Valyrian soldiers

[Coolbeard the Exile]

Do we know how valyrian soldiers looked and how they fought. Im doing some animation on aegons conquest and wonderd how his regular soldiers were.

[TheSovereignGrave]

We don't really know for certain, but it's not outside the realm of possibility that Aegon's men weren't particularly different from mainland Westerosi armies. They'd been there for an exceptionally long time, and since one of their original supporters was House Massey it's not outside the realm of possibility that a sizable chunk of his men were Stormlanders even during Aegon's Landing. And it probably wasn't long before most of his army was composed of soldiers from the Westerosi Houses who bent the knee anyway. He landed with about 1,600 men, and during the Field of Fire he had around 11,000.

[YOVMO]

2 hours ago, Knight of valour said:

Do we know how valyrian soldiers looked and how they fought. Im doing some animation on aegons conquest and wonderd how his regular soldiers were.

While I have no textual evidence for it, I will say that I have always assumed that Valyrian soldiers fought the way Roman Legions did. There would be a legion separated into several cohorts divded into maniples split into two centuries (100 men commanded by a centurion). Fighting would be typical infantry fighting (much like the unsullied fight) and organized with several different possible formations based on lock shield attack with different formations for different types of enemy or terrain.

I picture this not only because of the connection between Valyria and the Roman Empire and also because of the tactics of the unsullied, but also because it would have made sense for the freehold to have armies that worked like this based on their social hierarchy. It would make sense, imo, to a Valyrian dragonlord to have a group of low level soldiers working with no particular individual identiy but as a complete whole under the command of a single centurion (Think Sargent) who in turn had colleague centurions all of which under the command of a Primus Pilus (think captain) and a few of these which in turn would be under the command of a Prefect (think colonel) who would fall under a Tribune (low ranking general) and then up to a Legatus Legionis (the legion commander or high general) and that that person would then answer to a Praetor who would be one of the civilian aristocrats named by the dragon lords as their military commander (for US equivalent think, maybe, Army Chief of Staff or Defense Secretary) who then  would report to the Consul or whomever the decision maker was for the dragonlord families (or to the group of the families collectively).

The reason this makes sense is that it very clearly draws a hierarchy where people go from being actual people like like the Legatus Legionis to, essentially, equipment which would be the lock step soldier at the bottom.

 

Another reason this makes sense is that this whole military formation could be controlled from the air by a dragon rider and, if you look at a map of essos, it would seem very likely that this would be an effective army that could stand against armies, dothraki screamers, lay siege to cities etc.

As for how they would look....I imagine them having black armor with the lowest ranking being very similar to the way the unsullied are dressed and as the rank goes up and up the leathers and padded armor turning into more and more ornate armor with the absolute top generals wearing something that very much looks like the Daedric armor we see in skyrim (probably made of Valyrian Steel)

 

http://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/1722-1-1322380748.jpg

 

[Blackfyre Bastard]

Very dragony armor. That's also how I picture the Valyrian top rank warriors.

This is a depiction of Aegon and sisters which I think is also very close to the mark.

 

I agree that the armies of the Freehold of Valyria would function in that way, after all, it was modeled after the Roman Empire. But that would be before the Doom.

By the time of Aegon's conquest, which is OP's question, probably the bulk of Aegon's host that landed in Westeros from Dragonstone, Driftmark and Claw Isle would war and fight more in a Westerosi way than Valyrian (although I seem to recall that the smallfolk of Dragonstone were very much Valyrian after centuries of practically worshipping their Dragonlords and them having children with the smallfolk, most likely all the know-how on war was lost with the Doom).

[YOVMO]

4 minutes ago, Blackfyre Bastard said:

Very dragony armor. That's also how I picture the Valyrian top rank warriors.

It is super dragony isn't it. I remember when Skyrim first came out and I saw the Daedric armor. I knew it was perfect for high ranking Valyrian warriors.

4 minutes ago, Blackfyre Bastard said:

This is a depiction of Aegon and sisters which I think is also very close to the mark.

Yes, agreed, Aegon and Sisters might have had lighter armor than high ranking ground soldiers because they would be on dragon back.

4 minutes ago, Blackfyre Bastard said:

 

I agree that the armies of the Freehold of Valyria would function in that way, after all, it was modeled after the Roman Empire. But that would be before the Doom.

Agreed, but I see no reason why a couple of generations on Dragonstone would have changed this.

4 minutes ago, Blackfyre Bastard said:

By the time of Aegon's conquest, which is OP's question, probably the bulk of Aegon's host that landed in Westeros from Dragonstone, Driftmark and Claw Isle would war and fight more in a Westerosi way than Valyrian (although I seem to recall that the smallfolk of Dragonstone were very much Valyrian after centuries of practically worshipping their Dragonlords and them having children with the smallfolk, most likely all the know-how on war was lost with the Doom).

So too OP's post, when Aegon landed and set up the Aegonfort (a totally absurd name for a fort...I mean, there had to be at least one solidier rolling his eyes saying "the aegon fort? really?" I see no reason why those 1600 men wouldn't have been split into 15 Centuries each with a centurion commander answering up the chain to higher and higher ranking officers with Aegon at the top. After Rosby and Stokeworth fell I still see no reason why things would have changed. They may have yielded to the dragon but they weren't military forces which would have been sucked into Aegon's army, much less changed it. Lords Darklyn and Mooton much the same....with Orys leading the ground forces (dressed much like the daedric warrior I imagine) and aegon in the air they basically caused them to turn their belly. Then Gulltown and the decimation of Black Harren. Finally, after taking the stormlands I think the original 1600 would have grown to a much larger size.

 

However, even as such I picture it much like Dany's army with the original army of 1600 being akin to Dany's unsullied and the Westerosi troops being like the sellswords and freeriders. I can see it totally possible that the entire conquest and even the reign of Aenys I looked much like this with the military being restructured under Maegor The Cruel.

Again, I have absolutely no textual evidence for this as I said in my first post, it is just the way I have always seen it in my head.

[Red Man Racey]

I'm thinking that Euron's [probable] VS black scale armor is probably reminiscent of high-ranking Valyrian soldier armor since it's possible that it came from the ruins of Valyria.

Edit:  Just looked at the picture of Aegon I and his sisters and saw it's very similar to Euron's armor from the WoW sample chapter.

[Universal Sword Donor]

22 minutes ago, YOVMO said:

Yes, agreed, Aegon and Sisters might have had lighter armor than high ranking ground soldiers because they would be on dragon back.

I mean they are wearing chainmail and full plate. That's basically as much as we see anyone wear save the Mountain. Ignoring the variation we see in armor from north to south, the average knights and heavy cavalry seem about as well armored. When we get descriptions of Aemond and Daemon fighting on dragonback, they appear to be wearing full sets of armor.

[YOVMO]

12 minutes ago, Universal Sword Donor said:

I mean they are wearing chainmail and full plate. That's basically as much as we see anyone wear save the Mountain. Ignoring the variation we see in armor from north to south, the average knights and heavy cavalry seem about as well armored. When we get descriptions of Aemond and Daemon fighting on dragonback, they appear to be wearing full sets of armor.

yes, this makes sense....especially considering that even the mountain rides a horse and while it might be a large horse it is no where near the size of a dragon. I think I was more going off of the difference in photos in the links above. But, you are right for sure.

[Universal Sword Donor]

20 minutes ago, YOVMO said:

yes, this makes sense....especially considering that even the mountain rides a horse and while it might be a large horse it is no where near the size of a dragon. I think I was more going off of the difference in photos in the links above. But, you are right for sure.

Now that I think about it a little more it makes sense they'd be heavily armored. They'd be the target of arrows and other siege weapons like ballistae and scorpions. Meraxes obviously died that way, but iirc there are some examples of dragon riders getting hit by arrows (battle of the gullet for one).

[YOVMO]

Just now, Universal Sword Donor said:

Now that I think about it a little more it makes sense they'd be heavily armored. They'd be the target of arrows and other siege weapons like ballistae and scorpions. Meraxes obviously died that way, but iirc there are some examples of dragon riders getting hit by arrows (battle of the gullet for one).

Yes, that would make some sense...but also, if you picture the mechanics of riding a dragon, the safest way to avoid ballistics  from arrows all the way to scorpion bolts would be to remain laying forward and as flat to the dragon as possible. If you are sitting up like a jouster you are a huge target (comparatively). Still, I believe you are correct in your assentation that full plate and mail would be worn. Especially since, as I think of it, the legs would not be used to control the dragon the way they would a horse...dragonriders would, rather, have some kind of psionic connection with the dragon. 

[Storm Lords Bane]

I fail to see how and why the Valyrians would field armies that had ANY resemblance with a legion. 

First, the way the did battle. Romans uses infantry as the main "killer". Valyrians used dragons.

Infantry means that either you have an active and politicaly strong class of citizents that are willing to take arms and march to the field or the state population has reach a point that you can recruit soldiers and turn them to professionals. The Freehold had free land owners but the oligarhy of the Dragonlords had all political power. Their population does not seems booming too.

I belive that their "slow" expansion came as a resolt of the Dragonlords will to keep the greatest part of wealth, power and control. New lands, wealth and trade might give rise to new contenders within the Freehold.

In my mind valyrians soldiers looked like the late Byzantine-Persian Wars elite troops. Well trained in all weapons, well armored in lamellar armor, able to fight both on foot and horseback. Not huge in numbers though, maybe a 14-20000 strong standing army and another 10000 in reserve.

Their one thing in common with the roman armies of the early imperial era would have been their artilery and field equipment. Dragons are impressive and deadly, but if you want to multiply the strength of your field army, give them machines that can devastate a slow advancing mass infantry formation (lockstep legion of Old Ghish) and watch what happens.

[Byfort of Corfe]

15 minutes ago, Storm Lords Bane said:

I fail to see how and why the Valyrians would field armies that had ANY resemblance with a legion. 

First, the way the did battle. Romans uses infantry as the main "killer". Valyrians used dragons.

Infantry means that either you have an active and politicaly strong class of citizents that are willing to take arms and march to the field or the state population has reach a point that you can recruit soldiers and turn them to professionals. The Freehold had free land owners but the oligarhy of the Dragonlords had all political power. Their population does not seems booming too.

I belive that their "slow" expansion came as a resolt of the Dragonlords will to keep the greatest part of wealth, power and control. New lands, wealth and trade might give rise to new contenders within the Freehold.

In my mind valyrians soldiers looked like the late Byzantine-Persian Wars elite troops. Well trained in all weapons, well armored in lamellar armor, able to fight both on foot and horseback. Not huge in numbers though, maybe a 14-20000 strong standing army and another 10000 in reserve.

Their one thing in common with the roman armies of the early imperial era would have been their artilery and field equipment. Dragons are impressive and deadly, but if you want to multiply the strength of your field army, give them machines that can devastate a slow advancing mass infantry formation (lockstep legion of Old Ghish) and watch what happens.

I have to agree.  While I concede that there is a resemblance to Rome GRRM never makes a close comparison.  Imperial Rome, until the Battle of Adrianople relied heavily on it's infantry, to the point that "auxiliary" troops, including Cavalry were often not Roman themselves.  I could see a Valyrian Army as closer to a late Eastern Roman Army, made up of large amounts of Cataphractii, "field artillery" similar to "scorpions" and heavy armored infantry. 

But of course when one discusses the Roman Army you have to attach it to a period.  After all in the early days the Romans fought as a phalanx as the Etruscans and Greeks did.  After a few horrible defeats, including the surrender of an entire Legion without resistance, the Romans adopted the Manipular Legion to give themselves greater tactical maneuverability.  A little over a Century Later the Romans would adopt the "Marian" Legion, based in the reforms of Gaius Marius who not only established a new structure for the Legions but also altered the requirements for men to serve.  Other reforms would follow, Augustus and Trajan would both reform the structure and by the time of Hadrian many Legions had become permanent fixtures in their regions, often drawing their soldiers from those regions themselves.  By the late Roman Period most "Roman" Legions would actually be manned by "Barbarians".

So too of course would be their armor and equipment.  The early Roman Phalanxes looked like the Greek or Etruscan, fighting with long spears (or pikes) an essentially forming a slow moving shield wall. As the legion would change so to its armor and armament.  The Legions would adopt the pilum, or light throwing spear and also the gladius, a short sword.  Over time the spatha or long sword (roughly equivalent to a knight's broadsword) would be adopted as well.  Armor, shield size and shape and helmets would all change as well.  Hollywood is horrible at this, to them a Roman, whether fighting Hannibal or the Goths should look the same when in reality a soldier of Julius Caesar would be wearing a different helmet and some pieces of armor than one of Tiberius.

[TheSovereignGrave]

Would Dragonstone have even been able to support any kind of professional armies? It's not exactly the largest and most fertile island out there, so would it have even been able to support a highly trained and disciplined army of professional soldiery even if Valyria had?

[Blackfyre Bastard]

26 minutes ago, TheSovereignGrave said:

Would Dragonstone have even been able to support any kind of professional armies? It's not exactly the largest and most fertile island out there, so would it have even been able to support a highly trained and disciplined army of professional soldiery even if Valyria had?

Unlikely. The World book states the highest figure of Aegon's host at 3000. This would include his allies from Driftmark, Claw Isle and Massey's Hook.

[Trigger Warning]

I pretty much just imagined colonial troops drawn from all over the Freehold with whatever local arms and armour they had. 

[HelmHammerhand]

I know this is an unhelpful answer for the OP but I'm pretty sure they fought in pajamas and their strategy was generally to sleep  until the juniormost soldiers woke everyone up to inform them that the enemy had been torched.  Stretch, eat some breakfast, and then go pick through the charred battlefield to find booty.  Done and done.

[Ser Arthur Hightower]

I imagine that they would be modelled on the Roman legions to a certain extent, however I feel that it is important to note the Valyrian army was not as important to Valyria as the Roman army was to Rome. Valyria succeeded because of magic and dragons, not because of regular soldiers, that's not to say that their soldiers would be incompetent, just that in terms of discipline, numbers, training et cetera they probably weren't too much better off than other soldiers in other cultures, if at all.

The reason I'm making this point is that I don't think it is necessarily true that many of Aegon's soldiers fought in the same way that the soldiers of the Valyrian Freehold did, more likely the majority were of Westerosi decent and most of those who weren't likely would have trained with those who were, meaning they would use similar tactics and equipment to other Westerosi soldiers.

[Kaibaman]

My guess is after their war with the Ghiscari Empire, the Valyrians must have either absorbed or incorporated the seemingly unbeatable lock step legions into their own military forces. So its possible their infantry must have looked very much like the legions of Old Ghis.

[Storm Lords Bane]

5 hours ago, Kaibaman said:

My guess is after their war with the Ghiscari Empire, the Valyrians must have either absorbed or incorporated the seemingly unbeatable lock step legions into their own military forces. So its possible their infantry must have looked very much like the legions of Old Ghis.

The legions were crushed by the Freehold. Their troops, tactics and dragons were proven better.

No victorious army has never ever reform itself into the army they have beaten. 

[Kaibaman]

5 hours ago, Storm Lords Bane said:

The legions were crushed by the Freehold. Their troops, tactics and dragons were proven better.

No victorious army has never ever reform itself into the army they have beaten. 

Yes the lock step legions were defeated but I'm quite certain the Valyrians might have saw the value of integrating those troops into their own forces because they were seemingly invincible and were no doubt far better than their own infantry forces. Think of it this way. When the Romans defeated barbarian tribes who were better horseman than themselves, they didn't disband those forces after defeating them. Instead they would bring them into their own armies as auxiliaries.