First, I apologize for causing offense. I meant none, but that doesn't mean none was taken.
>Why then use Hastings to throw shade on my statement about small shield-wall skirmishes,
That was sloppy on my part. I was referencing the only shieldwall battle I know about, which I know wasn't at all small. It's just that the shield wall did break--so they could attack, wasn't it? As I said previously, this is not at all my area.
As for offense vs defense, I think I did read you correctly, I just wasn't clear in my response. Your advancing characters form a shield wall at the last minute to go against the ones on defense. That was the part that surprised me. Repeating here that this far from my area of knowledge, I had never pictured the Saxon shieldwall in an advancing state after the manner of the Romans (more or less). I always picture them standing still. Being a historian, I am always eager to know the source when I learn something new.
So I went looking. Cornwell's web site is rich with information, including a long excerpt describing exactly a clash between shield walls. Of historical records I could find only one--a poem about the Battle of Maldon in 991. There's a good, detailed description of it in a thesis
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1949&context=all_theses
Clearly my mental picture was wrong, though Cornwell's version actually has the attacker from a "swine head" formation, which is more like the ancient Germanic wedge formation. Still shields, just flanking walls rather than straight-on. Minor point.
Anyway, there's what I found. And I apologize again for giving offense. I often forget that I have Moderator under my name and that this can give a different tone to my comments, especially when making a stab at humor (the Hastings line). Stick around, Jan, and you can just ignore me.
>Why then use Hastings to throw shade on my statement about small shield-wall skirmishes,
That was sloppy on my part. I was referencing the only shieldwall battle I know about, which I know wasn't at all small. It's just that the shield wall did break--so they could attack, wasn't it? As I said previously, this is not at all my area.
As for offense vs defense, I think I did read you correctly, I just wasn't clear in my response. Your advancing characters form a shield wall at the last minute to go against the ones on defense. That was the part that surprised me. Repeating here that this far from my area of knowledge, I had never pictured the Saxon shieldwall in an advancing state after the manner of the Romans (more or less). I always picture them standing still. Being a historian, I am always eager to know the source when I learn something new.
So I went looking. Cornwell's web site is rich with information, including a long excerpt describing exactly a clash between shield walls. Of historical records I could find only one--a poem about the Battle of Maldon in 991. There's a good, detailed description of it in a thesis
https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1949&context=all_theses
Clearly my mental picture was wrong, though Cornwell's version actually has the attacker from a "swine head" formation, which is more like the ancient Germanic wedge formation. Still shields, just flanking walls rather than straight-on. Minor point.
Anyway, there's what I found. And I apologize again for giving offense. I often forget that I have Moderator under my name and that this can give a different tone to my comments, especially when making a stab at humor (the Hastings line). Stick around, Jan, and you can just ignore me.
