No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies?

[Ray552]

Did the Scots and the late English (Tudor 1485-1500 and Yorkist 1486-1497) armies not recruit light cavalry units such as the Scottish and English Border reivers?

Or were they recruited, but so unreliable that they don't appear in the lists?

I know Wikipedia isn't the most comprehensive source, but the article there (Border reivers) doesn't speak highly of them as soldiers, as opposed to raiders, as they would even rob troops on the same side, and fraternize with Borderers on the opposite side instead of fighting.

[rbodleyscott]

Did the Scots and the late English (Tudor 1485-1500 and Yorkist 1486-1497) armies not recruit light cavalry units such as the Scottish and English Border reivers?

Or were they recruited, but so unreliable that they don't appear in the lists?

I know Wikipedia isn't the most comprehensive source, but the article there (Border reivers) doesn't speak highly of them as soldiers, as opposed to raiders, as they would even rob troops on the same side, and fraternize with Borderers on the opposite side instead of fighting.

The information we were able to access led us to include them in Yorkist armies up until 1485.

The later Yorkist list pretty much represents the Battle of Stoke, at which there is no record of any such troops.

Similarly Lancastrian lists have them till 1484.

We have no information on their inclusion in very early Tudor armies - thus including them would be speculative.

If you can provide good evidence of the use of such troops in pitched battles (not merely for raids) by either of these armies, or the Scots army in this period, the lists can be updated.

[Ray552]

Thank you for the information. I doubt any sources I could find would be more comprehensive than yours.

They were probably off pillaging the countryside instead of doing their jobs...

[patronius]

It might be noted that Phil Barker included LH for Tudor English and Scots Common armies in the first edition WRG DBR army lists, August 1995. These lists run nominally from 1494 to 1700 which is the span of the DBR rules.

10 Early Tudor English 1494-1558: English javelins and staves - LH(O)
11 Scots Common Army 1513-1602: Borderers! - LH(O)

The notes in the English list says

Javelins, staves, prickers and border horse were the standard English light cavalry type, primarily armed with a light spear, sometimes supplemented with a crossbow or firearm.

The notes in the Scots list says

Borderers normally fought as raiding light cavalry, but at Flodden were persuaded to leave their horses and become pikemen.

The first major clash of English and Scots armies during Henry VIII's reign was Flodden in the Borders in September 1513

[rbodleyscott]

It might be noted that Phil Barker included LH for Tudor English and Scots Common armies in the first edition WRG DBR army lists, August 1995. These lists run nominally from 1494 to 1700 which is the span of the DBR rules.

10 Early Tudor English 1494-1558: English javelins and staves - LH(O)
11 Scots Common Army 1513-1602: Borderers! - LH(O)

The notes in the English list says

Javelins, staves, prickers and border horse were the standard English light cavalry type, primarily armed with a light spear, sometimes supplemented with a crossbow or firearm.

The notes in the Scots list says

Borderers normally fought as raiding light cavalry, but at Flodden were persuaded to leave their horses and become pikemen.

The first major clash of English and Scots armies during Henry VIII's reign was Flodden in the Borders in September 1513

If we were doing later period lists for these armies, we would include them.

[Athos1660]

In Pike & Shot (Richard Bodley Scott's renaissance wargame), there are 'Light Lancers' (Skirmishing LH with lance) in the Scottish and English lists of the 16th century.

[patronius]

It might be noted that Phil Barker included LH for Tudor English and Scots Common armies in the first edition WRG DBR army lists, August 1995. These lists run nominally from 1494 to 1700 which is the span of the DBR rules.

10 Early Tudor English 1494-1558: English javelins and staves - LH(O)
11 Scots Common Army 1513-1602: Borderers! - LH(O)

The notes in the English list says

Javelins, staves, prickers and border horse were the standard English light cavalry type, primarily armed with a light spear, sometimes supplemented with a crossbow or firearm.

The notes in the Scots list says

Borderers normally fought as raiding light cavalry, but at Flodden were persuaded to leave their horses and become pikemen.

The first major clash of English and Scots armies during Henry VIII's reign was Flodden in the Borders in September 1513

If we were doing later period lists for these armies, we would include them.

Well, the thread title is 'No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies?'. So...

There were light horsemen in the Wars of the Roses, if the DBM Book 4 lists are to believed. Northern border staves - Irr LH(O).
It seems unlikely that these would have disappeared after 1485, only to surface again in 1513. Certainly the reivers were a thorn in the side of the Scots and English monarchs, and fought as mercenaries in Ireland to avoid having their lands seized by the Crown.

[Athos1660]

Well, the thread title is 'No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies?'. So...

imho :
- 'No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies' means in the Medieval game of FoG2, that is before ca. 1500
- while "later period lists for these armies" means in a Renaissance game with army lists after ca. 1500

There were light horsemen in the Wars of the Roses, if the DBM Book 4 lists are to believed. Northern border staves - Irr LH(O).

And there are Light Horses in the lists of the Wars of the Roses in FoGII Medieval.

It seems unlikely that these would have disappeared after 1485, only to surface again in 1513. Certainly the reivers were a thorn in the side of the Scots and English monarchs, and fought as mercenaries in Ireland to avoid having their lands seized by the Crown.

Sometimes there are holes in documentation, uncertainty, unknown things, absence of evidence...
Sometimes... perhaps... it is best to leave it as is than to make things up.
(And it can also be a way to make army lists with different flavours, from a gameplay point of view : Medieval ones vs Renaissance ones)

[patronius]

Well, the thread title is 'No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies?'. So...

imho :
- 'No light cavalry for all Scottish and late English armies' means in the Medieval game of FoG2, that is before ca. 1500
- while "later period lists for these armies" means in a Renaissance game with army lists after ca. 1500

There were light horsemen in the Wars of the Roses, if the DBM Book 4 lists are to believed. Northern border staves - Irr LH(O).

And there are Light Horses in the lists of the Wars of the Roses in FoGII Medieval.

It seems unlikely that these would have disappeared after 1485, only to surface again in 1513. Certainly the reivers were a thorn in the side of the Scots and English monarchs, and fought as mercenaries in Ireland to avoid having their lands seized by the Crown.

Sometimes there are holes in documentation, uncertainty, unknown things, absence of evidence...
Sometimes... perhaps... it is best to leave it as is than to make things up.
(And it can also be a way to make army lists with different flavours, from a gameplay point of view : Medieval ones vs Renaissance ones)

The WotR ended in 1485. The list I gave begins from 1494. Are we supposed to believe there was a 9 year gap when NO light horse were fielded? Remembering of course that Stoke Field took place in 1487.
Post 1485 was certainly the early Tudor period, Edward VII was king from then until 1509.

Given that you disagree with me and the OP, what is the OP actually asking for that you can't countenance?

[Athos1660]

@patronius : Let's take the heat out of this debate and take a scientific approach.

When you disagree about what a knowledgeable gentleman says in good faith on an Historical subject (in the present case, about the presence of Light Horse in some given lists), in order to make him change his mind, you have to provide evidence.

By evidence, I mean primary sources (that is any documents produced during the studied period) or, at a pinch, the papers written by reputed Historians you expect they correctly read, understood and render most of the primary sources on the subject.

Evidence of the presence of LH in these lists are what you have to post in this thread, if you want these lists changed. No more, no less. Evidence, not speculation, not hypothesis, not belief.

That's exactly what Richard wrote above :

Did the Scots and the late English (Tudor 1485-1500 and Yorkist 1486-1497) armies not recruit light cavalry units such as the Scottish and English Border reivers?

Or were they recruited, but so unreliable that they don't appear in the lists?

I know Wikipedia isn't the most comprehensive source, but the article there (Border reivers) doesn't speak highly of them as soldiers, as opposed to raiders, as they would even rob troops on the same side, and fraternize with Borderers on the opposite side instead of fighting.

The information we were able to access led us to include them in Yorkist armies up until 1485.

The later Yorkist list pretty much represents the Battle of Stoke, at which there is no record of any such troops.

Similarly Lancastrian lists have them till 1484.

We have no information on their inclusion in very early Tudor armies - thus including them would be speculative.

If you can provide good evidence of the use of such troops in pitched battles (not merely for raids) by either of these armies, or the Scots army in this period, the lists can be updated.