Enemy horses as targets

[Nerva]

Look lads, you've got a a lot of excited horses and riders coming youre way, fast. Your weapon has an effective range of 30 yards at most (no guns remember). Somehow I don't think your going to take the time to be too selective :wink:

[philsidnell]

No, you are going to turn and run instead, which is why cavalry charges often succeeded.

[Nerva]

Very hard to run away without slipping on 'something' your mates have just deposited :oops:

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes true Tarb, but most mobs that require police to charge them on horseback are the kind that usually don't mind hurting horses!

As long as there is a policeofficer to injure in the process, they will find a way!

IIRC, every riot I've ever seen on the news that even involved police on foot saw the rioters retreat. Perhaps not fully occasionally, but at least to a safe distance where missiles can be thrown from. When the horses turn up it's even more so. Rioters don't carry shields, nor do they train together every day or even year. What you really need are riot police standing against riot police horse. Even army guys in riot gear against police horse (sets them up for a competition :wink: )

Actually, I have seen rioters with shields somewhere, and I think the comments of the mounted police officer seem to agree that they would not really stand up to a crowd intent on doing the police and horses harm?

Correct me here, as I have been offshore and do not always get the chance to follow a thread as closely as I would like!

[philsidnell]

I'm not surprised the police in question would not risk themselves or their horses against determined armed opposition, but they don't really operate in the same environment as ancient warriors. If he had said there was no way he could get his horses to go in there even if he wanted to becuase the enemy had shields then that, with all respect, would be more relevant, as horse mentality may have changed little; but a modern policeman on duty has a different set of priorities to an ancient warrior intent on victory and glory (and the avoidance of punishment or humiliation for cowardice).

Phil

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

That I can't argue with, just the point that there have been instances where crowds have stood up to mounted police, and the fact that some rioters have armed themselves with shields and weapons.

That a rioter and an organized army are 2 different animals, no arguement there.

[Mar]

There´s something that just came into my mind:
Lately i watched a video showing the usage of pila (the shieldpiercing thing). It didn´t really convince me, that this could have been an effective weapon (throwing distance) at all.

But...what would be the most effective weapon, when trying to kill a horse that attacks you? Wouldn´t you wish for that pilum, you just threw away 5 minutes ago?!

Even if it survives the impact...someone has to remove that thing.


:wink:

[M. Demetrius]

In De Bello Gallico, (don't remember the specific location) I'm pretty sure Caesar had ordered his men not to throw their pila at the cavary in one instance, but to hold them back, and attack the riders' faces with them, thereby repelling the cavalry attack. Heck, a pilum jabbed at my face will make me turn my head every time!

There were different kinds of points on pila, and some postulate that the leaf-shaped tips were more designed to be used against animals, because they cause more bleeding. These points were still fairly small, not like the ones on hastae. And some were barbed, which would be really awful to remove from a living man or beast.

But you're right. At ten to twenty meters, it's time to throw or go! Also, we don't practice and train like they did. I'm certain they could throw further than I can. They threw them many thousands of times in practice, I have thrown fewer comparatively.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Definately, Demetrius. It was at the battle at Pharsalus.

And a ballista comes to mind as an effective horse stopper, especially the repeating variety!

[PhilusEstilius]

The name for cavalry was Alla which simply means wing and this is where they were deployed, most commanders would prefer to hold the cavalry right up until the end of a battle. The Roman military tactics were to surround your enemy but not to close the circle, then when the enemy finds he is getting the worst of it he does not fight to the death by being surrounded. This is where he would run out of the circle and the cavalry on the wings run him down in a rout I suppose in this way you do not expose your horses so much to your enemy. There is however the nasty thought in the later centuries where the small Plumbata comes into being, I suppose one could put ten men on a field in a line each with ten of these Plumbata and I'm sure they could stop any cavalry charge.

[M. CVRIVS ALEXANDER]

Just curious if there is any specific instance where commanders told their legonaries to purposely target enemy horses with missile weapons or otherwise during a battle? That to me would be the best way to disrupt or destroy cavalry.

During the battle of Magnesia in 190 B.C.E., king Eumenes II, who commanded the right flank of the Roman forces, ordered his troops to attacks the horses of charging chariots of Antiochus III:
Appian, Syr. 33

The day was dark and gloomy so that the sight of the display was obscured and the aim of the missiles of all kinds impaired by the misty and murky atmosphere. When Eumenes perceived this he disregarded the remainder of the enemy's force, and fearing only the onset of the scythe-bearing chariots, which were mostly ranged against him, he ordered the slingers, archers, and other light-armed under his command to circle around the chariots and aim at the horses, instead of the drivers, for when a horse becomes unmanageable in a chariot all the chariot becomes useless. He often breaks the ranks of his own friends, who are afraid of the scythes.

So it turned out. The horses being wounded in great numbers charged with their chariots upon their own ranks. The dromedaries were thrown into disorder first, as they were next in line to the chariots, and after them the mail-clad horse who could not easily dodge the scythes on account of the weight of their armor. Great was the tumult and various the disorder started chiefly by these runaways and spreading along the whole front, the apprehension being even worse than the fact.

[John Conyard]

I think infantry would target the horse over the rider since it is larger, and often less well protected. However both would be moving very fast, between 40-60 kmp in the combat area, and so be hard to hit.

I think it would be safe to say that infantry would be walking and running under 15kph. So say a pede is 33% of the volume of a horse. This is very subjective, but it's Christmas and I'm on a diet of fruit cake, sherry and malt. The horse is traveling 2.6-4.0 times as fast. So the horse is hard to hit. Even when sober.

[Virtus Probi Invicti]

Wasn't there something in Ammianus about some of Julian Gallic troops getting under the horses of the Sasanid cataphracts and stabbing them in the bellies during a desperate fight?
Obviously, this couldn't have been during the heat of a charge...I would assume that a charge had been stopped and the horseman hadn't gotten away yet, or the Gauls had broken and some of the braver ones were doing what they could to stop a rout. I can certainly see having to get under a horse clad in a scale trapper to attack it effectively with a sword.
I'm wondering if I might be thinking of a mid-3rd century battle under Gordian III or Valerian...but Ammianus/Julian seems the most likely to me.

[philsidnell]

Battle of Strasbourg I think.

Phil Sidnell

[Arturus Uriconium]

Hi Phil, sorry, just joined so I've come to this late. Do you ever use the Cantabrian Circle? I believe some Gaulish tribes also turned backwards to throw javelins once they were riding away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantabrian_circle