The stirrups

[Argeus the Paladin]

Popular opinion is that without the stirrups the cavalry charge wouldn't have been quite nearly that devastating.

However, some members of TWC just enlightened to me that the role of the stirrups might as well have been nothing more than a measure for comfort and has little to do with the power of a charge.

Which of this is correct? Discuss.

[thursgun]

I think it was a very important thing. To charge you need to stay in the horse to ride steady, especially if you are riding fast.
The controversy I believe is about the shock or clash between the cavalry and the enemy line (usually infantry). And I think that stirrups or not, the shock made no difference.

[Carpathian Wolf]

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...hlight=stirrup

Pretty much, at least according to modern reanactors. It's greatest affect would probably be melee (not charge) combat. But that would give the advantage in melee over non stirrup cavalry, not really over infantry because fighting on a horse swinging your sword around, while it looks glorious in movies, is difficult to actually do.

[cenkiss]

Stirrups were effective.Without it riders would not be able to hold on to their horses effectively.Cavalry charge does not only make an effect on infantry that was charged.It also makes a backfire effect for the rider.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Stirrups were effective.Without it riders would not be able to hold on to their horses effectively.Cavalry charge does not only make an effect on infantry that was charged.It also makes a backfire effect for the rider.

Except history (for example Alexander the Great's cavalry. The various Persian lancer cavalry and Sarmatians who did not have stirrups) show this isn't true. Ontop of that we have modern day renactors who also say the stirrup doesn't make much of a difference on the charge.

[cenkiss]

Except history (for example Alexander the Great's cavalry. The various Persian lancer cavalry and Sarmatians who did not have stirrups) show this isn't true. Ontop of that we have modern day renactors who also say the stirrup doesn't make much of a difference on the charge.

Have you ever ridden a horse without stirrups?

[thursgun]

Have you ever ridden a horse without stirrups?

What's your point? It obviously can be done, otherwise mankind would never have used the horse in the first place, and certainly not for battle.

[cenkiss]

What's your point? It obviously can be done, otherwise mankind would never have used the horse in the first place, and certainly not for battle.

I do not say you can't ride horses without stirrups.But stirrups give you advantage of staying on horse better.

[Argeus the Paladin]

Perhaps let's put it this way: Without stirrups it is easier for the charger to fall off the horse at the point of impact and breaks his neck for trying?

[cenkiss]

Perhaps let's put it this way: Without stirrups it is easier for the charger to fall off the horse at the point of impact and breaks his neck for trying?

That is what i was saying.

[Sphere]

The opinions I have read of modern re-enactors is when delivering a lance blow the limiting factor is the grip on the lance not the attachment to the horse i.e. the lance will be torn out of your hand long before you develop enough force to de-horse yourself, with or without stirrups.

History seems to back this up as shock cavalry was in use well before stirrups, so it had to be effective.

[HunGeneral]

To my knowledge the stirrups had no large influence if making the charge more devastating. The technik of Couching the Lanze had more to do with it.

The stirrups had more effect in meele against other cavalry (it helped you stay in the saddle). If I'm not mistaken then I heard that stirrups had a good effect on horse archery - he rider could stand up in the saddle to minimize the "shaking" effect caused by the movement of the horse. At least thats my opinion.

[konny]

It's rather simple:

- usage of stirrups in Europe: c. 7th Century until today
- absolute domination of cavalry on European battlefiedls: c. 12th Century until c. 15th Century

otherwise see:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...14#post6721214
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...80#post6724680

[Carpathian Wolf]

To my knowledge the stirrups had no large influence if making the charge more devastating. The technik of Couching the Lanze had more to do with it.

The stirrups had more effect in meele against other cavalry (it helped you stay in the saddle). If I'm not mistaken then I heard that stirrups had a good effect on horse archery - he rider could stand up in the saddle to minimize the "shaking" effect caused by the movement of the horse. At least thats my opinion.

But even when the saddle you release the arrow only when the 4 hoofs of the horse are off the ground, regardless of a stirrup or not.

It's rather simple:

- usage of stirrups in Europe: c. 7th Century until today
- absolute domination of cavalry on European battlefiedls: c. 12th Century until c. 15th Century

otherwise see:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...14#post6721214
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...80#post6724680

Domination due to the stirrup? Or because there there simply didn't exist any high grade infantry in that era?

[konny]

Domination due to the stirrup?

Nope.

Again:

- usage of stirrups in Europe: c. 7th Century until today
- absolute domination of cavalry on European battlefields: c. 12th Century until c. 15th Century

The domination begun some 1/2 millenium after the intorduction of the stirrup. I think this number should make clear that both are unrelated (despite stirrups might have helped riding in general).

[Abyrvalg]

btw
http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/shock.php

[Romano-Dacis]

There must be a thread about this every month.

[AUSSIE11]

i have already explained this on an identical thread about two months ago... http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...=329105&page=3, this should tell you all you need to know if you read my posts... if you've got any other questions just ask...

[Manco]

And let's not forget Pegasus, which obviously shows the Greeks could tie jet engines to horses.

[konny]

OK, so let's talk about Sanskirt texts and air combat in prehistorical times.