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 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.
(3). Heavy infantry - the Pelandans showed that a solid heavy infantry can 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.
(4). Horse archers, light cavalry. The conflict with the Pentans during the 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.
(5). Heavy knights. During the campaigns of the Nadar the Avenger, the 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
Powered by hypermail