Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Renaissance Ressurection of Pike from Antiquity Reply to topic
This is a standard topic  
Author Message
Bob Burns




Location: South Indianapolis IN
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 112 books

Posts: 1,019

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 1:41 am    Post subject: Renaissance Ressurection of Pike from Antiquity         Reply with quote

I know only some of the basics about the pike, which from what I understand came back into play for battle in the late 16th century and of course was integral to the dominance of Alexander the Great against the ancient Persian Empire.
What was it that brought the pike back into battle strategies? Was the pike out of use between ancient times and the late 16th century?

Any help is appreciated!

Bob
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Wolfgang Armbruster





Joined: 03 Apr 2005

Posts: 322

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 3:26 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

The pike came back already in the 15th century and was employed with great success especially by the Swiss. Earlier "Gewalthaufen", the Swiss version of the greek phalanx, used mainly halberds. However they soon found out that a phalanx of halberdiers was almost helpless against massed cavalry, so they started to increase the number of pikes. In short time they became very good at handling this "new" waepon bot defensively and offensively. The German Landsknechte and Flemish Pikemen soon adopted this old new tactic.

Albrecht Altdorfer's painting "The gruesome Swiss war" gives a very good impression how the pike was used, that is basically the same way as the macedonian phalanx of Alexander but without shields.

View user's profile Send private message
Bob Burns




Location: South Indianapolis IN
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Likes: 1 page
Reading list: 112 books

Posts: 1,019

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 4:23 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks Wolfgang, so the pike came back a whole century earlier than what I had thought.

Bob
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Geoff Wood




Location: UK
Joined: 31 Aug 2003

Posts: 634

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 4:43 am    Post subject: Re: Renaissance Ressurection of Pike from Antiquity         Reply with quote

Bob Burns wrote:
What was it that brought the pike back into battle strategies? Was the pike out of use between ancient times and the late 16th century?

Any help is appreciated!

Bob


Mr Burns
Might it have had something to do with the availability of relatively disciplined armies (Macedonian/Swiss)? Drill must have been important in use of the pike, as disorganisation of the unit could be fatal (e.g. early Scots use). Of course, that doesn't explain the Romans' lack of interest, so it is probably wrong,.
Geoff
View user's profile Send private message
Wolfgang Armbruster





Joined: 03 Apr 2005

Posts: 322

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 8:35 am    Post subject: Re: Renaissance Ressurection of Pike from Antiquity         Reply with quote

Geoff Wood wrote:
Bob Burns wrote:
What was it that brought the pike back into battle strategies? Was the pike out of use between ancient times and the late 16th century?

Any help is appreciated!

Bob


Mr Burns
Might it have had something to do with the availability of relatively disciplined armies (Macedonian/Swiss)? Drill must have been important in use of the pike, as disorganisation of the unit could be fatal (e.g. early Scots use). Of course, that doesn't explain the Romans' lack of interest, so it is probably wrong,.
Geoff


I'd like to point out another possibility in addtion to your remarks.
Western culture, which means to me Greek and Roman, was severely damaged by Germanic tribes during the migration era. Nevertheless it survived the so-called dark ages only to resurface during the renaissance. Republic and democratic traditions such as an acutely organized military was often replaced by tribal traditions. I'm not saying that the Roman emperors following Augustus were in any way democratic, but the core-ideas survived.
It comes as no surprise that hellenic military tactics were used by the city-states of northern Italy and the Swiss. Few Swiss farmers could afford a horse, so it was only logical for them to fight on foot in massed formations - just like the Thebans, Athenians and Spartans did almost 2000 years before them. From that point it was only a small step to the re-invention of the macedonian phalanx. No skirmishes or guerilla-warfare like in the Middle-East and Asia, the battle had to be won a certain amount of time since the harvest was waiting - that led to deceisive battles instead of drawn out campaigns. It should be noted that Machiavelli called the Swiss "the new Romans".
"Carnage and Culture" by Victor Davis Hanson is the book to read. I don't agree with all his findings, but he definitely has a point Happy
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,310

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:18 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

My knowledge is thin about the Swiss but what I seem to remember was that the social organization of the Swiss was very
egalitarian and the idea of the citizen soldier very strong similarly to the Classical Greeks or Macedonians.

Their combat effectiveness was based at least in part in the fact that the Swiss would never surrender and I think that at least early on they tended to not take prisoners either, as well as fighting to the last man: Or at least that was their reputation and would make an opposing force fear the Swiss more than most period opponents. A Swiss caught retreating would be better off dead as he would never have a place in his society again: So bravery might have less to do with it than the greater fear of being despised by all his friend and family.

The main defining feature of a pike versus a spear is length and the first medieval period spears may have started at around the 12' mark and would have gotten longer and longer until a maximum manageable size of 21' was reached. ( could be wrong here about the evolution ? )

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message
Joe Fults




Location: Midwest
Joined: 02 Sep 2003

Posts: 3,646

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:29 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Any sources for this Swiss stuff?
"The goal shouldn’t be to avoid being evil; it should be to actively do good." - Danah Boyd
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,310

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 9:47 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Joe Fults wrote:
Any sources for this Swiss stuff?



Joe: You are making me work here rather than just pulling vague memories of things read from the air. Razz Wink

O.K. one quick source: THE RENAISSANCE AT WAR, Thomas Arnold, Cassel & Co

Chapter two: THE NEW LEGIONS, Quote page 61: " A Swiss pike unit presented an enemy with an awesome hedge of steel. Instilled with a ruthless warrior's code that ensured absolute battlefield discipline ( instant death to any man who panicked ) "

So worse than I remembered: Disgraced would only be a factor if you weren't cut down on the spot by your fellow soldiers and actually managed to run away from both your side and the other side of the fight.

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message
Carl Scholer





Joined: 14 Jun 2006

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Mon 07 Aug, 2006 11:42 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

I think armour might have played a role too. The first time you start seeing two handed spear armed troops in Europe is during the 13th century (with the notable exception of an 8th century Pictish carving portraying a long spear armed troop with his shield strapped over his shoulder like a Macedonian phalangette), which just happens to be the century that rigid plate armours start becoming available.

I'm not saying that the development of plate armour was the main cause for the reintroduction of the pike, but I'm sure that not having to lug around a 15lbs shield to protect yourself with made the prospect of using an 16ft long spear much more attractive.
View user's profile Send private message
Randall Moffett




Location: Northern Utah
Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Reading list: 5 books

Posts: 2,121

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 2:50 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Carl,

Excellent observation. I have contemplated that as well regarding two handed weapons in general. Seems solid to me. The only problem is that many mass troops w/ two handed weapons were lightly armoured but it still sounds plausibe to me.

Randall
View user's profile Send private message
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional




Joined: 20 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Posts: 2,608

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 6:34 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Carl Scholer wrote:
I think armour might have played a role too. The first time you start seeing two handed spear armed troops in Europe is during the 13th century (with the notable exception of an 8th century Pictish carving portraying a long spear armed troop with his shield strapped over his shoulder like a Macedonian phalangette), which just happens to be the century that rigid plate armours start becoming available.

I'm not saying that the development of plate armour was the main cause for the reintroduction of the pike, but I'm sure that not having to lug around a 15lbs shield to protect yourself with made the prospect of using an 16ft long spear much more attractive.


A good theory, but it is my understanding that the Swiss pikeman were very lightly armored... which is why they were in so much trouble when the Spanich Tercios got within their formations.

TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
View user's profile Send private message
Jean Thibodeau




Location: Montreal,Quebec,Canada
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Likes: 50 pages
Reading list: 1 book

Spotlight topics: 5
Posts: 8,310

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 9:13 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Russ Ellis wrote:
Carl Scholer wrote:
I think armour might have played a role too. The first time you start seeing two handed spear armed troops in Europe is during the 13th century (with the notable exception of an 8th century Pictish carving portraying a long spear armed troop with his shield strapped over his shoulder like a Macedonian phalangette), which just happens to be the century that rigid plate armours start becoming available.

I'm not saying that the development of plate armour was the main cause for the reintroduction of the pike, but I'm sure that not having to lug around a 15lbs shield to protect yourself with made the prospect of using an 16ft long spear much more attractive.


A good theory, but it is my understanding that the Swiss pikeman were very lightly armored... which is why they were in so much trouble when the Spanich Tercios got within their formations.


They could and would move very fast and I would assume could coordinate their formations very efficiently due to constant drill. Also their pikes would be their armour to a degree since you wouldn't be able to do much against them if you couldn't close on them. I also think that the first few ranks might be armoured to varying degrees.

So their pike squares wouldn't be slow and ponderous formations and could manoeuvre fast enough: That they didn't act as mostly defensive formations.

Later on in the 16th and early 17th century a pike square might be more defensive and used more as moving walls and protection for ever increasing numbers of shot troops.

Also the early Swiss would not have similarly equipped rivals or at least have to face pikes handled by equally competent troops. ( Again a mix of some facts and some speculation on my part. )

You can easily give up your freedom. You have to fight hard to get it back!
View user's profile Send private message
Benjamin H. Abbott




Location: New Mexico
Joined: 28 Feb 2004

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 1,248

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 11:20 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Quote:
A good theory, but it is my understanding that the Swiss pikeman were very lightly armored...


I'm not so sure. I've read that the front ranks were often armored fairly well. 16th-century military writers tend to suggest considerable armor for pikemen, but none of those writers were Swiss. Perhaps it varied.

Quote:
which is why they were in so much trouble when the Spanich Tercios got within their formations.


I don't think targetiers were only effective against lightly armored men. For example, Forquevaux both loved armor and targetiers. He suggested that they thrust at the face or legs, or any other unarmored part.
View user's profile Send private message
Russ Ellis
Industry Professional




Joined: 20 Aug 2003
Reading list: 42 books

Posts: 2,608

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 11:48 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Benjamin H. Abbott wrote:
Quote:
A good theory, but it is my understanding that the Swiss pikeman were very lightly armored...


I'm not so sure. I've read that the front ranks were often armored fairly well. 16th-century military writers tend to suggest considerable armor for pikemen, but none of those writers were Swiss. Perhaps it varied.

Quote:
which is why they were in so much trouble when the Spanich Tercios got within their formations.


I don't think targetiers were only effective against lightly armored men. For example, Forquevaux both loved armor and targetiers. He suggested that they thrust at the face or legs, or any other unarmored part.


I don't have a larger context for that, simply mentioning something I read in Ospreys The Swiss at War by Douglas Miller and Gary Embleton. They suggest that the reason for losses against the Spanish were that the Spanish would meet the swiss with their own pike and then allow the rodeleros to move in under the pikes to attack the lightly armored pikemen...

TRITONWORKS Custom Scabbards
View user's profile Send private message
Carl Scholer





Joined: 14 Jun 2006

Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue 08 Aug, 2006 11:34 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Machiavelli considered the German pikemen of his era to be lightly armoured because most carried only a breast and backplate, which, being maybe 2 or 2.5mm thick, might account for only 14lbs of armour. This armour would provide a great deal of protection to pikemen from thrusts and arrows yet it would still leave his limbs, waist, and head exposed to sword cuts. So lightly armoured is pretty relative.
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Historical Arms Talk > Renaissance Ressurection of Pike from Antiquity
Page 1 of 1 Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum