Unsullied comparable to Janissaries

[E-Ro]

In the Battle of Hastings, where Willam's cavalry charge failed to break Harold's shieldwall.

Who told you that harolds army was untrained? You do know that right before hastings they had just fought the vikings at stamford bridge and beaten them, right? Also, apparently the fyrd was pretty well equipped and well trained. I did some googling, here

The fyrd was composed of men who owned their own land, and were equipped by their community to fulfil the king's demands for military forces. For every five hides,[24] or units of land nominally capable of supporting one household,[25] one man was supposed to serve.[24] It appears that the hundred was the main organising unit for the fyrd.[26] As a whole, England could furnish about 14,000 men for the fyrd, when it was called out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings

http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_battle_hastings.html

I would only use wikepedia as an emergency source admittedly, but it backs up what im saying here nicely.

In fact, BEFORE the battle of stamford bridge, harold had disbanded the fyrd, as it looked like the vikings were not coming. Then he had to rush into battle when they did land. After he disbanded his men AGAIN William showed up.

At hastings his men were so disciplined that even after the route some of them stopped and ambushed some normans pursuing them. So yeah, Harolds army was by no means untrained or inexperienced. Those men in that sheildwall resisting the cavalry were trained, and well equipped.

[Angalin]

Further personal attacks by anybody in this thread will result in suspensions. You lot need to learn from British academics, who loathe each other and still disagree in only the politest of ways.

[Fire Eater]

snip

Fyrds were led by thegns (lords) but most of the men who followed were inexperience fighters much like the feudal levy.

If you want ASOIAF examples, Maekar's shield wall held in the Battle of the Redgrass Field which was made up of feudal levies. Feudal levies were the norm in the Middle Ages, which were mostly made up of poorly armored and armed peasants. GRRM notes this.

[E-Ro]

Fyrds were led by thegns (lords) but most of the men who followed were inexperience fighters much like the feudal levy.

If you want ASOIAF examples, Maekar's shield wall held in the Battle of the Redgrass Field which was made up of feudal levies. Feudal levies were the norm in the Middle Ages, which were mostly made up of poorly armored and armed peasants. GRRM notes this.

No. Cite something that says the fyrds were poor quality.

Feudal levies were not poorly armed and armored peasants, your wrong as anyone that knows a basic amount of history will be able to tell you.

I already cited the battle of visby, in which even the peasants that fought and got butchered by the danish soldiers were well armed and armored. you should go back and read that post.

[jarl the climber]

What about the Battle of the Golden Spurs?

[E-Ro]

What about the Battle of the Golden Spurs?

Nope, the flemish were well trained and well equipped.

The Flemish were primarily town militia who were well equipped, with such weapons as the mace, goedendag and a long spear known as the geldon. They were also well organized; the urban militias of the time prided themselves on their regular training and preparation, which allowed them to use the geldon. They numbered about 9,000, including 400 nobles. The biggest difference from the French and other feudal armies was that the Flemish force consisted almost solely of infantry with only the leaders mounted, more to express their leadership than for combat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Golden_Spurs

I really dont get where this untrained peasant thing comes from. Its simply not true.

[jarl the climber]

And about the whole Jannisary thing. Did the Turks go around selling them to people, irregardless of the buyers ethnicity, religion or purpose? I'm under the impression that they were not for sale at any price, so it seems like a different sort of slavery. What happened to them when they had served for twenty years or they got hurt and couldn't fight anymore? It seems like a really superficial comparision in a lot of ways and it really makes no sense that the Unsullied would be for sale, at least to just anybody and certainly not all of them. At best they would be for rent and only to the right power.

[Fire Eater]

No. Cite something that says the fyrds were poor quality.

I think you misinterpreted my argument. I never said they were poor quality but they were mostly made up of peasants and tradesmen serving two months out of the year for the king.

Feudal levies were not poorly armed and armored peasants, your wrong as anyone that knows a basic amount of history will be able to tell you.

Like GRRM?

SSM:

What is the relative composition of archers (or horse-archers), infantry and cavalry?

Infantry outnumbered cavalry by a considerable margin, but for the most part we are talking about feudal levies and peasant militia, with little discipline and less training.

[jarl the climber]

Nope, the flemish were well trained and well equipped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Golden_Spurs

I really dont get where this untrained peasant thing comes from. Its simply not true.

I guess there is always the English peasant revolt but no one brings that up because it might prove your point. Still it was shock to knights that trained commoners on foot could defeat them under any circumstance.

[Lord Reaver]

When oh when will people learn the difference between a peasant levy and the feudal levy ? Hint: It's in the name.

[E-Ro]

I think you misinterpreted my argument. I never said they were poor quality but they were mostly made up of peasants serving two months out of the year for the king.

Like GRRM?

SSM:

I must have missed the part where grrm is a historian?

[E-Ro]

Oh and fire eater, from your own link

Harold’s army mainly consisted of highly trained soldiers known as the Housecarls. It also consisted of Fyrds, peasants serving two months at war a year for the king, who did not have much skill.

Nice selective quoting though, brah. did you even read the link you quoted from just now? Jesus christ. Dont argue this with me, your gonna lose.

[E-Ro]

I guess there is always the English peasant revolt but no one brings that up because it might prove your point. Still it was shock to knights that trained commoners on foot could defeat them under any circumstance.

Yeah, the English peasant revolt was put down hard, same as many other peasant revolts, which usually ended with the leaders of said revolts getting horribly tortured to death.

[Fire Eater]

I must have missed the part where grrm is a historian?

Well, may I remind you this is his universe we are talking about. He is the one who created the series, and those are his words regarding infantry and feudal levies in his series.

snip

Fair enough, Housecarls were in the front lines.

But I think the fact remains that the infantry in Westeros in GRRM's world is made up of peasants with little training and discipline.

When oh when will people learn the difference between a peasant levy and the feudal levy ? Hint: It's in the name.

What GRRM said applied to both.

[Lord Reaver]

The english peasant's revolt was a massacre - of peasants.

[E-Ro]

Well, may I remind you this is his universe we are talking about. He is the one who created the series, and those are his words regarding infantry and feudal levies in his series.

He seems to change his mind constantly on the quality of men though. what he presents in got is far flung from untrained men.

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/91171-come-into-my-castle-the-ways-of-warfare-in-westeros-updated-and-psa-regarding-troop-quality/

the above is a link to every single description of troops we get in the books. there is NO mention at all of untrained men. The closes you get to that are the HALF trained portion of tywins army, used to trick robb.

Fair enough, Housecarls were in the front lines.

The link you yourself cited says his army was mostly houscarls, so what is it, are you arguing against the link you yourself cited now?

Anyway its irrelevant, I would contest the fact that it says the fyrds were poorly trained. They had just fought in a battle against the vikings, and they were by all accounts well equipped and supported by a large amount of people per soldier.

But I think the fact remains that the infantry in Westeros in GRRM's world is made up of peasants with little training and discipline.

Wouldn't be so sure of that.

[Lord Reaver]

What GRRM said applied to both.

If that's what he meant, then he's wrong, too. Personally, I don't quite trust that transcription. He could well have meant: feudal levies, and peasant militia with litte discipline and less training. This would make much more sense, as the two are by no means the same.

Alternatively, GRRM is ignorant of this fact, too. Though his description of the infantry elsewhere seems to belie this interpretation of that particular SSM.

[E-Ro]

If that's what he meant, then he's wrong, too. Personally, I don't quite trust that transcription. He could well have meant: feudal levies, and peasant militia with litte discipline and less training. This would make much more sense, as the two are by no means the same.

Alternatively, GRRM is ignorant of this fact, too. Though his description of the infantry elsewhere seems to belie this interpretation of that particular SSM.

Yeah, I agree 100% with you on the matter, as you most likely know already.

He completely flip flopped on his idea of what the armies of westeros are composed of if that ssm is to be believed and interpreted in the way that fire eater suggests.

[Fire Eater]

He seems to change his mind constantly on the quality of men though. what he presents in got is far flung from untrained men.

He did say it varied.

Although some lords do better than others. Tywin Lannister's infantry was notoriously well disciplined, and the City Watch of Lannisport is well trained as well... much better than their counterparts in Oldtown and King's Landing.

The quality of the levy depended on the lord.

The link you yourself cited says his army was mostly houscarls, so what is it, are you arguing against the link you yourself cited now?

No, I was conceding that the housecarls were in the front lines at the Battle of Hastings. I don't see the why one should argue with you if this is how you respond to posters who concede points.

[Salt 'n' Gravy]

Aren't SSMs only semi-canon?

If they are, I'm going with what's in the novels.