Trayned band cavalry

[Chevalier IX]

I am curious as to whyether we will be seeing trayned band cavalry anytime in the near future so as to compliment the intrepid men that make up the foot regiments of said trayned men.Searching through several sources,most prominently Ospreys book on the Cavalry classes of the English Civil War,I noticed not only speak of them but rosters and rolls as well,the one catching my eye the most being the presence of trayned band lancers in most counties still being enlisted per the measures layed forth for such in the Tudor era.just thought perhaps I would bring this to light if it were not yet considered,and if it had been perhaps to open the possibility once more

[Wildfowler]

Thats very interesting. I was unaware of Trained Band Cavalry. Thanks for the heads up! Cheers

[AlphaDelta]

The Osprey book about the Ironsides covers the demi-lancer recruitment in quite a lot of detail. Infact it shows records from the late 1630's, in the form of a table, that show the number of trayned band demi-lancers that each county produced. I'm quoting from memory but some counties produced over a hundred.

You never read about lancers in the first ECW (other than the Scots).

Where did they all go?

Cheers

[Wildfowler]

I don't think they went anywhere! I think they changed.

The Lance was a good weapon against enemy horse, a superb weapon against Infantry but no good against the pike!

The lance fell out of favour in western europe until late 1700's. Your local lancer unit just evolved with the times.

[Graf zu Adler]

I do miss melèe cavalry in the mod a bit, as my standard battle tactic needs them, but on the other hand, i's fun to watch your soldiers to shoot the enemy to bits while he runs away, comes back, runs away, comes back.....

[leonn]

agreed,wildfowler.the english just didnt use lancers during the ecw.only the scots did,and with great success.

[AlphaDelta]

This document shows a list of trained band cavalry raised in 1637, 5 years before the war started.

We can see a large number of harquebussiers, and a decent number of light cav, demi-lancers and cuirrassiers.

So during 5 years between the date of this 'census', and the start of the ECW, the bulk of the English cavalry simply dumped their lances and the bulk of their armour? There must have been atleast some cavalry troops armed with lances.

Cheers

[leonn]

as to why they didnt use lances etc who can say,but i do know that there is not one reference to any english cavalry unit of either side using,or being issued with lances.i suppose you might only conjecture that raising lancers and training them to be effective are two very different things.the scots had very effective lancers because they hadnt really stopped using them for centurys.and i think the influx of professional officers from the continent,who were used to train the soldiery here ment that continental ideas were put in place.lancers were used in the 30 years war,but were very highly trained and there was little time to implement that in england.

[Chevalier IX]

I suppose it would not hurt,since there is not record of them being disbanded,to perhaps include a few lancers as a theoretical unit,seeing as even though there is no reference to them,as stated there is no reference they were cast away eitherIt might be nice to fight the battles with a what if notion...perhaps even a few double armed men for good measureAnd indeed it is known that lancers requiered a lot of time,trianing and perhaps even monetary means with which to be effective,I suppose it i possible that this would have been in place as well for these theoretical lancers seeing as the roster seems to state they had been in place as early as the tudor era,so perhaps just a few at start with no option to recruit???

[Wildfowler]

I see what Alphadelta means when i look at the records. There did appear to be alot of them (lancers).

But I cannot ever remember reading about their use in battle besides the scots.

Having said that archery was used in the ECW. Again the Scots seemed to monopolise that as well.

I am going to look into this Lancer thing some more. It has me intrigued!

[AlphaDelta]

.the scots had very effective lancers because they hadnt really stopped using them for centurys.

I don't think we (the English) ever really stopped using lancers either. A lot of the Tudor era sources show harquebusiers riding next to cassock wearing lancers.

Cheers

[leonn]

agreed,yet at no point did either parliament or the royalists use them. i sort of agree with ikusa,dont see any harm in having a few.if you want to be accurate,just dont use them.

[Wildfowler]

Training a lancer is a lot more complex than training a cavalry trooper.

The lance has to be aimed, in the heat of action it is very easy to stick it in the ground and unhorse yourself or worse bring your own mount down. Also (As Bernard Cornwall the author had his hero Sharpe say) "Lancers are easy, get past the point and you have him" This is very true.

Most cavalry troopers recruited in the ECW were from the Yeoman farmer stock. Riding was second nature, but weapon handling had to be trained and (Forgeting now the complex 19th Century manuals on cavalry sword play) the pistol and sword was the easiest to teach.

You cannot fight with a sword sitting down! The only reason stirrups were invented was so you could fight from horseback! You have no force behind thrusts or weight behind cuts if you are sitting down. For this reason Medieval Knights rode with a long stirrup as have most cavalry so you can stand in the stirrups to fight (look at many Napoleonic pictures of cavalry combat).

But if you use a lance you must sit, with shorter stirrups so you can brace against the impact of the lance, otherwise you will be pushed back yourself which will cause the horse to raise it's head and become vulnerable itself.

For a horse to operate a maximum efficency with a rider the rider must keep above the horses centre of gravity. The fast a horse goes the further forward the centre of gravity travels. That is why Jockeys lean well forward over the horses neck. Now look at the length of the Jockey's stirrup, it's short so he can get well forward.

If you attack with a lance you need speed, that means you must lean forward, that is easiest if you have short stirrups.

Fight with a sword and you do not need speed beyond the initial charge, you need control, riding long and deep in the saddle gives that, also the longer stirrup means you can stand to use your sword but at the same time remain close to the saddle and remain stable.

That I offer as a reason for limited lancers in the ECW. They were harder and more time consumming to train.

I will offer as qualification for my ideas the fact that I cannot remember a time I could not ride a horse as my Father ran a riding school and I can remember having it drummed into me when schooling a horse
"Sit deep then you can control your horse, bring him under you"
Or doing fast work
"Get forward, help your horse to run, get forward let him open up"

I also remember a conversation I heard whilst schooling a horse

" Well the Horse is going like sh+t, the rider looks like sh+t I think it's kinder to have him destroyed"
"Why, that horse has potential!"
"I wasn't talking about the horse!" :hmmm:

[AlphaDelta]

Too technical for my brain which was, by the way, destroyed long ago by booze and nagging. But I can see your logic.

Cheers

[Chevalier IX]

Well then,all things stated and taken well to mind,I am still rather of the mind that we see a few to start off in some of the respective areas,Lancers that is,perchance without the option to enlist.seeing as they would be of the trayned band(nothing taken from the gents,but they were not online with the professionals)no one would be expecting anything along the lines of a Biological tank,but somethnig that would fill the ranks of the trayned bands absent horse(honestly,seeing as the trayned band was really the only option for a good period of this era as far as a military arm for the English,doesnt make a lot of sense that their cavalry should be lackig,going to need them eventually,and I am sort of holding the opinion that the lancers in question would fall to a greater part to the effect of Hobilars,rather than lance couching heavy cav)and as was stated before,I have done some research and have really come across nothing to give reason to believe that the English abandoned the lance arm altogether,especially seeing the if it isnt broke dont fix it logic that permeates the military minds of the day,there are really no accounts of said arm going belly up against the enemy,hence no real reason in practice to discontinue the use of said arm.just some more thoughts on the matterI am looking to get into the Strathbogie regiments next thread