"Last use of Heavy Cavalry lancers in Germany" Topic

When was the last battle in which native german Heavy lancers ("gendarmes") were employed? They seem to still be the main type of cavalry used by the germans in the 1540s. Also, why didn't the germans develop their own Demi-lancers/chevauxlegers/lanzas like the mid to late 16th century english, french and spaniards?

Greater availability of wheelocks? No idea.

There is only one way for a lancer to fight Pike,is by charging them.

Reiters are mostly mercenary and do not wish to die for there pay.

The Reiter/Cuirassier can caracole and can brake up a pike block formation.

Also, why didn't the germans develop their own Demi-lancers/chevauxlegers/lanzas like the mid to late 16th century english, french and spaniards?

But the Germans did field a cavalryman virtualy identical to the Demi-lancer/lanza, the Speisser who I have mentioned in previous discussions. By the 1540's the Speisser was far more common than the expensive "kürisser" who served in full armour on barded horse. But the Speisser had problems standing up to heavy lancers (Mühlberg is a good example of this) and were expensive compared to the Schützenpferd (reiter) who they served alongside. (Yet the schützenpferd did as well or better at most tasks given the cavalry)
So by the late 1540's professional cavalry commanders like Albrecht Alcibiades increased the number of Schützenpferd even though their contracts still called for a majority of Speissers.

There is only one way for a lancer to fight Pike,is by charging them.

Reiters are mostly mercenary and do not wish to die for there pay.

The Reiter/Cuirassier can caracole and can brake up a pike block formation.

By the time Reiters were introduced in large numbers big battles were rare and the need to charge pikes would have been even rarer. The daily experience of war was dominated by sieges, raids and the other small scale actions of war that was typical of much of 16th and 17th Century warfare.

As for not wishing to die for their pay the Reiters certainly chose an odd way to avoid risk given that their basic tactics against other cavalry was an orderly charge with pistol fire at point blank range were firearms were most effective. When Reiter fought Reiter casulties were often severe, Sievershausen is a good example of this. In comparison it was considered a miracle if a an armoured cavalryman was killed by a lance.

So am I under wrong impression on how Reiters behave on a battlefield.
I know this is a generalization,
Did they not close with an enemy caracoling forward using pistols and rarely fighting in hand to hand melees ?

And was not the breast plate pistol proof?

Didn't Wallenstein have a company of heavy lancers as part of his bodyguard circa 1630? Granted they were something of a curiosity at that time.

Thank you Daniel! i had forgotten about the Speissers! Now that you explained, the transition made more sense to me. However, why didn't the Spanish and French realize sooner the advantages of reiter cavalry over "light" lancers in the continental warfare of the time? Was it, as someone guessed here, the greater availability of/familiarity with whellock pistols in Germany?

Also, when do the last mentions to lance armed Speissers and Kürisser appear? (Not counting the Wallenstein Bodyguard company, which was only a small part of his bodyguard, if I'm not wrong)

The French and Spanish had very diffrent military and economic circumstances compared to the Germans. They had the resources to field heavy lancers, demi-lancers, light cavalry as well as their own Reiters. And Reiters were not automaticly superior to light lancers, poor units or units using bad tactics would be defeated by lancers, at times even when they outnumbered the lancers by a large margin. This happend more than once in the Netherlands during the 80 years war. (Mookerheyde 1574 is a classic example of this) So the proffessional cavalrymen in the Army of Flanders such as Mendoza, Davila and others tended to view the lancer as superior to the Reiter.

The French on the other hand got handled roughly more than once by Reiters both before and during the Wars of Religion, probably because their thin "En Haye" formation was very vulnerable to losses as well as having limited cohesion compared to the thight and well ordered deep formations used by the Reiters.

Wheellock firearms were high-tech weapons by 16th C standards, while they were available to anyone with the money to buy one they required special skills and equipment to mantain and use with full effectiveness in campaign conditions. La Noue describes how the French Gendarmes lacked the skill to load their pistol properly and often left the task to their equaly unskilled servants. And French units did not have the gunsmith who was a well paid member of a Reiter unit.
In many ways the easier solution was to hire your own Reiters rather than trying to raise French or Spanish Reiter style cavalry. The French Royal army in particular hired large numbers of Reiters to avoid a repeat of the mauling the Reiters gave the Royal Gendarmes in the battle of Dreux and at least once avoided battle before their own Reiters had joined the army.

I see. So since the Spanish and French had both the means to recruit lance armed cavalry, lack of experience with pistol armed native cavalry and money to hire german reiters, it was easier for those nations to provide their own "heavy" cavalry, and recruit native german reiter units. Did I get it?

Also, if Kürissers and Speissers were present during Albrecht Alcibiades' Margrave war (were they also used during the Italian War of 1551–1559), and the Imperial regulations of 1570 do not mention them, should we assume that the lance fell out of use during the 1560s, which saw german cavalry fighting as mercenary pistol armed cavalry during the early wars of religion in France?

So am I under wrong impression on how Reiters behave on a battlefield.
I know this is a generalization,
Did they not close with an enemy caracoling forward using pistols and rarely fighting in hand to hand melees ?
(…)

It's not entirely false but neither is it the whole truth. Reiter tactics varied depending on unit, time period and conflict area. This have been obscured in many books due to an overreliance on flawed secondary sources like Oman and Delbrück or the use of just a few primary sources which show only a narrow view of the Reiters & their tactics.

When you study the full range of sources available it is revealed that the Reiters were much more flexible than they get credit for and that a common tactic against cavalry was a charge at the trott with pistols fired at point blank range followed by melee in which they used their remaining pistols as well as other weapons.

Mortiz von Sachsen described the tactics used by the Reiters who fought at Sievershausen 1553 this way in his letter to the bishop of Würzburg:

"That the horsemen of the two sides approached each other so closely that they could se the white of the enemy's eye. Then they fired their pistols and dashed into the fight."

Landsknecht commander Sebastian Schertlin von Burtenbach made the following remark about Sievershausen in his autobiography

"In this battle the Schützen zu pferd caused great damage"

(Schützen zu pferd= common German name for the Reiters, particularly in 1540's & 1550's)

The same tactic was still in use in the battle of Ivry almost 40 years later

"the Count de Schombergh with the German Horse, 'not wheeling off, but charging home into the very Body of the Enemy, with Volleys of Pistols, did great execution upon the Squadron of the Chevalier d'Aumale, who, no Iess valiant than fame reported him, being seconded by a strong party of his men, made the Conflict very sharp and dangerous"

(From Davila's history of the French Wars of Religion)

One of the most detailed descriptions of Reiter tactics are to be found in Francois de la Noue's "Discourses". La Noue was a French Huguenot and a highly experienced soldier who describes the Reiters way of fighting this way:

"…the perfect Reiter do never discharge their pistols but in joining and striking [close] at hand, they wound, aiming always either at the face or at the thigh. The second rank also shooteth off so [that] the forefront of the men-at-arms squadron is at the first meeting half overthrown and maimed.

Both La Noue and Arrigo Caterino Davila (an Italian who fought for theRoyalist/Catholic side in the French wars of Religion) considered the Reiters to be most dangerous when mixed up with the enemy in the melee.
Davila describing Reiters in action during the battle of Dreux 1562

"the Reiters (So they call the German Horse)"
(…)
"and thereupon the German Horse coming up in two great Squadrons, armed with pistols, with a new and furious assault mingled themselves in the conflict , and absolutely disordered the whole Battalion of the Catholicks so that being defeated and routed, they manifestly ran away.
(…)
"the Germans, (who if they can once find a breach open , easily overthrow any body of men)"

La Noue:

"Herein we are to consider two things which experience hath confirmed. The one that the Reiter is never so dangerous as when they be mingled with the enemy, for then be they all fire.

But not all Reiters were "perfect" and La Noue stresses the need to prevent them from firing their pistols at 20 paces and then turning away. Even worse was the habit of some Reiters to simply discharge the pistols into the air when they heard the first ranks fire at 20 paces. In this case the end result was a disordered unit which was rather vulnerable to a charge by lancers or any other cavalry.

Some Reiters also made an orderly attempt to soften up the enemy at distance by firing pistols by rank before wheeling away using the caracole.
Davila describes Catholic Reiters in the battle of Ivry 1590

"who were to charge , and wheel off after their wonted manner , and so passing between the two Wings, Would fall as a Reserve, and rally themselves in order, that they might return more fresh into the Battel."

(…)
"as soon as ever they had discharged their Pistols, they fell off according .
to the custom of their Discipline, turning to get behind the Body of the Army, as they
had received Orders from their General"

In this case "charge" is probably short for ‘discharge' i.e firing as is verified by the 2nd part of the quote.

And was not the breast plate pistol proof?

When the Reiters appeared on the battlefield in the 1540's shot proof/pistol proof armour was not standard and it took time to learn how to design armour that was shot proof at close range. And skilled Reiters targeted the face or the thighs rather than the chest. (See La Noue quote above). Giorgio Basta, a veteran cavalryman who rose to high command in Spanish & Imperial service considered it essential for cavalry to wear armour covering the thigh to protect against "the blows of the pistols which are deadly". And in the melee Reiters would actually thrust the muzzle of the pistol into gaps in the armour such as the armpit or under the lower edge of the breastplate.

I see. So since the Spanish and French had both the means to recruit lance armed cavalry, lack of experience with pistol armed native cavalry and money to hire german reiters, it was easier for those nations to provide their own "heavy" cavalry, and recruit native german reiter units. Did I get it?

Yes, of course both the French and Spanish did use the pistol but it was seen as a sidearm rather than the primary arm of the cavalry. (The exception is of course the Huguenots who adopted the pistol as the primary weapon of their heavy cavalry after having used the lance in the 1560's)
The Spanish army in particular was multinational and while the Spanish and Italians prefered to serve as lancers they used Germans and later on Walloons as pistoleers while Walloons and Burgundians supplied mounted arquebusiers serving alongside the lance armed "Epirote"/"Albanian" light cavalry.

Also, if Kürissers and Speissers were present during Albrecht Alcibiades' Margrave war (were they also used during the Italian War of 1551–1559), and the Imperial regulations of 1570 do not mention them, should we assume that the lance fell out of use during the 1560s, which saw german cavalry fighting as mercenary pistol armed cavalry during the early wars of religion in France?

The Habsburg-Valois war of 1551-1559 same some use of Speissers but their numbers were rapidly declining, by the 1557 St. Quentin campaign the Spanish-Imperial army fielded some 4500 Reiters but only 300 were armed with lances.

I'd say that by 1560 the lance was no longer in use among the professional Reiter units raised by military contractors. There is certainly no evidence of it among the Reiters serving with the Huguenots, Danes or Swedes in the early 1560's. As always it is much harder to find details for the nobles providing armed service to their ruler but given that such troops saw very little use that is not a big problem.

But the Speisser had problems standing up to heavy lancers (Mühlberg is a good example of this) and were expensive compared to the Schützenpferd (reiter) who they served alongside.

Why were they more expensive? Did they need better horses?

Thank you, daniel! That was really helpful! (:
And about the Kürissers, are they last mentioned during the Schmalkaldic War, or were they employed one last time during the Margrave wars?

P.S.: Daniel, have you seen the paintings of the Battle of White Mountain I posted on Renaissance Discussion? I think you might find them interesting.

Why were they more expensive? Did they need better horses?

Since lancers make their charges at speed they need horses that are swift, strong and have the endurance to make multiple charges. Such horses were not only expensive but always in short supply. The Reiter on the other hand made his charge at the trot and relied on the combination of pistols and the close order of his formation to create the impact of the charge. This allowed the Reiter to make use of a much wider variety of horses and the light armour worn by Reiters also place less demands on the horse.

Speissers also wore more expensive armour and had higher pay which added to the price tag.

Daniel, what was the incident at muhlberg between the speissers and heavy lancers? And was the Schmalkaldic War the last war that saw native german heavy Kürissers?

The problem with the Kürisser is that they hard much harder to track due to not bein in separate units but rather fighting alongside the Speisser in action. For example one contract for 2000 cavalry called for 1600 Speisser and 400 Schützen and that among those 1600 Speisser there should be at least 100 Kürisser. A ratio of 15-1 on paper but the reality was rather diffrent:
1st muster on July 9th 1546
26 Kürisser, 204 Speisser and 175 Schützen
2nd muster August 8th
31 Kürisser, 145 Speisser and 214 Schützen
3rd and last muster September 21st
37 Kürisser, 528 Speisser and 1946 Schützen

What happend at Mühlberg was that the heavy cavalry led by Alba quickly shattered the opposing Saxon wing, Albas wing seems to have been made up by the Bandes d'Ordonnance and similar troops.

Thank you very much, daniel! That was really helpful (: