Are there any good examples where cavalry charges have been effective and decisive in battle?
It seems to me that cavalry charges are mostly ineffective throughout history. At hastings the normans would never charge directly into the saxon lines because they were massed so well on the hilltop and would just ride up, try to jab at them with weapons and throw javelins.
At Crecy french cavalry was utterly ineffective since the english archers would take down the horses which probably created a wall of dead horses and knights which the rest of the horsemen couldn't ride through and had to ride around instead. Even if they had reached the english they would have to deal with pikemen and heavy infantry. At agincourt stakes, mud and archers would stop them completely.
And another thing, horses are living beings with instincts and minds. They can't just mindlessly ride through spears and masses of people without stopping, or can they?
It's not like lord of the rings, isn't? Where the horsemen just effortlessly stampede through tens of thousands of monsters
Oh and to add about Hastings, the norman cavalry was very effective once the saxons scattered and started running downhill chasing a fake retreat. The norman knights would then start riding through and between them cutting them down
>>964821
There's one perfect example from the end of the medieval period of a cavalry charge deciding the battle. Just not in the way they expected...
>>964821
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kircholm
I remember a Time Team episode where they found a norman horseshoe or something, and they said that norman horses were actually a very small breed, not destrier at all. They had one of them members ride one and a tall man could almost reach the ground with his feet on that horse.
>>964821
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capture_of_the_Dutch_fleet_at_Den_Helder
>>964832
damn richard the triple looks very noble there and not like an ambitious psycho who killed his nephews
>>964821
The easy examples are the Battle of Ascalon and the Battle of Manzikert, arguably the battle of Ain Jalut. Honestly, most major medieval battles.
>>964821
Take pretty much any of Alexander's battles.
>>964821
>And another thing, horses are living beings with instincts and minds. They can't just mindlessly ride through spears and masses of people without stopping, or can they?
They can ride with fucking blinding mask before their eyes...
>>964821
Horses couldn't stampede like they do in movies but they were incredibly useful for several reasons
>1.) Mobility-
Simply put having a large cavalry force allowed your army to move around quicker and respond to more threats and out maniver an infentry based army.
>2.) Intemedation-
If you have never ridden or seen horses in person you don't appreciate how big they are. Can you imagine being a poor farm hand in some battle and seeing hundreds of giant beasts charging at you. It would be very easy to be intimidated and run away.
>3.) The Route-
If you beat an enemy in the field but let him retreat in good order or bring his forces back together after a wild retreat then you haven't done much. Cavalry was widely important in chasing down enemis who retreated and not allowing them to regroup.
>4.) Flanking-
allows you to move around your enemy and attack whever his weak spot is especially his camp where the gold is kept to pay the soldiers. Also when people see they are about to be surrounded they tend to panic and run.
>5.) Harrasing-
Cavalry is good at horsing contigents of army and disengaging before a large force can respond. If you kill an enemies foragers and scouts he will be blind and hungry
>6.) Scouting-
I mean I feel this self explanatory, but scouts on horses cover a much wiDer area and more likely to escape if found.
And honestly I'm sure there are things I'm forgetting.
Heavy Calvary maybe not so much but horse archers dominated warfare for a very long time
>>964821
Beersheba
inb4 mounted infantry, they were used in a cavalry function
>>966026
7) Lets the nobility run away quickly when things go south.
>>964821
Battle of Vienna comes to mind
>>966170
This actually important being able to get away from the enemy is extremely important. You especially don't want to lose your most seasoned troops.
>>966026
Good list.
I would also add it would help communication between units.
>>966209
Shit that is a big one communications in premodern units must have been hell, but I don't how useful horses would have been since I believe most communication was done with horns and flags.
>And another thing, horses are living beings with instincts and minds. They can't just mindlessly ride through spears and masses of people without stopping, or can they? It's not like lord of the rings, isn't? Where the horsemen just effortlessly stampede through tens of thousands of monsters
Training was a massive part of what a horse could and couldn't do on the battlefield. A local farm pony is probably going to bolt at the first sign of danger, but a well-bred and well-trained warhorse is almost a soldier in itself.
The Battle of Patay. Xaintrailles and La Hire used the vanguard cavalry of the French army to ride over the English army.
The Battle of Eylau. Napoleon unleashed an absolutely immense cavalry charge of 10,700 men under the command of Marshal Murat right into the Russian center. It was a desperate move because some French corps were falling apart and needed a reprieve. Murat's charge plowed through everything in front of it. He handled it masterfully, using it to hit other infantry, cavalry and artillery lines, penetrating kilometers deep into the Russian lines before retreating back to the French line.
How about this cavalry charge?
