Slitherine

rbodleyscott wrote:


Not exactly disagreeing with you, but it occurs to me that in that depiction the artillery are deployed far far in front of their infantry and cavalry on the right. If they aren't that good against cavalry, why don't some Swedish cavalry ride them down before their own troops can get forward to protect them?

Or perhaps riding frontally towards guns wasn't such a good idea....

Well that is rather an inaccurate depiction of Lutzen

However, it is worth noting that Bernhard's cavalry wing (with the assistance of an infantry brigade?) appears to have spend most of the battle attacking the Imperialist right wing before finally over-running the windmill battery about nightfall. So (a) something prevented him from simply riding over it and (b) the battery didn't rip his cavalry wing to shreds.

Things to bear in mind : the fortified and garrisoned house of the miller was in front of the right end of the Windmill battery and had to be taken. The Swedish Green Brigade then sheltered behind it from the battery's fire. Bernhard 's cavalry passed between the Windmill battery and Lutzen while detached musketeers fought its garrison . The cavalry fight on that wing raged behind and to the right of the Windmills with the Imperialist cavalry bent to face their own rear.
Imperialist infantry supported the battery throughout .
The Merian print reproduced in Brzezinski illustrates this nicely, as does his text.
The Swedish horse doesn't go through or over the battery at all but neither is it halted in front of it : Bernard's cavalry rides around it .

Are there any examples of artillery being particularly effective against mounted? Ravenna (1513) is a special case. I just wonder if the advantage should rest with shooting at foot rather than the reverse?