Talk:Lance
Page contents not supported in other languages.
 | This article is ratedStart-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
"Generally, a spear which is not thrown is called a lance" That is new to me. Can anybody provide evidence that this is the case. To my mind, the term lance is reserved for spears that are primarily used in a charging attack, usually from horse back as inJousting or carried by aLancer of necessity, a lance is generally long. A spear used in regular melee combat is just that: aspear whereas a thowing spear is aJavelin.Gaius Cornelius10:35, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A lance has to be long as well-a hoplite at Platea didn't have a lance, although he charged, he had a spearSamrsharma20:08, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Changed the refference to the charge of the light brigade to include the word "ultimately" since the charge itself achieved the capture of the gun emplacement, but the brigade was unable to hold the position (the heavy brigade did not come to its support) and was "ultimately" unsuccessful.Robinivich12:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article needs some discussion and tightening up; the idea that Stirrups wre instrumental in the development and use of the Cavalry Lance, for instance, has long been discredited. References to Fantasy films should similarly be removed, especially ones showing Massed Cavalry charging into a Spear wall.
I see that some of the old Lance(formation) has been moved over here prior to this former's remouval. The information itself on the formation that was perserved is quite small if somewhat out of the blue and isolated from the other medieval formations. Searching for the formation I foudn theLances fournies and thought this the evolution of the earlier Lance(formation), therefore I sought to complete the article as Lance Formation not just the later provided Lance formation. I would like to point you tothis article and its discussions for the future of the Lance as a formation, either to mix it all under the weapon or to keep it divided as two seperate articles.Dryzen15:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
TheKopia, though listed as a lance, is apparently a formation of lancers. Somebody should probably remove it . . . --Anonymous
Same anonymous here again. The link forSangu goes to the disambiguation page, and apparently there is no main page. Either somebody should write one, or the link should be removed.
And again. Either the pagesudis (stake) is wrong, or the sudis isn't a weapon. Could somebody do research to find out which is true?
And either the pagetaru links to is wrong, or Taru is the name of a god, not a weapon. Again, research is needed.
There's been vandalism in the lead sentence of the last article of the "History" section. I don't know what goes there.—The precedingunsigned comment was added byGlasperlenspiel (talk •contribs)20:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]
The sentence about John-curlyburns-etc. and his spears of pumpernickel appears to be nonsense, and I am about to remove it.J S Ayer (talk)03:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Statement that lances were not useful in melee due to being too long and bulky has no citation. Is this really true? I've heard the opposite, and it seems silly to have a weapon that only gets used once in battle. Knight charges and then gets cut to ribbons by everyone other than the guy he impaled as he secures (or just drops?) his lance and draws his sword.—Precedingunsigned comment added by131.109.46.7 (talk)13:42, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The claim that cuirassiers used lances is unsubstantiated and unfounded. True, mediaeval armored knights used lances, but the term cuirassier is much later. During the 1500s armored heavy cavalry mostly used pistols, but Gustavus Adolphus started using them as sword-armed shock cavalry, a trend which became universal up to WWI.Geira (talk)12:47, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The illustration from the Bayeux Tapestry is cited as showing how lances were used (notice the overhand grip), but the women who made the tapestry had, as far as I know, not seen the actual battles and were perhaps not accurate in the way they portrayed the fighting techniques? Also, if the weapons were in fact used like that, perhaps they should be called spears instead, as a lance is, as I understand it, a weapon that is couched and used as part of a charge.— Precedingunsigned comment added by85.81.40.95 (talk •contribs) 17:46, 14 February 2011
There is one theorie that Norman cavalry at the time of the battle of Hastings engaged the enemy by riding towards the enemy's line and from close range threw javalins at them. Although i do not know of any proof at this besides the Bayeux Tapestry and the way the Normans held their shields.
In the Bayeux Tapestry they hold their spears overhanded. This is a very ineffective way of thrustings because you have to hold the spear rougly in the middle where the balance is and so reducing the range of your attacks. Also thrusting in front of you is almost impossible because the only attacking motion possible is a downward thrust. So either the Bayeux Tapestry depicts the cavalry incorrectly or they didn't use their spears in a thrusting motion but threw them like a javalin.
Also the long shields norman cavalry carried at that time are always held at an 45° angle at the side. If you ride towards the enemy, throw a Javalin and make a right turn the shield at an angle not only protects your side from but also the flank of your horse which is really vurnrable at that moment.— Precedingunsigned comment added by82.73.173.49 (talk) 20:38, 27 May 2011 (UTC)--500jbl (talk)01:14, 19 March 2013 (UTC)Lance[reply]
I propose a better image for the lead would be something likeFranz Skarbina Pikenier.jpg. Additionally,Ulani RB3.jpg wasincluded in a previous version, although I've not tracked its origins.--Trevj (talk ·contribs)09:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've been seeing some citations onlancea originating from celtiberian backed either byVarro (onCeltiberians) or by theOED (on this page, as well asLancea), but the former does not cite where Varro reported such a claim, and the later Isuspect not only would help back the former, but also add more information than is presented here, butwould of course require a paid subscription to check and verify. I'm still on the lookout for alternative sources, but if someone with a subscription could check that'd be wuite helpful.78.30.26.29 (talk)09:33, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, the academic reference for this I've dug up is in Spanish. Martín Almagro-GorbeaLancea, palabra lusitana,y la etnogénesis de los Lancienses(Lancea, Lusitanian Word, and the Lancienses Ethnogenesis) 2016.--Monstrelet (talk)16:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The last sentence on the first picture is pretty questionable. Sure it describes what is seen in the graphic, but as a whole, this is generally not how they were wielded from my understanding.— Precedingunsigned comment added by146.178.95.246 (talk)00:53, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirectNagayari and has thus listed itfor discussion. This discussion will occur atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 3#Nagayari until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.Steel1943 (talk)05:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
the article has several photos of lance heads, which are interesting and worthwhile, but they aren't the whole lance. should there, additionally, be a picture of a lance in its enrirety? is there a reason why this shouldn't happen or why available images aren't suitable?Nyuuposting (talk)13:58, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It would be good if some qualified individual could add some information about earlier use of lances. They go back at least to the time of Alexander.B.Bryant (talk)12:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
