Originally Posted by Ranika
Ireland was not a collection of small tribes and kingdoms; this is a misconception when translated into English or other languages. The Irish word for 'kingdom' at the time, was the same as the word for 'tribe' (tuathea'); however, the more accurate word for a 'tribe' was 'drognan' or 'cineil', but it was not used that often in writing (at least, not proper rolls; so they got overlooked), while all answered to a 'tuathea'; a kingdom. There were indeed many families, each with a 'flath' or 'deias' (a 'prince' or 'chieftain', not a king, though foreigners often called them kings due to their livliehood), but all of them were part of 4-5 kingdoms (since the southern portion of Ulaiddu (Ulster) eventually split off and formed into Mide (Meath), and before that there was the temporarily seperate kingdom of Dal Riada, though Dal Riada was pushed out of Ireland after renouncing their position as vassal of the Ui Neill, though, if you count British Dal Riada as an Irish kingdom, since they were still Irish in culture, there were 6 kingdoms; there would later be Tuadmumu as an indepedent kingdom, but that's way out of period). However, the position of a 'high king' (although it wasn't called that; that title is a medieval invention the Ui Neill used to 'prove' they were the proper kings of Ireland) was effectively filled from about 600 - 720 AD; while the sub-kingdoms weren't too happy about it, and Iogh na Daithi mac Roidhe Uo Corra broke Laigin (Leinster) away around 634, most of the island was still under the ostensible hegemony of a single series of kings; it was part of an attempt at reunification (since the island had also been unified in the pre-Christian period, but had collapsed toward the end of it). It was clearly not overly effective, and 'little wars' were allowed during the period, but no major wars occured. The Irish in 500 AD were at a point of re-evaluating their relationships with one another, and were fairly unified through alliances, though sporadic border wars occured between the more recently formed Connacht (it existed before as the name for the region, but few managed to bring the whole region under their control until about 450, ever since the death of Cunnart, hence the name (Connacht is 'Dangerous Men', referencing the prior lawlessness of the area)) and, the older kingdom of Munster.
And the Picts weren't necessarily anymore united than the Irish were. While Caithness ultimately overcame Fibb, they had constant uprisings in the south, largely because they would occassionally have pagan kings, several who were openly hostile to Christians (and Fibb was wholely Christian at the time).
Also, the 'Scots' did not 'invade' in 500 AD; the Irish tribe of Dalriatta, who had once been their own kingdom, had colonies in Argyll from the 300s onward, at the latest; they only mass-migrated because the Ui Neill had demanded vassalage and land from them. At the time, Dal Riada was a vassal of the Ui Neill and had to pay them tribute (and the Ui Neill did occassionally send them soldiers to help them against the Picts from time to time, though some speculate this was more a token gesture to keep their loyalty and not deal with a revolt, more than any interest in keeping the land).
That said; Dyfedd in Wales was settled by men from the kingdom of Mumu/Muma (Munster). They came in, conquered the Britons there, and established a new kingdom. They were also technically a vassal of Munster (which was itself initially a vassal of Ulster/the Ui Neill in this period, since they comprised almost all of the over kings), and an extention of the Irish, but this meant little; the Irish, including Munster, took very little concern over the region. They considered it dim in value, and didn't really much care for Britons (despite some Celtic romanticists wishes, Gaels and Britons weren't that close; culturally/linguistically they were set apart, and both didn't much care for the other in most cases). Enough Gaels settled the region that their army had some Gaelic weaponry and such used in it, but it's really a moot point.
As for Gaels vs. Picts; it is true that Dal Riada was pretty much a non-issue for most of the period. In fact, the Dal Riada didn't gain the upper hand through war, but through inheritance. Gaels did not 'inherit' their titles; they had tanists (an elected successor; often from the current official's family, but not always). So, one could not use prigomeniture (bloodlines) as an excuse to take their land. However, the same was not true of Picts. Picts had matriolinical bloodlines (supposedly because they were given many Irish wives after some malady killed many Pictish women; part of the deal was that bloodlines would be traced through children's mothers, ensuring Gaelic-descended rulers). Dal Riadans (and other Irish, actually, who'd married into Picts; the Ui Neill did this too) used this as a way to stake claims on land. All of it, regardless of what kingdom took it, ended up under the ostensible control of Dal Riada. In this process, they eventually procured portions of Caithness, Domun/Domon (the Hebrides), and all of Fibb, as well as bits and pieces of other parts of Pictland, such as Atholl.
Also, the Irish didn't call themselves Gaels, the name of the (often fractured, but from time-to-time existent) kingdom of Ireland was 'na hÉireannaigh'; literally 'The Irishmen', or simply Éireann, 'Ireland'. Gael is a later version of 'Goidil' or 'Goedel', which was a name for their race.
A fun bit of knowledge is that Ireland, in the earliest part of the middle ages, was not a disunited region as is often supposed; most of the island fell under the rule of a single Irish 'emperor' (his title was 'Scotum Imperator'; Emperor of the Irish, but the Irish casually called the position 'Ardruire'; 'high king'). It wasn't until the lesser king of Leinster determined he'd make a better high king did the island collapse; it had been effectively a single kingdom since Brian Boru (some people think the island just collapsed after his death, which is entirely false; his successor, Mael Sechnaill, was called 'The Great' for a reason; he was an excellent king who controlled the whole island). Sub-kings still existed in this, but they weren't that different from 'dukes' in feudal kingdoms (Gaelic law wasn't very feudal, it was more like a republic, with mounting tiers of elected officials and 'senates' where laws would be discussed, volunteer armies, and the like).
Onto something hopefully less boring;
What Irish wear in combat. There are three tiers of Irish clothing in combat.
Levies; Militias, archers, non-Gaels forced into service {such as they did with Picts}; they wore a calf-length shirt, no cloak (or a cloak with one color and a fringe), and ankle-length, skin-tight pants called trews, with a pair of boots that came up over the ankle. Archers are in this group because Gaels never had professional archers until the 1020s (Mael Sechnaill's 'Saeghnanei' reform, when he introduced a few regiments of dedicated archers to his regional army in Ulster). However, archers always wore a cloak, with a hood up. Their trews could also be pulled above the knee, and tied there, to be worn as breezier shorts. The most advanced levies (generally light spearmen) would sometimes also wear a padded coat.
Dedicated Soldiers; Any soldier who had no other occupation, so was a year-round soldier. A volunteer soldier. He dressed in a knee-length shirt (usually off-white or saffron in color), belt, no trousers, a cloak (a short cloak that went down only to the top of his shoulder blades, though some higher rank soldiers, usually swordsmen, had theirs slightly longer), fur-lined boots that came over the ankle, and usually a padded coat called an acton, or cuton, worn over this; some wealthier soldiers might have overlapping iron scale armor, or chain. Horsemen would not be considered wealthier soldiers; horses were doled out to those who proved proficiency in cavalry training, not whoever had a horse (though militia light cavalry weren't unheard of, composed, usually, of wealthier farmers who owned their own horses). Most also wore a leather cap, but higher class soldiers sometimes had metal helmets. Plaid or checkered designs would be embroidered on their cloaks (kilts didn't exist, but they did use similar decoration on cloaks).
Aristocracy; The wealthiest soldiers, elected officials, kings, and their retainers ('knights', called Milidha {champions} or Ridire {a Saxon loan word}, that fought either on horseback or on foot); This whole lot dressed the same way. The Arras ('nobles'; any person elected to an office) usually formed the personal guard of kings, and often fought on foot. They all tended to wear robes (of varying lengths; the highest class wore ankle-length robes, slightly lower class wore mid-calf-length robes), with armor over it, such as mail or scale. They almost universally wore helmets (often with fancy inlay, gem studs, or delicate metalworking), and all wore long cloaks (not full-length though; those were for formal functions, and they would hold them up in combat, but they did wear a cloak that went at least past the small of their back). They would often wear fancier shoes, or even greaves with iron plates riveted over them; essentially plated metal boots. Almost everything they carried would have decoration (sword scabbards, their shields, helmets, etc.). Again, plaid designs appear on their cloaks. Their robes would often feature fine embroidery along the edges, and kings sometimes might have robes that depicted elaborate scenes or patterns.
And onto weapons;
The main weapons of Gaels were axes, and spears. The Gaelic axe is a hand axe or modified hatchet, with a spike on the back of it. It's a cheap piece of equipment, and most Gaelic infantry carried one. Spears had flared blades that could be used to slash and thrust with, and sometimes the Gaels employed long wood pikes to bring down horses. ALL Gaelic spearmen, except for pikemen, would fight with their spears overhand (Irish authors from the dark ages and middle ages are very clear about this, when they compare Gaelic war to foreigners). It's a byproduct of fighting mainly infantry wars where cavalry is little of a factor. The same spears could also be thrown; almost every actual Gaelic soldier carried one or two spears to throw before charging the enemy, including their spearmen.
Gaelic missiles revolved around 2/3rd scale javelins called 'darts', usually carried by militia (there weren't 'dartmen'; in some regions of Ireland it was actually against the law not to have enough darts for ALL militia to carry at least three). The dart was NOT an ineffective weapon; they weighted the heads specifically so they could punch a hole in armor or shields, generally making a nuisance of themselves. Professional soldiers preferred the sling, usually, and slings were in popular circulation in Gaelic armies until the 1400s (Irish allies from Connacht and Munster were still using slings during Robert the Bruce and William Wallace's war with the English). Of militia themselves, most fought as skirmishers, though cheap line spearmen were sometimes called to duty too; however, the main weapon of most militia was a sciota (a solid cudgel or club).
Gaelic swords were generally not that long, with a leaf-shaped blade, and a wooden grip. Gaelic longswords featured the same style of blade (though stretched out), and sometimes a longer grip (so they could be used in one or two hands). Longswords also often had polished bone grips, or leather wrapped grips, and often had elaborately decorated scabbards (until about 900 AD, the longsword was an expensive weapon in Ireland).
Other Gaelic weapons included ceasor and ordda (maces, usually with a round or egg-shaped head, and hammers). Longer javelins were used as well, as mid-way between the heavy throwing spears, and the cheaper, short range darts (despite what MTW: VI seemed to depict, darts were not for fighting over a long range, they were often thrown within maybe 20 meters of an opponent). Two-handed axes were in use from time to time, but were never really that popular. Two-handed hammers were sometimes in use by captains (this was an old pagan thing that held on for a while) and some soldiers.
Gaelic horses usually were little more than ponies; this was fine though. The terrain of both Ireland and northern Scotland could be unforgiving to larger horses, and in their native terrain, Gaelic ponies had a marked advantage. Horsemen often used the 'Gaelic lance', a long spear, still used overhand, and were more intended to kill infantry than other cavalry. They also carried a bundle of javelins pretty often, and were often used to skirmish before the battle, and chase down routers at the end of it. Heavier cavalrymen usually carried the 'lance' and a sword or axe (either a longsword or axe with elongated handle), and were used as shock cavalry but were fairly rare. Chariots still saw some irregular use; they were on their way out, but chariots remained a part of a Gaelic arras's retinue until the 1000s, at least (and some later kings still owned chariots as a symbol of prestige).
Gaelic shields were usually round 'target/targe' style shields, but cavalrymen and some nobles sometimes used long, oval-shaped shields.
And now, extrapolation on how they fought;
Attacking against a loose formation, Gaels usually would form into a few lines, with a specific job for each one, and 'special' regiments (like men with hammers or other, more irregular weapons) would wait behind. Skirmishers would take the front, pelt the enemy, and cover the advance of the second line; spearmen, who would also throw spears over the skirmishers, as the skirmishers fell back. The spearmen would march in a close formation, and engage the front of the enemy line. At the same time, cavalry of some sort would usually try to encircle or flank the enemy, throw some javelins, and withdraw. When some gaps in the enemy's front line appeared, the spearmen would slowly melt behind the third line, which would be men with axes, swords, or other close melee weapons, who would exploit any gaps and try and wedge the opposition apart. Prior to the movement of the three main lines, any longer range missiles, such as archers or slings, would launch a few volleys. Specialists would be used as discretion dictated.
Defending against was different; skirmishers would throw some darts or javelins to slow the advance, and try to get around the sides to flank or disorient, and the lines would form into a single, long, supported line, which would throw spears when the skirmishers withdrew, and form themselves into a tight, quasi-shieldwall, to absorb the brunt of the enemy charge. If cavalry came up first, levies with wood pikes would be placed before the line, or the line itself would have pikes available to them, to try and stop the cavalry attempt. Flanks would be guarded by cavalry, and the center of the line would be held by the commanding arras and his retainers.
Against a dense formation, the shape of the second two main lines is reversed; axemen (usually) would go in front of spearmen. The skirmishers would hit as usual, withdraw, and the axemen, with their heavy headed weapons, were actually intended to break the shields of the opponents, and withdraw behind the spearmen, allowing them to take advantage of the gaps in the enemy line's defenses, and when they broke some holes in it, the axemen would move back in.
In all cases, a few things remain the same. The commanding Arras worked out his plan before the battle; he would be fighting in either the line of close melee soldiers, or a reserve line just behind them, and would likely see combat (which is why so many Gaelic kings died in battle). Additional regiments would attempt to encircle the enemy and flank them; ultimately, the goal was to hem the enemy in, and move the main lines' flanks around the enemy, encircling and killing as many as possible.
This is a simplification; doesn't take into account wedge formations and other things they did, but it was the main way they fought (since it was developed largely to fight other Gaels, and Caledonians/Picts, who had invaded off and on, as well as Britons, who invaded fairly regularly before the Roman conquest of Britain). I mention it here to see if you can perhaps tailor their combat to work best in that way, though I know it probably can't be perfectly replicated (I doubt there's a way to simulate breaking shields and such).
