|
|
Post by buster on Apr 7, 2022 11:12:10 GMT
Can anyone tell me why the Indian archers in this list are classed as 3Bw,but in the Republican & classical armies Indian archers are 3Lb/4Lb respectively?
|
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Apr 7, 2022 22:04:21 GMT
I’d explain this by saying that DBA classifications are relative and not subjective. So a bow that was exceedingly effective against Macedonian Companions (classified 3Kn) did not change while the cavalry developed thicker armour and barding, evolving into Cataphracts (4Kn) which was a different proposition to Companions. Therefore bows, previously effective enough to be considered LB against Companions, were not effective enough to be considered LB against the more heavily armoured cataphracts.
|
|
|
|
Post by buster on Apr 8, 2022 10:26:33 GMT
Many thanks for your explanation but I would like to add, In the case of the Classical Indians they list Graeco Bactrians & Parthians as enemies both armies using cataphracts 4Kn,but are still classed as Lb archers,so one must assume they where effective against heavier armoured opponents, thus still raising the question as to why Graeco Indians are not Lb when the armies existed in the same time periods.
|
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Apr 9, 2022 18:18:06 GMT
Many thanks for your explanation but I would like to add, In the case of the Classical Indians they list Graeco Bactrians & Parthians as enemies both armies using cataphracts 4Kn,but are still classed as Lb archers,so one must assume they where effective against heavier armoured opponents, thus still raising the question as to why Graeco Indians are not Lb when the armies existed in the same time periods. A couple of reasons might apply, but there could be a lot more. 1 - PB in his research (and helpers) might have found different bows and arrows being used by different Indian groups. 2 - It might be down to how they were originally used, and how they best fit into the rules. I will at present exclude "mistake" because that is too easy. David Constable |
|
|
|
Post by buster on Apr 9, 2022 20:49:08 GMT
Thanks David, I may have found one explanation for 3Bw.From 130 B.C.coins from the graeco indian kingdom show representations of the Asian recurve bow ala saka/skythian steppe bows, so they may have been adopted not only by the cavalry but also the archers to replace the old Indian Lb's.
|
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Apr 26, 2022 16:07:06 GMT
Thanks David, I may have found one explanation for 3Bw.From 130 B.C.coins from the graeco indian kingdom show representations of the Asian recurve bow ala saka/skythian steppe bows, so they may have been adopted not only by the cavalry but also the archers to replace the old Indian Lb's. Possibly quite true, I have seen suggestions that the Indian longbow with cane arrows was not that good, and certainly nowhere near as good as English 100 years war longbowmen. To some extent DBA is a one size fits all situation. Coins can sometimes be a very useful source of information, as long as they are classified correctly. David Constable |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Apr 27, 2022 8:25:48 GMT
Thanks David, I may have found one explanation for 3Bw.From 130 B.C.coins from the graeco indian kingdom show representations of the Asian recurve bow ala saka/skythian steppe bows, so they may have been adopted not only by the cavalry but also the archers to replace the old Indian Lb's. Possibly quite true, I have seen suggestions that the Indian longbow with cane arrows was not that good, and certainly nowhere near as good as English 100 years war longbowmen. David Constable Indeed…a classic case of “it’s a loooong bow, but t’aint no longbow”, methinks. |
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on May 1, 2022 9:05:40 GMT
Possibly quite true, I have seen suggestions that the Indian longbow with cane arrows was not that good, and certainly nowhere near as good as English 100 years war longbowmen. David Constable Indeed…a classic case of “it’s a loooong bow, but t’aint no longbow”, methinks. |
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on May 1, 2022 9:15:52 GMT
Hello Martin
Oh yes, the anomolies you find throw the rules out, but if Trajanic Roman and around it that time would make fielding 4Ax worth while.
German 4Sp moving as 4Ax.
Batavian 4Bd moving as 4Ax.
The lovely one is how you count Normans in the tapestry, as 3Cv probably.
And a Thessalian rhomboid will only work if LH, if in a Macedonian army in Persia to be Cv they need to be in wedge.
David Constable
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on May 11, 2022 19:47:37 GMT
Probably just an oversite when compiling lists.
TomT
|
|
