Kevin wrote in part:
}Pure shock infantry is not the ideal type of troops to try to fight light
}mounted archers and shock cavalry.
But It can be done with disiplined enough troops. The Romans vs Parthians shows one way. Relying partially on heavier armor, short charges towards the archers by alternating blocks of infantry with the archers getting more disorganized with each withdrawl.
} The basic strategic problem is that infantry cannot force
}cavalry to fight them, while the cavalry can chose when and where to
}attack.
I would argue this as tactical because in the long term, ie strategic, infantry can move further faster. Men can consume enough calories to keep moving much faster than animals that graze. After a few days of continous maximum effort, say 14 to 18 hour days, horses would be seriously affected and require days to recover, while the infantry would recover much faster.
The trick to get nomads to stand and fight is to attack something they must defend, a religous shrine or there herds/camps, which are much less mobile than the military force. May be the Agrimori go for more of a close defense of there camps, if any one wants the booty they almost have to charge the pikes to get to the goodies. If they don't attack that's just as well in there eyes.
On Agrimori pikes, could it be that what the Agrimori might consider just a long spear the shorter peoples might think of as a pike? A greek at 5 and-a-half feet looks at an 8 foot spear as 'long', Agrimori are 7 and-a- half (?) so a 12 foot spear might be 'long'.
The peltast analogy might depend on which kind of peltast, some were strictly javelin armed, others with long spear and javelin. The name comes from the size and shape of the shield carried. Some may have been more skirmishers, others a just slightly looser formation to be the flexible support for a phalanx.
And for a though to pike-shafts and such in Prax, maybe bone? Could be that impala legs provide a nice comfortable grip size ...
Ward Ballard
Powered by hypermail