C&C / GG&S

[Dave Long]

> 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.

How does the geography of Japan compare
to that of Greece?  In Greece, as later
in Switzerland, one could hold mountain*
passes with infantry. (like the 300)

On plains, I don't see how infantry can
keep (without firearms) a large enough
zone of control to force a cavalry body
to engage them. (and Stuart avoided it
even well into cav's obsolescence)

The Hapsburgs were defeated by infantry
in Switzerland in 1386, but they were a
going concern on the flat up until 1918.

>                         ... the phalanx allegedly
> remained the most potent military weapon in the field
> for the next few centuries. [after Alexander]

So what replaced it, when?  If medievals
arise due to cavalry superiority, heavy
cav doesn't need to replace it for over
another millenium: 300BC - 900AD

-Dave

:::::::::::::::

* mountainous regions are not only more
difficult for outsiders to control, but
they tend to be worth less effort to do
so as well:

"see what manner of men these are, who
came to rob us of our poverty"
(see also Grave's "The Persian Version")

"freedom's just another word for nothing
left to lose"

:::::::::::::::

I suppose we need also check agricultural
technology -- if one has metal plowshares,
making pikes ought to be no problem.  Does
rice culture lend itself as well to self-
armament?

:::::::::::::::

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

and I guess Hastings is another place we
would expect infantry to do well -- with
a shield wall on top of the hill, if the
cavalry (800 kg?) can't get 15 m/s, but
only 5 m/s, they go from 180 kJ to 20 kJ.