and controlable.
How would you use your arms if you are busy staying on top of your horse. I think your main weapen will be your weapon, which would be a lance or a sword in the most melee situations. They are boosted by the mass and speed of the beast beneath you, yet the horse itself would not be the perfect weapon to rely on. It is easily wounded, it cannot distinguish between friend an foe and after all, you beeing a well trained fighter and, as before said, having the power of the horse in your blows, are by fare more able to inflict damage onyour enemys. Of course, the actions of the horse are well suited to give you some space when you are surrounded.
You will always have to control the horse in some manner if you want to fight from top of it. And, after all, there are your comrades left which whom you are supposed to cooperate against an organised enemy.

I believe the best place to teach horse and rider the proper abilities to cope with melee would be the spanish academic school of riding or classical dressage.
The spanish school derrives from the medieval trainig of war horses and underwent some changes to become the traditional baroque art of riding. It teaches courbettes and caprioles and the artificial gaits which greatly improve the horses mobility. E. g. the gait called "terre à terre" which is basically a very slow and controlled two-beat gallop: You can gallop on the spot, turn around on the spot, are able to command the horse to kick out to the back (capriole) or command it to dash forward explosively, giving the thrust of lance or sword an enourmous power. Looks quite like this or clearer, like this, as you see, it doesn't even need a barb or andalusian horse to do it :-) )
It also enables you to ride the hore rather free handed, giving only minimal helps via balance changes and nearly without using the reins, which is quite important if you intent to fight from horseback.
Of cause, the western riding stile or the spanish doma vaquera give you free hands, too. Yet these are stiles dedicated to work with cattle and not to dash headlong into a massed spearwall and fight within it until everyone but you is dead. So they miss all the skills so nescessary in a melee. You can of cause not just use the classical dressage lessons and hope to survive. All which has been said before by Justin is most important to train the horse to not become mad when it is in the battle. And naturally many lessons of classical dressage are quite obsolete if you intent to train a horse for melee.
Of cause all this training will take a huge amount of time and effort and I doubt that in war most of the horses were trained to a degree where things like terre à terre or capriols would be possible.

[John Conyard]

Put simply by "jump" into a shield wall I really meant bunny hop into a wall :lol: The horse has enough weight and speed to break into the infanty fromation without unduly exposing itself, and it remains under control. The movements practiced by the classic riding schools demonstrate the action beautifully.

I suspect it looks good for the crowd, but there is a danger to the infantry. This is mimimised by one horse at a time going through the infantry. But if 3 or 4 horses go through at once some poor pede might have nowhere to go. And the horses slowly get used to it.

[Lepidina]

The movements practiced by the classic riding schools demonstrate the action beautifully.

What movements are those? I've heard that mounted police in the UK still use cavarly tactics to break up crowds by rushing them because the horses aim for the spaces between the people instead of the people themselves. I wish I could get a copy of "The Warhorse" series that was on the History Channel some time ago as it demonstrated this beautifully

[Tarbicus]

Can we stop calling it a "shield wall".

It's a "shield and lethal spear wall".

When you add the long lethal pointy things it changes the entire nature of the conjecture, especially when anachronising.

[John Conyard]

Call the infantry formation what you will, the approach to breaking it on a horse remains the same.

An earlier post described the Spanish Riding School's techniques. Similar movements for use against infantry are given in English 17th century manuals.

[Lepidina]

Okay, that's English 17th cenutry manuals. Not to be a pain but what evidence do we have that they were used in Roman times? Plus the cav of the 17th cent. is much different than the cav of the 1st cen. Different fighting styles, different weapons, different opponents. I can see charging a line in a fully armored warhorse but not with essentially an unarmored pony.

You also have to remember that by the 17th century, cav was being phased out because of the use of canon and other firearms. Riding became one of the "gentlemanly arts" and was being refined as an art form like fencing. Classical dressage bears about as much resemblance to being on the battle field as Olympic fencing.

[Scipio Bristolus]

C17th cavalry could make up half of an army. They may have been declining as a % but they were still relevant.

Some similarities - the charge was at "a good round trot" (slow canter?) in close order, with sword (English anyway) and opposition could be pike aka guys with long spears. Not all horses were trained 'warhorses' mind - at least one used was noted as blind!

What happens when two units of close-order cavalry charge head to head? hock:

[John Conyard]

Time is limited so forgive my short reply.

Of course nobody is suggesting that 17th century manuals correlate to Roman cavalry practice. I mentioned them in reply to a previous post. How relevant such manuals are with regards to actual 17th combat is another question. But I feel they are undoubtedly important. Certainly Newcastle's 1658 "General System of Horsemanship in all it's Branches" was intended to fit horses "for the Service of the Field in Time of War".

I sense this thread is aimed at the training of horses for war, not the mechanics of Roman cavalry combat. I suspect the latter has been looked at on a previous thread. The last paper I read on the subject was "Cavalry in Late Roman Warfare" by Hugh Elton. He was kind enough to send me a copy before publication, and I fear I can't remember where the paper was published. But to summarise, he suggested that cavalry could be used to soften up an opponent with missile weapons, before possibly inducing the enemy to break due to weakened morale. While cavalry would not be suited to charging directly into confident formed infantry they could be used to pursue them from the field. He doubted the willingness of a horse to charge into another horse during close order cavalry combat. I broadly agree with this position, but have little doubt some horses can be induced to charge into close order foot or cavalry. They might do it only once, but they will do it.

Hyland's book makes the Ars Tactica very accessible. Various other cavalry manuals through history are full of good advice. Putting bits of them into practice gives a sense of what can be achieved, and what can be viewed as theoretical.

[Thiadricus Saxonicus]

He doubted the willingness of a horse to charge into another horse during close order cavalry combat.

I have read a different opinion on this:

Marcus Junkelmann wrote in his book "Das Spiel mit dem Tod" on his reconstruction of gladiatorial combat about his experiences with the behavior of horses in combat.
I do not know whether an English translation exists; I will post the original German phrase and then translate it into English myself.

He interprets the accounts of Isidor of Sevilla on mounted gladiatoiral fight: The equites in gladiatorial combat start fighting with each other by gallopping headlong agains each other. Then he tells his personal expierience on this:

Natürlich hing auch viel von der Eigenart der eingesetzten Pferde ab. Unsere Camarguehengste Pegasus und Incitatus machten das ganz hervorragend und wären auch in schnellster Gangart mit den Köpfen zusammengestoßen, hätte man sie entsprechend gelenkt.

My trial of translation:

"The character of horses used [in mounted combat] was quite important as well. Our camargue stallions Pegasus and Incitatus excelled in this. They would have crushed against each others head even at fastest gait, if one had reined them so."

He further tells that after the death of the stallions, they use geldings which perform well, yet are not nearly as aggressive as the stallions where, when reined headlong each other, they refuse to run straight and jump aside. Quite like Elton thought.

So this seems to depend on the individual horse, maybe one can say: It's all about balls.

[John Conyard]

Neatly put :lol:

It certainly depends on attitude. All horses need an analyst to get the best from them. I think a rider must really try and get the best from every animal. Luckily I generally ride the grumpiest, meanest, nastiest, lasiest horse in the world. He is a gelding. But he would, with a little encouragement, ride into a wall if asked. He kicks other horses through fences, and tries to eat helmets - with heads in them.

On a more serious note, Roman riders had a full range of instruments to encourage or even force imediate obedience from a horse. Obviously many of these tools are not used today.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

That is an excellent point John. But I still feel Tarbicus made a good point when he mentioned th addition of the spears. These would definately pose the greatest obstacle to the frontal attack!

[John Conyard]

Well, spears do kill horses, and riders.

When trying to get a horse to charge into infantry it is the size and colour of several shields together that seem to worry the horse.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

I can imagine that, but as the topic had mentioned the training of horses to overcome this reluctance, I can see the pointy addition would even cause a war hardened horse to shy from a charge head on.

[John Conyard]

I really look forward to you trying this to see what I mean.

A horse doesn't see a line of spearmen and think, "Hey look, Swanton Type B spearheads, this is going to hurt!". Its too busy looking at the bright big flat things waving around in it's face. But whatever, the aim is to get the horse to charge into anything.