Raven Blackwell
Mongoose
Ltlconf said:
Big heavy, homicidally inclined puppies at that! What's not to love? 8)
Horses that kill?
- Thread starter René
- Start date
Big heavy, homicidally inclined puppies at that! What's not to love? 8)
High Lord Dee
Mongoose
:?
"The horse rears up on it's hind legs and snorts a wicked challenge to the barbarian before it charges. The barbarian side steps and delivers a massive killing blow to the bizzare creature. The horse is dead. The barbarian wipes the blood off his blade and continues his travels."
Problem solved. :twisted:
HLD
"The horse rears up on it's hind legs and snorts a wicked challenge to the barbarian before it charges. The barbarian side steps and delivers a massive killing blow to the bizzare creature. The horse is dead. The barbarian wipes the blood off his blade and continues his travels."
Problem solved. :twisted:
HLD
Hello Folks,
Horse meat? Yeuk. But then I like rattlesnake, so to each their own.
Yeup, the barabrian gets some horsemeat. Rolled dang well, cause in reality a, big, strong horse can take some real damage and keep on going. In the Civil War, some horses were shot over six times and kept going for hours until they bled out. Hard on the horse, but it shows they have alot of heart when their blood is up. Contemporary documents from the Rennessiance talk of horse standing over their dead riders, covered in mortal wounds, attacking anyone who came near. Big deadly puppies indeed! :twisted: [/i]
Horse meat? Yeuk. But then I like rattlesnake, so to each their own.
Yeup, the barabrian gets some horsemeat. Rolled dang well, cause in reality a, big, strong horse can take some real damage and keep on going. In the Civil War, some horses were shot over six times and kept going for hours until they bled out. Hard on the horse, but it shows they have alot of heart when their blood is up. Contemporary documents from the Rennessiance talk of horse standing over their dead riders, covered in mortal wounds, attacking anyone who came near. Big deadly puppies indeed! :twisted: [/i]
The King
Cosmic Mongoose
Southern America (especially Argentina, Uruguay) has great horse herds that are dedicated to slaughter and exported around the world.Ltlconf said:
I am quite surprised at your statement. Though I know some horse could do what you mention because of the special relationship developped between man and animal, it is difficult for me to believe that this practice is generalized.
Yes big warhorse of the middle age were used to charge in melee whatever the obstacles in front of them and couldn't be frighten.
Ok to give order to horses because almost any domestic animals can be trained somewhat.
But that horses can be given specific attack order is beyond me.
Most animals fear man and this special training to attack (and kill) is natural in carnivore animals because they are trained to recover their wild behaviour and thus have the practice to use their attacks as they would in wilderness. Horses are pure vegetarians and grazer animals (as bulls) so this practice is totally beyond their behaviour.
Hello Folks,
You have to remember I'm talking about horse and rider that have worked and trained together for up to TWO YEARS! Knights worked and trained with their mounts form the moment the colt was born. A special relationship was considered vital for combat: a knight and his horse were considered a single and vital unit.
Up until the 19th century this remained true since the cavalry were made up of of the nobility and prosperous landowners and often supplied their own mounts. In the 19th mass armies watered down training at every level and cavalry became what most think of today: a shock arm that makes a single head on charge at a stationary target and little protracted melee action with other cavalry (with exceptions of course). However in some elite units the training remained and thus the stories (the British Scots Grays and Austrian Imperial Chaussers, riders of the Lipps are examples).
Also cavalry and knightly mounts were bred for generations (in the case of the Lipps, for almost 700 years) for intelligence, aggression, speed, power, and agility.
Docility? If you've ever seen a African Buffalo or a Spanish Bull in action, you'll see just how aggressive a "harmless" grazer can get! African Plains Buffalo are in fact considered one of the top five most dangerous animals on the continenant! Lions only attack buffalo when they can surround a single lone animal or the lions are really desperate. Even then many a lion never gets to enjoy the meal. If the lions even get their meal. Longhorns and Spanish bulls are considered dangerous by anyone who works with them, especially the bulls (why we castrate them and make 'em steers: To make them safe to work around!).
Many of the larger grazers will be extremely aggressive when defending territory, mates or fellow herd members, and breeders take advantage of these traits. Training then accentuates these traits. Also, many species are afraid of humans because we've hunted them for millenia. Any animal is afraid of another animal that will kill it. Also any animal can learn "you know, maybe they aren't so bad#@% after all!" Some, no matter what, never learn that fear. Caution maybe, but not fear (boars, bulls, leopards ect.).
Sorry to be so long winded, but I like to anticipate questions and this was my family's (Mother's side) for two centuries, and mine for 20 years. I still hunt, ride, shoot and occassinaly mix all three on a vacation.
You have to remember I'm talking about horse and rider that have worked and trained together for up to TWO YEARS! Knights worked and trained with their mounts form the moment the colt was born. A special relationship was considered vital for combat: a knight and his horse were considered a single and vital unit.
Up until the 19th century this remained true since the cavalry were made up of of the nobility and prosperous landowners and often supplied their own mounts. In the 19th mass armies watered down training at every level and cavalry became what most think of today: a shock arm that makes a single head on charge at a stationary target and little protracted melee action with other cavalry (with exceptions of course). However in some elite units the training remained and thus the stories (the British Scots Grays and Austrian Imperial Chaussers, riders of the Lipps are examples).
Also cavalry and knightly mounts were bred for generations (in the case of the Lipps, for almost 700 years) for intelligence, aggression, speed, power, and agility.
Docility? If you've ever seen a African Buffalo or a Spanish Bull in action, you'll see just how aggressive a "harmless" grazer can get! African Plains Buffalo are in fact considered one of the top five most dangerous animals on the continenant! Lions only attack buffalo when they can surround a single lone animal or the lions are really desperate. Even then many a lion never gets to enjoy the meal. If the lions even get their meal. Longhorns and Spanish bulls are considered dangerous by anyone who works with them, especially the bulls (why we castrate them and make 'em steers: To make them safe to work around!).
Many of the larger grazers will be extremely aggressive when defending territory, mates or fellow herd members, and breeders take advantage of these traits. Training then accentuates these traits. Also, many species are afraid of humans because we've hunted them for millenia. Any animal is afraid of another animal that will kill it. Also any animal can learn "you know, maybe they aren't so bad#@% after all!" Some, no matter what, never learn that fear. Caution maybe, but not fear (boars, bulls, leopards ect.).
Sorry to be so long winded, but I like to anticipate questions and this was my family's (Mother's side) for two centuries, and mine for 20 years. I still hunt, ride, shoot and occassinaly mix all three on a vacation.
I'm not convinced knights gave horses specific verbal attack commands, and I think you are wildly overestimating their impact on disciplined infantry.
For a start, trying to do use even simple verbal orders in battle would be almost impossible with all the noise, even to other humans. Hence the standards. I respect that there are various traditions dating back hundreds of years, but I think it would probably be wiser in this case to refer to contemporary documentation of 12th-14th century knights, rather than ~700 years of chinese whispers. Just look at fencing masters of the 17th century ignorantly criticise those of the 13th.
Personally I've not been able to find much, except references to size and the "spirit" of certain warhorses, particularly stallions around mares in heat! I'm not saying you are wrong, you may be perfectly correct, it just doesn't seem to match what I've learnt, whatever that's worth!
For a start, trying to do use even simple verbal orders in battle would be almost impossible with all the noise, even to other humans. Hence the standards. I respect that there are various traditions dating back hundreds of years, but I think it would probably be wiser in this case to refer to contemporary documentation of 12th-14th century knights, rather than ~700 years of chinese whispers. Just look at fencing masters of the 17th century ignorantly criticise those of the 13th.
Personally I've not been able to find much, except references to size and the "spirit" of certain warhorses, particularly stallions around mares in heat! I'm not saying you are wrong, you may be perfectly correct, it just doesn't seem to match what I've learnt, whatever that's worth!
The King
Cosmic Mongoose
I don't contest heavy and massive male grazers are dangerous but can you train a bull to attack on orders and designated targets? I doubt it; it will attack whoever he sees even the one who attempt to give the orders. A bull in a corrida doesn't just attack the matador even if he is the most teasing thing for the animal. But if a spectator or anyone else happens to be in its sight ...
So again a trained warhorse will follow its masters orders of direction even running into human obtacles and make use of its hooves but I can't believe its master giving verbal orders for the horse to attack a specific target. Even charging orders are firstly given with the knees.
So again a trained warhorse will follow its masters orders of direction even running into human obtacles and make use of its hooves but I can't believe its master giving verbal orders for the horse to attack a specific target. Even charging orders are firstly given with the knees.
Yogah of Yag
Mongoose
taylor said:
Exactly. 8)
Hello Folks,
The example of the fencing masters is quite apt. When skills of those of the past are lost it's normal for those of the present to denigrate people of the past and hold their own superior. After all, don't things improve over time? Progress is progress after all. True verbal commands are hard on a battlefield, but they are how it was done and still is in most cases at the squad level (believe me I know). As a Civil War reenactor whose done cavalry (and Civil War battlefields were much louder than Medieval ones to be sure) I could command my horse with voice commands (how I made him halt with a pistol in one hand and the shotgun in the other) despite gunshots, shouts, cannon and thundering hooves (thats what they really sound like!). True, I prefered knees, but thats mainly for steering, not giving complex commands, for these you need voice commands (you'll notice that nearly all physical commands are accompanied by voice commands as well). Plus a horse is nearly as smart as a dog, and if a dog can do it.
You can follow voice commands despite the noise once you know your leader's voice. It's kind of like (a loose anology here) hearing and listening to a single voice across a noisy, crowded room.
I did in fact mention several instances of horses defending and attacking while Lipps did in fact "do there thing" on the battlefield (well documented). Cavalry manuals dating as far back as those written by the Greeks give direction on breeding and training as do cavalry manuals of the 19th century. In some cases then, horses were better trained than the riders! Most Medieval and Rennaissance manuals are not in print though manuscripts do exist.
King, you are quite right about CATTLE, they are DUMB. Having worked around them, I have VERY low opinion of a bull's brain power. They are aggressive, but far from bright. To compare cattle to horses however, is like comparing apples and oranges. Yes they are both large grazers, but horses are a whole level above, nearly dog-like (they HAVE been bred to be partners and thus for intelligence for millenia). Cattle have been bred for food, labor, or for ferocity and definitely not their brains. Did I mention they are dumb?
Lets be clear on thing here above all else: these animals were and are similar to todays rescue, war, and police dogs. In other words the elite and a small elite to boot. The vast number of horse were simple riding beasts no different form today's riding horses. Not mention I did point out even amongst war horses the quality of training discussed was uncommon, the bulk taught only a few commands needed. The fully trained variety were as expensive as a modern M1 Abrams battle tanks(how many you think can afford one of their very own?). Now add in cost of armor, weaponry, upkeep (horses are freakin expensive to keep up!). Add in the years needed to train and you get the idea of how rare they are.
I know it's hard to believe what I've pointed out but my own personal experience says it's possible. Research such as that done by Lipp breeders and the Royal Armoury Museum in Leeds (Britain) says it as well.
The example of the fencing masters is quite apt. When skills of those of the past are lost it's normal for those of the present to denigrate people of the past and hold their own superior. After all, don't things improve over time? Progress is progress after all. True verbal commands are hard on a battlefield, but they are how it was done and still is in most cases at the squad level (believe me I know). As a Civil War reenactor whose done cavalry (and Civil War battlefields were much louder than Medieval ones to be sure) I could command my horse with voice commands (how I made him halt with a pistol in one hand and the shotgun in the other) despite gunshots, shouts, cannon and thundering hooves (thats what they really sound like!). True, I prefered knees, but thats mainly for steering, not giving complex commands, for these you need voice commands (you'll notice that nearly all physical commands are accompanied by voice commands as well). Plus a horse is nearly as smart as a dog, and if a dog can do it.
You can follow voice commands despite the noise once you know your leader's voice. It's kind of like (a loose anology here) hearing and listening to a single voice across a noisy, crowded room.
I did in fact mention several instances of horses defending and attacking while Lipps did in fact "do there thing" on the battlefield (well documented). Cavalry manuals dating as far back as those written by the Greeks give direction on breeding and training as do cavalry manuals of the 19th century. In some cases then, horses were better trained than the riders! Most Medieval and Rennaissance manuals are not in print though manuscripts do exist.
King, you are quite right about CATTLE, they are DUMB. Having worked around them, I have VERY low opinion of a bull's brain power. They are aggressive, but far from bright. To compare cattle to horses however, is like comparing apples and oranges. Yes they are both large grazers, but horses are a whole level above, nearly dog-like (they HAVE been bred to be partners and thus for intelligence for millenia). Cattle have been bred for food, labor, or for ferocity and definitely not their brains. Did I mention they are dumb?
Lets be clear on thing here above all else: these animals were and are similar to todays rescue, war, and police dogs. In other words the elite and a small elite to boot. The vast number of horse were simple riding beasts no different form today's riding horses. Not mention I did point out even amongst war horses the quality of training discussed was uncommon, the bulk taught only a few commands needed. The fully trained variety were as expensive as a modern M1 Abrams battle tanks(how many you think can afford one of their very own?). Now add in cost of armor, weaponry, upkeep (horses are freakin expensive to keep up!). Add in the years needed to train and you get the idea of how rare they are.
I know it's hard to believe what I've pointed out but my own personal experience says it's possible. Research such as that done by Lipp breeders and the Royal Armoury Museum in Leeds (Britain) says it as well.
geordiekimbo
Mongoose
Good post Ltlconf. exactly what i was trying to say which you have informed us about from experience.
Similar threads
