Sup /k/. Looking for some help with German military history.

Most city state had very well trained and equipped volunteer militia, usually equipped with spears or pikes, as the core of their army. Trained to take down charging knights from neighboring kingdoms. They were very cost effective against knights. especially with time to dig in. They were a marked improvement from conscripted peasants that were feudal infantry.

Germany in particular produced mercenary company but the hundred. Cities would hire them out for utility and specialist roles in an army. Things like siege engineers, Crossbowmen, anti spear Landsknecht and scouts. Heavy cavalry would often be provided by the city elites but they were generally fewer in number and not as effective as their more feudal counterparts as there were usually merchants sons and could do the daily insane training of full time knight.

Most of my knowledge is of Italy and Flanders, but this stuff is fairly universal for city states at the time

>>32224668
Were there any units from any specific region or city state that stood out on their own?

File: 1st century Germanic warriors.jpg (395KB, 1200x1435px) Image search: [Google]

395KB, 1200x1435px

>>32224519
That is a huge time gap, OP. You can go from tribal warriors like these fellows to heavily armored pikemen in the Renaissance. I assume you're talking about the Italian Renaissance, and not the Carolingian Renaissance... if you want the latter then you are looking at a much shorter time gap

File: suebian knot.jpg (2MB, 2736x3648px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2736x3648px

>>32226443
The Suebians had a particular hairstyle that helped identify them against the other tribes. Hardy warriors, like every Germanic, who gave the Romans a run for the money a couple times

File: Goths using Sarmatian inspired equipment.jpg (84KB, 580x800px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 580x800px

>>32226459
The Goths used equipment from their neighbors. Persian and Sarmatian equipment was their big item pool during their migration into Europe. Once they split into Ostrogoths and Visigoths, the differences between the two grew in time. Visigoths entered Hispania while the Ostrogoths took Italy and Dalmatia. The Goths had a sweet shield design called the "Coffin Shield" Look into them for the Eastern Germanic style cities

File: Vandal story.png (859KB, 1097x906px) Image search: [Google]

859KB, 1097x906px

>>32226491
The Vandals are a much more dynamic story. Unlike their Germanic kin, they came from to travel much further south. They eventually became a massive pirate nation based on raiding neighboring Germanic kingdoms and working with the native North Africans.

File: Ostrogoth skull with sling wound.jpg (27KB, 500x390px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 500x390px

>>32226514
Forgot to mention about the Goths, they sometimes shaped their skulls like the Hunnic tribes did. The success of Attila's people inspired all kinds of trends among Germanic peoples. The skull shaping was not common though, even among the Goths. Oddly enough, it has no effect on the person if it is done gradually after birth

File: Frankish rider.jpg (1MB, 1888x2572px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1888x2572px

>>32226526
After the Germanic peoples stopped chimping out on Rome, they looked at the ruins in awe. They finally took the time to appreciate what the Romans were building and tried their best to emulate it. The biggest fans of Rome were the Franks. The Franks took over what was Gaul from the Romans. They left a decent portion of the Latin population as well as any Celts left alive so long as they became active members of society.

File: Frankish warriors.jpg (119KB, 564x750px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 564x750px

>>32226563
The Franks had a variety of warriors. From pulling influence of the previous Romans, they formed large units of militia grade spearmen. Their tight ranks would be the end of a once unstoppable Saracen army. They also pulled in whatever people they happened to conquer into their military. Saxon axemen, Aquintainian archers, Salian cavalry, Frisian skirmisher and infantry, and even some mock "Legions"

File: frankish knight.jpg (3MB, 4200x5641px)

3MB, 4200x5641px

>>32226587
It was during the rule of Charles the Great, grandson of Charles Martel (the Hammer), that literature exploded inside Europe. He personally petitioned the many monasteries to begin producing copies of any literature they had as well as more books imported from as far as Syria to Hispania. The parchment came from cattle farmers who were able to sell their calves at a much higher rate than before. Their increased wealth eventually got dispersed into other aspects of Frankish society. Things got pretty well considering most still call it "the Dark Ages".

>>32225810
Landsknecht

were known for carrying fuck off huge 2 handed swords to knock away spear and pikes.

File: Frankish cavalry repel Viking raiders.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>32226616
The Franks dealt with their Germanic kin often. Whenever they failed to convert to Christianity, Charlemagne would petition them to convert. This often ended in raids against them and any missionaries sent there to be slaughtered. Which was probably the stupidest thing you could do back then. Charlemagne was not very merciful after nearly fifteen years of seasonal warfare against Saxon tribes in Central Europe.

In your setting, remember that winter was not a time for war. Only desperate conquerors or insane rebels would dare to mobilize large operations in winter.

File: seax typology.jpg (160KB, 1024x673px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 1024x673px

>>32226646
And they were /fa/ as fuck, and their prowess was copied many times over. It made them expensive too

>>32226652
There is a famous sword/knife that you should use if this setting is going to be Germanic: the seax. The weapon has a focus more on the blade than any part of the sword. It is easily recognizable because of the shape. Though diverse in shape and size over time, people like the Angles and Saxons used it heavily. A great side arm for any spearman, it was a fantastic stabbing and chopping weapon.

File: metallurgy differences seax.jpg (923KB, 2280x2000px) Image search: [Google]

923KB, 2280x2000px

>>32226685
Many were forged with hardened tips. This difference in metallurgy gave the seax a powerful tip for stabbing and a decently flexible spine near the handle. You can see it on this seax pictured here. Notice the color shift as you travel down the blade. These blades were more expensive and took more time to produce. They were not THAT much more expensive though, so a decent amount of warriors could have them

File: Anglo Saxon line.jpg (114KB, 1165x686px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1165x686px

>>32226712
The Angles and Saxons traveled far during the Migration Period. Most ended up in the British Isles though. The Angles and Saxons were not a unified people, and did not call themselves Anglo-Saxons like we do today. Both groups took on the remaining Latins and Celts into their societies as well. An odd caste of warriors developed inside Britain during this time: the Fyrd. Look into them more here - https://regia.org/research/warfare/fyrd1.htm

File: pre-Viking scandinavian.jpg (231KB, 999x1336px) Image search: [Google]

231KB, 999x1336px

>>32226760
Scandinavian Germanics are interesting because they never received much Latin influence. Their weapons and style of warfare remained similar from before the Migration Period all the way through the Age of the Vikings. Oddly enough, their swords are the same as the what the Franks favored: a heavy hand guard with a long blade. By the end of the ninth century, the Franks were producing so many of these swords that more than elite warriors could afford them. They became principle cavalry weapons for the Franks and a favored weapon of many Viking raiders.

File: viking pommels.jpg (154KB, 800x676px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 800x676px

>>32226826
Both Scandinavian and Frankish sword pommels went on to influence much of Europe's swords in the coming centuries

File: Norman warrior.jpg (203KB, 736x981px)

203KB, 736x981px

>>32226839
Time went on, warfare in Europe changed. As the "Dark Ages" ended and gave way to the Middle Ages, cavalry became the dominant force in European armies. Lances, stirrups, strong armor that finally matched Roman quality, long swords with defined hand guards, and large horses produced from mixing several European breeds gave Western and Central Europe powerful cavalry cores. A single charge could eliminate a foe's infantry formation if they weren't prepared for it. Germanic peoples began to change as well. Latin mixed with whatever tongues the conquerors spoke. It produced a huge variety in spoken and written languages through Europe. Romance languages began forming out of this. Regions without a Latin population resisted this change of course, and gave rise to divisions between the traditional "Germanics" and the newly formed Romance peoples.

File: Norman fighters.jpg (232KB, 960x635px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 960x635px

>>32226893
Normans are great examples of this process. After centuries of mixing with Latin influence, French speaking descendants of Vikings (Northmen - i.e. Normans) and Franks went on to conquer a Germanic neighbor: the Anglo-Saxons. Bringing with them a large cavalry core, the Normans eventually conquered England (i.e. Angleland). Normans went elsewhere too as time wore on. Sicily had a strong population of Norman warriors that sailed there to be soldiers against raiding Saracens

File: sicilian normans.jpg (2MB, 2533x3321px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2533x3321px

>>32226923
Norman styles of warfare became much more common throughout Western and Central Europe. Southern Europe was either controlled by Arabs still, Spain, or fractured systems of city states that kept highly trained and well armed infantry militias. Chainmail was the in-style armor of the time. Although great against edged weapons, a decent spear or arrow could easily pierce it. And a club? You'd feel every pound of pressure in your ribs and organs if someone struck you. This pressured Europeans into designing new armors that would better protect their warriors. Plate armor came along

File: 13th century armor and weapons.jpg (2MB, 2714x2604px)

2MB, 2714x2604px

>>32226965
Plate armor was expensive though, so only the elite could afford those massive suits many of us know and love. Noblemen enjoyed great protection, while the common soldier would have to budget whatever equipment they could get their hands on. Plate armor did not kill chainmail. Sometimes, warriors would mix the two together to produce strong protection for their cores, while allowing their limbs to enjoy the freedom of chainmail. As more plate armor came under demand though, various schools of producing it emerged across Europe.

File: 1430 - Assault Infantry.jpg (89KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 600x600px

>>32226993
Swords were still popular, but as armor advanced to a point of superior protection against any blade the development of better polearms became necessary. Armor piercing weapons became common across Europe. English billmen, French and Swiss halberdiers, German macemen, and Italian crossbowmen emerged as various peoples handled the introduction of advanced armors.

File: 1475 - Swiss Pikemen.jpg (68KB, 691x792px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 691x792px

>>32227043
Armor would have kept advancing had gunpowder not shown up. Now, a simple man with decent training and discipline could blow a hole the size of a quarter in a man wearing even plate armor. As gunpowder became the weapon of choice in Europe, armor began to decline. Without the need to crush armor, bulky polearms gave way to spears. Whoever had the longest spears could better ward off cavalry, keep infantry away, and protect their own gunners better than the side with shorter spears. Long and longer these spears grew until eventually pikes came along. The Swiss were the first of Europe's peoples to embrace the pike so well. Their long pikes and decently armored soldiers made a demand for Swiss Pikemen incredibly high across Europe.

File: Landsknecht.jpg (1MB, 1500x3060px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1500x3060px

>>32227073
As time wore on and gunpowder became increasingly effective, armor became obsolete. With less armor on soldiers, the sword could again be a viable weapon to use against foes. Pikes were still extremely common in armies though: it's called Pike and Shot warfare for a reason. A need for open up pike formations so that more infantry could pour in to wipe out enemy gunners was growing in Europe. Small bands of German soldiers began using two-handed swords to smash and push pikes aside in combat. Their calling card was tearing fragments of enemy banners and clothing to add to their own. Colorful, proud, and deadly are three words to describe these German mercenaries. The name they came to be known by was "Landsknecht". It kind of means foot soldier but with a deeper meaning of land, country, and lowlands. It helped differentiate from highland mercenaries like Swiss and Scottish soldiers.

File: 1515 - Swiss Soldiers.gif (65KB, 650x675px)

65KB, 650x675px

>>32227121
The Swiss remained popular as mercenaries for all armies in Europe. I guess their neutrality back then was good for war business. Swiss mercenaries rose to an even higher fame when a band of them stood to the death against a large German army that sought to kidnap or kill the Pope. There is a fantastic monument commemorating their sacrifice. This was much later in time though. Bravery in battle became synonymous with the Swiss name.

File: Battle of Ksar ek Kbar.jpg (968KB, 1114x815px) Image search: [Google]

968KB, 1114x815px

>>32227157
Cannons were not too advanced for some time. They were mainly a siege weapon that made city walls almost useless. In battle, they could devastate tightly packed pike formations with a few well placed shots. The Ottomans are probably the best known cannon users. They bribed Hungarian cannon producers after the Byzantines told them to fuck off. These cannons shattered Constantinople's once fancied impenetrable walls.

For your Germanic setting, if you are going as late as gunpowder then remember any siege scenarios your party might come across will have cannons in them. They were loud, smelly, and sometimes blew up upon ignition. They were great for halting charges though. Just load in some fragments of metal, ball bearings, and other shrapnel to create a weapon great for making soldiers into mince meat

File: siege warfare.jpg (2MB, 3504x2544px)

2MB, 3504x2544px

>>32227219
Sieges were brutal. If you could not assault the enemy, then you were forced to wait them out. Prolonged camp life is probably something I am glad I will never experience. Especially if an early winter came. Assaults were risky, expensive, and rare. They are great for hollywood and artwork though

I'm pretty drunk now so forgive me if I'm inaccurate

With your interests (borders and cavalry) there are two things that come to mind

The first, with regards to borders, is Diocletian's (and his successors) redefinition of border control
In the past (i.e. 0 AD to 230 AD) the Roman borders were solid lines. There were guard posts and generally solid line
Diocletian (well maybe not him, but around 300 AD), the Romans changed to a soft border
Invaders could pass the eminent border.
But it was a staggered border
Like a net
You pass the first border, and they send a horse to the next border, and then they send a horse to the next one and so forth.
So instead of a single border, it's a 300 mile thick border with a militia at every 10 miles
It's not a line but a net to stop invaders from reaching the core.

As for cavalry, the Romans never really used it.
They hired mercs to do it for them. In Gaul, there was a time where legion used horses. They were laughably called the "Mounted Legion". That should make you realize how they thought about mounted troops. It's an exception to be mounted.

But, according to many historians, everything changed in the Battle of Adrianople.
A Roman Emperor led a great army against the Gothic invaders. They though they had the advantage.
Then the Goths had cavalry attack all sides.
The Romans were destroyed. It was as horrible battle for the Romans and many historians think it was the point where medieval horse warrior supremacy first came into effect.

File: english longbowman.jpg (925KB, 1200x1600px)

925KB, 1200x1600px

>>32227258
I don't have much more left, >>32224519, but one final group of famous soldiers are English Longbowmen. The Longbow was a powerful weapon that actually survived into the age of Pike and Shot. English armies consisted of infantry divisions armed with billhooks and halberds to defend against incoming assaults against their longbows. With greater range than early personal gunpowder weapons, they could antagonize and kill many enemies from great distance. Rain might reduce accuracy but it did not prevent use like some gunpowder weapons. They were not full proof however. Agincourt is a great example of the Longbow's power, but the English still ended up losing the Hundred Years war. It also did not survive through Pike and Shot. Gunpowder weapons grew in advancement much too fast for weapons like the centuries old longbow to survive

>>32227297
All very interesting desu

File: hunnic skull elongation.jpg (19KB, 417x312px)

19KB, 417x312px

>>32227295
Drunk anon makes a good point, and I'd like to point out the battle of Chalons. The Romans utilized foreign elements in their army as mainly cavalry. Alans in the center to better counter Hunnic charges at the center, Salian Franks to counter any steppe cavalry thrown at them, and so on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Catalaunian_Plains

>>32227318
You can go back to the Second Punic War for Roman use of hired cavalry troops
The Numidian Cavalry were the best in the Mediterranean.
The clever Numidian King Massanissa used that to his advantage to play both the Carthaginians and the Romans
He made it through the war in favour of both

>>32227297
Longbows.... weren't actually much for killing at range, especially as the period wore on. Their performance against armor was absolutely dismal, despite modern myth.

The English essentially fucked off into their safe space and refused to modernize after the HYW, and it showed badly at flodden-the longbows got to shoot unopposed at advancing pikes and accomplished nothing, with the scots losing simple because the terrain was garbage for them.

More than half of the reason the english system ever worked was the unusually heavy equipment-many were close to a man at arms for armor-and willingness to get stuck in allowing long bowmen to charge into melee and flank people.

there's a reason that the continent went from
>HIRE EVERY MERCENARY OUTFIT WITH LONGBOWS
to
>BOWs HAVE NO PLACE IN WAR
relatively rapidly.

>>32227157
>I guess their neutrality back then was good for war business.
Swiss neutrality didn't exist as a concept until after they get their asses stomped fighting the french in Milan and then fractured politically. If the cantons went to war-and they did often, both offensively and defensively-your swiss marched home the moment they found out.

>>32227121
MUH ZWEIHANDERS
Zweihanders guarded the standard and were fairly rare, even in the VERY short window where they saw use.

Halberds did the work of pushing forward.

>>32227073
>Armor would have kept advancing had gunpowder not shown up.
It DID. Plate reaches the height of it's sophistication and protective ability, as well as it's most widespread use well after gunpowder arrives.

You clearly don't know what you're talking about.

>Now, a simple man with decent training and discipline could blow a hole the size of a quarter in a man wearing even plate armor.
At point blank range. Sometimes. This may require the gun to be pressed against the armor, unless it's a full size musket.

Muskets being a specialists weapon used by expensive, well trained men who needed a rest to fight at all.

>>32226993
>Plate armor did not kill chainmail.
Except it did. Utterly. The only chain you find on the field when plate reaches it's zenith is small patches sewn onto arming garments, the occasional aventail, and hand-me downs that would decades or centuries old.

Common men would be in brigandines or almain-rivet. Both cheaper, faster to get, and more protective than mail.

>Sometimes, warriors would mix the two together to produce strong protection for their cores, while allowing their limbs to enjoy the freedom of chainmail
Plate limb defenses emerged and spread before breastplates came into wide use. Transitional armor routinely sees men with hauberk, brigandine or coat of plates, and a full plate helm with plate covering the arms and legs.
>>32226965
Chainmail was the in-style armor of the time. Although great against edged weapons, a decent spear or arrow could easily pierce it.
Except testing and period accounts disagree with that statement.

>You'd feel every pound of pressure in your ribs and organs if someone struck you
A:
No, mail does in fact disperese force, though not very well
B: It's worn with a gambeson for this reason.

>This pressured Europeans into designing new armors that would better protect their warriors
No it fucking didn't. Mail existed for a thousand fucking years. Literally. It got replaced because metallurgy advanced to the point where larger iron and steel plates could be made, nobody was fucking sitting around dreaming up new forms of armor. New armor was a result of a process that was happening anyway.

>Armor piercing weapons became common across Europe.
Go on
>English billmen,
Predates the wide use of full plate.
>French and Swiss halberdiers,
Frenchmen weren't known for the halberd. At all. Poleaxe? Yes, they were the foremost fucking knights in europe. That and the lance. Yes, on foot.
French commoner infantry was considered trash.

>>32227043
>German macemen,
Germans are only particularly known for the mace in the game series you stole all this from.

>and Italian crossbowmen
Predates plate. Militias who are likely to fight in cities and sailors who fight from ship decks love crossbows for a lot of reasons. So do skirmishers. Mostly because they work great with cover.

Italians were known for exceptional qualities and quantities of all three.


>emerged as various peoples handled the introduction of advanced armors.
Nope.

>>32227073
Swiss were known for relatively light equipment combined with a very rapid march and charge mixed with aggression, not armor.

>Without the need to crush armor, bulky polearms gave way to spears.
Pole arms aren't bulky.
Pole arms are at their height when the swiss-and pikes-come onto the scene.
Armor becomes MORE available to common men at this time, and more widespread.

>Their long pikes
The swiss were known for gripping their pikes unusually high on the shaft.

>and protect their own gunners
Gunners weren't the main fixture of fighting until after the thirty years war. The swiss had essentially no gunners. Mercenary forces were nearly all pikes, "swiss" national armies would often be around 80% pikes/halberds. They didn't give two shits about shooting, they preferred to charge and sweep you off the field.

>>32227307
He's mostly full of shit. He stole a lot of what he's parroting from medieval:total war, and has the timeline of what happened all fucked up, much less why.

>>32227473
>metallurgy advanced to the point where larger iron and steel plates could be made,
Mail replaced larger plates initially.
Mail was very costly in terms of labour. It was typically made assembly line fashion with multiple labourers doing set tasks. When labour became more expensive you saw the return of larger plales that would be made by one higher skilled worker with help from a few helpers. The advent of industrial production with things like water powered trip hammers further helped cement the popularity of plate. Even with industrialiastion mail was still very labour intensive.

>>32227583
>Mail replaced larger plates initially.
Really a matter of opinion. The closest you get is bronze, or the segmentata which never fully supplanted mail even among the legions, and which doesn't take very large plates. And which may have been shitty armor.

Beyond that, it's lammelar, and individual lames are tiny.... and lammelar was never popular in europe.
You couldn't realistically make the large sheets of iron or steel needed for plate without a number of later medieval inventions.

If life worked like the video games that anon so clearly plays, the romans would have started making it to deal with falxes, or the danes would have to deal with Dane axes.

This thread is interesting, please keep it alive

File: 1423376292431.jpg (64KB, 720x534px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 720x534px

In order to bump the thread, how did battles typically go in the Renaissance? How did the the halberdiers and pike men work with ranged units, and what was the role of cavalry? Specifically, what did armies fielded by the Holy Roman Empire typically consist of?

pic not related

>>32228408
Two things:
That's too broad of a question to really answer. Shit varies heavily over time, war was not static.

Second:
Go ask /his/.

/k/ has no real understanding of anything before 1910 or so.

Used to go back into the days of line infantry, but those fuckers ran to /his/.