I was definitely curious about that. If your lance was broken by a shield though, was it really effective? A hollow lance would be more easily fended off, so the shield could be lighter as well…
At this time, shields had been largely abandoned, since pikes require two free hands to handle effectively.
The thinking behind a broken lance being effective is less about the durability of the lance itself, and more that it signals that the charge had real force behind it. With the invention of the stirrup and the technique of couching one’s lance (tucking it under the arm to brace it against the body - which is anchored to the horse by the stirrups) immense force was imparted from the lance to the target. A good percentage of the concentrated momentum of horse and rider was channeled into a single spear-point, making it about as deadly as any strike could possibly be.
But more than that, the lance itself was disruptive when delivered by a forceful charge - the lance is long enough that it comes before the the horse and rider. If you’re hit by a weapon that’s being imparted with enough force to snap, unless that’s some shitty wood, you’ve been hit pretty hard - certainly hard enough to lose your footing, even if you took it on your armor or a shield. And footing is the difference between slowing a charging cavalryman with your mass, and being unremarkable terrain under his horse’s hooves…
So if your lance breaks, that meant, to medieval knights and some early modern cavalry, that the charge was good. A broken lance meant you got a nice square hit, put all your momentum into the weapon that presaged the bodily clash, and did as much as anyone could hope to with the weapon - after all, if your strike is so firm that it breaks your lance, the only way you could have gotten more out of it would be by a stronger lance! You’ve ‘maxed out’ on personal effort!
In addition, lances were often discarded after the initial charge anyway, as they’re unwieldy in hand-to-hand combat, so your lance snapping on the charge or being trampled to pieces during the melee isn’t really a difference, speaking in terms of materials/finances.
I was definitely curious about that. If your lance was broken by a shield though, was it really effective? A hollow lance would be more easily fended off, so the shield could be lighter as well…
At this time, shields had been largely abandoned, since pikes require two free hands to handle effectively.
The thinking behind a broken lance being effective is less about the durability of the lance itself, and more that it signals that the charge had real force behind it. With the invention of the stirrup and the technique of couching one’s lance (tucking it under the arm to brace it against the body - which is anchored to the horse by the stirrups) immense force was imparted from the lance to the target. A good percentage of the concentrated momentum of horse and rider was channeled into a single spear-point, making it about as deadly as any strike could possibly be.
But more than that, the lance itself was disruptive when delivered by a forceful charge - the lance is long enough that it comes before the the horse and rider. If you’re hit by a weapon that’s being imparted with enough force to snap, unless that’s some shitty wood, you’ve been hit pretty hard - certainly hard enough to lose your footing, even if you took it on your armor or a shield. And footing is the difference between slowing a charging cavalryman with your mass, and being unremarkable terrain under his horse’s hooves…
So if your lance breaks, that meant, to medieval knights and some early modern cavalry, that the charge was good. A broken lance meant you got a nice square hit, put all your momentum into the weapon that presaged the bodily clash, and did as much as anyone could hope to with the weapon - after all, if your strike is so firm that it breaks your lance, the only way you could have gotten more out of it would be by a stronger lance! You’ve ‘maxed out’ on personal effort!
In addition, lances were often discarded after the initial charge anyway, as they’re unwieldy in hand-to-hand combat, so your lance snapping on the charge or being trampled to pieces during the melee isn’t really a difference, speaking in terms of materials/finances.