It's unusual for infantry to charge cavalry, and tended to occur in very specific situations.

I can think of a few, none really conforming to infantry piling into cavalry in the open.

Marathon 490BC: Greek warriors run downhill to evict a Persians from the beach.
Target includes cavalry, mixed in with infantry, and probably in the process of unloading form ships.

Later on (Still ancient / medieval): Several armies included heavily armed infantrymen who operated within spear/pike formations to counterattack heavy enemy cavalry.
 Palestinian Club wielders are mentioned (Late Roman I think) - not one of my interests, so I know little more.
 Byzantine skoutatoi added detachments with menaulion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menaulion
 Flemish burghers (Cortrai 1302) mix detachments with Goedendag / Plancon among their long spears.
In each of these cases the heavy weapons are used to counterattack cavalry whose charge has been halted by the formation spears.

I suspect any other charges are equally situational.

Once firearms become general issue, Infantry are better served, by edging into range and shooting up the cavalry.

Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 27 March 2021, 01:17:05 PM
It's unusual for infantry to charge cavalry, and tended to occur in very specific situations.

I can think of a few, none really conforming to infantry piling into cavalry in the open.

Marathon 490BC: Greek warriors run downhill to evict a Persians from the beach.
Target includes cavalry, mixed in with infantry, and probably in the process of unloading form ships.

Later on (Still ancient / medieval): Several armies included heavily armed infantrymen who operated within spear/pike formations to counterattack heavy enemy cavalry.
  Palestinian Club wielders are mentioned (Late Roman I think) - not one of my interests, so I know little more.
  Byzantine skoutatoi added detachments with menaulion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menaulion
  Flemish burghers (Cortrai 1302) mix detachments with Goedendag / Plancon among their long spears.
In each of these cases the heavy weapons are used to counterattack cavalry whose charge has been halted by the formation spears.

I suspect any other charges are equally situational.

Once firearms become general issue, Infantry are better served, by edging into range and shooting up the cavalry.

Interesting thanks. I would say most of those as you say are more a case of cavalry charging in, being stopped then counter attacked, or ambushed in disorder. No active charging when all formed up.

Certainly I think fresh cavalry should auto evade, as probably should any in loose formation. For close formation possibly if they're disordered then they have to test.

In a somewhat later period (but one in whIch I know you have some interest) Montrose's Irish foot occasionally  attacked horse with the intent of hamstringing the horses using their long dirks. Atholl Highlanders at Tippermuir showering the advancing Rosyth horse with rocks then charging is another example.

To the best of my knowledge, these were all special situations where the enemy horse was committed to advancing uphill which limited their ability to evade.
They were also not very high quality. Your qualification of formed foot might also be problematic.

Yes, I can relate everything to Montrose's campaign. If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything is a nail. 

BTW, I have been enjoying your holy war series!

Quote from: d_Guy on 27 March 2021, 03:50:56 PM
In a somewhat later period (but one in whIch I know you have some interest) Montrose's Irish foot occasionally  attacked horse with the intent of hamstringing the horses using their long dirks. Atholl Highlanders at Tippermuir showering the advancing Rosyth horse with rocks then charging is another example.

To the best of my knowledge, these were all special situations where the enemy horse was committed to advancing uphill which limited their ability to evade.
They were also not very high quality. Your qualification of formed foot might also be problematic.

Yes, I can relate everything to Montrose's campaign. If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything is a nail.  

BTW, I have been enjoying your holy war series!

That Montrose was a crafty one!

Yeah a feel a lot of these are exceptions that prove the rule, so are probably a scenario specific instance rather than an all purpose rule.

Thanks, hopefully the holy war will get more exciting, just playing a small game with my own loose rule ideas now.

I think there were some instances during the Napoleonic Wars. I think one involved Russians attacking French cavalry.

Not an expert but I think alexander's foot at Granicus piled in to cavalry who were already in an engagement with the companions.

Quote from: fsn on 27 March 2021, 11:40:39 AM
Morgarten?

The Austrians dismounted at Morgarten (& gave the Swiss a tough time). The Swiss at this time are c.80% halberds and polearms & only c.20% pikes - it was the pikes that caused the Austrian dismounted men-at-arms the real problems and led to the Swiss rearming to a c.90% pike to 10% halberd composition. It was this combination that won them such success in the Burgundian Wars.

The Swiss Kiels do appear to have advanced upon & (maybe even) charged mounted men-at-arms during both the Burgundian Wars battles of Grandson and Nancy and beat their adversaries soundly. At Morat they attacked the Burgundian army in the flank, whilst it was at lunch and had just been paid - but even though it was behind field fortifications, and again beat it soundly. But I suspect most of the mounted Burgundians would have been dismounted when the Swiss caught them by surprise.  

Later, during the French Italian Wars. the Swiss again attacked enemy Spanish men-at-arms and Italian cavalry - but by that time it was their fearsome reputation that caused their mounted opponents to flee rather than enter into melee. Swiss over confidence was their downfall and they then attempted to charge (frontally) Spanish arquebusiers in field fortifications and supported by artillery and met their match.

At the Battle of Dreux (19th Dec 1562) - during the French Wars of Religion - the Swiss (Royal Catholic Guard) kiels hold off the Protestant 'Miller' nobles to start with, but are ultimately beaten by then - but only after they have fought for a large part of the day taking most of the 'strain' of the battle. At that time the Millers were still armed as classic fully armoured men-at-arms with barded horses and lance - rather than their later pistol armed variant. Even by this time the Swiss were still formidable but were still a very high % of pikes compared to their Landsknecht and Spanish adversaries who were starting to move towards Tercios - with as much as 50% of each formation armed with arquebus. The Swiss were considered outdated at this point using as few as 5% of their force armed with arquebus to screen the pike keils.

NB: We see infantry charging cavalry - with disastrous results in various British and Italian colonial campaigns in Africa - most notably during the Sudan.
(they don't like it up 'em Mr Mainwaring!)

I'd suggest that the Swiss are however a very rare exception and that it is most unusual for infantry to charge enemy cavalry that is not their disordered or already engaged in a melee or can be caught in the flank or rear.

Quote from: Big Insect on 27 March 2021, 07:51:53 PM
I'd suggest that the Swiss are however a very rare exception and that it is most unusual for infantry to charge enemy cavalry that is not their disordered or already engaged in a melee or can be caught in the flank or rear.

Yes I suspect you're right, and even for them it was usually driving the cavalry away with pikes or cutting them down when cornered rather than in the open where they could turn and run.

Quote from: Big Insect on 27 March 2021, 07:31:36 PM
The Austrians dismounted at Morgarten (& gave the Swiss a tough time). The Swiss at this time are c.80% halberds and polearms & only c.20% pikes - it was the pikes that caused the Austrian dismounted men-at-arms the real problems and led to the Swiss rearming to a c.90% pike to 10% halberd composition. It was this combination that won then such success in the Burgundian Wars.

The Swiss Kiels do appear to have advanced upon & (maybe even) charged mounted men-at-arms during both the Burgundian Wars battles of Grandson and Nancy and beat their adversaries soundly. At Morat they attacked the Burgundian army in the flank, whilst it was at lunch and had just been paid - but even though it was behind field fortifications, and again beat it soundly. But I suspect most of the mounted Burgundians would have been dismounted when the Swiss caught them by surprise.  

Later, during the French Italian Wars. the Swiss again attacked enemy Spanish men-at-arms and Italian cavalry - but by that time it was their fearsome reputation that caused their mounted opponents to flee rather than enter into melee. Swiss over confidence was their downfall and they then attempted to charge (frontally) Spanish arquebusiers in field fortifications and supported by artillery and met their match.

At the Battle of Dreux (19th Dec 1562) - during the French Wars of Religion - the Swiss (Royal Catholic Guard) kiels hold off the Protestant 'Miller' nobles to start with, but are ultimately beaten by then - but only after they have fought for a large part of the day taking most of the 'strain' of the battle. At that time the Millers were still armed as classic fully armoured men-at-arms with barded horses and lance - rather than their later pistol armed variant. Even by this time the Swiss were still formidable but were still a very high % of pikes compared to their Landsknecht and Spanish adversaries who were starting to move towards Tercios - with as much as 50% of each formation armed with arquebus. The Swiss were considered outdated at this point using as few as 5% of their force armed with arquebus to screen the pike keils.

NB: We see infantry charging cavalry - with disastrous results in various British and Italian colonial campaigns in Africa - most notably during the Sudan.
(they don't like it up 'em Mr Mainwaring!)

The Swiss also appear to have taken on and charged 'German/Austrian' men-at-arms during the Swabian Wars battle of Dornach (22nd July 1499) - a woodcut representing the battle shows the Swiss in attacking stance - but then it is only a very lovely woodcut   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dornach  (I just love those late C15th prints)

Romans were ordered to go for the thighs of Armenian Pontic cavalry, this part not being covered in sword-proof armour. Whether this means they were to expect a charge and be ready to hold and defeat it, or rather to go onto the attack....

I can offer a case from 1848: Austrian Grenzer skirmishers attacking and driving off Hungarian hussars at Tapio-Bicske IIRC. Unfortunately the account doesn't make clear whether it is a battalion of Grenzers against a regiment of cavalry, or (more likely I think) just a platoon or so against a troop or two.

In my experiments last night the infantry had to take a resolve test to advance on cavalry (with a negative modifier). Failing the test can result in then taking disorder or even routing in extreme cases. Success means they advance on the cavalry who in most cases just run away though may potentially counter charge. If the cavalry attempt a counter charge and fail to pass their resolve test they may end up disordered and in melee with the infantry, then would have to await their next activation to attempt to withdraw. They have no need to test to evade.

This seems a reasonable approach where it can be done in extreme cases but is very hard and risky. I've not settled in what the modifiers will be to charge cav and cav to withdraw yet, will need to tweak and balance them.

Will probably have something similar for cavalry charging non disordered formed infantry. Can be done, but difficult and near suicidal.

Generally (In the open, no other units involved, no special conditions).

I would expect cavalry to respond to an infantry advance in one of these ways:
  Evade - maybe drawing the Infantry out of their supporting formation.
  Counter charge - probably giving cavalry the advantage, and maybe disordering the infantry.
  Skirmish - A blend of evading combined with missiles directed at the pesky footmen.

I would usually expect foot to advance to get a better firing range on the horsemen.
Some situations mess this up.
A classic colonial example might see a spear and shield warrior facing some of her Majesty's horse.
The poor old warrior is in quite a bind:
   Outgunned Vs the horseman's repeating carbine.
   Outweighted in a charge situation.
   Outmobiled on good going type ground.

The warrior's best option is to rely on cavalry unfriendly terrain, ambush and cunning.
Or hope the horsemen are led by a Hollywood style buffoon.

Caesar at Pharsalus?   "hidden" only means behind other troops.

As Pompey's infantry fought, Labienus ordered the Pompeian cavalry on his left flank to attack Caesar's cavalry; as expected they successfully pushed back Caesar's cavalry. Caesar then revealed his hidden fourth line of infantry and surprised Pompey's cavalry charge; Caesar's men were ordered to leap up and use their pila to thrust at Pompey's cavalry instead of throwing them.