College of Kings

Fall In! 2022, Battle of Trylisy

Over the last few weeks we have been play testing the 1651 Battle of Trylisy in 28mm using the By Fire and Sword rules.

At Historicon in 2021, I ran the 1651 Battle of Berestechko using Pike and Shotte early on the Thursday morning. This Battle took place between the 28th and 30th June, 1651. The cossacks lost the battle and retreated. Eventually the Poles and Lithuanians caught up with the cossacks at Bila Tserkva (white church) on the 24th September 1651. On the Saturday morning at Fall In! 2022 I plan to run the Battle of Bila Tserkva again using Pike and Shotte rules. This game will be reasonably large and will be for 8-10 players.

Before the engagement at Bila Tserkva, the Poles fought a small engagement against some cossack units at village Trylisy on 23rd August. The village was defended by a small garrison of about 600 cossacks. At Fall In! 2022 I also plan to run the Battle of Trylisy on the Friday. As it is a smaller engagement I plan to use the By Fire and Sword rules. As the rules are more complex and detailed, I plan to limit the number of players to four. This smaller game will allow me to tech the rules to anyone who has not played them before and wants to try them out.

At our last club games day we tried the rules for a second time. We caught most of the errors that we made during a first outing of the rules, but made a few new errors. As a result of the game I believe that we now have a good understanding of the system.

Most of the errors that we made the first time involved not understanding the cossack infantry special rules, which give them some defensive options against cavalry. As a result the cossacks got massacred. Because of this game, we overcompensated by giving the cossacks too many defenses, which made it extremely hard going for the Poles. I believe we now have a good understanding of how to achieve a balanced game.

Register Cossacks in the village of Trylisy.

I am hoping that I will get a few players that want to get to learn the By Fire and Sword rules sign up for the game. In my opinion it is a set of rules that really captures the flavor of the period. Due to the size of the rule book they can seem a little overwhelming. But a convention should allow people to try them out.

I plan to have a relatively small number of units. The Poles will have a unit of Winged Hussars, a unit of Pancerni, two units of Polish cossack style cavalry and two units of Noble Levy. The cossacks will have two unit of register cossacks, two unit of moloitsy and two units of mounted cossacks. Each player will have three units to control.

We should easily be able to finish the game of the Battle of Trylisy within the four hours.

For players preferring the larger game, I will be running the battle of Bila Tserkva on the Saturday with way more troops. This game will use the Pike and Shotte rules.

Battle of Ravenna at Historicon 2022

Historicon 2022 was held at the Marriott in downtown Lancaster PA between the 20th and 24th July. On the Saturday I ran the Battle of Ravenna, once in the morning and once late afternoon/early evening. Each battle took four hours to play.

Running the battle at Historicon

We initially advertised the game in program for eight players. However, we managed to fit quite a few extras in and I think that we had about twelve players per session. The Battle was run with the much appreciated help of Pat, Lou and Bob from the Wargaming Association of Metropolitan Philadelphia. It takes a lot of support to keep a game of this size moving along efficiently.

The Battle of Ravenna game was run using the Pike and Shotte rules, which tend to work reasonably well in a large game in a convention setting. They give a flavor of the period and allow player unfamiliar with the rules to join in easily. To help I make easy to read unit sheets for each player – an example can be seen in the photo above.

I believe that the game had close to 1300 figures. The largest single unit was the Landsknecht pike block with 196 figures. There were also nine other pike blocks with 36 figures. These units were supported by huge amounts of Gendarmes, light cavalry, arquebusiers and artillery.

A view looking down the table at the City walls in the background.

How the games unfolded.

Both of the games ended in a French victory (as in real life). However, the paths to victory were very different. The first game saw the Landsknechts race out to attack the defenses, only to get repulsed after a fierce struggle. This loss left the rest of the French forces to assault the defenses which had been depleted by units moving to protect against the Landsknechts. In the second game the French players were more cautious, with the French crossbow screening the Landsknechts from the massed war carts that were a feature of the battle. In the end, it was also the French center that again managed to beat the defenses.

Spanish war carts and artillery wait behind the defenses.

In both games the light cavalry battle between the Jinetes and Stradiots on the French left flank was intense. In the second game the Jinetes managed to get behind the French position and attack the artillery and threaten other units.

Also in both games the heavy cavalry battles between the French Gendarmes and the Papal Knights on the French right flank was a more cautious affair than in real life. Both sides were hesitant to engage in both games.

Siege guns threatening the city of Ravenna.

The terrain

The Ravenna city and walls and the siege works around them were just a back-drop to the game. The actual Battle of Ravenna had relatively flat terrain with only Spanish field defenses. However, I do have plans to use these city walls for a different game in the future and I bought three discounted trebuchets from the Miniature Building Authority in the dealer hall.

A view of the battlefield from inside the city.

Overall I was happy with how the city and city walls turned out. They took a while to both plan and build.

Another view from the city – French forces on the left and Spanish on the right.

To prevent this post becoming too long, I will now just show some pictures from the Battle of Ravenna games. In a future post I will do the orders of battle that I used.

Photos of the battles

Landsknecht pike assaulting the Spanish war carts

A close up of the Spanish receiving the French attackers

The second game with French crossbow screening the advancing pike.

Another view of the Spanish Colunela in defense

Italian infantry push the Spanish off the defenses.

The Italians and French push their advantage

The French infantry finish the job, while the Landsknechts are delayed by the Gendarmes threatening their flank.

The light cavalry battles on the flank were intense during both games.

Thanks to all of the players – it is great for a GM when they have fun.

Ravenna city walls, 1512

Last year at Historicon, I did the Battle of Bicocca 1522. The Battle had quite a lot of scenery required for the action including the field defenses and the villa Bicocca with the large Italian Gardens. You can see a report on the Battle here. This year I will be doing the Battle of Ravenna. The problem that I have is that the battlefield itself is limited in terms of scenery, I want to make the table look as impressive as possible for Historicon. The Battle was fought when the Spanish and Papal troops came to relieve the city of Ravenna from siege by the French. Although the city played no part in the battle, the Ravenna city walls were a backdrop to the battle.

Wood cut of the Battle showing the city of Ravenna.

Models for the walls

The solution was obvious, I needed to make the city walls of Ravenna as a backdrop to the battle. After searching the internet for a suitable kit to represent the Italian style city walls I came across the range by Tabletop World from Croatia. They are walls originally made for fantasy, but by selecting the right models from their range I was able to get a great looking wall. At first I was initially nervous about ordering from Croatia, so I placed a small order. It arrived without issue, and the company was a joy to deal with; so I then placed a larger order for the rest of the parts.

After washing the parts with soapy water, I spray primed them in black. After a couple of days I them sprayed them brown and sealed them with a coat of matte varnish. I then used a beige paint to paint the walls and then used various powders for different tones and weathering effects.

The base

Once the base painting had been done I wanted to check the layout with some city buildings. The total area is about 2′ x 4′. I didn’t want the buildings to be taller than the city walls, so I raised the walls with 2″ of foam. This meant that only the church tower could be seen rising above the walls, similar to the woodcut.

2″ foam used to raise the walls.

I kept the foam pieces at a maximum of 24″ in length so that they would be transportable. This decision meant that I needed three foam base pieces. Once the layout had been done I then shaped the base foam using a cheap woodland scenics hot-wire foam cutter. I then painted and sealed the foam with my usual mixture of brown paint, Elmers glue and model railroad ballast.

Blending the base into the terrain

I then needed to make sure that the base would blend with my terrain mats rather than just sit on them. So I cut and glued some terrain mat pieces to the edge of the foam.

Some terrain mat glued to the foam to blend in to the terrain mat.

This technique is the one that I used for the field defenses at Bicocca and it worked well in that case. However, it didn’t seem quite right in this situation, so I folded the terrain mat pieces underneath and glued them. It seemed to work much better.

The next stage was to blend in the terrain mat to the foam at the top, so I made up some more of my paint/elmers/ballast mixture. After shaving the fur mat on the top I proceeded to apply the mixture to blend things in.

Finishing and detailing.

The last stage was to add various woodland scenic flocks, grasses and bushes.

That meant that the outside was finished. For inside the city I was planning to use some cobblestone mats (from Novus designs) for the city to sit on. This still meant that I needed to finish the foam on the inside. To provide a pleasing transition I made some earth retaining walls from balsa and then weathered them.

Another view of the inside retaining walls.

The city is now complete for Historicon, all I have to do now is finish about 60 Landsknechts. Here are a couple more views of the Ravenna city walls and buildings.

Ravenna for Historicon – a play test

Yesterday I did a test run of my 1512 Battle of Ravenna for Historicon. I will be running this game twice at the HMGS Historicon convention. Once on Saturday morning and once later on Saturday. It is for eight people at a time, but I can probably fit a few extras in. I was not originally planning on doing another Italian Wars game at Historicon. However, when the theme was announced as “World in Conflict: Italy” it really forced my hand.

Ravenna for Historicon

This post is not designed to give too many details of the battle, game, or talk about the results of the play test. I will cover those topics in future posts. The aim is just to show a few photos of the test run as as a sort of advertisement for Ravenna at Historicon.

The test run was designed to make sure that the game is balanced, as an unbalanced game is typically not great for a convention. I also wanted to make sure that it allowed all of the players to get into combat quickly. The test run was a success with the Spanish war carts performing well and the stats for the field defenses giving a very playable game. I will make a couple of minor adjustments but nothing too serious.

The Cavalry battles on each flank were a little constrained by the space, but at Historicon I will have extra room on each flank which should make for some exciting charges.

Spanish infantry wait behind the defenses

The battle was between French forces and Spanish forces that had been sent to relieve the Siege of Ravenna. Therefore the table at Historicon will include a few buildings to represent the city of Ravenna. These will not influence the game play but should add a nice scenic touch.

The Spanish and Papal defenses viewed from the French side

The figures include many of the figures that I used last year at Historicon for the 1522 Battle of Bicocca. However, there are new figures including the 196 figure Landsknecht Pike block. This block will be one of the largest 28mm pike blocks ever put on the table at an HMGS convention.

A few extra photos.

Another view of the Spanish and Papal defenses

Papal Pikes with the Landsknechts approaching

Thanks to Lou, Pat, Walt, Bob, Steve, Scott and Eric for assisting with the play test. I hope that Ravenna at Historicon will be as fun as last year’s Battle of Bicocca.

A view of the clash of pikes at the defenses.

By Fire and Sword in 28mm

This weekend we had our first game with the by Fire and Sword rules. The rule set is designed to use the writers range of 15mm figures. However, I have a large collection (600 figures) of Poles, Cossacks and Tatars in 28mm. I also have about 300 Ottoman figures to paint in 28mm. I wanted to see if I could use By Fire and Sword with 28mm figures.

Changes for 28mm

We normally use Pike and Shotte rules for large games using my figures. For example, I ran the Battle of Berestechko at Historicon in 2021. I see the Pike and Shotte as more suited to large games with multiple players. However, I see that By Fire and Sword could be a very nice alternative for smaller scale skirmish games.

The only real changes that we made to the rules were that we doubled up all distances, including the movement and ranges. I then purchased custom bases from Litko that were double the frontage of the 15mm bases that By Fire and Sword sell. litho are excellent with custom orders.

In this photo you can see the custom 3 figure bases that I bought for the infantry.

Table size

The only real concern that I had was if my 5′ x 6′ table in my house would be large enough considering that the distances had been doubled. We played with 4 units per side – 13 Force Points for the Poles and 11 Force Points for the Cossacks. The table was sufficient for this sized game, but if I went any larger I would need a larger table at a club game’s day.

Polish winged Hussars on custom 3 figure cavalry bases. These are the same width as the infantry bases.

Data sheets and Quick Reference sheets.

I found that the rules take some getting used to. I had prepared unit data sheets in advance, which really helped. However, we kept needing to refer to 3 or 4 tables in the main rule book and I need to make a quick reference sheet for our next game. The quick reference sheet included in the book is just too complex.

More cossack infantry – spears in the back, guns up front.

How the rules worked out.

The main issues that we had were understanding some of the movement rules and understanding some of the details of using cossacks. This lack of understanding really put the cossacks at a disadvantage. We did not fully understand the rules advantage that the cossack pikes/spears had against cavalry. We also did not understand that cossack shot could fire (at a reduce effect) from the second row.

Winged Hussars – only three bases but still very effective.

The Polish cavalry were a lot more forgiving of not understanding the rules. The Winged Hussars were dominant throughout the game, despite only being a unit of three bases.

The two units of Polish Cossack style cavalry, on of six bases and one of four bases.

Overall, the Poles easily won the game. Playing the game gave me many questions that I had to clarify in the rules the evening after the game. I think that we all have a better understanding of the rules now and the cossacks will be much more effective next time.

I liked the rule set, but I think that using them for small skirmish style games is the way forward for me. I just don’t see them replacing Pike and Shotte for large club games.

The final defeat of the cossacks in the test of By Fire and Sword in 28mm

To conclude, there were no major issue in playing By Fire and Sword in 28mm.

Getting the Romans and Huns on the table.

This weekend was our local club’s game day. It was the first opportunity that I have had to get some of my Catalaunian Plains figures on the table. As many of you know, I am building these forces for a game at Historicon in 2023. At the moment I only have a little less than 20% of the final forces painted, but this is enough for a small game. The game was an encounter battle between the Romans and Huns (with some of their Frank allies).

Roman forces

The Roman right flank with a weak Pseudo Comitatenses unit – Prima Flavia Gallicana Constantia

The game was my first run with the Hail Caesar rule set. From my Italian Wars games I am very familiar with the Pike and Shotte rules. The rules have many of the same mechanisms, but I underestimated the amount of differences. I now realize that I need to devote some more time to studying these rules. The good thing is that we still managed a fun game for six players.

The Roman center with two Auxilia Palatina units, the Cornuti Seniori (shown) and the Leones Iuniores (just at the edge of the camera shot.

The Roman army consisted of two Legions each of two bases, two Auxiliary units of one base each, and two cavalry units each of one base. Also, there was a scorpion and a ballista.

The elite of the Roman force, the Legion Herculiani Seniores with the Ballista in the rear.

The Roman Heavy cavalry – Scholar Gentilium Senirum

Hun forces

The Roman army was overmatched by the larger Hun Army. The order of battle of the Huns consisted of 15 units of light cavalry and 3 Frank war bands with two units of supporting archers. In terms of points, the Hun army was 50% larger. To counter this points difference, the Romans were playing defense and had occupied a hill position.

The Huns in the foreground with the Franks in the rear.

The Frank war bands on the Hun left flank

The Battle

The battle started with the Huns advancing quickly into arrow range. They took some early casualties from the Roman ballista, but concentrated their bow fire to quickly put it out of action. The Romans were taking casualties from the Hun bows, so decided to charge with their heavy cavalry and cataphracts. Despite overwhelming odds, these two units fought valiantly but were eventually destroyed by concentrated Hun archery.

The slow advance of the Franks on the Roman right.

The Huns were having success on the Roman left, on the Roman right the Franks were having trouble advancing (poor dice rolling). They were taking regular damage from the Roman scorpion. The Franks eventually got within charge range and unleashed their full fury. The Levy Pseudo Comitatenses units guarding the Roman flank quickly collapsed.

The Franks quickly destroyed the weak Roman right flank. On the Roman left flank, the Huns massed their arrows on the elite Legion and quickly routed one of the cohorts. This left the Auxilia in the center as the only viable Roman forces and they decided to retreat in good order off the table.

Conclusion

It was nice to get the first of the project figures on the table and it gave me a chance to try out the Hail Caesar rules with my Romans and Huns. The six players all seemed to have fun with this quick two hour game. The result was as predicted with the larger Hun force eventually overcoming the stiff Roman defenses. The Roman cavalry and the Frank war bands performed above expectations.

I probably won’t have time to paint any more Romans and Huns figures for this project until after Historicon 2022 in July as I am putting my attention to figures and scenery for the 1512 battle of Ravenna for the show.

Catalaunian Plains – order of battle.

Syvanne and MacDowall both give very different number for the troops at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. As I discussed in my last post, the numbers presented by Syvanne seem a lot more consistent with those presented by Jordanes. However, as war-gamers tend to use a ratio of figures to troops, I will go on to argue that it is not too important to resolve this issue of differing numbers to recreate the battle.

Hun army composition

Syvanne, argues that the Hun army has about 410,000 troops and that with non-combatants this would total the 500,000 men reference by Jordanes. Syvanne breaks the army down as shown in the table below:

	Inf	Cav	Total	%
Ostragoths	40,000	60,000	100,000	27%
Huns		110,000	110,000	24%
Gepids		50,000	50,000	12%
Other	105,000	45,000	150,000	37%
Total	145,000	265,000	410,000	100%

Hun Order of Battle – Syvanne

MacDowall has much lower numbers of troops which he breaks down as follows:

	Total
Ostragoths	7,500	27%
Huns	12,500	46%
Gepids and Others	7,500	27%
Total	27,500	100%

Order of Battle – MacDowall

It can be seen that both authors have the Ostragoths making up around a quarter of the troops. This is where the similarity ends. MacDowall has the Huns comprising of nearly half the army whereas Syvanne has the Huns at around quarter of the army.

Roman army composition.

Syvanne has the Roman army at just short of 400,000 troops:

	Inf	Cav	Total	%
Romans	179,000	34,000	213,000	55%
Alans		75,000	75,000	19%
Visigoths	40,000	60,000	100,000	26%
Total	219,000	169,000	388,000	100%

MacDowall places the Roman army strength at around 30,000:

	Total	%
Romans	15,000	51%
Alans	2,000	7%
Visigoths	12,500	42%
Total	29,500	100%

It can be seen that both authors have the Roman contingent at around 50-55%. The main difference is that MacDowall only has a small contingent of Alans at around 7% while Syvanne has the Alans at 19%.

Setting an order of Battle for a game.

I am less worried about the difference in the total number of troops between the two authors than the difference in composition. Syvanne has a total number of troops for both sides together of around 800,000 whereas MacDowall has around 57,000. Irrespective of which author I believe I have set the goal of replaying the battle with about 1400-1500 figures. All that will change is my figure ratio. For Syvanne I would use 600:1 and for MacDowall I would use 40:1.

I have a personal bias for using the force composition suggested by Syvanne. The main reason is that his estimate of the total army size of the Huns more closely corresponds to the account of Jordanes that I am using for the basis of my game. The second reason is that the account of Jordanes, the Alans seem to play a more important part that the 7% composition figure that MacDowall would suggest.

In the final analysis, there is no way of knowing which order of battle is closer to that of the actual battle. As I am starting this project from scratch I have chosen to take the order of battle presented by Syvanne as my basis. Others with existing armies might plausibly chose a different force composition that allows them to use the figures that they have.

Below are the units of Romans that I have painted to so far. In the next post I will detail the list of units I will be creating for the battle.

The two cohorts of the Legion Herculiani Seniors

The two cohorts of the Pseudocomitatenses Prima Flavia Gallicana Constantia

My units consist of two rows of troops with a row of archers in the rear.

Battle of the Catalaunian Plains – background Part 2

In this post I will continue the discussion about the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. I will just pick up from where I left off in the first post.

XL continued.

This section continues with a discussion about the battle that the Visigoths had engaged in: “(209) Here King Theodorid, while riding by to encourage his army, was thrown from his horse and trampled under foot by his own men, thus ending his days at a ripe old age. But others say he was slain by the spear of Andag of the host of the Ostrogoths, who were then under the sway of Attila. This was what the soothsayers had told to Attila in prophecy, though he understood it of Aëtius. (210) Then the Visigoths, separating from the Alani, fell upon the horde of the Huns and nearly slew Attila. But he prudently took flight and straightway shut himself and his companions within the barriers of the camp, which he had fortified with wagons. A frail defence indeed; yet there they sought refuge for their lives, whom but a little while before no walls of earth could withstand.

From this section MacDowall infers that the Alani were defeated and routed and the Visigoths were then on the edge of breaking. Syvanne states that the Ostragoths managed to defeat the Visigoths after having engaged in a battle for many hours. At the very least both authors have embellished the account and inferred information that is just not there.

What we can say is that the battle of the Catalaunian Plains seems very confused with close fighting between the Ostragoths and Visigoths. We can also say that Attila was in the area. The cause of the death of Theodrid does not seem certain, but it does seem likely that the Ostragoths were within spear range of him and his lines.

The statement that the Visigoths separated from the Alani does not imply to me that the Alani retreated. Rather it says “the Visigoths, separating from the Alani, fell upon the horde of The Huns”. This suggests that the Visigoths were doing the movement causing the separation when the they fell upon the Hun. Falling on the Hun, in turn, suggests that they were advancing. This interpretation implies that the Alani were not retreating and the Visigoths were not defeated. Rather the Alani remained in position and the Visigoths advanced.

The other factor to consider is that Aetius had put the Alani between the Visigoths and Romans in order to reduce the possibility of them routing or deserting. Given all of these factors, I just find no evidence to support the contention that the Alani had routed. If such a significant event had occurred, it seems likely that Jordanes would have mentioned it.

The other item worth noting in these sections is that Attila had a camp fortified with wagons, but it was referred to as a frail defense. I take from these statements that the camp fortifications had been assembled quickly and that it was not a prepared defensive position. This information is consistent with a retreating army suddenly finding itself under threat and assembling makeshift fortifications.

Sections 211 and 212 discusses how both Thorismund and Aetius independently both became mixed up with the enemy in the darkness and confusion as night set in. These statements again point to the confusion of the battle.

Section 212 and 213 discuss the events of the next morning after the battle of the Catalaunian Plains was essentially over.

My current Hun forces. I have about 100 Huns but I plan to increase them to about 180 for the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. [In this photo they are being used as Tatar for the 1651 Battle of Berestechko, hence the cossack wagon in the foreground and the Polish cavalry opposite].

XLI

Section 217 is the most interesting part of this Chapter and relates to the number of troops involved: “In this most famous war of the bravest tribes, one hundred and sixty five thousand are said to have been slain on both sides, leaving out of account fifteen thousand of the Gepidae and Franks, who met each other the night before the general engagement and fell by wounds mutually received, the Franks fighting for the Romans and the Gepidae for the Huns”.

It suggests that 165,000 men were slain. I have interpreted this number as being a combined number from the Roman and Hun sides. In a previous section of Jordanes (182) he suggests that Attila had an army of 500,000, (not necessarily all on this campaign).

There is considerable discrepancy in books that people have published on the size of Attilas army at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. MacDowall suggests that Attila had 5-10,000 Ostragoths, 10-15,000 Hun and 5-10,000 Gepids. As far as I can tell, he bases these numbers on the statement that Attila could not forage enough to support an army any bigger. On the other hand Syvanne estimates 100,000 Hun, 40,000 Ostragoth infantry and 60,000 Ostragoth Cavalry and 50,000 Gepids. Plus troops of various nations.

Given that major battles of this type could have 30-35% casualties, I could see the estimates of Syvanne being a lot closer with troops from both sides combined being in the range of 500,000.

The other factor that supports the higher numbers is that Jordanes states that there were 15,000 casualties the night before in the battle between the Gepids and the Franks. While it is easy to get numbers wrong when you approach several hundred thousand, it is more difficult to get numbers wrong at the 15,000 level. This 15,000 dead would have made a significant dent in the armies of both sides if the numbers presented by McDowall were correct. Such a devastating combat would have been discussed in more detail.

The Hun supply situation.

I would like to thank Michael Blodgett for some of his insights in helping me develop some of my thoughts on the Hun supply situation. MacDowall suggests that there were only 10-15,000 Hun warriors at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. He suggests that it could not have been any more as The Huns could not forage enough to support an army any bigger. I would like to challenge this assertion.

Attila had a good supply situation. He probably had food and supplies provided by the Bishop of Troyes. Also as Jordanes states (192), ”That portion of the earth accordingly became the threshing-floor for countless races”; in June the whole area would be flush with food – it was a bread basket for the whole region. Also, less than 100 miles behind Troyes were the friendly Franks around the Neckar river which would have provided supplies.
Attila on his march to Orleans probably set up intermediate depots, maybe at Sens and Montargis. Even though he did not get supplies when he arrived at Orleans, he probably had an excellent supply train that was fully capable of supporting a sizable army. In addition, the land at this time of year was probably plentiful and he had a supply line through friendly territory.

Even though the Hun are routinely portrayed as Nomadic people living solely off the land, by 450 AD hey had a Kingdom with a center of power in Pannonia. They were quite capable of creating supply lines and securing supplies from friendly peoples through which their supply lines passed. I do not see that the army size is limited by foraging ability alone.

Also, I just do not believe that Attila would engage in a campaign to eliminate the threat of the Visigoths by marching to their homeland with only 10-15,000 Hun troops.

An alternative theory for the battle.

Attila was retreating from Orleans in the direction of Metz. He wanted to retreat as quickly as possible so as not to be trapped by the combined Roman and Visigoth army. The terrain in this region consists of a number of parallel ridges running north to south. These ridges had gentler slopes on the West side and steeper slopes on the East side.

On the route from Orleans to Metz there are two sizable rivers the Seine and the Marne. For the crossing of the Seine, Troyes is the most logical option as it is the only major route in the direction of Metz; also Attila was familiar with Troyes. For the crossing of the Marne, there are several options, including Chalons.

Approaching Troyes is possible from the direction of Orleans on one of two roads passing through the gaps in a ridge West of Troyes. One road goes West from Troyes through Fontvannes and the other goes South West from Troyes, through Auxon. It is possible that Attila used both roads.

Crossing a river, even at a crossing would present a bottleneck due to the convergence of troops. This would cause the gap between any pursuing army and Attila to close. I therefore regard it as likely that any pursuing army caught up near either the Seine or the Marne. For now I will assume it was the Seine, but the argument that I am going to make could equally apply to the Marne.

Between the Seine at Troyes and the nearest ridge is about 8-10km. If the main bulk of Attila’s forces were bunched up at Troyes, preparing to cross the Seine, he would have an excellent view of the ridge in the distance. He would be able to see his rear-guard or a Roman/Visigoth advanced guard, or both, crossing the ridge. The initial Frank/Gepid clash referenced by Jordanes could easily have been an advanced guard / rear guard action at the ridge.

The sight of this threat to his troops on the plain would then be obvious to Attila, as he would have his back to the river with a larger army advancing. As the ridge is a defendable location, it would then be prudent to send troops to reinforce/capture the ridge to prevent a threat to his forces on the plain.

I could then see the battle being a large meeting engagement at the ridge. The Romans would be coming along the road from the West and the Visigoths from the road to the South West. The Alani could have been coming along either road or across country. I could then see the fight developing as more and more troops arrived from both sides.

The map below is a current map showing the topography of the region. I have indicated the ridge to the West of Troyes and the two road providing the axes of advance. The plain between the ridge and the Seine at Troyes is clear to see. The Riviere-de-Corps that was discussed in the first part of this blog discussion is also visible between the Romans and the Huns.

In my next post I will discuss how I can see the battle of the Catalaunian Plains with these dispositions developing in line with Jordanes. My main goal is to take Jordanes and see if a battle consistent with the statements made by him makes sense. It is my contention that it does.

Battle of the Catalaunian Plains – background Part 1

My next big project is going to be the 451 AD Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. This battle was between the Romans and The Huns. I have been reading about this battle and this post discusses the information that I have read and some of the contradictions that I have found. The post is getting quite long so I will split it into two, with the second part coming in a few weeks time.

The books that I bought are the “Military History of Late Rome 425-457” by Ilkka Syvanne as well as “Catalaunian Fields AD 451” and “Conquerors of the Roman Empire – The Goths”, both by Simon MacDowall. I also obtained a coy of the public domain writings by Jordanes, “Origins and deeds of the Goths”, translated by Charles C.Mierow. Both of Syvanne and MacDowall quote this Jordanes text as one of their primary sources of information as it represents one of the only complete texts about the battle.

Although in parts of this blog I may be critical of some of the assumptions and conclusions of both Syvanne and MacDowall, I should say that they have both provided an excellent starting point in understanding the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. They were particularly useful as there is very little information out there about this major battle. I fully recommend all three books for anyone looking at gaming this battle.

My main criticism of both authors is that they clearly state that the most complete account of the battle is Jordanes (a 6th century Roman bureaucrat) and that they have used his account as a primary source. However, they use parts of the text to support their view of the battle, while ignoring or misinterpreting parts of the text that do not support their view. To me this approach is not entirely consistent.

I should say that both authors come up with a different interpretation of the battle of the Catalaunian Plains based on the same starting information. Both accounts seem plausible when taken in isolation and as a war-gamer, both would make an excellent game. So to start with I have two potential battles to fight. However, I just wasn’t feeling comfortable with either account.

In order to review the battle, I too will go back to the Jordanes text and then discuss some of the assumptions of both authors along with my views. Due to the age, the Jordanes text is in the public domain so I can quote it directly. As I want to respect the other two authors copy-write, I will not be quoting their texts directly. You will need to purchase the books which are very reasonably priced.

The Jordanes text is divided into chapters numbered by Roman numerals, and then sections with standard numbers. I will go through the text in sequence giving these numbers. Some sections have not been included as they add no useful information for this discussion. One item to note is that I have used the translation of the original text done by Mierow; I am aware that there could be errors, but I have a very poor knowledge of Latin and I cannot contribute anything in relation to the translation.

Chapter XXXVI

Section 191 lists the allies of the Romans. “Now these were his auxiliaries: Franks, Sarmations, Armoricians, Liticians, Burgundians, Saxons, Riparians, Olibriones (once Roman soldiers and now the flower of the allied forces), and some other Celtic or German tribes. I will get back to this when I discuss the number of troops involved.

Section 192 discusses the location of the battle “And so they met in the Catalaunian Plains, which are also called Mauriacian, extending in length one hundred leuva, as the Gauls express it, and seventy in width. Now a Gallic leuva measures a distance of fifteen hundred paces. That portion of the earth accordingly became the threshing-floor of countless races. The two hosts bravely joined battle. Nothing was done under cover, but they contended in open fight”.

Given that a Roman pace is 1.48m, the size of the Catalaunian Plains can be calculated to be 222 km x 155km (138 miles x 96 miles). This section really doesn’t tie down the location of the battle in any detail.

Chapter XXXVII

In Sections 194 and 195 the Alans are discussed. The Alans occupied Orleans, then known as Aureliani. “But before we set forth the order of the battle itself, it seems needful to relate what had already happened in the course of the campaign, for it was not only a famous struggle but one that was complicated and confused. Well then, Sangiban, king of the Alani, smitten with fear of what might come to pass, had promised to surrender to Attila, and to give into his keeping Aureliani, a city of Gaul wherein he dwelt. (195) When Theodorid and Aëtius learned of this, they cast up great earthworks around that city before Attila’s arrival and kept watch over the suspected Sangiban, placing him with his tribe in the midst of their auxiliaries. Then Attila, king of the Huns, was taken aback by this event and lost confidence in his own troops, so that he feared to begin the conflict. While he was meditating on flight–a greater calamity than death itself–he decided to inquire into the future through soothsayers”.

These sections show that the Alans were on the side of the Romans, but were not the most trusted allies. Once Attila had seen Theodorid and Aetius at Orleans, he began is retreat to the Catalaunian Plains.

XXVIII

Section 197 is critical. It discusses the layout of the battlefield an the disposition of the Roman army. “The armies met, as we have said, in the Catalaunian Plains. The battle field was a plain rising by a sharp slope to a ridge, which both armies sought to gain; for advantage of position is a great help. The Huns with their forces seized the right side, the Romans, the Visigoths and their allies the left, and then began a struggle for the yet untaken crest. Now Theodorid with the Visigoths held the right wing and Aëtius with the Romans the left. They placed in the centre Sangiban (who, as said before, was in command of the Alani), thus contriving with military caution to surround by a host of faithful troops the man in whose loyalty they had little confidence. For one who has difficulties placed in the way of his flight readily submits to the necessity of fighting”.

This passage is where I have problems with both authors. The text clearly says that the battlefield was a plain rising by a sharp slope to a ridge and that both sides wanted to control the ridge. Both authors make the case that the ridge is Montgueux Ridge a few miles West of Troyes. There is evidence that the battle occurred in this general area as another source, the Chronicle of Prosper claims that the battle takes place 5 miles from Troyes.

Syvanne makes the case that “subsequent details prove that the hill was located on the Roman left wing” without citing any such proof. MacDowall claims that this hill was on the Roman right wing, again without citing any proof. Jordanes if read without interpretation states that the battlefield was a plain rising by a sharp slope to a ridge. It does not say that part of the battlefield (Roman left or right) was a plain rising to a ridge. I will come back to this critical point when I discuss the brook details in section 208.

The section also states that the Romans and Visigoth seized the left. Having just discussed the ridge, I read this as the Romans and the Visigoths seized the left slope of the ridge. It then goes on to say that the Visigoths were on the right wing and the Romans were on the left wing, with the Alani in the middle. If both the Visigoths and the Romans seized the left slope and if they were on opposite flanks of the army, then the slope must have run the whole length of the army.

Section 198 discusses The Huns initial positions for the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. “On the other side, however, the battle line of the Huns was arranged so that Attila and his bravest followers were stationed in the centre. In arranging them thus the king had chiefly his own safety in view, since by his position in the very midst of his race he would be kept out of the way of threatening danger. The innumerable peoples of the divers tribes, which he had subjected to his sway, formed the wings”.

The section also states that The Huns with their forces seized the right side of the slope. This analysis suggests that the starting positions were two armies on the opposite side of a ridge which ran the entire length of the battlefield. On at least one side of this hill were plains. I just do not see how the text of Jordanes supports the ridge being at one end or other of the battlefield.

Section 199 to 200 discusses the Ostragoths and the Gepids. the key point from these sections is that the Ostragoths faced off against the Visigoths. this would place them on the left flank of The Huns. In this section it does not specifically say that the Gepids and other nations were on the Hun right, but with The Huns in the center, I would regard this placement as reasonable.

Section 201 is interesting and has potentially led to some false conclusions by Syvanne due to the initial assumptions about the ridge being only on one flank. “Attila alone was king of all kings over all and concerned for all. So then the struggle began for the advantage of position we have mentioned. Attila sent his men to take the summit of the mountain, but was outstripped by Thorismund and Aëtius, who in their effort to gain the top of the hill reached higher ground and through this advantage of position easily routed the Huns as they came up”.

From this section Syvanne has assumed that because the ridge was only on one flank that both Thorismund and Aetius must have been together on that flank. If instead the ridge runs the length of the battlefield, then both Thorismund and Aetius could have taken control of the entire length of the ridge with one on each flank. There is no evidence that Thorismund was with Aetius. Syvanne suggests that he is with Aetius as some sort of hostage to keep the Visigoths loyal. This statement just does not hold with section 197 which states that Aetius had surrounded the Alani with a host of faithful troops (one of which were the Visigoths on the right of the Alani). The Visigoths cannot be both faithful troops and potentially disloyal.

As a side note it is possible the both Aetius and Thorismund used cavalry to gain initial control of the ridge. I have no evidence to support this possibility but it is interesting to consider, particularly when trying to recreate the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains.

XXXIX

Sections 202 to 206 discuss Atilas words to his troops after being repulsed from the initial assault of the ridge. I won’t go into these sections in detail but there is an interesting point from a gaming perspective. Attila says “Who, moreover, made armed men yield to you, when you were as yet unarmed?” This section implies that the Hun, at least in part, were now using armor.

Also Attila says about the enemy in Section 204: “Let us then attack the foe eagerly; for they are ever the bolder who make the attack. Despise this union of discordant races! To defend oneself by alliance is proof of cowardice. See, even before our attack they are smitten with terror. They seek the heights, they seize the hills and, repenting too late, clamor for protection against battle in the open fields. You know how slight a matter the Roman attack is. While they are still gathering in order and forming in one line with locked shields, they are checked, I will not say by the first wound, but even by the dust of battle”.

This clearly shows that the enemy are on the hills and not on the Plains as postulated by MacDowall. It also indicates that they formed in one line with locked shields.

XL (sections 207 and 208)

This chapter is where I have one of my major differences of opinion with MacDowall. In sections 207 and 208 it says: “And although the situation was itself fearful, yet the presence of their king dispelled anxiety and hesitation. Hand to hand they clashed in battle, and the fight grew fierce, confused, monstrous, unrelenting–a fight whose like no ancient time has ever recorded. There such deeds were done that a brave man who missed this marvellous spectacle could not hope to see anything so wonderful all his life long. For, if we may believe our elders, a brook flowing between low banks through the plain was greatly increased by blood from the wounds of the slain. It was not flooded by showers, as brooks usually rise, but was swollen by a strange stream and turned into a torrent by the increase of blood. Those whose wounds drove them to slake their parching thirst drank water mingled with gore. In their wretched plight they were forced to drink what they thought was the blood they had poured from their own wounds”.

MacDowall makes the case that a brook West of Troyes is called “la Riviere de Corps (the river of bodies)” and that this brook could be the brook referred to in section 208. I think that this argument has considerable merit and place names can often be a reflection of history. MacDowall uses this name to justify his belief that the battle of the Catalaunian Plains took place just West of Troyes. My main problem is that la Riveiere de Corps is actually south of the Ridge of Montegueux whereas MacDowall would lead us to believe that the battle took place north of the ridge. This seems another case of MacDowall selectively using information from Jordanes to justify his view of the battle, while ignoring information that is contradictory.

Summary

In order to avoid this blog post becoming too long, I plan to cover the rest of the Chapters in Jordanes in the next post as well as discussing how I plan to recreate the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. Some of the key items that I plan to discuss are 1) Did the Alans actually retreat as the authors suggest (spoiler alert – there is no evidence that they did) and 2) How many troops took part at the Catalaunian Plains as Syvanne and MacDowall have wildly differing views.

Historicon 2021 – Bicocca after action report.

Here is my Battle of Bicocca after action report. The 1522 Italian Wars battle was refought on Friday morning in the Grand Ballroom at Historicon 2021. It was originally for ten players, but we managed to fit in two or three extras.

Bicocca after action report

The battle was laid out on a “T” shaped table using 4 sets of 5′ x 8′ tables. The battle involved over 1600 figures in 28mm, all of which I painted since I got back into the hobby in 2017. All of the terrain was also hand-built, kit assembled or kit-bashed.

Without going too much into the Historical details of the battle, the Spanish had set up defensive positions along a sunken road near the Villa Bicocca north of Milan. Their left flank was protected by a marsh and their right flank was protected by a large drainage ditch. The Spanish were supported by their Landsknecht allies and the Milanese army was arriving from Milan to protect the bridge across the drainage ditch.

The overall table layout with the French – Milanese cavalry engagement in the foreground.

Against the Spanish was the French army. The French commander did not want to assault the prepared Spanish positions. Their Swiss allies threatened to head back to the Cantons if they did not attack and so the French commander reluctantly agreed. The French also had the Black Band of Giovanni as a scouting force and the army of Venice approaching the Spanish from the marsh side.

Our battle differed from the actual battle in that we allowed the Venetians to attack through the marsh and we allowed the French to commit significant forces to attacking the bridge over the drainage ditch. These changes meant that the Spanish were threatened not only from the front, but from both flanks. The Spanish overall commander would have to decide how to commit his forces to defend against these threats and these choices ultimately proved critical in deciding the outcome of the battle. Now to begin the Battle of Bicocca after action report.

Initial Spanish deployments.

The main Spanish force of arqubusiers and artillery was deployed at the field defenses at the sunken road. These troops were supported by two very large Landsknecht pike blocks. Out front of these troops were four units of Spanish Jinetes which are light cavalry. The Jinetes were to remove the Black Band screening forces so that the artillery at the defense could fire on the advancing Swiss pike.

Spanish Jinetes out front of the defenses at the sunken road.

In reserve at the camp were four Spanish Pike blocks, some Spanish artillery and a unit of Spanish knights.

The Landsknecht pike blocks with the Spanish reserves in the camp behind.

Arriving on the Spanish right were the Milanese cavalry and infantry. Their role was to protect the bridge across the drainage ditch on the Spanish right.

The Milanese cavalry on the left with their infantry near the church.

French initial deployments

The French Gendarmes and other heavy Cavalry were on the French left facing the Milanese. The open table was designed to allow a fast moving cavalry battle.

Next to the French cavalry, near the vineyard were the French infantry.

The French infantry consisting of two pike blocks and four units of crossbows.

In the center were the two massive Swiss pike blocks. They were ready to assault the prepared defense head-on. Supporting the Swiss was the French artillery and the Black Band of Giovanni to screen the pike blocks. the table was set up as a “T” shape to allow the Swiss room to advance against the defenses.

Swiss Pike blocks on the starting line. One from the rural cantons and one from the urban cantons.

On the French right were the Venetians. Their job was to get through the marsh and pressure the Spanish right through the Villa Bicocca and its gardens.

In the background the Venetians can be seen emerging from the marsh.

Opening moves

On the left the French cavalry wasted no time engaging the Milanese cavalry. This resulted in a sweeping cavalry battle that lasted most of the game. The Milanese player fought this battle very well, but just had no dice luck. His efforts did result in keeping the mighty French Gendarmes away from the Milanese infantry.

The early stages of the massed cavalry battle.

Covered by the bold French cavalry advance to their left, the French infantry started to make progress towards the bridge over the drainage ditch. The Milanese infantry moved to engage them. All of this was done with the sound of church bells coming from the church (this was not done with Renaissance technology, but by bluetooth speakers and my iPhone).

Hand to hand fighting between the French and Milanese infantry.

In the center the Swiss Pike blocks started their advance. Ahead of them fierce fighting erupted between the Spanish Jinetes and the Black Band.

The Swiss advance was so fast that the French artillery got left behind, as in the real battle.

The Venetian tactics

On the Spanish left, near the marsh and Villa, was perhaps the most decisive of the opening moves, and the one that would have the most impact upon the result of the battle. The Venetians were only a small force consisting of light cavalry (Stradiots and mounted arquebusiers), foot arquebusiers and a couple of pike blocks. The light cavalry, unimpeded by the marsh, made a lightning raid towards the sprawling Italian gardens at the back of the Villa.

The speed of this advance spooked the Spanish commander. Rather than send a small screening force to protect the easily defended villa, they sent the entire Spanish reserve of four elite pike blocks towards the gardens. In addition they moved one of the massive Landsknecht pike blocks towards the villa. The Landsknecht pike block therefore vacated the position behind the field defenses and was no longer able to defend against the advancing Swiss pike blocks.

The massive commitment of Spanish reserves against the advancing Swiss.

Not only did the Venetians draw the pike blocks across to face them, but they enticed them to advance through the gardens. The advance of the Spanish through the gardens was slow due to the need to stay in formation. It therefore took them a long time to make progress. More importantly, every turn that they spent advancing into the gardens would take a turn to get back out to support the main defenses.

The Venetians, once they had sucked the Spanish in, kept on harassing them with mildly effective shot as they slowly withdrew back towards the safety of the marshes – not wishing to engage the vastly superior Spanish forces. This was a tactical masterpiece by the Venetians, who Paul, who commanded some of them, will talk about for years.

The middle battle.

On the Spanish right things were not going well for the Milanese cavalry. Despite excellent tactics, the dice just would not roll for their commander and their force was slowly reduced by the relentless French Gendarmes.

This French Cavalry victory protected the flank of the advancing French infantry and allowed them to battle and push back the Milanese infantry after much fierce fighting.

The clergy watch as the French infantry advance. Points to those who can recognize the figures on the French command base.

The French continue battling the Milanese

In the center the Swiss Pike blocks continued their advance. The Spanish Jinetes fought valiantly to try and clear out the Black Band skirmish force to allow the cannons on the field defenses to open fire on the Swiss Pikes.

With the Swiss pike almost at the defenses, the Spanish commander realized the tactical error of over concentrating on the Venetians. It was too late to recover.

The wooden dowels show the position of the pikes in the garden.

The end game

On the Spanish right, the French infantry continued to make progress. The Spanish moved their reserve artillery to fire on them from the other side of the drainage ditch, but this fire was ineffective. The French would go on to capture the bridge, leaving an unopposed advance to the Spanish camp – with all of the reserves committed against the Venetians.

The last line of defense, the Spanish artillery.

Even the geese along the banks of the drainage ditch don’t seem worried by the Spanish artillery.

The final French infantry move to capture the bridge before the march into the Spanish camp

In the center the Swiss reached the field defense. The pike block from the urban cantons was almost unopposed with the Landsknecht pike block that was due to face them having been diverted against the Venetians. The arquebusiers put up a valiant fight for a turn, but were never going to stop a massive Swiss pike block.

The Swiss pike block from the rural cantons also hit the defenses. They were met with the Landsknechts in prepared positions. The clash of pikes between the two was intense and lasted three or four turns. Eventually the Swiss got the upper hand and managed to push back the Landsknechts, but the battle was close until the end. We were left wondering if the both Landsknecht pike blocks had remained at the wall and had even been supported by a couple of Spanish Pike blocks, could the result have been different? I suspect that the Spanish would have held.

The lone Landsknecht pike block looking at the mass of advancing Swiss.

The final result

In the end both Swiss pike blocks crashed through the defenses at the sunken road. Nothing was between them and the Spanish camp. With the camp being attacked by the French infantry and the Swiss Pike, the battle was over. The Venetians were the only forces not to make it to the Spanish camp, but they had been instrumental in the result of the battle.

Conclusion

I hoped that you enjoyed seeing and reading this Battle of Bicocca after action report. The battle had gone very differently from how I expected it, but that made it more fun. With attacks on the Spanish center and both flanks, the game was always going to come down to both the frontal assault of the defenses and how the Spanish deployed and committed their reserves. I had not expected the Spanish to over commit against the Venetians, even to the point of pulling the Landsknechts away from the defenses. The Venetians tactics were a masterclass.

I hope that everyone that played had a good time. The positive comments that I received from players and those that walked by were pleasing, particularly as this convention was the first time I had hosted games at a con.

I was also very pleased to receive an award for the game. This made all of my efforts on this Italian Wars project for the last three or four years worthwhile.

Update 27th November: HMGS just officially announced the Best of Show award and it was awarded to my Battle of Bicocca game. Considering the number of great looking tables at Historicon (see my last blog post), I was honored to receive Best in Show.

I am now considering what to do as my next project. The favorite may be the 451AD clash at the Catalaunian Plains between the Romans and the Huns. That project would need about 1500 cavalry – it wouldn’t be ready for 2022, but maybe 2023.