Post by dpd on Jul 15, 2024 16:56:18 GMT
Sorry, but there were no chariots used for direct shock action like a charging formation of knights.
There was only light chariots (horse archer equivalent - NOT cavalry) and scythed chariots.
warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/chariot-tactics-in-the-near-eastern-bronze-age/#:~:text=To%20assume%20that%20chariotry%20could,not%20a%20kinetic%2Denergy%20weapon.
Given the competency and numerical superiority of infantry in civilized armies, chariotry was not practical for use in frontal assaults, as a weapon of “shock,” that is, as a weapon that could be hurled against an infantry phalanx in order to rupture the formation with the shock of collision. In this context “shock” refers to the weight and inertial momentum or impetus of an object moving at speed to shatter a stationary entity. To assume that chariotry could be used in this manner is to endow it with the capabilities of a modern tank. Insofar as chariot horses and crewmen were outfitted with substantial protective gear (e.g., helmets and body armor for equines and humans alike), it is fair to categorize the light, spoke-wheeled war chariot as a crew-served armored fighting vehicle, one of history’s earliest; as such it had certain uses in common with those of modern armored fighting vehicles. But collision-shock was not one of them. The Bronze Age chariot was not a tank; it was not a kinetic-energy weapon.
Nor was a chariot formation a solid body. It was, rather, a grouping of individual vehicles. Even when moving at speed, chariots in formation lacked the numbers and the close configuration, hence the weight and mass, required to generate phalanx-shattering force. The average phalanx was sturdier and stronger than most chariotry formations and could not be ruptured by a frontal assault of chariotry so long as the foot soldiers kept their nerve and held their positions.
If the foot soldiers did hold their positions, and if a commander of chariotry was foolish enough to launch his squadrons into them, the encounter would likely end in disaster for the chariotry. The first chariots to strike the phalanx would certainly inflict some casualties among the foot soldiers and a few vehicles might penetrate into the secondary ranks. Even so, infantrymen who remained steadfast and unyielding would break the charge, with most of the vehicles that composed the tip of Liverani’s “vertical wedge” of chariotry coming to grief on the phalanx’s hedge of spears. The horses, pierced by one or more spears, would be rearing and screaming in pain, and many of the chariots would be overturned, spilling the crewmen onto the ground. In the next instant the following chariots would crash into the leading vehicles; a pileup would ensue, resulting in fearful carnage as the foot soldiers swarmed amidst the wreckage to slaughter the dismounted chariot crewmen.
So we should replace all HCH with LCH, or if justified, SCH
There was only light chariots (horse archer equivalent - NOT cavalry) and scythed chariots.
warfarehistorynetwork.com/article/chariot-tactics-in-the-near-eastern-bronze-age/#:~:text=To%20assume%20that%20chariotry%20could,not%20a%20kinetic%2Denergy%20weapon.
Given the competency and numerical superiority of infantry in civilized armies, chariotry was not practical for use in frontal assaults, as a weapon of “shock,” that is, as a weapon that could be hurled against an infantry phalanx in order to rupture the formation with the shock of collision. In this context “shock” refers to the weight and inertial momentum or impetus of an object moving at speed to shatter a stationary entity. To assume that chariotry could be used in this manner is to endow it with the capabilities of a modern tank. Insofar as chariot horses and crewmen were outfitted with substantial protective gear (e.g., helmets and body armor for equines and humans alike), it is fair to categorize the light, spoke-wheeled war chariot as a crew-served armored fighting vehicle, one of history’s earliest; as such it had certain uses in common with those of modern armored fighting vehicles. But collision-shock was not one of them. The Bronze Age chariot was not a tank; it was not a kinetic-energy weapon.
Nor was a chariot formation a solid body. It was, rather, a grouping of individual vehicles. Even when moving at speed, chariots in formation lacked the numbers and the close configuration, hence the weight and mass, required to generate phalanx-shattering force. The average phalanx was sturdier and stronger than most chariotry formations and could not be ruptured by a frontal assault of chariotry so long as the foot soldiers kept their nerve and held their positions.
If the foot soldiers did hold their positions, and if a commander of chariotry was foolish enough to launch his squadrons into them, the encounter would likely end in disaster for the chariotry. The first chariots to strike the phalanx would certainly inflict some casualties among the foot soldiers and a few vehicles might penetrate into the secondary ranks. Even so, infantrymen who remained steadfast and unyielding would break the charge, with most of the vehicles that composed the tip of Liverani’s “vertical wedge” of chariotry coming to grief on the phalanx’s hedge of spears. The horses, pierced by one or more spears, would be rearing and screaming in pain, and many of the chariots would be overturned, spilling the crewmen onto the ground. In the next instant the following chariots would crash into the leading vehicles; a pileup would ensue, resulting in fearful carnage as the foot soldiers swarmed amidst the wreckage to slaughter the dismounted chariot crewmen.
So we should replace all HCH with LCH, or if justified, SCH
