The Armour Archive

Hello all, I'm fairly new to Armoured Combat, and new to the site, so I'm trying to decide what period I would like to base my armour around. Since most (if not all) of the combat I will be taking part in will be on foot, I was curious. Did Knights always fight from horseback? If not, what period would it have been acceptable for a Knight to fight on foot in actual combat? (not in tourneys). I've seen some beautiful late period harnesses, but from my understanding they're all based around the combatant being mounted, and it seems it would look out of place to see someone wearing Gothic or Maximillian plate fighting on foot, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,
Ulric

Ulricus Wulbrandus wrote:Did Knights always fight from horseback?

Yes.

Ulricus Wulbrandus wrote:If not, what period would it have been acceptable for a Knight to fight on foot in actual combat? (not in tourneys).

NEVAR!

Ulricus Wulbrandus wrote:I've seen some beautiful late period harnesses, but from my understanding they're all based around the combatant being mounted, and it seems it would look out of place to see someone wearing Gothic or Maximillian plate fighting on foot

Quite right you are, Sir.

There was no time when some knights didn't dismount and fight on foot some of the time, as far as actual battles go.

For tournament/joust fighting, early tournaments all started on horseback but could go to the ground; later on there was actual planned foot combat, but I can't tell you exactly when it started (14-15 centuryish).

I think the confusion is that a Knight should be *able* to fight from horseback not that he solely fought that way.
Horses rather get in the way defending from the walls of a castle or fighting with daggers in a sapper's tunnel both of which are described in primary accounts.

A lot of the real pretty late period armour was used in foot jousting. The horse jousting armour gradually began to get specialized only for the joust with very heavy defensive plates and much lighter other plates.

Ulricus Wulbrandus wrote:Hello all, I'm fairly new to Armoured Combat, and new to the site, so I'm trying to decide what period I would like to base my armour around. Since most (if not all) of the combat I will be taking part in will be on foot, I was curious. Did Knights always fight from horseback? If not, what period would it have been acceptable for a Knight to fight on foot in actual combat? (not in tourneys). I've seen some beautiful late period harnesses, but from my understanding they're all based around the combatant being mounted, and it seems it would look out of place to see someone wearing Gothic or Maximillian plate fighting on foot, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,
Ulric

Look at your Landsknechts, dude.

14th century English under Edward III had knights fighting from foot iirc. Not all the time, but I believe it was used in some static formations.

Thomas Powers wrote:I think the confusion is that a Knight should be *able* to fight from horseback not that he solely fought that way.
Horses rather get in the way defending from the walls of a castle or fighting with daggers in a sapper's tunnel both of which are described in primary accounts.

That's a very good point, thanks. I can't believe I didn't think of that.

Payn wrote:14th century English under Edward III had knights fighting from foot iirc. Not all the time, but I believe it was used in some static formations.

Perhaps more importantly, the French took to the practice in several large engagements of ALSO dismounting to engage the defensive English so that the horses didn't become a liability against hailstorms of crossfire arrows and loud cannon.
The English learned a costly lesson at the hands of the smelly and ill-tempered Scotts. The key to English mounted heavy troops was to ride in a conroi (stirrup to stirrup), to create a giant tsunami of man, horse, and metal to sweep the field. But harrowing arrows, deep schiltrons, and broken ground could disrupt the conroi and greatly reduce it's efficacy. The English later used similiar tactics against the French who were still dedicated to the heavy cavalry. After several defeats, they decided to dismount prior to certain engagements and that often worked out even worse for them.
Some very historic foot engagements occured at Crecy & Poitiers, 1346-1356 respectively.

From Froissart's Chronicles:
" ... So many Englishmen and Gascons came to that part, that perforce they opened the king's battle, so that the Frenchmen were so mingled among their enemies that sometime there was five men upon one gentleman. There was taken the lord of Pompadour and ^ the lord Bartholomew de Burghersh, and there was slain sir Geoffrey of Charny with the king's banner in his hands : also the lord Raynold Cobham slew the earl of Dammartin. Then there was a great press to take the king, and such as knew him cried, ' Sir, yield you, or else ye are but dead.' There was a knight of Saint Omer's, retained in wages with the king of England, called sir Denis Morbeke, who had served the Englishmen five year before, because in his youth he had forfeited the realm of France for a murder that he did at Saint-Omer's. It happened so well for him, that he was next to the king when they were about to take him : he stept forth into the press, and by strength of his body and arms he came to the French king and said in good F'rench, ' Sir, yield you.' The king beheld the knight and said : ' To whom shall I yield me ? Where is my cousin the prince of Wales ? If I might see him, I would speak with him.' Denis answered and said : ' Sir, he is not here ; but yield you to me and I shall bring you to him. ' ' Who be you ? ' quoth the king. ' Sir,' quoth he, ' I am Denis of Morbeke, a knight of Artois ; but I serve the king of England because I am banished the realm. of France and I have forfeited all that I had there.' Then the king gave him his right gauntlet, saying, ' I yield me to you.' ...

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/froissart-full.asp
If you're interested in the Hundred Year's War between France and England, it's a good read. The accounts of the battle of Poitiers specifically are full of ferocious deeds, and stirring moments, such as when the Prince hears of the wounding Sir James Audley and rewards him, and he turns and gifts the reward to his four squires. Word of his gift being given away disturbs the Prince...and well...you should read it yourself.

The Prince also has a supper in honor of his hostage, his cousin, King John II and his son Prince Phillip. Reminds me of the SCA...Clubbing each other like baby harp seals, and then sitting down in the evening drinking beer, sharing food and good conversation.

Good stuff.
-Cian

Ulricus Wulbrandus wrote:Hello all, I'm fairly new to Armoured Combat, and new to the site, so I'm trying to decide what period I would like to base my armour around. Since most (if not all) of the combat I will be taking part in will be on foot, I was curious. Did Knights always fight from horseback? If not, what period would it have been acceptable for a Knight to fight on foot in actual combat? (not in tourneys). I've seen some beautiful late period harnesses, but from my understanding they're all based around the combatant being mounted, and it seems it would look out of place to see someone wearing Gothic or Maximillian plate fighting on foot, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

Thanks,
Ulric

I like the appearance of English armour from 1330-1360. There are also many examples of knights fighting dismounted during this period.
(Early hundred year's war.)

If you haven't already seen it, this site is a great resource.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/

jarlragnar wrote:Look at your Landsknechts, dude.

Landsknechts were soldiers not knights; there was still a separate knightly class in Germany at that time.


As Cian has pointed out during much of the 100 years war and War of the Roses the English in particular would dismount and fight on foot often.

Contemporary references to the "English Companies" of the late 14th C particularly mention their emphasis on fighting afoot, using their lances as pikes while supported by archers. As James B & Cian say, it seem almost to have been the fashionable way to fight, if you were an English knight ...

Get on a horse because there is nothing quite so splendid as fart-arsing about on ponies. Absolutley, sweet bugger all. Just sayin.

Seriously, if you wanna be a real knight, fight on foot and fight on horseback. It is the bomb!!

James B. wrote:

jarlragnar wrote:Look at your Landsknechts, dude.

Landsknechts were soldiers not knights; there was still a separate knightly class in Germany at that time.


As Cian has pointed out during much of the 100 years war and War of the Roses the English in particular would dismount and fight on foot often.

True enough. Don't know what I was thinking posting that. Just guys in armour, really.

Just from an etymological perspective, I believe the English term Knight is premised on a root word for servant, implying more of the vassalage/fealty nature of the role. However, the French and German terms (Chevalier and Ritter) as well as the root Latin (Caballus), all referred to roles that were specifically horse-related in nature.

Thus, "Chivalry" has always been associated with horsemanship (if not actual combat on horseback), while "Knighthood" can be seen as focusing more on the martial service obligations of fealty and vassalage.

My $.02, of course.

Max Von Halstern

English Knights in the 14th and 15th century rode horses too it is just they used dismounted tactics often in that time frame.

Don't forge spanish---Caballero!

James B. wrote:English Knights in the 14th and 15th century rode horses too it is just they used dismounted tactics often in that time frame.

Exactly. Which is what I was trying to get at by stating that it is associated with horsemanship if not actual combat on horseback.

On the chivalry thing grab y'self a copy of Terry Jones' book Chaucer's Knight (isbn 0413575101, 0413691403*, 0413496406, 0807106917 or 0297775669 *The '403 is the '94 revised edition)

De Clisson who fought for the English in the Breton succession wars, before changing to the French who eventually made him Constable, was known for fighting 'English style' (Dismounted) with a cut down lance and axe.