Slitherine

Thanks Filipe.

Filipe, we are allowing the army one BG of mounted crossbowmen or mounted arquebusiers.

We need an "Only before" date for the mounted crossbowmen and an "Only from" date for the mounted arquebusiers.

Any suggestions?

-------------------------

Another question:

Is there any evidence of Portugal using substantial numbers of Landsknecht-style mercenaries other than for the Alcácer Quibir campaign?

rbodleyscott wrote:Filipe, we are allowing the army one BG of mounted crossbowmen or mounted arquebusiers.

We need an "Only before" date for the mounted crossbowmen and an "Only from" date for the mounted arquebusiers.

Any suggestions?

Unfortunately, I cannot really help you on that subject.

For instance, even a very scholarly guy (Jorge Freitas) doubted on the existence of mounted crossbowmen in Morocco, at least until I found that description of the garrison of Safim in 1511 which I translated and put here in this thread.
As for the mounted arquebusiers, there are no exact reports of the existence of that sort of troop besides those “stradiot-like” cavalrymen. Given the existence of the ginetes, those “stradiots” could well be arquebusiers.
So, regarding the existence of these, there’s only an “educated guess”.

As for the “before” and “after”, perhaps we should look at the “Law of the weapons” of D. João (1547, if my memory doesn’t fail me). I will look further to see if there’s any reference to crossbows. If there isn’t, maybe we should stick to a date, say, 1540.

rbodleyscott wrote: Another question:

Is there any evidence of Portugal using substantial numbers of Landsknecht-style mercenaries other than for the Alcácer Quibir campaign?

Were they really Landsknecht? They were Germans and Burgundians for sure, but to say that they were dressed and fought like Landsknecht...
I think there were also some Germans at Alcântara, in 1580, but I'm not really sure. I'll see what I can find back home.

pippohispano wrote:As for the “before” and “after”, perhaps we should look at the “Law of the weapons” of D. João (1547, if my memory doesn’t fail me). I will look further to see if there’s any reference to crossbows. If there isn’t, maybe we should stick to a date, say, 1540.

I wasn't looking for a single date for both. I assume that there might be some overlap possible.

rbodleyscott wrote: Another question:

Is there any evidence of Portugal using substantial numbers of Landsknecht-style mercenaries other than for the Alcácer Quibir campaign?

Were they really Landsknecht? They were Germans and Burgundians for sure, but to say that they were dressed and fought like Landsknecht...
I think there were also some Germans at Alcântara, in 1580, but I'm not really sure. I'll see what I can find back home.

Well the issue isn't whether they were actually called Landsknechte - by that date they were probably called Fußknechte anyway. The issue is whether they used German mercenaries not organised into proper tercios.

Hi Filipe.

Thanks for your help, very much apreciated.


I had founded this text about Alcántara 1580:

http://forumdefesa.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=9543


And I have some questions.


Actually, the Aviz list allow poor Tercos in Alcantara. But the most of them were unexperienced and lightly trainned. We include option to choose between poor tercos in early tercio formation, and other ones without the ET capability, because the peasants were organized in Tercos but we assume that they couldn´t have the trainning to kept an effective tercio formation.

The text talks about the portuguese "esquadras" that couldn´t kept the order when the spanish tercios attacks.

I´m not sure if all the infantry units should be able to make a ET formation, or if at least a half of them must be in no ET formation.

What do you think?

Hi!
In the Ordenação sobre os cavalos e armas (Law regarding the horses and guns), the only time a crossbow in mentioned is in the13th chapter which refers to people unable to keep a horse: toda a pessoa que (…) tendo fazenda de cinquenta mil reais e dai para cima até cem mil reais, seja obrigado a ter uma espingarda aparelhada ou uma besta de três arretéis e vinte setas
"Having an income ranging from 50.000 to 100.000 reais, he must have a espingarda (a more primitive arquebus) ready to be used or a 1,3kg crossbow with 20 bolts."
This Law was written in 1549. Besides this sentence, nowhere else can we see mounted crossbowmen or arquebusiers. Therefore, I would allow for mounted crossbowmen until, say, 1540. Mounted arquebusiers could have been used in the early 70’s, but could have existed well before that as well.

As for the Germans at Alcácer Quibir (12 companies), they all fought well and were properly organised in one formation. They were heavily armoured, at least compared with the Portuguese and Spanish.

Regarding Alcântara, I think you are being too kind! Unfortunately for them, the Portuguese didn't have time to train properly and were demoralized, not only because they still felt the defeat in Morocco, but especially because now they where fighting against the best army of those times.
I'm not really sure if they could even muster a proper ET. The ordinary people surely could not. They would be arranged in companies and I think that's all there is to say. As for the others, perhaps treating them as Poor Tercio would be accurate. There would still exist independent arquebusier companies and several companies, either shot or pike, or both, could be organised into bigger esquadrões (not “esquadras”).

Please note that at Alcântara, the Portuguese cavaly was not as bad as the infantry. Several men were veterans from Morocco and a handful came from the African garrisons (the corredores de cavalo , literally “horse riders”).

The description in the link is from the author of “The Campaigns of the Prior do Crato”. It’s the only description of Alcântara I have at hand, unfortunately. Curiously enough, I worked in Alcântara for some four years and passed in the exact site the battle took place many times (the are a lot of restaurants over there were they serve seafood...)

Thanks Filipe.

About the cavalry in Alcántara, the cronics talks about corredores a cavalo, I think they were ginetes (the most) and mounted arquebusiers, so are represented in the pictures at least.



Será uma lista muito bonita.

robertthebruce wrote: About the cavalry in Alcántara, the cronics talks about corredores a cavalo, I think they were ginetes (the most) and mounted arquebusiers, so are represented in the pictures at least.

The corredores de cavalo were surely ginetes. But the Portuguese cavalry also got involved in fierce close combat so I think there would be some "heavy" (medium) cavalry units as well. I don't know how you would rate them, perhaps as Horse. D. António fought well in that battle, and he wouldn't be a ginete, that's for sure!
As for the arquebusiers in the picture, please note that the ones upstream are Spanish, and these had mounted arquebusiers.

robertthebruce wrote:Será uma lista muito bonita.

Que bien qué escribes!

Recieved


About the heavy cavalry, in the list, we have "Cavaleiros Acobertados" they can be Gendarmes and Cavaliers. They were used in Alcazarquivir and other times in the african wars.

I think that they couldn´t be used in Alcantara, bacause the most of them died in Alcazarquivir to years before.


You are talking about a medium cavalry, I think they can be similar to the spanish Celadas, the spanish called them "Caballos Ligeros" in portuguese "Cavalos Ligeros".




Maybe armoured horse with superior option.

Que bien qué escribes! Smile

Estou aprendendo Português através las listas de FOGR

robertthebruce wrote:Recieved


About the heavy cavalry, in the list, we have "Cavaleiros Acobertados" they can be Gendarmes and Cavaliers. They were used in Alcazarquivir and other times in the african wars.

I think that they couldn´t be used in Alcantara, bacause the most of them died in Alcazarquivir to years before.


You are talking about a medium cavalry, I think they can be similar to the spanish Celadas, the spanish called them "Caballos Ligeros" in portuguese "Cavalos Ligeros".

Maybe armoured horse with superior option.

Assuming that we are talking about Alcantara, they don't need to be Superior to be better than the foot (who are mostly Poor). Including a few veterans would not be sufficient to make them Superior I think.

rbodleyscott wrote:

robertthebruce wrote:Recieved


About the heavy cavalry, in the list, we have "Cavaleiros Acobertados" they can be Gendarmes and Cavaliers. They were used in Alcazarquivir and other times in the african wars.

I think that they couldn´t be used in Alcantara, bacause the most of them died in Alcazarquivir to years before.


You are talking about a medium cavalry, I think they can be similar to the spanish Celadas, the spanish called them "Caballos Ligeros" in portuguese "Cavalos Ligeros".

Maybe armoured horse with superior option.

Assuming that we are talking about Alcantara, they don't need to be Superior to be better than the foot (who are mostly Poor). Including a few veterans would not be sufficient to make them Superior I think.

Ok Richard, in fact the only source who talks about the quality of the potuguese mounted in Alcántara is a portuguese source, they can be matched with the spanish celadas.


Are you taking notes to include the changes in the list?, or maybe do you want a small summary with the changes proposals in the army list board?

robertthebruce wrote: Are you taking notes to include the changes in the list?, or maybe do you want a small summary with the changes proposals in the army list board?

I plan to put them in tomorrow, but a checklist would be useful to make sure I don't miss anything.

I agree with you.

The cavaleiros acobertados (Gendarmes) could hardly have been present at Alcântara. Most of the men were lost in Alcáçer Quibir, the same happening with their equipment. Armoured horse would be a more accurate option.

Also, to qualify tha cavalry in 1580 as Superior... Well, they had veterans all right, but I think most of them were not. MAYBE you could classify the corredores de cavalos as Superior, as they were used to constant warfare in Morocco; MAYBE you could classify ONE "heavy" cavalry BG as Superior (deppending on the army size), but I think that's it.

Lets face it: the army at Alcântara was a shadow of the Portuguese army two years before. The best men in the Kingdom had either died or were being held in captivity; the best infantry also came from the South, namely Lisbon, and it was completely lost...
Now, at Alcântara, even defending a bridge, in a strong defensive position (I know the place!), the Portuguese were soundly defeated.

Thanks Filipe, you has been very helpful.


Tha Place of the battle of Alcántara is near Belem?, I was here the last year play¡ng in the International Team Challenge, it´s a lovely place.

You're welcome. I'm glad to be of any use.

Alcântara is not far from Belém, it's basically "under" the "25th of April" bridge.
The bridge (the word Alcântara comes from al-Qantara, "the bridge") was located in the intersection of the R. Prior do Crato, R. das Fontaínhas and Avenida de Ceuta. That's where the battle took place and that's where there are many restaurants nowadays .
The Duke of Alba directed the operations from a nearby Ermida, a round building near the intersection of the R. João de Lemos and the southern end of the Calçada de Santo Amaro, some 1000m SW from the bridge.

http://maps.google.pt/maps?hl=pt-PT&biw ... CBoQ8gEwAA

By the way, I would be interested in seeing that list. Could you send me a Beta Version, or something of the sort??

Have sent you a PM Filipe.

Thanks!