Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Steve]

Hello All,

Despite my determination to complete my current project I just can't help being drawn inexorably towards my two all time favourite armies which are Macedonian Imperial and Later Carthaginian (reputedly both A Listers now, but I'd soon change that).

Looking at the relevant fast warrior lists, I see the Carthaginians have elephants even here, but none of the Successors do, despite their use historically.

So, I got to thinking, because it's such a small game, using the Elephants as a battering ram is probably much more valid than as an anti-cavalry flank screen.

Now to the history. Why did their use evolve in this way? Did the Successors fear they would hamper the phalanx too much or did they see neutralising the enemy cavalry as more important?

Thanks, Steve

[LarryEssick]

Roman experience with elephants showed that they were relatively easy to neutralize with light troops. We see this in Alexander's battle against Porus as well (Hydaspes).

Because contemporary armies used large numbers of light troops I suspect that the effect of elephants against main battle lines declined. As elephant numbers declined (through attrition, age, and a drying up of sources) the issue became one of how to get the most use out of a relatively few number of animals.

Horses, however, react badly to elephants unless adequately trained. So use against enemy cavalry is much more of an option.

Still, I'm not convinced that this became their primary role even in the later successor armies. At Ipsus, for example, the elephants deployed with the phalanx and were part of the reason for the success of the combined Macedonian/Seleucid army against the Antigonids.

[Bill Chriss]

Elephants fell out of use in European successor armies for the simple reason that they died off and did not reproduce well in captivity . Seleucids, Egyptians, and other asiatics and africans continued to use them long after the Second Punic War (e.g. the Sassanids, Ghazanavids, etc.)