Spacing between horses in cavalry formations

[Justin Swanton]

I can confirm that cavalry wheeling does require the subsequent ranks to remain stationary.

In fact almost every horse is stationary through the process.

The innermost wheeling horse barely moves, the rest of the rank walks slowly around, focussed on maintaining frontal alignment.  The line reaches it's new facing, it advances a horse length or two and stops, becoming the new front.
The second line steps one horse length forward, and begins it's wheel on the same exact point as the first.
When it reaches it's new facing, it and the first line steps forward a length or two, then they stop.
Repeat until the last line is in place, then the formation is completed wheeling, and may move forward.

It takes time.

We had a thread on it two years ago after I saw 30 reenactors perform it in a turma

Interesting input. Thanks Mark. 

[Justin Swanton]

Two further pieces of context from 19th century manuals :

US cavalry manuals define the space occupied by a cavalryman as 3ft wide and 9ft deep for calculating frontage and depth.

A horse is about 7 feet long so that means there is at least 2 feet between horses of each rank. I notice however from the videos that US cavalry marching in 4-horse-wide columns tend have a much greater space between the ranks.

English Light Horse drill from the Napoleonic period puts the default spacing of cavalry at Easy Files (six inches between men) and Close Order of half a horses length between ranks.  It notes that with cavalry in Open Files, with a 3 ft gap, a mounted man "can just pass betwixt"

So about 3 1/2 feet between horses of each rank which approximates fairly well to the US cavalry manuals.

If we factor in these latest analogies, our minimum cavalry front is looking to be closer to the 3 ft/1m mark  and the depth  needed to manouever in ranks about 9ft head-to-head.

Pretty much what I thought though there is a sometimes quite considerable variation in depth between stationary and moving formations.

[Erpingham]

Examples of cavalry manuals, as requested

US Cavalry   Note that this includes a comparative study of European drill from 1861.

Light horse drill book

The Light Horse drill book is interesting because it has clear diagrams and is written for volunteers so is inclined to explain some of its technicalities.  On wheeling, look at pp23-4 and plate 17 for a two line squadron wheel on a stationary pivot and wheeling a column of squadrons using a sliding pivot pp33-4, plate 23.  With a sliding pivot, the true pivot point is static but placed beyond the formation.  All the troopers are essentially moving round arcs of a circle wider than line.  Incidentally, you can download the e-book for free.

I think if you look at this, it becomes obvious you can't wheel a deep formation on a stationary pivot.  Either, as Mark has said earlier, you pivot each line as it reaches the pivot point, which needs a reasonable distance between lines, so the each line has wheeled and moved on before the next attempts it, or you can do it on a sliding or moveable pivot.

[Justin Swanton]

Thanks Anthony, very interesting. 

[Justin Swanton]

I can confirm that cavalry wheeling does require the subsequent ranks to remain stationary.

In fact almost every horse is stationary through the process.

The innermost wheeling horse barely moves, the rest of the rank walks slowly around, focussed on maintaining frontal alignment.  The line reaches it's new facing, it advances a horse length or two and stops, becoming the new front.
The second line steps one horse length forward, and begins it's wheel on the same exact point as the first.
When it reaches it's new facing, it and the first line steps forward a length or two, then they stop.
Repeat until the last line is in place, then the formation is completed wheeling, and may move forward.

It takes time.

We had a thread on it two years ago after I saw 30 reenactors perform it in a turma

One question: why would squadrons in a battle want to use this time-consuming and vulnerable method of turning 180 degrees when countermarching is much quicker and safer? (the ranks of the squadron that have not yet countermarched are in formation and facing the enemy) It really puzzles me.

[Erpingham]

Not being familiar with the material I can't say but are we sure they never countermarched?

One observation which may be relevant is that cavalry would need to open its order to countermarch - it couldn't be done in close order.  Would this process, however it was done, have evened out the time taken?

[Justin Swanton]

Not being familiar with the material I can't say but are we sure they never countermarched?

One observation which may be relevant is that cavalry would need to open its order to countermarch - it couldn't be done in close order.  Would this process, however it was done, have evened out the time taken?

According to Arrian, cavalry (Roman cavalry at least and one can suppose they weren't unusual) countermarched all the time. When throwing javelins for example each rank would countermarch to permit the next rank to shoot then countermarch in turn.

What I get from Asklepiodotus and Aelian is that open order was the standard battle order for cavalry - at least for non-cataphract cavalry. It was certainly the standard order for rhombus formations where each horse needed to wheel in place and nothing suggests the other formations - square, rectangle and wedge - weren't in the same order. So cavalry were by default in the right order for countermarching.

Again, the only reason I can think of for wheeling squadrons rather than countermarching them is because wheeling is easier for horses to do than countermarching which requires more training.

[Jim Webster]

One question: why would squadrons in a battle want to use this time-consuming and vulnerable method of turning 180 degrees when countermarching is much quicker and safer? (the ranks of the squadron that have not yet countermarched are in formation and facing the enemy) It really puzzles me.

this is one of the things that stump us and might appear obvious to a cavalry officer. Perhaps when you countermarch in too tight a formation the horses tend to kick out at each other as they pass?

Jim

[Justin Swanton]

One question: why would squadrons in a battle want to use this time-consuming and vulnerable method of turning 180 degrees when countermarching is much quicker and safer? (the ranks of the squadron that have not yet countermarched are in formation and facing the enemy) It really puzzles me.

this is one of the things that stump us and might appear obvious to a cavalry officer. Perhaps when you countermarch in too tight a formation the horses tend to kick out at each other as they pass?

Jim

Could be. Wheeling would keep with the horses' natural inclination to move with each other in the same direction. I notice that countermarching is not part of the repertoire in the Light Horse drill book. It could be difficult to get horses to move in a direction opposite to the facing of adjacent horses.

[Mark G]

I think you are forgetting ancient deployments, which were very much a line up by agreement and go forward.  Complicated manoeuvres are a luxury in such training.

But going forward, turning and coming back.  That has a use

[Patrick Waterson]

I think you are forgetting ancient deployments, which were very much a line up by agreement and go forward.  Complicated manoeuvres are a luxury in such training.

Arrian's Ars Tactica (aka Tekhne Taktike) indicates that Roman cavalry of his time practised some quite complicated evolutions at speed.  Some of them even retained their original Gallic designations, indicating that the Romans had learned these manoeuvres from the Gauls.

I think we should not underrate the ability of men who spend much of all day, every day on horseback to perform manoeuvres rapidly and effectively.

That said, I am still not sure why Polybius wants to wheel his cavalry.