Why Poland SHOULD be included in one of the official sets

[Jools]

Cavalrymen operating antitank gun. Cavalry wasn't used for charges only as transport...

[Jools]

Map of Poland in 1600

Great Historical Atlas to be found on http://www.euratlas.com/summary.htm

This map isn't full, you have to add the Baltic area (inflanty : Latvia+Estonia)

[Jools]

Hussar Charge!!!

Polish Warfare 1450 to 1699

At this time the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth was the largest territory in central and eastern Europe and its army, though small, achieved many successes against a wide variety of foes.

There were few periods when Polish-Lithuanian forces were not fighting against one of the Commonwealth's enemies, which included Tartars, Teutonic Knights, Swedes, Austrians, Ottomans, Muscovites, Moldavians and Zaporozhian Cossacks.

Their forces combined elements of eastern tactical and strategic thinking with western tactics of technology and firepower.

The influence of the Polish army on the West has been under estimated, some of these influences include:-
-Full gallop cavalry charge with drawn sabres
-Diverse tactical and defensive use of fortified camps
-Origins of the divisional system
-Uhlan lancers
-Military uniforms, e.g. long-cut jackets, grenadier caps and dragoon uniforms.

It should be remembered that one of the greatest generals in history, Gustav Adolf, developed his skills in almost continuous warfare with the Poles - and his success in the Thirty Years War was preceded my many years of effort against inferior numbers of Poles who had humiliated the Swedish army at Kircholm.

[Jools]

Better Map

http://www.domnasz.freeserve.co.uk/misc/maps.htm

Polish Generals

http://www.domnasz.freeserve.co.uk/comp/comp02.htm

Husaria

http://www.domnasz.freeserve.co.uk/comp/comp06.htm

[Jools]

Although the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (Poland for brevity) has a well deserved reputation for fielding the finest cavalry in 17th C. Europe, the accomplishments and integrated role of the infantry and artillery is less known. It is true that the dominant and often decisive arm was the cavalry, and the other types of units were influenced by this reality. In particular, all units had to be highly mobile or risk being irrelevant in battle, or relegated to siege or defensive duties.
Polish generals had great faith that, given the appropriate tactical situation, their excellent cavalry could sweep the field of any opponent. They were seldom disappointed. The trick in good generalship was creating the conditions for the appropriate tactical situation. The most important consideration was that cavalry was devastating against disorganized foes, but could not break intact pike formations (although the hussar lances did on a few occasions), and could be checked by disciplined musket formations or by field works. One way of creating disorganization and breaking formation was the firepower provided by light artillery.

Light Artillery in Polish service had to adapt to a cavalry-dominated army’s operational and tactical situation. It had to be mobile enough to keep up with the cavalry, and had to provide concentrated firepower when needed to disrupt enemy ranks.

In addition to regular Crown and Lithuanian units, much of the Polish strength-in-numbers came from levies of noblemen and from private armies (great noblemen might amass a thousand men or more, and several pieces of artillery). These irregular forces could be quite variable in equipment, costume, and organization. Boleslav Orlicki’s Horse Artillery represents a private unit of this type, raised by a medium-sized estate. The service is less likely to be offered as a mercenary contract for cash than as a display of loyalty to the Crown or a political faction.

The Poles invested heavily in artillery and mastered the tactics of bombardment in concentration with mobility in advance of their enemies. They exchanged many insights with their on-again/off-again rivals, the Swedes, under Gustav II Adolf (Gustavus Adolfus), also a noted artillery innovator. Faced with the need to keep up with their cavalry, the Poles were particularly advanced in carriage design and the tactical aspects of handling horse artillery. A case can be made that Poles invented horse artillery, at least, Jan Tarnowski’s "Consilium rationis bellicae" (Outline of Military Method ) included a description of the use of light cannons mounted on wagons, a concept akin to 'gallopers'. Kazimierz Siemienowicz wrote Artis Magnae Artilleriae pars prima (The Complete Art of Artillery, Part One) the standard European reference for artillery until the Napoleonic era, which included the first description of multi-stage rockets. Siemienowicz, as Lieutenant General of Crown Artillery, directed it’s technical and tactical refinement in the mid 17th Century. (See also dell'Aqua's manual.)

Horse Artillery worked closely with mounted infantry- the dragoons - who would typically accompany batteries to form skirmishing screens in front, and some security to the battery line itself. Dragoons were often armed with smaller infantry matchlocks prior to 1670, but were also often armed with carbines with wheel-locks, dog-locks, other types of early flint-locks and pistols, as well as sabers. Dragoons were numerous in Polish service, and did most of the routine work of scouting, picket duty, and finding provisions, as well as providing critical infantry support in the highly mobile battles the Poles favored.

In the 1500's, artillery was typically parked on top of a hill before the battle, from which spot it never moved. It was usually heavy (6 pounder and larger), and after an opening bombardment often fell silent as the battle was determined by the rest of the army. Contrast those tactics with the following dramatization, after the Poles and Swedes developed the use of light artillery that was integrated with the battle line.

Horse Artillery in the XVII Century?

Although the term 'Horse Artillery' is associated with the 18th Century, the concept was well established some two hundred years earlier. According to Tomczak in Taktyka artylerii konnej wg regulaminu T. Kosciuszki:

"Paul Jovius described the essence of light artillery moving where and when required by horsepower in 1494, in Historia del sue tempo. The French king Henry IV reportedly proposed arming his cavalry with cannons. In 1533, Maurice Sask in the battle of Sivershausen assigned light artillery to assist his cavalry.

"Horse artillery in connection with the Polish army is described in K. Gorski's Historia Artylerii. Horse artillery was a factor in the cavalry battle of Lopusza in 1512. Gorski concluded that the field pieces involved were falconetts (3 pounders). This was not necessarily dedicated and specialized horse artillery, but this was nevertheless a joint effort by cavalry and, by necessity, highly mobile artillery.

"In steps, light, mobile proto-horse artillery became part of the regimental organization, assigned in close support of infantry. In the west artillery gained a role in the army as important as cavalry. Gustav Adolf organized light artillery as part of infantry regiments...."

M. Rostafinski in Zarys rozwoju historii wojskowosci w Polsce, p. 79, argues that Horse Artillery was a fact in 17th C. Poland. The Pole's light artillery was used in a highly mobile fashion, and had the necessary equipment for horse artillery, and were integrated in the battle line and used (in a very modern way) in close support of cavalry and infantry, so they were in effect horse artillery. However, they were not explicitly organized as standing units dedicated to the support of cavalry, the modern technical definition. So purists can still claim that it is not really ‘Horse Artillery,’ although I wish to add the point that the Poland had a cavalry army with supporting infantry, whereas all western European nations had infantry armies supported by cavalry.

Who gets the official credit for the first standing organization of horse artillery? Tomczak observed that some say it was Peter I, others claim Frederic II of Prussia. Peter I’s reform was to provide his dragoon regiments with two light artillery pieces. The artillery took on the character of dragoons, and could accommodate the rapid pace of travel required in support of cavalry. Frederic II of Prussia gets credit for horse artillery as standing companies dedicated to supporting cavalry with highly mobile operations - the fully modern late 18th through early 20th century concept.

Certainly the term ‘Horse Artillery’ was new in the XVIII century. T. Kosciuszku in his 1808 treatise on horse artillery prepared for the American army mentioned that when he first brought up the concept some officers apparently thought that he meant that the artillery pieces were to be strapped on the horses back. Kosciuszku said that, at lease in the late 18th century, horse (aka 'flying' or 'position') artillery was not too different from field artillery in usage, except that it was more independent. He said that all American field artillery in service in 1800 was of a design suitable for horse artillery use. Kosciuszku's only specific design recommendations was the use of a carriage traveling position, esp for any heavier piece, esp 4 pdr+. The key difference is the presence of the horse as the motive force! Horses, according to Kosciuszku, are reliable and as brave as their handlers, and can obviously move the gun faster.

Taken from http://www.kismeta.com/diGrasse/Poli...eArtillery.htm

[Jools]

Sarmatism.

Term used to describe an ideology and a way of life of Polish nobles in the 17th century and the early 18th. Although it is not an art-historical term, it has been used to describe artistic phenomena connected with the patronage of Polish nobles of the period. Like the historians of other European countries, the Polish historians of the 16th century sought to dignify the origins of their nation by placing them in antiquity. The fabled valiant Sarmatians were believed to have been the ancestors of the Poles and to have lived north of the Black Sea in the time of the Roman Empire; later driven west and northwards by other peoples, they were thought to have conquered the Polish territory and reduced its original population to serfdom, themselves forming the nobility of the new nation. The name Sarmatia was already applied to Poland in the 16th century, and its people referred to as Sarmatians. The Polish–Sarmatian nation of the nobility developed a specific outlook and civilization that had its culmination in the late 17th century; to a great extent it adopted elements from the general culture of Catholic Europe. Politically, the exponents of Sarmatism promoted the idea of a republic of nobles with an elected king as first among equals, and strongly opposed absolutist tendencies, then popular in Europe. Consequently, its features included conservatism, traditionalism, xenophobia, religious zeal and, finally, a deep conviction that the Polish political and social system was the best possible and that the mission of the Polish nation was to defend the Christian (especially Roman Catholic) world against the Eastern Orthodox, Protestant and Islamic peoples.

Poland was much more tolerant in the sense of practical toleration than any of the other countries. Which is, of course, the reason why it became a haven for persecuted minorities. Large numbers of Scots, for example, escaped from Scotland, from persecution by the Puritans. Large numbers of English in the time of Queen Elizabeth went to Poland to escape the persecution there. And, of course, the reason why Poland became the largest refuge for European Jewry is exactly because they had extremely favorable conditions protected by charters and by laws. It was a very rich kaleidoscope of religions which, generally speaking, managed to live in relative harmony with each other.

I tried to find some pictures of Sarmatian clothing but was unsuccesful

[LoD]

Excellent job, Jools . I really hope someone from Firaxis reads this - should turn some heads.

[Martinus]

Polish CSA

Guys,

I don't think whether this point has already been made, but I think that if the additional CSAs proposed on this forum are to be introducted, Poland should get for sure the "Agricultural" special ability.

Throughout much of its history, it has been the "breadbasket/granary of Europe" and even now many Poles are farmers.

(I hope this would not mean Lepper as the Polish leader )

[RunnerSan]

Hi! This is my first post here in this forum.

I juz widze jak dobrze znam angileski

I agree with people, Poland should be in Civ3, maybe you say he is from Poland, so he must say that.
Let's look on this problem like that, we have 3 countries from western Europe, 2 ancient and one Russia. So all Central Europe, Eastern Europe is in Russia? Hmmm......

I belive that if Poland will not be available, Slaves should be . This nation/tribe could cover Poland, Hungary, Czech and others....

But the best solution is Poland
Why back and read what others wrote here?

[LoD]

Martinus: So that would make it Agricultural and Scientific, right (I'd dare not think you mean Agricultural and Religious, as that would imply that LPR and Samoobrona are true patriotic parties ).


RunnerSan: Well said.

[krzysiek]

Hey, look at the CivTrivia question today (Tuesday). Very easy, but worth only 10 points

[LoD]

krzysiek et al.: Am I having halucinations or the question has been changed ?

[Martinus]

Originally posted by LoD
Martinus: So that would make it Agricultural and Scientific, right (I'd dare not think you mean Agricultural and Religious, as that would imply that LPR and Samoobrona are true patriotic parties ).

[krzysiek]

Originally posted by LoD
krzysiek et al.: Am I having halucinations or the question has been changed ?

Have you seen question about liberator of South America?
You were too late then.

[LoD]

Martinus: Terrifying thought, isn't it ?

krzysiek: No, it was about Tayllerand and Napoleon, and was worth 40 points, not 10.