heavy cavalry engaging heavy cavalry

[Domen]

the 14th century saw a change from cavalry dominated battles to infantry dominated ones.

Yes but this statement is of no use without the context. In other words - question is what contributed more to that change, decline of quality of cavalry, or increase of quality of infantry, or some other factors.

BTW - the 17th century saw a renaissance of cavalry, which again had a significant role in battles.

In the 15th - 16th centuries there were also some professional cavalry formations which remained efficient. But it was the bulk of feudal knighthood, that was gradually becoming useless. I think that collapse of discipline and decreasing interest in warrior ethos contributed to collapse of knighthood. Nobility of Western Europe started to be busy with running their farms or trading companies, rather than training their military skills.

In other words - nobility gradually transformed from military elite into intellectual and economic elite.

Of course this process was largely caused by the Renaissance and by the rise of early capitalism.

As the result, knighthood lost its previous value as a military force of well-trained, skilled warriors.

More generally speaking, 15th century saw the decline of feudal armies and the rise of professional or mercenary armies, rather than the decline of cavalry and the rise of infantry. Within those professional and mercenary armies, there was still also a place for heavy cavalry (like French gendarmes).

===========================================

There are followers of a theory that only disciplined infantry can resist cavalry.

On the other hand, I am supporting a theory, that undisciplined cavalry cannot beat infantry.

Some explain instances when infantry lost to cavalry with alleged lack of quality of that infantry.

I would explain instances when cavalry lost to infantry with lack of quality of that cavalry.

But in many cases other factors were decisive - for example 100 cavalry cannot beat 5000 infantry.

.