Some interesting information on Polish armies of the 17th century.

[Sapura]

Hey,
Why not?

At least its interesting military history reading of a country NOT in Western Europe (rarity!)


Polish armies had to operate in all types of terrain and climates (baking plains in the south to freezing bogs and forests in the north, wilderness or city).

The enemy varied from slow-moving pikemen and musketeers to nimble, swift-attacking horsemen and invariably the fighting was far from home and lacking in ancillary services.
Polish military thinking was therefore based on the ideas of mobility, adaptability and self-sufficiency.

The old Hussite idea of forming a gigantic square, a mobile fortress quickly formed if caught out in the open, became standard practice in all operations against
Tartars and Turks. The Poles also devised the idea of operating in divisions since this gave them all-important mobility and ability to live off the land (this was at a
time when most European armies marched in a great mass).

Another tradition was that of the deep cavalry raid sweeping ahead of the main army, sometimes covering a thousand miles in a great arc behind enemy lines. The crux of any battle was the cavalry charge, not a massed attack by heavy armour, but light cavalry supported by artillery, probing for weak points to be exploited by the heavy cavalry deployed in a chequerboard pattern so that the bringing down of one rank or
section did not affect the others.


The Poles set great store by artillery and were years in advance of their enemies until the eighteenth century, using light cannon with accurate bombardment and mobility being the crucial factors. They also used rocketry to great effect (Siemienowicz published a treatise on multi-stage rocketry in 1650!).

The infantry was lightly dressed without helmets or armour and armed with musket, short sword and hatchet. Only one man in eight carried a pike. In the 1550's a
Polish regiment of 200 men could fire 150 shots in five minutes (contemporary Spanish brigades of 10,000 men could only deliver 750 in the same time) Polish infantry possessed ten times greater firepower on a man-to-man basis than standard European infantries.

The cavalry was the backbone of the Commonwealth's military power, outnumbering the infantry by three to one. The crossed Turkish and European breeds to produce horses with speed and endurance, and rode on eastern saddles in order to place less strain on the horse. Because of these factors they could cover tremendous distances (up to 120 kilometres a day) without killing their mounts. Their curved sabres were the finest cutting weapon ever in use in a European army and accounted for their endurance in battle.

The pride and glory of the cavalry, its mailed first, was the Husaria, the winged cavalry. Operating in regiments of about 300, the front rank carried an astonishing
lance of up to twenty feet in length (thus outreaching infantry pikes and allowing the Husaria to cut straight through an enemy square).


The ultimate weapon of the Husaria was psychological. As well as wearing helmets, thick steel breastplates and shoulder and arm guards the Husaria also wore
wings; great wooden arcs bristling with eagle feathers attached to the back of the saddle or the shoulders. Over their shoulders they wore the skin of a tiger or leopard as a cloak. Their harnesses, saddle and horse cloths were embroidered and embellished with gold and gems and their long lances were painted with stripes like a stick of rock and decorated with a five-foot-long silk pennant which, along with the wings and jingling jewellery, made a frightful sound (described as 'an evil hiss' by some) and sight during the charge.

Hussaria was considered to be heavy assault cavalry only by the Polish and Lithuanian army. The West did not have this type of cavalry, and hussaria was considered light by western standards of speed and tactics. The main task of hussaria during battle was to breach enemy formations. Polish commanders of the 16th and 17th centuries realized that the effectiveness of firearms was still very limited, so a charge by good horsemen had to endure at most one salvo before reaching the
enemy with lances and sabers. This was sound reasoning, and hussaria won most battles they fought, in many cases against foes of far greater numbers.

Victory by outnumbered forces is nothing special in the history of warfare provided that the troops used are well trained and bolstered with high morale. This was the case of hussaria for the span of nearly two centuries.

In the initial phases of a charge, hussaria loosened and tightened their formation a few times in order to diminish the effect of enemy fire. The charge was started at
low speed and riders accelerated during its progress, reaching top speed just before the enemy. This not only preserved the horses’ strength, but also had psychological effects on the enemy who saw the preliminaries to the charge. Extremely long but light lances were used to break opponents’ formations, and were
supposed to break during the clash. After the lances were gone, sabers and estocs were used.

When the first charge was not successful, hussaria withdrew and charged again. There were battles in which the same troops charged 10 times and later helped pursue the enemy. This was possible only with highly trained units that could withdraw and regroup in an orderly manner.

Except in a few cases, casualties suffered by hussaria were very low, and this was the best proof of their worth, as well as proof of the talent of Polish commanders of the time.

For over a century, the Husaria were the lords of the battlefield, delivering the decisive blow in many an important engagement; at Kircholm (1605) 4,000 Poles
accounted for 14,000 Swedes, at Klushino (1610) 6,000 Poles (of only 200 were infantry) defeated 30,000 Muscovite and 5,000 German and Scottish mercenaries, at Gniew (1656) 5,500 Polish cavalry defeated 13,000 Swedes and outside Vienna (1683) the Husaria saved Europe from the, until then, unstoppable might of the Ottoman Empire.


----
I found this info quite informative, easily the best written source in the english language by far.

----
Source 'The Polish Way' 1000 yr history of the Poles & their culture. Zamoyski, Adam
ISBN: 0781802008

Anyways I just wanted to show you what I most admire about Poland, why I campaigned for it to be installed as a playable country in the GC.

[Doomdark]

Very interesting reading, Sapura!

Indeed, Poland-Lithuania truly deserves to be in the GC and I understand perfectly well why you campaigned so hard for its inclusion.

The Hussars were extremely impressive. If only there had been more of them... Btw, I think I read somewhere that the Hussar units consisted solely of noblemen, which might perhaps explain why there were not more of them.

The Poles set great store by artillery and were years in advance of their enemies until the eighteenth century, using light cannon with accurate bombardment and mobility being the crucial factors.

I would contest this statement slightly by pointing out that the Swedes were also ahead of the competition in the field of artillery usage, at least during the 30 Years War, using lighter pieces than their enemies and moving them around to great effect during the battles (e.g. the battle of Jankov). Furthermore, Sweden exported a lot of cannons and I gather they were considered to be of very high quality. None of this reflects badly on Poland though; I just wanted to point out that at least one of Poland's perennial enemies was quite advanced in the use of this military branch. We didn't construct any multi-stage rockets though.

Unfortunately, later Swedish rulers (notably Charles XII) tended to neglect the artillery and concentrate on cavalry.

/Doomie

[Sapura]

Btw, I think I read somewhere that the Hussar units consisted solely of noblemen, which might perhaps explain why there were not more of them.

The reason there was never a large number of them compared to other cavalry forces in Poland was because they were _EXREMELY_ expensive. The horses were so expensive that they superceeded the monthly salary of a hussar officer (one of the higher pay rates in the army) by 2-3x at the point of sale.

2) As you say noblemen were usually conscripted. They needed a lot of training and this was expensive.

3) The armour was also quite expensive as well, + the weaponry.


I would contest this statement slightly by pointing out that the Swedes were also ahead of the competition in the field of artillery usage, at least during the 30 Years War, using lighter pieces than their enemies and moving them around to great effect during the battles

I agree with you about Sweden. The main reason the Poles were unable to use artillery after 1648 (until the 70's) was due to the deluge. The army, as you know, during the Deluge basically gave up without a fight. e.g. the Radziwills capitulation of the leve en mass in Lithuanian before the battle had even began. The quick movement of Swedish forces into Poland encountering little resistance made it impossible to move some of the more guarded riches, armour, cannon, works of art and so on.

The Swedes captured massive reserves of artillery stocks in Warsaw and transported many back to Sweden, amongst other things. This depletion was not increased until much later, that is after 1667 when the Poles concluded the war with the Russians.


Poland's perennial enemies was quite advanced in the use of this military branch. We didn't construct any multi-stage rockets though.

Yep, Sweden used artillery more effectively out of them and Poland after 1620's. Reason as stated above as well as due to the large areas in the Commonwealth. Polish army based its attacks using cavalry mostly with infantry used as fire support. It would take MUCH longer to tow artillery pieces to the southern boundaries of Poland when the Tartars were ravaging it THIS very second. A lightning response was needed.

Sapura