![]() ![]() If this battle line is broken somewhere and the enemy pour in, the cohesion is lost and it will be easier for the opposing army to flank and overwhelm the smaller clusters of men that form as a result of their line being broken. In small skirmishes, it might not be as vital for victory, but the larger the battle is, the more important it is to keep the line together. That’s why men in most medieval and ancient engagements over the course of history were arranged in most natural formation - the line formation. Especially when there's a dozen fully armored men with sharp sticks pointed at you. But the higher the stakes (possible death or other serious crippling injury), the lower the eagerness to cross that invisible line. (Doesn’t need to be a straight line.) If the stakes are not high and we’re in some silly football hooligan fist-fight brawl, people just ignore the line and the battle indeed becomes a chaotic mess. (Everytime there is a high stake situation, in which two huge crowds of humans gather in one place to solve a dispute by beating each other with sharp sticks to death or some other serious injury, an invisible line forms between them. It is no coincidence that many different cultures over the history of mankind perfected their fighting cohesion in this manner and some even named it like phalanx or scildweall.īattle dynamics – What a medieval battle looks like The point is, if you stay in your crowd, keeping your enemy only in front of you, while being surrounded by your friends from left, right and behind, your chances of survival increase. If Total War games can get it almost right, why can’t the movies? Yes, it might have looked good once in Braveheart 25 years ago, but when I see it in a modern TV show like Vikings or in a movie like Troy or The King(2019), it robs me of the pleasure watching it and I’d genuinely love to see it done the right way for once. Nor you need to be a trained veteran to know it’s a suicide. ![]() This is no way to wage a battle! You don’t need to experience it to know it’s bullshit. Hypothetically, all your buddies could do it all at once and get as far as the fourth rank, but that will only lead to more wasteful death. You will not only have enemies in front of you but everywhere around you. And no one wants to die like that.īy running out of your crowd towards the enemy crowd, you lose all defensive advantages which being in a crowd provides. The point is, if you run into a crowd of armed people with no regards to your safety, you die without any contribution to the battle-effort. Why would medieval soldiers behave differently than any other human being? We all wish to return back unscathed to our homes, families and friends. Humans, in general, are usually not very keen on dying or getting themselves seriously injured or crippled. Others might ask how did the frontline soldiers deal with the fact that they’re basically going to die – because standing in the frontline means certain death, right? That’s how it’s depicted in the movies, right? Battles were chaotic, it had to be like that! Right?Īs Jonathan Frakes would put it: No way. „How did medieval soldiers tell friend from foe in battle?“ A very common question both on Reddit and Quora. They engage in individual duels all over the field. Such chaos ensues that it looks like a giant mosh pit at a rave in which it’s impossible to tell friend from foe, but somehow, the people still know who to strike. Two armies meet for the final time and soldiers of both sides, disregarding any sense of self-preservation, suicidally charge into each other and intermingle with the enemy soldiers. In movies or historical documentaries, we’ve seen it time and time again. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |