Slitherine

When is the above book due out ? And will the Tarsa Spanish cover the Neopolitan Spanish armies of Cordova ?

Cheers

Taking a ride on Scrumpy's post, shouldn't the Portuguese army of early/mid 16th century (Continental and the armies that fought in north Africa) be covered in this companion? Are they in other book?

According to: http://slitherine.com/games/fog_t&t 10/11/2010 - which I assume is in UK format so mid November.

VMadeira wrote:Taking a ride on Scrumpy's post, shouldn't the Portuguese army of early/mid 16th century (Continental and the armies that fought in north Africa) be covered in this companion? Are they in other book?

We didn't include a Portuguese army, and to be honest I can't recall why - other than the one that toddled off to North Africa and fought a single, disastrous battle, didn't justify a list of its own.

According to Amazon UK it is October 11th; at least that is what it said in my order confirmation

nikgaukroger wrote:

VMadeira wrote:Taking a ride on Scrumpy's post, shouldn't the Portuguese army of early/mid 16th century (Continental and the armies that fought in north Africa) be covered in this companion? Are they in other book?

We didn't include a Portuguese army, and to be honest I can't recall why - other than the one that toddled off to North Africa and fought a single, disastrous battle, didn't justify a list of its own.

And this has stopped you before?

It is a pity, because the Portuguese did fight several battles and campaigns in north africa against the moors in this period, they are just less well know. It's the old story, everybody loves a good disaster.
If you need information on them, i can give the contacts of someone who knows more about it than me....

Scrumpy wrote:When is the above book due out ? And will the Tarsa Spanish cover the Neopolitan Spanish armies of Cordova ?

Cheers

The Trastámara Spanish cover from the first ordinnace of 1494 up to the Charles I enthronement. It includes the Gonzalo of Cordova Armies in Italy.

Whoopee!

VMadeira wrote:It is a pity, because the Portuguese did fight several battles and campaigns in north africa against the moors in this period, they are just less well know. It's the old story, everybody loves a good disaster.
If you need information on them, i can give the contacts of someone who knows more about it than me....

If you can get information I'd encourage you to post it on this forum for players edification, as, I'm afraid, it is too late for the list books

robertthebruce wrote:
The Trastámara Spanish cover from the first ordinnace of 1494 up to the Charles I enthronement. It includes the Gonzalo of Cordova Armies in Italy.

Yuhuuuuu!!! "Cierra! España cierra!!

nikgaukroger wrote:

VMadeira wrote:It is a pity, because the Portuguese did fight several battles and campaigns in north africa against the moors in this period, they are just less well know. It's the old story, everybody loves a good disaster.
If you need information on them, i can give the contacts of someone who knows more about it than me....

If you can get information I'd encourage you to post it on this forum for players edification, as, I'm afraid, it is too late for the list books

Hello Nick,

It greatly saddens me that you know nothing of Portuguese Early Modern Military History, and I honestly cannot understand why for there are many books about this subject, and many more are being written right this instant.
The fact is that the Portuguese have a long and distinguished History of warfare in this period, although most of the fighting took place outside Europe (the exception being Alcantara, in 1580).
The Portuguese fought many actions and battles, both in North Africa, where the war was permanent, and in the Indies. In Morocco the Portuguese had an army and fought just like the Border Reivers, who have a list of their own in FoG:R.

In another post I'll post a short review on the Portuguese army of the XVI and XVII centuries (keeping the Restauration army aside). Maybe you will consider to create the rightly deserved list, if not in a proper book, as it should be, at least in a downloadable PDF file.

I think you have misconstrued Nik's remarks above. The situation is not as bad as you think. There isn't a Portugese list in T&T but.....

There is a Portuguese Colonial list in Volume 4, Colonies and Conquest, which covers Portuguese colonial forces from 1494 to 1698, including those in Morocco.

There is also a Later Restoration Portuguese list in Volume 5, Duty and Glory.

rbodleyscott wrote:I think you have misconstrued Nik's remarks above. The situation is not as bad as you think. There isn't a Portugese list in T&T but.....

Well, he said that he knew only of one battle, and there were several..

rbodleyscott wrote:There is a Portuguese Colonial list in Volume 4, Colonies and Conquest, which covers Portuguese colonial forces from 1494 to 1698, including those in Morocco.

Ah, that's better! You see, Portugal was so distant from those European wars that there's not much information regarding the army in Portugal proper. Nevertheless, there was an army!

rbodleyscott wrote:There is also a Later Restoration Portuguese list in Volume 5, Duty and Glory.

Sure, that I knew already.

Anyway, I've put a short text on the Portuguese subject in this Forum, maybe you'll care to read it.

pippohispano wrote:Anyway, I've put a short text on the Portuguese subject in this Forum, maybe you'll care to read it.

Of course.

As Nik says, it is too late to make alterations to Trade & Treachery, but it may not be too late to make some changes to the Book 4 Colonial Portguese list - the "final" draft has already gone to Osprey, but the layout has not yet been finalised.

At the moment it has most infantry as Warriors, Arquebus, Impact Foot up till 1625.

The reasoning behind this is as follows:

"Portuguese civilisados soldiers had a reputation for being ill-disciplined, no doubt not helped by the fact they were poorly paid - what little pay they did receive being paid at irregular intervals. They were armed with a mixture of missile weapons, initially crossbow, but later arquebus, supplemented by a variety of close combat weapons such as swords, halberds and half-pikes. The usual tactic was a volley of shot followed by a fierce charge. We therefore classify them as Warriors to represent their poor discipline, but give them Impact Foot capability to reflect their fierce charge."

Do not think that any disrespect to Portuguese troops is intended. This classification gives them a unique (in the lists) combination of full effect firepower and impact foot capability.

What the Colonial list does not currently have is conventional pike & shot BGs. If you think that it should, can you say whether it should do so in every colonial location, or perhaps only in North Africa, and if so at what dates?

Note that it is not our policy to grade half-pikes as pikes.

rbodleyscott wrote:At the moment it has most infantry as Warriors, Arquebus, Impact Foot up till 1625.

The reasoning behind this is as follows:

"Portuguese civilisados soldiers had a reputation for being ill-disciplined, no doubt not helped by the fact they were poorly paid - what little pay they did receive being paid at irregular intervals. They were armed with a mixture of missile weapons, initially crossbow, but later arquebus, supplemented by a variety of close combat weapons such as swords, halberds and half-pikes. The usual tactic was a volley of shot followed by a fierce charge. We therefore classify them as Warriors to represent their poor discipline, but give them Impact Foot capability to reflect their fierce charge."

Do not think that any disrespect to Portuguese troops is intended. This classification gives them a unique (in the lists) combination of full effect firepower and impact foot capability.

Hi!

In general terms the classification is correct and I cannot consider it as “disrespectful”. But I do not totally agree with it, specially the Warrior classification.
First of all, there were no “civilisado” soldiers (“civilisado” means civilized!). Perhaps who mean “casado”, which basicaly means a colonist, a settled man, usually an ex-soldier married to a local woman. The “casados” were not full time soldiers but could be enrolled in times of need (and these were frequent!).
But in general terms, the soldiers were obedient to their commanders and followed orders [“In these arraiais punishment and obedience was rigorously observed by the soldiery because, if a death sentence was issued, it was promptly executed by a bando (team)”, Ribeiro, João].
They could - and did - perform elaborate formations (Castanhoso refers to it, you may read it in my other post) . Their problem was that they were rash and often charged their enemies, loosing formation in the process, but that was the Portuguese fighting style, not a discipline problem, as even the captains led those charges! Ribeiro refers that: “(…) as our men in that island [of Ceylon] knew no other way of marching and fighting other than charging ahead (…)”.

Therefore, for a correct “feeling” of the Portuguese soldier, I would classify it as:
MF, Unprotected (except against arrows, as they wore brigandines and helmets), Drilled, Arquebus, Impact Foot.

rbodleyscott wrote:What the Colonial list does not currently have is conventional pike & shot BGs. If you think that it should, can you say whether it should do so in every colonial location, or perhaps only in North Africa, and if so at what dates?

My other text refers to it. In Morocco pike & shot was used roughly in a 1-1 proportion, but to these one should add independent arquebus companies. Due to the nature of that war and the contant threat enemy cavalry posed, I would allow for conventional pike & shot BGs throughout the whole period.
As for the remaining possessions, it seems clear, from Ribeiro and others, that the arquebuses were the main weapon used by the Portuguese, along with the omnipresent sword. However, Ribeiro also refers to a battle in May 1643 where the Portuguese dealt with the Dutch with “lançadas e coronhadas” (spear thrusts and arquebus stocks).

rbodleyscott wrote: Note that it is not our policy to grade half-pikes as pikes.

In this case you should consider either spearmen of pikemen.

Thank you. I will be interested to see Nik's comments.

The Portoguese Colonial list already allows for Jinete type LH in Morocco (0-12 is that enough?).

Should there be any heavier cavalry? If so, how many, what types, and what dates?

Any truth in the rumour that to help sales in South Wales this book will be called Trade & Treorchy ?

Scrumpy wrote:Any truth in the rumour that to help sales in South Wales this book will be called Trade & Treorchy ?

No - it will instead be called "The Sheep Fanciers Gazette", and also be targeted at New Zealand ...