One thing I'd like to see is the practical ability for Zachary to defend himself with different types of shield on horseback (i.e. how much better is the kite/teardrop shield over the later heater shield).
Pietro Monte described how the combatant on foot has the option to attack the horse underneath on its belly, whether intentionally or opportunistically if overrun by the animal. He noted that "nearly all footsoldiers" fail to do this in practice, & that it takes considerable courage to face a rider even though the person on foot in theory can do so successfully.
I think this is further enhanced by the riders mobility allowing them to essentially choose their engagements most of the time. Even if one would encounter such a brave and skilled footman, if the horseman recognizes this in time he'd just ride away and find one of many potential others targets who would break under the immense pressure of facing a mounted knight. In a one-on-one situation the horseman might not notice this in time, but on a battlefield the footmen most likely to properly stand up to the cavalry are those surrounded by fellow soldiers who'd do the same, AKA those in an infantry block that doesn't break cohesion at an incoming charge. Which would likely result in the cavalry abandoning the charge and finding some other targets elsewhere on the field isntead. So those footsoldiers who would manage to fend off a horseman like that are the least likely to actually find themselves fighting one directly.
@@predwin1998 I'd agree that in open field conditions, the combatant with greater manouverability will use that advantage to avoid engaging except on terms favourable to him. But urban fighting, or fighting in woodland or scrub or on broken ground or bog, would negate this to a greater or lesser extent. One on one, in an open, level, firm field, my money would be on the horseman. Hint to the footman: choose your ground.
@@simonbrooke4065 I agree. Additionaly, while I don't want to give the impression that knights were fools, it can also be noted that the cavalry was often chosen based on who had access to the proper equipment (warhorses), which meant that *some* knights could be arrogant/foolish enough to be lured into a fight they should and could have avoided, perhaps due to peer pressure or something. I'd say Agincourt is a good example of mounted men-at-arms taking a fight they really shouldn't have. P.S. While you don't seem like someone who would assume knights were just arrogant rich dudes in armour, the emphasis I put on stating that would be the exception was aimed at others who might read this conversation.
@@davidtuttle7556 The Scots waited until 'about 2,000' of Hugh de Cressingham's troops - apparently mainly cavalry - had crossed the extremely narrow bridge, and were hemmed in on a small area of soft ground, before they launched their attack. The attack drove de Cressingham's force away from the bridge into a bend of the river on extremely soft ground. Outnumbered more than two to one by mainly light infantry while tightly packed in a bog with no escape route, it's hardly surprising that de Cressingham's cavalry was cut to pieces. It's also significant that the Scots commanders, on the Abbey Mount, had a clear strategic view of the field of battle, while the English side did not - so the Scots command and control will have been better.
Having seen Jason Kingsley's videos with him galopping full speed in armor I can't help but think that I'd be absolutely terrified by even one mounted knight attacking me, let alone a group of them. I mean: even when you stab at them (and timing might not be easy to do damage), there's still a metric ton of mass coming at you at 30km/h
For sure. It would be incredibly scary. And most of the time the horse itself was pretty well armored as well. Not to mention that a knight would have also been riding a bigger horse than the one shown in this video. They would have been on a big destrier warhorse, bred specifically for the purpose of being rode into battle. Mounted knights really were like the tanks of the medieval period. They were just incredibly difficult to kill. I certainly wouldnt want to find myself on a battlefield with one of them running me down, thats for sure.
Note also that a man on foot has a tighter turn radius than the horse. This allows him to find the optimum spot to attack. With properly trained horse and rider there are methods that negate this advantage , see the Spanish School Lipizzaners.
Being run down, bullied or knocked out of the way is indeed (or better said, would be) my primary concern when fighting mounted opposition. The momentum he can command is just so much more then any brace i can pull.
Yes, unless a footman gets a surprise hit in the crush of battle, I can't imagine a one-on-one duel ending in any way but a fallen footman covered in hoof prints.
@@stevenkobb156 Pietro Monte wrote that this was no big deal, that even if you were unarmored & trampled by a horse, it still shouldn't be able to hurt you enough to prevent you from killing it by attacking its belly as it rides over you. He did, however, note, that soldiers on foot almost always failed to do this theoretically obvious thing in practice, that it required considerable courage to accomplish.
Probably depends a lot on the horse. If it's trained to think and move on it's own while being really aggressive. I wouldn't want to fight it even without a rider on top.
I have a theory, as HEMA seems to rise in popularity anti populists join and want to do things other than the normal swords. they want to do axes, and spears, because those are not normal. My sister kind of did this by learning fencing with her left hand
Meanwhile, if the horse was an old sergeant major horse, "Ok you two you keep swinging those pointy things around I'm goin to run about 200 meters that way. Rider, you can come along if you behave, but this is not up for debate. We'll come back after that at full speed but I'm not doing anything useful standing still."
I like to point out that physically the lunge seems a very risky move against an armored rider, because you'd probably lose your pole weapon before you'd knock the rider. You are putting your pole weapon's balance point really far out your reach with that move, and if it hits solid enough, any angle in impact will be felt really hard on your grip, possibly twisting it out. It probably is useful, however maybe the fact it's not really safe/reliable is a reason why it never went into the medieval sources, only showing up when armor started to fade out from the battlefield because of guns
When I saw your preview of this video I thought you were about to make a collab with Jason, but Zac looks very competent too. I will subscribe to his channel for sure. Nice video 👍
Zack, you're far more of a subject matter expert than most of us watching, don't be so apologetic or self dismissive buddy, humility is good but as I'm always telling my wife where you have actual authority be confidence in it and project it, especially if you're holding anything back we all want to know on the subject due to excess humility, great to watch you, its plainly obvious you know and have exercised far more than you're letting on, I hope you're on more videos
Currently writing an article on a similar topic, looking at the ability of Early Medieval infantry to face down horsemen, with Hastings and Zallaqa as the primary case studies. At one you've got housecarls with Dane axes holding out against Norman cav until the end of the day, at the other the countercharge of the sword and assegai armed Blackguard routs the Spanish knights.
wow, I do a lot of backpacking, and occasionally meet horse (and rider) on the trails, but those horses are 9/10 spooked by us by the backpacks changing the shape. And here you are waving pike spear sword shield around.. and the only thing the horse is bothered with is the fact that you didn't bring an apple.
As a horseman and cavalry reenactor, I can address that. It comes down to two things -- selecting the right horse and doing enough training. Many horses can be taught to tolerate those things but certainly not all of them. After finding a horse with the right temperament, it's a matter of doing a lot of training. I won't go into the techniques for that but there are a number of ways to do it. Obviously it also involves a lot of trust for both partners. The horse learns that the rider won't take him into a situation where he will get hurt and the rider learns that when the horse is hesitant to do something it might be wise to reevaluate. I don't know where you're hiking but it's very likely that most of the riders you encounter haven't selected their horses for that and haven't spent a lot of time training them to tolerate things they haven't seen before. People select their horses for a lot of reasons and everything involves compromises.
@@itsapittie Even in more modern times, horses had to be selected for tolerance to gunfire whether from the rider or from others. Some horses will more or less ignore it, others become uncontrollable.
@@markfergerson2145 Oh, absolutely. I've trained horses to gunfire for cavalry competition. Some of them just aren't suited and will never get it. Some are dead easy to train. Most can be trained with enough time and patience.
and to add to what Kelton is on about, even nowadays certain horse breed are bred for different things. most horse breed you encounter in europe or used for hacking nowadays have been bred from riding stock meant for hunting and jumping as sports. they have not been selectively bred to be docile and amiable and brave. you can hear reaction anecdotes about how arabs, thoroughbreds and warmbloods behave and react. and then how pres, shetlands and cobs react. ofc all horses are different but there are generalisations of how they cope with certain things. and in those days some horse were bred for war, so were they bred to be brave? which is certainly not something they are being selectively bred for today. and e.g. quarter horses are bred to herd cattle and ik someone and have heard from others that some even bred in the uk and with no prior experiences to cows will try to herd and drive them when first introduced
That was very, very interesting. My thanks to everybody involved. It was really interesting to see the pictures from the treatises put into practice, so to speak.
Thank you two for making this video. I'm planning an animation of two knights fighting and at one point I want one to be on foot, the other on his horse. So I needed to look up what the knight on foot could do to even the playing field. This really helped and gave me some idea of what I could put in to make the fighting believable.
First off, that's a beautiful horse! Secondly, absolutely fantastic video! So many insightful thoughts and ideas about a topic that (for practical reasons) is largely neglected or only looked at from a very theoretical standpoint by others. Loved it.
I'd like to see whether it would be advantageous and realistic for the horseman to just ride away to then turn and charge. Also, do some full speed agility maneuvers! I wanna know how easy it is for you to outmaneuver a horseman
this was the explicit advice throughout the cenutries, this was known in Italian as a 'repulon' and in franch as a 'passade' the tightness of the turns at the end is quite significant to make it an effective technique. sidestepping is not really as easy as people presume as a horse can be very easily made to follow with a lot of precision, in fact side stepping very much encourages the horse. stepping towards can also be accomodated by the rider in a way akin tot he rejoneo bullfight, for instance. the sidestep of a horse is generally much larger than the step of the human.
@Satanas Luciferi There's 3 main problems when it comes to "Side stepping" a charging horse. 1: If you're in a set piece battle, your mate by your side will block you 2: If your entire formation does decide to side step with you, the entire formation will scatter, lose cohesion and allow the horsemen to pass through your lines unscathed 3: Horses can turn on a dime. There's always a chance that a horseman might see you sidestepping and decide to strafe his horse to your direction before you could even hit him back. You should see how good horses are at turning when they come to a halt.
I've trained myself to see kinetic energy When I close my eyes I find it has helped me in fencing and I saw a flaw in everybody's statement that a landscape be used multiple times yes it can when's the horse remains basically still as soon as the horse Lynch's the Lance will snap and if armor grabs the Lance you have to drop It or Break It
A crossover/collaboration like this is so valuable! Please keep on with content like that! 👍💪🙂 So often I thought about "real" historical combat which I guess for 99% didn't consist of one on one sword duels rather than polearms, shields, missile weapons, cavalry and most importantly groups of people against groups of people (be it rather unorganized in melees or organized in formations) in a "real" environment (mud, castles, villages, cities, other difficult terrain).
Back in the day when I used to participate in riots I faced mounted police a couple of times. Very very scary and i can't even imagine how it would be if they actually charged at us. Also..what a video! What a production value! Thanks so much!
Matt, if I may make just the smallest quality of life suggestion for your videos, please shield your microphones from the wind. This can be as easy as placing a sheet of cloth to one side to catch the bulk of the wind from the camera microphone to using studio quality filters over them. No matter what, it'll help a lot. Cheers, and all the best no matter your choices. I'll still watch.
It would be great if you guys could explore the differences between using a lance vs using a spear(possibly with the addition of a shield) from horseback against a footman. I'm asking because lances that were designed to break on impact and spear-like lances were used side by side for centuries. My take on it is that both offered some advantages and disadvantages in different scenarios.
15th century lances can be really long, 12-16 foot is pretty normal, there is an original lance of 467 cm, overhand spear use and two handed use of long lances is shown in the treatises. but the reach of a 16 foot lance is pretty huge and the lance feels much heavier in the hand, especially with a period weight head on it. (ca 150 grams) but you can absolutely fence with it still the 12 foot lances are a lot more nimble lances in later periods (napoleonic, or something) are often 250-310 cm long, which is a fair deal shorter and is more commonly held in the middle (or 2/3rds) of the shaft. this does really change the game.
@@bakters I figure some poor peasant woamn at one time or a antother picked up a spear or pitch fork and sais "Oh ya? you wanna piece of this?" and stabbed the fool getting too close. lol!
Great video, I have to say that the only time I would have wanted to see horses on a medieval battle ground would be if I was in the middle of a pike square. Just imagining what a large cavalry charge must have been like sends shivers down the spine. I know it's a bit later in time but if I had a time machine I would want to witness the cavalry charge at the Battle of Vienna, 1683.
Up until the advent of semi-automatic rifles, the cavalry charge still had some utility against unsupported infantry. Obviously machine guns would change the equation but there are examples as late as WW1 of infantry in the open being cut up by cavalry. A horse can close the distance from out-of-range to right on top of you so fast that someone with a bolt-action rifle can get off two or three shots at a moving target before he's skewered. The last cavalry charge by the U.S. Army took place against the Japanese on the Philippine Islands in January of 1942 but they used semi-automatic pistols against the Japanese bolt-action rifles so you could say the advantage lay mostly with the cavalrymen in that case.
Attack and retreat or break thru the line both at speed leaving their lances stuck into the enemy was the goal. While some would go for the horseman, others would go for the horses legs in order to trip him with a spear or various snares even ropes. Often the goal was not to kill but, take the knight for ransom. Also, one way to disable a fallen knight it to lay a pole arm across his neck and you and a mate stand on each end. Still, it took a number of footmen to defeat a horseman.
In regard to leg reining… a person on the ground could also give the horse conflicting commands by nudging the sides of the horse in some way. Making the horse think he has been given additional directional commands.
Love this content! Would love to see the Fiore footman vs. cavalry stuff more in detail as you said as well as other specific techniques from sources. Would love to see stuff with both combatants mounted as well, that's something sorely lacking in the community!
This is an amazing video and I enjoyed every bit of it. I've been talking with one friend who does SCA and she specializes mounted competitions. We discuss a lot about this and different styles of horsemanship. I would be really interested in the pros and cons of the different grips used on horse (Overhand, underhand, and the couched).
A good one handed hit using Meyer quaterstaff technique with a spear on the horse's legs would be pretty effective I'd imagine. I own 3 horses and I must say the fragile part of their body is the legs.
I would love to see you Matt taking riding lessons and hear about how the experience was for you. Perhaps you eventually could ride a lesson in your armour!
Lovely horse, so affectionate, not a war horse at all. He seems to understand you, mostly, at other times puzzled, also understands his role and that it's a game, simulation. Fascinating how good natured and trusting our 4 legged friends are, despite us putting them in danger (historically)
I'm in love with this horse. So calm, so docile, so beautiful. That's quite a tiny horse, though. A larger horse would dictate longer reaches and wider movements for positioning. On the subject of asking anything... Anything? Hmm... But what if the horse has wings? What are the implicattions to armour, movement, and air superiority?
@@alicelund147 In antiquity and the early middle ages, yes. Not so from the high middle ages on. Those horses were pretty big. That goes for (western) europe, other peoples often preferred lighter infantry and had smaller horses for that (Mongols, Arabs, etc.)
Regarding grabbing the horseman's lance: if the footman drops his weapon, he has a much better chance of recovering it than the horseman has. So if you've crossed the horseman's lance with your pole weapon, and got one hand on his lance, it seems to me that a viable gambit would be to dump your own weapon, grab the lance with both hands, and continue round the horse clockwise as fast as you can. Biomechanically, if you can get far enough round, the horseman will have to let go the lance or fall off the horse. His defences are 1. to out-turn you (which, it he can, nullifies this attack, and may leave you at least temporarily with only your secondary weapon); or 2. accelerate away, in which case one of you is going to have to let go of the lance - but the footman now has both hands on it and the horseman only one. Best case is you're going to deprive the horseman of his pole weapon, which he's very unlikely to recover without dismounting, forcing him onto his secondary weapon while you now have two pole weapons available to you. If he accelerates away and you lose your grip on his lance, there's a good chance you can pick up your pole weapon before he has time to return, so you're back to status quo ante. If you grab anything other than the weapon and the horseman accelerates away, you're either going to have to let go or be pulled off your feet, in which case chances are you get trampled. The reins might be a good target except that puts you right in the right place to be attacked by his secondary weapon. The 'bayonet lunge' is probably better directed at the horse in a real situation. It's almost certainly much less armoured, it's much nearer to you, and any significant injury to the horse is likely to cause the horseman to lose control of it. Nasty though this is, either its throat or its stomach (whichever is nearer) is probably the right thing to go for - big, vital, non-bony targets. ...Bolognese sauces... Yes, Matt.
Matt mentioned waving something in front of the horse's face to cause it to shy away. Perhaps the horsehair tassel attached to the head socket on Chinese quiang (spear) would be useful for that.
4 Cavalrymen have already put their dislike in lol! Nice video, Matt. and I will look at Zach's channel. And give that horse an apple. Indy did a great job.
LOL! I'm a cavalryman and I gave it a hearty thumbs up. Only a fool thinks his preferred weapon system (yes, the horse is part of the weapon system) has no disadvantages or will always prevail.
O.K., to generalise a bit, If you have a similar reach to your opponent, go to their off-hand side to make them shorten that reach. If, on the other hand, you have a significantly shorter reach, go to their weapon-side to get a mechanical advantage. Fascinating!
If the horse would be ok, it would be interesting to see some half speed tap stuff. Maybe with LARP gear. I grew up with horses and while I ride ok I am less than expert but I know enough to know that people have no idea what a really good horse and rider can do together. I don't know if the horses really tried going after people on their own but even if they didn't those techniques would have required a lot of skill and luck as well as knowledge of horses to have more than a Hail Mary chance. It would be cool if people could see what a change the horse makes even at half speed on a riding horse.
A very lovely horse. Were not at least some medieval war horses trained to kick and bite the enemy? leaving aside highly disciplined infantry squares, that it was almost impossible to get horses to charge into, in the Sudan in 1898 when the 21st Lancers charged the Dervishes, the footmen often lay on the ground (a less good tactic against lancers) and cut at the horses bellies and legs with their spears and swords, while others cut at the reins and the riders. Men who were unhorsed did not fair well. One good thing about modern war is that horses are not really involved in it any more and I say that as a former soldier who likes horses.
Interesting. Just last week, I was doing some reading, and I found an interesting account from the Battle of Arsuf. Granted, this could be sensationalizing a fallen commander, so as always, take with a grain of salt. There was a knight by the name of d'Avesnes, one of the French commanders, who was thrown from his horse during the battle. Allegedly, he cut down 15 enemy horsemen, while on foot, before he was overwhelmed. Possibly exaggerated, but still, it seems that well trained warriors were not helpless against cavalry.
Matt, when you cross the lance performing the manuever where you stated. "The treatise version is done with the other hand and foot leading . . . " Is that an inside move or an outside move? I would suspect it to be an outside move, but man, it could be hard to get outside fast enough with someone riding at you - eh?
Not sure how easy this would be to pull off but some kind of size comparison of the various types of cavalry horses. As the mounted knights got heavier armour the horses had to get bigger (as much as 4 hands/16" and 1400lbs) which lead to longer weapons (on both sides) and then the reverse when firearms came in and armour was worn less and speed for horses became more important than size. The size of the horse is going to change, to some extent, the techniques you use whether you are infantry or cavalry.
Most evidence we have suggests warhorses even from the late medieval period were usually around 15hh to 15.2hh, which is a modest sized horse by some modern standards. They were likely stallions though, and few people today ride stallions (I have several). They are much more powerful than geldings generally.
from my experience i know its not easy to hit the armoured horse. it was early 2000 the village simth trying to change horse shoes. and for some reason the horse got pisses. start to running kicking and jumping. the blacksmith and some farmers trying to stop it runing everywhere by jabing sticks and swing broom at it. but only to make it more crazy. i was so amazed by the horses agility to doge attacks while kicking stomping front and rear...while at the end they got the horse wangled down and no one got hurt.
Also, if you stab a horse with spear, and the horse has even some cloth on it, it might got stuck in the cloth and you need to ditch the spear if circling like that.
A spear that gets stuck to something on the horse is likely to obstruct or even hurt the horse in some way. The horse could get a bit mad. It could be a gamble how well trained the enemies' horses are.
@35:35 this lunge is why the british SMLE bayonet drill included an extended single grip lunge, designed to defeat a mounted opponent. cavalry was still an issue in the first years of the great war.
I'd like to see some exploring of the great axe and the great sword against cavalry. It's a use where many think they may have had significant advantages, but, especially with the great axe, I haven't seen anyone comment with anything more than speculation.
Can you do a video about sicilian stick fighting? What's your opinion about its fighting technique? What I found to be the most interesting thing, is the continous rotation of the stick
Zach's ability to manoeuvre his lance would have been greatly restricted if he had a shield as mounted medieval cavalry often, even usually, did. PS despite modern illustrations the use of ECW bridle gauntlets was restricted almost entirely to officers - there is not a single example of its issue to common troopers (and that holds true right through to the 1680s)
Matt (talking): Offend... threat... lever... take his lance in hand... penetrate... that being said... context... Zack (thinking): Wait! Am I... helping him explain... how to, um, kill me? Indy the horse (thinking): Blah-blah-blah! When does the fighting start? I know I can crush that puny human! Matt (talking): Beautiful, big horse... Indy the horse (thinking): Aw... Isn't he cute? Fine! I'll let him live!
Great Video as usual. I saw part two on Zac's channel. It would be interesting to learn how to offend a mounted Archer. So many armies used them. Thanks
On the bit about _____ always winning, one thing people don't take into account is luck. Sometimes the really good fighter just has bad luck and the other guy gets in the proverbial lucky shot.
This is an awesome video! Thank you so much! Your content provides lots of valuable information I can use for my late 14th century infantryman representation. :D
16th century Chinese genreal Qi Jiguang said spear has little use against heavy cavalry charge. especially when facing barded heavy horse of mongol elite cavalry which they were trained to run into infantry spear instead of ride pass. spears often break when meet the barding and rarely killing the horse. and brace cavalry chargewith spears also required extreme displine. he encourage the use of mobile wagons, imported japanese/European firearm and twohanded swords to fight cavalry dominated mongol army. he stated using twohanded sword sweeping at horse legs that has been stopped or slowed down by the wagon; is much more effective than brace the impact with spears.
A very fair summation of the ways in which an infantryman could counter a cavalryman. I have a question about attacking the cavalryman from their left hand side: I can see they then have a reduced sword reach with a forehand stroke, but what if the cavalryman counters with a backhanded sword swipe across their left hand side?
@@scholagladiatoria thanks. I’ll look forward to the sequel in which we get the cavalryman’s take on tackling the infantryman. It’s refreshing to hear about the tactics, one on one, since most books I’ve read on infantry versus cavalry encounters tend to lean towards group encounters, either in a skirmish or full scale battle, and I guess there are different dynamics / considerations with formations of cavalry versus formed infantry as, say, at Bannockburn or Nancy.
Matt: Fight me fairly! Horse: Why should he? Matt: Matt Easton of Schola Gladiatoria here Matt your content is literally gold for us historical military heads