insane numbers of cavalry...

[Ragss]

Watching all the TC videos raised a concern with me...Many of the units of horses were absoultely HUUUGE This seems...odd...I guess im just used to charging 20 knights into 60 swordsmen, not 200 horses into 200 swordsmen. It just seems hard to use like we all know how, flanking and tight manuevers.

Any other opinions on this?

[Leet Eriksson]

well first of all,since were talking about cavalry in antiquity,they might be more fragile than the ones in MTW and could only be used in skirmishing and flanking manuevers,becuase the game seems to emphasise on heavier infantry and not cavalry,they should not be treated as your coup de grace like you did with knights.thats why i think they increased their numbers.also pulling off manuevers is pretty easy becuase the maps this time around are bigger.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

In shogun cavalry is same size as infantry unit...no problems flanking there.

[The Wizard]

Well, if the infantry units are bigger, shouldn't the cavalry become bigger as well?

Besides, units in TC were oversized to better approach the real army sizes.

[jLan]

Cavalry probably won't be as strong as in MTW, at least if you look at it historically. The stir-up (or however it's spelled) wasn't invented yet in the era that RTW takes place in, so charging with a lance was virtually impossible, since you'd probably fall off the horse in the process. Basically we will just have the lighter forms of cavalry we know from MTW I expect.. Mounted archers and other mounted skrimishers, plus some spear-armed cavalry to give chase and flank.

[Longshanks]

I agree with Jlan. I suspect that cavalry units won't be the juggernauts they were in MTW.

[TigerVX]

I think Elephants will take the place of tank =P. But did you see the TC episode of Chalons? One unit of Visigoth cavalry got butchered by a unit of Auxilery.

[The Wizard]

Quote[/b] (jLan @ April 24 2004,21:19)]Cavalry probably won't be as strong as in MTW, at least if you look at it historically. The stir-up (or however it's spelled) wasn't invented yet in the era that RTW takes place in, so charging with a lance was virtually impossible, since you'd probably fall off the horse in the process. Basically we will just have the lighter forms of cavalry we know from MTW I expect.. Mounted archers and other mounted skrimishers, plus some spear-armed cavalry to give chase and flank.

It was quite possible, take a look at the hetairoi and the Persian heavy cavalry (who, with the ill training they received, did reasonably against the hetairoi) and the Parthian cataphracts. It just took a great horseman and long training to do it. But if you take one look at the devastation a hetairoi or Parthian heavy horse charge could wreak, it was worth it.

I do not know when, but somewhere in the Roman Imperial age, the war saddle was invented. With a large cantle at the back, it made it a lot easier for, for instance, a clibanarius or a Sassanid lancer to resist falling off of his horse at impact.



~Wiz

[CBR]

The stirrup isnt really necessary for use of lance in shock combat. The saddle design is more important and the 4-horned saddle, that was used in ancient times, was a good design. The stirrup actually helps horsearchers a lot, maybe even more than lancers.

Here is one
link

Cavalry in ancient times didnt have the same advantage in training and armour versus infantry as we see in medieval times. Nor was it used in same numbers (except the eastern armies) so it didnt have the same impact in battle.

Try some MTW historical battles and there are actually 100 men cavalry units used a few times heh. And we do see very large infantry units (300? men) in TC too.


CBR

[The Wizard]

CBR, do you know when the war saddle was first employed on a large scale? A hunch tells me my estimate is a bit off...



~Wiz

[Ashen]

Probably right about stirrups helping archers more since bows were far more prevalent weapons than lances on horseback in the middle-east/asian area where the stirrup first appeared.

Plus the real lance wasn't really adopted mass scale until the middle ages I believe. It was mostly spear and sword until then.

[The Wizard]

So you would call the xyston and the charging weapon of an East Parthian lancer (cataphract) a spear?



~Wiz

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Ashen @ April 25 2004,15:13)]Probably right about stirrups helping archers more since bows were far more prevalent weapons than lances on horseback in the middle-east/asian area where the stirrup first appeared.

Sorry, but no. In the West, the stirrups were first used about 400AD. The 4-horned saddle was used, in the West, well before 200BC. The Celts used such a saddle.

Quote[/b] ]Plus the real lance wasn't really adopted mass scale until the middle ages I believe. It was mostly spear and sword until then.

Sorry, again. Cavalry never uses spears. The equivalent of a spear, in cavalry use, was always called lance. When you mean real lance, you are refering to couched lances, which is an improvement invented in the Middle Ages.

Lance - cavalry weapon.
Spear - infantry weapon.

[SpencerH]

I was trying to think of an example of 'heavy cav' from around this time period and all I could think of was the Macedonians who did use cavalry as shock troops.

[Nowake]

Sorry, again. Cavalry never uses spears. The equivalent of a spear, in cavalry use, was always called lance.


This way of differentiating is simplistic. The cavalry lances were lighter and more the spearpoint was shaped somewhat different.

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Ashen @ April 25 2004,22:13)]Probably right about stirrups helping archers more since bows were far more prevalent weapons than lances on horseback in the middle-east/asian area where the stirrup first appeared.

Well more because a horsearcher would stand in his stirrups while using his bow. That way he can compensate for the movement of the horse and deliver a more accurate "fire"

The sirrup doesnt help the lancer much as they wont prevent him from being pushed back on impact. Thats really only the saddle and his skill. In the link I gave its mentioned that:

Quote[/b] ]the stirrups can be useful before the impact, to brace the rider more firmly against the cantle. The moment of impact however, tends to pull the rider's feet up and back - or otherwise "out" of the stirrups.

They even tried to use lances without a saddle and it can be done.


CBR

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ April 25 2004,13:44)]CBR, do you know when the war saddle was first employed on a large scale? A hunch tells me my estimate is a bit off...

Hm well we cant really be 100% sure.. But AFAIK we have archaeological evidence from early 1st century AD so we know Romans used the 4 horned saddle at that point. Some experts think they got it from Germans and Celts in late 1st century BC but it could have been earlier.

But as you can see from Alexander the Great and his Companions they didnt need the 4 horned saddle to make them good and feared cavalry.


CBR

[CBR]

Quote[/b] (Aymar de Bois Mauri @ April 26 2004,00:22)]Sorry, again. Cavalry never uses spears. The equivalent of a spear, in cavalry use, was always called lance.

How can you make such a statement? Some languages dont even have a seperate word for spear/lance

I have seen several discussions on what specific weapon some ancient unit used, because the names of the weapons used in the text could mean several things. Several translations have had errors because they didnt know what english word to use.

The lance we see in later medieval ages were the most advanced and very different compared to an infantry weapon. Before that there wouldnt be that much of a difference.

In some medieval texts spear and lance are used interchangeably (even what talking about infantry) and I guess difference in length might be the reason, as a lance could be longer than a normal (short)spear.


CBR

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (CBR @ April 27 2004,06:36)]

Quote[/b] (Aymar de Bois Mauri @ April 26 2004,00:22)]Sorry, again. Cavalry never uses spears. The equivalent of a spear, in cavalry use, was always called lance.

How can you make such a statement? Some languages dont even have a seperate word for spear/lance

I have seen several discussions on what specific weapon some ancient unit used, because the names of the weapons used in the text could mean several things. Several translations have had errors because they didnt know what english word to use.

The lance we see in later medieval ages were the most advanced and very different compared to an infantry weapon. Before that there wouldnt be that much of a difference.

In some medieval texts spear and lance are used interchangeably (even what talking about infantry) and I guess difference in length might be the reason, as a lance could be longer than a normal (short)spear.


CBR

OK. So, I'm being unfair to other languages. Let me explain:

In Portuguese, Lance (Lança) always mean Cavalry weapon. Spear (Zarguncho ou Venábulo), like Pike (Pique) or throwing spear (Azagaia), always means Infantry weapon. On the other hand, Javelin or Dart (Dardo) aren't exclusivelly designated as Infantry or Cavalry weapons.

[shingenmitch2]

CB,
I'd modify ur first post a bit. Stirrups aren't required for shock tactics as the 4 prong saddle was adaquate. However, stirrups are much more effective for shock tactics as they allow transference of impact forces to the rider's legs as opposed to back/butt. Thus the Knights were an improved charger.

As for where the 4-prong saddle develop there is some debate. Generally it is called the Celtic sadle, but there is growing evidence that it was a Scythian/Sarmatian development.

Spear/lance debate
I have no idea about other languages...
My understanding for English definitions is that the employment of the weapon is as important to how it is termed as is whether or not it was used by infantry or cavalry. Thus a cav. could use a "cavalry spear" if the weapon was a traditional spear length and used predominantly for stabbing from a horse--like early Greek and Persian cavalry employed it. If it was an elongated spear used in a "charge" like the Sarmatians employed it is was considered a lance.

A javelin is any spear designed for throwing. Thus, throwing spear and javelin would be the same thing. (as opposed to a spear designed for thrusting that I happened to toss)
I'm not certain, but I think the difference between a military dart and small javelin is that the dart has "fins" to help guide it.

[Kraxis]

shingen, that classicalfencing site clearly proves that the saddle is the most important part, not the stirrups.
To use the stirrups to transfer the power you would have to lean forward quite a bit to get the legs towards the back (I'm sure you understand what I mean), but that would in effect lessen the balance of the rider. Not something you would want if you expect to get a rather hard shock.
Further, I have seen for instance the Bayeaux tapestry and a few pictures of later images, never have I seen a rider that leans forward like what I mentioned. I have though seen riders lean forward by bending his body at the hips.

Thus I can only conclude that the stirrups were the most important thing to balance, and thus stamina. I mean clinging to a horse with your legs is something that will sap your strength rather quick.

About the language issues...
Well in danish we don't have a proper word for pike, so we use the same word for pike and lance, while spear more or less feels like something for infantry, though it can be used to determine the weapon of cavalry with a short spear.
So it is all about the culture and its language, and I believe in english spear can be used for both infantry and cavalry, while lance is purely a cavalry weapon.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

OK, guys I won't refer spear as an exclusivelly infantry weapon in the future.

[The Wizard]

In Dutch, speer (spear) is the word used for infantry, and infantry alone. Lans (lance) is a word used for both infantry and cavalry usage, but predominantly for cavalry. Then again, Dutch is a western language.



~Wiz

[Oleander Ardens]

Intéresting debate;

I know perhaps how at least the Scythians called their long stick with the sharp end

We know that the Scythians got their name from the Indo-Iranian "shoothers" or better archers, and the Sarmantians likewise from the word "arrowbearer".

Now there is a semi-mythic Scythian tribe called Gerrhi;
Now this is a word which is deeply rooted in the indoeuropean languages for thousends of years in various forms: ira. Gerrahe IIRC, ger. Ger, celtic. gaesum and so one.

We all now that in the germanic tradition a warrior was very often simply called "spearman" or in the older form "german".

It sould be truly surprising if Gerrhi wouldn't mean "Spearmen"...

So all points to the conclusion that the Scythians used a Gerrha or something called in similar way. Note that it could both be a javelin, a "spear" or a lance..

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ April 28 2004,12:59)]In Dutch, speer (spear) is the word used for infantry, and infantry alone. Lans (lance) is a word used for both infantry and cavalry usage, but predominantly for cavalry. Then again, Dutch is a western language.



~Wiz

So is Portuguese...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Oleander Ardens @ April 28 2004,14:33)]Intéresting debate;

I know perhaps how at least the Scythians called their long stick with the sharp end

We know that the Scythians got their name from the Indo-Iranian "shoothers" or better archers, and the Sarmantians likewise from the word "arrowbearer".

Now there is a semi-mythic Scythian tribe called Gerrhi;
Now this is a word which is deeply rooted in the indoeuropean languages for thousends of years in various forms: ira. Gerrahe IIRC, ger. Ger, celtic. gaesum and so one.

We all now that in the germanic tradition a warrior was very often simply called "spearman" or in the older form "german".

It sould be truly surprising if Gerrhi wouldn't mean "Spearmen"...

So all points to the conclusion that the Scythians used a Gerrha or something called in similar way. Note that it could both be a javelin, a "spear" or a lance..

Interesting that you mention it. It seems that many names of populations have similar origin processes...

Any others?

[Hakonarson]

Long spears used on horseback were called Kontos (Kontus, contos, etc) by the Romans - I believe the word means "bargepole" and refers to the length of the weapon.

There is no practical difference between spears used on foot or mounted - they can have various lengths, different shaped heads, butt-spikes or not, etc.

the couched lance was initially not a different type of weapon - it was the same ol' spear used in a different manner - I've seen earlier pictures of lances (kontos) being held in 2 hands along the flank of hte horse that is probably functionally the same (Parthians, Sarmatians, etc).

The development of the lance with hand guards, etc did mark a difference from the infantry spear - the ultimate probably being the Polish lance - hollow and anything up to 6 metres long

The final version of the lance - the light Napoleonic styles, again were not any different from spears used on foot.

Basically if it's long with a point on it then it's a spear - and they have always been pretty similar to each other

[Ragss]

lol...I'm glad I could start such a heated discussion.

[Oleander Ardens]

Quote[/b] ]Any others?

The Samnites are said to have gotten their name from their spear/javelin the "saunia" IIRC

We don't know if the Sax gave the name to the tribe of the Saxons or vice versa, the other way around.

The same applies to the Franks and the Franciska...


I rather sure that with a little research you could detect some more, but for the moment this is all...


About the Scythian gerrhae:

From the pictures It seems that the Scythians only used rather short spears, which could also been thrown if necessary.

The Kontos seems to be a Sarmantian innovation, or to origin from the Steppes between Altai and the Volga...

[The Wizard]

Were the Sarmatians not the people that did not use the traditionally Skythian horse archers, but only heavy horse? At least that's what I read on some site, and it sounds pretty hard to believe, since if you rely on only heavy horse and foot archers, horse archers will defeat you, and Skythian warfare was centered around the horse archer.



~Wiz