How manoeuvrable were cavalry on the battlefield?

[Justin Swanton]

Could cavalry do more than the 90 degree wheel the tacticians seem to indicate? If they could do more are there any examples from the sources showing what they could do? Could a cavalry line wheel?

There are a couple of examples in the sources of cavalry charging enemy by squadron, e.g. Gaugamela. What exactly does that mean, what are the implications for how cavalry moved and manoeuvred by subunit?

What are the implications for wargaming rules that make some attempt at historical accuracy?

I'm uncertain on all the answers so look forward to input.

[Mark G]

There is video of the Roman Turma wheeling that the reenactment groups did about 5 years ago, on YouTube.

A few of us saw it live.

Short version is, it's really slow wheeling even ten horses and two ranks because the pivot horse takes up space, the second can't move into the first space until the first line is fully past, and isn't easy to turn a horse on the spot.

Long version is about the importance of maintaining formation.

If your happy that un forming and reforming is fine on a battlefield, then wheeling is a doddle.

If you think cavalry are dead if out of formation horsemen are caught, then it's as slow as the video.

There have been prior threads that expand on the above

[Justin Swanton]

Sure, we've discussed before how cavalry wheel. My interest is if they wheeled in increments of less than 90 degrees and what else they could do under battlefield conditions.

One thing about the reenactment groups - do they ever wheel in anything less than 90 degrees? I presume they base their manoeuvres on military manuals; do any manuals - Ancient, Mediaeval, Renaissance, etc. - talk about cavalry wheeling in increments of less than 90 degrees? Besides the shapes cavalry formations could adopt, do they talk about how those formations could move? I presume countermarching was a thing. How about insertion or interjection? How did light infantry insert themselves into a cavalry formation without getting trampled by the horses?

[Jim Webster]

I think there must have been a good reason for forming wedges and romboids. It may have been that they were manoeuvrable, even if they weren't as manoeuvrable as figures on a wargames table

[Mark G]

Keep in mind that armies agreed to fight.

They didn't stumble into each other, at least one side would always have selected a field and the other almost always accepted battle there.

Usually both did.  And they formed up facing each other.

So why would you need to consider wheels that weren't related to positions that arise from a starting square go?

[RichT]

If it's possible to wheel 90 degrees, it is therefore also possible to wheel 1,2,3,4,5,....86,87,88,89 degrees.

As to whether it happened IRL on the battlefield - when we talked about this WRT infantry, the votes were: Justin - No, Rest of the World - Yes.  Then it came down to whether we could conceive of a situation in which a turn of less than 90 degrees (or between 90 and 180) might be tactically useful.

Byzantine manuals are chock full of cavalry manoeuvre stuff and while I don't have leisure to peruse them at the moment, they are the place to look first ('Anonymous Byzantine', Maurice/Maurikios, Leo et al).

Plus, yes, wedges, rhomboids, flights of cranes. Can cranes turn only in 90 degree increments? Discuss.

Cavalry charging by squadrons, charging and retiring etc - clearly this is what they did, and I don't think the process has ever been clearly elucidated by any modern author. Yet it happened. Xenophon, Cavalry Commander and Horsemanship will have some useful bits.

How did light infantry insert themselves into a cavalry formation without getting trampled by the horses?

Carefully...

[Justin Swanton]

If it's possible to wheel 90 degrees, it is therefore also possible to wheel 1,2,3,4,5,....86,87,88,89 degrees.

As to whether it happened IRL on the battlefield - when we talked about this WRT infantry, the votes were: Justin - No, Rest of the World - Yes.

We few, we happy few, we band of brother. 

[Nick Harbud]

Although it is written much later, have you tried L.E. Nolan's "Cavalry - Its History and Tactics"?

[Erpingham]

do any manuals - Ancient, Mediaeval, Renaissance, etc. - talk about cavalry wheeling in increments of less than 90 degrees?

When we last discussed, I found several 19th century manuals that did.  Nick has mentioned Nolan, which I'm sure was one.  There was one on US cavalry manoeuvers which was well illustrated with diagrams IIRC.  I'll see if I can find it again.

As to squadron manoeuvers, the example of Charles the Bold's 1473 ordnance gives some ideas

Furthermore, my lord (the duke) ordains that, in order that the said troops may be better trained and exercised in the use of arms and better practised and instructed when something happens, when they are in garrison, or have the time and leisure to do this, the captains of the squadrons and the chambres are from time to time to take some of their men-at-arms out into the fields, sometimes partly, sometimes fully armed, to practice charging with the lance, keeping in close formation while charging, (how) to charge briskly, to defend their ensigns, to withdraw on command, and to rally, each helping the other, when so ordered, and how to withstand a charge.

[aligern]

Light infantry inserting themselves. That's going to be easy enough if  the cavalry are in a loose order. The Germans are described as running along with the horses, rather like Lady Butler's highlanders.  When near the opposing force the infantry firm up as a rallying point for the cavalry's fluid manoeuvres. Presumably the cavalry can close up to move and fight without the infantry.

As to changing face, there is a Roman formation, the globus.  This is a bit like a modern infantry unit forming a blob. The soldiers mass together without rank or file and the officer leads.  It is very flexible and very useful for say rough terrain because no one has to worry about alignment.  When the desired position is arrived at the globus then reforms ranks.

As wargaming generally reproduces actions within a few bowshot of the enemy I doubt if complex manoeuvres are attempted .  Let's say that the troops are changing position half a mile from the enemy, that's about five bowshots.  It would take an opposing cavalry unit three minutes to charge and hit an opposing unit wheeling in front of it.  In that timescale all the wheeling unit can do is flee. I know some sets of rules have, in effect, a variable groundscale so a unit can move faster and do whizzy things like expanding, contracting and wheeling as long as it's out of bowshot of the enemy, but it really is more of a fix to allow wargamers unrestricted movement, which they love.  A unit of cavalry some 200/yards long is incredibly vulnerable if it forms front to flank, i.e. presents its flank to a formed enemy.  I wonder if it might not fall apart whilst attempting to do it.
Roy

[Justin Swanton]

Light infantry inserting themselves. That's going to be easy enough if  the  cavalry are in a loose rder. Tge Germans are described as running along with the horses, rather like Lady Butler's highlanders.  When near the opposing firce the infantry firm up as a rallying point for the cavalry's fluid manoeuvres. Presumably the cav@kry can close up to move and fight without the infantry.

My own take is that a loose order was the default arrangement for cavalry, with files spaced far enough apart to enable horses to turn in place. That would certainly allow infantry to insert themselves between the files without getting in the way of the horses.

As to changing face, there is a Roman formation, the globus.  This is a bit lije a modern infantry unit firming a blob. The soldiers mass together without rank or file and the officer leads.  It is very flexible and very useful for say rough terrain because no no one  has to worry about alignment.  When the desired position is arrived at the globus then reforms ranks .

It sounds like a natural disposition, essentially letting horses travel as they would in a herd.

As wargaming generally reproduces  action s within a few bowshot of the  enemy I doubt if complex manoeuvres are attempted .  lets say that the troops are changing position half a mike from the enemy, that's about five bowshots.  It would take an opposing cavalry unit three minutes to charge and hit an opposing unit  wheeling in front of it.  In that timescale all the wheeling unit can do is flee. I know some sets if rules have, in effect, a variable groundscale so a unit can move faster and di whizzy things like expanding , contracting and wheeling as long as its out of bowshot of the enemy, but it really is more of a fix to allow wargamers unrestricted movement, which they love.  A unit of cavalry some 200/yards long is incredibly vulnerable if it forms front to flank, i.e. presents its flank to a formed enemy.  I wonder if it might not fall apart whilst attempting to do it.
Roy

If the unit is small enough so as to be able to wheel quickly and then wheel back again, the entire cavalry force might be tempted to try something. Take a cavalry line typically 6 ranks deep. If the subunit is square in shape then you are looking at about 12 files (the tacticians talk about cavalry squares having twice as many files as ranks (and sometimes three times as many). So a cavalry subunit would have about 72 riders, not too many to execute a snappy wheel.

[Erpingham]

The change of direction in Echellon Formations is always made by the word "Right" or " Left" for the degree
of wheel required, followed by the word "Forward," as soon the Troop is parallel to the new Line.

Regulations for the instruction, formations, and movements of the Cavalry Volume 2
By War office

[Justin Swanton]

The change of direction in Echellon Formations is always made by the word "Right" or " Left" for the degree
of wheel required, followed by the word "Forward," as soon the Troop is parallel to the new Line.

Regulations for the instruction, formations, and movements of the Cavalry Volume 2
By War office

Does that mean "wheel right 90 degrees" or "wheel left 90 degrees"?

[RichT]

Does that mean "wheel right 90 degrees" or "wheel left 90 degrees"?

No.

If you don't need to stay in period there are lots of cavalry drill manuals eg 'Instructions and Regulations for the Formations and Movements of the Cavalry' 1799. (GIYF).

p. 23
"Whenever the wheel made is less than the quarter circle... should the wheel be greater than the quarter circle..."

p. 25
"In this manner, without the constraint of formal wheels, a column, when not confined on its flanks, may be conducted in all kinds of winding and changeable directions"

Full of interesting stuff (well, interesting up to a point).

[Justin Swanton]

Does that mean "wheel right 90 degrees" or "wheel left 90 degrees"?

No.

If you don't need to stay in period there are lots of cavalry drill manuals eg 'Instructions and Regulations for the Formations and Movements of the Cavalry' 1799. (GIYF).

p. 23
"Whenever the wheel made is less than the quarter circle... should the wheel be greater than the quarter circle..."

p. 25
"In this manner, without the constraint of formal wheels, a column, when not confined on its flanks, may be conducted in all kinds of winding and changeable directions"

Full of interesting stuff (well, interesting up to a point).

Interesting as you say, but this seems to refer to cavalry columns on the march rather than under battle conditions. Naturalla cavalry units marching cross country in column will make all sorts of lesser or greater changes of direction as the terrain dictates. Is there any indication that that holds true of cavalry units under battle conditions, where the terrain, by mutual consent, is usually free of obstacles?