Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kronckew
... English pikemen tended to wear shorter 'hanger' type swords rather than cavalry length ones, as a backup weapon they hoped never to need...
|
No cavalry sword type was mentioned Wayne, but cup hilted ones; and those you have them mounted on blades for all tastes, short, long, thin, thick. I have one with a rather small cup bowl, a wide blade but only 63 cms. long.
Actually i didn't find any specific description of sword used by pikemen; i gathered it was mostly the one used, as by the time, and not only, they were more than flies in number. And i have for myself tat pikes were not only abandoned as per virtual written tactics; they brake, they fall, they may become clumsy in determined circumstances. Having a sword at hand in real crude battle was a comfortable ally.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by kronckew
... they were very vulnerable on the flanks and rear, the flanks were usually protected by cavalry, Halberders or men with partisans/bills, later with pistols and matchlock muskets. .
|
I was trying not to be heavy and only focus on the shown breastplate and its potential users. But i may widen the conversation and transcribe some documented records contemplating that angle...
" In total there would be in a Terço 480 pikemen, 720 musketeers 300 arquebusiers; as per the allocation recommended by the 1643 draft Regulation
".
" The defensive equipment referred to in the records shows that the use of chest and backplates was rare among infantry. Only the officers
and the pikemen were entitled to this type of protection, but the proportions are very low in relation to the offensive armament existing in each company
".
" Breast and backplates range from 0.4% to 7.6%, morions between 0.4% and 8.3% (and this maximum is only reached in 1647, and is increasingly scarce in later years), the rodelas (round shields used by the captains) between 0.2% and 0.4% and the gorgeiras (collars) between 0.1% and 0.3%. In the case of rodelas and collars, their official use exclusively by officers justifies the small number found in the lists, but they were still very rare. The captains could choose to fight with pike or sword and rodela, or with musket and haquebut, if they preferred
".
" The abandonment of any metallic body protection was an obvious tendency in infantry. The Count of Ericeira reports that about 3,000 infantry cossoletes (breast & backplates) were adapted for cavalry armor in 1663, as they were no longer used by infantry. On the other hand, infantry use of couras (buffcoats ) depended on each military's ability to sourcing themselves - for example, by stripping off the dead, wounded, and enemy prisoners, particularly knights and officers. There is no reference to this type of protection in the records as it was not provided to the military on account of the royal estate
".
Let me show you details of a painting attributed to the Flemish painter Dirk Stoop (1610-1686), patented at the Lisbon City Museum. It represents a procession (probably Royal) in Terreiro do Paço, greeted by a small military force. It is plausible that the depicted scene is circa 1650. Dirk Stoop worked in Portugal during the 50's and 60's.
In the first image are unarmored pikemen (so called dry pikes).
In the second, on horseback and in front of a row of musketeers is a fieldmaster (although he may also be a sergeant, since this officer was also entitled to mount). However, if the force came from the Lisbon ordinance, the officer would not be a fieldmaster but a colonel, and instead of a terço, the unit would be designated by regiment, by tradition.
In the third and last image, also in front of the row of musketeers, is a sergeant, recognizable by the halberd that served as the insignia of his post, personal weapon, and instrument to align the ranks.
And in a last detail we may see how common was the cup hilt sword.
.