"Scenario for Hastings" Topic

Just added this one to the blog thing:

link

The plan is to make it playable solo-ish. I do hope the image has come out okay!

Cheers
Paul

This is of great interest to me. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for looking, Captain Sir. Several questions have come up so far in discussion -

First of all, should the Normans have some crossbows? I don't really have an opinion about this one, but it would be easy enough to replace a couple of archer units with skirmish crossbows.

Second, have I given the Normans too many infantry, especially since none are shown on the tapestry? My answer to this is that I just don't see an invading Norman army being almost entirely mounted, so I think a decent number of units should in effect be dismounted milites, especially for a hill assault. As with the crossbows, though, I don't really have a very strong opinion either way, and it would be easy enough to take off a couple of foot units and beef up the cavalry to compensate. My own feeling (and it is just that) is that the glorious cavalry charges are over-represented at the expense of the poor footsloggers, especially since it was the cavalry who eventually won the battle. Besides, I have the figures and I want to use them!

Third is the vexed question of Saxon firepower. I must admit that I copped out of this one and gave them some skirmish javelins rather than integral archers as such.

Cheers again!
Paul

The Norman army is believed to have consisted of about 2,200 cavalry, 4,500 infantry and 1,700 archers and some crossbowmen.

William's strategy relied on archers to soften up the enemy, followed by a general advance of the infantry, and then a cavalry charge. The Norman army was composed of nobles, mercenaries, and troops from France and Europe, including some from Southern Italy.

The English army is usually thought to have numbered roughly 7,500 and consisted entirely of infantry. It is most probable that all the members of the army rode to battle, but once at the appointed place they dismounted to fight on foot in the traditional shield wall, a line of shield-bearing men.

Whereas the English army consisted of foot troops, the Norman army's power derived from its cavalry which were reckoned amongst the best in Europe. They were heavily armored, and usually had a lance and a sword. Their power was negated by having to fight uphill.

Thanks, Captain, I was pretty much working along those proportions, that's really helpful. I may have inadvertently done something right! Maybe still need to beef up the cavalry contingent, but that's easily enough done…

Season's greetings to one and all; maybe William the Lucky EXPLETIVE DELETED will end up being crowned on Christmas day after all.

I'd love to see the source for the captain's figures on the Normans. It is inherently unlikely that William would bring dismounted milites across, though some horses may have died after th sea crossing. There is a possibility that sailors fought and that therefore a portion of the sailors came ashorewith weapons, but again, not large number. Also there may have been some specialist infantry, but not many. That might give some infantry say up the three units on your scale, but if the Normans had a meaningfully large infantry contingent then you have to account for a problem in the battle. When the Norman ( Breton?) cavalry rout William has to get them to rally and some English pour forward in disordered pursuit . Now, if he had a lot of infantry the cavalry just go back behind the infantry and rally and the English pursuit is facing the Norman infantry. But it isn't, the pursuers are cut down by cavalry.
Infantry do appear in a source, but it is 100 years later.

In your diagram the Norman knights should also occupy the centre of the army deployment because, as far as we know they attacked all along the line after the archery.
William may well not have brought much infantry because
1) Someone had to guard Normandy and its castles in his absence.
2) The English were very good infantry and the Normans rather poor at foot fighting. So why bring a large number of men who would just be fodder for the housecarls when you would be better off using the space for bowmen and knights and horses.
I also think William has more bows than you are giving because they clearly make a major contribution to the battle and I rather think that he hired all the mercenaries he could get.

As to the representative status of the tapestry, it shows
in the English army:
Housecarls with round and long shields
men with axes, spears, swords, bundles of javelins.
English unarmoured spearman
An English archer
English peasant with a large club of a stone tied to a shaft.

Norman knights
Norman archers
Norman archer captain.

Can anyone explain why a contingent that is in D'Ewell's calculation over half the Norman army is totally unrepresented?? Not even one figure of a Norman spearman??

Thanks to everyone who has looked and commented. I've updated the scenario to reduce the Norman infantry and increase their cavalry:

Cheers!
Paul

At the battle there were French mercenaries too. How are these represented in your plan? Are they part of the Norman host or an amalgam of the different sections within the Norman army?

Hi Orlock, I've kind of incorporated them into the Breton and foot contingents. We're going to play this with four Norman commanders, so I've made it as simple as possible to avid confusion on the night. I suppose I could rename some of these to make it clearer. The Saxons will be umpire-controlled, effectively as NPCs, if that makes any sense.

I like your new plan

Sounds like it'll be a good fight. Let us know how it goes. Best of luck!

Hi Lewisgunner,

Unfortunately, not a better source than Time Commanders Battle of Hastings

YouTube link

and Wikipedia, and also a number of other sites quoting the same.

For me, good enough for wargame purposes as I regard an increased infantry element a more credible OOB, although I accept that cavalry get more of a mention in the available literature. Correctly or incorrectly?

Can anyone explain why a contingent that is in D'Ewell's calculation over half the Norman army is totally unrepresented?? Not even one figure of a Norman spearman??

I would hazard, social status and rank. Who would wish to record the exploits of the common soldier, for whom and why?

As aye,

D'Ewell

I accept happily that there are some Norman infantry, my query is how many. One of the secondary souces did a calculation based upon ships containing horses and ships containing men on the tapestry and worked out a number for the cavalry and infantry proportions based upon a source that says that there were 600 ships. Unfortunately there is a source that says 1000 ships and the size of ships might well be compressed on the tapestry and ships will have been of different sizes.
We might get a better idea of the relative importance of the Norman infantry by looking at their tactical function. some sources have the infantry following up the first barrage of archery to degrade the Saxons and then falling back to allow the cavalry in, but some sources have the cavalry straight in after the archery.

As I think I said earlier, the infantry cannot have been particularly numerous because they have such a meagre impact on the combat. They don't serve to protect fleeing cavalry and allow them to rally as one would expect in a medieval battle. Also, if one were assaulting up a hill and had dismounted knights in the front rank it would make sense to pick one end of a static line and outnumber them locally with the infantry whilst the cavalry prevented the opposing English from aiding their comrades. (Though I admit that might be a bit sophisticated for this period).
Again, if William had a lot of infantry then why are the knights referred to as doing so much of the fighting and having such a hard time of it?
For all these reasons I think William has structured his force to have lots of mounted milites and has to use them riding up a hill and fighting hand to hand

Thanks again for the thoughts, gentles all. I think we are getting to the stage where there's only one way to find out, and that is to play it!

We are hoping for mid-January and I'll post a full report with photos. This discussion has really helped refine my thinking. It will be interesting to see how it plays out with the Saxons on solo.

Cheers and thanks again

Paul

I have this breakdown of numbers in the Norman host

Franco – Flemish 1500 under William fitzOzbern and Eustace of Bologne
Normans – 4000 under Duke William
Bretons – 2000 probably under Alan Fergant

Total number of ships 776

Further info in my book breaks down the army

2000 horse
4000 infantry
1500 archers/ cossbowmen

This info comes from osprey – Campaign series – Hastings 1066

Hope this helps the discussion!

Thanks, Richard. Whereabouts are you based in the UK? If you ever make it to Glasgow, do give us a shout and we'll put on a game for you.

Thanks for the offer Caliban. I am based way down south in the sunny island of Jersey, although I do wonder where the sun has gone of late. I am currently working on a War of the Roses project. You can find my blog at link

Cheers,

Richard

Thanks for the link, Richard; hope you don't mind acquiring another follower…

Our first attempt has been attempted. Report on t'blog thing here:

link

Cheers, all