The Trojan era armies

Xen

Magister
Joined
Feb 10, 2003
Messages
16,004
Location
Formosa
Historical overview: Between 2000 and 1900BC the Greek-speaking peoples who would come to dominate the area entered the peninsula of Greece. To the south on the island of Crete a great culture based around marvellous palaces was just developing along Egyptian lines. In Anatolia the Hurrians were setting the seeds for what would become the Hittite Empire and merchants from the Old Assyrian culture were setting up trading posts.
The Cretan Palace Culture (referred to as Minoan) set the standard in the Aegean Sea and their power seems to have been absolute to the extent that they needed no walls to defend their beautiful palaces and the riches therein. This Palace culture has survived in the form of clay tablets that tell us in incredible detail (for the Minoans seem to have invented red tape) the daily and seasonal life of Crete.

While Minoa maintained her sea power and prestige the more barbarous and adventurous natives of mainland Greece (Myceneans) were on the rise setting up several colonies in Asia Minor and raiding down the coastline. Then around 1500BC Crete and the Palace Culture was overtaken by some cataclysm probably natural which snuffed out their society in a very short period of time. Although a few cities may have held to the Palace Culture it was the Myceneans who would now make their mark on history, and what a mark it would be...

The Trojan War: That Troy existed and violent actions took place around the city identified as such is now pretty much accepted as truth. That it happened as written in Homer's Iliad is definitely debatable. What is certain is that Myceneans began to push out from the Greek mainland into Anatolia and down the Aegean coast formerly guarded from such piracy by the Minoans. So why Troy? Because it is the one written about is the simple answer, the scenario was probably enacted up and down the Aegean coast for centuries. The raid on Troy is probably remembered because it was one of the last in a long line of such actions that deflected criticism of a king at home, gave his army something to do, gained prestige, booty and slaves(in many cases there was no differnce ;) ) and would provide a good song for winter nights. The raids on Troy are dated to the mid-13th century BC and archaeological evidence shows civil war and unrest in the Mycenean homelands dating to 1230BC so attention may have been turned inwards just after this last great raid.

The Minoan and Mycenean range is divisible into three main historical periods, the Palace Culture of Minoa between 1600 and 1250BC, the period of change 1300 to 1200BC when the Minoans were declining and the early Myceneans gaining a foothold in Asia and, finally, the later Mycenean period encompassing the Trojan War period. I have also made some mention of the Trojans as, naturally, they were as important to the war as the Myceneans.

The Minoan Military System 1600 to 1300BC: Minoan forces were divided into three main groups chariotry, infantry and ships, the first two are detailed below. I will only give a brief outline of the maritime forces as they really require a section to themselves but do not play a central role in the hsitory of the time, as Minoan sea dominance was complete, with no (known) major sea battles at the time

Chariotry: Known as the eqeta or `followers' this arm of the Minoan field force developed along typical Bronze Age lines from around 1600BC. The chariots themselves were usually drawn by teams of two horses (a `span') and crewed by a charioteer and a warrior. The chariots themselves were heavier and stronger in construction than contemporary Egyptian and Syrian examples having more in common with Hittite and Anatolian types. This was probably due to the nature of the terrain they fought over where a much more robust vehicle was necessary.

There is strong evidence that the chariot corps was organised centrally as clay tablet records of the charioteers supplying vehicles have been found alongside lists of chariot parts and their state of repair. This has led to the belief that the owners of chariots could not always provide a complete vehicle so a record of parts available was needed to match up wheels, cabs and horse teams. It is amusing to imagine that the owner's had a rota for crewing this composite vehicle, "Monday, Wednesday and Friday Telemachus, Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday Agamemnon while Cleomenes gets Sunday because he only brought the wheels":D.

The crew had varying degrees of defensive equipment that became lighter as time went on. The most famous and distinctive panoply is the Dendra armour comprising large sheets of bronze skilfully worked to form complete protection from mid-thigh to chin (The other parts of the body being covered by the chariot cab and a helmet respectively). The effect is not unlike a menacing, bronze garbage can! Scale and linen armour was also favoured, with the charioteers having the lighter varieties due to the need for mobility.

It has been possible to reconstruct the size of chariot corps from the tablet records and they could be considerable with cities fielding between 100 and 400 at a time(quite a bit, when you consider that the chariots in question used AT LEAST 2 horses).

Infantry: While the chariotry was the "glamour" component of Minoan armies it was the footmen who made up the majority troop type. The infantry spearmen made up the bulk and while they were simply equipped and dressed they were also very distinctive in appearance.

Two pieces of equipment stand out, the tall shield and long spear, The shield was of two types, the "tower" and "figure-of-eight". These were tough, flexible and yet light covering the entire spearman from chin to toe negating the need for body armour. An impressive shield wall could be formed using these items. From between the shields would poke the 12' plus spears, with a foot-long blade of bronze tipping them they must have been an impressive sight en masse.

A helmet formed from sliced boar-tusks bound to a leather foundation protected the head. Atop this could be fixed a stiff crest of horsehair or tusk, alternatively the lacings holding the helmet together could be plaited decoratively. Most infantry wore only a loincloth or went naked. Richer individuals might wear colourful fringed kilts identical to those common throughout the region at this time. Swords were items of some worth and denoted status so would be confined to chariot crews and spearmen.

Archers: During this early period archers were relatively common and widely employed. They could operate in several different roles with varying levels of specialisation. The classic role was as a skirmisher, skipping around the battlefield pestering the slower or less agile enemy troops or driving off the enemy skirmishers to allow their own side a free hand. Secondly they could group together in an attempt (not always successful it must be said) to concentrate their shooting at vulnerable targets such as horses.

The last role for the archers was to directly support the spearmen, this could be by indirect shooting from the rear ranks of the shield wall in an attempt to disrupt an advancing enemy formation or in a more aggressive way which would see them shooting from between the shields of the front rank spearmen directly at the enemy. It is therefore possible to depict your spearmen with archers mixed into or behind the ranks.

Slingers: While not an important part of the army numerically the slingers would still perform a valuable service holding rough or broken terrain and harassing the enemy flanks.

Javelinmen: Again not numerically outstanding but interesting in that I have heard that a contingent of Libyan javelin have fought with Mycenaean forces, wich perhaps sets presedence for minoan use. The native javelinmen may even be entirely absent if Libyans were present, as the Lybians at this time were considerd master skirmishers(thats just a thought of mine, for the most part)

The Pylians: These inhabitants of Achaea make an interesting alternative to the more usual solid spearmen or skirmishing javelinmen. They appear wearing kilts, linen greaves and boar tusk helmets. They have no shield but are shown carrying swords (rapier-like affairs) and, sometimes, javelins. Although not a common troop-type, they seem to have had their fare share of engagements

Minoan Tactics: The foundation of the battle line was the wall of shields with the spearmen up to 8-deep backed up and interspersed by archers. Other skirmishers would operate on the flanks as described above. The only real decision for the Minoan and early Mycenean chieftains seems to have been the placement of his chariotry.

The chariot combats between the noble champions would most likely decide any battle so it depended upon how confident the chariot corps felt as to the formation it took up. If both sides were eager for battle and both sides were equal in numbers or one side felt more confident than the other did then the chariots formed up in front of the spears. If a side were outnumbered or reluctant to face their adversaries then they would form up on the flanks and between spear blocks. This would enable "downed" charioteers to retreat to the safety their shield walls.
 
THE LATER MYCENEANS & THE TROJAN WARS

Changes in warfare: Around 1300BC the style of engagement changed from one of solid lines of infantry poking each other with lances while chariot warriors smashed into each other to something far looser yet more structured. Firstly the chariot was no longer a "lance-delivery-system" but the battlefield transport of a warrior of heroic status. This proud fellow would be driven around followed by his loyal band of retainers looking for opposing proud fellows. They would then issue long and poetic challenges and boasts before laying into each other with suitable maniacal gusto. This game was played for keeps and would only end if/when the hero receiving the most punishment offered ransom, if not accepted the fight was to the death!

Weapons and Equipment: In this later period the new style of fighting required a change in the armour of warriors. Defensively the aim was for lighter, more flexible materials, notably canvas, linen and leather. Bronze breastplates and scales were still worn but these were no longer like the awesome Dendra style. Linen greaves became common as an alternative to boots as well as protection now that warriors were running about so much more. Helmets could still be of boar tusks but leather and bronze were as common. Some appear very like Sea People styles with horns and rivets protruding in a wonderfully barbaric fashion.

Shields underwent a major evolution, gone were the unwieldy tower-types that required a shoulder strap to heave about, in came the round, the crescent and the dyplon. Round shields need little explanation but the crescent shapes are a little different to later Greek and Thracian examples as the cut-out section seems to have been carried with the "horns" pointing downwards. This may have allowed greater freedom of movement when running so that the shield rim did not catch the legs as would occur with a round shield. The idea of shield design changing to enable rapid movement has been put forward for the introduction of the side cut-outs in the dyplon shields (as a note, the Civ3 Legionary Centurion has a dyplon shield, and not the scutum which it should have). What you have now is a "figure-of-8" shield that can be slung on the back with strategically placed holes so that a running (Fleeing? Chasing?) mans elbows are not restricted.

Weaponry also became lighter with javelins replacing long spears and swords becoming more commonplace and important in the increasingly popular single combats that took place. We even read of the occasional bow being used, heroically of course, by high status warriors.

This change may have been bought about by the shift of military activity from the Aegean to mainland Greece and Asia Minor where terrain is much more of a factor in warfare. That some areas retained the earlier Minoan Palace Culture and/or style warfare is a strong possibility. You could therefore have Pylians fighting in the old long spear style, mainland Myceneans charging about being barbaric heroes while civilised Achaians order their ranks with precision.

Who were the Trojans? There is still an ongoing debate about the origins of the Trojans; one school of thought is that they were settlers from the Greek mainland who took on local customs to become distinct from other Myceneans. Another theory is that they were an indigenous Asiatic people who were strongly influenced by Mycenean culture so had many similarities. Whatever the truth their military system was the same as that of the Later Myceneans with rapidly moving infantry and chariotry fighting in a heroic fashion. A personal opinion is that the Trojans influenced the Mycenean military style as it came to equate very strongly with other Anatolian military systems of this period, a case of a "fringe" state coming into line with the mainline thinking of the time

Of Wooden Horses: Mention must be made of this the most famous single item in siege history. If the story is taken literally it makes little sense unless the Trojan defenders were terminally dim. If we look at it in the light of contemporary siege practice it makes a little more sense. For over 100 years the Assyrian Empire had been refining its siege tactics and had developed a frightening array of equipment to batter down walls and get warriors onto walls. Several of these were given the appearance of animals, famously a boar in one illustration and it is only a simple step to change this to a horse amongst the equine-loving Myceneans for logic to prevail over myth and show the kernel of truth within.

Clothing: There are three basic styles of clothing worn throughout the period, a simple loincloth, a fringed kilt and a short sleeved tunic. At the most basic level these would be plain off-white garments, they could then be dyed (purple, red and green are recorded and/or illustrated) or bleached white. According to personal taste decorative embroidery could be added in contrasting colours, kilts especially could be a real riot of colour. Tunics had bands of colour edging them and running down sleeves and sides, one example shows an off-white base colour with black trim. Greaves would also appear off-white but could have red decoration on them. Assyrian style woollen socks were worn by some towards the end of the period.

Helmets: The most outstanding examples are those manufactured from boar tusks; the tusk is split down its length and then the sections attached to a leather foundation with thongs. The tusks would be a creamy white colour and the exposed thongs of various leather colours, mostly natural but with occasional red or green dye. Crests were of horsehair or more tusk ("waste not want not") and would be respectively dyed or painted black and/or white. This could give a striped or checkerboard effect. Occasionally the warriors own hair might be pulled up through the top of the helmet but would appear little different from a horsehair crest.

Shields: The Minoan and early Mycenean tower shields are well illustrated as having their oxhide patterns on the shield faces Later period round and crescent shields are a little more difficult to reconstruct accurately. Pictorial evidence shows the inside of the shields as being buff in colour but I have seen few clear examples of shield faces. Shields would have had a leather or bronze covering over the face; this would be strengthened with bosses and rivets. Leather would have been the most common material with richer individuals having bronze examples. No blazons or patterns seem to have been used so leather would be natural, red or green and the bronze polished.

Chariots: Materials used in the construction of the chariot cabs would be naturally coloured wood and leather. The hide coverings can be reproduced in similar fashion to the tower shields described above. Cabs are often shown to be yellow and black, this could represent different materials, bindings or paint. The painting of wheels was not uncommon and this would add to the decorative effect of the different colours of wood used. Wheels and cabs could have expensive inlays of ivory, bronze, ebony, horn, gold or silver to show the status of the owner. Spans would be matched pairs of black, brown or white horse and their tack might be inlaid with ivory, gold or silver.

*note- I have given a lot a detail on apperence, as a nice trojan war unit or two would be very nice...
 
Next up- Armies of classical Greece, and the peloponisian wars

Go Athens!
 
Addendum; There will be no explenation of navel forces, i dont feel that i know enough to describe as in depth as i would like to
 
Top Bottom