![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]() Quote:
Third Battle of Panipat , 1761: 32,000 Rohilla infantry Second Anglo-Afghani War, 1878: 62 infantry, 16 cavalry regiments |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]() Quote:
Mmmm it depends if this word "infantry" was used by Europeans/British or in local sources... Then the swords that you posted are not infantry swords, forgive my classic vision of an infantry but to me me the swords should be standardized like the late khyber knives for example. So in fact it depends of your personal definition or opinion about infantry. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
Infantry: foot soldiers, organized in defined units. Like ( see above) “regiments”:-)
Question: if there were so many foot soldiers in the 18-19 century Afghan armies, why are Afghani “ cutlases” so rare? Last edited by ariel; 28th May 2020 at 03:14 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,193
|
![]() Quote:
It seems to me that foot soldiers were far more available than cavalry, which obviously required a horse, and like much of the arms etc. were at the expense of the individual so at a premium. Perhaps that is too simplistic a notion? I guess it depends on which Afghan region or demographic, as I know parts of Afghanistan the horsemen are outstanding as well known from the sport of Buzkhashi (cf.polo). |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|