"How well disciplined were Wallensteins Imperial Cuirassiers?" Topic

More specifically, how was their discipline in comparison to Adolphus' cavalry at Lutzen?

Some units were exceptional, others not so much to the point where there was a large courtmartial follow by a number of death sentences once Wallenstein's army had fallen back into Bohemia.

The same applies to the Swedes and their mercenaries & allies. Some units fought very well and would endure sustained combat for a long time. Others broke and fled or failed in their charges.

There is no army wide fast and easy rule to apply like some authors have tried to do in favour of either side. You have to dig deeper and look at the individual regiments and theor performance if possible or the performance the larger formation they were part of if one can not trace the performance at the regimental level.

Thanks for your high-quality answer Daniel. I remember reading the book that discusses the court Marshall in Prague. It always amazed me that the Wallenstein never got any attention for the sheer brutality that he was capable of inflicting on his own men. I imagine some of that had more to do with the Cuirassiers being seen as "Elite" in his army. Naturally being as costly to maintain and train as they were, he held them to tight standards, at least in camp and on the battlefield.

I also agree with you in that it seems that the Inhaber had a lot more to do with the overall discipline in the units on both sides. I've seen some authors suggest(at least for the Imperials) that their performance had much to do with their armor.I feel as if this is selling them short, as although armor is important, many regiments at lutzen were veterans capable of keeping together with their units, charging, obeying orders and retreating in good order(this goes for both sides). Those feats are only capable of being effectively executed by well trained and disciplined cavalrymen, especially when discussing heavy cavalry.