Schiltron in 28mm plastic?

[Iain R]

I’m thinking ancient authors are mixing up pike and long spear, and also the use of a long spear. For example you could (if you wanted) wield your long spear in two hands, similar to a pike. Or just use it in one hand.

So for around 1300, I’m going to go with long spear and shield, buuuuut model some spears held in two hands, just not as long as a pike.

Honestly, if you're going for c.1300 and assuming you're representing mainland Scots fighting the English, other than small bucklers or targes worn on belts I'd ditch the shields entirely (maybe the odd one, but they'd be rare).

The long spear was intended to counter the rise of cavalry (which was still the primary arm of English armies at this point, the whole longbow-heavy thing came a wee bit later), and were about 12-14' long. These things cannot be easily wielded in one hand while holding a shield, other than being planted into the ground and held out at an angle; contrary to popular belief, this was not standard Scottish practice. A "schiltron" didn't refer to a specific, static ring of outward facing spears, it originated from "shield troop" (ironically) and referred to any formed body of spearmen, and the Scots almost exclusively advanced to contact using their spears offensively; Falkirk was the outlier, but for some reason has become rooted in popular conciousness of how the Scots fought their battles. The earlier spear used offensively with one hand and a large shield was probably no more than 8' long, so quite a difference.

Standard caveat though, your toys, your game, etc, do what makes you happy...

To our minds, a long spear is different to a pike...
...I doubt they would have drawn a distinction between a long spear and a pike. It would have been the same item - a long pole with a spike...
...So don't get too tied up on whether they should be long spear or pike armed. The words would have been used to describe the same item. So make it what you want.

This. Until the advent of "true" pikes in the 1500s (and of course in reference to Macedonian Phalangists) I just use "pike" as an interchangeable catch-all term for any spear longer than the aforementioned one-handed "dark ages" spear.

And don't get me started on the wargamerism of nicely delineated units of seperate polearms; "these guys have spears, but this unit has halberds/bills/polaxes..."

[Tim Haslam]

Good information, many thanks.

I’m just waiting to see these new sets from Wargames Atlantic now…
I got a promotion email last night that mentioned sergeants and a common folk type of box.

[carlos marighela]

eBob make 13th C Scots with pointy sticks. I would have thought a bespoke range of very nice sulpts would be the way to go.

https://www.ebobminiatures.com/medieval---rebellion.html

Specifically: https://ebobminiatures.com/ecomimg/714c8899-3f75-4869-ae53-ff0d9c137c12.png

No, they're not in plastic but would give you the chance to start on the core of your army which you could add to once suitable placcy figures arrive (if ever).

[Iain R]

The Ebob range is.... not great. Was fine(ish... if you ignored all the Braveheart bollocks in it) 20 odd years ago when no one else made a bespoke range, but has been well and truly surpassed by the Antediluvian Miniatures "Wars of The Bruces" range,  which is better sculpted, more accurate, better cast, and far more in depth, and also matches beautifully with Bickley's early HYW stuff through Claymore, to plug some gaps.

[Iain R]

Good information, many thanks.

I’m just waiting to see these new sets from Wargames Atlantic now…
I got a promotion email last night that mentioned sergeants and a common folk type of box.

Ignore any "common folk" type boxes full of ragged peasants with sharp fruit and missing teeth. These sorts of people didn't actually turn up in mediaeval armies, the idea of the "Sma' Folk" and "Ribauds" being a major component part of the Scots army is old Victorian antiquarian scrollox, perpetuated by hack, populist historians playing to the nationalist audience. Stick with traditionally equipped foot.

[Atheling]

Pikes not until 1513- at least on the battlefield.

Schiltron was a formation not a tactic.

I can't remember where I read it, but one very interesting point of view was that the English too when dismounted, fought in a Schiltron/or the formations on the battlefield were just called Schiltron's, which kind of messes up the idea that only the Scots fought in this manner.

I'd love to hear Rob Jones' point of view if reading this(?)

[carlos marighela]

The Ebob range is.... not great. Was fine(ish... if you ignored all the Braveheart bollocks in it) 20 odd years ago when no one else made a bespoke range, but has been well and truly surpassed by the Antediluvian Miniatures "Wars of The Bruces" range,  which is better sculpted, more accurate, better cast, and far more in depth, and also matches beautifully with Bickley's early HYW stuff through Claymore, to plug some gaps.

Fairy nuff. Pointy stick wielding Scotsmen is not a topic I have great knowledge of and you are right in the sense that the Antideluvian sculpts look better sculpted. Paul Hicks' sculpts?

By the by are you suggesting that in addition to being an anti-semitic, racist, mysognistic, wife-beating, alchoholic  c*** that Mr Gibson is less than wholly comitted to the pursuit of historical verity? Shocked I am.

That said there is an alternative viewpoint.

[Von Stroheim]

There is seller on Etsy who has a range of 28mm Scots in metal - I thing they may be the Medbury figures.

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/1472445293/scots-13th-14th-century-pikemen-x-4-28mm?ga_order=most_relevant&ga_search_type=all&ga_view_type=gallery&ga_search_query=28mm+14th+century+scots&ref=sr_gallery-1-1&sts=1&content_source=3f61f08f58dad9e3a74d14e4e1d8f909057d4c21%253A1472445293&organic_search_click=1

[Iain R]

Paul Hicks' sculpts?

No, Matt Bickley. Hicks does their later (ex-Claymore) Otterburn/Harlaw stuff and earlier Islemen ranges.