Elizabethan escape on horseback. How far & how fast could be sustained without changing horses?

From what I can find, a horse can gallop for about 10 miles average, if it's in very good shape. In other words, your horse will probably have to take a rest halfway through the trip at LEAST.

Other horse enthusiasts were saying that a true gallop speed can only be sustained for 3 miles at most. A canter or trot could go for the 10 mile stretch more realistically.

I found an endurance race winner who averaged 15 mph for a 100 mile course and completed it in about 6.5 hours. However, that horse was well trained and I'm sure that it had breaks, but I couldn't find what intervals those were. http://www.squidoo.com/riding

Can't find much on how long it'd take to ride the horse to death, but the guesses are about 2 days.

Cross-country riding at night! Good way to damage your horse badly due to unseen obstacles, uneven surfaces, mole-holes etc.

For the 700 mile trip I think that a human in good shape would beat a horse. Humans can walk 20 to 30 miles a day everyday, while the horse would be able to continue that pace for a couple of days, then it would need rest. It would be impossible for a horse to carry two adults for that distance is a reasonable amount of time.

If that 23 mile leg were started at 8 PM and continued through the night until 4 AM, that would be a pace of a little less that 4 MPH, then the horse would be exhausted, but it would be possible. Any human is reasonable shape could do that on foot if necessary. If one person rode with the infant, then it might work.

My book is set in the same period, and I used to ride when I was a teenager, so...

Snick has a good point. Over long distances, horses aren't appreciably faster than humans, as their walking stride isn't much different from than that of a tall man. A single horse, used to carry supplies and/or rest the walkers' feet, would be adequate for the slow part of the journey. It's the fast part where mounts make a huge difference. However...

23 miles at night? Galloping? No. Just, no. The roads of the period were utterly awful - think of the worst untarmac'd country road you've ever seen, rutted and potholed to hell, and it's probably better than an Elizabethan road. If there's a fullish moon and clear sky, you can see your way OK (surprisingly well, in fact, because there's no light pollution from cities), but otherwise forget it. Movies (and lazy, unrealistic books) get away with all manner of implausible adventures - the fact that you're asking suggests you don't want to make these mistakes.

Why do they need to go so fast? Is there supernatural pursuit that isn't hampered by the same factors as them? If not, all that really matters is that they stay ahead of their pursuers, by whatever means you can think up. Get creative

For long distant horse travel for speed with changing horses, the best source of information would be the Pony Express. Ten days, about 2,000 miles, horses were changed every 10 - 15 miles and in the plains traveled mostly at a canter or gallop. For an individual horse, there were various races held where the horse needed to cover several hundred miles. The movie HILDAGO is based on these types of races. In the movie, the race is for 3,000 miles.

Travel time with one horse is slower than being able to switch and travel time reflects it. The Pony Express averaged about 200 miles per day. A single horse is going to be somewhere in the range of 50 - 100 miles per day. Horses given enough room will put themselves into very good condition by their normal actions. Wild horses are known to travel 30 - 50 miles per day. Breed does make a difference, and the best endurance horses tend to be Arabs and Mustangs.

Horses have incredible night vision. The limiting factor of night riding is how much faith you have in your horse. A horse that has grown up in natural terrain is capable of traveling over terrain that will cause the rider to lose faith. Their natural agility is close to a mountain goat. Terrain will affect hoof wear, and may result on the need for shoes. Some horses have tougher feet than others.

Weight is the biggest limiting factor for a horse. For racing, handicapping is done by adding weight, called the impost. Weight is done in one pound increments, and adding as little as one or two pounds makes a difference. The Pony Express required riders to weigh less than 125 pounds and had a total weight of rider, saddle, and mail of 165 pounds.

And weight is going to be the biggest problem your first night. Two adults, weighing say 170 pounds in clothes for one and 130 pounds in clothes for the second plus another 20 pounds for the baby, plus tack weighing 20 pounds equals about 340 pounds. That's horse killing weight. Plus riding double is just plain harder on both the rider and the horse, especially since the weigh when riding double frequently gets far enough back to start hitting the kidneys.

You're not going to get far at higher speeds. Maybe a mile at a slow gallop. My guess would be an average speed of 3 - 4 miles per hour would be about right, but you're going to need a strong horse. Probably something with a bit of draft in it. You're going to have to sacrifice speed for strength.

Looking at your specific questions:

• How long will the first 23 miles at night take? I'd guess in the range of 6 to 8 hours. And that's going to be rather brutal on both the horse and the second rider.
  
• how long can a good horse sustain a gallop? You need to understand that horses can slightly change pace and this makes a difference. An absolute, flat-out gallop is maintained for less than a quarter of a mile. A slower gallop might be maintained for five miles. In horse races, the horses change their speed, starting fast to get a good position for the first turn, then slowing down around the first turn and the backstretch, Then towards the end of the second turn, the horses gradually quicken, until they're running flat out at the finish line. A good jockey, judging his or her horse right, will have the horse run out of gas about ten yards beyond the finish line. Add into this that horses are two-sided (having a preference just like people to be left or right sided). During a horse race, the horse will switch leads (or sides) several times, equalizing wear and tear and balancing energy outputs.
  

• how long can a good horse sustain a canter ? Depends upon the horse. First off, you need to understand that some horses have a very long trot that covers ground more efficiently for the horse than a canter. My horse can sustain a trot covering 8 - 10 mph for over an hour. Whether I can last as long is the interesting question. But a slow canter or long trot, in the range of 10 mph, can be sustained by most horses for an hour or more. This is ignoring terrain, as uphills tend to involve more energy consumption on the part of the horse (although easier to ride), while downhills frequently result in a horse naturally wanting to increase its speed (frequently to the dismay of the rider). However, to cover a lot of distance, you want to vary the pace. It provides a break to both the horse and rider.
  
• would a good horse be able to drop from a sustained gallop to a canter for any length of time? or would he have to walk/stop? It depends upon how sustained the gallop was. The more oxygen debt you incur at the gallop, the slower you have to go to recover.
  
• to travel 20-30 miles a day - would they have to walk to sustain the distance? how many hours would that take? and how many consecutive days could they travel without killing the horse? You'd walk a bit, but a lot of horses could cover most of that distance at a trot without any discomfort. Thirty miles in six hours a day is a very sustainable pace. A good horse person could easily double that distance without killing their horse. Providing you pay attention to what you're doing, take care of your horse, have adequate food and water, you could go on like that forever.

Click to expand...

There's a lot of information out there for endurance horses. And any standards we now have are rather wimpy compared to the Mongols, the American West, or other heavy horse cultures. Cowboys were known to ride 50 - 100 miles to a dance (with girls! real girls!!!) and then ride back to their ranch.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Canterbury is called that because it's how far a horse can canter in a day, starting from London. WolframAlpha says that's a shade over 54 miles.

Endurance rider chiming in here.

A superbly conditioned horse can complete a hundred miles, in less than 24 hours. This horse will need plenty of stops for wet hay/grain, water, and electrolytes. Letting the horse eat bites of lush grass along the way will also make a huge difference in how it feels (the grass contains moisture and electrolytes). However, you better believe that horse won't be doing anything for the rest of the week after something like that. Google 'Tevis Cup', for more info. Or '100 mile endurance ride'.

There are pioneer rides, in which horses go 50 miles a day, for three or four days (can't remember the most days a single horse has been ridden in a pioneer ride). Similar breaks and conditioning as above. Afterwards, the horse will need a good week long layoff.

And then, for a super long journey, you'll have to slow things down to about 20 miles a day. The horse can complete these daily miles pretty quickly, in less than four hours. That would give your characters plenty of time to do stuff around camp.

Anne Lyle said:

23 miles at night? Galloping? No. Just, no. The roads of the period were utterly awful - think of the worst untarmac'd country road you've ever seen, rutted and potholed to hell, and it's probably better than an Elizabethan road.

Click to expand...

I beg to differ. Hundreds of riders actually do this every summer, in the Tevis Cup, and in Big Horn, in the worst terrain imaginable--high mountains, with sheer drop offs. Both these rides, however, are always scheduled on a full moon.

• How long will the first 23 miles at night take? Maybe two and a half hours, on a good horse, low rider weight, with a full moon. Mostly fast trotting, slow cantering. The average finishing time for top 25 mile endurance riders is like three hours. However, that's over the WORST terrain (up and down), and taking extreme consideration for the horse. If you had characters in a desperate situation, and the welfare of the horses was low on their list of priorities, I suspect two and a half would be doable.
  
• how long can a good horse sustain a gallop? Not very long. Two miles, maybe. Galloping would fatigue the horse. It wouldn't do a fast 20 miles, if a gallop is involved anywhere within.
  
• how long can a good horse sustain a canter ? Some endurance horses don't trot much. They have this slow canter the whole way. Horses of barb descent (like my mustang) are really good at sustaining a canter for seven or so miles without stopping for a breather.
  
• would a good horse be able to drop from a sustained gallop to a canter for any length of time? or would he have to walk/stop? I don't understand what you mean by this.
  
• to travel 20-30 miles a day - would they have to walk to sustain the distance? how many hours would that take? and how many consecutive days could they travel without killing the horse? They could sustain this pace for a very long time. And complete it under four hours a day, on good days. But this also depends on the condition of the horse's feet. There are super conditioned barefoot horses (like mine), that have good sole callouses, and only need occasional booties over the worst terrain--but this is an absolute art form. After the Roman Empire fell, few people had the knowledge to keep hard working barefoot horses. Otherwise, the horses would need new shoes every few weeks. Not all the farriers your group would encounter would be equal. Some of them would be liable to lame a horse or two, by driving a nail too deep, or setting a shoe off balance.
  

Couple of comments...

First, the type of horse used for modern endurance races (arabs and arab crosses) wasn't comonly available in Europe in the Elizabethan times, right? The TYPE of horse the couple is riding would make a huge difference to speed and distance.

Second, another consideration is the baby. How are they feeding it? Because a newborn has to eat every two hours and I'm guessing the woman is not nursing. Plus, a newborn on a galloping, cantering, or trotting horse is a really, really dangerous thing. Both in terms of dropping them (road conditions and night time says to me that the horse will be tripping regularly) and on the baby itself (anything faster than a walk is hard to ride double, let alone triple. It's going to be really, really, bouncy and they won't be properly seated in the saddle). I'd think they couldn't realistically move faster than a walk for that consideration alone. Having them in a cart behind the horse would solve this problem.

samw11 said:

They're not actively being pursued; they are trying to smuggle someone else's newborn baby away. If they get caught (in hostile country) they're likely to be executed (probably the baby too). They need to get to France fast. If they can't gallop then I'll cope. I just wanted to convey the urgency & a gentle walk won't do that.

Click to expand...

In that case, you need to rely on your writing skills rather than fudging the technical details. I would have them on foot, stumbling through the darkness, twitching at any sound of pursuit, trying desperately to keep the baby quiet...

If the baby's that important, I don't think they would try to take it on a horse - I know I wouldn't!

Lehcarjt said:

Couple of comments...

First, the type of horse used for modern endurance races (arabs and arab crosses) wasn't comonly available in Europe in the Elizabethan times, right? The TYPE of horse the couple is riding would make a huge difference to speed and distance.

Second, another consideration is the baby. How are they feeding it? Because a newborn has to eat every two hours and I'm guessing the woman is not nursing. Plus, a newborn on a galloping, cantering, or trotting horse is a really, really dangerous thing. Both in terms of dropping them (road conditions and night time says to me that the horse will be tripping regularly) and on the baby itself (anything faster than a walk is hard to ride double, let alone triple. It's going to be really, really, bouncy and they won't be properly seated in the saddle). I'd think they couldn't realistically move faster than a walk for that consideration alone. Having them in a cart behind the horse would solve this problem.

Click to expand...

Ah, yes. I was only thinking of the horse aspect. Shaken baby syndrome would be an issue here. A gaited horse in a fast walking gait, like what this woman and baby are doing, would be easier on the baby than a cart. Gaited horses of many breeds were quite common back in the day. In fact, trotters were often regarded as cart horses, not riding horses.

As far as endurance horse breeds not being available, like Jim said, we're kinda wimps in the modern times. They rode their horses more often, and harder back in the day. They also bred more durable, functional animals. But, even today, one of the nation's top Limited Distance horses belongs to a friend of mine. His horse is a Tennessee Walker. (The only thing that prevented this horse from scoring highest, is my friend stopped to free a runaway horse from barbed-wire during that determining ride).

Anaximander said:

Canterbury is called that because it's how far a horse can canter in a day, starting from London.

Click to expand...

That's a myth; Canterbury is from O.E. Cantware buruh; the fortified/walled town of the Kentish [people].

See this previous thread on horses and extended riding: http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11324

jclarkdawe said:

. . . plus another 20 pounds for the baby. . .

Click to expand...

I don't know a thing about horses, but I do know that a newborn baby weighs a lot less than 20 pounds. The average newborn is between 5 and 8 pounds, with an occasional 10-pounder making an appearance. Add in a blanket and a diaper, which weigh perhaps a few ounces each. Now, a modern woman's diaper bag could easily weigh 20 pounds, what with all the bottles, pacifiers, diapers, wipes, bibs, toys, etc. But in this situation, I doubt they have any of that. They certainly won't have bottles, since those weren't invented until the 1870s or so.

Feeding the baby is an issue, as someone else pointed out. Newborns need to eat frequently, certainly no more than four hours apart. Where are they going to get breast milk? You can't just feed cow's milk to a newborn baby and expect them to be okay. Also, as someone else said, keeping the baby from being jostled is very important. Anything faster than a slow walk could cause bruising of the baby's brain or damage to the spinal cord (shaken baby syndrome), which can lead to death.

Crusaders deliberately brought back Arab horses, and there were famous strains of Arabs in Spain.

Arabs were quite available in Elizabethan England, for the wealthy.

We have letters from Philip Sidney regarding buying Arab breeding stock.

Orianna2000 said:

Originally Posted by jclarkdawe
. . . plus another 20 pounds for the baby. . .

Click to expand...

I don't know a thing about horses, but I do know that a newborn baby weighs a lot less than 20 pounds. The average newborn is between 5 and 8 pounds, with an occasional 10-pounder making an appearance. Add in a blanket and a diaper, which weigh perhaps a few ounces each. Now, a modern woman's diaper bag could easily weigh 20 pounds, what with all the bottles, pacifiers, diapers, wipes, bibs, toys, etc. But in this situation, I doubt they have any of that. They certainly won't have bottles, since those weren't invented until the 1870s or so.

Click to expand...

Breakdown on why I said twenty pounds for the baby:

• Baby as you said weighing between 5 - 8 pounds.
• Heavy blanket for baby. They're planning on traveling at night, which would require a substantial blanket to keep the newborn warm. And if this was anything other than summer, the temperature consideration becomes worse and the blanket heavier. At least a couple of pounds worth of blanket and maybe more.
• Cradle or other device to hold the baby on the horse. For example, a papoose could be used in the US. But you need a carrier for two purposes. One is to prevent shaken baby syndrome. You've got to limit the baby's ability to move and vibrate. Second is to strap the baby to the horse. For a short distance, you can carry something like a baby, although neither the baby or the person holding it is going to be happy. Anything longer and you have to attach the baby in some sort of secure carrier. For long, slow movements, you might use a carrier dragged by the horse, but nomadic tribes using horses had to be able to move women and their babies rapidly. My guess is they used something like a papoose strapped to the saddle by the mother's knee, roughly in the same position as a rifle scabbard. As far as the baby being secure, I've packed eggs without breakage. A baby wouldn't be any harder to do. How English women traveled horseback with babies I don't know. My guess is they didn't. But anybody who's done some packing could figure out a solution quickly. But whatever your solution, it's going to weigh something, and my guess would be in the five - ten pound range.

So fifteen - twenty pounds for the baby. Difference to the horse between 330 pounds and 340 is insignificant. Both are horse killing weights. You're talking something with a some draft to be able to tolerate that sort of weight for very long.

I don't see any big problems in traveling with a newborn by horse. Three or four hours would provide a good break for everyone. Nursing could probably be done in the saddle by an experienced rider with a well-broke horse, the horse being led while the infant is feeding. A nursing woman is your only practical solution here, unless you have milk sources on your route.

One thing to understand is that riding takes a lot out of the rider if they're not in shape. There's nothing more fun than watching a bunch of dudes getting off their horses after twenty miles. You probably could sell pain killers for $20 a pill. Riding 700 miles is going to be rough and need lots of bag balm or other lotion to smear on the butt.

As far as riding at night goes, I do it fairly often. Nothing more fun that riding across an uncut field of hay in the dark when you can't even see the horse's ears at a full gallop. That will teach you to 'feel' your horse faster than anything I know. Biggest limitation of night riding is my vision. On a dirt road or something like that, we can travel at the same speed day or night. Narrow trails that I can't quite see are a lot slower at night. If there is a moon out and you're out in the open, visibility is quite good. And if there is snow on the ground and a full moon, other than the cold, it's as bright as daylight.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

jclarkdawe said:

As far as the baby being secure, I've packed eggs without breakage.

Click to expand...

That is fascinating. I would have never thought to pack eggs!

I'm thinking a drafty gaited horse would be your best bet, samw11. The horse could be traveling at the speed of a fast trot, yet be smooth as a walking person, because it lacks that suspension in the air the trot has.

The friend I mentioned before, with the Tennessee Walker, his horses are all in the 16-17 hand range, and are doing amazingly well in Limited Distance rides (25-35 miles). Heck, I was riding next to him on a little arab at a canter, and his horse was still walking! Oh, and with tack, he weighs in close to the 300lb range--gaited horses can carry a bit more, because they lack that jarring, leg-stressing suspension. However, it would be more believable, if you just gave these characters two horses.

Think Pony Express. That short-lived but romantic episode in American history involved establishing relief posts at regular intervals so horses could be ridden fast and replaced as quickly as possible. I'd think the distances between those relief posts would be a good guide for what you might need. I don't happen to know what they were, but I'm sure gooooogle could be your friend.

caw

Three hundred pounds requires a horse of a thousand pounds to carry it comfortably. Horses regularly work with a third of their body weight. This was true for armored cavalry from ancient to modern times.

As others have noted, riding double, with someone HOLDING a baby - is going to be done at a walk over that distance. Sure, you might hang on for dear life and 'sprint out the gate' of the castle/city but you won't sustain that for any kind of distance. Once out of sight in the darkness it will be down to a walk.

Walking it will take appx seven to ten hours to cover that distance.


In terms of possible and 'notable' distances covered, there are historical references. For instance in Froissart's Chronicles, written in the late 1300's we have two references to horseback distance rides.

In the section titled 'royal visitation' - he describes an actual horse race between the King of France and his brother of Toruaine. They raced from Montpellier to Paris - a distance of four hundred and fifty miles. A few comments:

"Of course they made several changes of horses."

"The King took four and a half days to reach Paris, and the Duke only four and a third; They were as close as each other as that."

"The Ladies treated the whole things as a joke, but they did realise that it was a great feat of endurance, such as only the young in body and heart would have attempted."

And in the section titled "The Downfall of Richard II"

He writes of a messenger being sent off by the Archbishop from Plymouth to London, late in the evening.

"The man rode so fast, taking fresh horses in each town, that by the dawn the next day he reached London and clattered into it."

The straight line distance between Plymouth and London is 192 miles. So figure with twists and turns it was easily 200. That's a trained courier, riding at night, with changes of horses. And Froissart considered this a notable feet. So it's possible, but exceptional.

samw11 said:

it's 23rd/24th July 1567 (around midsummer), but in Scotland (they're trying to reach Stirling first)

Click to expand...

I guessed you meant Scotland, since they were trying to get to France. Lady-in-waiting, eh? Hmm, wonder who that baby might be