heavy cavalry engaging heavy cavalry

[Domen]

Two pictures of "lance kills" from 17th century paintings:

Lancer killing an infantryman:



Lancer killing a cavalryman:



A unit of hussars with long lances - 1649:



Plus some horses:





=======================================

Light cavalry lancers charging against pike-musket infantry square:

[M. Demetrius]

to keep it sporting for the hares

And yet, I predict the hares were not amused, even though the hunters kept it sporting. :-P

Peter: none of your images show heavy cavalry engaging heavy cavalry. Were you only trying to bend the conversation back to Polish hussars?

[Michael Kerr]

In regard to Roman cavalry & whether they charged in tight or loose formations & effects on horses & riders.
I was looking through Strategikon & in Book II/Cavalry battle formations/18 The battle cry sometimes used & Maurice explains to the reader why he doesn't like the customary battle cry shouted before a cavalry charge & gives his reasons why.

18. The Battle Cry Sometimes Used

The battle cry “Nobiscum," which it is customary to shout when beginning the charge is in our opinion, extremely dangerous and harmful. “Shouting it at that moment may cause the ranks to break up. For because of the shout, the more timid soldiers in approaching really close combat may hesitate before the clash, while the bolder, roused to anger, may rashly push forward and break ranks. The same problem occurs with the horses, for they too differ in temperament. The result is that the battle line is uneven and without cohesion, in fact it's ranks may well be broken even before the charge, which is very dangerous.

Regards
Michael Kerr

[Flavivs Aetivs]

Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting wabbits!

@Michael Kerr

That's interesting, because the battle cry known as the Barritus that the infantry used certainly did not have the same ill effects ad the Nobiscus.

[Urselius]

Warhorses were usually deliberately exposed to loud noises in their training, to inure them to battlefield noise and chaos. The same thing is done with modern police horses.

[Flavivs Aetivs]

The argument here is the soldier, not the horse, though.

[Michael Kerr]

Instead of the usual battle cry Maurice suggests that instead of a shout, prayers should be said in camp on the actual day of battle before anyone goes out the gate. All led by priests, the general, and the other officers. Inspiring stuff for a pagan auxiliary semi barbarian.
Regards
Michael Kerr

[Urselius]

Soldier and horse are mentioned in the passage.

Irish cavalry are said to have "shrieked" when charging - possibly the origin of the "Rebel Yell." I think Mauricius was just pandering to the monks.

[Macedon]

What is interesting in this passage is that the emperor deems it very important that the cavalry units retain their formation until they engage the enemy. As threats that may lead to disorder - in the various cavalry contingents of different nationalities, training, experience, horses that comprised an army- he counted both human and horse psychology and as factors that may work towards either of them break in disorder, he counted the excitement of the war-cry and of course higher speed, which directly implies that the charge should not be made at top speed but at a slower pace, which he does not specify here. He stresses the importance of keeping the ranks and deems disorder as destructive. This is what Maurice says here regarding his understanding of cavalry warfare, which cannot be so different from what would be considered mainstream at his time among the military circles of the Byzantine Empire.

[Domen]

Info about Ancient war horses can be found in sources such as Kikkuli or Xenophont:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kikkuli

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophon#Short_treatises

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hipparchicus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Horsemanship

====================================

Kikkuli, 1,350 BC

Around 1345 B.C., Kikkuli, Horsemaster to the Hittite king Suppililiuma, recorded a war horse training regime. As a result of his method, the Hittites became a mighty power rivaling Egypt.

After murdering his brother to gain the throne, Suppililiuma set his heart upon Hittite supremacy. He started by buying large numbers of horses, and somehow acquired the services of a leading Mitannian horsemaster by the name of Kikkuli. Kikkuli 'defected' to the Hittites and trained their horses, turning them into superb war machines. As a result, Suppililiuma wiped Mitanni off the face of the earth. All we have of their incredible knowledge is the horse training text written by Kikkuli. It survives in cuneiform in four clay tablets, and is known today as "The Kikkuli Text".

Kikkuli obviously had difficulty getting the high-tech Mitannian concepts across in the Hittite language, for he frequently gives a term such as "Intervals" in his own language, followed by "this means" with an attempt to explain in Hittite. For example, "And 1/2 DANNA and 20 IKU he trots them. Thereupon 38 IKU he canters. One calls this 'sinisella auzameua'. One does it this way: The first time he canters 20 IKU. The second time he canters 7 IKU. One calls this 'two-heat canter'."(1 DANNA = 3.6 miles, 1 IKU = 250 yards.)

After Kikkuli's demise, the Hittites were at a loss to understand his techniques, for we have several Hittite horse-training tablets which have regressed substantially.

The Kikkuli Method is amazing from a modern equine physiology point of view. The Kikkuli Method uses Interval training, and makes much use of leading the horses (from chariots) at the gaits of trot, canter and gallop, before subjecting them to the weight bearing stress of a rider or driver.

The Kikkuli Text details a seven month training regime. Rest days are scheduled, but workouts sometimes number three a day. Kikkuli's Interval training program contained three stages. The first two stages develop strong legs and a strong cardiomuscular system, and the third stage develops neuromuscular conditioning. His workouts include....d brief recoveries to lower the heart rate partially. Even swimming is done in intervals of three or five repeats, with a rest in between.

After being worked in harness, the horses were brushed down and cooled out. Every workout include....s a warm down period, and all workouts were carried out on a marked course. The horses were washed in warm water and rugged. (prosze zwrocic uwage jak wielka role przywiazywano do higeny skory konskiej, jednego z podstawowych atrybutow zdrowia konskiego)

The Kikkuli Method identifies the precise moment in training when the horse has adapted, physically and psychologically, to its training. It also encompasses a four day period known as the "Culling Process" which allows performance potential to be estimated. The Culling Process also identifies horses prone to Chronic Respiratory Disease. From days 11-20, the horses are stabled, and cracks in the stable walls are blocked. This causes an increase in dust, fungal and ammonia levels which in turn identifies underlying respiratory disorders in a horse.

In 1991, the 3,300 year old, seven month method was duplicated at the University of New England, Australia. The results revealed that the Kikkuli Method enables horses to remain sound while becoming extremely fit (sic!!!). The Hittites needed very fit horses, as they had a war season much like we have a baseball season. The war zone was a four week march away, and the horses had to fight in battles all summer. One famous battle involved a 44 mile (70 km) march overnight before hard fighting all day.

Kikkuli also was careful to lay down the very times salt should be fed, and even malt as carbohydrate replacement. The horses were fed three to four times a day, and Kikkuli gives the exact measurement for each feeding. He did have a standard set feed, which is as follows:

oats

barley

hay/chaff

morning

1 UPNU

2 UPNU

1 UPNU

midday

2 UPNU

2 UPNU

3 UPNU

evening

2 UPNU

1 UPNU

4 UPNU

night

ad.lib. hay

(1 UPNU = 10 liters by volume). There were many variations of the above.

Sometimes the horses were fed pollard and pulled-up grass. Pollard was always fed in the meal after the swimming intervals.

Here are some examples of the workouts:

"And 1/2 DANNA 20 IKU he trots. Thereupon again 1/2 DANNA 20 IKU he canters, 5 intervals."

"And he trots 2 DANNA but canters at the 80 IKU marker. Again they canter, over 1 DANNA and 20 IKU. When he drives back they unhitch them."

"And 1 DANNA he trots, but he hard gallops at the 7 IKU marker. But when he drives back, they unhitch them."

"2 1/2 DANNA he trots, and canters at the 7 IKU marker. Then he drives again. And at the 10 IKU marker he canters."

The intervals came in the latter phase of training. In the initial phase, a single daily workout was repeated for several days. This was followed by another phase where a longer daily single workout was repeated for a number of days. For Days 23-32, the horses were led at a trot for 2 DANNA. By Days 111-120, the horses were led at the trot for 7 DANNA and cantered for 7 IKU. After this, the distances were decreased greatly but by then the interval training had started in earnest.

[Domen]

Assyrians are sometimes credited with developing first true heavy cavalry formations.

These Assyrian horse archers also seem to be using quite large horses:

[Dan Howard]

Assyrians are sometimes credited with developing first true heavy cavalry formations.

As far as I can tell there was no heavy cavalry employed by anyone that early. Even their chariotry didn't operate as heavy units. It isn't until the reforms of Cyrus that chariots operate like true heavy units and heavy cavalry doesn't appear until even later. The Assyrians are likely to have been the first to employ horse archery in the region though.

[Alanus]

Assyrians are sometimes credited with developing first true heavy cavalry formations.

As far as I can tell there was no heavy cavalry employed by anyone that early. Even their chariotry didn't operate as heavy units. It isn't until the reforms of Cyrus that chariots operate like true heavy units and heavy cavalry doesn't appear until even later. The Assyrians are likely to have been the first to employ horse archery in the region though.

Dan's was the last post on a fairly dead thread. However, I'm not totally in agreement. Peter's statement places the credit of heavy cavalry to the Assyrians, who were actually light cavalry archers. Dan credits Cyrus the Great. However, back at the beginning of this thread we posited the Massagetae as the originators. Perhaps it doesn't matter since both are recorded at the battle of Araxes in 530.

What we should remember is this-- heavy cavalry could not exist until large well-bred horses were employed. And we know where the first large horses came from: the steppe of Eurasia. Cavalry as a warfare unit didn't exist until after 1,000 BC. Before that, it was chariot warfare. Perhaps then, we are left with two "heavy-weight" contenders. :whistle:

I'll leave you with a quiz. Who gets the honor as the first great heavy cavalry general?

Would you vote for Cyrus?
[attachment=9771]CyrustheGreat.JPG[/attachment]

Or would you vote for Tomyris?
[attachment=9772]Tomyriswithlong-swordakinakes-2.jpg[/attachment]

[Michael Kerr]

Alanus, for some reason with these multi page threads, we can't see the last post and I can't read yours. Don't know if there is a problem with scripting but I only wrote this as it sometimes brings up the previous post. Getting back to the subject, while unclear about the term heavy cavalry ( is it heavily armed or heavily protected by armour & does the armour include the horse as well as rider) but never sure whether offensive/shock cavalry was developed to combat mounted archers or chariots, any thoughts? For example was the natural progression in ancient cavalry warfare that chariots first dominated the battlefield, then horse archer units developed to run rings around & pick off chariot crews and then slightly heavier armed horsemen to combat horse archers who before the introduction of stirrups and being somewhat restricted seated in their saddles had less agility to turn all the way around on their right assuming most held their bow with the left arm & thus would be exposed to attack from behind their right flank by mounted lancers and vice versa if you held the bow with the other arm. It seems that ancient cavalry especially mounted archers were always vulnerable on the right flank according to A.D.H. Bivar in his paper "Cavalry Equipment and Tactics on the Euphrates Frontier". (Maybe the horse archers who used the Parthian shot in battle will disagree) but there has to be some restriction in turning all the way on the side of the arm pulling the bowstring to his ears & the archer must be restricted if having to shoot at someone attacking him from this side. But as is my habit I digress as your topic was heavy cavalry. I notice that a few members have had a go at mounted archery and would be keen to know their thoughts on this as I can only theorise. But John W. Eadie writes that it was probably Massagetae &/or Chorasmians who first developed heavier cavalry but he does credit the Assyrians with some role in the development.
John W. Eadie wrote in his paper "The Development of Roman Mailed Cavalry".

Cavalry equipment brought to light by excavations around the Aral Sea, begun in the 1930's, indicates that similar experimentation with cavalry tactics and armour was under-taken simultaneously by the Massageto-Chorasmian peoples of central Asia. Unfortunately, neither the precise nature of each phase in the development nor the exact relationship of this experimentation to contemporary developments elsewhere can be discerned in the archaeological record, but it is clear that a distinctive Chorasmian cavalryman evolved by the sixth century B.C. According to S. P. Tolstov and B. Rubin, this cavalryman was the prototype cataphract i.e. a partially armoured rider, wearing a coat of mail and perhaps a metal helmet, on a horse whose head and flanks were partially protected by metal plates. The offensive weapons of the Chorasmian cataphracts and the Assyrian' hybrid' horseman were identical (bow and pike): both could fire arrows from a distance and then charge with their pikes to engage infantry or cavalry at close quarters. They differed, however, in one major respect: the Assyrians, as far as we know, did not attempt to protect the horse as well as the rider.

Regards
Michael Kerr

[Alanus]

Hi, Michael

I posted with a couple of pics; it was recorded and showed up under "Recent Discussions" but I couldn't find it. Only Dan's. Your post brought mine up... but can you see your post? :dizzy: