- Welcome to SoA Forum.
Recent posts
#1
Weapons and Tactics / Re: Infantry charging cavalry
Last post by Jim Webster - Today at 03:27 PMThe 1066 example is an interesting one. It looks as if the English thought that the Norman army was falling back in disarray and was on the edge of breaking, especially as people on both sides seem to have thought that William was dead.
It seems that William had to frantically gather troops for a counter attack to deal with the pursuers. It is one case where I wonder if the English had a cavalry force which they could have used for a pursuit whether, actually, it would have just pushed the Norman army over the edge
It seems that William had to frantically gather troops for a counter attack to deal with the pursuers. It is one case where I wonder if the English had a cavalry force which they could have used for a pursuit whether, actually, it would have just pushed the Norman army over the edge
#2
Shows & Events / Re: Colours, 5th September ‘26
Last post by Imperial Dave - Today at 02:38 PMWibble...
#3
Weapons and Tactics / Re: Infantry charging cavalry
Last post by Imperial Dave - Today at 02:38 PMThere are 1066 reasons to be careful
#4
Weapons and Tactics / Re: Infantry charging cavalry
Last post by Erpingham - Today at 01:38 PMIf we add in examples where infantry follow up what they think are broken cavalry who turn out just to be rallying back (or feigning flight - it may depend on how it is spun later) we can see why infantry really had to be well controlled and commanded to get these charges to work.
#5
Shows & Events / Colours, 5th September ‘26
Last post by Martin Smith - Today at 01:01 PMFor those attending Colours this year, it's worth a mention that Peter Pig are doing free collection at the show, and offering a 15% discount for pre-orders, code being COL26.
They have a wide variety of ranges, including some Greeks/Macedonians, Persians, Parthians, Midianites , NKE and Nubians as well as an updated Early Imperial Roman range.
They have a wide variety of ranges, including some Greeks/Macedonians, Persians, Parthians, Midianites , NKE and Nubians as well as an updated Early Imperial Roman range.
#6
Ancient and Medieval History / Re: Chaironeia reconstruction ...
Last post by Ian61 - Today at 12:29 PMI reviewed Nic's Jugurthine War book for Slingshot last year. I remember being quite positive about it. That said I am not well enough up on the Macedonians to volunteer for this one.
#7
Ancient and Medieval History / Re: Chaironeia reconstruction ...
Last post by Justin Swanton - Today at 10:19 AMThat illustration of the pike phalanx is exactly right. Has somebody read my book? I can't think of any other way phalangites could have presented their sarissas especially when in close order, keeping in mind the pike phalanx was a development of the hoplite phalanx and in the latter the spears were certainly presented overarm.
My take is that the hypaspists and agema at this time were equipped as hoplites. This was so they could manoeuvre to outflank the end of the enemy line as regular hoplites did by accident and Spartans did by design. This they did at Issus and - I think - Gaugamela facing the Greek mercenary hoplites in the centre. Pikemen cannot wheel once their pikes are lowered hence couldn't indulge in any fancy giftwrapping tactics (incidentally that would explain why the Persian scythed chariots targeted Alexander's "phalanx" - i.e the taxeis of the agema and hypaspists under his direct command - as they weren't equipped with pikes that would have stopped chariot horses dead in their tracks).
When the hypaspists and agema withdrew to the hill behind them they were doing something than only drilled infantry could do: fall back before an opponent that had engaged them whilst remaining in order. They had to fall back since the high ground gave the Athenians the advantage in an othismos push. Once the Macedonians reached their own high ground and resumed the othismos pressure, the Athenians folded since they weren't professionals like the Macedonians and couldn't yield ground in a disciplined way. For them being driven back equated being defeated and so they broke and ran. Philip had worked it all out nicely.
In Alexander's campaigns the hypaspists and agema were initially equipped as hoplites and later as pikemen when the need to outflank heavy infantry disappeared with the disappearance of a suitable heavy infantry opponent. The Successors equipped all their heavy infantry as pike to deal with pike-armed opponents that hoplites could not manage. More or less. No doubt there are exceptions.
As regards the cavalry charging the Sacred Band - they wouldn't have been the Companions since Philip had command of that unit on the right (no way he was in the front rank of the hypaspists fighting as an infantryman). They could have been the Sarissophoroi. In the pic they and the hoplites look pretty disorganised - and where are the rear ranks of the Sacred Band? Cavalry smashing through infantry was certainly a thing as we have discussed in earlier threads. But how exactly the Macedonian horse got through the Sacred Band is of course a topic of livelyinvective discussion.
I can't think of any other way phalangites could have presented their sarissas especially when in close order, keeping in mind the pike phalanx was a development of the hoplite phalanx and in the latter the spears were certainly presented overarm.My take is that the hypaspists and agema at this time were equipped as hoplites. This was so they could manoeuvre to outflank the end of the enemy line as regular hoplites did by accident and Spartans did by design. This they did at Issus and - I think - Gaugamela facing the Greek mercenary hoplites in the centre. Pikemen cannot wheel once their pikes are lowered hence couldn't indulge in any fancy giftwrapping tactics (incidentally that would explain why the Persian scythed chariots targeted Alexander's "phalanx" - i.e the taxeis of the agema and hypaspists under his direct command - as they weren't equipped with pikes that would have stopped chariot horses dead in their tracks).
When the hypaspists and agema withdrew to the hill behind them they were doing something than only drilled infantry could do: fall back before an opponent that had engaged them whilst remaining in order. They had to fall back since the high ground gave the Athenians the advantage in an othismos push. Once the Macedonians reached their own high ground and resumed the othismos pressure, the Athenians folded since they weren't professionals like the Macedonians and couldn't yield ground in a disciplined way. For them being driven back equated being defeated and so they broke and ran. Philip had worked it all out nicely.
In Alexander's campaigns the hypaspists and agema were initially equipped as hoplites and later as pikemen when the need to outflank heavy infantry disappeared with the disappearance of a suitable heavy infantry opponent. The Successors equipped all their heavy infantry as pike to deal with pike-armed opponents that hoplites could not manage. More or less. No doubt there are exceptions.
As regards the cavalry charging the Sacred Band - they wouldn't have been the Companions since Philip had command of that unit on the right (no way he was in the front rank of the hypaspists fighting as an infantryman). They could have been the Sarissophoroi. In the pic they and the hoplites look pretty disorganised - and where are the rear ranks of the Sacred Band? Cavalry smashing through infantry was certainly a thing as we have discussed in earlier threads. But how exactly the Macedonian horse got through the Sacred Band is of course a topic of lively
#8
Ancient and Medieval History / Re: Chaironeia reconstruction ...
Last post by skb777 - Today at 09:12 AMAs they are wearing cuirasses I'd say they aren't the Prodromoi or at least not meant to be.
#9
Weapons and Tactics / Re: Infantry charging cavalry
Last post by Jim Webster - Today at 07:17 AMQuote from: dwkay57 on Today at 07:10 AMI would guess it was fairly common for cavalry to evade charging infantry without any mishaps, what we appear to be reading are those recorded examples where something went wrong, for the other side of course.
I suppose it is a bit like a football highlights reel. All those shots over the bar and defensive midfield bits get missed and we just see shots on target.
I suspect that where infantry were faced with skirmishing horse archers etc who they knew they couldn't catch they just didn't charge. After all, when the charge inevitably fails, you're out in the open surrounded by horse archers.
I suspect there were very few charges like that.
#10
Weapons and Tactics / Re: Infantry charging cavalry
Last post by dwkay57 - Today at 07:10 AMI would guess it was fairly common for cavalry to evade charging infantry without any mishaps, what we appear to be reading are those recorded examples where something went wrong, for the other side of course.
I suppose it is a bit like a football highlights reel. All those shots over the bar and defensive midfield bits get missed and we just see shots on target.
I suppose it is a bit like a football highlights reel. All those shots over the bar and defensive midfield bits get missed and we just see shots on target.