Who were the Turks?

[waysoftheearth]

More specifically; who were the Turks listed as an example of heavy foot (CM 2nd Ed p12, 3rd Ed p14)?

Why?
. CM Front cover illustration (later crusades period, judging by the helmet).
. Saracens (CM 2nd Ed p18, 3rd Ed p20) "All Saracen footmen are light troops..."
. Elastolin Turk figure range representing Ottoman/Janissaries (circa 14-16th century)


. I'm curious. So flay me.

[Deleted]

Turks were people from Turkey? Conquered Constantinople in the 15th century?

I'm not really sure of your question.

[makofan]

I assume the Ottomans

[bravewolf]

My gut-level reaction to Chainmail was that Perrin & Gygax had a Turk fetish. Is it fair to say of the OP that the question might be put, "What made the Turks so bad-ass that they get such prominent mention in CM?"?

[bravewolf]

Shoot, they made it into M&M, p.7 as well, albeit in a modulated form (Turcopole-type). Turcopoles are probably militarily (and religiously) distinct from Turks, despite their shared heritage, though.

[waysoftheearth]

Just that the term "Turk" is a pretty broad one, potentially implying any or all of the Seljuk Turks, various "Syrians" that fought the crusaders, the Turkoman emirates, Ottoman Turks, and others (e.g., see here).

My initial question was: which of these "Turks" constitute the Heavy Foot example in CM? Viewed from 10,000ft, my inkling is that most of the earlier "Turks" favoured mobility over protection, so might be what CM refers to as "Saracens"... but even that gets confusing, since Saracen was a label that the Christians eventually slapped on anyone who practised Islam. It seems likely that CM refers to a narrower group.

Apr 27, 2018 11:34:49 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Turks were people from Turkey? Conquered Constantinople in the 15th century?

Right. So that's the Ottoman Turkish, who'd be pretty late medieval. (Interesting to note there were also some Turkish troops loyal to the Byzantine emperor defending the city).

The Ottomans had their famous Janissaries. I'd have thought them archers in their early period and, given the Elastolin miniatures, probably represented by CM's "Turk Archers". Later they might be musketeers; they were also supposedly expert miners/sappers.

So anyways, is there a specific Ottoman Turkish solider type that would epitomise Heavy Foot? Or was it just that the Ottomans had a regularised infantry?

[clownboss]

The Turks referred to in CHAINMAIL are most definitely Ottomans, I would venture circa 1300-1600 when their Balkan conquests were at their peak. Takes 500 years of adversity to know one.

Likewise I also am wondering why they're listed as Heavy Foot because I mainly know the Ottomans as wearing light armour, although that might be more true for the late-age gunpowder using ones. It must be during the Battle of Kosovo in 1389 that they must have had more heavily armed soldiers with melee weapons.

[waysoftheearth]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kosovo#Army_composition suggests the Ottoman army at Kosovo comprised:

2,000 Janissaries,
2,500 Murad's (presumably elite) cavalry guard,
6,000 Sipahis (cavalry)
20,000 Asappi and Akinji (Irregular, light foot and light horse, respectively)
8,000 troops from various vassals.

The Ottoman foot explicitly mentioned are Janissaries ("Turk Archers"?) and Asappi (irregular, light foot).

It also acknowledges that "Reliable historical accounts of the battle are scarce". But even if details a specific battle are sketchy, one supposes(?) that the basic troop types of an Empire might be known to the chroniclers by their appearance in multiple actions over longer periods... ?


Anyways. It occurred to me that maybe the entry "Turks" as an example of HF was to imply "Turk Archers" are HF in melee. I.e., Ottoman Janissaries may have been considered a cut above other missile troops in melee (the others being classed as LF). Janissaries are known to have carried melee weapons and had elite discipline so... not implausible? Thoughts?

[Deleted]

"Heavy Foot" are organized foot troops equipped for melee. The only light foot are sappers, archers, gun crews, etc. Somebody in heavy padding or leather is still "heavy foot."

So yeah, Ottoman Turk melee troops would be heavy foot.

[waysoftheearth]

Do you class Ottoman Janissaries (presumably "Turk Archers"?) as missile troops (LF), or as Turks (HF) for melee?


Also, how would you class the Ottoman Asappi? Would you have them LF or HF?

[Deleted]

Janissaries with bows are light foot for melee.

Asappi are irregular light infantry, so they're LF.

[Starbeard]

I wonder if it the answer can be found in the history books that were available to general readers at the time.

In Oman's Art of War in the Middle Ages, he quoted primary sources that describe the Saracens as the best advised and most prudent in military matters of all the barbarous nations (p. 32-33), and he also wrote that the 'disciplined fanaticism' of janissaries 'made them formidable foes in close combat, it was not for that kind of fighting that the Janissaries were designed.' (p. 130). I could have sworn that I also just read a snippet in there that described the Turks of the early Conquest formidable enemies because of their fanatical devotion, but for the life of me I can't find it again. Oman also typically reserved the term 'Turk' for Seljuks and earlier, and kept the term distinct from Saracens.

It could be that Gygax and Perrin had read books on the subject that spun the same angle, determined Turks to have an edge in melee due to a mixture of organization and/or devotion, and thus decided to let them fight as HF instead of LF.

[waysoftheearth]

Found this detailed series of posts (click the < > buttons at the top) on Ottoman military organisation: groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/tatar-l/conversations/topics/4783

[Malchor]

Perhaps this www.flickr.com/photos/lsauld/5988495287/in/pool-festivalofhistory/

[Deleted]

Also, "Turks" are included in CHAINMAIL because Elastolin made Turk figures.

That is the primary reason.