We have a situation in the other period I play in (11th-century norman) where the main re-enactment organisation supplies most of the infantry for big events, and has its own in-house cavalry unit.

We would like to make it easier for owner-riders and/or other cavalry groups to play with us, but need to have some sort of confidence that they are safe on the feild, 'cos horses are waaaay too risky to have running round the battlefeild out of control.

I'm therefore trying to work out a series of standards we could use to assess people, so that they can be fitted into a role they can handle safely.

Since there seem to be a number of knowledgeable people on this forum, I thought I'd run it past y'all for comments.

Please note that this piece of work has absolutely NO official status at this point, and may never have - it's simply an item for discussion.

PS - I apologise for the page of bureaucratese at the end, but I figure there isn't much point having the standards if people can just ignore them, and there'd better be some way to sort out objections etc.

Neil

"CAVALRY RIDER GRADING SYSTEM

This note is intended to outline a grading system to determine what riders are able to do on a re-enactment battlefield.

It is not intended to exclude riders from the battlefield, but to allow the maximum number of riders to participate by allowing riders to be placed in situations that are commensurate with their skill levels.

It outlines a series of grades and sets out the standards individuals must reach to qualify as each grade, then sets out an administrative framework for conducting the gradings.

GRADES

LEVEL 1 – This grade does NOT qualify a rider to fight on horseback. However, they are of a sufficient standard to be on the battlefield without endangering other participants, and could act as messengers, foot unit commanders etc.

A rider of this standard should be able to ride one-handed at walk and trot, but is allowed to use both hands for cantering. They are not expected to be able to perform drill manoeuvres or to fight.

LEVEL 2 – This is the most basic combat grade. A rider of this standard should be able to control his/her horse at walk, trot and canter with one hand only. They are expected to be able to fight against infantry or other cavalry with sword, and should be able to use a lance to a more limited extent.

They would be expected to understand, and be able to perform, basic drill manoeuvres such as changing from column to line, wheeling in line etc.

Riders of this standard can either be formed into a separate unit and given a more limited independent role on the battlefield, or amalgamated into an existing unit under the supervision of more experienced riders.

LEVEL 3 – This is a fully competent fighting rider. They should be able to control their horse at all paces one handed, and should be able to fight against infantry with sword or lance.

They would be expected to understand, and be able to perform, all common drill manoeuvres used on the battlefield.

They are regarded as being able to perform any battlefield role.

SPECIAL SKILLS

As the above grades are essentially planned around a battle or skill-at-arms scenario, they do NOT require experience or training specifically for special skills such as jousting, which would not normally happen on a battlefield.

Rather than try to think of every possible permutation of special skills, a standard for such things should be set by agreement between the candidate and the assessor. An example of how this might be done is given in an appendix at the end of the document.

A rider’s special skills are in addition to his grade, so that a rider night be classified as Level 2 + special skill (jousting) or whatever.

STANDARDS FOR GRADES

All grading should take place using the armour and tack that the candidate intends to use in the field. If you intend to do a show in full plate, that’s what you wear for the grading.

All candidates get a minimum 20 minutes warm up time before the start of the assessment, to allow them to get used to the horse and ensure it is properly worked in. If they would prefer longer – for example to work a horse in after being trailered to the assessment site – the assessor should attempt to accommodate this, but it is not an automatic right.

LEVEL 1 – Noncombatant rider

- Rider must be demonstrate awareness of basic safety procedures (e.g. need to check girth after mounting), horse welfare (e.g. need to avoid over-exerting horse when riding in armour) and of the sponsoring organisation’s horse combat guidelines in a short verbal examination by the assessor.

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command.

- Rider must be able to canter large with both hands on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a specified marker, usually X.

- Rider must be able to canter large without stirrups, with both hands on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command.

LEVEL 2 – limited combat rider

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command.

- Rider must be able to canter a series of school figures (circles, figure-eights) with one hand on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a specified marker, usually X. Where a figure involves a change of rein, candidates should bring the horse back to trot, and pick up canter on new lead within three strides.

- Candidates must be able to make safe, dramatic sword attacks against targets on both left and right sides. Targets should be both inanimate (cabbages, posts) and infantry, and several targets should be engaged without pause.

- Candidate should be able to use their sword to parry incoming attacks aimed at themselves from left, right or ahead.

- Candidates should be able to take a standard 4-inch ring at canter, using a lance on their right side.

- Rider must be able to canter large without stirrups, with one hand on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command. During the canter large, they must make at least one safe, convincing sword attack on a target.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in a line of horsemen at a walk and trot, and must be able to maintain position at both centre and either end of the line during left and right wheels at trot.

- Candidates must be able to redeploy from column to line, and from line to column of twos, with minimum of fuss, at walk.

LEVEL 3 – full combat rider

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command.

- Rider must be able to canter a series of school figures (circles, figure-eights) with one hand on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a specified marker, usually X. Where a figure involves a change of rein, candidates should bring the horse back to trot, and pick up canter on new lead within three strides.

- Candidates must be able to make safe, dramatic sword attacks against targets on both left and right sides. Targets should be both inanimate (cabbages, posts) and infantry, and several targets should be engaged without pause. Targets should be arranged so that the rider must change rein at least twice during the engagement sequence.

- Candidate should be able to use their sword to parry incoming attacks aimed at themselves from all angles, INCLUDING from behind.

- Candidates should be able to take three standard 4-inch rings at canter, using the lance across their body (i.e. over their shield). The targets should be set up in a line and be taken without pause.

- Candidates should be able to pick up a standard 6x8 inch polystyrene block with their lance on their right side at canter, and recover the lance safely to the vertical.

- Candidates should be able to perform the same lance exercise as above against targets on their left (shield) side, but need only demonstrate a one-in-three hit rate.

- Rider must be able to canter circles and figure-eights without stirrups, with one hand on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command. During the canter, they must make several safe, convincing sword attacks on targets to both left and right sides.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in a line of horsemen at a walk and trot, and must be able to maintain position at both centre and either end of the line during left and right wheels at trot.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in line of horsemen at a controlled canter.

- Candidates must be able to redeploy from column to line, and from line to column of twos, with minimum of fuss, at trot.

- The rider must be able to canter up to a trained infantry team, then be dragged off and “killed” in a safe and convincing manner.

METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

The Sponsoring organisation should appoint at least two assessors, and more as necessary to ensure that at least two are in post at any time, and their names and contact details should be published in the sponsoring organisation newsletter.

At least one assessor should be present at any event involving cavalry that the sponsoring organisation holds, whether battles, training sessions or living history, and should be involved in planning how riders are split into units and how these units can be used on the battlefield.

Riders without gradings may only ride at any Sponsoring organisation event with the explicit permission of both the event organiser AND at least one of the assessors. Even then, they may only ride at two events without being formally graded – it is not possible to circumvent the grading scheme indefinitely.

All gradings will take place by an assessor approved by the sponsoring organisation, at a formal grading session. There will be a minimum of two grading sessions per year, open to all candidates and announced at least one month in advance in the sponsoring organisation’s newsletter.

Before taking part in any grading, candidates must sign a form stating that they understand that they are about to take part in a dangerous activity, which involves unpredictable animals, and which may involve their injury or death. The law doesn’t allow people to sign their rights away, but at least this form will show that they knew what they were getting into!

After their initial gradings, candidates may attempt to pass a higher grading only ONCE per training session. A candidate cannot simply keep trying to get a grading they failed by trying over and over again on the same afternoon. Candidates also may not “skip” gradings – for example, a Grade 0 candidate must pass a Level 1 grading before he can attempt a Level 2 grading.

If, during the course of a battle, training session or other event, the assessor feels a graded rider is performing far below his grade, he or she can TEMPORARILY reduce that rider’s grade to any lower grade that he or she feels necessary for the safety of horse, rider or other participants.

In this event, the Rider has the right to be graded again by a different assessor at the next training session, after which either the original grade will be restored, or the temporary lower grade made permanent, according to the judgement of the second assessor.

If any graded rider has a long period during which they are not riding, they should ideally be regraded before taking part in an event. If that is not possible, an approved assessor MAY temporarily reduce the rider’s grade to any lower grade he or she feels appropriate, as above. However, they need not do so if they feel the “time off” is unlikely to have affected the rider’s skill level.

For reasons of safety, while an assessor may be willing to discuss points with a candidate, in the last resort their judgement is FINAL, and may not be over-ruled by a show organiser or group leader.

In the event that a rider feels an assessor has acted unreasonably, he or she should make a formal complaint to the sponsoring organisation, who should consider whether the complaint is justified, take appropriate action and inform the complainant of the decision in writing within a reasonable period of time.

APPENDIX 1

Example of a standard for a special skill – Jousting.

The candidate and assessor should talk through the key ingredients that the candidates needs to demonstrate to be regarded as reasonably safe at that skill.

In the case of jousting, they decide that the key ingredients are

- Lance skills
- Ability to ride with visor down, as this will be required during the joust
- A very good, deep seat to avoid being knocked out of the saddle

On the other hand, sword skills would not normally be required at all. They therefore might decide that an appropriate standard would be

- All general riding and lance exercises from the Level 3 test, but conducted with helmet visor CLOSED. However, the candidate need not pass the sections requiring sword work, drill or being dragged off and killed.
- Rider should make five runs at a heavily-weighted quintain, with special reference to the quality of their lance impact. The first run is done with stirrups so that candidate gets the feel of the quintain, the remainder are done without stirrups as a test of the strength of the candidate’s seat."

We run a pretty similar "grading system" and "qualification tests" here in New Zealand. The two competitive jousting organisations that I'm aware of in North America also run quite similar tests on would-be competitors prior to their tournaments.

If the results of such tests are enforced then they are a good method of screening out people whose skills may not be up to scratch. Where they fall down is that somebody may do well in the test but they may get "stage fright" when they are out there doing it.

--------------------

URL=http://www.jousting.co.nz

quote:

---

Rider must be able to canter large without stirrups, with one hand on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command. During the canter large, they must make at least one safe, convincing sword attack on a target.

---

--------------------

Although carrying the shield on the forearm does complicate the issue of rein control, I imagine that the "Gestech" and other later period styles of jousting will incur the same problem, although perhaps to a lessor degree.

This is why we require that our riders be able to ride "on the buckle" e.g. during jousting, melee combat and the "skill-at-arms" exercise most of the control is through the seat and leg while the reins are used mainly for neck reining.

This means that a lot of mounted combat activities are restricted to only the confident and competent riders and such tests can be seen as some by being elitist. However their ultimate intention is to ensure the safety of all concerned, e.g. the horse, rider and people on the ground.

--------------------

URL=http://www.jousting.co.nz

--------------------

Thanks for the comments. I'll try to answer questions from all the above posts at once;

a) We do expect people to perform the tests with a shield if they are going to use one on the feild, but not if they aren't. People in the main battle line normally need sheilds, but messengers, people who only want to do a skill at arms show etc might not.

We don't have to worry about full plate, but I don't think I'd change the test if we did - it's what we have to do, and it's only sensible to test people in the equipment they'll be using on the real thing.

b) I hope the requirement to canter without stirrups isn't setting the bar too high - but on the other hand, these people are going to go onto a battlefeild with lots of other horses pelting around, and directly into melee with other cavalry or infantry. If I have to set the bar too high or too low, I'd sooner do the former. Better safe and a few frustrated people who have to be messengers than try to explain to English heritage why an out-of-control horse has crashed into the crowd.

c) I'm aware of creating an "elitism" problem by setting a high bar, which is why there are the lower grades, allowing people who are just starting out to play. However, the only alternative I could think of was making everybody do the test we use for our own people....which is effectively the highest of the three, but assessed over a number of training weekends. That'd really get me accused of elitism....and a lot of the point of this is to get more people onto the feild mounted, so that'd probably be counterproductive.

d) "stage fright" when people do OK in training but freeze on the day....the only thing I could think of for this is make them ride at "probationary" status somehow for their first battle. I'm not sure how it'd work, and it'd certainly piss a lot of people off - remember that at the five-yearly "big" hastings last year, we had riders who'd come from the US to take part. Imagine one of them passes all our tests, then finds he's STILL not allowed to play properly!

I've therefore tried to make the tests harder than anything they'll ever be asked to do in the live fight - like a Gulf War vet once told me "It was just like training, only the Iraqis weren't as tough as the people we train against". Hyperbole, but it makes my point.

Those standards might be tough for some to accomplish but if you want to make fairly certain you have safe competent riders, they look like they should tell you everything you need to know about a rider's capabilities.

By canter large, I assume you mean something along the line of hand gallop or extended canter? Excellent idea--a good rider should always be able to drop, pick up or continue exactly what they are doing without their stirrups. And I think it quite possible a rider involved in battle type scenarios migh lose a stirrup.

Well, I've just had the feedback from up the chain of command within the society, and it looks like a rewrite is in order.

Partly this is because we've just been told that our Health & Safety advisor has reclassified all equestrian activities within the society as HIGH risk - the same sort of rating as gunpowder weapons - and we therefore have to tighten up a lot of our horse related procedures, especially for non-members.

Main points were;

a) Level 1 riders are either NOT allowed to carry weapons onto the battlefeild, or these weapons are to be firmly secured into scabbards etc. They are also to wear something identifying them as noncombatant, eg sash tied around arm etc. Our society does not allow noncombatants to carry weapons, and level 1s are not qualified for mounted combat, even if they are qualified to fight with those weapons on foot.

b) Nobody gets to ride without having gone through a formal grading. I'd written the possibility of an ungraded rider being allowed onto the feild with the agreeement of the assessor after an informal grading, but this leaves us too open - we have to demonstrate good procedures and adhere to them.

c) Much miscellaneous tightening of language - it's impossible to cover everything, but if the cavalry group leader, the society's lawyer and HSE assessor can find and plug any loopholes they can find, it's a start.

d) "Special skills" get the boot - the only one anybody thought was likely was jousting, and anything too odd, we probably couldn't assess anyway. That section gets replaced by a separate jousting test.

e) A requirement that somebody cannot be assessed by somebody they have been trained by. I'd thought of including this, but didn't, because I'm conscious of how few trainers and assessors we've got. However, as with point b), "because it'll be a pain to do in practice" isn't a good enough reason.

f) Insertion of an explicit rule allowing the examiner to fail candidates for two minor or one major safety breaches during the assessment.

g) Targets for sword and lance attacks must start with inanimate ones, and may move to infantry only once assessor is happy with quality of attacks.

h) riders must dfinitely be reassessed after any significant time away from riding.

i) Annual reassessment for all riders, including our own.

j) Less confrontational complaints procedure.

I'll probably post a revised version once I've stopped whimpering

I'm glad we don't need such rules here. We'd spend all our time reading and writing and enforcing and no time riding or reenacting.

if you have to have codified rules and authorizations, I strongly suggest that you make sure that each rider is certified on the SAME horse.

Around here we swap rental horses all the time, and while a rider may or may not be able to control one horse adequately, put them on another horse and it can be a very different story.

just a suggestion...if you're lucky, you wont have to deal with it at all!

--AM

--------------------

Excellent point. As most horsepeople know, the mount can play just as much of a role in the qualifications as the rider.

Shouldn't you have qualifications for the rider AND the horse? Perhaps separate qualification for each?

My mare is very competent in a battle situation, though since she's heavily built and not very nimble in tight maneuvers, she might not be able to make the grade but that doesn't mean she would be unsafe in reenactments. By the same token, my gelding is much more nimble but unaccustomed to battle as yet, so he would be less trustworthy in the commotion of a reenactment. I would trust the mare, but not the gelding, though both have things they're good at.

Medieval Horse Guild

While safety is paramount in most groups who know what they are about, I don't believe that the guidelines listed by Neil are elitist, however...I think that they are somewhat exclusive to the degree that it seems that one must nearly be of a semi to professional caliber equestrian to get past the "lunge line" stage and do more look pretty on the back of your horse.

I agree with AM about qualifying for specific horses. If you draw from the same pool of horses in a rental situation, this shouldn't be as hard as if you were drawing from a new lot every time.

Bob and I are fortunate that we have two horses and would thus try to qualify for each others mounts. I don't think the stirrups free option would work for a "15th century knight" in full plate on my horse, except at a canter or a walk. Ms. Phantom's trot has been likened to that of a cement mixer. I don't mind it, but some folks don't care for it.

The Medieval Horse Guild has such an "every horse" qualifier. You cannot ride a specific horse on the field in parade or battle until you have been qualified on that mount. Both rider and horse are qualified separately, I believe.

quote:

---

The Medieval Horse Guild has such an "every horse" qualifier. You cannot ride a specific horse on the field in parade or battle until you have been qualified on that mount.

---

I think what they are looking for is the guarantee the rider can handle any situation that comes up. They wish to avoid the type of situations we've had at the horse park where Merlin has spooked and taken off through the crowd back to the barn. In certain instances the horse's behavior is more important than the rider. Fortunately for us in Kentucky and Indiana, the liability factor isn't an issue, as the laws were written specifically to protect the stinking rich owners of race horses from any risk regardless of what happens.
90% of the time Merlin is as good as gold and perfectly trained. Every once in a while though, he just spooks and takes off. He has also taken idiots through wood fences. The more insecure you are, the more likely he will over-react.
My fear is that when we (the Norman conroi) canter to the Saxon shield wall, throw our spears and turn right, Merlin will say "Hey boss, there's just a couple of round boards in the way, let's break through the line!" And the Saxon rabble will get smashed... You've got to have the horse respond to leg signals if your hands are busy elswhere. Meanwhile, I've started riding bareback, and the old farmer at the stable thinks Patty should lunge Merlin with me on his back and NO BRIDLE, so I have to react to her signals the same as the horse.

--------------------

hauptmann Said

---------------------------------------------
"Jeepers
I'm glad we don't need such rules here. We'd spend all our time reading and writing and enforcing and no time riding or reenacting."
---------------------------------------------

Tell me about it!

The main reason they are so complex is because we are trying to write rules that can be used to integrate people who aren't members of our society - which means that everybody needs to know exactly where they stand!

We're also looking at doing some pretty serious stuff, hence the high bar - our parent society set up my unit specifically to be able to fight infantry or other cavalry in a semi-unscripted scenario, so our people HAVE to be able to deal with things that go pear-shaped.

We're normally deploying 6-12 riders, but occasionally this jumps massively for things like the five-yearly "big" Hastings refight - last time we got 88 riders from a number of societies on the feild. Start playing with numbers like that - many of whom you won't even have met before the one-day shakedown before the show - and rules like these start seeming less anal-retentive and more necessary.

Regarding horses - well, members of the unit I belong to are expected to be able to work with most of the horses in the pool available to us - not quite all, but close; you are allowed to have one or two that you can't get on with.

However, these tests are designed to help us integrate owner-riders, and we'd therefore want them to do the test on their OWN horse, since that's the one they'll be riding on the day. There are rules being drafted for a similar set of qualifying rules for horses, and I'll probably post those here, too, once they're finished.

Thanks again for the comments

quote:

---

Originally posted by NEIL G:

We're normally deploying 6-12 riders, but occasionally this jumps massively for things like the five-yearly "big" Hastings refight - last time we got 88 riders from a number of societies on the feild. Start playing with numbers like that - many of whom you won't even have met before the one-day shakedown before the show - and rules like these start seeming less anal-retentive and more necessary.

Neil

---

Hi Neil,

Sorry to break topic, but any news on the rumour that the next "big one" will be next summer?

I totally agree with your comments regarding training, apart from having lower grade riders act as runners. At the end of the day it takes more ability to ride a horse away from the herd, and keep it under control when returning. We have had new members who when stuck in the middle of a section don't have a problem, but as soon as they are on their own...

A top example of this was at HIA III back in '98, when a member of NF&OE took it on himself to nab a horse to take the British line out. The horse went a few meters onto the field, turned and galloped off the field slipping over and dumping the rider inches from the ruins of the house in front of a crowd of thousands - and Janet..!

Donnachaidh said;
---------------------------------------------

Sorry to break topic, but any news on the rumour that the next "big one" will be next summer?

I totally agree with your comments regarding training, apart from having lower grade riders act as runners. At the end of the day it takes more ability to ride a horse away from the herd, and keep it under control when returning

---------------------------------------------

Hi Andy;

a) I've heard the standard-issue rumours that they want to make the Big Hastings every three years, rather than every five. Other than that, I don't know nothin'

b) It's certainly harder to ride a horse into infantry away from the herd, but the grade1s are meant to be way, way from the battle or anything scary, which should make their jobs easier.

The grade 1 standard is the one that's actually causing most debate within our society, with a strong PoV that we shouldn't have anybody on the feild who can't look after themselves if (say) an enemy cavalry unit doesn't realise they are noncombatant and attacks them.

On the other hand, if we don't, it's going to basically mean that you won't be able to play unless you have passed our combat tests, and since they are set high, it essentially means you won't be able to play unless you are training regularly with us or an equivalent unit (Destrier, say, or the Dutch Curassiers), and we're back to being accused of elitism!

Seriously, this is a debate that hasn't burned itself out yet even within our society, so watch this space.

I think for the sanctity of safety, the "elitist" line may be the one to go with. Certainly within the group I belong to, attending monthly training, and proving to the Junta that you will be safe on the battle field is paramount before going before a live audience.

At H2K, Janet had no qualms in not passing a member of Destrier who couldn't control his horse (and it wasn't one of her bolshi ones)

If Elitism means safety for all on the battle field, then I'd go with it any day, and it only takes one person to ruin the spectacle.

I'm also hoping to make it to one of your sessions this season in order to widen my awareness, I like to think that you can never ride too much..!

Cheers,
Andy

ps
We attacked the Dutch at a battle this year, armed only with fridge magnets

"Don't give your son money...Give him horses. No one ever came to grief, except honourable grief through riding. No hour of life is lost that is spent in the saddle. Young men have often been ruined through owning horses, or through backing them, but never through riding them: unless of course they break their necks, which, taken at a gallop, is a very good death to die_ "

You'd be very welcome at one of our training sessions, just give Nice Uncle Ross a ring. If you need his number, let me know and I'll mail it to you. Dates are:

3rd & 4th November 2001
1st & 2nd December 2001
5th & 6th January 2002
2nd & 3rd February 2002
2nd & 3rd March 2002
6th & 7th April 2002

All our people are expected to train regularly, but they are also expected to go into combat, as was the chap Janet binned at Hastings.

I'm not suggesting people be allowed to do that unless we're really happy about them - I'm dumb, but I ain't that dumb! What we have to do is decide whether we can let people on in a RESTRICTED role at a more limited standard.

The rules I've posted don't have any official status, and may well never have - think of them as a discussion document to help decide what is possible if we DO go down the path of trying to integrate owner riders, which isn't certain either.

PS - if you're going to attack the Dutch with fridge magnets, use the big dustbin-lid ones the germans produced during the war, with shaped charges in them....tellermines, I think they were called. After all, they are meant to deal with armour!

PPS - you said "Young men have often been ruined through owning horses, or through backing them, but never through riding them: unless of course they break their necks, which, taken at a gallop, is a very good death to die" - not during one of our shows it isn't!!! Besides, you should know we aren't allowed to die on duty without permission from Uncle Ross!

on qualifing horses and riders:

few folks up here own their own horses. we're fortunate in that theres a large rental facility who is amused by what we do .

we've spent the last year running "practices", using different horses each time. A list is maintained as to which horses think the games and funny clothing ar fun and which think those carparasons are trying to eat them .

At the same time, riders are getting qualified on different horses. I personally am qualified on three different ones, and that means that we know all three are ridable. We even keep notes to help pair new riders with the happy horse for them...some horses do great at the games with an experienced hand at the reins, others think they're ok but dont really want to work that hard, etc. Others know what you want even if you dont know it yourself.

some horses will do fine with one rider, but not with another (especially when you are dealing with various skill levels and the different ways different people interact with horses).

works for us....keep in mind your objectives:
1. protect the horses
2. protect the public
3. protect the riders
(in that order)

to that end, qualification of the rider is very important, but qualifiaction of the rider-horse pair is critical.

just my opinion....

--Anne-Marie, who hopes to get to ride again in November

--------------------

My unit (and Andy's, and Destrier et cetera) normally use horses provide by Janet Rogers, who runs a specialist yard catering to re-enactors, TV companies, films and other sundry loons. Her horses are the ones we train on, and we are all pretty much familiar with all of them.

They are all very used to all sorts of strange stuff, from jousting through to being painted strange colours and fitted with horns to impersonate unicorns.

Owner-riders will obviously be in a rather different position - they will know their horses well under normal circumstances, but may not know how they will react to musket fire, people with axes running at them etc.

Their horses obviously need to be screened for this sort of stuff - panicking horses may be atmospheric and accurate for a battlefeild, but EH are likely to object.

If we go ahead with this, we're going to end up having to keep a database of owner-rider's horses and what they are cleared for....

....ever get the feeling I need to start a new group, dedicated to re-enacting something like the administration and record keeping functions of the royal wardrobe under Edward III?

Neil

A very interesting ruleset. I wasn't going to comment on this thread in particular, but I would like to point out a couple of different things.

If you intend to have cavalry and infantry interaction at a reenactment, then you need a thoroughgoing set of rules like this. That said, I think the basic premise of cavalry and infantry fighting each other is a flawed one - a bad idea in general.

From a purely visual viewpoint, and from a point of historical accuracy in presenting the subject - that is Cav vs. Inf, you can barely get away with the only type of contact possible in the context of something like Hastings, where historically, you have a series of charges not actually ploughing into the Saxon shield wall, but rather riding up and down in frustration, hurling javelins, etc. (OK - skip the hurling javelins part). Visually, it won't be a complete botch, swatting shields with swords and tapping them with lances.

I still don't think it is safe. Regardless of how good the rider, and how good the horse, the best horse in the world is still unpredictable at times. Top that off with hundreds, or thousands of unpredictable infantry, the vast majority having no experience of horses, and you are in the situation of sitting atop a powder keg holding a blazing torch. Sure, you might get away with it a few times, but at some point you will have a disaster, and knowing how things legal run in the UK, you will all be skipping around at reenactments banging together pairs of coconuts - that will be what you are reduced to.

Visually, as soon as you hit the 13th century, this sort of trotting about in front of an infantry formation is as good a representation of a cavalry charge as running a half track along behind.

I think there is no possible way to give an accurate representation of a 14th or 15th century cavalry charge interacting with infantry safetly. In disscussing our ARMET rules, we have handled things this way - no interaction between cavalry and infantry, and have agreed to allow mounted combattants to melee. There are so few of us, and for the most part we are familiar with each other, and each others mounts. At this point Red Co leads the field with three mounts, and we trail behind with two, although should eventually have five.

I realize there vast difference between UK & US laws regarding this sort of thing. In every State I have ridden in the laws of that State have invariably placed all resposibility on the individuals head for any injury to themselves when dealing with equines. If you are a rider, a farrier, are participating with other riders, a vet, a trainer, etc, and you get injured, it is tough luck on you. Personally, I'm glad to see this one area where resposibility for ones own actions still holds sway. All bets are off if you injure a spectator, of course.

--------------------

A) I should probably point out that even we're not crazy enough to anticipate attacking random infantry blocks - we have a couple of infantry units we train with every month, and most of our combat plans revolve around fighting them.

B) We acknowledge it's something with inherent danger, hence the strict requirements in our rules - we think (not know, just think!) that we can keep risk to an acceptable level by training and practice. So far, we've been right...or lucky, take your pick.

C) "swatting sheilds and tapping lances"..."trotting about in front of an infantry formation"...um, no. Not even when straffing the saxon line at Hastings. The whole point of cavalry is speed and manouverability, and if you drop back the slower paces, you lose your main advantage, and it looks **** as well.

If that is all we can do, we should seriously reconsider doing it at all - it isn't going to be either accurate or dramatic, and if we can't achieve one or other of those, we're better off adding a few more guys to the infantry.

We have to be running a plan that says something like we head towards the sheildwall in canter, peel off and ride half a dozen strides along the sheildwall slashing with sword, then disengage, back to trot and reform. The sword attacks must be proper attacks, too, as convincing as the ones infantry put in against each other.

D) I can't comment on whether it is possible to do a decent, convincing impression of C14th/15th cavalry - all my experience of this is Norman, remember.

I do know that it is possible for cavalry to be used in a useful, dramatic way in an c11th reenactment. Apart from straffing the main battle line as above, we'd certainly expect to wipe out their skirmishers at the beginning of an engagement, and ride down anybody damn fool enough to leave the sheildwall...which seems to be half the saxon army at hastings. Take the first couple with lance attacks, then lose the lance "in" the third guy and draw your sword...

E) We can also do nice little set pieces, choreographed beforehand, for things like people being pulled off their horses and "killed", that kind of thing. Obviously, this needs everybody involved to have trained together enough to do this safely.

F) If your group feels that cavlry/infantry combat isn't safe, that's fair enough, and you should stick to that unless your opinion changes, regardless of what any other group does or says - at the end of the day, it has to be YOUR call on what is safe and what isn't.

We don't have sheildwalls, we have squares of fellows armed with pikes and halberds, or bowmen sitting behind hedges of horse gutting stakes.

Actually, we don't have enough people in our era to do anything close to a full scale battle (yet), and we are probably the largest and most viable Medieval reenactment era in the US.

We are just to the point of getting the different companies in close (500+ miles) proximity to each other to talk, and come together in specific reenactments instead of timelines, or encampments.

At this point, I primarily envision us only being able to do things on the scale of meeting engagements between scouting elements of each army. We could concievable come up with choreographed actions - running down fleeing infantry, and that sort of thing. A bar to us being able to get together for monthly (or even quarterly) practice is the large distances between us.

Oh well, you have to start somewhere. At this point, if you could get every serious 15th century reenactor from the Mid-Atlantic States to the Northeast together, you would have about 100 people, with a similar situation on the West Coast.

Since we have you English reenactors talking rules, could you please enlighten us as to the combat rules regarding infantry, either the 11th century, or WOR federation. We are trying to come up with a tried method of interacting here.

I think Cavalry vs. Cavalry is as dramatic, or more dramatic than cav vs infantry. I don't know of a single reenactment era in the US that allows mounted cavalry to engage infantry. It probably has to do with our legal system.

--------------------

AS I said, I don't have any experience of running the cavalry side of C15th battles, so better I confess it now. I know the theory, and that the problems are different, but I haven't done it in practice. Perhaps one day.

As you say, we're running on a different order of scale over here. Things like Tewkesbury and Bosworth can put a couple of thousand infantry on the feild in a good year, although they are terminally short of cavalry. The five-yearly "big" hastings....well, I don't know how many people we had total, 'cos infantry all look the same to me and I stopped counting them after about 3000...plus we get cool accessories for the playing feild, like abbeys and castles and stuff.

Your 500-mile radius gets me every re-enactor in england and wales, most of those in scotland and quite a lot of the french, dutch and german ones - and yes, we do attend shows in each other's countries. Figure 5-6,000 in the C15th period, all told?

We don't have the SCA, either, and while I wouldn't wish to say they are a bad thing (honest!), it does mean that anyone who wants to play with swords has to join a reenactment group. I'm not sure all our groups would meet your standard of "serious" - no, actually, I'm sure a lot wouldn't - but they are at least singing from a watered-down version of the same hymnsheet.

We do a lot of training for cavalry versus cavalry (well, hell, there's plenty of people on horses at our training sessions, since we are often sharing with destrier), but since we always end up as normans-v-saxons, we don't get to do it on the feild!

I'm happy to talk about infantry combat rules, provided it is very clear that I make no claim to be any sort of expert, and don't wish to set myself up as one.

I can pass you the written rules used by several of the big societies in the UK, and can supply explanations etc - things like that always turn out to have all sorts of interesting little implicit assumptions that can confuse the bejesus out of people who aren't familiar with the UK scene.

Give me a couple of days to put some sort of sensible post together, and I'll stick it onto a more appropriate topic, rather than keep it on this one.

There are at least a couple of other UK people on this list, too - Caliburnus and Donnachaidh - who can probably provide good input, too, since I make no claim to have all the answers.

The actual standards themselves haven't changed that much, but a lot of the admin procedures and stuff around them has been heavily redone.

As previously, these rules have no official status etc etc.

"CAVALRY RIDER ASSESSMENT SYSTEM

This note is intended to outline an assessment system to determine what riders are able to do on a re-enactment battlefield.

It is not intended to exclude riders from the battlefield, but to allow the maximum number of riders to participate by allowing riders to be placed in situations that are commensurate with their skill levels.

It outlines a series of grades and sets out the standards individuals must reach to qualify as each grade, then sets out an administrative framework for conducting the assessments.

GRADES

LEVEL 1 – This grade does NOT qualify a rider to fight on horseback. However, they are of a sufficient standard to be on the battlefield without endangering other participants, and could act as messengers, foot unit commanders etc.

A rider of this standard should be able to ride one-handed at walk and trot, but is allowed to use both hands for cantering. They are not expected to be able to perform drill manoeuvres or to fight.

Riders of this level must wear an identification sign (e.g. red scarf tied around their upper arm) to identify them as non-combatant, and as they are not qualified for mounted combat, they may NOT carry weapons onto the field, even if they are qualified to use the same weapons on foot.

LEVEL 2 – This is the most basic combat grade. A rider of this standard should be able to control his/her horse at walk, trot and canter with one hand only. They are expected to be able to fight against infantry or other cavalry with sword, and should be able to use a lance to a more limited extent.

They would be expected to understand, and be able to perform, basic drill manoeuvres such as changing from column to line, wheeling in line etc.

Riders of this standard can either be formed into a separate unit and given a more limited independent role on the battlefield, or amalgamated into an existing unit under the supervision of more experienced riders.

LEVEL 3 – This is a fully competent fighting rider. They should be able to control their horse at all paces one handed, and should be able to fight against infantry with sword or lance.

They would be expected to understand, and be able to perform, all common drill manoeuvres used on the battlefield.

They are regarded as being able to perform any battlefield role.

As the above grades are essentially planned around a battle or skill-at-arms scenario, they do NOT require experience or training specifically for special skills such as jousting, which would not normally happen on a battlefield.

STANDARDS FOR GRADES

All assessments should take place using the clothing, armour and tack that the candidate intends to use in the field. If you intend to do a show in full plate, that’s what you wear for the grading.

All candidates get a minimum 20 minutes warm up time before the start of the assessment, to allow them to get used to the horse and ensure it is properly worked in. If they would prefer longer – for example to work a horse in after being trailered to the assessment site – the assessor should attempt to accommodate this, but it is not an automatic right.

The assessor should check all tack, equipment etc before the assessment begins. If he is not satisfied with the design, condition or fitting of any item, the assessment should not go ahead until the item is repaired, refitted or replaced to his satisfaction.

A rider will normally pass if the assessor feels they are achieving approximately 70% score in all or substantially all the requirements for that grade. Note that this should NOT be interpreted as a 70% hit rate, but as 70% of perfection in criteria such as safety and control – we are far better off with a rider who misses the ring by half an inch each time, but in a safe manner, than with a rider who is unsafe to be around but hits the target.

However, it is still possible for a candidate who achieves the requisite scores on all tests to fail, if the assessor believes they are unsafe for reasons not explicitly covered by the standards. As a guideline, if a candidate does anything that causes the assessor to feel he may be unsafe, this is a “yellow card”, and should be highlighted to the candidate at the end of the test. Two or more “yellow cards” would normally result in the candidate failing, regardless of other performance.

If the candidate does anything the assessor feels is actively dangerous, this is a “Red card”, and the assessor should fail the candidate and terminate the assessment at that point.

LEVEL 1 – Non-combatant rider

- Rider must be demonstrate awareness of basic safety procedures (e.g. need to check girth after mounting), horse welfare (e.g. need to avoid over-exerting horse when riding in armour) and of the sponsoring organisation’s horse combat guidelines in a short verbal examination by the assessor.

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command from the assessor.

- Rider must be able to canter large with both hands on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a marker specified by the assessor, usually X.

- Rider must be able to canter large without stirrups, with both hands on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command from the assessor.

LEVEL 2 – limited combat rider

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command from the assessor.

- Rider must be able to canter a series of school figures (circles, figure-eights) with one hand on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a specified marker, usually X. Where a figure involves a change of rein, candidates should bring the horse back to trot, and pick up canter on new lead within three strides. Changing canter lead via a flying change is acceptable, but not required.

- Candidates must be able to make safe, controlled sword attacks against inanimate targets (cabbages, posts etc) on both left and right sides. Several targets should be engaged without pause on each run.

- Provided the assessor is satisfied with the safety and control of the sword attacks in the previous exercise, the candidate should repeat the above exercise against infantry. No candidate should proceed to this stage of the test unless the assessor is satisfied that his or her use of the sword is safe and controlled.

- Candidate should be able to use their sword to defend themselves against incoming attacks aimed at themselves from left, right or ahead.

- Candidates should be able to take an appropriate-size ring (usually 4-inch diameter) at canter, using a lance on their right side.

- Rider must be able to canter large without stirrups, with one hand on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command from the assessor. During the canter large, they must make at least one safe, controlled sword attack on a target.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in a line of horsemen at a walk and trot, and must be able to maintain position at both centre and either end of the line during left and right wheels at trot.

- Candidates must be able to redeploy smoothly from column to line, and from line to column of twos, at walk.

LEVEL 3 – full combat rider

- Rider must be able to walk and trot a series of school figures (circles, serpentines, teardrops etc) using only one hand on the reins. During this, they must be capable of bringing horse to walk or halt within 3 strides of a verbal command from the assessor.

- Rider must be able to canter a series of school figures (circles, figure-eights) with one hand on the rein, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot and then to walk at a marker specified by the assessor, usually X. Where a figure involves a change of rein, candidates should bring the horse back to trot, and pick up canter on new lead within three strides. Changing canter lead via a flying change is acceptable, but not required.

- Candidates must be able to make safe, controlled sword attacks against inanimate targets (cabbages, posts) on both left and right sides. Several targets should be engaged without pause. Targets should be arranged so that the rider must change rein at least twice during the engagement sequence.

- Provided the assessor is satisfied with the safety and control of the sword attacks in the previous exercise, the candidate should repeat the above exercise against infantry. No candidate should proceed to this stage of the test unless the assessor is satisfied that his or her use of the sword is safe and controlled.

- Candidate should be able to use their sword to defend against incoming attacks aimed at themselves from all angles, INCLUDING from behind.

- Candidates should be able to take three appropriate-size (usually 4-inch) rings at canter, using the lance across their body (i.e. over their shield). The targets should be set up in a line and be taken without pause.

- Candidates should be able to pick up an appropriate size target (usually a 6x8 inch polystyrene block) with their lance on their right side at canter, and recover the lance safely to the vertical.

- Candidates should be able to perform the same lance exercise as above against targets on their left (shield) side. However, the important point is whether candidates can do this SAFELY – picking up the block on this rein is a secondary consideration in assessing success.

- Rider must be able to canter circles and figure-eights without stirrups, with one hand on the reins, and must be able to bring the horse back to trot within five strides of a verbal command from the assessor. During the canter, they must make several safe, controlled sword attacks on targets to both left and right sides.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in a line of horsemen at a walk and trot, and must be able to maintain position at both centre and either end of the line during left and right wheels at trot.

- Candidates must be able to keep position in line of horsemen at a canter.

- Candidates must be able to redeploy smoothly from column to line, and from line to column of twos, at walk and trot.

- The rider must be able to canter up to a trained infantry team, then be dragged off and “killed” in a safe and controlled manner. NB – this exercise requires a minimum of four infantry who are trained and experienced in this exercise.

METHOD OF ASSESSMENT

The Society should appoint at least two assessors, and more as necessary to ensure that at least two are in post at any time, and their names and contact details should be published in the society newsletter.

At least one assessor should be present at any event involving cavalry that the society organises, whether battles, training sessions or living history, and should be involved in planning the show script, deciding how riders are split into units and how these units can be used on the battlefield.

Riders may not ride at any event organised by the society without being assessed. Riders who have been assessed may ride with the explicit permission of both the event organiser AND at least one of the assessors. Successfully passing an assessment does not confer an automatic right to ride at any particular event.

All assessments will be conducted by an assessor approved by the society, at a formal grading session. There will be a minimum of two grading sessions per year, open to all candidates and announced at least one month in advance in the society’s newsletter.

An assessor cannot conduct the assessment of a candidate they have been personally responsible for the training of, though they may conduct the assessment of a candidate who is a member of the same group as the assessor.

Before taking part in any grading, assessors should remind each candidate that they are about to take part in a dangerous activity which involves unpredictable animals. While the society will take all reasonable precautions to ensure their safety, risk of personal injury or even death to candidates cannot be completely eliminated. The candidate should then sign to say that they have been told this, and understand it.
The law doesn’t allow people to sign their rights away, but at least this form will show that they knew what they were getting into!

Candidates must take all assessments sequentially, and may not skip levels – everyone must do level two before going on to level three and so forth.

Candidates may attempt to pass a higher grading only ONCE per training session. A candidate cannot simply keep trying to get a grading they have failed by trying over and over again at the same session.

If, during the course of a battle, training session or other event, the assessor feels a graded rider is performing far below the required standard for his or her grade, he or she can TEMPORARILY reduce that rider’s grade to any lower grade that he or she feels necessary for the safety of horse, rider or other participants, with immediate effect.

In this event, the Rider has the right to be graded again by a different assessor at the next appropriate opportunity, after which either the original grade will be restored, or the temporary lower grade made permanent, according to the judgement of the second assessor.

Any graded rider who has a long period during which they are not riding must be reassessed before taking part in an event.

An assessor may be willing to discuss points with a candidate. For reasons of safety, however, their judgement is FINAL, and may not be over-ruled by a show organiser or group leader.

In the event that a rider feels an assessor has acted unreasonably, he or she should explain to the assessor why he feels that he has been so treated. If the candidate and assessor cannot come to a mutually acceptable resolution, the rider should explain the situation to his group leader.