Comments by "Voryn Rosethorn" (@vorynrosethorn903) on "Modern History TV" channel.

Meanwhile in western Russia winter travel was preferable as the swamps, streams and mud froze over, indeed armies campaigned in the winter, which was not the accepted practice in many other places, shows how bad the conditions for travel was when winters of such severity were preferred.
25
One thing to note is that the highlands would have had a much higher population density than now and within your clan territory or that of allied clans you would probably be be a guest in someone's house for the night. Indeed this is what most people did historically and why concepts like guest right were seen as sacred. Everyone who travelled (so most people (or men at least in societies without strong traditions of pilgrimage) at one point or another) relied on the social norms of hospitality, so it was important that the standards around that be actively maintained for the common good.
17
Mule trader was a polite way of saying slave trader, that emperor actually made his wealth off of slavery.
2
Modern horses have been bred for an easy temperament, warhorses weren't, many of the things tried here would have resulted in considerable biting and kicking if tried against a historic knights horse. Also horses will charge a dense formation if they are well trained, or have a bad temper, especially if they have the experience to know humans are squishy. And in when in a dense formation themselves they will be pushed in a surge by the other horses and so will have no choice but to ride over so long as the riders are all reckless. In the Napoleonic wars many horses were of agricultural background and the riders were soldiers rather than horsemen, as a result cavalry was a bit of a glass cannon, though light horsemen were often pretty good they performed a different type of war, heavy cavalry became all about reserves. A knight would have been terrifying and remained so for a long time, in the Russian civil war the Cossacks repeatedly decimated large red army formations which ventured onto open ground with sword and lance, these were the lightest of light cavalry in historical understanding. Without considerable training and organisation the infantryman was in a rather unfortunate position, he was very useful as a soldier but the outcome of battle would likely not fall to him, and the consequences of loss were much more severe as he probably couldn't outrun a horse.
1
Norman swords often jutted out of a hole in their chainmail so the scabard could be worn underneath, on a horse that wouldn't have worked at that angle given the cut of the mail. From the practice of later horsemen I would speculate that it is likely that they were carried close to straight down, at only a slight angle from the leg itself. Though the western horsemen of the 18th and 19th century didn't carry them that way so who knows, but it is sensible if it it is bouncing off your leg rather than your horse, it should also been noted that the cavalry of later periods tended to be extremely variable in quality due to (generally) being trained into in from recruitment rather than born into it as an estate (meaning that they were not trained in horsemanship from early childhood and institutional knowledge could be and was lost, with many of the problems the British cavalry had in the Napoleonic wars not existing a century before in many of the very same units).
1