>
> > (besides having the depth of the phalanx to shoot over, thus the
> rang
> > comment). Indirect fire wasn't an practiced art in ancient armies.
>
> I can't let that go however!
>
> Early Persian Sparabara infantry formed up 10 ranks deep with the
> front man protected by a large shield and the next 9 ranks armed
> with
> bows. Neo-Assyrian infantry also formed up 10 deep with 5 ranks of
> spear and shield armed infantry supported by 5 ranks of bowmen. The
> Athenian hoplites at Plataea probably drew up 8 deep and were
> supported by archers behind. Thematic Byzantine skoutatoi could from
> up with 8 ranks of pike supported by archers behind. I still say the
> reason the Cretans couldn't shoot was that they were out of range
> anyway not that they were behind the phalanx! Xenephon says later
> in 'The Persian Expedition': 'The Persians use large bows, and so
> all
> the arrows of theirs which were picked up came in useful to the
> Cretans, who constantly used the enemy's arrows and practised long-
> range shooting with a high trajectory.'
You're right, I was off in cloud-cuckoo-land when I made the comment.
RR
C'est par mon ordre et pour le bien de l'Etat que le porteur du pr�sent a
fait ce qu'il a fait.
- Richelieu
Powered by hypermail