Prodromoi

[hoplite14gr]

Agree with you Robert.
I guess people took their social status more seriously then.
Kind regards
Stefanos

[Anonymous]

They certainly did take their status seriously, but I think their refusal to dismount was based on the fact that they would thus become even LESS effective against their foes. If you look at cavalry kit, it often doesn't lend itself to foot fighting. Norman (hawk, spit!) kit was the same for infantry as for cavalry, but being mounted had clear advantages, as demonstrated at the Battle of Hastings, even though cavalry utterly failed to break the English shieldwall.

[Robert Vermaat]

I disagree on that point. I doubt the equipment would have been the problem. Dismounted cavalry could, provided they had far larger numbers, act like infantry but with far deeper ranks. The small detachment would have been in under far greater pressure (literally) then with any cavalry attack.

[Anonymous]

That's if the cavalry could function as a foot unit. They didn't normally train for dual roles; that would have made them dragoons. If they out- numbered the enemy so heavily, it would probably have taken them far too long to adjust to the idea that dismounting might be both necessary and effective. Remember that they didn't tend to fight in isolation, but with infantry support, another reason for sticking to what they know best. But to return to the equipment, it would be best to look at specific examples and consider, case by case, whether the equipment would lend itself to fighting on foot and whether this idea would be likely to recommend itself on the basis of the effectiveness of the equipment, used in that fashion.

[hoplite14gr]

Only Velissarios and Narsis Katafracts are recorded to fight effectively bothe mounted and dimounted. So I will agree with Paul's consept here.
Light cavalry that most people consider of little value could force submission of the enemy by the constant threat of unexpected devastation while avoiding serious battle engagement. Endless hordes oh light horsemen was the way that Skythians got their tribute not by becoming souvlaki on spear points.
Kind regards
Stefanos

[Aryaman2]

So, is there a clear answer to the original question?
a) Did prodromoi carry sarissa or a shorter sort of lance?
b) Did they use it twohanded?

[hoplite14gr]

So, is there a clear answer to the original question?
a) Did prodromoi carry sarissa or a shorter sort of lance?
b) Did they use it twohanded?

a) In my opinion they could use both depending on the tactical situation and the mission.

b) Philips tomb fresco proves it was possible to use it 2-handed. The imported skythian saddle could help a lot.

Kind regards
Stefanos

[hoplite14gr]

In my opinion the lady proved that even the Archaic cavalry could charge.
So Cleomachos charge in the Lilantio pedio was possible.
But, by the time of Philp the skythian saddle was known to the Greeks through trade.
Kind regards

[Arthes]

Greetings,
it is possible....those who perform the Doma Vanquera art of 'Fantasia a la garrocha' are able to wield a 13 foot garrocha pole in one hand ....
My cousin is adapt at that..... :wink:
It is simply learning the art without using using strirrups.....
The garrocha seems be be held couched into the body, rather like a lance when practising the 'charge'
regards
Arthes

[Arthes]

Greetings,
it is possible....those who perform the Doma Vanquera art of 'Fantasia a la garrocha' are able to wield a 13 foot garrocha pole in one hand ....
My cousin is adapt at that..... :wink:
It is simply learning the art without using using strirrups.....
The garrocha seems be be held couched into the body, rather like a lance when practising the 'charge'
Incidentially, I was watching Narnia again last night.... and Oresius's centaurs in the battle charge...!
blurryCentaurs
regards
Arthes

[Anonymous]

This Scotish woman sed did tryed the Macedonian tactic as you can see! :lol:
Tactic
Bareback & one hand. :wink:

This picture suggests to me that using such a long lance is a waste of effort - nearly half of it is behind the rider.

There is no reason why cavalry should not use lances two-handed - as Arthes mentioned in passing, it was done with the Contos.

It may be that we re-enactors use lances which are unnecessarily heavy - we tend to want them to last! Nearly every Hoplite re-enactor I know started out with a spear-shaft much thicker than the art suggests and I think this happens in all of re-enactment. Contrarily, the (gebuine) lances of the 19th Century are remarkable for their slimness. With such slim shafts, the length could easily be increased, but using something the length of a sarissa would have serious drawbacks and little to recommend it, unless the cavalry rode in phalanx, or something very like it. I don't discount such a possibility.

Paul

[Felix]

Incidently, the use of a one-handed lance with shield by a bare-back horseman was commonplace on the American Great Plains in the 18th and 19th century.

http://www.plainsledgerart.org/view.pila?PLATE_ID=1703 (no shield, but a rifle in the other hand)

another view: http://www.vmfa.state.va.us/collections/85_609.html

here with both lance and shield http://americanart.si.edu/images/1985/1 ... 487_1b.jpg

[Aryaman2]

Maybe rather than think if this or that was possible, we should ask ourselves why did they do that, I mean, what is the use of carry a pike on horse? why one handed or twohanded? It is possible that a single horseman could use several different configurations, but for what purposses would he use each of them?

[hoplite14gr]

I do not think that "saddleless" classic cavalry used 2-handed grip on lance.
The most probable case are Armenian, Seleukidic, Parthian, Sarmatian and Roman catafracts. All of them had access to skythian saddle and were heavily armored. They could use the extra length of a 2-handed lance to overpower/unhorse less well protected opponents.
The non-catafract horsemen would need a shield to be well protected and 2-handed grip would be a problem.
It seemed though that the 2-handed grip advantages were not great because Byzantines, Sassanids, Islamic Ghoulams and Western Knights did not continue the practise.
Kind regards

[Felix]

Actually, the two-handed grip did not disappear entirely. There is a Mamluk furusiyyah translated by Kurtulus Oztopcu which discusses two-handed grips on a lance. How often this was used on the battlefield I do not know, but the technique was certainly known.

http://www.oztopcu.com/books/mamluk-kip ... litary.htm

P.S. note that both the native Cheyenne artist and George Catlin agree on how the long lance is held - in the middle with one hand.