Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

  1. #1
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    I was browsing armchairgeneral forums when one of the members posted links to several videos regarding the Qin armies:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8VVmdiwVNw

    Fast forward to 5:30, and it mentions 6 meter pikes used by the Qin army. The entire video only mentions it briefly for a few seconds. The historical accuracy kinda falls apart when the video shows the soldiers charging at top speed with their long spears, completely out of formation...

    The video is mediocre overall, but I wanted to know what are your thoughts on the similar pikes...were they used in similar fashion as the sarissa tactically speaking? (pining down enemy infantry while cavalry/other infantry did the flanking)

    Were the Qin army formations similar to the Macedonian army (combination of pikes, cavalry, and infantry?) that necessitated the use of a sarissa formation?

    The video also mentions the shorter halbreds/dagger axes and spears...and how they could have been used in conjunction with the longer pikes. So was it possible to have a sarissa formation with the shorter lengthed spearmen/halbred infantry in front, while the longer pikemen were behind them? (with the pike still long enough to reach the same length as the spears carried by the infantry in front) ?


    *Apologies if this topic is in the wrong section...
    Last edited by Intranetusa; 03-16-2010 at 05:07.
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  2. #2
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    The Japanese had pike formations as well as cavalry cover formations where soldiers stood in a loose line and would skewer pursuing cavalry so their own cavalry could reform.. There's no reason why you would not be able to try one though. Would have been quite nice against those super heavy (Jin? Era) Kataphracts.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  3. #3
    Klibanophoros Ton Rhomaioktono Member Duguntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iasi, Romania
    Posts
    766

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    nica video. Only point is that they state a fact, and then there's the chinese guy who explain in detail... and in chinese! Still, knowing the deicpline of the chinese, and their mentality, I'd not be surprised if they used it in another fashion, slightly different than Alexander did... They had the necessary dicipline (or fear of punishments!) do receive any training... so yeah, I'd not say it's wise to run with a 7 meters spear, but I'd not erradicate the fact that it demonstrate a different way to use the weapon
    Opinions are like bacteries : we all have, but it's better to keep them for ourself... (By me!)

    generously given by Nachtmeister
    generously given by Macilrille for Sweboz combat tactics
    Generously given by Brennus




  4. #4
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    lol, yeh...it sucks that it didn't have any subtitles or a translation
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  5. #5
    Varangarchos ton Romaioktonon Member Hannibal Khan the Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    I'm no expert on Chinese warfare, but the Qin and Han, to my knowledge, were possibly the only pre-Mongol dynasties that usually had their melee infantry fight in close-order formations. The ancient Chinese used archery, crossbows, and sometimes chariots as the main offensive arm, and on average, only about 5% of the army was on horseback. Of course, Qin Shi Huangdi was a very militant and innovative man, and so ignoring the traditional fear of stronger revolts didn't stop him from training mass levies of peasants to fight in disciplined formations.
    Last edited by Hannibal Khan the Great; 03-20-2010 at 12:51.
    from Megas Methuselah for helping with city names from Hooahguy for my sig


  6. #6
    Near East TW Mod Leader Member Cute Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In ancient Middle East, driving Assyrian war machines...
    Posts
    3,991
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Actually they use the longspears are used for charging, and hold the enemies afterwards......

    So they are just running for quick positioning..... (where is Sata.... he had better mandarin than me)

    My Projects : * Near East Total War * Nusantara Total War * Assyria Total War *
    * Watch the mind-blowing game : My Little Ponies : The Mafia Game!!! *

    Also known as SPIKE in TWC

  7. #7
    Arrogant Ashigaru Moderator Ludens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9,059
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Intranetusa View Post
    *Apologies if this topic is in the wrong section...
    The .Org's forum for general historical discussion is the Monastry, but I have no problem with such discussions taking place here.
    Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!

  8. #8
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hannibal Khan the Great View Post
    I'm no expert on Chinese warfare, but the Qin, to my knowledge, were possibly the only pre-Mongol dynasty that usually had it's melee infantry fight in close-order formations. The ancient Chinese used archery, crossbows, and sometimes chariots as the main offensive arm, and on average, only about 5% of the army was on horseback. Of course, Qin Shi Huangdi was a very militant and innovative man, and so ignoring the traditional fear of stronger revolts didn't stop him from training mass levies of peasants to fight in disciplined formations.
    The Han Dynasty/3 kingdoms era also used close order formations I believe. By the time the Han Dynasty came around, cavalry was strongly emphasized, maybe 1/3 of the army was cavalry. And in the armies that went campaigning against the Xiongnu Confederation, the majority, if not all of the soldiers that went north were on horse back - either as cavalry or as mobile infantry which rode to battle and fought dismounted.

    The 3 kingdoms, Sui, Tang, and Song Dynasties all used heavy infantry in conjunction with medium cavalry/light/heavy cavalry...while the Tang I believe used heavy cavalry less while the Song emphasized super heavy cataphracts more. No idea if these infantry were used in close formations or not.... =/


    Quote Originally Posted by Cute Wolf View Post
    Actually they use the longspears are used for charging, and hold the enemies afterwards......
    So they are just running for quick positioning..... (where is Sata.... he had better mandarin than me)
    I don't think it's likely that you'd be charging when you're holding a 19 foot pike... It's very unweildly and when charging, the formation will break...leaving you and your formation vunerable...
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  9. #9
    Klibanophoros Ton Rhomaioktono Member Duguntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iasi, Romania
    Posts
    766

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Intranetusa View Post
    I don't think it's likely that you'd be charging when you're holding a 19 foot pike... It's very unweildly and when charging, the formation will break...leaving you and your formation vunerable...
    He was saying they ran to GET to position quickly... not charging directly the ennemy... he said : running for quick positionning''
    Opinions are like bacteries : we all have, but it's better to keep them for ourself... (By me!)

    generously given by Nachtmeister
    generously given by Macilrille for Sweboz combat tactics
    Generously given by Brennus




  10. #10
    Satalextos Basileus Seron Member satalexton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,180

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Well it's the silly actors sharging, the historians and researchers said NOTHING about running with their pikes... They were simply iterating the tactical values of having pikes, like how "it is like a mountain or fortress pushing towards the enemy" from the front.




    "ΜΗΔΕΝ ΕΩΡΑΚΕΝΑΙ ΦΟΒΕΡΩΤΕΡΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΔΕΙΝΟΤΕΡΟΝ ΦΑΛΑΓΓΟΣ ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΗΣ" -Lucius Aemilius Paullus

  11. #11
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    The main weapons that seemed to have been emphasized during that era were 2 edged swords, spears, crossbows, and pole-dagger-axes with. Personally I believe that it looked more like the mixed melee formations of Sengoku Jidai or Feudal europe due to the combined arms approach that the Qin used. Chinese army formations were fairly fluid and were quite capable of fending off a wide array of forces as long as discipline was maintained.

    You'll probably find your answers if you can get weapon data from the terracotta army but the only decent link I found was this: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/ind...?showtopic=234

    1) BATTLE ARRAY IN VAULT 1

    There are about 6,000 terracotta warriors and horses is Vault 1. At the time of writing, however, only some thousand warriors, eight war chariots and thirty-two horses have been excavated. The following is the way they are arrayed.

    The chariots are arranged in mixed compositions with the foot soldiers, composing a rectangular formation facing east. It consists of four parts: the van, the rearguard, the main body and the flanks.

    The vanguard is formed by three ranks of warriors, all facing east; with 68 men in each rank. It has a total strength of 204.

    Immediately behind the van is the main body of the formation, a massive array extending about 184 metres with war chariots interposed with infantrymen in close order.

    On either side of the main body is a single rank of men extending also for 184 metres. They stand facing out (to the north and south) and are the side guard of the formation.

    At the end of the main column to the west are another three ranks of soldiers, of whom two rows stand facing east while the third row faces west to guard against attacks from the rear.

    The above goes to show how compactly the array of the pottery army is organized.

    An important principle followed in ancient times in lining up a battle array was that each formation must have a crack force as the van and a powerful force to bring up the rear. Without a dauntless vanguard, the army would be like a sword with no edge; without a forceful rearguard, it would be like a sword with no hilt. Only "with a sharp van and a protective rear," says Sun Bin (4th to 3rd century B.C.) in his Art of War, can an armed force "hold its own and repulse the enemy." The battle formation of the terracotta Qin army conforms with this principle.

    The pottery warriors in the van of Vault 1 are light-dressed without armour or helmet. They have their hair tied up in buns and legs protected in leggings, and use bows or crossbows as their weapons. They can only be the fleet-footed warriors who could "scale great heights and march long distances."

    Behind the van is a column of 38 files composed of chariots and foot soldiers. All the warriors, being the heavy-dressed ones, wear armour and shin guards and hold a variety of longshaft and shooting weapons. They are outfitted for protracted hand-to-hand encounters with the enemy.

    The battle formation in Vault 1 clearly places the light and vigorous force in front, followed by the heavy and powerful, to integrate assaulting impact with enduring strength. This created a mighty fighting force with which to shatter enemy positions and wipe out a strong foe.

    The war chariots at the eastern end of Vault 1 are positioned in pairs, each pair a fighting unit. One of the pair is the leader, the other the supporting chariot. In defence the two would cover each other in attacks from all sides; in assault they would mount a pincer movement. The two were inseparable; separated, both would be doomed to failure.

    As for coordination between chariots and men, each chariot is manned by three armoured soldiers, namely one chariot driver and two warriors, and is covered by infantrymen on all sides. Twelve men precede it in three rows of four, forming a squad to fight the enemy in front. Flanking it, soldiers varying in number between 52 and 60, also in ranks of four, form two small phalanxes to march alongside the chariot, each responsible for dealing with the enemy from one side. Then a fourth group of between seventy-two and over a hundred men bring up the rear of each chariot.

    This system of grouping four bodies of foot soldiers round a chariot, called the "five-element formation" in its time, was meant to ensure close coordination between the two arms and to provide greater infantry cover to the chariots. It also allowed ample room for the employment of flexible tactics. When the chariots were handicapped in movements in defensive operations or on rugged terrain, greater reliance was placed on the infantry. On flat terrain the chariots were placed ahead of the foot soldiers and employed as the main combat force assisted by the infantrymen. This tactic is summarised succinctly by an ancient writer in these words: "Chariots precede the foot, with the latter filling up the gaps, ... Dispatch chariots to meet the enemy; follow up with the soldiers to meet the changing situation." (Research in a Mountain Cottage: Chariot Warfare.) It appears clear, therefore, that the relative positioning of the chariots and foot soldiers changed with varying topography and combat situation
    2) BATTLE ARRAY IN VAULT 2

    The general layout of the soldiers in Vault 2, as explained before, is like a thick letter L, and consists of four small phalanxes.

    Click here for a pic of the layout:


    Phalanx 1 -- 174 non-armoured archers and 160 armoured archers/crossbowmen, totalling 334 men
    Phalanx 2 -- 64 chariots (manned by 3 men each or 192 men)
    Phalanx 3 -- 19 chariots (manned by 3 men each or 57 men) and 264 infantry, plus 8 cavalry -- 14 chariots with 8
    infantry each, 3 chariots with 32 infantry each, 2 chariots with 28 infantry each plus 4 cavalry each
    Phalanx 4 -- 6 chariots (manned by 2 men each) and 108 cavalry -- 6 chariots escorted by 4 cavalry each,
    with main body of 84 cavalry following behind

    Phalanx 1, situated at the top of the L, forms the front corner of the whole formation. It is composed of two parts: the borders and the core. Standing all along the four sides are 174 figures of bowmen, lightly clad without armour. They surround the core of the formation, which is a group of 160 archers arrayed in eight files of 20 men each. All covered by armour, they are the heavy-dressed type and hold bows and crossbows as their weapons.

    Why is it that the figures on the four sides are standing while those in the middle are squatting? Two rules were to be observed in ancient times by troops using shooting weapons. First, no fellow soldiers must stand in front of those shooting so that nobody of the same side got hurt; second, archers of the same unit must take turns at shooting to keep arrows flying at the enemy and give him no reprieve. The two groups of archer figures in this phalanx are supposed to alternate between the postures of standing and squatting, depending on whether or not it is their turn to shoot. That is to say, the archers on the sides shoot first at the enemy and then squat down; they are followed by those in the middle, who stand up to start shooting. The two groups take turns at shooting so that continuous flights of arrows keep the enemy at bay.

    Phalanx 2, to the right of the base of the L-formation is a chariot array composed of eight lines of eight chariots each, sixty-four in all. Each chariot, drawn by a team of four horses, carries three armoured figures - a driver and two warriors. There are no foot soldiers attached to it on any side, a type of troop deployment different from the practice prevalent in the Yin and Zhou dynasties (c. 16th to 11th century B.C.) or the Spring and Autumn Period (770-476 B.C.) when chariots were without exception supported by infantry. This new discovery has revealed something we did not know before. The change must have followed the development of foot soldiers during the Warring States Period (475-221 B.C.) into an independent infantry arm. Battles were now fought by coordinated action between units of horse, foot and chariot, and it was presumably no longer necessary for each individual chariot to have foot soldiers assigned to it.

    Phalanx 3, the middle of the L-formation, consists of three files of chariots reinforced with horse and foot. There are six chariots each in two of the files, and seven in the middle file, totaling nineteen. Each carries three occupants, namely one driver and two fighters as usual. At the very end of the left file a chariot with the figure of a general is the command chariot, which is followed by a group of infantry. Of the other chariots, those in front are followed by eight infantrymen each and those toward the back are supported from behind by a group of 28 or 32 foot soldiers. The rear of the phalanx includes two groups of cavalrymen, with four horses to each group, plus 32 infantrymen arranged in eight ranks of four men each. It forms an oblong echelon behind the last war chariot.

    The presence of mounted soldiers in the composition of ancient battle arrays is also a new element that has just come to light. The cavalry was quick and mobile and could be used as a reserve strike force giving greater flexibility to the chariot formation.

    Phalanx 4, an array mainly of mounted soldiers, occupies the corner of the letter L. A long rectangle of three columns consisting of six chariots and 108 horses and men, it may be divided into two parts: the van and the body. Forming the van or the phalanx head are the six chariots, two in each column, one behind the other but separated by a row of mounted soldiers between each two chariots. Each has two riders: a driver and a warrior. Cavalrymen sandwiched between the chariots are in rows of four, making a total of twelve mounted men. The body of the phalanx is composed of 108 cavalrymen, who stand with their steeds in rows of four in the three columns. Altogether in this phalanx are 108 horses, each with the figure of its rider standing by holding the reins.

    The four phalanxes described above form an organic major formation. This form of troop deployment has been described in ancient books on the art of war as: a major formation comprises minor ones, a large battle-array consists of smaller ones, with each part linked to another, every section covering all the others. Unless a large array comprises several small ones, it would be handicapped in flexibility, and "would not be able to break into smaller fighting units" to adapt to complicated terrain or the ever-changing enemy situation: the troops would find themselves unable to spread out or take different positions, or even be thrown into confusion, crowding and jostling against each other.

    The positioning of the four phalanxes reflects well-conceived military thinking. The archers' phalanx, protruding in front, faces the enemy on three sides- the front and the two flanks - and is a position to give full play to the power of their bows and arrows. The chariot formation, on the right, can engage the enemy in front and from the right and, availing itself of the "arrow cover" from the archers, is ever ready for both offensive and defensive actions. The cavalry, on the left and facing the enemy only from one flank, is covered on three sides in defence while retaining complete freedom to disengage itself from the main body in an assault. The mixed phalanx of foot, horse and chariot, placed in the middle of the formation, serves as the central coordinating force to link up the other three phalanxes described above and the rearguard placed behind. All four units, offering support to one another, may break up into separate combat units or combine to fight as an integral whole of multiple arms. Highly maneuverable, the battle-array under the command of a seasoned commander could perform miraculously on the battlefield.

    The mixed composition of foot, horse and chariot in the same formation represented an important change taking place during the Warring States Period (475-2 2 1 B.C.). Before that a battle-array meant an array of chariots. The change came about with the infantry and cavalry becoming independent arms of the forces.

    The three arms were meant to serve different purposes. The chariots were to "storm strong fortifications, put the formidable enemy to rout, and block the fleeing foe." The cavalry, being mobile fighters, were to "chase the foe in flight, disrupt his routes of food supply, and attack lightly armed marauders." Foot soldiers, on their part, would be employed mainly in operations in closed or marshy terrains, where the maneuvers of chariots and horses became difficult, or on garrison duty at forts and passes.

    Sun Bin, an eminent military writer quoted above, wrote in his Art of War: Eight Arrays: "Chariot, horse and foot are to be organized in three arrays and positioned one on the right, one on the left and one in the middle. When the terrain is favourable, chariots should be largely employed. When it is difficult, cavalry should be largely employed. In distress, arrows should be resorted to." In other words, according to Sun Bin, topography and combat situation must be taken as the determinant factors in deciding which of the arms should be used as the main force and which as the auxiliary force. Only a good coordination of the three arms could ensure victory.

    A brilliant example of this was the Battle of Changping fought in 260 B.C. between the states of Qin and Zhao. The Qin feigned defeat and began to fall back, inducing the unsuspecting Zhao to pursue them. They then unleashed a force which they had laid in ambush to cut off the retreat route of the Zhao. Meanwhile a Qin cavalry unit 5,000 strong struck between various camps of the Zhao, encircling them in separate pockets. Thanks to the well-coordinated use of the three arms, Qin wiped out four hundred and fifty thousand of the enemy, entering a famous battle into the pages of history of ancient Chinese warfare......
    Last edited by antisocialmunky; 03-17-2010 at 01:34.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  12. #12
    The Creator of Stories Member Parallel Pain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sitting on the Throne of My Empires
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Nice find. Really interesting.

    But I really don't see how it's not possible to charge in a pike square. The thing is that in this one the soldiers are NOT standing as tightly together as the Macedonian phalanx. Instead there's enough room to move around.

    The Chinese have since-iunno-when always liked to mix their weapons in a single formation. I think the pikes were no different. I imagine the three times of polearms intersperced at different intervals working in the same formation. This gives up a bit of the sheer frontal power of the Macedonian phalanx for flexibility. And in an environment where ranged troops are much move common and deadly than what faced the Greeks, flexibility would've been more important. The medieval pike square had the ability to advance rapidly, and I personally believe Chinese pike formation would have been even looser.

    I think the independent formations quoted by ASM illustrate this point.

    Also the Changping campaign lasted years! I would very much believe even the final decisive battle would not have been done in a single day and would've been carried out in a much larger battlefield than decisive battles in the west say Gaugamela or Cannae. This makes loose and independent operating formations even more important.
    Last edited by Parallel Pain; 03-18-2010 at 09:57.

  13. #13
    Satalextos Basileus Seron Member satalexton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,180

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Chang Ping was more a war than a campaign, most of it simply boiled down to skirmishes and stalemates, with hardly any gains to either side. Come to think of it, it's kinda like WW1 with crossbows instead of rifles....

    As for the the pikes, which are called the Pi in chinese, the Qin used it more like the the Swiss and Spanish than say...the Makedones. =/ Even so, pikemen fill a very small niche in the Qin army. The average infantryman of the warring states serve as armour-clad crossbowmen, it -is- easier to drill a citizen farmer/city dweller to fill the sky with bolts afterall....




    "ΜΗΔΕΝ ΕΩΡΑΚΕΝΑΙ ΦΟΒΕΡΩΤΕΡΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΔΕΙΝΟΤΕΡΟΝ ΦΑΛΑΓΓΟΣ ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΗΣ" -Lucius Aemilius Paullus

  14. #14
    The Creator of Stories Member Parallel Pain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sitting on the Throne of My Empires
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Well it's more like THAT particular war boiled down to one campaign. And really THAT campaign is more like "The Western Front" campaign, like there's really no where else to fight but there. Like the western front, it began as a semi-mobile warfare before settling down in a stalemate in defenses as the Qin can't break the Zhao's final defense line (for the campaign) and Zhao is unwilling to attack. However UNLIKE the western front, it successfully ended in an encirclement, NOT a frontal war of attrition. Considering Qin, the winner, reported battle casualties at close to 50%, exaggerated or not there would have been many terribly fiercely contested large scale battles in the campaign, and not minor skirmishes.

    I also don't think there's something like "the average" soldier. And if there was it WASN'T crossbow/archers because both were used in unison in the same formation, presumably crossbow need cover while they reload, and this was done until both weapons were phased out in the late Qing. For good or bad somewhere down the line someone thought it was most efficient to mix arms, and the policy stuck. If I was to guess, in a standard army of the era sent against other Chinese states, the horse cavalry (that's light skirmish cavalry) made up 5 to 10%, depending on the situation. Light and heavy chariots another 10% to 15% Ranged infantry up to 35%. And the rest melee infantry of different types (pikes, spears, halberds/dagger-axes with heavy/light/no armor).

  15. #15
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    The Qin and Han used crossbow formations/firing line to provide continuous fire...something that was lost after the Han.
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  16. #16
    The Creator of Stories Member Parallel Pain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sitting on the Throne of My Empires
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Don't know about that. At the very least we have report of arrows and bolts in the supplys during the general Three Kingdoms period.

    And "civilization" at least record keeping never fell appart as completely as at the end of the Empire. Though admittedly record keeping wasn't very good to begin with.
    Last edited by Parallel Pain; 03-19-2010 at 02:43.

  17. #17
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    What I meant was the crossbow firing line formation that was similar to 18th century rifle firing lines was no longer used after the Zhou Confederation to Qin/Han/Three Kingdoms eras.
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  18. #18
    Satalextos Basileus Seron Member satalexton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,180

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    but at the same time you have to bear in mind that then cavalry gradually increased in numbers as the steppe 'barbarians' settled and became 'civilized'. Battled fields became more and more mobile with light unarmoured infantry, horse archers and even the occasional cat-tanks.....static lines of range weapons and with people clad in stuff that make them barely able to run just simply don't cut it anymore. Mobility FTW




    "ΜΗΔΕΝ ΕΩΡΑΚΕΝΑΙ ΦΟΒΕΡΩΤΕΡΟΝ ΚΑΙ ΔΕΙΝΟΤΕΡΟΝ ΦΑΛΑΓΓΟΣ ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΚΗΣ" -Lucius Aemilius Paullus

  19. #19

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    China always has a tradition of put more empasis on versatility, flexibility and mobility, even their heavy units.
    It is recorded that around 400BC, the Wei state which is the first great-power in warring-state period before Zhao and Qin, had a special heavy infantry force called Wuzu.
    "An armyman must wear a helmet and three layers of armor, and his weapons included a strong crossbow which needed the pulling force of 12 Dan (石). At that time, 1 Dan=30 kilograms, so 12 Dan=360 kilograms. He also would have to carry fifty strong arrows, a Ge (戈, a kind of weapon with a long handle and a transverse dagger), and a sword. If he could carry all of these weapons and the supplies for three days and then run the entire distance of 100 Li (里. At that time, 1 Li was equal to about 0.4 kilometers, so 100 Li was equal to about 40 kilometers) in half a day, he could then become a Wuzu. The government gave farmland and a house to a Wuzu, and his family was exempt from taxes."
    I guess those guys must looked very much like Marius's mules...
    cited from http://www.ourorient.com/articles/states/wuzu.htm
    Last edited by Julianus; 03-19-2010 at 10:29. Reason: typo

  20. #20
    The Creator of Stories Member Parallel Pain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sitting on the Throne of My Empires
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Except with crossbows and no (mention of) a shield. And Wei did get its ass kicked by Sun Bin and Guiling and Maling

  21. #21
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Quote Originally Posted by Julianus
    and his weapons included a strong crossbow which needed the pulling force of 12 Dan (石). At that time, 1 Dan=30 kilograms, so 12 Dan=360 kilograms.
    that's a heavy crossbow by all accounts; that's a force of 3528N, or792Lbs.

    can people even pull that naturally?
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  22. #22
    The Creator of Stories Member Parallel Pain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sitting on the Throne of My Empires
    Posts
    380

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    It might have a sort of crank mechanism. An Arbalest (according to wiki) has a pull force of 5000lbs.

  23. #23
    Member Member Intranetusa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Wiki says up to 5000lbs, and it seems a bit dubious. 5000lbs of draw weight for a hand held weapon? It seems more likely to be a siege weapon.
    "Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind...but there is one thing that science cannot accept - and that is a personal God who meddles in the affairs of his creation."
    -Albert Einstein




  24. #24
    Near East TW Mod Leader Member Cute Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    In ancient Middle East, driving Assyrian war machines...
    Posts
    3,991
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    And finally, my ancestors defeats my other ancestors with horse archery........

    My Projects : * Near East Total War * Nusantara Total War * Assyria Total War *
    * Watch the mind-blowing game : My Little Ponies : The Mafia Game!!! *

    Also known as SPIKE in TWC

  25. #25
    Varangarchos ton Romaioktonon Member Hannibal Khan the Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: Qin Dynasty sarissas?

    Which Ancestors? Steppe Nomads?
    from Megas Methuselah for helping with city names from Hooahguy for my sig


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO