C&C / GG&S

[John Hall]

I was trying to say that "Japan was too centralized" begs the question of
why.  Yes, they were.  But it also seems that they didn't need to be that
centralized, and that had ideas similar to those the greeks became known for
been used then things would have turned out differently.  Japan could have
had a 500 year head start on England, instead of being left 500 years
behind.

I don't think Alexander's cavalry would have been nearly as successful
without the infantry.  It was the Persian Greek infantry he concentrated on
destroying first.  Had his infantry not held while he was breaking the line
elsewhere with cavalry, things would have been bad.

My source on Poiters was Hanson.

At Hastings, it was undisciplined pursuit that broke the cohesion of the
shield wall as I understand it.


From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com]On Behalf Of Dave Long
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2002 12:24 PM
To: fork@xent.com
Subject: RE: C&C / GG&S

This has just argued against the
epilogue and then for it.  Japan
was centralized enough that the
Samurai could turn back the clock
on the introduction of firearms,
and retain feudalism; in Europe,
if the old school bellatores did
not arm other classes, they then
got their lunches eaten by their
neighbors who did.

(China could act like a bondholder,
all the petty dynasts of Europe had
to act like aggresive stockholders)


> The people of India had an opportunity to see disciplined Infantry when
> Alexander the Great came crashing through over 2,000 years before then.

Maybe as part of combined arms, but
Alexander used cavalry for deciding
his battles.

> Later, it was an infantry wall at Poiters that stopped the Muslim high
water
> mark in southern France about 730AD or so.

1) Do we have an order of battle
for Martel?  Earlier, I'd heard of
Tours as showing the superiority
of Frankish heavy cavalry to the
Moorish light (?al jinete?) cav.

2) The Franks were later known for
fighting almost exclusively with
heavy cavalry.  Chevalier, Ritter,
chivalry, etc.

Would we be typing Anglo-Saxon, if
infantry was so powerful in 1066?
Hwaet!


http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork