"Feigned flight" Topic

I was chatting with a friend about how common (or not) feigned flight was in battle. I could only think of Hastings, which might not have been a feigned flight in any case, but rather making the best of an unplanned retreat.

Could readers remind me of battle accounts where feigned flight is described?

Thanks Simon

In just about every account of a battle in the crusades it seems like there is a feigned flight described. I think if you google for feigned flight crusades you'll find some.

I think also the Parthians used it when they defeated Crassus, but I'm a little foggy about that.

My favourite, Kalka River 1224 AD.

link

This thread just shows how Euro-centred we are. Read any good book about steppe nomad history (Empire of the Steppes by Grousset for example) and you will find countless examples of feigned retreats from the early Hsuing Nu right through to the medieval Turks and Mongols. It was a staple of horse archer warfare for well over two thousand years.

The Bulgars used it against the Byzantines, I think.
More recently, it worked quite well for the Sioux at the Fetterman Fight, December 21, 1866.

Grelber

Thanks chaps. The nomad angle is an interesting one.

Might one assume that most nomad armies are capable of feigned flight?

Is feigned flight almost exclusively a light cavalry tactic?

World War II. Germans. 1944-45. Oh, wait…

The so-called feigned flight/rout/retreat was practiced by just about everybody in Europe except the French! No, really, with few exceptions, the French simply put their heads down and charged until they either won or were stopped and defeated. Germans on foot did much the same thing. "Western charge", or "Frankish charge" was a famous phenomenon. But many other "Franks", such as the Normans, used the faked rout/retreat as a tactic whenever it seemed suitable. Beeler, in his book on Feudal Warfare, was the first seminal source to bring up examples of this tactic that I read. Since then the almost consensus is that the feigned rout was not a rare event practiced only by Normans.

Feigned flight is not a "light cavalry" tactic. As far as I know it was used by all Asiatic cavalry. Mongols typically enticed with light cavalry, which is the usual method, to be exploited by heavier reserves. It just makes sense to use swifter moving bait, that way the risk of being caught accidentally is reduced to a minimum….

There are a handful of 11th, early 12th century battles in Western France that show a feigned flight being used. But without going and looking in my books to find the names and dates I can't dredge that info up at the moment, and don't want to spend anymore time on this just now….

Feigned flight is not a "light cavalry" tactic. As far as I know it was used by all Asiatic cavalry.

But wouldn't most asiatic cavalry be light cavalry?

Yes, but not all. I wouldn't make a distinction in an army list, for instance, that allows "light" but prohibits "heavy" Steppes cavalry from doing a feigned rout. This would be an artificial "gamey" distinction based on no evidence….

Yes, the feigned flight was a staple of all the Asiatic hordes. Its strange that it alway seemed to work with the Mongols as the people they used it on were either similar Turco-Mongol tribes or people who had a great deal of experience fighting them. Maybe they had a way to make it look more real?

From my copy of Armies of the Dark Ages it says that the Byzantine cavalry would use feigned flights quite a bit, and that this was their main method of dealing with the Normans, as they could neither stand up to their charge nor suitably thin them with archery, so they would shoot their horses on the retreat and turn to deal with them on foot.

Its somewhat strange that, as far as I know, the only feigned flight pre-Carrahae was at Thermopylae, were the Spartans on day one or two pulled off a limited false retreat.

…although "heavy" steppe cavalry might be at a rather greater risk of being caught whilst evading, due to the heavier loads on the horses, as I suppose they are in some sets of wargames rules. Certainly those on barded horses wouldn't want to engage in feigned flight…

And they probably didn't. Back to the Mongols again, didn't they use their heavy cavalry to sweep the flanks? The "light" cavalry did all the distracting, hard work to pin the enemy and then the Mongol heavies would swing wide and come in from the flanks and rear. No need to do feigned rout with them. If the light cavalry performed a feigned rout and the enemy went for it, the heavy cavalry would be stationed already on the flanks to sweep out of ambush and catch the feckless pursuing enemy horse.

But again, I wouldn't forbid a gamer from trying a feigned rout/flight/retreat with his heavy cavalry, because they undoubtedly knew how to do it, they probably just didn't in most cases. So let the player do it if s/he wants to. Most likely outcome will be that they do get caught and it won't be tried again….

Not too sure about battle accounts Simon but Hail Caesar allows Numidians and Tarentine light horse to tempt their opponents using this tactic. The Rules allow them to move back further than their opponents can follow up.

Garry

Thanks Garry, I'll have a read of my Caesar (and HC). From memory the legionaries were well drilled and usually didn't bother to chase the Numidian cavalry. Their allied Gallic cavalry, on the other hand, charged hard and never stopped!

BEst, Simon

Civitate in 1053 Normans vs. Papal Forces.

The White Huns use feigned flight against the Persians in the Vth century. A body of thrm demonstrate in front of the Sasanid army and then withdraw over a concealed trench which the Persians fall into when they follow up.

I don't think we can ge too certain about hevy versus light steppe cavalry.. I suppose cataphracts might not choose to lumber off, but armoured steppe cavalry might just as lijely be with their less well armoured retainers , performing the same evolutions. We should remember that the richer nomads would have the best horseflesh and would have spare horses which they could ride up until just before action. There is also no need for the feigned flight to occur within close range of the enemy. Accounts suggest that it couod sta rt from bow range or further away. That gives a head start of some 200 yards It is quite possible to keep well ahead of an enemy with that sort of start.

#BigRedBat. The Mongols used the tactic extensively in China. On several occasions they would lay siege to a city, then pretend to get bored and ride off, sometimes leaving a token force behind. The Chinese would then come out, defeat the token force and then get totally bladdered by the main Mongol army waiting just around the geographical corner. (I can find out references if you wish).
They also used the tactic very effectively at Miechow and Leignitz in Poland and the lead up to the Battle of Mohi in Hungary, all in 1241

#Great War Ace. From my readings on the Mongols, the LC were used as skirmishers, softener-uppers, flanking troops, finders of weak points etc. while the M/HC stayed back until there was a crisis point in the enemy lines. Remember that each 10,000 warrior tumen (division equivalent), was made up of 10 mingghan of 1,000 each (theoretical strength, usually lower) of which only 2 mingghan were M/HC. It would not be a good idea to use the shock troops as bait.

#timurilank. Mine as well. A nine days feigned flight has -without equal- got to be the best example.

Fair point Lewisgunner…

Nicopolis as well if I remember correctly. Might be wrong on that though.

I think Nicopolis is more a situation in which the knights defeat theTurkish cavalry opposite them and then advance onwards to be met by janissaries behind stakes and then surrounded by Turkish cavalry. I don't think we know whether the first line cavalry carried out a feigned flight r just got beaten. You would be right to say the effect is much the same!

Chinggis, what is your source for tumen having 2000 heavy cavalry and 8000 light. I'd be genuinely interested in that as a case for an army list.