"Need advice on late medieval cavalry weapons" Topic

I have a box of Perry's War Of The Roses mounted men at arms. I am building a somewhat generic late medieval force that I hope to be able to use for a variety of games and time periods, from Hundred Years War, to Wars of The Roses, to European conflicts in the 14th & 15th centuries, and games like Sword & Spear, DBA and Kings Of War.

So, what should I arm these cavalry with? I can do lances or hand weapons – sword, mace, axe. They don't come with shields.

Suggestions?

Typical armament for a mounted knight (or equivalent) around 1200-1550 would be something like this:

- Lance
- Sword
- (maybe) mace, axe or warhammer
- Dagger

Lance would be used for the initial charge(s), and once it would have broken or dropped the rider would resort to employing a hand weapon, at least until he could retrieve a new lance from a squire. Dagger would be a weapon of last resort, and probably of little use when mounted.

He might also have a two-handed weapon (sword, axe, hammer or pole-arm) if opting for dismounted action, though this probably was not taken along when going into action mounted.

Shields started to gradually go out of use in the early 15th century, due to improvements in armour reducing the need for them.

My suggestion would be to arm 50-75 % of the riders with lances and the rest with a mixture of hand weapons – this should provide nice variety.

On another note, I would like to point out that if you want to maintain some level of historical accuracy, it is very difficult to do a generic western European medieval army that will work for the whole late medieval (1300-1500) period.

Firstly, there was significant development in the style of armour used in this era, and this would be especially noticeable on knights and men-at-arms (and also the practice of wearing jupons over armour changed during this era). Partial plate armour of 14th century is clearly different from the early full plate armour of early 15th century, which is different from the more sophisticated full plate armour of later 15th century. And also the styles of helmets changed noticiably over time.

Even for unarmoured combatants there are noticeable changes, like the cut of the tunics and the shift from spear and shield towards heavier two-handed polearms as main infantry armament.

Thanks!

I'd like to put in a plug for "generic" being okay. Details like "Grief" suggests are essential only for true "fans" of a specific period. But just like any other period that is lengthy, the middle ages can safely and inoffensively be collected within a large range of suitably "generic" miniatures. The "cut" of a tunic or presence of a jupon/surcoat, whatever, shouldn't offend anyone engaging in a friendly game or campaign. Nicely painted minis is the first priority, not avoiding being a century "off". My favorite example of "generic" is using "Normans" for late tenth century through mid thirteenth century roles: early on they are of course the "cat's whiskers" of the battlefield, by the First Crusade they are divided into those with the "old" three-quarters mail and those possessing full mail to the wrists and ankles, and by the thirteenth century they are rustic serjants in outdated armor. Yes, a fudge to be sure. But it allows the gamer to play and clearly point out which of his cavalry are knights and which are ignoble (serjants or early MAA). Infantry are even more facile for "generic". A shield and spear "then" can take the place of a shield and a spear "now". Tunics hardly change for centuries. Helmets would be "old style" mixed with new far more among ignoble infantry than among the nobility who can afford new, etc….

The safest weapons, from the point of view of universal usage, would be the sword. Lances were broken, and sometimes not used by individuals or groups.

Medieval Weapons & Armour

link

Armand

Best to give them either a lance or …..a lance. T

Medieval Weapons & Armour

Liberal fistfuls of salt advisable