Indian (Moghul) Musketeers

This Mikes Models figure is based on the sketch in Gush's Renaissance Armies, p. 105 (a). It's interesting that so many of the figures in the Mikes Models range were based on Ian Heath's excellent drawings in Gush's book. Helpful too, since at a remove of decades, one can precisely identify half-forgotten figures fished from a cigar box.

Moorish Arquebusiers

More Mikes Models figures, these 16th century Moorish (Moroccan) arquebusiers seem to have been modeled on the sketch on p. 95 (g) in Gush's Renaissance Armies. Gush's brief description of the Moorish kingdom and its array of enemies, both European and African, indicates that it is a fascinating subject for a wargames army.

Ottoman Infantry: Yayas

Above: Mikes Models 15mm "Yayas"

The Yayas were an Ottoman peasant militia that were the predecessors of the Azabs. They were granted land in return for their military service and seem to have been mostly bow-armed irregulars. In my army, they are depicted by Mikes Models figures that appear to have been modeled on the Moorish bowman depicted in Gush's Renaissance Armies, p. 95 (e). Yayas and Azabs actually served together for a time, but it appears that the Yayas were relegated to rear-area services in the second half of the 15th century and thenceforward were no longer considered among the combat troops. Still, I haven't any problem using these figures to represent bow-armed skirmishers in any "Eastern" renaissance army.

Ottoman Infantry: Azabs

Above: Three views of 15mm Azabs

The photos show a ten-figure unit of Turkish infantry (probably Mikes Models) based for WRG rules and suitable for late 15th - mid-17th century Azabs. This figure appears to have been modeled after the arquebusier sketched on p. 78 (b) of George Gush's Renaissance Armies, 1480-1650.

The Renaissance and the Crisis of the Italian Military

Pieri, Piero. Il Rinascimento e la crisi militare italiana. Biblioteca di cultura storica, 45. Torino: G. Einaudi, 1952.

This was, and I expect remains, the principal general source for the military history of the Italian states during the transition from medieval to modern warfare that took place (rather rudely for Italy) during 1494-1530. It is a truly magisterial work, encompassing 661 pages. While it is military history primarily, the author is careful to examine the economy, industrialization, agriculture, finance, and social classes in Part 1. Part 2 is given over entirely to military history. This is a superb source for the battles of the Italian Wars in the period.

From Pavia to Rocroi

Albi de la Cuesta, Julio. De Pavía a Rocroi: los tercios de infantería española en los siglos XVI y XVII. [Madrid]: Balkan Ediciones, 1999.

A very interesting examination of the Spanish tercio from many different standpoints. I haven't had a chance to do more than skim it, but I've already found it quite useful in some respects. The table of contents is posted, so that you can get an idea of the author's coverage of the subject. The glossary particularly, though spare, is useful. There are no footnotes, and the bibliography is keyed to the chapters (not necessarily helpful, but it does at least give an idea of the foundation of the author's thoughts).

Trust but Verify

Landsknecht (NYPL)

Or, the Perils of Renaissance Military History.

While plowing through the essays in Italy and the European Powers, I discovered in one that: “The Black Bands of Guelders, one of the most prestigious Landsknecht contingents, whch fought for the French at Marignano (1515), had 12,000 pikemen, 2,000 arquebusiers, 2,000 swordsmen and 1,000 halberdiers.” Well, says I, this is interesting. That’s a lot of soldiers (17,000) to be gathered together in a single formation or formation-like rubric. Moreover, the reference to “swordsmen” in such numbers attracted my attention, since as those who know my thoughts on swordsmen know, I’m a skeptic of the sword-and-bucklermen so beloved of renaissance military historians from the time of Giovio and Macchiavelli onwards.

So, naturally, I checked the author’s footnotes. As is the case with so much of this particular article, I was referred to another secondary source. In other words, the author, himself a distinguished scholar, was referring me to the work of another distinguished scholar. This is just sloppy scholarship, and I dare say would be unacceptable in a post-graduate paper.

Having the referenced source to hand, I found that aside from the minor corruption of details and a few of the numbers that comes with the territory, the facts were more or less as stated. But, when I looked for scholar no. 2’s source, I was referred to yet another secondary source! Fortunately, scholar no. 3 (also to hand), cited his primary sources, and, mirabile dictu, the 17,000 landsknecht of scholars 1 and 2 were not the Black Band after all. No, those were other landsknecht. The Black Band numbered about 6,000 in addition to the others, and the original source provided no breakdown by weapon type for them.

Now, it really didn’t take me too long to chase down the facts, but I wonder what all this says about serious scholarship on renaissance military matters.

Oh, those swordsmen. Turns out they weren’t the elusive sword-and-bucklermen after all. They were landsknecht armed with two-handed swords – rather a different type of swordsman than the sword-and-bucklerman.