Post by timurilank on Jan 10, 2023 8:21:48 GMT
II/80d, Strathclyde Army 580 – 1054 AD, have three cavalry
with an optional fourth element on their army list.
I am researching another Anglo-Saxon event, adding the Kingdom of Strathclyde
among the list of historic based scenarios, however, finding sources mentioning
any mounted forces during the period of Viking incursions is perplexing.
Throughout nearly five centuries, Strathclyde was in conflict with the Welsh, Mercia,
Northumbria, the Scots and Norsemen. According to the few surviving primary sources,
most online, some the conflicts that took place and the monarch who ruled at the time.
None list the strength of either force, the location of the battle or who was in command.
From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, in 890, King Donald II of Alba expels the
British aristocracy of Strathclyde, most flee south to North Wales. Would this
mean, with the aristocracy, so went the cavalry?
The next mention of Strathclyde is their alliance with the Scots in 937;
some historians mention not as an independent kingdom, but as a vassal of Alba.
Not advocating any changes to the army list, but keeping a large cavalry presence
seems to contradict the general trend of combat during the 9th and 10th century,
that is if mounted, dismount to fight on foot.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
with an optional fourth element on their army list.
I am researching another Anglo-Saxon event, adding the Kingdom of Strathclyde
among the list of historic based scenarios, however, finding sources mentioning
any mounted forces during the period of Viking incursions is perplexing.
Throughout nearly five centuries, Strathclyde was in conflict with the Welsh, Mercia,
Northumbria, the Scots and Norsemen. According to the few surviving primary sources,
most online, some the conflicts that took place and the monarch who ruled at the time.
None list the strength of either force, the location of the battle or who was in command.
From the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, in 890, King Donald II of Alba expels the
British aristocracy of Strathclyde, most flee south to North Wales. Would this
mean, with the aristocracy, so went the cavalry?
The next mention of Strathclyde is their alliance with the Scots in 937;
some historians mention not as an independent kingdom, but as a vassal of Alba.
Not advocating any changes to the army list, but keeping a large cavalry presence
seems to contradict the general trend of combat during the 9th and 10th century,
that is if mounted, dismount to fight on foot.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
