Assuming that the Anglo-Saxons have defeated William and survive. Had they used Knights like the other European powers?
>>477788
What are you trying to say? If the Anglo Saxons had cavalry at Hastings, they might have won? If they had won, would they have developed cavalry? Something else entirely?
>>477797
>If they had won, would they have developed cavalry
Yes, this.
>>477834
I don't see any reason why they would.
>>477788
Due to England's insular status, the Anglo-Saxons typically didn't not follow continental trends in warfare. For example, they continued to wield Dane axes even though swords were en vogue and they had neither mounted infantry nor archers. So no, had they not been conquered their knights would dissimilar to their continental equivalents.
They would have won if it wasn't for those damn vikings
>>477857
Mounted infantry > cavalry
>>477873
lol yes i realized that after i posted it...
>>477788
The Saxons did not have the tradition of the Foderati, which is were the Knights come from, all the way back to the Batavians, and stretching it, back to the Thracian Celts and Macedonian Companion Elites.
>>477886
Wrong. The Saxon "thegn" was a professional warrior employed by a king; so in other words a knight.
>>477886
Also Huscarls.
What is the difference between thegn and huscarl?
>>477788
if the scandinavians did, the saxons would have done.
>>477906
Not much but I believe huscarls were of higher social status.
>>477834
t. J. R.R Tolkien
>>477892
So what 's your take on the Foederati influence on the Arthurian legend?
> Alan
> Sarmatian
>>477917
>>477901
>>477892
>>477857
The ancestor of that helmet was around in the 4th century BC, the Saxons learned from their enemies, which were largely Foederati in Britain.
>>477892
Saxons did not influence the cavalrymen that defeated them.
They had no Knight culture, hence they didn't understand the feigned retreat tactics that the Normans used on them over and over throughout the Battle of Hastings.
>>477979
> protoRomanWarrior
wut
>>478095
Never mind.
>>477995
Sassanid empire?
>>477788
>>477834
Likely no. Europe went full circle, and once they started to field large bodies of well armed and organized infantry again, they rapidly began to displace cavalry.
The anglo-saxons likely would have seen little need to change things at all, and probably would have jumped to a form of pike and shot, just with shields and spears.
>>477857
They actually had archers, just not at hasting. Supposedly they left them behind after Stamford.
Nobody in western Europe failed to use archers outside of iberians and the irish. The weapon is simply too ubiquitous, and often among men too poor to stand in the line anyway.
>>477995
Arguable. We're not even sure it WAS a feigned retreat, and plenty of cavalrymen have failed to understand the idea as well.
>>477906
Originally the same concept, the retainer of a lord, but developed into different things. Thegn became term for the social class of the lower landed aristocracy: not earls, but still free land-holders who served the king. Huscarl remained much more specific term that referred to the free house-servant of a lord, his retainer/bodyguard.
>>477857
Anglo-Saxon England had archers.
They just...deployed them in a really ancient manner as skirmishers, grouping archers with other missile units like javelins and slingers, and told to run ahead of a shield wall and pepper the enemy with arrows/javelins/slings, tasked with ambushes
>>477788
Knighthood wouldve crept up to the Anglo-Saxons eventually.
The Norse who weren't conquered by anyone from Western Europe had knights. The Scotts who weren't conquered by the Normans had them as well.
Knighthood will be probably worked into the Anglo-Saxon system.
>>479246
I don't really see a reason why the Anglos wouldn't have developed knights but Scotts had to keep up with the English who now had knights, and the Swedes were sort of in a different position geographically and power-wise I guess
>>477930
Arthur was a Celt but I believe the Green Knight stands in for Anglos what with his axe and all.
>>477995
You're mistaken to equate knights with cavalrymen. The word "knight" just means "servant" or "bondsmen" and it has cognates in all Germanic languages (cniht, kniucht, knecht, knægt, knekt...). A knight is simply a professional warrior and as I've already explained, thegns and huscarls fulfilled this role in Anglo society.
The feigned retreat tactics at Hastings were part of an equestrian culture which is why the Anglos did not understand them.
>>479237
No one denies that the Anglos mastered the bow m8.
>>477857
This is incorrect. The saxons did have cavalry but it was only mounted infantry and mounted raiders. They had no conventional horse units like their continental counterparts. Their cavalry was also very small in number and likely want ever more than just the immediate guards of the nobility.
>>479919
I appreciate your clarification but I don't think it's inaccurate to say they didn't have cavalry when you yourself said:
>They had no conventional horse units
Although they had riders, they didn't have a developed equestrian culture.
>>479932
This
I think the first anon is asking if the Saxons would.have adapted their professional warriors to an equestrian rather than dismounted class. I do not believe so. As they were defeated, we shall never know.
However you were also spot on: the role of.the huscarl is the same as the Knight. A professional warrior in service to a single Lord. Every feudal society has a cognate, from.the huscarl to the Hindu Kshatriya, the famous Samurai and of course the sarwen of Ethiopia, the thematic warriors of the rump Roman Empire etc.
>>479953
Well said.
This thread is what I think /his/ ought to be. Informative discourse about an interesting subject that doesn't devolve into angry non-conformist shitflinging. That's what seems to happen with most threads these days.
I concur with most of the posts. If the saxons won they would've only been validated in their current military doctrine and doubled down on it. They'd need a body loss against a cavalry force to change that in any meaningful capacity. Even after the Normans won England still didn't have a strong cavalry arm. They still had a strong infantry focus.
Anyone want to elaborate on Anglo-Saxon tactics, weaponry, armour, clothing, warfare? Want to learn more about this period
The Anglo-Saxons weren't aloof from
Western Europe. They had extensive commercial and marriage ties to Flanders, the HRE, the Rus principalities, etc.
At the very least, the Old English will appreciate the mobility and striking power that armored cavalry can offer. Not to mention adapt crossbows since they were never seen before in Anglo-Saxon times. The core of their armies will be heavy infantry, but they'd raise a light and heavy cavalry units in border wars against the Welsh and Scottish.
>>480859
They weren't one trick ponies as some make out but they did use shield walls in which a line of men would overlap shields and stab over the top of the shield. Mercian Saxons famously attacked unprepared Vikings (they were bathing) on the banks of the Trent in a surprise attack from the river. Also descriptions of them using two handed axes in figure of 8 movements after the shield walls had repelled attacks. Archers were used mostly for defence as the duty that bound saxons to fight for the King held that they needed at least a long knife on them but never a bow so archers were rarely in the field.
>>480955
>Mercian
Love hearing about the Mercians, as i live in the capital of Mercia
>tfw the capital of a great anglo saxon kingdom now has the highest obesity and teen pregnancy rate of any town in the UK
how the mighty have fallen.
>>480962
Total War:Age of Charlemagne has Mercia as a faction with the capital at Lichfield when it is normally thought to have been Wolverhampton.
>>477788
Why not? Depends on contacts with continental Europe, but for example French king marrying his daughter to English king and sending together with her contingent of his knights to further support his influence over Britain and help his son-in-law against local opposition seems like plausible scenario.
Have any of you seen this show? I thought it was pretty good - I don't know enough /his/ to spot all the historical inaccuracies.
I did chuckle at the celts being depicted as dreadlock haired, tie-dye cloaked pagans.
>>477788
Eternal ANGLO detected
>>480986
Tamworth has always been said to have been Mercia's capital
Everything i've seen has said that, from Books to what i was taught at school to Mercias Wikipedia page.
>>481030
First episode
>Everyone in black or brown leather bondage gear
>Saxons using square shields
>Peasant soldiers using swords
I turned it off. Made me sperg hard.
>>481030
Well it was more accurate than Vikings but that isn't hard.
>>481044
They actually fix that a couple of episodes later... then for the big final battle they clearly ran out of props when the square shields return.
>>481036
american?
>>481400
English
>>481044
>>Everyone in black or brown leather bondage gear
Why the a great fear of colors.
>>482144
Sadly, likely design. Supposed to look grim/gritty, so lack of color.
