Traditional Unit Types
Adapted to SCA Fighting
by Mordock von Rugen
(mka Greg Shetler)

Historically, army units have been divided among heavy infantry, light infantry, archers (and other missileers), heavy cavalry, and light cavalry. The terms "heavy" and "light" were relative terms, and usually referred to both the amount of arms and armor and the speed with which the unit was capable of moving. Heavy units tended to be slower, and light units tended to be faster. At various times, both infantry and cavalry also used some kind of missile weapon - javelins, bows, slings, and so on. In short, the definitions of just what comprised these units changed with time, location, and culture. However, the employment of the various types of units has generally had a common thread throughout. It is this common thread which I will address.

In Society combat, infantry is not divided into quite the same divisions. Rather, we generally have shields, poles, missiles, and other systems (including florentine, great sword, sword and madu, etc). The heavy infantry would thus be composed of shields, which had trained for close-order combat and maneuver. Light infantry would be shields which had trained for looser order, skirmish combat, and those non-shield systems which cannot support shields. Pole weapons would be attached in support of infantry, or considered infantry themselves. Thus a heavy infantry unit in the Society would be a group of shields, some pole weapons, and some attached supporting skirmishers and missileers. A light infantry unit would have the same type of composition, with additional other systems. The big difference is in their organization and in their method of training. Heavy infantry is trained in close-order combat, maneuver, and mutual support of the line. Light infantry is trained in loose-order combat, maneuver, detached operations, and skirmishing.

Heavy infantry has existed for a long time. The Romans had heavily armed and armored infantry, lighter infantry, cavalry, and missileers of various sorts (slingers, archers, and javelineers). The tactics for employment of heavy infantry has seen many permutations throughout the ages, but essentially their purpose has been the same: to press the enemy and drive them from their positions. An army which has been driven from its position and formation is disordered, and can no longer fight as effectively. A disordered army is easier to destroy, demoralize and rout, or capture. Generally, the lighter infantry and cavalry were used to pursue a disorganized enemy, or to flank and destroy an enemy sore-pressed by the heavy infantry. This article combines experiences on the field as a heavy infantry commander and what I have been able to learn of the function and employment of various unit types from military classics.

The definition of heavy infantry has changed over time, according to the culture in which the unit was to be employed. For the Romans, heavy infantry was armored with a helm, a cuirass, greaves, and a shield, and armed with a spatha, a pilum, and five javelins held in the hollow of their shields. Light infantry was typically armored similarly to heavy infantry, but carried only two javelins and a spatha or a semispatha. In later times, heavy infantry was infantry which could afford to be heavily armed or armored, and light infantry was generally lightly armed and armored levies. Regardless of what period is considered, the heavy infantry was generally more heavily armed and armored, slower in movement, and more closely formed.

The slower movement expected of the heavy infantry allowed closer spacing, as more time was available for the individual soldier to account for terrain without disrupting the spacing and pace of those around him. That closer spacing also reduced the speed with which the unit was capable of moving, in general, unless the troops were well trained at close-order drill. A closer spacing provided the heavy infantry with considerably more impact during a charge, as there was little or no spacing for the enemy to slip into. Instead, the entire enemy front could be swept back. Further, with more men per foot of space in the line, the heavy infantry carried more momentum during a charge than light infantry. Heavy infantry could sometimes gain more ground even than cavalry during a charge, though cavalry often killed more of the enemy by getting among them.
Heavy infantry can provide an almost solid wall of shields and flesh by overlapping their shields and pressing their bodies close together. This tight overlapping leaves fewer gaps for enemy poles to take advantage of, and prevents enemy penetration. The mutual support provided by bracing against neighboring shields also provides a strong bastion against a charge. Heavy infantry units can further takes advantage of their tighter formation and higher mass density by advancing to contact and pressing against the enemy, rather than stopping at pole or sword range and trying to kill the enemy. This disorders the enemy, pushes them from their formation with relation to the rest of the army, and opens flanks and splits in the enemy line. As Vegetius says, writing about 390 AD, "The line is solely designed to repulse, or if possible, break the enemy." The Roman heavy infantry were placed "...in the line."

Heavy infantry should not be intended simply to provide a wall behind which the poles are safe. "Contact" for heavy infantry means actual, physical contact with the shields of the enemy. The line is thus not so exposed to the withering attrition resulting from standing just within pole range of the enemy. Moreover, heavy infantry shieldmen thus also take a more active role in pushing the enemy from their position. Polemen stand as close or as far from the line as necessary to attack enemy shields and poles, firing over or under shields. This technique is considerably different from the approach commonly seen in the Society of shield lines forming with sufficient space between them for poles to shoot through, and sufficiently far from the enemy line that poles are protected from enemy poles except when pressing forward to fire a shot. Thus poles assigned to fight with the heavy infantry shieldwall will need to train with them to become comfortable with this difference.

No type of unit can possibly be of any use to a commander if it is incapable of coordinating with the many other types of units used in the army. A good army will be composed of a number of types of units, which should train together so they will be coordinated. Heavy infantry attains its maximum usefulness when it is used to penetrate, disrupt, or push back the enemy. The light infantry and cavalry may take advantage of this to flank, or to flood the hole made by the heavy infantry, or to penetrate, mix with, and fall on the rear of the enemy. Heavy infantry without light infantry or cavalry may be used alone, just as the other types of units may be used alone. However, a properly mixed army can always take advantage of the fundamental weaknesses of an unmixed army.

Cavalry, as such, does not exist in Society combat. However, many types of units are best described as cavalry units, because they train primarily for rapid deployment, autonomous operation, flanking and penetration maneuvers, and generally have few if any shields. They train for rapid, running maneuvers. Cavalry units should practice combat in small teams, which operate semi-autonomously in the field. In practice, cavalry should try to flank the enemy, rolling up the line. They try to penetrate the line to attack the poles and command structure of the enemy, and reform behind or to one side of the line, to reattack at the weakest perceived point.

Cavalry may be used to shock and disrupt the enemy, as they are trained to penetrate and continue through to the "backfield", attacking the enemy poles, archers, and command structure. The biggest advantage of cavalry is that they deploy very rapidly, can often outrun the enemy (and thus flank him), and can often attack the enemy line repeatedly and reform. The goal of cavalry is to kill enemy soldiers. They differ in this from the infantry, whose purpose is generally to disorder the enemy. Tactics employing cavalry should bear this in mind - cavalry should function somewhat autonomously once they contact the enemy.

Light infantry is generally composed of lightly armored, lightly armed foot soldiers, trained at loose-order combat, rapid deployment and movement, and quick, short strikes. Light infantry, because of the wider spacing among the soldiers, can move more quickly without disrupting the spacing or pace of neighboring soldiers. Light infantry is best used as a quickly mobile strike package, to flank, pursue, or take advantage of holes opened by heavy infantry or cavalry. Generally, light infantry does not press to contact and stand toe-to-toe with the enemy. Rather, their mobility should be taken advantage of. Light infantry can provide outstanding cover for cavalry to reform, can pin the enemy without engaging by simply standing a short distance in front of him and occassionally "pulsing" toward him and away, and can very quickly deploy to take advantage of a sudden weakness anywhere in the enemy front.

Light infantry formations are looser than those of the heavy infantry. Rather than overlapping the shields, light infantry leave a gap of varying width between shields. The gap may be as small as one basket-hilt (about 5 inches), or may be as large as another shield (24-36 inches). A light infantry charge is intended to kill and confuse the enemy, rather than to drive him from his position or formation. Light infantry practice a "pulse" maneuver, in which the line charges the enemy, fights for a few seconds, and then falls back to reform. This maneuver has the advantage of holding an enemy line engaged without suffering casualties, as the enemy line must remain on-guard for pulses. When charged, the light infantry may try to repulse the enemy, or may fall back and lead them to expose a flank.

Light infantry is especially useful as skirmishers. Used to entice a group of enemy from the body of the enemy army, light infantry can whittle down the enemy in small pieces, limiting the casualties taken in destroying him. As skirmishers moving to flank, light infantry have the capability to roll the enemy line without making contact. Rolling the line makes weak spots - "corners" - which may be then be assaulted in force to disorder and penetrate the enemy line.

Ideally, an army will be a highly-coordinated composite of heavy infantry, light infantry, and cavalry. The heavy infantry would be used to pin, penetrate, or push the enemy, while the light infantry would take advantage of any disruption provided by the Fray. Meanwhile, the cavalry would flank or repeatedly drive through the enemy, as is their norm. By combining the units, and coordinating their action, the army commander has much greater flexibility at exploiting any weakness of the enemy. Heavy infantry could be formed behind a screen of light infantry, and pushed through whatever corner resulted from the flanking motion of the cavalry. The heavy infantry could engage one wing, while light infantry held off the center and the cavalry flanked the other. All sorts of permutations are possible, and I suggest the interested reader study "Frederick the Great's Orders to His Generals", "My Reveries on the Art of War" by the Marshal de Saxe, and "The Institutions of the Romans" by Vegetius. While Frederick's and the Marshal's armies included firearms, their units were still employed in a very similar fashion to those of Vegetius's day. Patton remarked on the similarity of unit tactics during WWII, leading one to a study of modern unit employment, as well.

Unfortunately, the SCA armies to date rely very heavily on one or two types of units. Caid relies on heavy infantry, with considerable support from the light infantry. The West relies more on light infantry, with some cavalry. Outlands relies more on cavalry, with some light infantry. Atenveldt relies mostly on light infantry, with some heavy infantry. I don't know what mixes other kingdoms have, as I have never seen them, but I am given to understand similar imbalance is the norm. An army which could effectively combine a balanced mix of the unit types would gain considerable advantage over its neighbors in war, owing to the flexibility then available to its army commander.


Fray Home Page