Pikemen in the Medieval period

[edyzmedieval]

Given that the Macedonian phalanx has been very successful in the Ancient period, was the pike used as widely in the Medieval period? There is the example of course of the Scottish pikemen, who successfully won at Bannockburn, and the example of the Flemish militia who did successfully employ these pike tactics using a schiltron. You have a couple of examples in battle, such as Stirling Bridge as well, plus the many instances of Swiss cantons defending themselves in pike formation.

Similarly, by the Renaissance period, you had the famous Swiss mercenaries fighting alongside musketeers and the Landsknecht mercenaries in the pay of the Habsburg Empire.

But are there any other examples of successful pikemen / pike phalanx / schiltron in the Medieval period? :book:

[Brandy Blue]

I'm not sure if you would want to include the Spanish/Portugese tercio or not. They were from the Renaissance, but if the the Swiss and Landsknecht count, I don't see why the tercio shouldn't. The tercio units were not limited to pikemen, but the pikemen were a major feature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tercio

[edyzmedieval]

I'm not sure if you would want to include the Spanish/Portugese tercio or not. They were from the Renaissance, but if the the Swiss and Landsknecht count, I don't see why the tercio shouldn't. The tercio units were not limited to pikemen, but the pikemen were a major feature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tercio

Indeed, but the Tercios as well they were a bit later on to the period. They were quite important to the Spanish crown however, they were a very capable unit.

[Brandy Blue]

Indeed, but the Tercios as well they were a bit later on to the period. They were quite important to the Spanish crown however, they were a very capable unit.

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to go up against them. Not without a totally unfair tech advantage or some such.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I vaguely remember reading in an Osprey book about Moorish soldiers fighting in very tight formations with long spears, this could have resembled a phalanx.

It is strange how it was so common in the ancient and Renaissance eras but disappeared in between.

[Brandy Blue]

It is strange how it was so common in the ancient and Renaissance eras but disappeared in between.

I get the impression that the spear and pike (which after all is just a long spear) did not disappear. They could protect missile troops, as they did in Crusader armies for instance, or could provide a screen for beaten cavalry to rally behind. However, it was rare for medieval spear/pike men to dominate a battle field, which is why the Scottish and Flemish victories stood out and impressed contemporaries and historians alike.
My guess is the decline of spears/pikes happened for political and economic reasons:
1: The collapse of central authority which typified the early middle ages meant that war was less about field battles and more about raids, countering raids, petty sieges of petty castles, ambushes, etc. This kind of war favored troops that were more mobile, flexible, and effective in small groups as well as large ones. Short spears mixed in with other unit types might work, but long spear phalanx units are specialized for use in large groups in field battles on favorable terrain.
2: The collapse of central authority also meant the decline of trade, and a shortage of rulers wealthy enough to field large groups of well trained, heavily armored pike men. Armies would have a large number of peasants who would lack the skill to maneuver effectively. They could take up static defensive positions, but would not be good at taking the offensive. Without heavy armor, they would be vulnerable to arrows, which would break up their formations, making them vulnerable to cavalry. In any case, they would not be likely to have standardized equipment, and you really need pikes of about the same length to make pike units work.
In the later middle ages, there was a shift from peasant armies with a sprinkle of professional soldiers (knights, squires, men at arms, etc.) toward armies of professional soldiers, largely mercenaries, and there was a political shift toward larger political units, at least in Spain and France. Not so much in Italy, but the city states grew rich from trade and could afford mercenaries anyway. They also tended to have active militias with plenty of crossbowmen who, sure enough, required an effective infantry arm to protect them. Conditions were right again for the professional pike man, and the Swiss mercenaries filled that niche.

Edit: Obviously the Byzantine empire did not suffer a similar collapse of central authority. However, they often didn't have enough soldiers to meet their enemies on equal terms, and so depended on maneuver to cut off the enemy from supplies and reinforcements. A slow, cumbersome army would not be useful.

[edyzmedieval]

I get the impression that the spear and pike (which after all is just a long spear) did not disappear. They could protect missile troops, as they did in Crusader armies for instance, or could provide a screen for beaten cavalry to rally behind. However, it was rare for medieval spear/pike men to dominate a battle field, which is why the Scottish and Flemish victories stood out and impressed contemporaries and historians alike.

The spear and the pike did not disappear per se, it was just the gradual use of a normal spear (something along the lines of a hoplite spear - hoplon) instead of a very long sarissa pike that would have required consistent training beforehand.


Edit: Obviously the Byzantine empire did not suffer a similar collapse of central authority. However, they often didn't have enough soldiers to meet their enemies on equal terms, and so depended on maneuver to cut off the enemy from supplies and reinforcements. A slow, cumbersome army would not be useful.

After the Komnenoi dynasty, so essentially around 1190, the central Byzantine authority collapsed as well but it was not replaced by small, powerful states. It was replaced by other empires.