09-29-2013, 11:21 AM
In reply to Peter's post.
Despite criticisms of their competence the British heavy cavalry reconnoitered the ground over which they were to charge at Waterloo. There is a difference between this sort of battlefield preparation and what modern stunt riders would do. The military scouts would be looking for major fearures like walls or hidden watercourses, not as stuntmen would do looking at every inch of ground for irregularities.
Most of the fast movement in tight formation in the clips you have shown show cavalry cantering. Well trained horsemen should be capable of this. There is a difference between cantering and galloping a l'outrance.
If cavalry, in a battlefield situation, could charge at the gallop knee to knee you have to ask yourself "why did they ever charge at a slower pace?"
It was generally accepted that higher speed gave more impact to a charge. We know for certain that in the English Civil War the Parliamentarian cavalry charged at the trot, knee to knee, we also know that the Royalists charged at the gallop. At Marston Moor the two cavalry wings of each army charged each other with very different outcomes. The right wing Parliamentarians had to cross a broken area of ground and the Royalists routed them. The Royalist charge at the gallop defeated the Parliamentarian slower approach precisely because they had lost the cohesion of their formation. On the other wing, Prince Rupert's Royalists (including a relative of mine) crashed into Oliver Cromwell's cavalry, who were in perfect formation. Cromwell won, and because his troops were in hand he rallied them and attacked the Royalist infantry in the rear, winning the battle.
If the cohesion of a unit of cavalry was not affected by its speed of attack the above case would not have occurred as it did. If matters were as you infer, then the events at Marston Moor would have been very different, the Royalists galloping in perfect formation, meeting the Parliamentarians moving at a much slower pace should have routed them.
There was a compromise in how fast a unit of cavalry charged, the greater the speed the greater the impact, but also the greater the loss of cohesion. In addition, a unit charging at speed was more difficult to make stop, rally and reform its ranks in order to be of further use in battle.
Despite criticisms of their competence the British heavy cavalry reconnoitered the ground over which they were to charge at Waterloo. There is a difference between this sort of battlefield preparation and what modern stunt riders would do. The military scouts would be looking for major fearures like walls or hidden watercourses, not as stuntmen would do looking at every inch of ground for irregularities.
Most of the fast movement in tight formation in the clips you have shown show cavalry cantering. Well trained horsemen should be capable of this. There is a difference between cantering and galloping a l'outrance.
If cavalry, in a battlefield situation, could charge at the gallop knee to knee you have to ask yourself "why did they ever charge at a slower pace?"
It was generally accepted that higher speed gave more impact to a charge. We know for certain that in the English Civil War the Parliamentarian cavalry charged at the trot, knee to knee, we also know that the Royalists charged at the gallop. At Marston Moor the two cavalry wings of each army charged each other with very different outcomes. The right wing Parliamentarians had to cross a broken area of ground and the Royalists routed them. The Royalist charge at the gallop defeated the Parliamentarian slower approach precisely because they had lost the cohesion of their formation. On the other wing, Prince Rupert's Royalists (including a relative of mine) crashed into Oliver Cromwell's cavalry, who were in perfect formation. Cromwell won, and because his troops were in hand he rallied them and attacked the Royalist infantry in the rear, winning the battle.
If the cohesion of a unit of cavalry was not affected by its speed of attack the above case would not have occurred as it did. If matters were as you infer, then the events at Marston Moor would have been very different, the Royalists galloping in perfect formation, meeting the Parliamentarians moving at a much slower pace should have routed them.
There was a compromise in how fast a unit of cavalry charged, the greater the speed the greater the impact, but also the greater the loss of cohesion. In addition, a unit charging at speed was more difficult to make stop, rally and reform its ranks in order to be of further use in battle.
Martin
Fac me cocleario vomere!
Fac me cocleario vomere!
