Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Evrenosgazi
Consul
Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 379
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Polish Winged Hussars? Posted: 08-Oct-2005 at 11:33 |
The Hussars were the one of the most elite cavalry units.They had proveb their brutality against the swedish, Russians, Tatars and the most important to the war machine of the Ottomans.The Hussars were the victorous at Khaldenberg 1683. But after all this the steppe cavalrys were the best for all the times.
|
|
Sarmata
Consul
suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 04:03 |
agreed, steppe cavalry did turn out to be more superior during 18th century and later on, which is why Poland developed its own light cavalry one who could check the Kozaks and other steppe cavalry; Uhlans, and Szwolozery.
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 14:06 |
Were they brutal? I consdier to think otherwise, or i just misunderstood the post, Evrenosgazi
|
|
El Cid
Knight
Joined: 07-Oct-2005
Location: Nicaragua
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 66
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 19:54 |
I think Hussars was good, but they would be vulnerable against some cavalry like Catphracti or the modern regiment of Dragoons. What do you think?
|
The spanish are coming!
|
|
Sarmata
Consul
suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 314
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 01:54 |
I thin Cataphracti was a heavier cavalry then the Winged Hussars, so i think the hussars would have more manouverability, as well as I think the Hussar lance was designed to reach the victim form a safe distance, would the catapracti survive the charge? i dont know...as for the dragoons i think that, sure they have an advantage with firearms, but what happens when they shoot some hussars start reloading while more hussars charge at them with the lances? Im pretty sure a Winged Hussar would beat a dragoon.
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 09:15 |
Well, probably they could beat both as:
Hussars were pretty heavily armoured, but their lances were still about 6 meters long. They had carabines and a pair of pistols, atheir horses were very good. Dragoons wouldn't stand a charge. Cataphractii would need to attack from charge, which would be pointless against Hussars who had longer lances.
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 09:29 |
I think "winged hussars" are in Turkish "atli efeler" means efe's on horse.
Here are some pics of them.
When they ride on horses, theyre "yelek" (kind of cloth) seems like a wing from distance.
|
|
|
Scytho-Sarmatian
Earl
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 290
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 06:26 |
DayI-
I think what you presented is totally different from Polish Winged
Hussars and it probably has nothing to do with them. It's
interesting, though!
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 07:43 |
no its because those guys where fighting with horses (the atli efeler) in WW1 and the anzac soldiers who saw them from distance tought they have wings.
And I tought also the winged hussars has maybe the same kind of clothes as them.
|
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 09:23 |
No, they were called thae Winged Hussars because their back armour was in the shape of angelic wings.
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 10:16 |
can you post a picture of those famoust winged hussars?
|
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 12:15 |
|
|
DayI
Sultan
Joined: 30-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2408
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 13:34 |
LOL, those ARE wings
|
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 15:17 |
Well, they are... but their main objective was to protect the back of you, and it frightened the enemy as well.
Still, they didn't go off as you explained before the Turks' ones did.
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 20:49 |
I dont see any advantage of dragoons over hussars. Especially because every hussar had 2 pistols and musket. Those who knew how to use it had also eastern type bows (I guess it were the same bows which were used by Tatars).
|
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 05:18 |
And some of their manouvers were really similiar to the ones the tartars used, and that made the western european armies unknown to their tactics when they used such...
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 17:39 |
Hussars carried a pair of pistols in later years (17th century) but never a musket. pancerni had muskets...
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 11:42 |
Hussars carried muskets. They were obligatory. Altough not on horse but it was carried by servant. Hussar was using musket only when was fighting on foots, not on horse. Example: during battle of Chocim (or Khotyn in 1621), after long siege when hussars have eaten their horses, they fought as infantry only with muskets. In the squadron (banner) of hussars were not only hussars but also their servants who were carrying equipment, cooking, etc. As Polish-Lithuanian army often lacked on infantry, hussars were supposed to act as infantry during defence of camp or when besieging enemy camp or fortress or city. One hussar wasnt equal to other. They were divided on comrades (towarzysz) and squires (pocztowy). Every commrade had 2-3 squires who were armed and equipped on his cost and were recuruited from poorer gentry. They all had servants who were carrying their equipment. Its simple, they had too much arms and armours, more than one man and horse could carry.
17th century hussar carbin (pol. bandolet). Maybe not a musket but 115 cm long, caliber 15 mm.
Edited by Mosquito
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 16:07 |
mmh, but if you look at it, the Pancerni had a lance, shield, curved sabre, pair of pistols, musket and even a Steppe bow, thats much more than a Hussar carries personally with him (pair of pistols, straight sabre, curved sabre and heavy lance)
|
|
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 19:38 |
As you said its more than hussar carried personally. But hussar had his servants with him. Servants were not counted as soldiers but somtimes they were fighting too.
Edited by Mosquito
|
|