Robert Lydiard (3:07)

Rob well, one of the things I think that the war horses of William's army enable him to do is that they provide mobility on the battlefield in a way that Harold's forces simply haven't got. The English army is drawn up in a static formation on the top of Senlac Hill and parts of the Norman army can move around the battlefield in a way that simply the English can't. And this has great tactical benefits. I mean, crucially, there is a point fairly early on in the battle where a rumour goes across the Norman army that William has been killed. And William then has to very quickly get amongst his forces and show that he is still alive and he's still fighting. And there's a wonderful scene in the Bayer Tapestry where William without his helmet, is riding amongst his troops with his standard going, look here, I'm alive. And so the horse allows him to get to where he needs to be in quick time. Equally, after this point in the battle, some of the English forces up on Senlac Hill think that they are winning and they probably charge down the hill. William has rallied his forces and then it's his cavalry that allow him to regroup, cut off those fleeing Englishmen, then cut them down. So really the possession of trained cavalry allow William to have tactical options and flexibility. And during the later stages of the battle, it's probably in combination with his archers that allow William's cavalry to actually be decisive. Again, the biotapestry shows archers moving up towards the English position, shooting their arrows high into the air. The English then being attacked by cavalry. So we shouldn't really be thinking about hell for leather charges. Rather more mobile, agile groups of cavalry that can operate tactically and flexibly. And the battle is a close run thing, but arguably it's horses that allow William to gain the edge.

Spencer Mizzen (5:17)

Were the Normans in any way pioneers when it came to deploying horsepower in warfare in the British Isles? Would the Anglo Saxons of use cavalry themselves? Would they have encountered it on the battlefield in the past before William arrived in 1066?

Oliver H. Crichton (5:35)

When we think of horsepower being used in military situations, I think it's important to underline that horses are used for a whole variety of purposes on the battlefield and in activities associated with conflict. They're used for reconnaissance, they're used for pursuing enemies, they're used for small scale skirmishes, for raids and so on. But when it comes down to, I guess what's the critical issue here is the role of the horse in combat. Combat. There's a huge difference between an army or a warrior riding to battle, the horse transporting the individual or the force to the field of conflict and riding into battle actually into combat.

Robert Lydiard (6:11)

But of course, the horse wasn't totally unfamiliar to the English, they encountered horsemen and cavalry when they were fighting the Welsh, for example. The English also used horses on campaigns, as Oliver has said, for transportation and getting warriors to the battlefield in the first place. But the key difference seems to be is that by the 11th century, the English were not trained to fight as cavalry in formation, as, for example, the Normans were. But we need to remember here that by the 11th century, English armies are used to fighting the Danes, and the Danes fight on foot as well. And one of the things that the Battle of Hastings tells us is that it's very difficult even for well trained cavalry to break steady infantry. And so for the English in the 11th century, fighting dismounted Danes and Vikings, there may not have been any tactical need for them to develop heavy cavalry, because it may not actually have worked. But as well as transporting warriors to battle, the horses may also have been used by English armies in the aftermath of battle for pursuing your defeated enemy. So, very famously, there is a poem in the Anglo Saxon Chronicle about the battle of Brunanburh in 937, where the English king Athelstan is taking on a coalition of Irish, Viking and Scottish armies. And it tells us of how, once the battle was won, the West Saxon mounted companies pursued the fugitives with blades cruelly whetted on grindstones, which is a wonderful kind of evocative sort of phrase. So while the Normans seemed to be doing something a bit different, of course, the English were well aware and used horses in warfare for their own very specific purposes.

Spencer Mizzen (8:04)

I want to step back a bit then, and look at the wider context behind this. When was cavalry first used in Northern Europe, and how long had this technology existed and where did it come from? Oliver, can I direct that one at you, please?

Oliver H. Crichton (8:18)

Of course, it's a great question. There's a very long history, very long ancestry, the successful use of cavalry and mounted forces on the battlefield and in combat. Way before the later Middle Ages, of course, the Romans have great expertise in cavalry warfare. But before I perhaps I go into the detail of an answer, I think we need to think fundamentally about what sort of advantages the horse gave a warrior on the field of combat. So absolutely central to the importance the military importance of the horse is its speed. The horse gives a warrior the speed to move in, to engage the enemy quickly, maybe to surprise them at the end of a set piece battle. It also would give the warrior, a military force, the speed to pursue an enemy. Of course, in medieval battles, where the majority of casualties are actually inflicted, but perhaps even more Importantly than that, the horse elevates the warrior above his foe. It allows the warrior to strike downwards at an enemy from above, to strike with great power. But psychologically, the fact the warrior is elevated above his enemies gives that individual great psychological advantage. And this is one of the great reasons that the medieval war horse becomes such an icon of the period. Many, many cultures and societies in early medieval Europe used horses in warfare in one way or another, from nomadic people such as the Avars and the Magyars through to the Moors in Iberia. An absolutely crucial innovation in all this is the stirrup. A stirrup allowed a warrior to stand up in the saddle. And as far as we know, certainly from archaeological evidence, stirrups are brought to Europe by Turkic speaking steppe people called the Av, and they're imported from the east, probably ultimately from China in the 6th century, and then adopted much more widely, especially by the Vikings. So in Britain, it's in the second Viking Age, really from the mid 10th century, that we first see stirrups used. So the stirrups are just crucial for the military roles of horses in warfare.

Spencer Mizzen (10:20)

Okay, so we've talked about the advantages that horses and cavalry provided in individual battles, but what about in warfare more generally? How did horses change the nature of warfare in, say, the 12th, 13th and 14th century? Did they, for example, enable campaigns of conquest to be conducted in higher speed and over faster swathes of territory?

Oliver H. Crichton (10:47)

I think there are two really important dimensions to the answer there. One is that we see the use of heavier and heavier cavalry through the Middle ages. Through the 12th, 13th and 14th centuries, we see war horses becoming increasingly armoured, heavily armoured, first of all with mail and then with plates. So on the one hand, cavalry becomes heavier, but on the other hand, as we move through the Middle Ages, a great variety of different horse types are used, especially in the 13th century. Edward I's Scottish campaigns see the first appearance in English armies of what are called hobblers, sometimes known as hobby horses. Now, these are a really specialist type of light cavalry horses. They're small, more agile mounts, very well suited to rapid, to destructive raids, as well as patrolling and scouting. So we see heavier cavalry, but also a great variety of other types of horses used on the field of combat and in other military operations.

Spencer Mizzen (11:40)

And Rob, do you have anything to add to that?

Robert Lydiard (11:42)

Yes, I really wanted to do this whole podcast without saying it's horses for courses, but I find myself saying this now, or rather horses for coursers. Because in the 14th century, we really see the rise of a particular type of animal called a Courser, which is still a sort of heavy mount, but it's one for endurance rather than sort of sheer power, if you like. And these come to the fore in the Hundred Years War exactly for the type of campaigns that the English armies increasingly want to prosecute in France. So famously, John of Cornt in 1373 conducts a chevaucher. This is a mounted long distance raid and he goes from Calais to Bordeaux across France. This takes sort of four months, it's about 900 miles. And for this of course, you do not need a powerful D armored animal. What you need is a lighter, swifter kind of horse. And these are increasingly the sort of horses that you see English armies taking on campaign with them.

Spencer Mizzen (12:46)

Another iconic battle you cover in your feature is Bannockburn, and obviously the famous defeat of English King Edward II's heavy cavalry by the famous Scottish Skilltron under the leadership of Robert the Bruce. Now had the Schiltron, which these were formations of pike armed foot soldiers. Had that been developed specifically to counter cavalry charges? And if so, to what extent did it puncture this sort of air of supremacy that surrounded heavy cavalry at the time?

Oliver H. Crichton (13:21)

So Schiltrons, although they're famously used by Scottish commanders against the English, the word actually derives from the old English for shield, troop. The important thing is a schiltron. It's a tight clustering of warriors, sometimes in a circular formation, sometimes in a rectangular formation. It's basically a hedge like phalanx of spears, in many ways almost harking back to ancient Greek military formations very much it's a tactic, it's used by Scottish commanders to negate English cavalry power at Bannockburn. I mean, that tactic is used very specifically as an anti cavalry device. But it's also quite interesting to note that the site of the battle is effectively chosen by the Scots forces, again to negate the power of English cavalry. It's an area in that period, very broken terrain, very waterlogged. It was a period of climatic deterioration. So it was an awful, awful landscape for cavalry warfare from the English perspective. And the Scots also deployed anti cavalry traps, pits, probably with spikes of some sort set within them to try and deny the terrain to the English cavalry.

Robert Lydiard (14:34)

Bannockburn stands as a reminder that it's a myth that cavalry in the mounted knight in the Middle Ages will sweep all before it on the battlefield. And if we take Edward II's defeat at Bannockburn, if we look at what his father had done, for example, at the the Battle of Falkirk, when presented with these Scottish chilterns, again he'd used a kind of combined arms approach. He'd used his archers, he'd used crossbowmen, possibly slingers, in order to kind of thin down the Scottish ranks before the cavalry can actually charge in. It was perhaps unfortunate for Edward II and the English commanders that they didn't use the experience that their immediate predecessors had used.

Shopify Advertiser (15:21)

It's that time of year again. Everyone knows that the holidays can become overwhelming quickly, so the sooner you get things done, the better. For both shoppers and businesses, the best time to score great deals during the holidays is Black Friday Cyber Monday Weekend. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world, from household names to entrepreneurs who are participating in their first Black Friday Cyber Monday this year. This Black Friday join thousands of new entrepreneurs hearing for the first time with Shopify. Sign up for your free trial today@shopify.com promo that's shopify.com promo go to shopify.com promo and make this black Friday one.

Home Depot Advertiser (16:02)

To remember, black Friday Savings are here at the Home Depot, which means it's time to add new cordless power to your collection. Right now, when you buy a select battery kit from one of our top brands like Ryobi or Milwaukee, you'll get a select tool from that same brand for free. Click into one of our best deals of the season and stock up on tools for all your upcoming projects. Get Black Friday Savings happening now at the Home Depot. Limit one per transaction exclusion supply full eligible tool list in store and online.

Coca Cola Advertiser (16:33)

Toast the holidays in a new way and raise a glass of Rumchata, a delicious creamy blend of horchata with rum. Enjoy it over ice or in your coffee. Rumchata. Your holiday cocktails just got sweeter. Tap or click the banner for more Drink Responsibly. Caribbean rum with real dairy cream, natural and artificial flavors. Alcohol 13.75% by volume 27.5 proof. Copyright 2025 Agave Loco Brands, Pojoae, Wisconsin. All rights reserved.

Spencer Mizzen (17:02)

You also make quite an interesting observation in that section of the feature. You write that these were elite steeds, expensively bred and trained in a royal stud network. How much time, money and manpower generally did medieval nation states sort of invest in churning out high quality warhorses?

Robert Lydiard (17:24)

What I can't underestimate here is the amount of time, money and effort that goes into producing these animals. It is absolutely extraordinary. The English Crown, for example, has a network of about a dozen horse studs across the kingdom which are almost devoted to producing war horses. And we know quite a lot about the the sort of life course of one of these animals. They were weaned in the stud about the age of. Of one, and then certainly in the south of England, they were then taken to dedicated cult parks where you've got sort of teenagers equivalent, you've got teenage war horses roaming around by themselves. And that's where their initial sort of training was undertaken and Jud made about their suitability. Then, at about the age of three, they begin their training proper and actually they are taken and they are placed within a group of trained war horses that itinerate around the kingdom, where they kind of learn their future trade. That's where they become war horses proper. And then from there they go into the royal household proper. And the largest department in the royal household is the Marshalsea. That's the place where the horses are looked after. All of this requires a great deal of money. You're talking hundreds and thousands of pounds, cumulatively. Royal keepers of horse often end their yearly accounts in deficit. And in terms of time, you could be talking about seven years, five to seven years from birth to actually being a sort of functioning, if you like, war horse. You talk to anyone who breeds horses now and trains horses, they always go on about how expensive it is. I can assure you it is absolutely the same in the Middle ages. And in 1360, Edward III, after the treaty of Brettony, which is a major landmark in the Hundred Years War, actually closes down that stud network, in part because it is so expensive, which really underlines just what an investment medieval kings make in their animals.

Oliver H. Crichton (19:32)

Yeah, Something I think is absolutely crystal clear from the documentation. The quite extensive documentation that survives from these royal studs for certain periods is quite how pampered the horses were. The documents are full of references to infrastructure, to things like salt licks. Horses have their own type of bread, horse bread, expensive bedding, even medical care. That's a level far above afforded to most ordinary people in the Middle Ages.

Spencer Mizzen (19:58)

So it was a hugely expensive undertaking to produce elite war horses. How onerous a task was it to supply, feed and care for these animals while you're out on campaign?

Robert Lydiard (20:13)

It's very difficult often. And the logistic train that is put into operation to keep mounted armies in the field really is quite extraordinary. One of the things that English kings regularly do in order to supply their horses during campaign is undertake what is called purveyance. And this is a situation where royal officials will buy up foodstuffs not at market rate, but at the rate that they are prepared to pay. And the poor person who gets their grain compulsory purchased, then has to try and get the money back later on. So purveyance is deeply resented amongst the people who have to pay it. But this is one of the ways in which the requisite supplies can be brought together. And one of the things that always surprises me, even as a medieval historian, is the amount of effort they will go to to make sure that these animals get the foodstuffs that they need. And you're often talking here about cartload of hay, grain, fodder and so forth, being brought literally miles to supply depots, campaign sites where the armies are in order to keep the King's war horses adequately fed and looked after.

Oliver H. Crichton (21:25)

A fascinating archaeological insight into the medical care that's afforded to horses and war horses, specifically things called orthopaedic horseshoes. These are sometimes found by metal detectorists and they're horseshoes that have an iron plate attached to them for a horse with a damaged hoof, with an iron plate that protects the sensitive underside of the hoof, an area called the frog. So these turn up, recovered and recorded by metal detectorists all the time, giving insight into the incredible medical care that's afforded to horses.

Spencer Mizzen (21:57)

So as horses become ever more important on the battlefield, do they kind of take on a greater cultural status in medieval societies? Do you find that they're celebrated to a greater extent as the Middle Ages progress in poetry, song and art?

Oliver H. Crichton (22:12)

Absolutely. Horses permeate medieval culture in many, many different ways. One very good example is medieval visual culture. We see representations of horses and war horses, for example, in wall paintings, in churches we see horses. In sculpture, we see horses for a certain period appear very, very prominently in funerary monuments, on the tombs of the wealthy and the famous, of great warriors. We see them on things called aquamanilia. These are devices that held water for washing hands at the table, maybe also sometimes containing oil. These are very, very frequently found in the shape of armoured war horses. Livery badges. These are badges that celebrate the identity of wealthy, powerful families. These are sometimes also in the form of war horses. Perhaps the greatest example is the celebration of horses in Romance literature. This is something we see very prominently from the 12th century onwards. It's a genre that highlights the very central importance of the horse in knightly identity. Horses and their owners have incredibly close symbiotic relationships. In Romance literature, horses were named in many, many cases. The names sometimes reflect that their colours, even their personalities, their abilities, even sometimes their places of origin. Horses are sometimes thought to actually select their own. Horses in Romance literature are sometimes depicted crying upon the deaths of their owners and riders. And if I could just add a particularly instructive case, it's one of the most famous pieces of medieval French literature, the Chanson de Roland, the Song of Roland. So this is an epic poem, probably of the 11th century, which recounts the last battle and the death of Charlemagne's nephew Roland, while fighting the Saracens at this climactic battle. And in this battle, the names of the various horses are clearly related to the personalities of their riders. So Roland's horse, for example, which is described as a very good, a very fast destrier, is called Villantief, which certainly refers to the courage and the vigilance both of the horse, but also the personality and the skills of its rider.

Robert Lydiard (24:33)

And I think one of the great strengths of the Romance literature is that it shows you the ideals to which perhaps medieval horse breeders were aspiring. So the horses that often appear in these romances, they're sort of ideal fantasy horses. They are the swiftest, they are the bravest and so forth. And it always strikes me that in terms of the reality, if there were any horses out there that met those high expectations, you can see why they were often bought and sold for very high prices, because they would have been very rare animals indeed.

Spencer Mizzen (25:06)

And they've also very much been associated with, with the rise of the knightly class in medieval Europe, haven't they? Was having a powerful, expensive steed the medieval equivalent of, say, driving a Range rover in the 21st century?

Robert Lydiard (25:22)

You could put it like that, yes. I mean, undoubtedly, well bred horses, they are status symbols and they are routinely given as gifts between monarchs. Barons give their kings horses as gifts equally. Kings reward their followers with horses as well. And in part this great value stems from the breeding and the training that the animals have been given. But in the same way as you shouldn't be driving your Range Rover to the supermarket. I know people do, but that's a different story. If you've got a highly trained prized warhorse, you're not riding that on a day to day level. They seem to be reserved for very special occasions where the king wants to impress. And that might also include the battlefield, but we're thinking jousting, other ceremonial events as well, funerals as well. The war horses will be sort of taken out for these as well. So we shouldn't necessarily think that a medieval king is riding around on his prized war horse the whole time. Probably on lots of occasions you would have seen him on a fine riding horse. But as status symbols, yes, you could say they are perhaps in some ways the Range Rovers of their day, Lamborghinis, I'd say.

Oliver H. Crichton (26:36)

But just to add, I mean, to perhaps one of the nicest ways of illustrating the incredible social cachet of the medieval war horses, to give some ballpark figures for how much the things actually cost. So by the 14th century, you've got a very clear idea of how much horses cost. So right at the top of the horsey hierarchy is the destrier. This is the elite warhorse destriers cost in that period, typically between 25, 30, maybe up to 50 pounds. The most expensive horse that we've found a reference to is a horse that was worth £200. It's an absolutely incredible size sum.

Spencer Mizzen (27:11)

How much roughly would that be worth in modern terms? Is it possible to put a figure on that?

Oliver H. Crichton (27:16)

It's a difficult thing to say. I mean, perhaps the best way of illustrating it, a pack horse, by comparison, costs about 5 to 10 shillings. And I appreciate it's quite difficult. You know, those, those are medieval figures. People wonder, you know, what on earth does that mean today? I mean, by comparison. So a destrier could be worth 160 and 200 times more than a pack horse. To give it some context, the cost of edestria is about 6, 8 years, the wages of a skilled labourer and an entire lifetime's work for an unskilled labourer.

Spencer Mizzen (27:48)

So how did the arrival of gunpowder weapons affect the role of horses on the battlefields in the Middle Ages?

Oliver H. Crichton (27:57)

Yeah, perhaps I can make a comparison here to one of the other great icons in the Middle Ages, the castle. People often think that gunpowder artillery resulted in the decline of the castle. Likewise, people often assume that firearms made cavalry redundant. Of course, neither of them is quite true. Neither became obsolete overnight as a result of gunpowder weaponry.

Robert Lydiard (28:21)

Of course, one of the things we need to remember is that armies do not stop using cavalry or heavy horse at the end of the Middle Ages. And you will find wonderful examples of cavalry charges on the battlefield long after the Middle Ages has seen. So I'm thinking the Battle of Blenheim, the Battle of Omdurman, and indeed, cavalry was still being used effectively in some quarters in the Second World War. We just need to be a bit careful of assuming that the advent of gunpowder weapons means the decline of cavalry per se. Of course, what the development of firearms does do is that it means that a relatively untrained foot soldier with a firearm can take down even a mounted knight. And so almost it's. The social effects of this are arguably perhaps a little bit more significant than the purely military Ones, if I could.

Oliver H. Crichton (29:13)

Just add something that's very, very clear in an English context here, is that by the time of the 16th century, when we certainly see war horses, their use in decline in military situations, by comparison, the role of horses in the tournament is taken to a completely new level. So although they're increasingly becoming militarily less effective on the tournament ground, they become very, very widely used. It's a period when we see new tournament facilities. Tilt yards. He VIII famously builds bespoke tilt yards for grand courtly tournament rituals at some of his main palaces. And this is at a time when the actual military use of these beasts is somewhat in decline.

Spencer Mizzen (29:56)

I wonder if we can now talk about our third world famous medieval battle, which is the Battle of Bosworth. Now the evidence, as you write in your feature, seems to point to Richard III being cut down after attempting a cavalry charge at Henry Tudor. So you make an interesting point related to this. You say that previous battles in the wars of the Roses had seen little in the way of cavalry action. So why was that? Why was cavalry no longer regarded as a war winning weapon in the context of the wars of the Roses?

Oliver H. Crichton (30:34)

I think one of the main reasons is that in the principal clashes of the wars of the Roses, both the opposed sides have more or less the same army composition. They both have a lot of archers. Horses aren't used to any great effect. I think what's really, really interesting is that leaders typically choose to fight on foot alongside their men. Leaders dismount from their horses to fight it out on foot in these absolutely brutal slugfests. And a really good example is the Battle of Towton in Yorkshire, usually held to be the bloodiest battle of the entire Middle Ages in Britain, where the leaders are fighting on foot alongside their men at arms, completely dismounted.

Robert Lydiard (31:17)

One of the very interesting things about Bosworth is in a way it takes us back to Hastings at the start of the Middle Ages, that other famous battle in English history where we talk about mobility and speed and giving options. It may well be at Bosworth that Richard III sees Henry Tud and spots his opportunity and thinks, right, I can go for him. I can finish this now in one sort of fell swoop. That may be what influences him to do this charge, which as Oliver says, is really quite unusual. He wants to give the death blow to that battle in one fell swoop. As it happens, as we know, it doesn't quite go according to plan.

Spencer Mizzen (31:57)

Now, finally, where better to end the podcast than with Henry viii? We've talked about tournaments and jousting earlier in the interview, and they're obviously very important to. But you argue that Henry's inability to stay on a horse in one of these jousts could be a major reason for him becoming an unpredictable and despotic tyrant towards the end of his reign. I wonder if you could elaborate on that a little bit, please.

Robert Lydiard (32:24)

Yes, of course. Well, this is one of the open questions that historians of the Tudor period of Henry VIII's reign discuss, which is how and why did this person seemingly become such a despot? And yes, one of the things that has been put forward by historians is that this jousting accident may have been one of the factors which may have led to a sea change in the King's personality. Certainly what it seemed to do is to open up an existing wound on his leg and that subsequently, it seems, never healed properly. It caused the King a lot of discomfort, it smelled bad, which you can only kind of imagine. And certainly he never goes jousting again. And as a younger man, of course, Henry was a very keen jouster. And you do kind of wonder he can no longer participate in his favourite sport. Does this lead him to be one of the steps on the way to him becoming a tyrant? In arguing against that, you can say 1536, when it happened, was a big year. Anyway, you've got Anne Boleyn being tried and executed. You've got a major rebellion in the north of England known as the Pilgrimage of Grace. So we shouldn't just necessarily focus down on this one accident. And the other thing we would perhaps say is that if you're looking for evidence for Henry VIII being a bit of a despot before this accident, you will certainly find it as well. You could cite, for example, Thomas More, his former friend, who was attained and executed. Edward Stafford, the third Duke of Buckingham, the the same. But nonetheless, it might be that his inability to stay on a horse did have some wider ramifications for his. For his later reign.

Spencer Mizzen (34:00)

And is it possible that Anne Boleyn miscarried due to the stress caused by Henry's injury?

Robert Lydiard (34:07)

That is one of the arguments that is put forward at the time. Now or not, we put much faith in that is open to question. Certainly she miscarried, there's no doubt about that. But of course, in the febrile Tudor court and the importance of Henry VIII having an heir, it's the sort of terrible event that then has becomes the source of political rumour, intrigue and so forth. But it is certainly what some people are saying at the time. Yes, sure.

Spencer Mizzen (34:40)

And Oliver do you have anything to add?

Robert Lydiard (34:41)

Yeah.

Oliver H. Crichton (34:42)

I could provide a little bit of insight from some archaeological evidence. As part of the project that we've carried out called the War Horse Project, which looked at archaeological evidence as well as historical evidence for war horses across the whole of the medieval period. We examined a lot of horse armour and we examined particular pieces of armour, specifically things called chaperons. These are the defences that covered the front of a horse's head. And we measured and analyzed in incredible detail many, many of these in collections around the world, well over 100 of them, them. And I can report that the biggest we found was related to one of Henry VIII's horses. He's clearly a man who had a fascination with big horses, which helped project his incredible personality.

Podcast Host / Narrator (35:23)

That was Robert Lydiard and Oliver H Crichton speaking to Spencer Mizzen. Robert is professor of History at the University of East Anglia and Oliver is professor of Archaeology at the University of of Exeter. They're the editors of Medieval Warhorse, Equestrian Landscapes, Material Culture and Zoo archaeology in Britain, AD 800 to 1550. And that's out now. Published by Liverpool University Press.

Home Depot Advertiser (36:01)

My place in tech changes every day, but I don't fear the future because I'm with the Leader Plural site. Their online learning platform has the hands on expert led courses I need to master new tech skills and create bigger impact so I can learn quickly and stay ahead. With pluralsight, I don't fear what's next, I embrace it. Tap in@pluralsight.com and see for yourself.