Romans vs. Normans--Help!

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

I'm telling you the Polish cavalry never fought tanks they wern't stupid

I said the poles didnt knew the tanks they were. They were supposed to attack infantry but ended up attacking tanks. The 18th lancers were even awarded the highest polish order for what they did that day.

How is it out of the question that the russians did that?

This refers to the latter part of my post dealing with russians attacking tanks from an ambush or whatsoever. Its not a big deal to get a horse to do that. But the discussion is about massive cavalry units head-on attacking an organised shield wall or a similiar thing.

[Steakslim]

If a horse will run toward a tank, or into rows of dummy's (Which are considerably more disiplined than humans) or a brick wall why would it not charge home against a shield wall?

[L C Cinna]

Yes you can make a charge without stirupps however staying on is a different story stirupps also allow you to put more weight in the saddle when the horse runs

as I said, it's the saddle that is important... why do you think they put those horns on the saddles :wink:

If a horse will run toward a tank,

the difference is towards and not into...just like the Napoleonic cavalry ran towards and alongside the infantry but not into.

running towards a tank is already stupid enough but into...well oh well...
:roll:

[Steakslim]

My point is...

[Caius Fabius]

Sigh, I spent an hour answering your post, then, lol RAT erased it.

Sir,

Captain Coignet,the horsemaster, started in the French Armee before Marengo, was entered into the Old Guard, was commissioned in Vilnius, in July 1812 before the Russian fiasco, survived as a staff rider for Napoleon, was attached to Napoleon's personal staff during the Waterloo Campaign and escorted the Emperor from the battlefield.

Horses can be trained to charge home against Formed Infantry, and although I have several more examples, that were not in the normal English histories, any example that proves the point false, renders the statement that horses will not charge formed infantry false.

I got Keegan's book when it first came out, it was required reading for my job because my commander liked it. I think all officers and NCO's could find this work interesting and helpful.

I never trained horses to attack formed infantry, but only to work with longhorn cattle, which they will not do without a few minutes of training.
When I was a young 2LT in Junction City, my neighbor was a retired Cavalry Colonel who often told of his favorite mount, one he trained for 4 years, before it died in a training mishap.

If it interests you I have video of the International Military Horse Competition of 2004, which was held at Fort Reno, Oklahoma. We also trained horses to pull Civil War artillery, and stand fast while we fired, which was not as easy as it sounds.

With my neck and spinal injuries, I just don't get to ride much anymore, but maybe we can get some horses for Lafe and see if we can teach them to go through spaces in formed infantry? I should have my saddle by then.

Wishing you the best!

Caius,

You state: " I think it is more important to measure the morale of the riders, and the training of the horses." What about the morale of the infantry and their training? I for one do not dispute the efficacy of cavalry vs infantry when the infantry is untrained, with low morale, and loses their cohesion. Further, I hardly think that a book by a horsemaster in Napoleon's Army qualifies as an unbiased source. He obviously didn't make it to Waterloo (oh, yeah, we're forgetting the death ride of the Grand Armee's cavalry there, are we not?)

You state that more squares were broken in the Napoleonic period than were recorded. Sorry, but this is a non sequitur. If this was not recorded, where (not to mention how) did you learn of it? :roll:

You state that the training of cavalry to perform the improbable feats you mention takes years -- would you care to mention how long the average cavalry horse of the Napoleonic era lasted in a particular campaign? What was the purpose of remounts? Could you expand on this phenomenon of cavalry horses? My reading of Chandler and others in the Napoleonic wars does not support the idea that cavalry horses enjoyed a lot of longevity.

Squares can certainly be broken, but in the vast majority of cases this was a result of the action of combined arms, not of cavalry charging unsupported. The way to break a square was to combine the effects of infantry and/or artillery with that of cavalry. Infantry battalions, faced with the threat of cavalry, form square, which is a horrible tactical formation when also facing artillery and or infantry, since square places them in the position of a) having their ranks blown open by artillery and/or b) at a distinct firepower disadvantage against an infantry unit able to deploy into line. Yes, squares were broken in the Napoleonic era by cavalry, but almost always by the use of combined arms.

You mention four specific examples: Borodino, Jena, Della Dogana Inn, Codroipo. Out of how many examples of infantry battalions forming square and winning vs losing? The Wars of the French Revolution/Napoleonic Wars lasted from ~1792 - 1815. 23 years. In that time, how many successful vs unsuccessful actions of unsupported cavalry vs infantry in square? Do you believe the statistics will be in your favor?

You cite a "myth" created by non-riders. Obviously, you have not read Keegan, who cites a myriad of serving cavalry officers in his work. Did he invent the same sources you used when you cite the breaking of squares more often than was recorded (I am still trying to understand that one). Since you are obviously a rider, can you tell us how many horses you have trained to specifically charge into a line of disciplined, spear or bayonet wielding infantry?

I think that before you accuse "non-riders" of believing in myths, you need to go back and uncover some of these unpublished reports you cite and do a little more research.

Regards,

Edge

[caiusbeerquitius]

... even the russians used horses to charge tanks.... and won

No, no that weren´t Russians, that wereAttilan Rough Riders
But they had hunting lances, which gave them an advantage. I shouldn´t be using the past time, I know.

[irony (or trolling-, if you wish) mode off]


One of the things RAT encourages you to do is: back up what you say. In this discussion some members seem to ignore this "rule" and instead prefer to simply state that they know everything (and better), which is a bad basis for an intelligent discussion. In that sense I suggest to follow the usual modus operandi of the board. Should the discussion continue like this it may seem fit to one mod or the other to close the thread.

[Steakslim]

Okay then I will back up what I say

How the polish hussars fought

Various snippets from Procopius and Marcellius

Byzantine battle tactics

AE

My own experience and that of my father and grand father

Cabballus et Cabballarius

De Re Militari (The website)

Several threads that I do not remember the names of on RAT that had to do with cavalry training

Cavalry training on ARMA

The winged hussars of poland

Polish rennisance warfare

Various articles on Red Cavalry in WWII and again I don't remeber the names

Horses in warfare

Encyclopedia of medieval horses

History of the sassanin army

Overview of the sassanin army

Arrians array against the alans

Thats all I can think of for now

[M. Demetrius]

Well, there's a list of short topic titles, and thanks for that, but backing something up is more like, "In [author] [book title] [page or other reference] it is written that ________".

But really, your combative tone must be lowered, because you've been asked to do so on more than one post, and because it's just polite. To do otherwise is to spurn the respect that the other members are due.

[Steakslim]

Well I'm sorry I didn't mean to combative and I'm not sure where I have been combative

[Magnus]

Try and quote specific sources Thomas as M. Demetrius pointed out. That way people can weigh in with their own opinions on it, or counter accordingly.

[Proximus]

Here is the german propaganda I saw (and there is more but I can't find it now)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rHlJKQqvljI

Now,

I think we are all familiarised with the destiny of "something VS something else" topic...

First, high subjectives arguments, second, tries to objectivate things (without results, most of the times) and then, fade out of the topic in the abyss of forgetness, after lots of arguments about lots of things whitch are all off topic.

As is german propaganda

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

Here is the german propaganda I saw (and there is more but I can't find it now)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=rHlJKQqvljI


[...] after lots of arguments about lots of things whitch are all off topic

which isnt all to bad because we're already off-topic.

nonetheless thanks for trying to clear this up Gregory

allthough the link doesn't work in my country, for legal reasons I guess, but I can imagine that it contains.

but it doesn't matter in this case, because that's not what we're talking about. There remains at least one generally approved and agreed upon incident of cavalry charging against tanks, that was obviously used afterwards for propagandistic means. But the point was just to show that horses can be made to charge against something like a massiv firing line. No more no less.
... and before it goes again the cavalry men weren't that stupid. Charging against tanks happens to get ASAP past the tanks when caught by surprise. It's no good tactic but better than retreating through the entire firing zone.

Source (a.o.):
Piekalkiewicz, Janusz (1992): Der Zweite Weltkrieg. 1. Ed., Augsburg: Weltbild Pbl. Pg. 81ff.
there are more, but this one is written by a polish historian, so I think we can trust him.

... and only for sake of availability: Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_at_Krojanty

[Proximus]

Yes, my English is poor but I did try to say in my last message the german propaganda is realy of topic.

Thank you for the references !

[Tiberius Clodius Corvinus]

No offence meant Gregory. I sent you a PM.

regards

Carsten

[Magnus]

Let's get back on topic gents and help out Mr. Amt yeah? 8)