From: Svechin@cs.com
Date: Sun 02 Apr 2000 - 22:10:47 EEST
Jose (great post BTW)
> Let's not forget that the battles between byzantines and Norman's in
>Italy were determinant in the latter adoption of the couched lance (with
>other influences thrown in). And it is indeed true that the Norman charge
>had a heavier impact than the 10th century Byzantine...
Yes, this is the case. The 10th century Kataphractoi attacked at the trot,
in wedge, with very few lancers in the formation, mostly with maces and a
significant body of horse archers. In effect the tactical deployment of the
formation was more of a direct assault attritional tool than a shock weapon.
Only operationally could it be counted as a shock formation. The Norman's on
the other hand were a shock tactical body.
> So, do the partially persian Carmanians value the bow (as the persians
>did) or not?
The dualism of the Carmanian faith is somewhat Persian, but this is a product
of their integration of Pelandan and Spolite culture into their own as well
as a rejection of the Malkioni "god learnerish" faith they escaped from in
their long journey. However, the military side of the Carmanian heritage is
best though of by using the Crusader states analogy. They maintain their
ways of combat but are influenced by the cultures they contact.
Further, the Carmanians have had the following influences:
(1). Barbarians in Fronela, Brolia, Eol etc gave them a tough time when
fighting in rough terrain, they have learnt to value a good loose order
infantry. Thus, they use Bisosae highlanders, Arrir hillmen and a host of
other lighter, more versatile troops
(2). Mariners - Constant fighting with the Bindle and Sweet sea
(3). Heavy infantry - the Pelandans showed that a solid heavy infantry can
(4). Horse archers, light cavalry. The conflict with the Pentans during the
(5). Heavy knights. During the campaigns of the Nadar the Avenger, the
confederations, the Blue people and the river pirates has given them an
understanding of the value of naval power (as an adjutant to land power, not
as a Mahan-like concept of power projection in its own right, or course).
Note that Dolbury was a major center of naval power and was very central for
access control.
withstand the contact of shock cavalry. This was somewhat new to the
Carmanians and must have come as a surprise initially. They would have had
to adapt their tactical body to cope with this, replying more on flanking
attacks _after_ disruptive missile and melee combat weakened the enemy
formation. Further fighting with Dara Happa would have honed this skill over
hundred of years. They would have also used the hoplite as a solid infantry
core of their army.
height of their rule of Peloria and the following long struggle with the
Char-un, which still simmers occasionally, has led to the Carmanians
developing strong tactics for dealing with horse archers. Their main
teaching is to maintain order among the formation and used ranged weapons to
frustrate the horse archers into range of a decisive charge. Crossbows are
popular for this but the most popular form of mercenary for this kind of work
was the Rathori longbowman, who often get recruited in large numbers for wars
against the nomads.
Carmanians were exposed to the developed Fronelan knight and re-integrated
some of the tactics that were being learnt in the West. It was during this
time that the Carmanian use of combined arms, infantry, cavalry and light
forces, gave them ten years of campaign victories in Fronela. No-one could
stand against them.
(6). Lunar forces. The Lunars were masters of inclusion and developed a
powerful combined arms army under Tarnils. At the time of his victories, the
series of Carmanian triumphs over the years had reduced their reliance on the
combined arms army and instead they had begun to applaud the knight above all
others, once more. This was a costly mistake because the more flexible and
innovative Lunar army drove their previously victorious armies from Peloria
in a few short years. Since that time, many Carmanians have converted to the
Lunar way and the value of combined arms is again and important debating
point.
> I proposed in the past that the classical Carmanians were of the close
>order, grinding melee cavalry (following the dark side, with light cavalry,
>using bows, representing the light side), while the new lunarized
>Carmanians, embracing the opposites, use both the bow and the lance.
I think some Carmanians might use the bow, but it is not a weapon they
consider "manly". They are in love with the charge. It is their defining
military moment to be part of the charge. The use of the bow is too
considered for them. I think that their combined arms thinking does exist
but it is at a level higher than the individual, rather it is at the unit
level.
> I remember some convention where the Carmanian knight with bow
>astonished the gathered Malkioni knights. And a good thing it is, in my
>opinion.
Yes, the Carmanian knighhood may be conservative by Lunar standards, but
compared to its Western brethren it is cosmopolitan in the extreme. Their
assumptions about what is militarily expedient would shock the Western knight
as being unholy and outlandish.
Martin Laurie
------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 21:14:18 EEST