Who would win in a fight 6000 Polish Hussars or a Roman legion?

The Poles would win. Even discounting the pistols, the Hussars were very well armed with large agile horses. In addition to the 20 ft. lance they also carried a straight stabbing sword with a blade of about 55 inches, a sabre, and a shorter sword. Some of the hussars also carried a saddle bow and each hussar had 2 to 4 retainers who would also be able to fight. They would have additional lances in wagons to the rear. They repeatedly defeated larger forces of infantry armed with 15 ft. pikes, swords and muskets. At the Battle of Kirchholm in 1605, 3,600 Poles defeated a Swedish army of almost 11,000. The Swedes were in squares with interlocking fields of fire and had 11 cannons. Both sides had about the same number of cavalry. The Swedish cavalry was routed at the beginning of the battle and the infantry squares were then crushed by the Polish cavalry with the infantry cleaning up. The Swedes at the time were considered to have the best army in Europe. Reports indicate that the impact of the lance hitting an infantryman would throw him into the second or third rows behind him thus breaking up their formation. After throwing their pilum, the Romans would be down to the gladius, a 2 ft. sword. A good weapon against infantry, but I doubt its effectiveness against a man on a horse swinging a sabre or 4.5 ft. long stabbing sword to say nothing about being trampled by a large horse at full gallop. From the late 1500s to the early 1700s, the Polish hussars met and beat every combination of infantry, artillery and cavalry they met including horse archers.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Would you call it historical revisionism to remove Confederate monuments 150 years after the Civil War?

No. It is not historical revisionism to remove statues or rename buildings etc. for racists, or for any other reason. But why limit it to Confederate Civil War generals, politicians and slave owners? There are many slave owners and racists who have been honored with monuments, statutes and buildings. If some, why not all? First let’s deal with the term “Traitor” that many respondents have used for the Confederates. The 1783 Treaty of Paris ended the war between the colonies and Great Britain. It’s first article declared the 13 colonies “to be free, sovereign and independent states.” In 1787, these 13 sovereign nations came together as principals and created the federal government as their agent for specific activities, i.e. “enumerated powers”. Principals have the right to fire their agent and withdraw from the pact, that is secede. During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made that would allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison rejected...
Read more

In war, does life expectancy go up with battle experience?

I would say yes to a certain degree. Skills are learned when you are in combat that are not learned in training. Some of it is just luck. This assumes that other things are equal. Not all combat is equal by any means. Some jobs are just less dangerous than others even in active combat operations. For instance incoming artillery rounds sound different from outgoing artillery rounds. I learned this from experience in about one day. The luck comes in when the spot you picked to take cover in gets hit or not. The first you have some control over, but absolutely no control over the second. This information is from Korea. Experiences after that may be different.
Read more

Read This First

Posts containing questions and answers are not in any particular order. You can search for a topic in the search bar or click on the Index to choose from an alphabetical list of topics. To see the original posts, go to his profile on  Quora.com .
Read more