Comments on: Cavalry Charges: Rallying http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/ Failing better at understanding the past Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:50:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Gavin Robinson http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/comment-page-1/#comment-13819 Gavin Robinson Sat, 09 Feb 2008 08:54:37 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/#comment-13819 That's a good point. Since reading Malcolm Wanklyn's <i>Decisive Battles</i> I've been rethinking this again. He points out that we can't be sure that it actually was Rupert who summoned the train to surrender. The eyewitness accounts only really tell us that it was a well-dressed officer, so it might not be safe to assume that it was definitely Rupert himself. That then raises the question of what Rupert was doing if he wasn't attacking the supply train. That’s a good point. Since reading Malcolm Wanklyn’s Decisive Battles I’ve been rethinking this again. He points out that we can’t be sure that it actually was Rupert who summoned the train to surrender. The eyewitness accounts only really tell us that it was a well-dressed officer, so it might not be safe to assume that it was definitely Rupert himself. That then raises the question of what Rupert was doing if he wasn’t attacking the supply train.

]]> By: Jagger http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/comment-page-1/#comment-13818 Jagger Fri, 08 Feb 2008 22:40:44 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/#comment-13818 It seems to me if the enemy army is destroyed, you will capture the supply train anyway. If the enemy army remains intact, you can only destroy the train but not capture and escape with the train. If outright victory is not expected, destroying the enemy supply is a sound tactical move as it cripples the enemies future activities. But if victory is expected or probable, destroying the enemy army should be the priority as supply capture will be part of the victory. It seems to me if the enemy army is destroyed, you will capture the supply train anyway. If the
enemy army remains intact, you can only destroy the train but not capture and escape with the
train.

If outright victory is not expected, destroying the enemy supply is a sound tactical move as it
cripples the enemies future activities. But if victory is expected or probable, destroying
the enemy army should be the priority as supply capture will be part of the victory.

]]> By: Gavin Robinson http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/comment-page-1/#comment-192 Gavin Robinson Fri, 22 Dec 2006 14:58:19 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/#comment-192 I don't think there's much mention of it in any published works. Peter Edwards might have said something about capturing horses in <i>Dealing in Death</i> or his article on horse supply in Historical Research. As far as I know no-one has taken the idea as far as I have, but in my PhD thesis I took it a bit too far and speculated that by the end of the First Civil War the royalists were mostly relying on capturing horses from the enemy. The evidence doesn't really support that, and Martyn Bennett was sceptical about it in the viva. I don’t think there’s much mention of it in any published works. Peter Edwards might have said something about capturing horses in Dealing in Death or his article on horse supply in Historical Research. As far as I know no-one has taken the idea as far as I have, but in my PhD thesis I took it a bit too far and speculated that by the end of the First Civil War the royalists were mostly relying on capturing horses from the enemy. The evidence doesn’t really support that, and Martyn Bennett was sceptical about it in the viva.

]]> By: Gary Smailes http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/comment-page-1/#comment-190 Gary Smailes Fri, 22 Dec 2006 13:02:12 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2006/12/19/cavalry-charges-rallying/#comment-190 Once again an excellent post. I find your assessment convincing. Having visited Naseby a number of times I have always been amazed by the action of the cavalry. The baggage train was a significant distance from the fighting and it has always seemed strange that the attack on the train was motivated by greed alone. Do you have any sources that discuss the importance of capturing horses? If your thesis is correct it would add a new light to the way ECW battles were fought. Once again an excellent post.
I find your assessment convincing. Having visited Naseby a number of times I have always been amazed by the action of the cavalry. The baggage train was a significant distance from the fighting and it has always seemed strange that the attack on the train was motivated by greed alone.
Do you have any sources that discuss the importance of capturing horses?
If your thesis is correct it would add a new light to the way ECW battles were fought.

]]>