Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Your best medieval army?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>
Author
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109
  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Your best medieval army?
    Posted: 15-Oct-2008 at 15:31
Cool I'm not in ARMA (proir commitment) but I am on the forum


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
Gothic-Knight View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 14-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote Gothic-Knight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Oct-2008 at 08:38
Well I will get to my Army soon.  Can we have some artillery or other siege weapons?   Or is this just simply troops vs troops type of thing?   
Back to Top
Goblin Monkey View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 11-Oct-2008
Location: Little Rock, AR
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 122
  Quote Goblin Monkey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Oct-2008 at 14:16
Cool thread bye the way.Alright first I would like to have a front line of about 2500 haleberders.Then 3000 foot soldiers armed with your basic chain mail and a long sword.Then I would have about 1000 cavalry behind them.Behind them I would have about 1000 of my more Elite Knights.Then my back line of 2499 archers.Finnaley my Genral (hes scared so he hides in back)


Is it just me or did your mom just wink at me?
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109
  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Oct-2008 at 00:01
Actually its a good thing for a general to be at the back if he's in the thick of things he can't give orders.


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Nov-2009 at 11:18
If it were say 10,000 versus 10,000 and before the common use of firearms then I would have to go with Catalans and Navarrese knights mounted and unmounted! IE, the Catalan Company and the Navaresse Company!

They fought the best of the Frankish / German / Italian / Ottonish knights of their day and soundly defeated them all!
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
Arakano View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 05-Mar-2010
Location: Hamburg/Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4
  Quote Arakano Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Mar-2010 at 07:15
I would like to bring up and chose, for myself, the Hussites in their wain-castles, mobile fortresses ready for every battlefield... they defeated European armies from many countries again and again, and mainly failed due to infighting in the end. ;)

Horsearchers, while fearsome, are overrated IMO. Those that claim that "horsearchers at XY were only defeated due to terrain" fail to appreciate that you cannot always have your favourite terrain to fight on. If the Mongols had intended to conquer Europe, for example, they could not have just fought battles on open plains without rivers, trees or hills on them. Simply not enough of that available.
Back to Top
Deano97 View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 03-Mar-2010
Location: Little Rock, Ar
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13
  Quote Deano97 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2010 at 17:46
I would say about 5000 archers 4000 cavalry and 1000 footmen.Pepper them w/ archers, smash them w/ cavalry and mop them up with the infantry!
I fart in your general direction!Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of Elderberries!
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2010 at 19:06
Originally posted by Arakano

I would like to bring up and chose, for myself, the Hussites in their wain-castles, mobile fortresses ready for every battlefield... they defeated European armies from many countries again and again, and mainly failed due to infighting in the end. ;) Horsearchers, while fearsome, are overrated IMO. Those that claim that "horsearchers at XY were only defeated due to terrain" fail to appreciate that you cannot always have your favourite terrain to fight on. If the Mongols had intended to conquer Europe, for example, they could not have just fought battles on open plains without rivers, trees or hills on them. Simply not enough of that available.


I would just like to know your definition of "wain-castles", and or "mobile fortresses/"

Are they but "War Wagons?'

Regards,
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10164
  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2010 at 22:23
Originally posted by opuslola

Originally posted by Arakano

I would like to bring up and chose, for myself, the Hussites in their wain-castles, mobile fortresses ready for every battlefield... they defeated European armies from many countries again and again, and mainly failed due to infighting in the end. ;) Horsearchers, while fearsome, are overrated IMO. Those that claim that "horsearchers at XY were only defeated due to terrain" fail to appreciate that you cannot always have your favourite terrain to fight on. If the Mongols had intended to conquer Europe, for example, they could not have just fought battles on open plains without rivers, trees or hills on them. Simply not enough of that available.


I would just like to know your definition of "wain-castles", and or "mobile fortresses/"

Are they but "War Wagons?'

Regards,
 
 
In the US they were known as "War Wagons".  I'm surprised that Opla didn't realize that, in Europe, they were referred to as, "Mobile Fortresses." Shocked
 
But I'm sure they were special in some way. Wink
 
Back to Top
Azadi View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
retired AE moderator

Joined: 17-Aug-2009
Location: Kurdistan, Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 362
  Quote Azadi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Mar-2010 at 00:18
My army would have consisted of 10 billion peasants. My tactic would be to make cheap and fake weapons and armor for my men, and just watch the enemy tremble when they saw us at distance. In case of an ambush, I'm screwed through... but no big deal, because of the reproduction growth.

Edited by Azadi - 08-Mar-2010 at 00:32
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Mar-2010 at 09:04
Azadi, good post! But you might well do OK, if you had an army made up of 100,000 Pheasants? LAUGH! The opposition army, ususally being very hungry, whould be so interested in fresh roasted pheasant, they would be distracted and easy to defeat! chuckle!

Red, thanks for pointing out something that you and I already knew! chuckle Sometimes I post things and await others pointing out the connections! As you certainly did!

But, in addition maybe you guys might want to consider this?


http://www.answers.com/topic/wain-1

"A wain is a type of horse-drawn, load-carrying vehicle, used for agricultural purposes rather than transporting people, for example a haywain. It normally has four wheels but the term has now acquired slightly poetical connotations so is not always used with technical correctness. However, a two-wheeled 'haywain' would be a hay cart, as opposed to a carriage. "Wain" is also an archaic term for chariot.

Builders of wains were known as wainwrights, just as the builders of carts were known as cartwrights. These trades no longer exist, but the terms survive as the surnames of descendants of those practising these crafts."

Please note the connection to "chariot!"

And a good read is this site, where you will find info also concerning "carts" or "wagons", etc.:

http://www.angelfire.com/md/devere/urse.html

"Castle of the Chariots", or the "castle of Arthur!"

http://www.uiweb.uidaho.edu/student_orgs/arthurian_legend/england/sites/morgan.htm

Perhaps a definition of "chariot" might be appropriate now?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chariot

http://ardictionary.com/Chariot/4167

All in all, it seems that the very word "chariot" which is oft used by historians and writers in general, is usually seen as a manufactured word whose use is to seperate its real meaning I.e. "a cart" or "wagon", etc., into another specifically designated vehicle, only used by Greek or Roman or other famous warriors or knights of antiquity!

Reading an account of an ancient figure of a chariot using warrior/knight like Achilles enter into battle riding in a "wagon" or "cart?"

So we end up with objects like this;

http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Post/885645

And of course Tut's famous wagon found in his tomb, being called "chariots!"

Thus writers, or historians could have easily used the word "cart", or "Wagon" or "Wain" to describe the method of mobility used by the famlous warriors/kinghts of the distant past, but instead chose to use the word "chariot" instead! Maybe because "chariot" more easily described the "antiquity" of the events?

Perhaps the only real use of the word "chariot" would apply in the following format?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chariot_racing

And a mess of famous charioteers here;

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=1&oq=famous+chariot&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBR_enUS315US315&q=famous+charioteers

Thus, I will propose that the use of "chariots" as presented in the above sources (as fighting vehicles for the use of a single knight or a knight and his driver.), would only be appropriate when their use was played out upon a specially prepared field, with no ditches, mounds, creeks, boulders, holes, bogs, etc.!

Thus we have combat for entertainment purposes and not warfare! Games like these existed well into the Christian era, and supposedly sometimes were fought to the death!

In the days of "chivalry", these "tournements" or maybe "Olympic Games?" were also called "jousts" or "tilts!" Thus the term "Tilting at wind-mills!" You can see the term "tilt" as relative to the "joust" itself. I.e. ""to tilt", closely resembles the act of "tilting" an opponent from his saddle, or "unseating him!"

"Cheval", equals "horse" and "Chevalier" means a mounted knight, or even a knight riding within or upon a fighting wagon, or cart, etc.!

It also seems the "Frankish" rulers of Greece were especially famous for their tournements held during the 12th-14th centuries C.E.!

Regards,



Edited by opuslola - 08-Mar-2010 at 09:08
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
Shield-of-Dardania View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 23-Mar-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 357
  Quote Shield-of-Dardania Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Apr-2010 at 02:03
I thought that the 11th century Norman army, highly dominated by its cavalry, with their huge chargers, of the destrier breed, mounted by heavily armoured warriors wielding massive lances, was the ultimate killing machine of its time. No?

Edited by Shield-of-Dardania - 12-Apr-2010 at 02:06
History makes everything. Everything is history in the making.
Back to Top
MagnaCarta View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Apr-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2
  Quote MagnaCarta Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Apr-2010 at 20:53
If lots of cavalry, I'd defend with lots of doppelsoldners. Longbowmen in the back, too.
Back to Top
Shield-of-Dardania View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 23-Mar-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 357
  Quote Shield-of-Dardania Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Apr-2010 at 18:51
Oh yeah? Only I'm worried that your poor foot soldiers would just end up as hoof fodder for their ginormous destrieres.Approve
 
Yes. The Anglo-Saxon longbow versus the Norman crossbow. I've heard a little about that. Any good battles with those two weapons playing decisive roles?


Edited by Shield-of-Dardania - 14-Apr-2010 at 18:57
History makes everything. Everything is history in the making.
Back to Top
Brainsucker View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl


Joined: 05-Apr-2009
Location: Indonesia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 44
  Quote Brainsucker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Apr-2010 at 23:28
Just a question :
 
Did the medieval lords use the formation / organized military organization just like the Legion in Rome and other? Or just a combination of mob with simple organization?
 
For example for simple organization : The army is splited into three sub armies. The spearmen, archers, and knights (the lord didn't even need to organize the number of each corp / companies because of it)
 
If they use a well organized army, then, they should have commanders for each group. So, can someone tell me how the medieval Lord organized their army?
Back to Top
DreamWeaver View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel

Suspended

Joined: 02-May-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 555
  Quote DreamWeaver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-May-2010 at 13:52
I suppose that you could regard medieval tactics asrather simple, especially in comparison to professional armies such as that of Rome. Though certainly some required alot of consideration and control, famously the fighting march as used in the crusades.

To answer you question, yes, they did somewhat. Medieval armies did distinguish and define themselves between different roles or perhaps 'units' for want of a better word, and they would be drawn up and positioned as per their suited abilities. The problem with the infantry though is that there a few sources written especially about them, because nobody cared as much about them usually because they just werent important.

Armies would often be given seperate commanders for different sections, usually for the vab guard, main part and rear guard or perhaps over left/right flanks and centre etc. But anything like on the scale of more modern armies or even ancient ones was not the case generally. Certainly not formally.

As far as western european cavalry is concerend then conroi's were the basis of units. Groups of individuals who knew/fought together with their associated hangers on, segeants and others. Ofcourse then you have a situation where an army is composed of lots of little groups, under a feudal structure one cna bind these together under associated feudal overlords for greater control.


As the middle ages go on fuedal based armies begin to make way for paidprofessional mercenary armies and hired free companies. A feudal core often surrounded by individual companies and retinues who have to be contracted etc.

The Military Orders ofocurse are somewhat different because of their very nature and raison d'etre.
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2010 at 09:17
SoD, here is a good example!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy

Also note this site;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

Although little is written about the use of the cross-bow, in this battle, it is certainly expected that they were used!

Make note of the impediment caused the very ground upon which these battles were fought! It certainly brings to mind other similar encounters!

Engarde'

Edited by opuslola - 25-May-2010 at 09:35
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-May-2010 at 09:35
DW, I especially loved your mention of "conroi's"! It is a little seen word in these discussions, but it appears, a very important one!

Perhaps some other readers were able to look it up, if they were not already familiar with these small units!

Regarde'
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
historynut91 View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary
Avatar

Joined: 30-Apr-2010
Location: ireland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 27
  Quote historynut91 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jun-2010 at 15:30
sometimes it can all come down to the leadership and charismatic flare of a good general who can hold his men together, know the terrain and how to use it and good intelligence on enemy strength and formation
"war is delightful to those who have no experience of it"-Erasmus
Back to Top
opuslola View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
suspended

Joined: 23-Sep-2009
Location: Long Beach, MS,
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4621
  Quote opuslola Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jun-2010 at 16:10
To historynut91;

Ditto!

I just love Rush!

Edited by opuslola - 07-Jun-2010 at 16:11
http://www.quotationspage.com/subjects/history/
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 10111213>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.