Month: April 2023

In some of the texts about the Battle of Pavia there is discussion about how the terrain influenced the battle. It is important in the recreation to understand the topography of Pavia.

Where are the hills?

Some of the battle descriptions talk about hills used as vantage points and troops taking protection in valleys from artillery fire. The writings of Colonel Hardy de Perini are particularly notable in this regard. The book that I have even has a map with contours showing the church of San Paulo on a hill dominating the centre of the park. To the new comer to the Battle of Pavia, this contoured map is convincing. The problem is that there is no actual hill in the park and San Paulo is not even in the park.

Without visiting the battlefield (which I have not done yet), how can I be so sure of the topography of Pavia? This is where Google Maps and their street view feature comes in. Google allows people to use these images on non commercial blogs as long as full credit is given. All of the pictures in this next section are thanks to Google Maps.

Photos of the terrain.

The above images together view almost every part of the battlefield. They give views from each side of the park looking into the park and views from the center of the park. One thing that is notable is that the park area is as flat as a snooker table (or a billiard table for our US friends).

What is also notable from the images is that both the park walls and many of the woods are no longer there. The flatness of the ground does make it easier to put together from a modeling perspective. I feel that these images have helped me get a feel of the topography of Pavia

What about the five chapels?

The Swiss mercenaries of the French were housed in the area known as the five Chapels. These Chapels were San Paolo, San Spirito and San Giacomo which were close to the walls of the park. San Pietro and San Lazzaro which were a little further out to the East of Pavia. I will probably only include the first three on the table as they have the most influence.

In looking at modern day photos of the area, I imagined that these five chapels were located in small villages. However, I found an excellent website which totally changed my views. I would encourage you to visit this website as the site has some images put together by the author. In respecting the intellectual property of the author I do not want to copy these images. However, there are some images of old art-work which I am free to use. Here are some interesting images of the San Paulo, San Spirito, San Giacomo area.

Images of the five chapels.

One thing that these images make clear is that the chapels were not surrounding by other buildings. They were almost like a monastery complex. Also it appears that San Paulo was on a small mound. So Perini, when he refers to San Paulo being on a hill, was not completely wrong. He just got the location and its role in the battle wrong. The rest of the terrain around the five chapels is also completely flat, just like the terrain inside the park.

This finding about the five chapels has changed my entire view on what role they took in the battle. I will now be re-reading many of the texts with this new understanding.

The roads from Pavia to Mirabello.

There are two roads from Pavia to the Mirabello area. One runs to the east of the Vernavola river and one runs to the west.

I have found quite a lot of information about the road to the East. Many accounts comment on this being a raised road, almost a dyke, to prevent flooding of the park to near Torre del Gallo. With such agreement between sources on this road, this is how I will model it.

The road to the West of the Vernavola is more complicated. There are accounts that say that this road was a huge tree lined avenue used for horse races. The road ran from Pavia to the Castello Mirabello. Other sources claim that this road was also partially raised to prevent flooding. I need to do more work on researching this road. The idea of a tree lined road does appeal to me as it will look good on the table.

Conclusion

Hopefully some of the information of the topography of Pavia will be useful to those trying to recreate this interesting battle.

I apologize that there are no pictures of figures in this post, but I wanted to get some of the information about the battlefield documented. I should have some photos of new Italian Wars figures to post soon.

I don’t like to claim that I am doing research on the Battle of Pavia 1525 as I am not going back to primary sources. However, I am doing a lot of reading about Pavia from various authors of different nationalities. In this post I hope to discuss how I plan to reconcile different accounts of the battle to create a table top event.

Books on Pavia

The following is a list of the main books that I am reading, I will list them in the order of importance to my recreation of the Battle:

• The Battle of Pavia, 24th February 1525 by Jean Giono. Translated from the French Le Desastre de Pavia.
• Da Marignano A Pavia. Le guerre italiane de Francesco 1 (1515-1525) by Luigi Casali and Marco Galandra (written in Italian)
• The Art of War in Italy 1494-1529. Taylor, F.L.
• History of the Art of War in the Sixteenth Century. Sir Charles Oman
• The Italian Wars. Volume 3. Francis I and the Battle of Pavia 1525. Massimo Predonzani and Vincenzo Alberici
• French Military Campaigns 1214 to 1542. By Colonel Hardy de Perini. Translated by G.F.Nafziger.

Problems with the books on Pavia 1525.

I have six books that form the bulk of my reading on Pavia 1525. The problem is that they give six substantially different accounts of the Battle of Pavia. The summary of what they all agree on is essentially the French were surrounding Pavia, the Imperials arrived and got into the park, the French gendarmes were killed by arquebusiers, the French King was captured and the imperials won. Details of the battlefield, initial deployments, strengths, movements and combats all vary. To recreate the battle by reconciling these accounts is all but impossible.

Some of these inconsistencies come from interpreting some of the source documents differently and from some of the writers of the source documents only having a limited understanding of what was going on around them. Others come from poor research and accepting long held false views of the battle.

Some of the accounts just don’t make sense when I read them. I can’t reconcile what they say with the actual layout of the battlefield and basic military tactics. I have spent many hours trying to resolve the accounts and recreate the battle on a map.

How to resolve the inconsistencies.

I had a moment of inspiration the other night when I was trying to resolve what happened at Pavia 1525 so that I can recreate the battle as a war-game on the table top. The inspiration was that I am not trying to recreate exactly what happened. All I need to do is have a good estimate of the main elements of each force, their abilities and their locations at the start of the Battle. Then I need to have a good understanding of the constraints of both the battlefield and the weather.

If I have a good understanding of these items, then the players are free to move their troops and fight in any way that they want. They can create their own Battle of Pavia. I don’t need to understand exactly when and where each unit moved in the real battle. I am not forcing players to move in a pre-ordained way. This methodology is consistent with the way that I run all of my games. I never force players to act in a certain way; they are the commanders.

The constraints of the battlefield terrain

In a previous post I discussed the location and the type of woods in the park. These woods and how I represent them are key to the flow of the battle.

The next key item is the walls of the park and their limitations. I accept the premise that the gates in the wall were not sufficiently large enough to allow an entire army to pass through, a breach had to be made. There is some discussion of this being in the North wall between Due Porte and Porta Pescarina. Others suggest that it is in the East Wall between Torre del Gallo and Due Porte.

I was originally of the opinion that the breach must have been in the North Wall near Porta Pescarina due to the restrictions of the woods. However, if we believe this view, we must also explain how the troops got outside the park near Porta Pescarina. To get there they must have also breached the wall near Due Porte to get into Parco Nuovo to the north. Due Porte means two doors – one entered the Parco Vecchio to the South and one entered the Parco Nuovo to the North.

I did not show the wall extending North from Due Porte to surround the Parco Nuovo on the above map. This omission was because I did not think that this wall was relevant at the time. I now believe that it was very important. There is no mention of this second breach in any of the texts so I do not believe that there were two breaches.

Instead I believe that the main Imperial army breached the park wall somewhere close to Due Porte to avoid the problems with the woods nearer Torre del Gallo. I also believe that the light arquebusiers initially heading rapidly to Castello Mirabello probably passed through Due Porte into Parco Nuovo and then entered Parco Vecchio through Porta Pescarina. As these troops were fewer and lighter, they could have gone through the gates and not required the wall to be breached.

The other main constraint is the Vernavola. Due to the wet weather this river was not passible in the Southern half of the park except around Torretta where there was a raised road. The river was only again passible at Castello Mirabello due to a road bridge. It was also passible further north between Cascina Repentita and Porta Pescarina. The other item of note around the river was the raised road running along the East of the river from Pavia to San Genesio. This road allowed travel through the marsh area and also provided a barrier for protection against artillery. Other than this raised road the battlefield was essentially flat.

The Vernavola is important to the recreation of the Battle as it provides an impassible barrier between the troops deployed to the East and those deployed to the West. Once the French troops are committed to one side of the river, they cannot influence the battle on the other side of the river. This terrain feature is also important when considered with the morning fog. Different elements of the French army are out of communication with each other. This means in the recreation of the battle it is important to not allow them to communicate with each other if they are not in contact.

Constraints of the weather.

The weather also provides a number of constraints. In addition to the morning fog, the late winter weather was cold and wet. Not only does it influence movement through the woods and prevent crossing the river, but it also impacts the ability of the pike blocks and heavy cavalry. The ground was wet and muddy. This prevented the pike blocks getting a grip and being as effective as usual. For the heavy cavalry, while it would not prevent an initial charge, the ground would tire the horses and prevent multiple devastating charges.

The initial locations of troops at Pavia 1525.

As I mentioned, the initial locations of troops is going to be key in setting up the game. Once we have decided where the Imperial troops can enter the park, which I discussed above, the French troop starting locations are the main issue.

Now many of the sources agree where the Swiss, Landsknechts, Black Band and Light Cavalry were located. So none of these are too much of a problem. The main issue is where the King and the Gendarmes were located at the start of the Battle. Jean Giono believes that they were near the Cascina Repentita and others believe that they were further South. I will discuss the locations of both sides in the next post.

Conclusion on gaming Pavia 1525.

Deciding on the battlefield and weather constraints, as well as starting positions of the troops allows a game to be played without a full understanding of the actual movements of all units in the battle. With the diverse accounts of the battle, this may be the best that is possible. There is plenty of scope for different war-games to interpret the vast amount of information available very differently. As a result I expect many different representations of Pavia by war-gamers in 2025.

An update to the painting, I am working on about 100 arquebusiers (Landsknecht and Italian) and 30 Spanish Jinetes. These are all additional troops and will be added to my collection.

I recently made a post on “The Italian Wars War Wargaming” Facebook page about fork supported muskets at Pavia. Everyone was very polite, but various people suggested that muskets were not around in 1525. Various dates were suggested for the introduction of muskets including 1540s, 1550s and 1560s.

Not one to be deterred by the collective hive mind of the wargaming community, (especially after having discovered that the collective narrative for the Battle of Novara was completely wrong) I set out in search of more information.

1) Taylor – The Art of War in Italy.

My first reference is a favorite for War-gamers, Taylor – The Art of War in Italy, 1494-1529.

Page 50-51 “..from 1516 to 1521 the Spanish army added to the military value of the infantry firearm not only by adopting the new invention of the musket, but also studying carefully its tactical employment..  When the war began again the ascendancy of the Spanish arquebusiers and musketeers over the other nations soon became very marked ”.

This section seems to imply muskets being different to arquebuses.

Page 46.  “… the Spaniards brought into the field a larger and improved firearm which came to be called the musket.  It was six feet long and fired balls weighing two ounces.  Its weight necessitated the use of a forked rest., but its unwieldiness was compensated by its great killing power – its ability to bring down two cavalry men with one shot.  For a time this new weapon was classed as an arquebus, and it is therefore difficult to trace its rate of increase.  Occasionally it is referred to as a part of the artillery owing to it being transported by horses on the march”.

The references of these statements are the Memoirs of Du Bellay. Bk II page 189 

Rustow, Geschichte der Infanterie Vol 1 Bk III pg 221-5

Nardi, Isolerei della città di Firenze Bk V Chapter 35

I don’t have access to the primary sources used by Taylor. I am referencing them so that others can seek them out.

2) Jean Giorno, The Battle of Pavia

My second reference is Jean Giono, The Battle of Pavia, 24th February 1525. The reference comes from page 154 where he talks about the French Gendarmes.

“Now they are at grips with seven or eight thousand light fusiliers wheeling in among them from left and right, shooting at point blank range; they are also under fire from “forked arquebuses”, (the machine guns of those days), that have been set up in the second wood” .

There are some areas of the account of the Battle by Jean Giorno that I am skeptical about. However, his account of the Battle is one of the most complete that I have seen. He also uses a wide array of primary sources which he discusses in some detail. I am therefore inclined to believe his discussion about arquebuses and “forked arquebuses”. His account clearly differentiates the two weapons.

3) Paulo Giovio

I have seen some accounts on the internet about Paulo Giovio discussing the Spanish Infantry using a new kind of firearm at Pavia in 1525. It is reported that the new firearm was heavier than the arquebus and could sometimes kill two French men at arms with a single bullet. I do not have this text. I only reference it in case others wish to explore it in more detail.

What do we know about fork supported muskets at Pavia?

We see a couple of credible references to a firearm that is heavier and different to a standard arquebus being employed at Pavia. Both of these references discuss a fork to support the weapon. Taylor also discusses the ability of this weapon to cut down French Gendarmes despite their armor, and even go through two cavalry men. There is also reference to the weapon being six feet long.

Now to support the conclusion that there were forked muskets at Pavia, I would like some additional evidence. Ideally I would like some art pieces displaying the battle to show the forked musket being used. To date I have not found it displayed in any of the tapestries, wood cuts or paintings that I have looked at.

In the absence of the display of a fork supported musket at Pavia in the artwork, I turned to looking for an example of such a musket in a museum.

NRA firearm museum.

The NRA firearm museum has in it’s collection a Spanish musket that “was likely made circa 1530 in Madrid, Spain and was intended to be used with a forked rest”.

I spoke to the museum Director, he kindly allowed me to post pictures of this weapon on my blog. I thank him and the museum for this permission. He also agreed to go and measure the overall length of the musket and reported that it is 57.25 inches. This length is a little shorter than the six foot (72 inches) reported in the historical texts. This means that it may not be the exact type referred to in the texts, but nevertheless shows that forked muskets were present around the time of Pavia.

Now 1530 is not 1525, but it is very, very close. We now have a Spanish forked musket from 1530 that is 57.25 inches long. This weapon certainly supports the possibility that the Spanish used forked muskets at Pavia.

There are additional images at the NRA website at this link

Figures for the forked supported muskets at Pavia

For my recreation of the Battle, I am convinced of the presence of fork supported muskets at Pavia. I will be employing these weapons in my recreation of the Battle.

Now I haven’t found a figure that I like for these Spanish forked muskets at Pavia. I know that I would buy 50 figures if I could find some figures that I like. Otherwise, I may need to do some conversions.

One major 28mm figure manufacturer has said “I could see us adding one or two miniatures” when discussing these fork supported muskets at Pavia. So I have a question for the community. Would you consider buying these figures if they are introduced prior to the anniversary of Pavia? Let’s show that it would be worth it for a figure manufacturer to add these weapons to their range.