"Horse armour in WoTR?" Topic

Having bought my Perry mounted men-at-arms box at Salute, I'm wondering if I should be using the horse armour for the Wars of the Roses?

Taking a few things into account;

There are examples of horse armour for the WOTR period in different museums, stately homes etc.,

There are few accounts of mounted knights (MAA) fighting in the WOTR,

What accounts there are of the main battles, let alone the smaller battles etc., are sketchy in detail and mainly uncorroborated,

I would say you are "safe" to use horse armour on any mounted knights (MAA) you use. Its a case of unproven one way or the other!

I agree with Tarleton. They had horse armor during that time and used it all over in Europe. British nobles were certainly wealthy enough to afford it. Bows were a major thing in England and horse armor would offer some protection.

I would use combination of fully armored, half armored and may be only horse head armor. If your rules allow for several ranks of warriors, like Warhammer, this would look more realistic with lesser armored horsemen in back ranks.

Igor

Reading the Notes included in the box from the Perry's, it would imply that, although horse armour was available it was not used all that often due to a variety of reasons. There was some use made of the partial frontal armour however.

Why is this a question? Anytime cavalry are kept mounted, horse armor is going to be used by those that have it. The reality is that very few horsemen had complete horse armor; even fewer than men in full plate. My guess is that less than a quarter of the men at arms that had full plate had full horse armor as well….

Anytime cavalry are kept mounted, horse armor is going to be used by those that have it.

Precisely. I was wondering how many mounted MAA at the time of the WoTR would actually have had horse armour. My understandig is that it was both rare and expensive?

Yes, very expensive. Not only for the armor but also for a horse capable to cary fully armored man and horse armor. It was more common in continental Europe where knights fought mostly mounted. In England they had a tradition of fighting on foot, so not that much need for horse armor. Nevertheless, I would give full horse armor to the unit command, front armor to the front rank and no armor to the rest.

Careful about going blindly down the road of a dismounted tradition in England. English knights and men-at-arms would fight mounted when appropriate.

Bosworth demonstrates the use of a mounted reserve drawn from the leaders' own household in line with traditional medieval practice across Europe. Further, England was no impoverished backwater, Knights and Men-at-Arms from royal and comital retinues would be well mounted and equipped.

So it will depend on which force you are seeking to recreate in miniature. If it is the royal household of, for example, Richard III then you would expect a higher proportion of men and horses in full harnass.

Regards,

Anybody having any cost references for the horse armour, compared to that of the rider?

Going by the weight (ca. 70 lbs), the raw materials would have cost more for the horse armour. However, the horse barding also seems to be quite simple in structure, compared to the armour for the rider (which consisted of quite many items). Also, the barding did not really need to facilitate movement (since it did not protect the legs of the horse), which also simplifies the manufacture as compared to human armour.

And in case somebody is interested, the regulations for the Burgundian ordonnance forces required men-at-arms to have armour for their horses.

There are medieval documents with pictures of the Swiss Burgundian Wars. These battles were at a similar time and may have similarities.
link

This picture of the Battle of Grandson by Diebold Schilling – shows no horse armour.

Schillings Ochsenfeld also shows no horse armour.

This sketch of The battle of Morat by Johannes Stumpf, 1548 appears to show 30% of horses with armour.

This shows René II, Duke of Lorraine at the Battle of Nancy on an armoured horse.

Mick

There are medieval documents with pictures of the Swiss Burgundian Wars. These battles were at a similar time and may have similarities.

While your pictures are interesting, we must be cautious in assuming that the situation in the Swiss Burgundian Wars was comparable in any way to the WoTR in England. The English were notorious for doing things differently compared to other European armies.

The last 2 pictures aren't contemporary though, I would think the Burgundian Ordonnances are a more accurate reflection of at least what was expected of the men at arms in the Burgundian wars.

Dielbold Schilling the Younger is not a contemporary source, the Grandson image is dated to 1515 while the Ochsenfeld one is dated to 1513.

On the other hand if we look at the work of Diebold Schilling the Elder we find that he shows a lot of horse armour.

This image is dated to 1480-1484, i.e within a decade of the Burgundian war and show details which are much more in line with the written sources.

Daniel,

That picture is very interesting. Not only do most (80%)of the Burgundian cavalry have metal full length barding, and they are all wearing English style visored bascinet helemets. I had expected the helmets to be sallets like the later pictures.

(It is a good job that the Perry Mounted Men at Arms have not arrived yet or I would have built my Burgundians in Germanic sallets and only a few with barding.)

Thanks
Mick