Posted: November 12, 1999 at 16:13:32: by Aelmer
: : Elsewhere I argued that the Dunedain Rangers could have been horse archers (they are described as being armed with sword, spear and bow - whilst mounted) and what advantages this ability would have given them in skirmish warfare against more numerous foes. Looking at the section of LOTR when the Rohirrim discover Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas in Rohan, a number of the Rohirrim horsemen (apparently a minority) are described as nocking arrows in bows whilst mounted. These seem to be undoubted horse archers, which given the fact that Aragorn is known to have fought amongst the Rohirrim before the War of the Ring, raises the possibility that he was instrumental in instructing either his own folk or alternatively the Rohirrim in this martial technique. Alternatively both peoples may have had a long history of using mounted archery as both had common ancestry derived in part from the "horse-rich" Hadorian folk which gave rise to the Third House of the Edain.: I don't claim to be an expert in ancient military tactics, but can see that mounted horsemen must have some advantage. By moving quickly they can reduce the risk of being hit themselves, and can even drive their foes to desperation by circling around them (Indian style). If the enemy has only few archers, the other soldiers can do parctically nothing except pray they won't be hit. Historically, horse-archers were always a threat. Their tactics could include a circling attack in front of the enemy, or riding into bowshot, shooting,turning around, riding away and repeating this time and again.These tactics were also used by javelin armed cavalry, and by later firearm equipped cavalry. Movement during shooting was key to the survival of horse-archers since foot bows often had a greater range. Since they were usually lighter armed and armored, horse-archers were always under threat from heavier cavalry. Horse-archers were often caught and ridden down by heavier cavalry.~Aelmer : Archery appears to have been common in ME, even among the Orcs. A band of mounted Orcs could have been totally murderous (any ideas why Sauron never resorted to this?). This may be a reason that dwarves, for example, who are not recorded as having made use of archers, were forced to perfection their armour technique (mail shirts etc) to compensate. There is nothing to indicate that bow-armed wolf riders were not present in Sauron's field army. Helm's Deep and Minas Tirith were both sieges of a fortification. As such, the tactical strengths of mounted bowmen would be of little or no use, and these troops would fight dismounted.~Aelmer : Mounted cavalary, however, does have one drawback. Horses are expensive to rear and feed. This is why they were especially common in places like Rohan which had exceptionally fertile soil. Many other nations probably wouldn't have been able to afford an army of that type. Applying this to the Dunedain of the North, their horses suggest a certain degree of affluence, which means their homesteads cannot have been of the simplest type. Not only are suitable mounts an expense, but finding or training capable riders is also an expense. Historically, armies fielding large numbers of horse-archers usually came from peoples with a long horse culture history. Also, not all mounted troops with a bow were horse-archers. Such troops would dismount to fight and remount to retreat or move to a new location.~Aelmer
|
