Why chariots suddenly disappear during middle ages

[Tripwire]

Some time around about 300 AD in China though uptake was slow and then 6th to 7th centuries it start to show up in Europe in increasing numbers.

Yeah, I thought the invention and spread of metal stirrups had something to do with the abandonment of chariots, but I could be off base with that. In old Roman mosaics and paintings horseback riders have no stirrups, their legs just dangle off the sides. I remember reading that during the filming of Gladiator, one of the ahistorical changes they deliberately made was adding stirrups to the horses' gear, because the stunts would be just too dangerous to do without them. Having solid stirrups allows the rider to stand up in the saddle and brace himself when stabbing someone, and allows a skilled archer to fire arrows.
.

 

[LSCatilina]

Having solid stirrups allows the rider to stand up in the saddle and brace himself when stabbing someone, and allows a skilled archer to fire arrows.

It shouldn't be systematized : gallic cavalry, among a thousand exemples, was one of the main forces of their levies, and was basically about people slashing and hitting footmen with swords without stirrups.

It can allow a better grasp, and less training : but it's not a pre-requise.

 

[Pachac]

Stirrups have nothing to do with the abandonment of chariots. The last recorded use of chariots in the Mediterranean is the Battle of the Lelantine Plain between Khalkis and Eretria in 700 BCE. Chariots were abandoned because people learned how to use horses more effectively.

One of the best cavalry forces in ancient history, that of Alexander, made do without stirrups or even a solid saddle. The Parthians and Scythians used arrows without stirrups.

 

[wcv215]

Well actually i was wondering where does Chariots go on Medieval total war 2. I kinda like it in Rome total war.

I know other people have commented on this, but from an in-game perspective:

Play Barbarian Invasion. I'll wait...

...okay, notice anything?

That's right. No chariots. They've died out by that point.

 

[Tripwire]

Stirrups have nothing to do with the abandonment of chariots. The last recorded use of chariots in the Mediterranean is the Battle of the Lelantine Plain between Khalkis and Eretria in 700 BCE. Chariots were abandoned because people learned how to use horses more effectively.

One of the best cavalry forces in ancient history, that of Alexander, made do without stirrups or even a solid saddle. The Parthians and Scythians used arrows without stirrups.

So it's the horse breeding theory, then. I do notice that all "primative" horse types are small ponies, and the original Eurasian wild horse was also a small, stocky animal.

 

[Nocrazy]

Also, chariots became impractical. I mean, horses don't like to charge hedgehog like formations.

 

[Saphroneth]

It shouldn't be all that surprising it took time to breed horses to the size and stiffness of spine to support a rider - after all, they didn't evolve for it...

 

[Pachac]

So it's the horse breeding theory, then.

It's more like more effective training. Like, you had to actually develop the tactics to use the larger horses in any case. The Assyrians were among the first to deploy large amounts of cavalry in their campaigns- the Achaemenids had excellent cavalry.

By the time we have a historical record in Italy we find that many of the local peoples, like the Samnites, Lucani, and the Iapygian tribes, are excellent horsemen. Bigger horses might have had a part in it, but the big changes in breeding really developed in the Roman period- and despite that we had Alexander. No doubt horses got bigger and bigger and easier to ride, but I think tactics had a play in it as well, and application.

 

[Driftless]

So it's the horse breeding theory, then.

I'd vote for all -of-the-above. Each technical advance by itself wasn't a world-beater. It's the accumulation of those advances, allowing more people to learn riding skills at an earlier time - and to figure out what traits they need from their mounts. The tech advances allowed the knowledge base to increase much faster.

 

[catconqueror]

I know other people have commented on this, but from an in-game perspective:

Play Barbarian Invasion. I'll wait...

...okay, notice anything?

That's right. No chariots. They've died out by that point.

And i didnt notice that... What????

 

[LSCatilina]

I'm not sure prooving anything trough TW is a good idea : this licence have so many historical issues it's as safe than pointing to Assassin's Creeds for historical plausibility.

 

[Pachac]

I'm not sure prooving anything trough TW is a good idea : this licence have so many historical issues it's as safe than pointing to Assassin's Creeds for historical plausibility.

[single gaul faction intensifies]
[four roman factions intensify]

 

[wcv215]

I'm not sure prooving anything trough TW is a good idea : this licence have so many historical issues it's as safe than pointing to Assassin's Creeds for historical plausibility.

True, I was just noting that the basis of the question was incorrect even proceeding from the Total War origin.

 

[Saphroneth]

I'm not sure prooving anything trough TW is a good idea : this licence have so many historical issues it's as safe than pointing to Assassin's Creeds for historical plausibility.

The elephants loaded with cannons are on fairly solid ground, though.

"Thus, for example, forty-four trained elephants were to be sent from India to carry the heavy guns on the march, while hiring commissions were dispatched all over the Mediterranean and the Near East to obtain mules and camels to handle the lighter gear. "

(The Blue Nile.)

Sure, it's not actually firing them, but it's a lot more than you'd expect. (Yes, it's also from 1868. Spoilsport.)

[single gaul faction intensifies]
[four roman factions intensify]

Rome 2's a bit better about that.

 

[Derek Pullem]

Also, chariots became impractical. I mean, horses don't like to charge hedgehog like formations.

Most chariots did not charge home but relied on missile power rather than Hollywood style scythes crashing into solid bodies of men

 

[Driftless]

Also, chariots became impractical. I mean, horses don't like to charge hedgehog like formations.

Most chariots did not charge home but relied on missile power rather than Hollywood style scythes crashing into solid bodies of men

Yup. With mounted horsemen, there were cycles of tactical evolution that included archers, javelin tossers, mounted swordsmen, light lancers, heavy armored lancers, and starting the cycle all over again - wheel-lock firing variations on the Parthian theme.

Chariots had too many battlefield limitations. If defenders had a prepatory hour or two, and you do a little bit of trenching-even a shallow furrow, or log & branch-laying in front of your line, that really causes serious problems for chariots, but less for riders on horseback. (i.e. try riding across a tilled field in an un-sprung chariot at any speed and you'll lose your fillings in the process - cross the same field on horseback, not much problem. )

*edit2* Light horsemen can deal with mud or sand to some extent. Armor wearing heavy cavalry struggle more, but they can still function. Chariots just get stuck in the mud, and struggle mightily on loose sand

 

[Saphroneth]

Could the Hussite war wagon represent a temporary return to chariots?

 

[Driftless]

Could the Hussite war wagon represent a temporary return to chariots?

I'd forgotten about them.... Kind of a semi-mobile fortification, rather than the classic chariot, but the mobile part applies. How did they ultimately defeat them? A return to archers with flaming arrows?

 

[Saphroneth]

I'd forgotten about them.... Kind of a semi-mobile fortification, rather than the classic chariot, but the mobile part applies. How did they ultimately defeat them? A return to archers with flaming arrows?

I suspect it may have been cannon. War wagons are critically vulnerable to artillery, since they're not strong enough to stand up to a round shot and yet are large and high-sided targets.

 

[kalamona]

I suspect it may have been cannon. War wagons are critically vulnerable to artillery, since they're not strong enough to stand up to a round shot and yet are large and high-sided targets.

I would rather call it as the fading of the shock and awe. The first encounters could have been terrible: moving fortresses with unholy cannons shooting hellfire, heavily armoured men fighting from it... not good.

But after a few dozen battles and some time, they become less scary and pretty much everyone learned how to fight them. And at that point, their numerous weaknesses gave the a death sentence (mobility, terrain and weather sensibilty, vunlerability to cannon and gunfire /horses/ and they were expensive as fuck).

So, the battlewagons became cost-unnefective and everyone stopped using them.

Something similar happened to the chariots i suppose.