2 historical questions about eastern cavalry

[ziegenpeter]

Good day fellow Eb-fans!
Eastern antiquity is not my bread and butter but I consider it very interesting. Today I got two more parctical questions.
1. How did horse archers manage to ride into battle with a bow and a lance? Did they leave the lance first behind (with a squire? what if you weren't noble? just rammed into the ground?) shooting arrows and returned when they needed the lance? I can't imagine them shooting while having this havy, long kontos somewhere attached to their horse.
2. Why did the kontos disappear? Although never tested, I'd say that a charge with that is much fiercer than with a single hand wielded lance. Ok having a shield is somehow cool, but the macedons figured out a way to combine both:idea2:

Thanks

[Cute Wolf]

you could simply slung your lance at your back, preferably with some kind of hook near your quiver...

[ziegenpeter]

I don't think so. AFAIK thats lance of at least 3m so if you have it across the back with its middle app. at your spine and the ground gets uneven, your in the ploughing business ;)

[Cute Wolf]

no, well, lance is about 3,5 m long, and your average horse back is 1.3 m tall, count your body 0.9 m long, that was 2,1 m area from your back to the ground...

just slung your lance in a third length, and it wouldn't touch the ground, of course you'll get 2 m stick rise from your back, but that's how Javanese cavalry archers doing that (look at my sig)

EDIT : Well, just to realize that in 1500 years, method of carrying lance could be very different... but well, javanese nobility is direct descendant to Saka rulers in India, which in turns is descendants of Saka horde in the EB starting period.... :grin:

[antisocialmunky]

1.3m may be the back height of a heavy horse but the height of a steppe pony at the head is 1.3m and since this question isn't just directed at heavy mounts I'm not sure that method is all that good. That and some of the antics that one did on the back of the horse like turning and leaning or keeping yourself behind the horse while shooting would not be facilitated by a 3m pole.

[Cute Wolf]

but as far as I can look, the relief on the temple, the artistic depictions from that time, and most importantly, the literature coming from this period, clearly said that they did slung their lance (tombak) behind their back, and that very same lance was about 3,5 m long.... well, I'm pretty sure that once you are used with 3 m pole attached to you, you won't take that as a problem anyway.

EDIT : Literature coming from 13th century Java, not the steppe...

[Badass Buddha]

The lance wouldn't be slung up and down, but at an angle, diagonally across one's back.

[ziegenpeter]

The lance wouldn't be slung up and down, but at an angle, diagonally across one's back.

of course, but still... and why did it disappear?

[Cute Wolf]

of course, but still... and why did it disappear?

it was some moddeling problem with the primary weapon and secondary weapon models...

[antisocialmunky]

The lance wouldn't be slung up and down, but at an angle, diagonally across one's back.

Of course, but turning and stuff would still be dangerous unless you had it up real high.

Do you have a pic of the Javan depictions of Bow + Lance?

[ziegenpeter]

it was some moddeling problem with the primary weapon and secondary weapon models...
Gnaaa, I was never talking about EB:laugh4:

I was referring to my 2nd question. Why did it came out of use?

[WinsingtonIII]

How could they turn around to shoot the bow in the famous "Parthian Shot" (which as we know was used by pretty much all Eurasian nomads, not just Parthians) when they had a 3 m lance slung across their back? Even if slung diagonally, wouldn't the lance knock into the flank of the horse before they could turn around that far; thus preventing them from turning around any more?

[mountaingoat]

How could they turn around to shoot the bow in the famous "Parthian Shot" (which as we know was used by pretty much all Eurasian nomads, not just Parthians) when they had a 3 m lance slung across their back? Even if slung diagonally, wouldn't the lance knock into the flank of the horse before they could turn around that far; thus preventing them from turning around any more?

i agree ... maybe there was some kind of contraption they could attach the mount to on one side of the saddle ? if people could twist around and fire an arrow backwards while a horse was galloping forwards (or in a circle).. i do not see how they could not bend down and grab a lance from some holding on the saddle. *shrug*

[Cute Wolf]

How could they turn around to shoot the bow in the famous "Parthian Shot" (which as we know was used by pretty much all Eurasian nomads, not just Parthians) when they had a 3 m lance slung across their back? Even if slung diagonally, wouldn't the lance knock into the flank of the horse before they could turn around that far; thus preventing them from turning around any more?

unfortunely, Javanese heavy cataphracts (which using bows and lance), are mentioned for their clumsiness (seriously), while lighter horse archers typically using bow and some kind of swords, and wearing little or no armour... just look the unit lists in my forge thread...

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I would think the lance would be held to the side of the horse, presumably slung there so that when a charge was required, the cavalryman could somehow slide it out, or even just cut the straps. I would think it unlikely that a kontos would be used multiple times in one battle. They presumably broke soon after, if not upon the initial charge and would be rather unwieldy in melee combat against other horsemen.

[Lvcretivs]

There would be also be the possibilty of an saddle-mounted 'quiver', in which the lance shaft was securely held until the rider required it for a charge - but this would require a much shorter lance (lonche,...) and I've seen no hellenistic depictions whatsoever of such an device - expert's opinion, anyone?

Perhaps we should think - just like Sir Robin suggested - of the Kontos as a 'one-way' weapon used only in the final, breaking charge - after all, the enemy was already expected to be demoralized and disorganized by the constant arrow hail inflicted by the lighter horse archers...

EDIT: Oops, just overread mountaingoat's post...

[Cute Wolf]

maybe it was right if a lance was mostly one way weapons in EB time period, but what about such delicate made lance, and strongly built one, that was designed to survive many impacts and used in close combats (some martial (silat) aspects prove that lance wasn't intended to be used as one way weapon, even when on top of a horse)

[Lvcretivs]

Maybe different (internal) construction and available raw materials to chose from - eg. bamboo and resilient tropical woods employed in composite fashion?
Also the surely different cavalry tactics utilized and the enemies encountered would have to be considered - I'm no expert on the subject, please correct me ;)

[WinsingtonIII]

But if the lance was slung on the saddle, wouldn't it drag on the ground? With something 3 m long, you're going to need at least 2 points fairly far apart to prevent it from flopping around. I guess if you have 4-5 points along the saddle to attach it it's not going to tip around too much, but then it's going to take quite long to actually get your lance out...

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I don't think time would be too much of a problem for the steppe warriors who used lances. One would assume that lances were mostly used against infantry formations (although certainly used against cavalry as well) and as such, the horseman would have time to move away from the infantry, wheel his horse around, form up with his fellow cavalrymen, and form a charge. During this time he could certainly undo 3-4 straps to get his lance out. From what I have remembered hearing about such engagements, any unit that used a lance, whether it was a purely kataphract type cavalry or a archer/lancer hybrid, they would start their run towards the enemy from decently far out, near the periphery of the battle. Therefore, they would be relatively unmolested while they got into formation for the charge as the lighter HA's or skirmishers would be busy distracting the enemy.

[WinsingtonIII]

I don't think time would be too much of a problem for the steppe warriors who used lances. One would assume that lances were mostly used against infantry formations (although certainly used against cavalry as well) and as such, the horseman would have time to move away from the infantry, wheel his horse around, form up with his fellow cavalrymen, and form a charge. During this time he could certainly undo 3-4 straps to get his lance out. From what I have remembered hearing about such engagements, any unit that used a lance, whether it was a purely kataphract type cavalry or a archer/lancer hybrid, they would start their run towards the enemy from decently far out, near the periphery of the battle. Therefore, they would be relatively unmolested while they got into formation for the charge as the lighter HA's or skirmishers would be busy distracting the enemy.

Yeah, that's true, I'm sure they would generally have time. It still just seems so cumbersome though, but I guess they didn't really have a choice.

[antisocialmunky]

Yeah, that's true, I'm sure they would generally have time. It still just seems so cumbersome though, but I guess they didn't really have a choice.

Did anyone use collapsable lances where its two parts and you can fit them together to use it?

[Lvcretivs]

The infamous sarissaphoroi? Although I seriously doubt that they assembled their lances on horseback - IKEA-style... ;)

[Badass Buddha]

With many Central Asian armies there would be stratification: there would be lightly armored or unarmored horse archers that would harass the enemy first, and there would also be heavily armored cavalry that would charge with lances and then switch over to swords or maces once in melee. I don't know how they switched, but it's not that big of a leap to assume that they just dropped their lances on the ground until they were done, since lances are fairly cheap and easy to make. Also, as far as I know, none of them used multi-sectioned lances.

[ziegenpeter]

yeah... BTT:
I think, if you attache a lance of 3-4m to your horse horizantally, it gets harder to manoeuver in close formations/combat. Vertically would still be quite handicapping.
Maybe thats why it wasn't used anymore:laugh4: