"Two Dismounted men-at-arms to wield a lance??" Topic

This is the second time that I have run across a reference to two men holding a lance in dismounted combat. One is in M. Mallett's "Mercenaries and Their Masters" and the other, I believe, was in Trease's "Condottieri". I have never heard of this practice before or read of it anywhere else. It is strange that it is only referred to in books on condottieri, I wonder if both authors are using a common source and possibly a flawed one at that. Why would a weapon that is easily used by one man, one handed, on horseback require two men on foot? I hope that someone here can shine some light on this topic.

I would imagine that is when it is used against cavalry. Plus on Horseback an armored knight can actually use the Horse's mass and momentum when he couches the lance to inflict all that impact energy through the lance point (a few square centimeters). When used by infantry it is basically an immobile defensive weapon used to discourage the cavalry charge.

I would suspect the reference. If anything a single man on foot handles a lance/spear/pike easier than a horseman can. All the infantry has to do is ground the butt end and then angle the point toward horse or rider: the momentum of the horse does the rest, easily impaling itself or its rider on the pointy bit. The infantryman needs no more strength to see this done than is required to hold the point up and aim it, i.e. practically none at all.

I thought lances used on foot were cut=down. The lanceusedon horseback wasapeculir shape andbalance that fitted only itsuse there.

I'm reaching wa-a-a-ay back into the dustier parts of my memory here but I seem to recall seeing a reference to Hawkwood's White Company men-at-arms doing that. Of course, he was a condotierre, too, come to think of it.

LT

Probably an error dating back to the late 1800's, confusing just what a 'lance' was. It was both a mounted weapon AND a tactical unit. The tactical unit often consisted of a knight/commander, a sergeant or another knight, and a number of archers & infantry, with or without mounts, so it is possible someone confused a reference to '2 knights in a lance' with '2 knights using a lance'. I have a vague recollection of a sketch type drawing from a 19th century kids book of 2 toy knights using a lance to attack a 'monster' of some sort.

bsrlee: that's very cogent thinking there. (why didn't I think of that?)

Found another reference to this practice in Osprey's "Condottiere" the author says that "two men of each lance would wield a heavy lance", he also states that it is an unusual but highly effective tactic. As far as I can figure, unless this "heavy lance" is the size of a small tree trunk there would be no need for two men to hold it. I think bsrlee is on the right track but I find it strange that all these scholars repeat each other, Trease and Mallett are listed in the Osprey's bibliography. I would still like to see the source where this all stems from.

It comes from Filippo Villani, who wrote in the late 14th century.
link

PK

Thanks for the link.

Hi

I have seen a couple of period etchings showing two men holding a lance, but they appear to be cartoons rather than illustrations and may refer to some held joke that we have lost over time. Like "snail eating french".

Rocky

In the link above Villani says that one men in two carried a lance, not that a lance was used by two men togheter!!!

"Keeping themselves in almost circular formation, every two take a lance, carrying it in a manner in which one waits for a boar with a boar-spear."
Every two, not one out of two. However, I can see this could be ambiguous – I wonder what the Italian says.

I've never heard of boar spears requiring TWO holders. It probably translates out as "every second", which is perfectly clear in English. What is the alternate (non lance) guy doing in this circular formation?

If one man can wield a 16 foot pike effectively, why would two men be needed to use a lance on foot?

I wonder what the Italian says.

Quite. The dangers of depending upon someone else's translation/interpretation of primary sources

What is the alternate (non lance) guy doing in this circular formation?

Carrying a pavise/missile weapon/lunch?

It does seem that the passage was incorrectly translated or interpreted, but what is more amazing is that several historical scholars took it at face value, makes one wonder how many other things are taken for granted in the books we read and base our notions on?

It took a little effort but I found the Croniche by Filippo villani with Google books. The quote is from chapter LXXXI and in italian says "il modo del loro combattere in campo quasi sempre era a piede, assegnando i cavalli a' paggi loro, legandosi in schiera quasi tonda; e i due prendeano una lancia, a quello modo che con gli spiedi s'aspetta il cinghiaro; e cosė legati e stretti, con le lance basse, a lenti passi si faceano contro a' nemici con terribili strida". I must confess that altough an italian speaker I can't understand what Villani means, the phrase is quite obscure. I'll make some inquires and let you know.

"e i due prendeano una lancia, a quello modo che con gli spiedi s'aspetta il cinghiaro…"

My Italian is a little rusty, but the above key phrase essentially translates into the English phrase noted above:

"and the two take a lance, in that mode that with the spears one awaits the boar…" [literal].

I assume that "predeano" is an archaic form of the third person plural of "prendere", which means to take [in modern Italian it is: Prendano."]

Your're right Doc but yet the phrase doesn't sound right to me. I want to check the text in other editions

I love TMP. Where else, I ask, will you find someone willing and interested in doing this?

at the moment my best guess is that Villani understood a word and the means is "and the two (hands) take a lance". This also explain the comparison with boar hunting.

Boar hunting
picture
picture

Thanks to all, especially Magister Equitem, so how do we contact these authors and get them to retract their flawed contentions? We should start with Osprey, I'm sure they've never made a mistake before. By the way Villani probably mentioned using two hands to differentiate with a man using a lance mounted with only one.

You could send Osprey an email with a link to this thread. That would satisfy your "duty."

There were actually three men involved. One behind the other two to bang the coconuts.

Rich

Didn't Keegan first say that somewhere?