The Star Captains

 ITVx is currently streaming the old Hornblower series. It provides a handy backdrop for my painting, as my usual poison, Turkish TV, requires me to read the subtitles. It's a cracking series, first shown in 1998. They used three actual sailing ships and eleven scale models for the bigger battle scenes. It inspired me to start a book that has been languishing on my to-read pile for some time, which I picked up in a second-hand bookshop. This is Tom Wareham's study of frigate command in the Napoleonic Wars.

I read a lot of books about the Royal Navy, particularly frigates, while researching my book on HMS Ambuscade. The first British-built HMS Ambuscade, a 32-gun frigate, fought in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. It had a mixed war, being captured and then recaptured. The frigate in the age of sail was the Royal Navy’s glamour ship, big enough to carry significant firepower but fast enough to evade larger enemies. They were the light cavalry of the seas, patrolling, scouting and above all, fighting. As Admiral Nelson said, they were ‘the eyes of the fleet’. 

There are many books about frigates, but most understandably focus on the frigate actions. Individual frigate-versus-frigate actions were actually rare; more typically, they were involved in capturing smaller ships and merchantmen. Battles between frigate squadrons were even rarer, one exception being the Battle of Lissa, which I covered in my book on the Napoleonic Wars in the Adriatic.

This book is somewhat different. The author has done an exceptional job researching the data on frigates. Mostly using the Admiralty List Books, supplemented by Steel's Navy Lists and Pitcairn Jones' List of Commissioned Sea Officers. I had to scour the National Archives for just one ship, so covering all the frigates is no mean feat. The result is a fascinating breakdown of the officers who sailed frigates. For example, frigate captains (670 of them in the Napoleonic Wars) were promoted more quickly, suggesting that they displayed the qualities that enhance promotion prospects. By the end of the wars, they could also be very young, between 23 and 26 years old. 

The median length of service was 3 years and 6 months, although this hides enormous variations, and the Admiralty appears to have had a policy of limiting the length of time a captain could serve on frigates. The dangers of the sea and disease were more likely to kill you than the enemy, but frigates were more likely to suffer from natural weather hazards given their service, and this partly explains the shorter service periods. There was no shortage of applicants, as although frigate captains were paid less, they were more likely to get prize money and had more freedom to operate independently. More than half would command more than one frigate.

This is just a sample of the data analysed in this book. If you are looking for the stories of naval actions, this is probably not the book for you. However, if you want to know more about how frigates were commanded, this is an invaluable source.

It also reminds me to play more Black Seas.

The Heretic

 My latest bedtime reading is The Heretic by David Pilling. It is another grim story, and after Vlad, I really must review my choice of bedtime reading! This is a fictional account of an English mercenary who ends up in Bohemia during the Hussite wars.

The Hussite Wars (1419–1436) were a series of religious and political conflicts in the Kingdom of Bohemia that followed the execution of the Czech reformer Jan Hus in 1415. His teachings, which criticised corruption in the Catholic Church and called for reform, inspired a strong movement among his followers known as the Hussites. After Hus’s death, tensions between reformers and Catholic authorities escalated into open warfare. The Hussites successfully resisted several crusades launched against them by forces loyal to the Holy Roman Empire and the papacy, using innovative tactics such as war wagons and disciplined infantry formations. They were led in the first stage by the outstanding tactician Jan Zizka, who was blinded in combat. The wars ended with a compromise that allowed moderate Hussite practices in Bohemia, marking one of the earliest major challenges to the authority of the medieval Catholic Church and foreshadowing later movements like the Protestant Reformation.

The story is told through an English mercenary, John Page. His narrative covers the years 1421-24. This is book two in the series, and he arrives in Bohemia after serving in the English army in France under Henry V. He witnesses the blinding of Zizka and takes part in some of the most famous battles, such as Kutná Hora and Malesov. His tale provides a brief snapshot of conditions in Bohemia at this time: the ever-present threat of war and invasion, the relentless fanaticism of splinter groups such as the Táborites, and the desperate battles, in which armies of peasants roared hymns as they drove the flower of European knighthood from the field. Above all, Page highlights the military genius of one man, Jan Zizka, still celebrated in the Czech Republic today as a national hero.

I didn't know much about the Hussite Wars, so this is a good introduction. It is fast-paced and well-written, with a hero that is just flawed enough to be credible. It readily served as inspiration for our midweek game. I found enough war wagons and generic 15mm figures to field a Hussite and German army in a game of DBA. The German army was led by Sigismund, the Holy Roman Emperor. This is a character I am familiar with, as in 1396, Sigismund led the Crusade of Nicopolis but was decisively defeated by the Ottoman Empire. Pilling is pretty dismissive of him as a ruler and battlefield commander, which may be justified. However, his major failures (such as his handling of the Hussite movement) are now generally considered by most scholars to be the result of a lack of financial resources and other constraints, rather than personal failings.

I was playing the Hussites, and I had little idea of how to use war wagons, which make up half the army. So, I chose the best available terrain and formed them into a line, as they appear to have done historically. I used the remaining troops on the flanks or in reserve.

My opponent shifted his main strike force of German knights to attack my left flank and brought a bombard forward to shoot at the war wagons.

As you can see from the above, his bombard blew a hole in my line. In fact, he destroyed all five war wagons with just five shots. I did reinforce the left flank and succeeded in killing Sigismund and all his knights, but it wasn't enough. Even allowing for the dice, I should have got out and attacked the bombard. It outranged the war wagons, and artillery destroys them fairly easily under DBA rules. I think it is known as a learning experience!

Bolton Castle

 I thought I had visited almost all of the castles in this part of North Yorkshire, but looking for a stop on our way home, I realised I hadn't visited Bolton Castle. I did walk to it many years ago when staying in Hawes, but it was closed.

The castle was built by Lord Scrope in 1379, although it took 20 years to finish. The Scrope (pronounced "scroop") family were originally Norman and became a powerful dynasty in the north. One was Henry V's Treasurer (a thankless task that one), and another fought at Towton. The castle was set on fire by Henry VIII when the 8th Baron reluctantly supported the Pilgrimage of Grace. It was also one of the castles used to imprison Mary Queen of Scots. The major damage was done by a Parliamentary siege during the civil wars, and it never properly recovered before restoration work in the modern era.

The castle is a mix of intact and partially intact rooms. There is a decent cafe, and a living history event was starting when we arrived. Bird of Prey displays are also held.

During the Napoleonic Wars, volunteer regiments were raised for home defence. The local version was the Dales Volunteers, and one of their cannons is on display.

We stopped off at Richmond on the way. My wife had interior design shops in mind, but that meant I could make a return visit to the excellent Green Howards Regimental Museum and the impressive Richmond Castle.

Of course, there is always a Balkan link, if you look closely enough 😂.

Bosniaks and the Austro-Hungarian Empire

 This is Dževada Šuśko's study of how Bosniaks adapted to the Austro-Hungarian Empire's occupation of Bosnia in 1878 and its formal annexation in 1908.

Bosnia and Herzegovina fell under Austro-Hungarian rule in 1878, when the Congress of Berlin approved the occupation of the Bosnia Vilayet, which officially remained part of the Ottoman Empire. Three decades later, in 1908, Austria-Hungary provoked the Bosnian crisis by formally annexing the occupied zone, establishing the Condominium of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the joint control of Austria and Hungary.

Bosnia was different to other parts of the Balkans occupied by the Ottoman Empire in that it had a large Muslim population, known as Bosniaks, who formed an effective border community against Austrian expansion in the Balkans for centuries. As they looked to the Ottoman caliphate, they were not driven by the nationalism that gripped many other Balkan states in the 19th century. This study examines how the shift in power from Ottoman to Austro-Hungarian rule in 1878 affected the Bosnian people, who suddenly found themselves under European rather than Islamic authority, and how they navigated this transition in terms of faith and loyalty. Of course, not everyone did, and there were waves of emigration.

The Austrians had historically made a mess of their Balkan invasions, and the Catholic state had a mixed record in dealing with parts of the empire that professed a different faith. However, Bosnia was given the status of a separate entity within the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Despite initial mistrust, a rapport of sorts with the Austria-Hungary occupiers was reached to the extent that Bosniaks even began enlisting in the Empire’s military following their religious demands of halal food, Friday prayers (Jumu‘ah), Ramadan, etc., being accommodated. This led to a complex interaction, with a degree of loyalty engendered toward the Austrian state, as well as toward the Islamic faith and its cultural heritage.

This book developed out of a PhD thesis, so there is a lengthy discussion of the theoretical framework and sources that the general reader may want to skip. There is a chapter that covers who the Bosniaks were and their development since the Ottoman invasion. There are lots of myths about this, and the chapter outlines the key developments. With the conquest of Bosnia by the Ottoman Empire, adherents of the Bosnian Church and a part of the Catholic and Orthodox population converted to Islam. Bosniaks are not left behind Turks, as some persist in arguing. The impact of developments in the surrounding states is equally important, as Bosnia did not exist in isolation, despite the mountainous terrain.

The Bosniaks were torn between showing loyalty to the Ottoman Empire, to an autonomous state of Bosnia, or to Austria-Hungary. Their main fear was losing their religious identity. The meat of this study is how the Bosniaks accommodated to the new rule and adopted Central European standards. The first conscription law was promulgated in 1881, and the author outlines how the Austrians imposed very different conditions of service on Bosniaks. The Ottoman state did not object to conscription, and Islamic scholars approved of the conditions of service. This took the steam out of possible revolts. During WW1, Bosnian Serbs took sides with Serbia, whereas Bosniaks and Croats sided with the Austro-Hungarian military. Austria, being allied with the Ottoman Empire, obviously helped. The Shaykh al- Islam issued a fatwa to proclaim a jihad, arguing that Russia had proven itself to be the enemy of Islam and Muslims. Its politics were supported by England and France and aimed at destroying the Ottoman Empire as well as the Muslim populations in the Balkans. 

Bosniak soldiers not only protected the borders of their home country, but they were also deployed to the Russian and Italian fronts. Some Austrian officers argued that the Bosniaks were a military elite within the Austro-Hungarian army. They were praised because they were the youngest, described as the most courageous, cooperative, cordial, and persistent of men, extremely loyal to their task and work. 

This might appear to be a rather specialist study, but there is plenty of material of wider interest that explains the role of Bosniaks in later conflicts, including WW2 and the Balkan wars of the 1990s. As the author concludes, "History bears witness that as long as their religious identity and practice, as well as the territorial integrity of their home country Bosnia and Herzegovina, and mother tongue has not been endangered, Bosniaks have adapted to new political, social and educational systems." It is also available as a free ebook, so no risk in giving it a go.

I do have some WW2 Bosniaks as Warlord do head conversions, but not for WW1. I can't see a range, so it looks like another conversion.

I do have Austrians of the period.

We shouldn't forget that the 'spark' for WW1 happened in Sarajevo. This is in the museum at the site of the assassination. Lovely city to visit.

Moldavia and Wallachia in the Phanariot Era

 My holiday reading has been Claudiu-Ion Neagoe's new book for Helion on the military organisation of Moldavia and Wallachia in the Phanariot Era, which he defines as 1709-1821.

The Phanariots were a class of wealthy Greek merchants (of mostly noble Byzantine descent), influential in the administration of the Ottoman Empire's Balkan domains in the 18th century. They usually built their houses in the Phanar quarter of Constantinople to be near the court of the Patriarch, who (under the Ottoman millet system) was recognised as the spiritual and secular head (millet-bashi) of the Orthodox subjects. Moldavia and Wallachia were vassal states of the Ottoman Empire, rather than being fully incorporated into the Ottoman system. The Ottomans had traditionally appointed a local prince as the ruler of both states. However, the policy changed due to the rebellion of local princes associated with the rise of Imperial Russia's power under Peter the Great and the presence of the Habsburg Empire on the Carpathian border with the principalities. This led to the appointment of Phanariots, who were regarded as more loyal and were regularly changed. Eleven different princes served in Wallachia alone during this period.

This book focuses on the military organisation, and the author has undertaken an impressive search of the primary sources to identify the units involved. The Ottomans never really trusted the Wallachians and Moldavians, so the overall size of the armed forces was modest, mostly for internal security and tax collecting. Larger forces could be raised during wartime. For example, during the 1737 war, 6,000 troops were raised to defend Wallachia, in support of the Ottoman units based there.

There was a bewildering variety of troop types, although each unit was fairly small. There was a similar approach in both principalities, with a heavy reliance on mercenaries. The traditional troop types declined during this period. For example, the 6,000 troops raised in Moldavia for the 1737 war included Tatars and Turks as well as Moldavians. Tatars were used as couriers, and Cossacks were also recruited, although this may refer to how they were dressed rather than to recruitment from Cossack lands. Serbian infantry (Seymen) were musket-armed foot, and Turkish cavalry (Besli) were prized over the traditional Moldavian and Wallachian horse. There are excellent colour plates of the main troop types.

The traditional view is that Ottomans insisted on a small military because they didn't trust local recruitment. However, this study found no evidence to support that assertion. The constraints were primarily financial, as the Phanariot princes had to refund the cost of their appointment. 

This is a reference book for those interested in the period, rather than a narrative history for the general reader. Very useful for me, though, even if they didn't play a significant role in the fighting. For the wargamer, there are some exotic troop types that will at least look good on the tabletop. The mercenaries can come from Ottoman forces of the period. The locals can fairly easily be converted from the Greek and Aldanian figure ranges. I have a few leftover Old Glory Albanians, which should work out fine.

Helmsley Castle

We are down in North Yorkshire, and stopped off at the very pleasant market town of Helmsley on the way down. While my wife toured the shops, I made for the excellent castle, one of the largest in the area. I haven't visited it for more than 15 years.

The castle was constructed of wood around 1120. In 1186, Robert de Ros began work on converting the castle to stone. It was to stay with the family throughout the Middle Ages. It was sold in the Tudor period, and a mansion was built within the walls.

The castle was built on an outcrop of rock on the north bank of the River Rye. The main ward, roughly rectangular, was surrounded by high curtain walls with towers at the corners. The castle keep, known as the East Tower, lay about halfway along the east wall. The castle was surrounded by two deep, steep-sided ditches separated by a bank. The main gate to the castle was in the south-east corner of the curtain wall. This gate was protected by the massive Southern Barbican, which stood on an enlarged section of the bank between the two ditches.

Southern barbican 

It was a Royalist stronghold in North Yorkshire during the First English Civil War. It was besieged by Parliamentarian forces in September 1644 and surrendered on 22 November after a two- to three-month siege. The damage you can see today is largely a result of the deliberate slighting of the castle after the siege. It was later sold to the Duncombe family, who built a nearby mansion, and the castle was allowed to deteriorate, with locals helping themselves to much of the stonework.

Despite that, there is still plenty to see, including the keep and Tudor mansion. You can also get a good impression of how strong this castle was. This is good farming country that, in the Middle Ages, could have supported a large castle. Well worth a look.

Vlad

 This is C.C. Humphreys' fictional take on the life of Vlad Tepes, better known as 'The Impaler' or Dracula. This was my bedtime reading, although perhaps not the wisest choice for that time of night.

Vlad was a 15th-century ruler of Wallachia (in present-day Romania). Born in 1431 into the noble Drăculești family, he spent part of his youth as a hostage in the Ottoman Empire, an experience that shaped his later hostility toward Ottoman expansion and, in particular, Mehmet the Conqueror. Vlad ruled Wallachia during several turbulent reigns, most notably from 1456 to 1462, when he sought to consolidate power, enforce strict order, and defend his territory against the Ottomans. He became infamous for his preferred method of punishment, impalement, which he used on enemies, criminals, and political rivals, earning a fearsome reputation across Europe. Despite his cruelty, which was far from unique, he was an effective ruler who brought stability and resisted foreign domination. Wallachia suffered throughout its history under a nobility (boyars) who rarely looked beyond their own self-interest. His reputation also suffered as a result of a medieval spin doctor campaign against him. 

When I first visited Romania, as a Brit brought up reading Bram Stoker's fictional vampire Count Dracula, I was surprised to discover that Vlad was a national hero. Stoker did very little research on the real Dracula; it was more a case of finding a suitable character and setting. You can ignore the tourist attraction of Dracula's Castle, which he almost certainly didn't even visit. But his birthplace and other sites in Transylvania are worth a visit.

Humphreys broadly follows what we know of Vlad's life, although his being present at the death of Mehmet the Conqueror is a bit of a stretch! He largely adds the dialogue you would expect to see in historical fiction. He uses the format of a historical look back, in the form of an inquisition interrogating those closest to him. It is a reasonably sympathetic view of his life, which I think is justified. It is also a great read, one of those examples of how history can be stranger and often better than fiction. It was a truly remarkable life, well told.

I visited his alleged burial place last year. Probably a myth, but a lovely spot.

And some of my 15mm Wallachian army of the period, with a tasteless but unavoidable camp!

1956: The Year That Changed Britain

 1956, The Year That Changed Britain by Francis Beckett and Tony Russell was my library pick for the month. A bit self-indulgent, as it is the year of my birth, but as I understandably recall nothing, I thought it might be interesting. 

In the first chapter, there was something I did recall, albeit from later childhood. The most-watched TV series in January 1956 (78% audience share) was ITV's The Adventures of Robin Hood, starring Richard Greene, the very best in the genre. The song "Robin Hood, Robin Hood, riding through the glen, Robin Hood, Robin Hood, with his band of men," stuck with me all these years. Was there a political message about the redistribution of wealth to undermine McCarthyism in the USA? At the other extreme, 1956 was the end of communist idealism for a generation with the Soviet invasion of Hungary. A historical event that the current pro-Putin Hungarian leader has forgotten. And on the subject of great political causes, the last Prime Minister of Republican Spain died in Paris in 1956.

On a more practical note, it was the year that double yellow lines appeared on our streets. Cursed by us all sometimes, but essential to keep our roads clear with ever-increasing car use. And on the subject of law enforcement, it was the first year that no life was taken by the judicial system. Parliament voted in favour of abolishing the death penalty in a motion, but it wasn't abolished in legislation until 1965. The Clean Air Act was passed as a response to the 1952 London smog, which killed 4,000 people. A reminder for climate change deniers that environmental legislation is both necessary and not new.

A special interest of mine, Cyprus, kicked off in 1956 with a bomb discovered under the bed of the governor, and Makarios was arrested for fostering terrorism. Shootings and other acts followed, led by EOKA. However, the big military event of 1956 was the Suez Crisis. Very topical today, given that it had to be abandoned because of US pressure. Trump doesn't read anything, certainly not history, but he has been reminded of it today. At the time 100 Tory MPs tabled a motion, 'deploring the attitude of the United states', hard to imagine that today either. When Eden resigned, and Macmillan took over, he was supposed to have telegraphed Ike saying, 'Over to you!', by which he meant the Middle East was now the US's responsibility.

The Lancaster bomber made its last operational flight in 1956. Britain also took its first steps toward energy security in 1956, another topical issue, when Calder Hall nuclear power station was switched on.

In culture, 1956 was the year when the theatre moved out of its comfortable middle-class blanket with plays like Look Back in Anger. Theatre critics like Kenneth Tynan (an obscure relative of mine) reflected the new mood of radical theatre productions. Granada TV was the first ITV franchise in northern England, and I can remember its distinctive logo from growing up in Liverpool. Tommy Trinder got sacked for offensive jokes, which were pretty inoffensive by later standards, and many were about my football team, Fulham, which he part-owned and later chaired.

In sport, this was the year of Jim Laker's still-standing record wicket tally: 19 wickets for 90 runs against Australia. Oh, for another Jim Laker today! Premium Bonds were launched in 1956, and I do remember being given one for my birthday. Not impressed, as I would rather have had the cash for comics. However, some £47 billion has been invested in them. 

I am now convinced that I was born in the year that changed Britain 😆. The author concluded that the lasting legacy of 1956 is the decline of deference. He may be right about that at least.

I have never gamed Suez, but here is an early Turkish intervention in the Cyprus conflict. My favourite jet aircraft is the F-100 Super Sabre.

Strategies of Ukrainian War

 This is a new book by the Russian historian Vladimir Shirogorov that examines the conflict among Russia, Poland, and the Ottoman Empire over the steppe from 1500 to 1800.

He starts by describing the seat of the conflict, Ukraine, sadly, a region all too familiar to modern readers. Although he rightly draws in a much larger territory than the modern country. Poland, the Balkans and the Caucasus all played a part, a region I called the Pontic Steppe in my recent book. The combatants' strategies did not recognise it as an integral entity and fought over what the author, interestingly, calls the Wild Fields. It may have been 'wild', but it was occupied by Tatars and Cossacks, as well as the Ottomans on the fringes and was increasingly subject to Russian colonisation. He argues that Poland adopted the ideology of Sarmatism, reflecting the ideals of that race of warriors, and also as justification for the right to possess Slavic peasant serfs.

While there is a narrative history of the numerous conflicts, strategy is the lens that runs through the book. The problem with this approach is a tendency to fit the historical narrative into these strategies, when history can be messy. While I, of all people, agree that this is a fascinating region, I fear the author goes too far in arguing, 'The dynamic south of eastern Europe seized the subcontinent's strategic agenda while its stagnant north shrank.' He certainly overstates the impact on Western European states, whose primary focus was not on the Wild Fields. Even Russia, at least since Peter the Great, started to look West, although I accept that the Wild Fields became the driving strategy as the period progressed. The Ottomans certainly had more on their plate than simply this territory. What I agree with in the author's analysis is the absence of ethnicity as the underlying ideology and the importance of local interests in driving their empire's strategy.

There is a lot of detail in the narrative history, and that is this book's strength. It covers a broad sweep of history that has been covered in parts, but rarely in the context it deserves. The Cossack raids on Constantinople and the early Azov campaigns are good examples of this. He also does not ignore the importance of economic factors, including food supply and slave trading. Wallachia and Moldavia were vital suppliers of food for Constantinople, and the interruption of these supplies during the Long War in 1595-1606 led the Ottomans to seek a replacement in Ukraine's fertile soil. The fortress at Ochakov was not built there by accident.

I am always grateful to Russian historians who pass their knowledge on in English, having just spent days painfully translating some older Russian texts. However, this book could have done with more editorial assistance. The text is incorrect in places and often clunky and hard to comprehend. I thought it was a case of using too much jargon, but it is often just the wrong word choice. That is a shame, because there is much to learn in this book if you are interested in the region. I fear the general reader might give up.

Ukraine. It has to be Cossacks!

Putin's Mercenaries

 This is the story of Russian private security companies that gave Putin a flexible and deniable military arm as he began to intervene, not just in states on Russia's borders, but further afield in Syria and Africa. These most famously included the Wagner Group and its leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin, who launched a botched mutiny against Putin's regime in 2023. It is written by the prolific Mark Galeotti, who is always worth reading on Russia.

He starts by reminding us that mercenaries are nothing new in Russian military history. The Cossacks are probably the most famous, but Russia recruited from tribes like the Kalmyks to help fight their wars in the 18th and 19th centuries. British, including many Scots, also found their way into Russian service. I suspect soldiers like Lacy, Gordon and Grieg would bristle at the mercenary tag. Soldier of fortune, or for the Jacobites, necessity, may be more accurate.

As serving as a mercenary or establishing such an organisation is banned under the Russian constitution and Criminal Code, Putin came up with a new concept, a commercial company with close links to his regime. The 'Little green men' were a key element of the invasion of Crimea and the Donbas. They were judged more reliable than the various militia warlords that sprang up during these and earlier conflicts. The author takes us through the development of these companies and the key players. In the Donbas, they all proved unable to achieve the breakthrough Putin sought, so regular Russian troops and their heavy equipment were deployed to the battle. After the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, they returned to the battlefield as Putin desperately needed more troops as his 'special operation' ground to a halt. Wagner recruited criminals, neo-Nazis, and pagans, amongst others, to send into the meat grinder.

In Syria, they were sent to prop up the regime of Bashar al-Assad, which, despite the support of Hezbollah and lots of Russian equipment, was losing the civil war. By 2016, Wagner had more than 1500 troops on the ground with support weapons. They fought against ISIS in the strategically important Palmyra area, scouting and then leading the attack, supported by Russian air power. This didn't come cheap. The Russians provided Wagner with some of the latest equipment, including T90 tanks. Wagner received around $170m dollars from the Russian state budget alone in 2016. This was unsustainable, so Wagner established a range of money-making schemes to defray costs. The first sign of tensions between Putin and Prigozhin came at Kasham, when the US brought enormous firepower down on Wagner forces (with up to 300 casualties) after being told by the Russians that none of their troops was involved.

Wagner had largely left Syria in 2018, but had already established itself in Africa, including Sudan, Libya, and the Central African Republic. They found a string of dictators, happy to pay for troops and other political services in return for gold and diamond concessions.

It all came to a sticky end when Prigozhin and his arch-enemy, Defence Minister Shoigu, clashed again in June 2023. Shoigu persuaded Putin to call up 300,000 conscripts, thereby making Wagner no longer essential and allowing its contracts to be ended. This led to a botched coup of sorts, with around 12,000 Wagner troops marching on Moscow (March of Justice). A sort of deal was negotiated, but Putin later decided to eliminate Prigozhin and incorporate the remnants of his forces into the Russian military. Prigozhin must have wisely kept away from windows, so his business jet was shot down and he was killed.

This is an interesting, if grim, story, well told, with lovely colour plates by Johnny Shumate. 

Some of my 20mm Russians

Borderlines

 I have always been interested in borders. The history of the Balkans is littered with examples of border disputes, revisions and the associated conflict. This book by Lewis Baston examines the history of Europe through 29 borders, and it's a fascinating read, not least because he visited most of them. 

Like most UK readers, I think of borders as our internal ones, even though they were once international. In my case, the Scottish Borders, which before the Union of the Crowns was a region of almost regulated conflict. The Welsh Marches were different, but the conflict was just as real. This book is about international borders across Europe, though I was more interested in those in Eastern Europe.

Borders can be a bridge between countries, but also a door keeping people out. A good example is Estonia, which is keeping its Russian border shut, while you can travel freely across the southern border into Latvia. Borders can also describe territorial revisionism, not simply the current political map of Europe. Nationalists in the Balkans are always drawing maps of 'greater' this or that, which purport to include ethnic groups that are in other countries. The Hungarian-Romanian border is an example of this. Historically, borders were not as fixed as they are today. Border communities could be areas of conflict, but also of cooperation. The Militargrenze and Bosnia are such areas.

The core of this book is the author's visits to famous and not-so-famous borders. In the north, he visits the barbed wire and tank traps that Estonia has built to deter Putin's expansionist Russia, and the Russia-Finland border, which stretches for 1,340km. Central Europe has some ironies. Hungary was the first to dismantle barriers and seek to join the EU, but now Orban has decided that barbed wire and division are a good thing. A detour to Cachtice on the Austria-Czechia-Slovakia border was a good opportunity to examine the myths and reality of the infamous Elisabeth Bathory. Today, visitors are positively encouraged to visit the castle!

The Ukraine-Russia boundary is a good example of states claiming 'historic' boundaries, when in reality their claims are simply a snapshot of history. If you look hard enough, almost any border claim can be justified. As Baston puts it, 'Old boundaries layer over each other like scar tissue.' In the periods I am currently writing about, the Cossacks and Tatars roamed over vast spaces between their empire masters, with little consideration of fixed borders. Catherine the Great had no concept of legal or even natural borders; she just expanded her empire in every direction possible. 

The best chapter in the book covers Galicia and Bukovina, which is today on the borders of Poland, Ukraine and Romania. In 1919, after the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the line was arbitrarily drawn by Lord Curzon. In the book's best line, 'There are few geopolitical situations that cannot be worsened by an Englishman brandishing a map and a pen.' On my visit to the Romania-Ukraine border last year, I didn't have time to get as far north as Chernivtsi, which looks like a fascinating place to visit. Its history is borderland par excellence.

The author concludes that 'Revising borders, even without evil intent, is a fool's errand. There is no ideal state of national borders.' Being obsessed with old borders, stirring up grievances, as Putin and Orban are, just makes everyone sadder, angrier and poorer. If there is one message from this brilliant book, it is to leave well alone.

Some of my Early Modern Croats who fought along a shifting border for centuries.

Ottoman

 My bedtime reading has been another historical fiction book I saved from my wife's paperback bookshelf cull on the understanding I would reread and donate. This is Alan Savage's take on the Ottomans from Mehmed the Conqueror to Lepanto.

The vehicle he uses is the Hawkwood family. This is a clever hook because most of us will know of Sir John Hawkwood (1320 – 1394), an English soldier who served as a mercenary leader or condottiero in Italy. He did have an illegitimate son named John, but sadly, he didn't arrive in Constantinople before the great siege. Savage has Hawkwood as a gunner, who comes to Constantinople to serve the Byzantines. However, he falls out with a powerful faction and has to flee the capital, with another of his sons being executed. His ship is forced to beach in Ottoman territory, and he is taken into Ottoman service. 

There is a tenuous link to history here, as the Ottomans had a renegade gunner who had originally offered his services to the Byzantines. He was a Hungarian (possibly Wallachian) named Orban. The sultan provided him with funds and materials to build a giant gun. He built it within three months at Adrianople, using sixty oxen to drag it to Constantinople. Orban also produced other, smaller cannons used by the Ottoman siege forces. It played an important, but not decisive role, in the successful 1453 siege. Orban died soon after and didn't create a dynasty.

Savage develops the Hawkwood family into an important Ottoman dynasty, leading armies on land and later on sea. They have a palace in Galata, and can benefit and fall foul of Ottoman politics across four generations of sultans. I won't spoil the story because, although it was first published in 1991, you can get a copy at a reasonable price. And I recommend you do because this is a cracking read. Historical fiction at its very best.

My 1453 renegade gunner in 28mm

Byzantine Soldier v Seljuk Warrior

 This is a timely new Osprey for me by Si Sheppard, as my current Turkish TV addiction is Alp Arslan - The Great Seljuks. I have mixed views on the 'Combat' series, as they often cover armies that already have a dedicated title. However, for wargamers who often build both armies for a conflict, the series is helpful, and in this case, while there are several titles covering the Byzantines, there is little on the Seljuks. They tend to get forgotten in favour of the latter Ottomans.

This book covers the period just after the TV series, from the battles of Manzikert to Myriokephalon, 1071–1176. The TV series, a mere 82 one-hour episodes (you need stamina for Turkish historical drama), covers Alp Arslan before he becomes Sultan. The history is a bit dodgy, although in fairness, it's a drama, not a documentary, and the producers only claim it is based on history. And cracking drama it is too, with plenty of action and intrigue in every episode. Turkish historical dramas remind me of British WW2 or American Cold War films. You are left in no doubt about who the good guys are, and even the Turkish traitors can be spotted from the outset. That said, it wouldn't be difficult to get the military dress correct. The Turks are generally fine, if a little underarmoured and narrowly drawn from Turkmen, but the Byzantines are hopelessly wrong. They are portrayed as 13th-century medieval knights with pot helmets, more like later crusaders than Eastern Roman warriors. The producers needed this book badly. I can forgive the fight scenes, where mounted warriors almost always dismount, because training actors to be horse archers is probably a step too far.

The actor Baris Arduç embodies the heroic Alp Arslan

The book gives us an introduction and an outline of the two armies, including their equipment and tactics. There are excellent colour plates of a Byzantine heavy infantryman and a Seljuk horse archer, neither of which is represented in the TV series, sadly. In practice, both armies consisted of a diverse range of troop types, with Turks on both sides. Byzantine military science focused on avoiding risks, seeking battle only on favourable geographical terms and anticipating ultimate victory through superior professionalism and discipline. Tactical doctrine emphasised drawing the enemy into a protracted deadlock with successive lines of Byzantine infantry, whose role was to hold the enemy in place and wear them down by attrition, with missile fire and flanking harassment contributing to the enemy’s frustration. While the Seljuks relied on classic horse archer tactics, including feigned retreat, they were more than capable of fighting hand-to-hand. The Byzantine historian Michael Attaleiates styled the Seljuks as the boldest and most aggressive of the Turks, eager to engage in hand-to-hand combat.

The core of the book covers three key battles. The first is Manzikert (1071), the encounter between Alp Arslan and Romanos IV Diogenes near Lake Van, in eastern Anatolia, modern Türkiye. Poor intelligence dragged the divided Byzantine army deeper into the newly conquered Seljuk territory. On the battlefield, they were again lured forward by feigned flight before being surrounded and destroyed. Undoubtedly aided by treachery in the Byzantine ranks. Militarily, the battle was less decisive than often claimed. The Byzantine army was largely intact, but political infighting broke out, allowing the Seljuks to establish themselves in Anatolia. Alp Arslan also died soon after the battle, and the Seljuks engaged in their own succession crisis.

The book moves on to the Battle of Philomelion 1116, fought between Emperor Alexios I Komnenos and the Seljuk Turks led by Sultan Malik Shah. Philomelion (modern Akşehir) is in western Anatolia. This battle was far from decisive, although it did demonstrate a return to Byzantine military efficiency and secured their position in Anatolia. Alexios adopted a hollow square formation, which the Seljuks struggled to weaken, and the Byzantines were disciplined enough not to be drawn out.

Finally, we have Myriokephalon 1176, which pitted Emperor Manuel I Komnenos and the Seljuk Turks led by Sultan Kilij Arslan II. It took place in mountainous terrain near the fortress of Myriokephalon in southwestern Anatolia. The Byzantines were caught in the narrow Tzibritze Pass; if not destroyed, they had to withdraw and concede more territory in subsequent negotiations. The Byzantine–Seljuk conflict settled back into its regular pattern of small border skirmishes. Thus, while Manzikert had opened up the heartland of Anatolia to the Turks, and Myriokephalon had confirmed they were there to stay, the latter campaign in no way predetermined they would ultimately inherit the entire peninsula.

All three battles have colour plates and excellent maps, and the author finishes with a clear analysis of the overall conflict, strategy and fighting styles. While Manzikert is well known, the broader conflict isn't. So, this is a welcome addition to the series.

My 28mm Byzantine cavalry.

Siege of Kazan 1552

 I have been looking forward to this Osprey Campaign book by Mark Galeotti. It is a couple of centuries before my current writing on Russian history, but it was one of the earliest efforts by Muscovy and later Russia to begin its colonial expansion.

The Khanate of Kazan was one of the greatest of the Turkic successor states to the Golden Horde, and it was seized by Ulugh Muhammad in 1438. It developed economically into a strong regional power, but was always under pressure from Muscovy and the Crimean Khanate.

Muscovy also had to balance threats from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania to the west and from the khanates to the south. Their motivation for an assault on Kazan was partly to stop slave raids, partly to free up the Volga trade routes, and partly to find land for its growing population. They launched a long-awaited campaign against Kazan in 1545. The plan was to coincide with a coup by pro-Russian elements. When this failed, the attackers, who lacked the siege train to take such a well-defended city, withdrew. Another effort in 1548 and 1550 also failed. However, the pro-Russian faction effectively handed over the city in the early 1550s, until the Kazan mob overthrew them and installed an independent ruler.

The book then gives us an overview of the commanders, including Tsar Ivan IV (Grozny, 'terrible' or 'awesome'), and Khan Ediger-Magmet of Kazan, and all their generals. The opposing forces provide some differing troop types. Muscovy was moving from a feudal army to one that had a core of regular troops. Cavalry was still important, but there was a growing dependence on arquebus-armed foot, including the Streltsy, and artillery. Cossacks and, surprisingly, Tatars provided infantry and light cavalry. As always in Russian campaigns, we should not forget the importance of logistics.

Although increasingly living in cities and towns rather than roaming the steppe, the Tatars of Kazan and the other khanates retained much of their old style of warfighting, one built around the raid and the horse archer. The infantry needed for the defence of towns like Kazan was largely composed of levies, mostly armed with bows, although some primitive firearms were also deployed. Women and children would also defend the walls, which were earth banks, dressed with stone and a wooden walkway. Moats, natural waterways, and wetlands helped to limit the enemy's line of attack. There is a reconstructed version in modern Tatarstan that gives a good impression of the style.

Obsrevatoria (Wikipedia)

The core of the book is the campaign and siege. As usual, the text is well illustrated with maps and colour plates. I particularly liked the style of the colour plates created by Angel García Pinto, whose work is new to me. The cover art is a good example. Maintaining a siege at the end of lengthy supply lines was quite an achievement. Kazan fell during the final assault in a day’s bloody fighting. The attackers lost 4,000–7,000 dead. Tatar losses were probably 20,000 dead, including civilians. Kazan was now a Muscovite possession, but holding it would prove a continuing challenge. A low-level rebellion went on for four years. Kazan would serve as a jumping-off point for further colonial expansion in the south, eventually incorporating all the khanates.

The city is now the capital of the Republic of Tatarstan, a constituent element of the Russian Federation. There is little left of 16th-century Kazan, and the city has a Kremlin fort built by Ivan after the siege. Local remembrance is discouraged in Putin's Russia, which has its own historical narrative.  

Sieges are not easy to replicate on the tabletop, but there were plenty of actions earlier in the campaign to field armies, which, in part, can be pulled together from other collections.

Some of my earlier Russ cavalry, which would still work for this period. Just need some Streltsy.

Italy's War for a Desert

 Francis McCullagh was a war correspondent embedded with the Italians during their 1911 invasion of Tripoli. He wrote up his experiences in this book, published in 1913. It has been republished by Forgotten Books, and there is an ebook version as well. He includes the best line I have read about this conflict: "The Italians are besieging the desert. They have sat down before it and called upon it to surrender." 

It would be fair to say the author was not impressed by the Italian army's performance in this campaign. He highlights equipment deficiencies, like the tiny half-litre water bottles (the French version was two litres), and the heavy uniform material, "criminally, out of place here." Officers had no training in local conditions, such as drinking from water fountains when Cholera was raging in the town. The defence lines were too close to the town, allowing Ottoman artillery to attack targets far behind the lines. They failed to disarm the locals and had few reserves.

The book is a narrative of the actions he witnessed, limited to Tripoli, and is a useful primary source, but Charles Stephenson's A Box of Sand does a comprehensive job of this. The value is in his often acerbic commentary. He sums up the Italian policy as "a mixture of excessive foolhardiness and excessive caution." It is hard to disagree. Any illusions that the Italians would be welcomed as liberators disappeared quickly. They wrongly assumed that the town Arabs and others were attacking them from the rear, when in fact they had infiltrated the Italian lines. This led to a series of atrocities, which simply fuelled the insurgency, and led our author to leave Tripoli to avoid the Italian censors.

As Napoleon once said, "Never make war against a desert." An adage the Italians forgot and paid a heavy price.

I have now painted the Arab horse, using Pendraken Miniatures.

This means I have enough troops to get this project onto the tabletop. We used The Men Who Would Be Kings for our midweek game, 36 points. The locally raised Ottoman infantry were holding an oasis, which would be attacked by an Italian column from Tripoli. The Arab horse ominously gathered on the flanks.

The Italian attack became a bit disjointed due to poor initiative dice, which was not helped by the Arab horse launching flank attacks. The whole attack then broke down, and the Italians made a hasty withdrawal back to Tripoli. The rules worked well, and it will be interesting to see how they work when I have painted the Ottomans. Hopefully, after my daughter's wedding this weekend, my painting productivity will improve.