Sling v Bow

THERE are four types of hand-held missiles in the biblical rules in Neil Thomas's Ancient & Medieval Wargaming - javelins, slings, bows on foot and bows on horseback.

Their ranges are, respectively, 8cm, 16cm, 24cm and 16cm, which, presumably, are effective ranges rather than maximums.

The difference between bows on foot and on horseback is easily explained: "A mobile horse is inevitably not as stable a firing platform as the earth on which the footman stood."

Unfortunately Thomas does not specifically mention whether the range of bow-armed charioteers should be 16cm or 24cm.

On the one hand charioteers are standing upright, rather than on horseback, but cannot be regarded as "on foot" in the normal sense of the phrase as a chariot floor is not stable.

I think the shooting range of bow-armed charioteers should be the same as for horse archers, namely 16cm.

So far, so simple, and in accordance with the spirit of the rules, I believe.

But the question of the range of slings is another matter.

It might be thought obvious that a bow is more powerful and so will have a longer range.

But my reading of authorities on the subject suggests that the ranges of bows and slings were compatible, especially when it came to effective range, ie the range at which weapons were typically used.

Some bows had longer ranges than other bows, but the same was true for slings, whose ranges were strongly influenced by the size of shot.

There were times when slings considerably outranged bows.

The following speech from Xenophon's Anabasis is informative: "The enemy can shoot arrows and sling stones so far that neither our Cretan bowmen nor our javelinmen can reach them in reply.

"We need slingers ourselves at once, [and] I am told there are Rhodians in our army, that most of them understand the use of the sling, and that their missiles carry no less than twice as far as those from the Persian slings.
"The latter have only a short range, because the stones used in them are as large as the hand can hold. The Rhodians, however, are versed also in the art of slinging leaden bullets."

It might be wondered, if slingers were as good as good as archers, and at times better, why they were by medieval times more-or-less completely replaced by bowmen.

This was partly due to slingers requiring many years of habitual use and practice to become proficient, which was why slingers from certain areas, for example the Balearic islands, were especially sought after. Archery also required dedicated practice, but to a lesser extent.

Also, more widespread use of armour made archery less effective - so much so that in most of Europe traditional archery died out, with the crossbow replacing ordinary bows, until both were superseded by gunpowder weapons.

A further complication is that the sling was a concussion weapon, while the arrow was a piercing weapon, which again made their effectiveness vary.

However, the main point is that slingers should, in my opinion, have the same range as bows on foot, ie 24cm.

Move Variation

IN wargaming it is regarded as normal to use dice to help determine such major things as shooting, hand-to-hand fighting and morale.

Dice, or perhaps drawing cards, are also often used for the weather and special events.

But everyone seems happy with troops moving at a strictly regimented pace, which means that if, for example, two units from rival armies are heading for a particular feature, perhaps a hill top, it is easy to see which should get there first.

I like to shake this up in my rules by introducing what I call the move variation.

This has it that if a unit is ordered to advance at least 75% of its permissible move distance that turn, roll a six-sided die.

If the die lands 2-5, all proceeds normally, but a 6 means 25% is added to the distance to be covered, while a 1 means 25% is deducted from the wished-for distance.

This represents the unexpected effects of terrain and other possible factors that may catch a unit by surprise.

The rule should not be enforced too zealously. For example a regiment sent to guard the bank of a river should not have to enter the river thanks to the move-variation rule.

Next Up

I PLAN in my next tabletop battle to use Neil Thomas's biblical rules from Ancient & Medieval Wargaming, pitting Egyptians against Hebrews.

As a twist, I think it will be fun to set up the two armies using the suggested deployments in the book.

That means the Egyptians will consist of three elite chariot squadrons, two units of spearmen (one upgraded to medium armour), two units of close-order archers and a unit of elite Sherden.

The suggested deployment for a pre-Solomon Hebrew army involves two elite units of Simeonite and Ephraimite auxiliary infantry, two units of javelinmen (Gadites and Issacharites), two units of Benjaminite slingers and two units of ordinary auxiliary infantry.

The two armies - Egyptians on the right

However, before proceeding further there are some adjustments I want to make to the rules that will in my opinion improve the game.

Full Hebrew Army

UNDER Neil Thomas's rules in Ancient & Medieval Wargaming, an army always starts with eight units, each consisting of four bases.

I think this system works well for ancient battles, particularly for biblical-era ones where army strengths are usually a matter of speculation.

Having completed painting my latest batch of chariots from Old Glory, I now have enough troops to field the options from Thomas's Israelite Army (1220-940 BC) list.

For Post-Solomonic armies (740-587 BC) he suggests using his Canaanite/Philistine list as "later [Israelite] armies seem to have lost their cutting edge."

Thomas adds: "This can be accounted for by allowing for the increased prominence of the chariot arm, and decline in the quality of foot soldiers."

Note that there is a 200-year between the main list and the start of Post-Solomonic armies.

It is hard to tell whether this is a typo, or perhaps deliberate, allowing the player to gradually move from early Hebrew to later monarchy.*

Anyway, so far I have troops to cover the Hebrew invasion of the Promised Land and the start of the united monarchy, before the split under Solomon's son Rehoboam into the twin monarchies of Israel, aka Samaria, and Judah (the reason I prefer to use Hebrew over Israelite is that it avoids confusion as to what exactly is meant).

My Hebrew forces

Left to right are two units of Simeonites and Ephraimites (auxiliary infantry, light armour, elite), two units of Gadites and Issacharites (javelin-armed open-order infantry, light armour, average), two units of Benjaminites (sling-armed open-order infantry, light armour, average), four units of Other Seven Tribes (auxiliary infantry, light armour, average) and three squadrons of Light Chariots (bow-armed, elite).

The pre-Solomon list reads:

Simeonites & Ephraimites 1-2 units

Gadites & Issacharites 1-2 units

Benjaminites 1-2 units

Other Seven Tribes 2-4 units

This army has the Guerrilla Warfare rule, which allows the Hebrew general to place extra rocky terrain and set an ambush.

That rule is lost for King Solomon's army, but the general instead gets to choose from 1-3 chariot squadrons.

*A typo seems more likely, especially as on the previous page Issachar is spelt Issacher.

Chariotry

Have painted 10 10mm chariots from Old Glory

They are specifically designed for a Solomonic Hebrew army under Neil Thomas's biblical rules in Ancient & Medieval Wargaming, but will be usable by other nations.

Prince Bruncvik

NEAR the south end of the Charles Bridge, ie on the Lesser Town side, is a statue erected in 1884.

It depicts the legendary Prince Bruncvik, who is famed for setting off on an adventure with a magical sword

At one point, so the story goes, he helped a lion defeat a dragon, resulting in the former becoming the prince's faithful companion.

The lion can be seen at the statue's feet

The interesting thing to me is the prince's armour, which seems a mix of medieval and renaissance, but that may say more about the state of my knowledge than about the accuracy of the depiction.

Powder Power

WORK on Prague's imposing Powder Gate began in 1475, and was intended as a grand entrance to the Old Town rather than a practical defensive structure.

Gunpowder made tall fortifications largely redundant, but they still looked good

Originally called New Tower, it was modelled after the 14th century Old Town Bridge Tower.

The building was used to store gunpower in the 1600s, hence its modern name of Powder Gate or Powder Tower.

It was badly damaged in 1757, during Frederick the Great's attempt to capture Prague after conquering Saxony to open the Seven Years War, but was quickly repaired, and received its most recent major restoration last year.

Signing Off

A FINAL set of shouse signs from Prague Old Town.

This stone carving of an elephant dates back to the 1300s, and was placed on an inn - now a hotel - as a symbol of wealth and prestige

The House At The Black Bear - now the Beer Restaurant - was built in 1428 in a merchants' courtyard that had its own high walls and moat to separate it from the rest of the old town

Peacocks are another symbol of wealth, although the building on which this iron peacock spreads its feathers has seen better times, and is now partly a Duck Boutique - a shop selling rubber ducks in various colours and sizes

Hotel Metamorphis was converted from a historic building known as The Blue House, and the sign above the entrance may have had a special religious meaning for a previous owner as the image and wording refer to the seven golden lampstands of Revelation, which symbolised seven early Christian churches, and the woman is probably the Wife of the Lamb, ie the church symbolised as Jesus's bride

Signing On

 MORE signs from Prague Old Town, and the stories behind them.

These bears were originally gilded, and may have referred to the building's use as a tannery (Czech leather makers often used bear skins rather cattle hide), although it was later occupied by an alchemist with connections to Habsburg royalty (bears were an early symbol of alchemy)

No one seems to know the significance of the blue horse - it may have just been a way of identifying the building in days before house numbers became common

The Golden Jug underground hostelry dates back to medieval times, but the name of the next-door Golden Kettle Irish bar is presumably more modern 

These three ducks may indicate the building was also used as a restaurant, but probably was just a house sign symbolising family and nurturing

Signs Of The Times

WALKING around Prague Old Town I have had a lot of fun looking at the district's many house signs from the days of mass illiteracy, and trying to guess what they signify.

This looks as if it should be on a winebar or tavern, but was placed on a housefront in the late 1700s by owners who wanted to highlight the biblical story of Joshua and Caleb bringing a huge bunch of grapes from the Promised Land 

I guessed this golden animal represented a lion, and indeed the house - now a pub-restaurant - previously had a lion as its emblem, but this was changed in 1713 to what is apparently a tiger

Snakes and their venom were associated with Asclepius, the Greek god of medicine, and this one indicates the building was once a pharmacy

This mermaid is a long way from the sea, but has had plenty of time to contemplate her fate, having been installed in 1439 for reasons no longer known