Greek Phalanx

During the era in history when Ancient Greece was at the height of power, great armies came in many cultures but one dominant formation: the phalanx.

File:Greek Phalanx.jpgAvailable under the wikipedia Greek Phalanx article.

The word phalanx comes from the ancient Greek word for ‘finger.’ And in Greece, the fighters in a phalanx were hoplites.  These warriors were the citizens of the city.  They provided their own weapons and armor and came together for the defense of the city state.  They were armed with spears, short swords, bronze body armor, a helmet and greaves as well as a round ‘hoplon’ (shield) which gave them their name.

This is a formation in which men march in close quarters.  They leave no gaps between rows, and the front ranks hold spears pointed at the enemy.  Because of the way that a phalanx works, the initial arrangement of the formation decided the direction (and sometimes the outcome of the battle) of the phalanx.  They were not very maneuverable and had little way of being directed to move any way but forward.

The strength of a phalanx depended on the discipline, strength, and endurance of the men of which it was composed.  The purpose was a contest of these things as two phalanxes would close together in a kind of brutal pushing war.

During the rise of the Macedonian Empire, Philip II and Alexander the Great modified the phalanx by employing an army of professional soldiers and equipping them with more standardized weapons and armor and significantly longer spears.  These men were much better trained, and their phalanxes were capable of more complex maneuvers.

Heavy Cavalry: An Introduction

During the late years of the Roman Empire, the two halves of the Empire were split and essentially ruled by different leaders.  While the western part dealt with Visigoths and other incursions into the northern border, the eastern half dealt with constant fighting with the Persians.  Between the 500s A.D. and the 700s, much of the fighting between the Persians and the Byzantines was done from horseback.  And the armor of the cavalry on both sides became more and more similar over time, coming to look something like this artistic piece:

Image courtesy of http://jpchapleau.blogspot.com/2011/10/easily-oldest-of-states-of-exodus-is.html

The armaments of a Byzantine Cataphract, (a name given to the heavy cavalry, literally meaning “armored” from the Greek, Kataphraktos) would include some or all of the following: two bows, a lance, a spear, a sword, a mace, an axe, a sling, full plate armor, full barding armor and in some cases a banner.  Because of the wide variety of their armaments, these warriors likely spent much of each year training in the use of each of their weapons.   They were the elite fighting force of their time.

The horsemanship of each man was as important as his familiarity with his weapons.  The Cataphracts rode in units and were capable of intricate movements to gain advantages on the field, and this was only possible because of expert horsemanship.

The advantage gained by this kind of a fighting force is that the riders could ride in deep (8-10 deep) ranks and punch through an entire rank of enemy infantry without losing all momentum.  They were as much a weapon of fear as an effective fighting force.  This tactic was emulated through history up to and even slightly beyond the development of gunpowder weapons.

Part of what allowed the extensive use of heavy cavalry was a decision made by Heraclius, Emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire from 610-641 A.D., who ordered that soldiers of Byzantium would be assigned a parcel of land in reward for their service.  Because land is very necessary for maintaining horses, this allowed many more of his men to keep and train horses for battle.

Scottish Claymores

What they are:

A claymore is a two handed Scottish great sword.  The origin of the name claymore comes from the Gaelic words ‘claidheamh mòr’ meaning ‘great sword.’

What they look like: Claymores have a long two handed hilt made with a spiral carved wooden handle covering the full tang with a cross guard angled toward the blade.  The intention behind this may have been to catch an enemy’s blade behind the crossguard providing an opportunity to kill or disarm him.  The crossguard of a claymore traditionally ends with a quatrefoil on each side, and the blade is traditionally between four-and-a-half and five feet long.  It includes a blunt section known as a ricasso.  This would sometimes be wrapped in leather, enabling the wielder to use it as a leverage point if his opponent managed to come to close grips with him.  Thus the sword would be agile enough to allow a contest even at very close quarters in spite of the blade’s great size and weight.claymore.jpeg

This is a stainless steel replica of a claymore from Scotland.  In all respects except materials, it closely resembles a historic piece which survived. Image is courtesy of http://www.sears.com/irc-claymore-sword-52inch-overall-red-handle/p-SPM7317624313?prdNo=1&blockNo=1&blockType=G1

 

How they were used: these great swords were used for close quarters combat but also gave some reach to the swordsman potentially allowing him to strike at his adversary before he himself was at risk of counter attack.

Scottish highlanders likely used claymores against the british and in border wars with other Scottish tribes as a weapon of intimidation because of the weight of the weapon and length of the blade.  This presented some difficulty when fighting in close ranks because the weapon seemed to be less about control and more about intimidation.

History of the claymore: the first claymores likely appeared in the late 1300s and were used up until the 1700s.

They were likely used by William Wallace and his men, however Wallace seems to have carried a custom sword that does not fit the exact qualifications of a claymore.  Despite this, it is likely that both claymores and highlanders were brought fame because of the campaigns fought by the Scottish against British oppression following the lead of William Wallace.

 

Saddles and Stirrups, Intro to Cavalry

While the time of the development of saddles and stirrups is difficult to pin down, art and other more permanent depictions of the two suggest that they may have been seen together somewhat commonly starting in the early 500’s B.C.  The idea for each piece may have existed hundreds of years earlier, but the idea became readily available to most cultures starting in this era.

horse-176990_640

image courtesy of: http://pixabay.com/en/horse-western-saddle-pomel-horn-176990/

It is difficult to describe the importance of horsemanship in early warfare without specifically addressing the advantages gained by particular civilizations because of their use of horses in their armies.  However, there is a useful comparison to make which illustrates how stirrups and saddles provided advantages to early horsemen.

Riding a horse in itself could provide some advantage to a warrior because arriving on the field of battle, he would be less exhausted from the journey.With a good saddle, it is easier to stay on a horse, which provides an even greater advantage in this respect.

Another aspect of advantage occurs after a battle or during a tactical part of a battle.  Horses allow for quicker movement on the field, so a group of riders could take advantage of a tactical situation which allowed them to divide and confuse the enemy (much like Alexander the Great).

Stirrups provide a greater advantage during the battle; they allow warriors on horseback to put more power into the strokes of their weapons, or to rely on the speed and weight of their horses to drive a spear or lance further into a crowd of enemies.  The critical advantage provided is that it is much more difficult to unhorse a rider who has stirrups.