Mark G Fry
Légat
Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017
Messages: 586
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
 Posté le: Mar Jan 21, 2025 10:03 pm Sujet du message: #Teutonic Knights |
 |
The v.4 2024 Errata states that Turcopoles cannot be fielded before 1230, and that Hungarians can only be fielded before 1230.
I can understand the reasoning around this prohibition (as an attempt to limit the numbers and types of LC available to a player) but it makes little historical sense - as the Hungarians were not available to the Order before the Order moved to the Baltic (e.g. in 1226) and Turcopoles were used by the Order when it fought in the Holy Land (where Turcopoles originated as LH bow - like the Hungarians) before its move to the Baltic in 1230.
Would it be therefore advisable to simply state that Hungarians and Turcopoles are mutually exclusive and cannot be field in the same army?
Also - I'd suggest that it should be possible to field some of the Order's lesser Brethren and Subjects as HC impact, alongside the Brethren (Medium Knights, impact elite) and the Crusaders and Vassals (Medium Knights impetuous or impact). Even if it was only a small number, 0-2 would be adequate.
I'd also suggest that the addition of 0-2 MF swd as Hanse/Danzig Marines, as they also appear in the Feudal German list #191
Thanks
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis
Dernière édition par Mark G Fry le Mer Jan 22, 2025 9:27 am; édité 1 fois |
|
KevinD
Légat
Inscrit le: 23 Aoû 2021
Messages: 665
Localisation: Texas
|
| Posté le: Mer Jan 22, 2025 1:20 am Sujet du message: |
|
Mark,
I assumed (based on my vague knowledge of the early Teutonic Order) that the pre 1230 list LC Bw are Hungarian recruited when the Order was established in Hungary. The later LC Jav represent native LC recruited locally in Prussia, Livonia, etc.
The TO was founded around 1190 in the Holy Land and from about 1211-1226 were in Transylvania as (more or less?) Hungarian vassals. They were then expelled by the Hungarian king and end up in the Baltics ca. 1230.
The 0-2 HC Impact suggestions would line up with separately deployed Sergeants seen in many of feudal/medieval European lists. But:
1. Did the TO deploy their mounted sergeants separately like this (or did they either mostly serve on foot).
2. Did the TO not use separately deployed mounted sergeants with lances and instead rely on the relatively numerous locally recruited cavalry or mounted crossbowmen for such operations (or indeed equip their mounted sergeants with crossbows….) that other European feudal armies would use detached sergeants for?
3. Do “vassal†MKn Impact represent (in part) what might be classed as mounted sergeants? |
|
Mark G Fry
Légat
Inscrit le: 15 Juin 2017
Messages: 586
Localisation: Bristol, UK
|
| Posté le: Mer Jan 22, 2025 9:25 am Sujet du message: |
|
| KevinD a écrit: | Mark,
Hi Kevin - thoughts below in 'bold'
I assumed (based on my vague knowledge of the early Teutonic Order) that the pre 1230 list LC Bw are Hungarian recruited when the Order was established in Hungary. The later LC Jav represent native LC recruited locally in Prussia, Livonia, etc.
> exactly my thinking as well Kevin - but there is also a period before the Order moves to Hungary when it is still fighting in the Holy Land (& from the list dates it is not included in the Later Crusader list), and had no access to Hungarian horse archers or native Baltic javelin armed cavalry, but does have access to native local Levantine LC Bow armed Turcopoles.
The TO was founded around 1190 in the Holy Land and from about 1211-1226 were in Transylvania as (more or less?) Hungarian vassals. They were then expelled by the Hungarian king and end up in the Baltics ca. 1230.
The 0-2 HC Impact suggestions would line up with separately deployed Sergeants seen in many of feudal/medieval European lists.
But:
1. Did the TO deploy their mounted sergeants separately like this (or did they either mostly serve on foot).
2. Did the TO not use separately deployed mounted sergeants with lances and instead rely on the relatively numerous locally recruited cavalry or mounted crossbowmen for such operations (or indeed equip their mounted sergeants with crossbows….) that other European feudal armies would use detached sergeants for?
3. Do “vassal†MKn Impact represent (in part) what might be classed as mounted sergeants?
> maybe offering the option to downgrade some of the existing Medium Knights impact elite in the list to HC impact, rather than adding them to the list, in addition to the Brethren, might resolve some of these 3 points.
We do already have the Sergeants depicted as HF spear or as Crossbows in the lists, as you point out. But we do also know that the Order fielded significant numbers of serving brethren (depicted in a grey livery with the Tau cross) but whether these would be less 'knightly' than the Brother knights as far as fighting quality or equipment goes, we can only guess at. Also, as you state, it is not known if they were fielded separately from the brother knights, however, my thinking was along the lines that the list as it is currently written is pretty much all MKn's and I have my doubts (from my reading) that this was probably the case in all circumstances.
|
Thanks
Mark
_________________
'He could have lived a risk-free, moneyed life, but he preferred to whittle away his fortune on warfare.' Xenophon, The Anabasis |
|
FAQ
Rechercher
Liste des Membres
Groupes d'utilisateurs
S'enregistrer
Profil
Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés
Connexion
