Quote:

Original post by Talroth Where are you getting this information?

Quote:

Wikipedia: Pike (weapon) These largely defensive formations were essentially immune to knightly attack as long as the knights obligingly threw themselves on the spear wall, but the passive nature of pike formations when used by such troops with rudimentary training made them very vulnerable to enemy archers and crossbowmen, who could shoot them down with impunity. Many defeats, such as at Roosebeke and Halidon Hill, were suffered by the militia pike armies when faced by cunning foes who employed their archers and crossbowmen to thin the ranks of the pike blocks before charging in with the knights.

Quote:

Original post by Talroth Quote: Original post by wodinoneeye Special semi-suicide troops were armed with 6 foot swords to try to chop enough heads off of pikes to weaken a section of a pike formation to allow assault by cavalry. Do you have a source for this? chopping the heads off of pikes is actually rather hard. Many are made of a fairly strong wood, Ash is usually a fairly good choice as when it dries it gets REALLY hard. So if you hit it with something, you might chip it a little, but you're just going to knock it out of the way a little till they recover a bit. However, one style of countering pike, which I can't remember 100% sure so if someone does know for sure, please please correct me, is to use troops with light armour, light small shields, and I forget the style of sword, but something compact. The goal being to DIVE to the ground, and roll under the heads of the pikes as fast as you can. Once you are inside 5 feet from the front men, no one can touch you with a pike without them breaking the formation to let the back men level their pikes at you. You only need one or two guys to get there in a short section to collapse it, as if they start killing people, everyone is going to have to drop their pikes to draw side arms. Also, pikes that are kept upright (as in those not in the front 3/4 ranks, can provide a surprising protection from arrow volleies. I didn't expect this to be true till I saw a demostration of it. (Sadly, I didn't own a video camera at the time :( why couldn't I have had one then? it looked so cool. Some of the dummies 'died' but still, less than I would have expected)

It was mentioned in a book by a British General (published in the 70s) on Weapons and Warfare (I havent seen that book for decades).

I did mention that it was a semi-suicidal (one of those 'forlorn hope' kind of assignments). Probably it was part of a combined effort to weaken the pike formation at one point. The 6 foot swords (weighing 20 pounds if i remember right) can develop alot of force (enough to splinter/damage very hard wood) and no doubt were well sharpened for the task. I kind of wonder how hard the wood could be since it had to also be thin (without mass to build up 3D) and hard woods are usually also brittler (and resilience would be needed when striking the pike's point into something).



Ive seen pictures (woodcuts) of pikes with many toward the center raised upeight but never thought of them being able to shield arrows (which they likely would have some effect doing in massed formation) as well as being out of the way for maneuvering and quicker to lower in a direction to fill gaps.




[Edited by - wodinoneeye on November 10, 2006 6:07:28 AM]

Quote:

Original post by Anonymous Poster the spears are short "sticks" to throw at the enemy. the advantages are that you can carry a shield in the offhand and you can draw a sword or an axe when you threw your spear away. the romanian spears were called "pilum", they where not intended to be thrown, but to keep away the enemy from the soldiers, like in a phalanx. quote: a 'pike' IS a spear, the same as a lance is a spear, however not all spears are lances or pikes - actually never heard of a lanceman :-)

You never heard of a lancer ???

Quote:

Original post by Anonymous Poster Quote: Remember, no armour, not even romans in Testudo are immune to arrows. Actually, a well crafted suite of full plate (which was never worn in real battles) is immune to non-bodkin arrows. Crossbow bolts, on the other hand, are a whole different ballgame.

Said by someone that likely hasn't seen real armour, let alone worn it, or actually crafted it. (Not that I've done much yet. Living in cities sucks, expect for the highspeed net)

It doesn't matter how great your armour is, unless you are being wheeled around in a steel box, there ARE gaps in the armour, points where they will fail. Also you can't make the armour proof against everything at all times, the advancements in metallurgy just wasn't there, there is always the chance of a brittle point in the plate which will have almost no strenght when hit by something.

Also, as much as people have liked to think about the bodkin arrow being designed to kill armour, this idea is being proved false by modern research. (people that are researching, do your research on your research material! there is a LOT of bad stuff out there. Look at the works cited lists, and track them down. If you can make a chain back to books from the victorian age that isn't there because they're correcting points made at those times, then don't bother with it.) I know I should be citing these things, sorry but I have no clue where my notes have gone too.

So, if bodkin points (the very long, pointed ones that don't have fins going out to either side) aren't for poking holes in armour, then what are they for? Most likely simply for range. Ones that would be good against armour are much much shorter, basically an iron cap barely an inch long. Why is this blunter cap better at making holes in armour? (not perfect mind you, I just said BETTER!) Because these are IRON, they are NOT steel! Iron is NOT steel, this is something many people seem to never learn. Iron can NOT be hardened, it remains soft. Steel has a proper carbon content (too much and you get brittle castiron, too little, and you get soft iron) and because of that carbon can be hardened.

So, because these bodkin points are iron, not steel, they are soft, and that long point is what makes them useless at going through armour. If they were modern steel they would be great (actually a few anti-tank rounds are based on a fairly similar design) but since they are soft, when that long point hits, the chances of it hitting 100% at a 90degree angle is basically 0 so the tip bends to one side, and the point collapses. Even if it does hit at 90 degrees, chances are the tip will flatten, and if you have ever seen slow motion video of a bullet hitting a bulletproof vest (which aren't bulletproof either ;) funny how much stock people put in armour) you will know how that works of the force being spread out, rather than going in.

Quote:

Original post by Talrothwheeled around in a steel box

Now we're talking! Go to war in a coffin, come home on your own two feet! Beats doing it the other way, I guess.