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.

General d'Armee 2

'I need a new set of Napoleonic rules like a hole in the head' was my first reaction when a couple of GDWS members were trying out David and Chris Brown's General d'Armee 2 rules at the club. I hadn't played the first iteration, but like the hopeless wargames butterfly I am, the mechanisms looked interesting. At the York show the following weekend, I gave in.

This is a division-sized game that can be scaled up to corps and, for me, might plug a gap between scuffle games like Rebels and Patriots and big battle rules like Blucher. I typically use Black Powder for this size of game, but it's not without its problems, and I am open to trying something else.

In our first game, we appreciated the rules layout, which includes plenty of examples and tips without overdoing the eye candy. I particularly liked the laminated QRF that comes with the rules, rather than the usual download-and-do-it-yourself approach. No rebasing is required, and unit/figure sizes are flexible. Anything from 12 to 36 figures per battalion. My 28mm figures are mostly based for 18 figure battalions, so that's all good. There are some unusual features. You will need separate skirmisher bases, as they play an important role, rather than being abstracted as in other rules.

The troop types have some original names, but are pretty standard. Casualties are shown by a marker rather than figure removal, and the strength levels are quite high, representing a more attritional game. Initiative is limited by the number of ADCs the commander has. This depends on the number of brigades, the ability/national classification, and a dice roll. Again, the nomenclature differs, but the mechanisms are similar to those in other rules. Unusually, there is a role for caissons in replenishing ammunition and supporting artillery more generally. I will need to dust mine down.

The deployment stage is more complex than other rules, with dummy deployments, hidden brigades and scouting rules, but it adds something to the game. The game turn starts with initiative, which is determined by dice, then charges before normal movement. Firing and combat are after that. Initiative is determined by the number of ADCs, and the tasks they can order have different costs. They are not just movement tasks; they can also strengthen the fire and combat capabilities. It allows the commander to focus on a particularly crucial part of the battlefield. Firing and combat rules are fairly conventional, as are discipline (morale) tests. A double six throw introduces the Destiny rule, which introduces some exceptional, but not overpowering, additional effects.

There are some national characteristics that are always much debated. However, they look generally fine to me. The focus is on Europe, ignoring the Ottomans, Persians, and others. There are a few army lists and an introductory scenario, but the book focuses on the rules. My initial reaction is that the rules add more complexity than necessary. This includes playing stages that could be abstracted and numerous modifiers. However, the rules are well laid out, and we found everything quite quickly. I am not yet sold on these, but I am prepared to persevere. The Napoleonic crew at Irvine were giving them a go last weekend, French v British. Again, mixed views, but they will also give them another go.

Our trial game was a small divisional battle with three brigades on each side. The War of 1812, in which the US invaded Canada. The US left flank collapsed, giving the Brits a marginal win by the end of play.