History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedSpahis

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2009 at 11:48
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:

İt really seems unbelieveable, because with the impact of the lance ,the lancer will also loose its stability with the first clash(momentum: speed*weight, single arm power against the clash).But with the powerful clash the formation of their opponents would crack. Maybe 2 soldier at once could be but 3-4 is impossible
 
Here is the secret of the hussar manner of wielding the lance:
Look at the second picture in the article. It is not the hussar's arm which has to endure the impact. It is the hussar's saddle where the impact is transfered.
There are even accouts that hussar lances were able to pierce an armour in this way.
 
When hussars attacked unarmoured cavalrymen, they aimed enemy navels. Potocki describes that hussar lances at Chocim 1621 struck livers. This part of the body is very easy to penetrate.
This is more accurate but again let us think the lance penetrated to a man, how could the rider use its lance when it is inside the body of a man?(even let us think it is out of the body)
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2009 at 16:18
Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:

This is more accurate but again let us think the lance penetrated to a man, how could the rider use its lance when it is inside the body of a man?(even let us think it is out of the body)
 
Lancer couldn't use his lance more than once. When the lance was in enemy's body, lancer couldn't change direction of the lance. The lance either pierced everything in front of its tip or it broke.
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1114
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2009 at 16:19
The point of the lance was to break up the formation a twenty four foot lance isn't much use 1-on-1 that is why hussars carried back up weapons
 
BTW this thread is about Spahis not Hussars
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2009 at 23:02
The sipahis differs in quality. The kapıkulu sipahis(altı bölük halkı) had 6 titles: Silahdar(Arm bearers), Sipahi oğlanları(Sipahi sons), left and right garips(poor foreigners), left and right ulufeci(salaried men). The silahdars were prior sultan bodyguards than sipahi sons were in charge to protect sultans. As I mentioned before they were elite soldiers and their prestige were higher than jannisaries.
 
Their equipments were afforded by the state so their armaments were better than the provincial troops. When we look to the numbers;
 
1527   total number 5088
1574   total number 5957
1597   total number 17000
1609   total number 20869
1679   total number 14070(From Rhoads Murphey "Ottoman Warfare"
 
As we can see the number increased in years , maybe the rising number also could demonstrate the falling quality but I am not so sure. 
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2009 at 07:38
Originally posted by Count Belisarius Count Belisarius wrote:

BTW this thread is about Spahis not Hussars
 
My point is that silk armour wasn't better than metal one. I've mentioned winged hussars only to show you experience of battles, which prove my opinion.
 
Originally posted by Evrenosgazi Evrenosgazi wrote:

As we can see the number increased in years , maybe the rising number also could demonstrate the falling quality but I am not so sure. 
 
It is possible. Anyway, describing the battle of Chocim Potocki many times states that Ottomans (spahis) don't wear armours. There are also desriptions of 'duels' between hussars and spahis. Hussars always wore armours, while spahis didn't use any metal armor.


Edited by ataman - 11-Jan-2009 at 07:43
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2009 at 10:23
Hello Ataman
 
You are right. There were unarmored sipahis. Probably they were the provincial ones. As I mentioned before there were sipahi retainers(cebellü), they were raw recruits, all provincial sipahis were obligated to bring this retainers to the army. The number of these retainers were paralel with the extent of the timar.The total number of these provincial soldiers exceeded 100000 and most of their equipment must be inadequate. 
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1114
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2009 at 17:23
Originally posted by ataman ataman wrote:

 
My point is that silk armour wasn't better than metal one. I've mentioned winged hussars only to show you experience of battles, which prove my opinion.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I agree BTW who said that silk is better than Plate? (Let me at him I'll tear him a new one)  
Back to Top
ataman View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 27-Feb-2006
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 1106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ataman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2009 at 18:46
Originally posted by Count Belisarius Count Belisarius wrote:

 
I agree BTW who said that silk is better than Plate? (Let me at him I'll tear him a new one)  
 
 
Originally posted by gezgin gezgin wrote:

Sipahis got dressed heavy silk armours.Silk armour is stronger than metal armours.Also silk gives confort activity.
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jan-2009 at 19:02
The provincial sipahis were different in their origin. The other name was tımarlı Sipahi they were the backbone of the army. They formed the wings of the army.They were grouped as Anatolian and Rumelia. The Anatolian corps were mainly previous fief holders and they had managed to keep it. They were accepted to the ottoman army. With the imperial domination kapıkulus had tımars also, even noncombatant multezims were tımar holders. Initially Rumeli sipahis were mainly natives . Constantine Dejanovic and Marko Kraljevic were tımar holders at Rumelia and they died in 1395 for ottomans in Wallachia. Approximately the christian sipahis consisted 30% of sipahis at Rumelia in the mid 15th century. However most of them accepted Islam and with the 16th century no christian sipahi were left. The total sipahi numbers at a campaign in the mid 16th century was between 30-40000. The most of them were equipped with pistols through the late 16th century. Their number and importance were decreased in the 17th century, infantry were know the primary forces  
Back to Top
Beylerbeyi View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Cuba
Status: Offline
Points: 1359
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Beylerbeyi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 16:45
Thanks for the useful info, Evrenos.

Quote As we can see the number increased in years , maybe the rising number also could demonstrate the falling quality but I am not so sure.

I think after the wars with Austria (ended in 1606) total number of cavalry in the army was reduced greatly, so the number of the timarli went down and infantry went up, janissaries and other gunpowder infantry as the Ottomans adapted to the new Western warfare. Probably the household cavalry increased along with the Janisarries. The quality naturally went down. 

Also after 1600,  the country became less centralised, which means that local lords gained power and incorporated individual timars.
Always try to be as radical as reality itself. - Lenin
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 19:49
Originally posted by Beylerbeyi Beylerbeyi wrote:

Thanks for the useful info, Evrenos.

Quote As we can see the number increased in years , maybe the rising number also could demonstrate the falling quality but I am not so sure.

I think after the wars with Austria (ended in 1606) total number of cavalry in the army was reduced greatly, so the number of the timarli went down and infantry went up, janissaries and other gunpowder infantry as the Ottomans adapted to the new Western warfare. Probably the household cavalry increased along with the Janisarries. The quality naturally went down. 

Also after 1600,  the country became less centralised, which means that local lords gained power and incorporated individual timars.
In 1596 Ottomans occupied Eger and when they were returning home their way was cut down by Habsburgs. Two army set against and wait for to fight. The first 2 days were clashs between the vanguard and in the 3rd day the ottoman army start to lost its cohesion and the imperial army started to penetrate through the encampment. The sipahis were one of the first who flee from the field. While the habsburgs were ravaging the ottoman camp Cağaloglu Sinan Pasa(The Cigalla`s from Genoa) attacked the habsburgs and win the war for the ottomans. Cağaloğlu Sinan Pasa disbanded a lot of sipahi after this battle and they were the major population who consisted the Celalis. This was the first splitting of sipahis from the state and their official decrease of importance
Back to Top
Evrenosgazi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 379
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Evrenosgazi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Jan-2009 at 19:50
By the way this battle was the battle of Kerestes(Haçova)
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.