Nikephorian Prokoursatoes

[nikgaukroger]

PaulG made the following point:

From McGeer's translation of the The Taktika on tactical function of the Prokoursatores: Chap 57, para 5. "If the enemy is advancing toward our units, you, the commander of the army, must send ahead five hundred or three hundred cavalrymen--not heavy kataphraktoi, but light and elusive--the ones the ancients called proukoursatores. They must be wearing their klibania only, and should set ambushes (a set-up rule in FoG) if they get the chance..." Then: "When our prokoursatores, the cavalrymen, make initial contact with the enemy, join battle with them, and the alarm goes up...", Para 10 "If though, when our units approach the enemy formations, these enemy formations remain in place, the prokoursatores should then move forward and begin skirmishing to open the battle."

Can't think of a clearer possiblity that native LH in the form of the prokoursatores were a regular feature of the Byzantine army and that they were not just scouts but active battle participants as skirmishers, not as Cv.

Weapons and armour. Again the Tatika, Chap 61, para 2: Prokoursatores must be set apart, five hundred cavalrymen. There must be proficient archers among them, one hundred or 120 men, and the rest of them must all be lancers." Later in the chapter: "These prokoursatores should not have an assigned station like the cavalry divisions for the reason that they are the ones who begin skirmishing and open the battle."

Again, clearly a function that would have probably 4-12 stands, some division of lancers/archers, Klibania and shield would rate them as Protected, and possibly a case tha they should be allowed superior status at least in the Nikephorian period, judging from their performance against the Rus in the 971AD campaign

[nikgaukroger]

And some git replied:

1. Any reason you have only quoted part of the information on the roles of the prokoursatores?
2. In FoG Cv can skirmish, it is a different mechanism to LH but it does cover skirmishing. In FoG mounted skirmisher does not automatically mean LH, you would have to show that LH is the most appropriate taking into account all their battlefield roles and behaviour.
3. How do 500 men turn into 4-12 bases?

[PaulByzan]

And some git replied:

1. Any reason you have only quoted part of the information on the roles of the prokoursatores?
2. In FoG Cv can skirmish, it is a different mechanism to LH but it does cover skirmishing. In FoG mounted skirmisher does not automatically mean LH, you would have to show that LH is the most appropriate taking into account all their battlefield roles and behaviour.
3. How do 500 men turn into 4-12 bases?

Good questions and my response;

1) I quoted the parts that supported my argument that there were alternative explanations as to the way the Prokoursatores fought other than as the Cav allowed in the list. These passages quoted from the Manual open up another interpretation that they could have operated as LH. In actuality they probably could operate as either Cav or LH depending on the circumstances they found themselves in.

2.For the Outflankers and/or Prokoursatores at least some of them, if not the majority are described as carrying lances as opposed to bows. If this is the case then as Cav they could not operate as skirmishers under the rules. Further the description in the translation can certainly be interpreted to indicate that they operated in looser formation in their skirmishing role than the line battle cavalry.

3. Well there are 8 bases of Outflankers allowed in the Nikephorean list as it is. If those were given an option of being LH or Cav, that would be fair. Alternatively, their could have been 300 or 500 on each flank and even in the center since they opened the battle which would allow for slightly more bases.

Paul G.

[nikgaukroger]

And some git replied:

1. Any reason you have only quoted part of the information on the roles of the prokoursatores?
2. In FoG Cv can skirmish, it is a different mechanism to LH but it does cover skirmishing. In FoG mounted skirmisher does not automatically mean LH, you would have to show that LH is the most appropriate taking into account all their battlefield roles and behaviour.
3. How do 500 men turn into 4-12 bases?

Good questions and my response;

1) I quoted the parts that supported my argument that there were alternative explanations as to the way the Prokoursatores fought other than as the Cav allowed in the list. These passages quoted from the Manual open up another interpretation that they could have operated as LH. In actuality they probably could operate as either Cav or LH depending on the circumstances they found themselves in.

The other part - which is, IIRC, about them protecting the flanks of the katafraktoi - cannot be left out as the classification has to cover all their expected battlefield roles.

I would also point out that if troops are expected to behave as "Cv" and "LH" in the same battle they really have to be FoG Cv as this allows both a skirmishing fnction and a fighting function.

2.For the Outflankers and/or Prokoursatores at least some of them, if not the majority are described as carrying lances as opposed to bows. If this is the case then as Cav they could not operate as skirmishers under the rules. Further the description in the translation can certainly be interpreted to indicate that they operated in looser formation in their skirmishing role than the line battle cavalry.

If they do not behave as "Lancers", which really means a shock role, then you do not give them the Lancers capability - it is the old one about possession of a weapon not meaning you get the related capability; ghilman often had lances but do not get "Lancers" is the usual example. The capabilities are allocated to get the correct effect.

This is why the current list has the Bow, Swordsmen cavalry as it allows them to skirmish as they do not appear to have been expected to act like "Lancers" i.e. as a FoG shock troop. Strikes me that an alternative may be Bow*, Light Spear, Swordsmen - limited shooting but slightly better close combat.

Again on the looser formation the single rank Cv skirmishing ability is how FoG deals with that (assuming LH is not deem ed suitable of course).

[bahdahbum]

But why would they be classified as "average" and not given he possibility to be upgraded as superior , at least before 1042 when the byzantine cav is superior ?

next :

Strikes me that an alternative may be Bow*, Light Spear, Swordsmen - limited shooting but slightly better close combat.

Seems a very good alternative .

and for

3. How do 500 men turn into 4-12 bases?

from John Haldon's " Warfare , State and Siciety in the Byzantine world 565-1204"pg 103 , it seems that during the 10th century, field armys from 3.000 to 4.000 were the usual thing . A force for a major expedition would be up to 12.000 and of course more could be sent for major campaining .

So the armies would be fairly small and 500 men would be easely represented by 4-12 bases .

There is another parallelism : the klinanophoroi/kataphraktoi are max 4 bases and their max strenght is described in the praecepta militaria as 504 men !