4 ms·
As an earlier reply said, fortresses and heavy armor did prove effective against the fast, lightly armored Mongolian archers. The effectiveness of the Alexande
by ptero 3y ago
As an earlier reply said, fortresses and heavy armor did prove effective against the fast, lightly armored Mongolian archers.
The effectiveness of the Alexander's sarissa is as much a result of training and tactics as the weapon itself; I think it took years of training to turn a soldier into an effective sarissa user. Thus I personally would not consider it a wunderwaffe. A crossbow, to me, is a better example as it enabled yesterday's peasant to kill a trained soldier from a distance, without many years of training needed to master archery. My 2c.
- eimrine 3y ago> I think it took years of training to turn a soldier into an effective sarissa user. AFAIK sarissa is a no-brainer without even ability of operating this weapon with one man. That allowed Alexander to take a lot of captured Persian men with no training under realy trained Greeks standing somewhere in more safe places of the formation. Miyamoto Musashi considered a spear as a king of weapons. But I am not a historian and all I told here is just an opinion, not a fact.