Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 55

Thread: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth



    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Augustus II the Strong (Wettin) (King 1697–1706, 1709–1733)

    Augustus II the Strong, also known as Frederick Augustus I, Prince-Elector of Saxony, was an over-ambitious ruler. He defeated his biggest rival, François Louis, Prince of Conti, supported by France, and Sobieski's son, Jakub. To ensure his success for the crown of Poland he decided to convert to Roman Catholicism from Lutheranism. Augustus hoped to make the Polish throne hereditary within his family, and to use his resources as Elector of Saxony to impose some order on the chaotic Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. However, he was soon distracted from his internal reform projects by the possibility of external conquest. He involved the Commonwealth in the disastrous Great Northern War. His attempts at internal reforms and strengthening the royal power came to nothing, but his mistakes allowed Russian Empire to strengthen its influence over the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

    August III Wettin (king 1733–1763)

    Also Elector of Saxony (as Frederick Augustus II), August III, after his father's death inherited Saxony and was elected king of Poland with support of Russian and Austrian troops. August III was uninterested in the affairs of his Polish dominion, which he viewed mostly as a source of funds and resources for strengthening his power in Saxony. During his 30 year-reign, he spent less than 3 years in Poland. He delegated most of his powers and responsibilities to count Heinrich von Brühl. 30 years of August III disinterested reign festered the political anarchy and further weakened the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, while neighboring Prussia, Austria and Russia finalized plans for the partitions of Poland.

    Stanisław August Poniatowski (King 1764–1795)

    In 1764 Catherine dictated the election of her former favorite and lover, Stanisław August Poniatowski, as king of Poland-Lithuania. Confounding expectations that he would be an obedient servant of his mistress, Stanislaw August encouraged the modernization of his realm's ramshackle political system and achieved a temporary moratorium on use of the individual veto in the Sejm (1764–1766). This turnabout threatened to renew the strength of the monarchy and brought displeasure in the foreign capitals that preferred an inert, pliable Poland. Catherine, being among the most displeased by Poniatowski's independence, encouraged religious dissension in Poland-Lithuania's substantial Eastern Orthodox population, which earlier in the eighteenth century had lost the rights enjoyed during the Jagiellon Dynasty.

    Under heavy Russian pressure, the Sejm introduced Orthodox and Protestant equality in 1767. Through the Polish nobles that Russia controlled and Russian Minister to Warsaw Prince Nikolai Repnin, Czarina Catherine the Great forced a constitution, which undid the reforms of 1764 under Stanislaw II, on Poland in 1767. The liberum veto and all the old abuses of the last 1 1/4 centuries were guaranteed as unalterable parts of this new constitution. Poland was compelled to sign Treaty of Guarantee with Russia, where Catharina was imposed as protector of Polish political system. After that Poland became de facto a Russian protectorate. The real power in Poland lay with the Russian ambassadors, and the Polish king became only an executor of their will. This action provoked a Catholic uprising by the Confederation of Bar, a league of Polish nobles that fought with Russian intervention until 1772 to revoke Catherine's mandate.

    The defeat of the Confederation of Bar again left Poland exposed to the ambitions of its neighbors. Although Catherine initially opposed partition, Frederick the Great of Prussia profited from Austria's threatening military position to the southwest by pressing a long-standing proposal to carve territory from the commonwealth. Catherine, persuaded that Russia did not have the resources to continue its unilateral domination of Poland, agreed. In 1772 Russia, Prussia, and Austria forced terms of partition upon the helpless commonwealth under the pretext of restoring order in the anarchic conditions of the country.

    The first partition in 1772 did not directly threaten the stability of Poland-Lithuania. Poland still retained extensive territory that included the Polish heartlands. In fact, the shock of the annexations made clear the dangers of decay in government institutions, creating a body of opinion favorable to reform along the lines of the European Enlightenment. King Stanislaw August supported the progressive elements in the government and promoted the ideas of foreign political figures such as Edmund Burke and George Washington. At the same time, Polish intellectuals discussed Enlightenment philosophers such as Montesquieu and Rousseau. During the period of Polish Enlightenment, the concept of democratic institutions for all classes was accepted in Polish society. Education reform included establishment of the first ministry of education in Europe (the Komisja Edukacji Narodowej). Taxation and the army underwent thorough reform, and government again was centralized in the Permanent Council. Landholders emancipated large numbers of peasants, although there was no official government decree. Polish cities, in decline for many decades, were revived by the influence of the Industrial Revolution, especially in mining and textiles.

    Stanislaw August's process of renovation reached its climax on May 3, 1791, when, after three years of intense debate, the "Four Years' Sejm" produced what is claimed as Europe's first modern codified constitution. Conceived in the liberal spirit of the contemporaneous document in the United States, the constitution recast Poland-Lithuania as a hereditary monarchy and abolished many of the eccentricities and antiquated features of the old system. The new constitution abolished the individual veto in parliament; provided a separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government; and established "people's sovereignty" (for the noble and bourgeois classes). Although never fully implemented, the Constitution of May 3rd gained an honored position in the Polish political heritage; tradition marks the anniversary of its passage as the country's most important civic holiday.

    Passage of the constitution alarmed nobles who would lose considerable stature under the new order. In autocratic states such as Russia, the democratic ideals of the constitution also threatened the existing order, and the prospect of Polish recovery threatened to end domination of Polish affairs by its neighbors. In 1792, Polish factions formed the Confederation of Targowica and appealed for Russian assistance in restoring the status quo. Catherine was happy to use this opportunity; enlisting Prussian support, she invaded Poland under the pretext of defending Poland's ancient liberties. The irresolute Stanislaw August capitulated, defecting to the Targowica faction. Arguing that Poland had fallen prey to the radical Jacobinism then at high tide in France, Russia and Prussia abrogated the Constitution of May 3, 1791, carried out a second partition of Poland in 1793, and placed the remainder of the country under occupation by Russian troops.

    The second partition was far more injurious than the first. Russia received a vast area of eastern Poland, extending southward from its gains in the first partition nearly to the Black Sea. To the west, Prussia received an area known as South Prussia, nearly twice the size of its first-partition gains along the Baltic, as well as the port of Gdańsk. Thus, Poland's neighbors reduced the commonwealth to a rump state and plainly signaled their designs to abolish it altogether at their convenience.

    In a gesture of defiance, a general Polish revolt broke out in 1794 under the leadership of Tadeusz Kościuszko (Kościuszko Uprising), a military officer who had rendered notable service in the American Revolution. Kosciuszko's ragtag insurgent armies won some initial successes, but they eventually fell before the superior forces of Russian General Alexander Suvorov. In the wake of the insurrection of 1794, Russia, Prussia, and Austria carried out the third and final partition of Poland-Lithuania in 1795, erasing the Commonwealth of Two Nations from the map and pledging never to let it return.

    Much of Europe condemned the dismemberment as an international crime without historical parallel. Amid the distractions of the French Revolution and its attendant wars, however, no state actively opposed the annexations. In the long term, the dissolution of Poland-Lithuania upset the traditional European balance of power, dramatically magnifying the influence of Russia and paving the way for the Germany that would emerge in the nineteenth century with Prussia at its core. For the Poles, the third partition began a period of continuous foreign rule that would endure well over a century.



    Faction Overview

    Land Army:
    Early Period-Trained, but weak soldiers. Excelent, but expencieve cavalry.
    Late Period-Low amount of infantry soldier, good cavalry.
    Navy:
    No navy,
    Economy:
    Income comes both from homeland and trade.

    New Units

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Infantry
    I'm compareing units frome the same class and writting their advantages and dissadvantages.
    When unit's statistics are similar to other units from the same class I don't write anything.

    Early Line Infantry


    Grenadiers (early):


    Cossacks - infantry and cavalry:


    Guard janissaries:


    Late Line Infantry
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Polish Militia


    Guard Infantry


    Artillery





    Cavalry

    ''Pancerni''


    Trabants


    Polish Wingded Hussars
    [IMG][/IMG]

    General Bodyguard
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Regiment Of Horse
    [IMG][/IMG]

    Provincial Cavalry


    List of new states and provinces (plans):
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    - Poland-Lithuania - Mazovia (Warsaw), Greater Poland (Poznań), Lesser Poland (Kraków), King's Prussia (Gdańsk), Galicia (Lwów), Podolia (Kamieniec), Volhynia (Łuck), Polesia (Brześć), Lithuania (Vilnius), Belarus (Minsk), Left-bank Ukraine (Zhytomyr)
    The campagain map will be changed if it's only possible.

    Outline:
    Last edited by Salvo; December 02, 2009 at 07:47 AM.

  2. #2
    Woland's Avatar Laetus
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Poznań/Polska - Poznan/Poland
    Posts
    19

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Late units for PLC

    Cavalry

    Straż Przednia (Front Guard) - when Diet decided to creat National Cavalry from heavy cavalry units (hussaria and pancerni), the dragoons where reorganized into new type of regiments "Straż Przednia". They weren't anymore used as mounted infantry (travel on horse back, fight on foot), they instead became something more like Horse Chasseurs/Carabiniers, used for scouting and screening purposes, fighting from horse back (they fire arms where shortened for easier use).

    Spoiler for Straż Przednia Litewska - Lithuanian Front Guard
    Kozacy - Nothing new from the Russian Cossacks, maybe more archaic organization, but still a pretty interesting unit that formed part of polish light cavalry till the end of Constitution War. Armed in lances and sabers, typical fast-striking cavalry.

    Spoiler for Pułk Czartoryskiego - Czartoryski's Cossack Regiment
    Infantry

    Guard - Polish Guard basically divided into five regiments - King's Own (Regiment Króla), Queen's Own (Regiment Królowej - even without the queen, the regiment existed), Crown Prince's Own (Regiment Królewicza - the same as wit the Queen's Own), and two supreme commander's regiments (one for the lithuanian hetman, one for the crown one - Regiment Buławy Wielkiej Koronnej, Regiment Buławy Wielkiej Litewskiej). They were among best fighting units in the army.

    Spoiler for Regiment Królowej - Queen's Own Regiment


    Spoiler for Regiment Królewicza - Crown Prince's Own
    Reformed Line Infantry - The polish army in the late XVIII century was becoming more of the citizen's, not subjects, army. It quickly modernized following more elastic rules than contemporary armies (possibly influenced by the generals and officers returning from US). Such attitude proved to be effective in the Constitution War where new polish army was more than a match (not i terms of numbers, which proved fatal) to the Russian forces. As always Polish Army was divided into separate Lithuanin and Crown Army. Crown units were more disciplined and had higher morale, while Lithuanian ones were excelled in fire-fighting.

    Spoiler for 4 Regiment Koronny - 4th Crown Infantry Regiment

    Spoiler for 12 i 13 Regiment Koronny - 12th (white) and 13th (blue) Crown Infantry Regiment

    Spoiler for 5 i 8 Regiment Litewski - 5th and 8th Lithuanian Infantry Regiment

  3. #3

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    hi peoples

  4. #4
    MOjok's Avatar Laetus
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    17

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Will you split PLC infantry in Polish and Lithuanian forces and/or special regiments (f.e. like presented in a post above)?
    Last edited by MOjok; November 30, 2009 at 03:19 PM.

  5. #5
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Yes, we will.
    But actually I'm thinking about prepareing new technology for PLC.
    I'm thinking about third Mai constitution

  6. #6
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Updated
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  7. #7
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    I think that the polish janissaries were white people with turkish costumes, isn´t it?

    [IMG]file:///C:/Windows/Temp/moz-screenshot-3.png[/IMG]

  8. #8
    Woland's Avatar Laetus
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Poznań/Polska - Poznan/Poland
    Posts
    19

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    It depend's. Shortly after the war with Ottoman's they were mostly POW pressed into polish service. Later they were recruited from Lipka's (polish Tartars) and ordinary recruites.

    I must say that the idea with the 3rd Mai Constitution is simply briliant

  9. #9
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Woland View Post
    It depend's. Shortly after the war with Ottoman's they were mostly POW pressed into polish service. Later they were recruited from Lipka's (polish Tartars) and ordinary recruites.

    I must say that the idea with the 3rd Mai Constitution is simply briliant
    Thanks.
    This would allow to recruit new units, add some prestige, incrised income...but also lowe happienes of the nobels.
    If You have any ideas write them here.

    Here You have picture of historical Polish Janissaries. Actuall ones are just recoloured Turks, I'm sure KLA will soon make new
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


  10. #10
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    [QUOTE=Salvo;6389536]Thanks.
    This would allow to recruit new units, add some prestige, incrised income...but also lowe happienes of the nobels.
    If You have any ideas write them here.

    Here You have picture of historical Polish Janissaries. Actuall ones are just recoloured Turks, I'm sure KLA will soon make new
    I´ll update a book with pictures soon!

  11. #11
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Thanks mate, You are incredible

  12. #12
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

  13. #13
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Unfortunetly I can't get acces to this pages...Maybe this links are bad?

  14. #14
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Salvo View Post
    Unfortunetly I can't get acces to this pages...Maybe this links are bad?
    No, it runs well with my connection

    I can select parts and send it
    Last edited by carricanta; December 05, 2009 at 04:16 AM.

  15. #15
    Salvo's Avatar Maréchal de l'Empire
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    2,160

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Thanks, it'll be very usefull for us

  16. #16
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    I´ll post more information about your beloved -sincerely- country. I got a poor information about the polish armies in the XVIII century, but i got the better consideration about Jan Sobieski and the History of Poland.

    Thanks

  17. #17
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Some of the material here is re-presented in the Equipment/Unit standards page, but much is unique, please see both pages. Keep in mind that, although we are not strict about it, we try to set our dress for 1674. This allows us to accurately portray events in Polish dress from the 1650s to about 1683. However, the western fashions did change quite a bit during this period, short coats before 1660, long coats thereafter. Many event we do are set for earlier times, in which case we make much more use of English Civil War style western clothing for infantry and artillery. The material below is heavily biased for this period of special interest to our group.
    From Vienna 1683, Uniforms, March-April 1984 (French) by Zygulski; Polish
    Hussar, King Sobieski, Pancerni, Light Cavalry, Dragoon, Infantry, Ensign, Infantry officer

    Turkish - 1683
    Deli, bannerette, vizir, porte-wuntschuk, spahi, artillery, janissary, peik, captain (aga) of Janissaries, solak

    Austrian/ Imperial -1683
    Arquebusier, ensign, general, cuirassier, dragoon, artillery, officer of infantry, musketeer, grenadier.
    (Opinion: These pictures by Zygulski are of low quality and do not seem authoritative.)

    Our Guys at MTA, March 2002 (our first event in-costume)

    I have few good pictures of artillerymen to show from 1650-1690. Their clothing is known to have been of a mix of western and eastern styles. Most years, Crown artillerymen were in western outfits, but that was not always true and as a private unit we are not following that trend anyway.
    Each unit was issued cloth of a uniform color, although the color and cut was not consistent. According to Brzezinski, crews were issued zupan-like coats in preparation for the Vienna campaign. Probably, Horse Artillery would have been outfitted similarly to the dragoons.
    Left, Artilleryman in 1650s western outfit. The picture (right) of the supposedly Polish artillerymen is the very model of a bad picture... the impossible gun carriage, the bogus concept of slowmatch and lack of understanding of the linstock, the unlikely bombs to be fired, the powerkeg right under the lit match... The
    Both dragoons and artillerymen were commoners. The infantry were as well, but officers and most of the cavalry were gentry or szlatchta (the western-style arqubusers and the 'true' Cossacks were the main exceptions to this rule.)


    At left an officer over the gun, and at right artillerymen. From
    frontpiece of 'Artis magnae artilleriae pars prima" (1650) by Jan Casmir Siemienowicz.


    Right, artillerists from a bas-relief on the tomb of Jan Casmir Siemienowicz in a church in Paris (the bas-relief presents a battle in 1651 - Beresteczk).

    Artillery, 1650s. Left to Right, Officer, mounted; General of Artillery; General's Orderly (Masztalerz)

    To the right, Left to Right: Artilleryman, with red shash; Fusiliers (fizylier) in red or grey coat (kolet) and pants.

    Left, Artillery from OiM.
    Dragoon, 1683, eastern style. Notice the necktie, slightly loose pants, Polish boots, long coat. Weapons include a pair of pistols, short musket, and saber.
    Dragoons were commoners, and were organized the same way infantry were. 'Free companies' were often attached to artillery, and in the 1670s a special 'free company' was raised specifically to provide field support to light artillery.
    Dragoon, 1683, western style, detail, by Angus McBride from Brzezinski, Polish Armies 1562-1696. (Pikeman in foreground) This and the other 1680-83 picture below are based on copies of German watercolors made in 1680-1683 published by A. Bruchalski and narrated by J. Bendę
    (Andrzej Bruchnalski, Nieznanemateriałydo ikonografiipiechotyłanowej z lat 1680—83. „Arsenał , kwartalnik Koła Miło¶ników Dawnej Broni i Barwy przy Muzeum Narodowym w Krakowie, 1959 r., nr 4, s. 101 )
    The dragoon to the right is from the 1690s.
    Note the jackboots, collar, and the relatively short coat - Western European features. The coat flaps are buttoned back , revealing the yellow lining. The coat is red. This man is from King Sobieski's guard dragoons. Guard dragoons in the Vienna campaign were under the command of the Queen's brother, Louis, Marquis d'Arquien. It is known that in 1646 they wore red coats with yellow linings, although their color in 1683 is not certain.
    Instead of boots, dragoons might have worn shoes or a short boot with leather gaiters.
    Right, a 1634 dragoon in quite western gear - like a musketeer. (1634 sketches are from a series by Wilhelm Hondiusa)
    Below, more dragoons, 2 from 1660s, rest from 1680s. Troop to far left are dragoons from the movie 'With Fire and Sword'







    Polish Style Infantry 1683. Axes were almost universal among the infantry. In 1683 the quality and uniformity of clothing was very poor, such that it embarrassed the King.
    Right, 1680 Polish Infantry
    Polish Style 1634 Infantry
    Right, Polish 'Select' (Wybranie) infantry
    Polish 'German' or western style infantry.
    Polish Janissaries of King Jan III Sobieski, 1683. The first company was made up out of captives who volunteered to switch sides. The second company deserted the Sultan and switched sides voluntarily in the 1670s, officers, men and pay-chest included.
    The Ottoman Janissaries were (like all government employees) slaves of the sultan, selected from captured or contributed Christian boys who usually converted to the Muslim faith.
    Light Cavalry. In 1683 much of the light cavalry was Cossack or Tatar; this looks to be of the Polish variety.

    See also Rembrandt's Polish Rider, below to left.




    Hussar and Pancerni Cavalry, 1683. The Pancerni - mail armored medium cavalry- was the most numerous in Polish service. Lance, pistol, bow, and saber were the usual weapons.


    Hussar 1634 model, note wings attached to saddle.

    Reiter 1683. A very few western style reiters were in Polish service, although they were common in Swedish and Austrian service.
    Reiter 1634
    Arquebuser: German style cavalry 1650-1690. Because they were armed with carbines, they were much used as skirmishers, along with dragoons. Substitute a 3-bar pot for this helmet, and it could be a picture of one of Cromwell's Ironsides.

    A picture of the battle of Vienna in the Vienna Military Museum shows Polish cavalry, unmistakable because of the wings and lances, wearing buffcoats and similar armor and so had a look of this type. I do not know if the picture was based on reality, or the extent to which Poles used buffcoats. A thousand or so Polish Arqbusers were involved in the battle of Vienna.
    Engineer: with trigonometry tool

    <Picture 7>This zupan (pron. zoo-pen) is characteristic of the 17th C. It is the main garment of the Polish gentry. The zupan was the garment worn immediately beneath armor, so it might be called an arming coat, especially in its padded military/field version. Since commoners did not wear armor, they did not wear the zupan. Even though their plain old 'coat' looked exactly like a zupan, they would never make the mistake of calling it a zupan. The zupan and other Polish/Hungarian garments are essentially
    Kristof Abaraska, 1622. White/gold zupan. This is before the era of the Kontuz. The patterned garment is a kontuz predecessor, a Delia




    16th C. Costume. An out-of-fashion hat, otherwise not too many changes. The winter-weight fir-lined kontuz outer coat, (might be called a riding coat) is almost the same length as the zupan or main coat (which might be called an arming coat). Note that the rear of the kontuz is somewhat longer than the front. Also it is split on the sides rather than in the back - this is characteristic throughout the 16th and 17th C.
    What looks like a pocket is actually an opening, and sometime one sees the sabre hilt poking through, while on horseback. The kontuz also looks like it has a fir-lined hood. Kontuzi usually have a split from the arm-pit to the elbow, allowing the sleeves to be peeled back in warm weather. A winter-weight kontuz might not have had this feature, for greater warmth.
    The buttons are 'standard'. The 'Hungarian' style of buttons on a ribbon were also popular throughout the 17th C. as seen below.
    This kontuz seems to be a summer-weight garment, modeled by deceased member of the szlatcha (gentry). Note the cartridge box, the wheellock pistol key hanging from the cartridge box (or waistbelt), the riding whip. From mid 1600's, prob. about 1660.
    This is further detailed in the Patterns page.




    1640-1650, Marshall Lukasz Opalinski. Rich guy. He is wearing a "zupan" (closed with buttons) and "delia" (this coat with fur collar). "Zupan" was normal, daily wear for EVERY nobleman - rich and poor. Delia was worn rather by very rich guys. The yellow boots are of such thin leather that they seem almost like stockings - not exactly practical battle dress. The boots are like gold "Patek" now. :-))
    This staff he is holding is a symbol of a Marshall. Note that his belt is thin. Sometimes one sees very wide belts made from silk, which were worn in the end of XVIII cent and in XIX cent, not in the XVII cent.

    Stanislaw Tenczynski, 1634
    Very nicely dressed young gentleman. He is wearing a white "zupan" (pronounce: "joopen"), but you can only see it's sleeves and two buttons near his neck. Over the zupan he is wearing an unusual white over-garment, perhaps a Ferezja or early type of kontuz. His hat is a "kolpak" (cowpak")




    A powerful Polish nobleman, Zamoyski, who was chancellor in the years 1580-1605.
    He is wearing a colorful "zupan" and a red "delia" in early 17th C. fashion.

    Right, Hetman Czarnicki c. 1680, in a Ferezja

    hussars.jpg
    1604. Hussars from the painting called "Rolka Sztokholmska," a very good
    historical source. You can see the sabre and Turkish broadsword (Palasz) and, maybe, they have a koncerz which you can't see since the koncerz was worn under the right knee. Some have short and some have knee -length boots. Each row may represent a different banner in the parade, since the robes vary by row: leopard, red silk turkish, midnight blue. Since they are all carrying the lance, they are probabally all 'comrades' not retainers. Or, they may be coordinated just for this parade. However, the horse-tack and helmet styles vary quite a bit, as well, so the artist seems to be trying to be true to what he saw.

    hussar.jpg
    Early hussar, about 1580. He is wearing the older type of helmet, called "hussar capalin". The "koncerz" under the knee is of a western style.




    Pancerni, about 1610-30. He is wearing a chainmail over the zupan. Note the sabre, eastern recurve bow and arrows. Yellow shoes, again. This pancerny is not really a pancerny - why? Because he at this time he would go by the old term for Pancers, e.g. 'Cossack'. (you know, one of those out-of-control wildmen from the east



    wybraniec
    Polish infantry. He is wearing what appears to be a kontuz/zupan coat combination, but, as noted above, clothes worn by commoners were not called "zupan". If you were a peasant and put on a zupan, presto! - it no longer was a zupan, but a simple, normal coat, in this case perhaps called a Gerimak. The outer coat front is tucked into the belt. Note the collection of pipes in the hat, the gourd powder flask, thin haversack/blanket roll, lit match, and axe.



    commander.jpg
    In the rank of "porucznik" or "rotmistrz" in the cavalry. He is wearing short reddish brocade zupan, the stereotypical yellow boots, a short Hungarian-style jacket, and a "ferezja" .




    King Sobieski in an XVIII th C. picture. Elements of this may not be accurate. But, the western-looking fellow to the rear is quite plausible. Although Sobieski himself made a point to wear tradition Polish costume, many of his entourage and, for example, foreign military observers and guests, would have worn western fashions.

    A warning about pictures as historical sources. These are a great source but are often inaccurate, especially if not contemporary. There are a lot of very nice 19th C. paintings by Jan Matejko and Wojciech Kossak, for example. But be cautious - sometimes they really painted total BS, of course very artistic and beautiful BS, but without any historical sense. All pictures posted come from the XVI and XVII C., unless otherwise identified, so you can put some trust in them.



    16th C. Illustrations By Braun & Schneider - c.1861-1880
    17th C. Costume - illustration done 19th C. or later


    A Russian, and a Pole Nobleman.
    Right, Poles and (far right) Hungarians, early XVII C.
    Kontuz-like Polish Coat, modeled by King Gustav Adolf of Sweden



    Coats
    Kontuz hem length was always below the knees, and often down to the ankle. This was a rather loose and full garmet, usually of a soft wool. Winter wiegth can be fur-lined.
    In the field, the kontuz was charactistically worn with the front ends of the garmet pulled up and tucked into the belt (or rarely, attached with buttons or claspes, as in later period Western coats) The sleeves were open in the underseam, and could be thrown back over the shoulder (this was not common until the 1640s)
    Zupan or zupan like coat, a uniquely polish variation of the under-kafkan. These are are two types:
    -Padded, usually of simpler design and ornamentation, they are practical military field wear. This is what we need for most of our impressions. They might be a bit hotter than un-padded, alas.
    -Normal - including plain and dressy varieties such as in most of the pictures above. See also examples of fancy zupan buttons.
    Zupan length varied with fashion to above and below the knees from year to year, but were most often below the knees. In the 1660s they became rather short for a while, reaching mid-thigh only (and the kontuz was shortened to just the knee). While civilian Zupans sometimes reached ankle lenght, of course those for military use would have been cut higher for practicality. Zupans for military use were padded and quilted. The 1630s zupan to the right is fur lined (or perhaps padded)
    Kontuz started to come into fashion in the 1640s, and Zupan/Kontuz combination stayed around for a long time after. They replaced over-kaftans of a type that do not look a whole lot unlike Kontuzs to my eyes.
    Important note: The Polish garments button from the right (right overlaps left), unlike modern western mens' clothes that button from the left! This shows their eastern heritage.

    To the left are two fancy 18th C. kontuz over zupans. Wrong details include: Big waist sash... use belts for 17th C. Length too long.. this is either a later fashion or is a courtly fashion, inappropriate for field wear; trailing zupan sleeves... not 17C. fashion, also impractical for field wear. The way the kontuz has a slit in the arm, allowing the sleeves to be thrown back, is however correct for our period. to the right are 17th C. and far right, an 18th C. kontuz/Zupan.
    A barka, an outer-mantle
    Delia, lined in fur, over zupan. The delia preceded the kontuz, which largely replaced it in the 1640s. The zupan was occasionally worn alone early in the century, but in the time of the Kontuz it gradually became an undergarment rater like a westcot, worn only with a kontuz covering it in polite society.
    Pants.
    Pants tended to the tight in the early 17th C., then loosened out to almost Turkish fullness, and then tightened again at the end of the century. There will be no 'uniform' pants... acceptable varieties are detailed in the patterns page.
    Hats
    The chapka or red square-shaped lancer's hat was not in use in the 17th C., except in the Crakow region where it seems to have been a local traditional style, in soft form (see left). In several varieties, the colpak (pron. 'cowpak') a fur-lined hat, fur-base exposed, with the center-part optionally not fur-lined, seems to have been almost universal.

    Boots and Shoes
    If you know how modern western cowboy boots and English riding boots look, you know there is a substantial difference, even though it is hard to put a finger on exactly what. You would, for example, immediately know if President George Bush showed up at a news conference wearing English riding boots, because it would be front page news around the world; in contrast, cowboy boots would not be remarked upon.
    According to noted shoe historian, June Swann, the American cowboy boot is the direct descendent of the Hungarian/Polish boot both in construction and in heritage.
    Shoes and boots are among the hardest items to get right for a reenactor in any period, and 17 C. Poland is no exception. Note the below the knee length, knee cap, and characteristic yellowish/buff color. Boots may also be short, or may fold down to the ankle. Sometimes, they seem to have opened on the outside seam. Some of them do seem to be like cowboy boots, with a slightly different top, and no fancy scrollwork. The leather on the shoes of some of the rich guys is so thin and soft you can see the outline of the toes - it fits like a sock.
    Unlike western shoes of the period, which were straight lasted, they were right and left lasted. Shoes, however, seemed rather similar to their western counterparts.
    While boots were cut to just below the knee during most of this period, according to Pasek boot legs did briefly pop up to mid-thigh (like Western jackboots), and were buckled, during the 1660s. To the right, a unusually fancy pair of 17th C. boots, not typical, but reminds one of some excessive modern cowboy boots.
    Better boots were often made of Saffian (safian) - delicate skin of goat, ram or veal ( but from goat most often ) using an immersion sumac tanning method and dyed different colors (most often reddish or golden). The process traditionally involves rubbing on the mordant (dye fixative).
    The root of Western fashion.
    Have you noticed that you have not worn a doublet and hose to work lately? This may sound braggadocio since this is a Polish-themed web site, but in all seriousness, the root of all western fashion for the last three hundred years was Hungarian/Polish/eastern fashion. It all started when the hussars rode into Paris in 1645, with their spectacular getups. The Paris ladies immediately - literally within a day- incorporated Polish elements in their cloths, making feminine versions of hussar outfits. The men's fashion world was a bit slower, but by the 1660's the doublet was history and the long-coat was it, from then until the latest business suit from Ralph Lauren nee Lipshitz. What I mean is, that there is a fundamental construction difference between the doublet and what you know as the business suit coat, and the same basic construction has been used on all coats in the west since 1660 or so, and in Polish coats for hundreds of years prior to that. Other pieces crept in waves over the next hundred years. The next one was the eastern-style cravat in imitation of Hungarian hussar styles, then the eastern-style tight long pants, again in imitation of Hungarian hussar style.
    The English court's changeover was recorded: "Oct 18, 1666.... It being the first time his Majesty put hemself solemnly into the Eastern fashion of vest, changeing doublet, stiff collar, bands and cloake, into a comley vest, after the Persian mode, with a girdle or straps, and shoe strings and garters into buckles." - John Evelyn, Diary
    ---------------
    Artillery - Org.
    Artillery was few in numbers and of uneven quality, however, until, Vladislav Vasa instituted a new Quarter tax in 1632. The new tax was used entirely to modernize the Artillery and Sappers.

    Equipment Weapons and Accessories are in the Unit Equipment Standards Page

    The plate armor of the hussars tended to be made up in segments, and used a lot of brass fitting and trimmings.

    At right, a quite typical panzer medium cavalry mail suit. Panzer cavalry was the most numerous type in Polish service throughout the XVII century. Note the basket-like figwood 'kalkan', or target.
    The famous wings were also used by Tatars and some light cavalry, who usually attached the wings to the saddles (see picture below, under Horse Tack).


    Horse Tack and Horses
    Non-military Noble Male Costume
    Identical to the military costume
    Peasant 'Chlop' (pron. 'hwop') Costume

    Peasant and a friend.
    City Guys
    Well, the guys in black.
    Jews

  18. #18
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Our good friend Eric's Hussar supply shop is an obvious place to start looking.
    http://www.polishhussarsupply.com/
    I am so grateful to Eric for doing some of the work for finding new sources of supplies and making beautiful armor. When I started this several years ago, one of the most time-consuming exercises was finding and coordinating suppliers to get our first dozen guys ready for an event.
    Equipment Item Artillery Dragoon Cavalry Possible Source -Questions? ask Rick (see home page for contact information) Hat Colpak. fur with a wool fabric or felt center. The flaps should fold down, so as to cover the ears in bad weather. The fur could be almost any kind you can find in a thrift store. Don't forget the egret feather! for now, See the posted pattern, and
    Rick Orli will make a hat that is complete except for fur for 15$. and will add the fur for cost, if available. (I have shredded a couple of 'Goodwill' coats for the cause so far.)
    Footwear boots, shoes, or shoes/gaiters. Brown 'biker boots' are close, if slightly modified. Shoes or short boots can be straight last or right/left last of any 17th C. style. Gaiters can be a squarish piece of leather, laced up. Boots of Polish style. Western jack boots are marginally acceptable. I have ordered boots from running-Iron.com, and they are a bit slow, and I had problems with a pair. Then more problems with a 2nd pair and they took my money and gave me nothing. Thieves. Look at the 2-piece cavalry boot, request yellowish buff leather; or 17th C. shoe.
    Radek also has a Polish source that several of us have tried. very good boots, mine are very comfortable, and are made very fast - 3 weeks from order to delivery. These are the bright yellow boots beloved of the nobility and so are best for hussars and other richer types.
    Mark Wolff recommends Shrader-Bootmaker
    1508 San Anselmo Ave.
    San Anselmo, CA 94960
    415-459-6576

    All infantry should wear 17th C. style shoes, available from several sources.

    Shirt 17th C. style linen Sykes Sutlering http://sykesutler.home.att.net/ Underwear Don't ask, don't tell Coat-inner optional zupan like coat zupan, not uniform (red suggested) Creative Clothes (Kate Reynolds)
    Thurmont, MD
    Please contact through Rick
    Uniform Measurements Chart
    I've checked with Elizabeth Potter of Round Two Costumes - seems to have experimented with Polish style clothing, but is not at present accurate for the 17th C.
    Coat-outer Red kontuz-like uniform coat Green uniform dragoon coat kontuz, not uniform (red suggested) Creative Clothes Outer mantle (bad weather) optional sheepskin burka optional optional Pants loose breeches - non uniform loose breeches or Turkish-style pants- non uniform Creative Clothes Belt plain or metal-decorated - non uniform same, with optional bow or carbine furniture. Saber optional - type 3 or hanger type 3 type 1, 2, or 3 I recommend Eric's Hussar supply shop http://www.polishhussarsupply.com/
    Armart and Szecepan are not reliable at this time. we are looking for other sources. Other cold hand weapon axe, dagger optional war hammer, koncerz, palasce; mace for officers; bow
    http://www.krackow.com/index.html http://www.kkart.cz/



    firearm none; optional pistol musket - matchlock or firelock (wheellock, doglock, flintlock) or carbine. Optional pistol. wheellock pistol(s). Optional firelock (wheellock, doglock, flintlock) carbine. Pistols and carbines http://sykesutler.home.att.net/
    or Tatershal: http://www.infomagic.net/~gwylym/ta/ta.html
    Doglock carbines: John Buck (contact me for how to reach him) makes excellent guns.
    Doglock carbines: ENGLISH ARMOURIE
    http://www.englisharmourie.fsnet.co.uk/index.htm
    a good source for inexpensive muskets.
    The doglock with french butt and 114 cm length is the
    standard 'short' dragoon musket for Katski's. All you need to add is
    a shoulder strap, and drill out the vent (shipped sealed).
    The matchlock is the same I bought several years ago. It is a solid
    reenactor's 'munition quality' (e.g., government issue... not fancy)
    musket. shipping cost is about 50 BP.

    wheellock carbine
    Various: Albion Arms (England) very nice but a bit expensive.
    If you can do a kit, that is are a VERY competent amateur gunsmith... we are talking about tempering springs yourself, and doing lots of metalwork and woodwork... try the Rife Shoppe.


    cartridge box none. Small or F&I war type. See diGrasse/images/ArtilleryKontuz.jpg and design of same.
    G. Godwin http://www.gggodwin.com/
    Dragoon box is close, but don't like the belt
    Rob Madden, contact through Jan W.
    small pouch, money purse etc. optional Various haversack optional jewelry and insignia optional armor none see hussar and pancerni descriptions Hussar armor and other neat stuff, contact Eric's Hussar supply shop
    http://www.polishhussarsupply.com/ or Radek http://strony.wp.pl/wp/radoslaw_siko...ml/glowna.htmlor also see kkart http://www.kkart.cz/
    Tack none The McClellan cavalry saddle seems close as a modern saddle easily available as a repro. The central American and 'paso' saddles seem even more accurate. Various, also Radek has a Polish source for saddles and caparisons - but the shipping cost for a saddle could be high.
    Information for new members
    For our unit, in our core 1673-1683 presentation, both the artillery and dragoons should have eastern-style outfits. This is a matter of concern (for historical authenticity), as both unit types are 'foreign style' (foreign autoraiment). As late as the 1650s, foreign autoraiment units wore uniforms of entirely western cut and detail. As costumes in the west became more similar to Polish costume - as in the case of 1670s French light cavalry hussars and dragoons explicitly adopting Hungarian or other eastern costume, the distinctly western character of the foreign autoraiment unit clothing began to fade. Rather than copying the uniquely western details of long coats 'of the Persian fashion', Polish military tailors allowed the costumes to show traditionally Polish detail, and later cut. The Artillery will have red with yellow trim coats, the dragoons serving as fusiliers will have green/yellow coats. Although an important scenario is 1683, we try to shoot for costumes of 1673. This is the time of the famous battle of Cochim, another great victory against the Turks, and will help ensure that our costume would fit reasonably well if we do a 'Potop' (late 1650s) period impression, as well as 1683.
    Dragoon, 1683, eastern style. Notice the cravat necktie, slightly loose pants, Polish boots, long coat. Weapons include a pair of pistols, short musket, and saber. To the right is the closest and best picture I can offer as a model for our dragoon uniform, except that our color is green, and the passamentrie button pattern on the breast is 3 sets of pairs (as per a documented 1674 fashion), rather than the even arrangement shown.
    For footwear, Polish style boots, western jackboots, shorter boots reaching the upper calf, and shoes combined with simple handmade leather gaiters are acceptable.
    Dragoons were commoners, and were organized the same way infantry were. 'Free companies' were often attached to artillery, and in the 1670s a special dragoon 'free company' was raised by Marcin Kantski, General of Artillery, specifically to provide field support to light artillery. Marcin Kantski had been a dragoon officer at various times in his distinguished career.

    Dragoon, 1683, western style, detail, by Angus McBride from Brzezinski, Polish Armies 1562-1696. (Pikeman in foreground) Based on copies of German watercolors made in 1680-1683. The dragoon to the right is from the 1690s.
    Note the jackboots, collar, and the relatively short coat - Western European features. The coat flaps are buttoned back , revealing the yellow lining. The coat is red. This man is from King Sobieski's guard dragoons. Guard dragoons in the Vienna campaign were under the command of the Queen's brother, Louis, Marquis d'Arquien. It is known that in 1646 they wore red coats with yellow linings, although their color in 1683 is not certain.
    Below, more dragoons, 2 from 1660s, rest from 1680s.

    I have few good pictures of artillerymen to show. Their clothing is known to have been of a mix of western and eastern styles. Most years, Crown artillerymen were in western outfits, but that was not always true, particularly after 1650, and as a private unit we would not necessarily be following that practice anyway. Each unit was issued cloth of a uniform color, although the color and cut was not consistent. According to Brzezinski, crews were issued zupan-like coats in preparation for the Vienna campaign. Horse Artillery crew would have been outfitted similarly to the dragoons.
    Left, Artilleryman in 1650s western outfit.
    Both dragoons and artillerymen were commoners. The infantry were as well, but officers and most of the cavalry were gentry or szlatchta (the western-style arqubusers and the 'true' cossacks were the main exceptions to this rule.)





    At left an officer over the gun, and at right artillerymen. From
    frontpiece of 'Artis magnae artilleriae pars prima" (1650) by Jan Casmir Siemienowicz.


    Right, artillerists from a bas-relief on the tomb of Jan Casmir Siemienowicz in a church in Paris. Note the Polish-style outfits to the right. (the bas-relief presents a battle in 1651 - Beresteczk).

    1640s-50s Artilleryman, with red sash; Fusiliers (fizylier) in red and
    gray coats (kolet).



    Artillery Uniform: In red with yellow trim:

    This coat is a kontuz, summer-weight, modeled by deceased member of the szlatchta (gentry). Note the cartridge box, the wheellock pistol key hanging from the cartridge box (or waistbelt), the riding whip. From mid 1600's, prob. about 1660.
    This is the design to be used for the kontuz-like uniform artillery coat, red with yellow trim. This is further detailed in the Patterns page, (except that the arm is NOT slit). The dragoon coat is similar (at least from the front) but has different details.
    We'll use this colpak (pron. 'cowpack') hat design, as well. Seems very typical for our period.

    Breeches: Not uniform; see Patterns page for acceptable variations.


    Polish Style Infantry - relevant because both artillerymen and dragoons are essentially infantry. Axes were almost universal among the infantry, and was a typical tool for an artillery piece.



    Engineer: with Astrolabe. Engineers and their equipment were typically part of the artillery train.




    CAVALRY IMPRESSIONS
    A variety of cavalry/nobility impressions can fit within the context of our unit, given the flexibility of our scenario, our educational mission, and the absence of other Commonwealth units that might have other specialties. We recommend that new members interested in a military impression, especially those without cavalry or substantial horsemanship experience, start as artillery crew or dragoon.
    Light Cavalry. In 1683 much of the light cavalry was Cossack or Tatar; this looks to be of the Polish variety. See also Rembrandt's Polish Rider, on the main page.


    Hussar and Pancerni Cavalry. The Panzer - mail armored medium cavalry- was the most numerous in Polish service. Lance, pistol, bow, and saber were the usual weapons. To the right is a view of a padded 'zupan' in red of the sort what would be worn under a Hussar's or Pancerni's armor.

    Infantry and Rieter. A very few western style rieters were in Polish service, although they were common in Swedish and Austrian service. We do not recommend a Rieter impression.

    Arqbuser: German style cavalry 1650-1690. Because they were armed with carbines, they were much used as skirmishers, along with dragoons. Left lower, modeled by Rotmiestrz Rysard Buzenowski. Substitute a 3-bar pot for this helmet, and it could be a picture of one of Cromwell's Ironsides.



    A thousand or so Polish Arqbusers were involved in the battle of Vienna. To the right, a mounted arqbuser (from Stĺlhandske's kavalleriregemente, an affiliated unit).



    wybraniec.jpg
    Polish infantry. He is wearing what appears to be a kontuz/zupan coat combination, but, as noted above, clothes worn by commoners were not called "zupan". If you were a peasant and put on a zupan, presto! - it no longer was a zupan, but a simple, normal coat - "sukna". The outer coat front is tucked into the belt. Note the collection of pipes in the hat, the gourd powder flask, thin haversack/blanket roll, lit match, and axe.

    This is a suitable foul-weather overcoat for any class - rich or poor
    Barka/ Gunya
    Equipment and Accessories

    Weapons
    Eastern recurve bow, standard equipment for most cavalry; on the right, the bow, of Turkish type, is unstrung; see the Archery page. Mace (buzdygan, a symbol of rank), hammer (nadjaick or obuch), Sabre. (from Zamoyski)
    The most appropriate saber for dragoons (artillery crew would prob. not carry a saber, but might have a short hanger) is 'Type III'. Cavalry or officers might use the karabella (Type II), type III, or Type I, although type Ia is a hussar style. For a detailed discussion of sabers,
    see my Sabre web site.
    Saber scabbards were leather-wrapped wood, with metal fixtures. Hangers were off the belt, itself usually leather, metal, or cloth. Most belts were 1-3 inches wide, rarely as wide a 3 inches. See Accessories
    Western style weapons such as hangers, rapiers and smallswords may fit depending on period.
    Firearms for artillery and dragoons include wheellocke, doglock, and snaphaunce pistols and carbines. The flintlock was invented in mid-century, and found much more rapid acceptance in the east than in the west. Generally, flintlocks of an earlier design are acceptable- even up to French & Indian war period for the end of our period (relief of Vienna). Shorter matchlock muskets are OK for dragoons, especially before the 1670s.

    I believe that a lot of dragoons would have had matchlocks even in 1683 (remember that they were truly 'mounted infantry', not the hybrid light cavalry that they were becoming in western armies). However, it is unlikely that these would have been assigned to artillery duty (barrels of powder and lit match, bad combination). Even in the 1500s, when wheellock guns were rare and extremely expensive, they were used by the artillery guards and crew. This is likely a point we will have to overlook, since we have access to more matchlocks than wheellocks.
    To the left is an illustration of a pistol or small carbine cartridge case from a contemporary illustration. It seems to be slightly curved to the inside, so as to fit the body better. I suspect it was made out of wood with holes for the cartridges drilled out, but may have been made of tin. Either way, it was covered with leather, prob. medium weight. It has small gussets (prob. of a thinner leather) on the side of the cover, to keep out rain. It's strap goes over the head or shoulder. A small one like this would have 9-14 cartridges in two rows, or 11 as shown. The cartridge was made of paper. Usually they included a bullet (ball), although at this time sometimes the balls were kept loose in a separate pouch.
    Cases could be very fancy, with facings of chased silver plates, sometimes set with jewels. This would be appropriate for a moderately wealthy noble.
    Armor
    An extremely wide range of armor applies to Polish armies. At a time when mail was unused in the west, mail remained popular with the cavalry.
    Mail tended to be made of bigger rings than western mail, and allowed the color of the zupan to show through. So, buy the cheaper 8mm rings, not the expensive 6mm ring armor!

    The plate armor of the hussars tended to be made up in segments, and used a lot of brass fitting and trimmings. The reproduction armor to the left is owned by our group.

    At right, a quite typical panzer medium cavalry mail suit. Panzer cavalry was the most numerous type in Polish service throughout the XVII century. Note the figwood target.
    The famous wings were also used by Tatars and some light cavalry, who usually attached the wings to the saddles (see picture below, under Horse Tack).





    Peasant, Townsman and Female Costume (and other military outfits) Are Illustrated in the General Costume Page
    Horse Tack is illustrated in the General Costume Page
    Camp to the right is a layout of a Polish 17th C. hussar banner's camp, at upper part is the rotmistrz and lieutenant, with their several wagons, large tent, and space for their many retainers, below are the other comrades, some with several retainers, some with only 2. Note especially that horses are kept with their riders, in tent stables, rather than away from the camp on a line, as in western practice. Below is a sub-camp for a wealthy comrade with about 3-5 retainers and 6 or so servants - stables for 8 good horses, and several other riding and draft horses would be elsewhere.
    The Turks had similar camps, keeping horses with the riders.

  19. #19
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Firearms were a basic weapon of the hussar, and readily available from the 1570s on. It is possible to say that there were three kinds of firearms: short, medium and long. However, long firearms such as matchlock muskets were not used from horseback. In contrast short weapons – pistols - were carried in abundance as a matter of course, in pairs of holsters over the fore part of the saddle and across the horse's back. The ‘medium’ length weapons – harquebus carbines with a maximum length of about one meter - were also designed to be used from horseback, and were usually carried by a sling over the shoulder to allow for single-handed operation.

    (It should be noted that the term ‘harquebus’ (a.k.a. ‘arquebus’) sometimes means archaic matchlocks of the XV and XVI century, and in another context, ‘modern’ XVII C cavalry wheellock and snaphaunce carbines.)
    All cavalry of this period carried pistols. An edict of King Stephan Batory in the 1570s required every hussar to carry at least a brace of pistols; 4 pistols became customary fairly early, and carrying 6 was a common practice. ‘Comrade’ Hussars of the front rank, who carried the lance, did not carry the harquebus normally; it was more common for the retainers in the rear ranks to be armed with them; however this was a latter development, perhaps not until the mid-1680s. The arquebuser cavalry of course carried the harquebus throughout the 17th C., as did many dragoons and pancers, and some light cavalry.
    Firearms use resulted from a deep acquaintance of their weaknesses and strengths. They were a major contributor to unit effectiveness, but at least in the hussar’s case, were seldom decisive alone, in the absence of a follow-up of cold steel combat.
    The efficiency of short firearms was low. They used small loads of powder, small shot, and had low range and poor accuracy. Effective use was limited to about twenty meters, and preferably less. The hussars treated them only as secondary weapons. However, by allowing an attack from a slight distance, the hussar exposed himself only to fire, not directly to blows.
    The hussar and other cavalry used long guns when they fought on foot. This requires explanation. That the hussars fought on foot can, at first, seem surprising, but consider the many type of fighting that might be called upon – at night, in sieges, in ambush, or if the hussar’s camp were attacked. For example in the battle of Chociem 1621, the hussars fought many days from behind fieldworks against the besieging Turks. Pasture for horses was cut off , and the horses not eaten by the men were soon in bad shape from hunger, and were not suitable for the saddle. Eight thousand elite hussars, in a dangerous situation when each soldier mattered, were expected to pull their weight even without horses. Since firearms were most effective when long, a few muskets were generally in each post’s gear. However, the musket’s use was not limited to such an extreme situation. Even if the hussar comrade and his retainers fought on horseback, the servants were expected to keep guard over the camp. While the servants’ normal duty was to act as teamsters and to make camp, prepare food, and take care of horses they also stood guard. (Although camp servants were not counted as soldier, they took part in battles sometimes, in defense of the personal camp particularly, and rarely, in assaults on fortified opponents ). As a result, muskets and sometimes other, even larger weapons (‘wall guns’ or Hakowice, from use from the tabor wagons) had a place in all cavalry outfits.
    (Hussar and pancer posts usually were accompanied by one or several tabor wagons)
    After this longish explanation of scope, lets proceed with a description of situational use of firearms.
    First let's concentrate on short weapons. Hussars, like all contemporary cavalry, used wheellock weapons (or sometimes snaphaunce or dog-locks, early forms of flintlocks). So, they had at least one advantage against matchlock-armed infantry: the weapon was always ready to shoot, whereas matchlocks, even if loaded, required the presence of lit match – and only men on guard duty or ready on a field of battle carry lit match, given its burn rate and the huge quantity of match consumed. A no less important advantage was that only one hand was required for shooting. These two features allowed this weapon’s use by cavalry, who usually had one hand engaged in controlling the horse. Advantages were compensated with some significant difficulties. This weapon was, because of its complexity, very expensive as well as very tricky to use. The lock easily failed. The pyrite crumbled easily in normal operation, and sometimes the pyrite shattered or became misaligned, or the mechanism was obstructed by powder residue. Contemporary black powder left behind ash as a byproduct of incineration, and the chemical substances caused corrosion. So, a mistreated weapon could be rendered unfit for use after several weeks. The delicate mechanism of wheellock was vulnerable to mechanical injuries, and in battle the weapon could easily fall into disarray. It is possible to follow the principle of operation of wheellock through the following drawing.

    Wheellock ‘kolowy zamek’ (or ‘krzosowy’ or ‘krecony’) Schema

    Wheellock operation relies on the friction of a steel wheel rubbing against a stone (iron pyrite - ‘pirytu’) which creates a spark, igniting the priming powder, which is kept in place by a pan cover. The iron pyrite stone is placed into a vice-like cock, cushioned by a piece of leather. The first step in firing is to to lower the cock until the pyrite contacts the the wheel, or the pan cover depending on the specific design. The wheel connects to the mainspring through a chain composed of a few flat-links, which are attached to the wheel's axle. The wheel is cocked with a key, a sort of spanner or wrench that turns a nut, which rotates the wheel in the opposite direction. The wheel is locked in place when cocked by a latch. When the trigger is pulled, the latch is released and 1) the pan cover moves exposing the priming powder, and 2) the wheel spins, scraping against the iron pyrite. This generates sparks, exactly like flicking your Bic (cigarette lighter).
    An exemplary wheellock pistol is presented below, it is transported in the hussar’s holster.
    Two pistols and a winding key from the first half of the XVII C (lengths are 42.5 cm and 45.5cm). Powder flask from the second half of the XVII C.


    Wheellock pistol (above) and wheellock arkebuz (below)


    As I indicated above, the hussars also carried the medium-length firearms on horseback. This became formalized after 1689 when Hetman Jablonowski ordered hussar retainers (rear-rankers) to carry harquebuses instead of lance. It boosted the fire power of the hussars, while the men with the lance ensured that the banner still had great ‘breaking power’. The following photo illustrates a wheellock/cavalry harquebus(rusznica).
    ‘Bandolet’, cavalry or dragoon carbine from XVIIw. With wheellock and butt of French style. Weapon’s caliber is 15 mm, full length 114 cm. Stock from dark wood.

    Let's proceed to long weapons not carried on horseback (except by dragoons, who were mounted infantry).
    This picture shoes a 17th C. flintlock short musket with shoulder strap - classic dragoon configuration.

    Matchlock and long firelock weapons were also used by cavalry, who had to do all sorts of tasks, but were transported normally on the tabor wagons. The following illustrates comparative sizes of a cavalry carbine, infantry musket, and a very large hackbut or 'wall gun' - usually fired from fortifications or mounted on tabor wagons or boats (and typically crewed by 2 men).


    Schema of matchlock

    The matchlock uses a slowmatch to ignite the priming powder, and fire the weapon. It works like this. The priming powder is held in place by the pan cover, which also protects from stray sparks. The slowmatch is placed into the jaws of the cock, hot end toward the pan (the slow match smolders red, sort of like a cigarette end). The cock is ‘tried’ or lowered a bit to help confirm that it is properly aligned with the pan. On the command to ‘ready’, the musket is raised (eyes should be BELOW pan level!) and the pan is opened, exposing the powder. Then, on the command to fire, the trigger is squeezed slowly, which lowers the hot match into the powder. The matchlock was simple, easy to maintain, and cheap to produce. The primitive mechanism was resistant to mechanical injuries. It survived in European military use into the early 18th C. However, it had serious defects. It required several special handling steps to fire, including lighting the match in advance, keeping the burning match in hand at all times without allowing it to burn holes into ones’ person or igniting ones’ powder supply; placing the match into the cock, and so on. Many of these steps required two hands. So, even a weapon that had been pre-loaded was not convenient for use by cavalry.
    The procedure for loading a weapon was very time-consuming, and the loading speed for a careful job allowed only 1 or at most 2 shots per minute (although infantry skirmishers could fire 3 shots per minute, taking all possible short cuts.) The rate of fire was considerably lower at the start of the XVI century – by some reports, each rank took 10-12 -min. to prepare to fire.
    Efficiency also depended on the kind and period, the oldest matchlock harquebus of the XV C. had a maximum range of about 100-150 M. the Arkebuz matchlock (‘lontowy’), the successor to the harquebus (‘rusznicy’), had an range of 150-200 M. the Musket (Muszkiet), the weapon which dominated battlefields from the end of the XVI C. could even shoot 250 –300 M and was generally about as effective as later firearms (the flintlock improved firing under certain adverse conditions, but under favorable condition the matchlock ignition was just as good, and the speed and size and flight of the musket ball was essentially unchanged until the invention of the minie ball and the rifled musket). However, the above range values represent only a theoretical maximum, and the actual effective range was far lower (usually under 50 M) due to their low accuracy. The caliber (from 10 to over 20 mm), different quality and load size of gun powder affected range and penetrating power. Certainly the biggest musket could pierce armor at 100 M. Shot was considerably weaker from the arquebus and harquebus - e.g. the best period armor protected against harquebus fire, especially if at long range or if the blow was glancing.
    All the weapons discussed had a large number of misfires, or rather ‘duds’ – where aiming a loaded weapon and pulling a trigger resulted in nothing happening, except for a soft ‘click’ sound followed (one might imagine) by a somewhat louder curse. This reliability factor also affected the use of firearms, particularly in the personal combat as experienced by the cavalry.
    The final photo compares the wheellock and matchlock weapons.

    Bibliography
    "Husaria" Jerzy Cichowski, Andrzej Szulczynski
    "Pistolety i rewolwery XVI-XIX wieku" Roman Matuszewski
    "Muszkiety, arkebuzy, karabiny..." Roman Matuszewski
    "Slownik uzbrojenia historycznego (Dictionary of Historic Arms)" Michal Gradowski,Zdzislaw Zygulski jun.
    "Historia piechoty polskiej (History Polish Infantry) do 1864r." Jan Wimmer

  20. #20
    carricanta's Avatar Going Nowhere Fast!
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    A Coruńa, Galiza
    Posts
    1,428

    Default Re: Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Discussion Thread

    Sorry Salvo... a poor information about the XVIII century

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •