WARRIORS HALL OF FAME

Gaius Marius (157 BC - 86 BC), Reformer of Roman Armies

2012-09-04T09:04:00.006+07:00

So-called “Marius”, free copy (probably augustean time) after a portrait of an important Roman from 2nd century BC. Because of many common details with the so-called « Sulla » (proportions, open mouth, large eyes), it is advanced that both statues (brothers, adversaries?) were concieved and exhibited together

Lists of those who were doomed were hung up in the Forum

“Gaius Marius sitting in exile among the ruins of Carthage after being kicked out of Rome,” plate from The Story of Rome by Mary Macgregor, illustrated by Paul Woodroffe, W. Rainey and Dudley Heath, now in the public domain

"Caius Marius on the ruins of Carthage" by John Vanderlyn. Engraving showing Gaius Marius, full-length portrait, seated, facing front, with ruins of Carthage behind him

Gaius Marius (157 BC – January 13, 86 BC) was a Roman general and statesman. He held the office of consul an unprecedented seven times during his career. He was also noted for his dramatic reforms of Roman armies, authorizing recruitment of landless citizens, eliminating the manipular military formations, and reorganizing the structure of the legions into separate cohorts. Marius defeated the invading Germanic tribes (the Teutones, Ambrones, and the Cimbri), for which he was called "the third founder of Rome." His life and career were significant in Rome's transformation from Republic to Empire.

Marius was born in 157 BC in the town of Arpinum in southern Latium. The town had been conquered by the Romans in the late 4th century BC and was given Roman citizenship without voting rights. Only in 188 BC did the town receive full citizenship. Although Plutarch claims that Marius' father was a laborer, this is almost certainly false since Marius had connections with the nobility in Rome, he ran for local office in Arpinum, and he had marriage relations with the local nobility in Arpinum, which all combine to indicate that he was born into a locally important family of equestrian status. The problems he faced in his early career in Rome show the difficulties that faced a "new man" (novus homo).

There is a legend that Marius, as a teenager, found an eagle's nest with seven chicks in it – eagle clutches hardly ever have more than 3 eggs; even if two females used the same nest, finding 7 offspring in a single nest would be exceptionally rare. Since eagles were considered sacred animals of Jupiter, the supreme god of the Romans, it was later seen as an omen predicting his election to the consulship seven times. Later, as consul, he decreed that the eagle would be the symbol of the Senate and People of Rome.

In 134 BC, he was serving with the army at Numantia and his good services brought him to the attention of Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus Africanus. Whether he arrived with Scipio Aemilianus or was already serving in the demoralized army that Scipio Aemilianus took over at Numantia is not clear. According to Plutarch, during a conversation after dinner, when the conversation turned to generals, someone asked Scipio Aemilianus where the Roman people would find a worthy successor to him. Aemilianus then gently tapped on Marius' shoulder, saying: "Perhaps this is the man." It would seem that even at this early stage in his army career, Marius had ambitions for a political career in Rome. He ran for election as one of the twenty-four special military tribunes of the first four legions who were elected (the rest were appointed by the magistrate who raised the legion). Sallust tells us that he was unknown by sight to the electors but was returned by all the tribes on the basis of his accomplishments.

Next, he ran for the quaestorship after losing an election for local office in Arpinum. The military tribunate shows that he was already interested in Roman politics before the quaestorship. Perhaps he simply ran for local office as a means of gaining support back home, and lost to some other local worthy. Nothing is known of his actions while quaestor.

In 120 BC, Marius was returned as plebeian tribune for the following year. He won with the support of Quintus Caecilius Metellus (later known as Metellus Numidicus), who was an inherited patronus. The Metelli, though neither ancient nor patrician, were one of the most powerful families in Rome at this time. During his tribunate, Marius pursued a populares line. He passed a law that restricted the interference of the wealthy in elections. In the 130s voting by ballot had been introduced in elections for choosing magistrates, passing laws and deciding legal cases, replacing the earlier system of oral voting. The wealthy continued to try to influence the voting by inspecting ballots and Marius passed a law narrowing the passages down which voters passed to cast their votes in order to prevent outsiders from harassing the electors. In the passage of this law, Marius alienated the Metelli, who opposed it.

Soon thereafter, Marius ran for the aedileship and lost. This loss was at least in part due to the enmity of the Metelli. In 116 BC he barely won election as praetor for the following year (presumably coming in sixth) and was promptly accused of ambitus (electoral corruption). He barely won acquittal on this charge, and spent an uneventful year as praetor in Rome (as Urban Praetor, Peregrine Praetor or President of the extortion court). In 114 BC, Marius' imperium was prorogued and he was sent to govern Lusitania, where he engaged in some sort of minor military operation: according to Plutarch, he cleared away the robbers whilst robbery was still considered a noble occupation by the local people. During this period in Roman history governors seem regularly to have served two years in Hispania, so he was probably replaced in 113 BC.

He received no triumph on his return and did not apparently run for the consulship, but he did marry Julia, the aunt of Julius Caesar. The Julii Caesares were a patrician family, but at this period seem to have found it hard to advance above the praetorship. (Only once in the 2nd century – in 157 BC – did a member of the family become consul.) To judge by this marriage, Marius had apparently achieved some substantial political or financial influence by this point (possibly from his governship in Hispania).

The Marii were the inherited clients of the Caecilii Metelli and a Caecilius Metellus had aided Marius' campaign for the tribunate. Although he seems to have had a break with the Metelli as a result of the laws he passed while tribune, the rupture was not permanent, since in 109 BC Quintus Caecilius Metellus took Marius with him as his legate on his campaign against Jugurtha. Legates (legati) were originally simply envoys sent by the Senate, but men appointed as legates by the Senate were used by generals as subordinate commanders, usually becoming the general's most trusted lieutenant. Hence, Metellus had to have asked the Senate to appoint Marius as legate to allow him to serve as Metellus' subordinate. In Sallust's long account of Metellus' campaign no other legates are mentioned, so it is assumed that Marius was Metellus's senior subordinate and right-hand man. Thus Metellus was using Marius' military experience, while Marius was strengthening his position to run for the consulship. The rupture in 119 BC may have been exaggerated after the fact in light of his later and much more serious disagreement with Metellus about Numidia.

By 108 BC, Marius conceived the desire to run for the consulship. Despite lack of approval from Metellus (brought on by Marius' status as a novus homo) who instead advised Marius to wait and run with Metellus' son (who was only twenty, which would signify a campaign 20 years in the future) Marius began to campaign for the consulship. Sallust claims that this was catalyzed, in part, by a fortune-teller who "told him that great and wonderful things were presaged to him that he might therefore pursue whatever designs he had formed trusting to the gods for success, and that he might try fortune as often as he pleased for that all his undertakings would prosper." Marius soon earned the respect of the troops by his conduct towards them, eating his meals with them and proving he was not afraid to share in any of their labours. He also won over the Italian traders by claiming that he could capture Jugurtha in a few days with half Metellus' troops. Both groups wrote home in praise of him, suggesting that he could end the war quickly unlike Metellus, who was pursuing a policy of methodically subduing the countryside. Eventually Metellus gave in, realizing that it was counterproductive to have a resentful subordinate.

Under these circumstances, Marius was triumphantly elected consul later that year, for 107 BC. He was campaigning against Metellus's apparent lack of swift action against Jugurtha. Because of the repeated military debacles from 113 BC to 109 BC and the accusations that the oligarchy was open to flagrant bribery, it became easier for the virtuous new man who had worked with difficulty up the ladder of offices to be elected as an alternative to the inept or corrupt nobility. The Senate had a trick up its sleeve, however. In accordance with the provisions of the Lex Sempronia on Consular provinces, which dictated that the Senate in a given year was to determine the Consular provinces for the next year at the end of year before the elections, the Senate decided not to make the war against Jugurtha one of the provinces and to prorogue Metellus in Numidia. Marius got around this through a ploy that had been used in 131 BC. In that year there was a dispute as to who should command the war against Aristonicus in Asia, and a tribune had passed a law authorizing an election to select the commander (there was precedent for this procedure from the Second Punic War). A similar law was passed in 108 BC and Marius was voted the command by the People in this special election. Metellus shed bitter tears when he learned of the decision. Upon returning home, he avoided meeting Marius, and was granted a Triumph and the agnomen Numidicus (conqueror of Numidia).

The most dramatic and influential changes Marius made to the Roman army were named the Marian Reforms. In 107 BC, shortly after being elected as Consul, Marius, fearing Barbarian invasion, saw the dire need for an increase in troop numbers. Until this time, the standard requirements to become a Roman soldier were very strict. To be considered a soldier in the service of the republic, an individual was required to provide his own arms and uniform for combat. Marius relaxed the recruitment policies by removing the necessity to own land, and allowed all Roman citizens entry, regardless of social class (Plutarch, The Life of Marius). The benefits to the army were numerous, with the unemployed masses enlisting for military service alongside the more fortunate citizens. Poorer citizens were drawn to lifelong service, as they were rewarded with the prospect of settlement in conquered land. This also 'Romanized' the population in newly subjugated provinces, thus reducing unrest and lowering the chance of revolt against the Roman Republic. The new Roman army, its numbers vastly bolstered by lower class citizens whose future was tied to their permanent career, was always able to provide reserves in times of disaster. In addition, the growth of the army ensured continued military success due to the high number of fresh soldiers available for each campaign. Even though the army increased in size considerably, Marius also sought to improve organization among his troops.

Marius needed more troops, and to this effect he made a change in procedure used for recruiting troops, probably unaware of the momentous implications of this change. All of the Gracchian agrarian reforms had been premised on the traditional Roman levy, which excluded from service those whose property qualification fell below the minimum property qualification for the fifth census class. The Gracchi had tried to restore the smallholders who would constitute the majority of those qualified to serve. The end of the Gracchan land legislation did nothing to change the military crisis that gave rise to that legislation. It seems that the minimum qualification for the fifth census class (the lowest one eligible for military service) was lowered from 11,000 to 3000 sesterces of property, and already in 109 BC the consuls had had to seek suspension of Gaius Gracchus' restrictions on the levy. In 107 BC Marius decided to ignore the census qualification altogether and recruited with no inquiry into the property of the potential soldier. From now on Rome's legions would largely consist of poor citizens (the "capite censi" or "head count") whose future after service could only be assured if their general could somehow bring about a land distribution on their behalf. Thus the soldiers had a very strong personal interest in supporting their general against the Senate (i.e., the oligarchy) and the "public interest" that was often equated with the Senate. Marius did not avail himself of this potential source of support, but in less than two decades Marius' ex-quaestor Sulla would use it against the Senate and Marius.
War in Numidia

Marius found that it wasn't as easy to end the war as he had claimed. He arrived comparatively late in 107 BC and in that year and the next he forced Jugurtha to the south and west toward Mauretania. Marius' quaestor in 107 BC had been Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix, the son of a patrician family that had fallen on hard times. Marius was supposedly unhappy at receiving the dissolute youth as his subordinate, but Sulla proved a competent military leader. By 105 the king of Mauretania, Bocchus I, who was also Jugurtha's father-in-law and reluctant ally, was worried about the approaching Romans. After receiving word that an accommodation with them was possible, Bocchus insisted that Sulla make the hazardous journey to his capital, where Sulla induced Bocchus to betray Jugurtha, who was duly handed over to Sulla, thus ending the war. Since Marius held the imperium and Sulla was acting as his subordinate, the honor of capturing Jugurtha belonged strictly to Marius, but Sulla had clearly been immediately responsible and had a signet ring made for himself commemorating the event. Sulla would later claim that the credit for ending the war was his. Meanwhile, Marius was the hero of the hour, and his services would be needed in another emergency.

The arrival of the Cimbri in Gaul in 109 BC and their complete defeat of Marcus Junius Silanus had resulted in unrest among the Celtic tribes recently conquered by the Romans in southern Gaul. In 107 the consul Lucius Cassius Longinus was completely defeated by the Tigurini clan, and the senior surviving officer (Gaius Popillius Laenas, son of the consul of 132) had saved what was left only by surrendering half the baggage and suffering the humiliation of having his army "march under the yoke." The next year (106 BC) another consul, Quintus Servilius Caepio, marched to Gaul and captured the disloyal community of Tolosa (Toulouse), where a huge sum of money (the Gold of Tolosa), was taken from shrines. The larger part of it mysteriously vanished when being transported to Massilia (Marseille). Caepio was prorogued into the next year, when one of the new consuls, Gnaeus Mallius Maximus, also operated in southern Gaul. Mallius was a new man like Marius, and he and the noble Caepio found it impossible to co-operate.

The Cimbri and the Teutones (both migrating Germanic tribes) appeared on the Rhône, and while Caepio was on the west bank he refused to come to the aid of Mallius on the left. Eventually the Senate got Caepio's reluctant agreement to co-operate, but even when he crossed the river to help the threatened Mallius, he refused to join forces and kept his own at a fair distance. First the Germans routed Caepio and then destroyed Mallius's army on October 6, 105 BC at Arausio. Since the Romans fought with the river at their back, flight was not possible and reportedly 80,000 were killed. The losses in the preceding decade had been bad enough, but this defeat, apparently caused by the arrogance of the nobility and its refusal to co-operate with talented non-nobles, was the last straw. Not only had huge numbers of Romans lost their lives but Italy itself was now exposed to invasion from barbarian hordes. The failure to deal with this threat marked the start of a period when dissatisfaction with the oligarchy (and thus, conflict between the optimates and the populares) was becoming increasingly, and dangerously, bitter. Sometime during this war Marius participated in the Trial of Trebonius.

In late 105 BC Marius was elected consul again while still in Africa. Election in absentia was unusual enough, but at some time after 152 BC a law had been passed dictating a ten-year interval between consulships, and there is even some evidence to indicate that by 135 BC a law had been passed that prohibited second consulships altogether. Nonetheless by this time news of a new advancing tribe known as the Cimbri had reached Rome and in the emergency Marius was again chosen consul. The law was either repealed or set aside under the circumstances of emergency, as Marius was then elected to an unprecedented five successive consulships (104 BC–100 BC). He returned to Rome by January 1, 104 BC, when he celebrated his triumph over Jugurtha, who was first led in the procession, then killed in the public prison.

The Cimbri conveniently marched into Hispania and the Teutoni milled around in northern Gaul, leaving Marius to prepare his army. One of his legates was his old quaestor, Sulla, which shows that at this time there was no ill-will between them. In 104 BC, Marius was returned as consul again for 103 BC. Though he could have continued to operate as proconsul, it seems that the position as consul would make his position as commander unassailable and avoid any problems with the consuls if he was only a proconsul. Marius seems to have been able to get exactly what he wanted, and it even seems that his support determined whom the people would elect as his colleagues (his choice was apparently determined, on several occasions, on the basis of their malleability: only Catulus in 102 BC, and Flaccus in 100 BC, would have been serious candidates in their own right without his support, and even Flaccus was described as more servant than partner in the office.) In 103 BC, the Germans still did not emerge from Hispania, and conveniently Marius's colleague (L. Aurelius Orestes, son of C. Gracchus's commander in Sardinia in 126 BC–124 BC) died, so Marius had to return to Rome to oversee the elections, being re-elected for 102 BC.

In 102 BC the Cimbri returned from Hispania into Gaul and together with the Teutones decided to invade Italy. The Teutones were to head south and advance toward Italy along the Mediterranean coast; the Cimbri were to attempt to cross the Alps into Italy from the northwest by the Brenner Pass; and the Tigurini (the allied Celtic tribe who had defeated Longinus in 107) were to cross the Alps from the northeast. This decision proved fatally flawed. The Germanic soldiers divided their forces, making each contingent manageable, and the Romans could use their shorter lines of communication and supply to concentrate their forces at will.

First, Marius had to deal with the Teutones, who were in the province of Narbonensis marching toward the Alps. He refused to give them a battle where they wanted, and withdrew to Aquae Sextiae (a settlement founded by Gaius Sextius Calvinus in 124 BC), which blocked their path. The leading contingent of the Germanic warriors, the Ambrones, foolishly attacked the Roman position without waiting for reinforcements and 30,000 were killed. Marius then hid 3,000 troops in ambush, so when the main Germanic contingent finally attacked, the hidden Roman troops could fall on them from behind. In the ensuing defeat, the Teutones were completely annihilated, to the number of something over 100,000.

Marius' colleague Quintus Lutatius Catulus in 102 BC did not have as much luck. He botched the holding of the Brenner Pass, allowing the Cimbri to advance into northern Italy by late 102 BC. Marius was in Rome, and after becoming elected consul for 101 BC and deferring his Triumph over the Teutones, he marched north to join Catulus, whose command was prorogued into 101. Finally, in the summer of that year a battle was fought at Vercellae in Cisalpine Gaul. Once again, Roman discipline overcame a larger barbarian force. At least 65,000 were killed (perhaps as many as 100,000 again) and all the remainder enslaved. The Tigurini gave up their efforts to enter Italy from the northeast and went home. Catulus and Marius celebrated a joint Triumph, but in popular thinking all the credit went to Marius, who was praised as "the third founder of Rome." Catulus became alienated from Marius and would later become one of his chief opponents. As a sort of reward (the danger was now gone) Marius was returned as consul for 100 BC. This year would not go at all well for Marius.

During this year Lucius Appuleius Saturninus was tribune for the second time (having apparently had Marius's support on both this occasion and the previous one), and advocated reforms like those earlier put forth by the Gracchi. He pushed for a bill that gave colonial lands to the veterans of the recent war and offered to lower the price of wheat distributed by the state. The Senate, however, opposed these measures and violence broke out. The Senate then ordered Marius, as consul, to put down the revolt. Marius, although he was generally allied with the radicals, complied with the request and put down the revolt in the interest of public order. He then went to the east and into retirement.

What is important in this incident is that instead of seizing the opportunity to establish himself as supreme ruler and reformer of the state, Marius showed the senate, who had always been suspicious of his motives, that he was one of them instead of the outsider that Quintus Metellus said he was in 108 BC. Marius' overall concern, for his part, was how to maintain the Senate's esteem.

While Marius was away and after he returned, Rome had several years of relative peace. But in 95 BC, Rome passed a decree expelling from the city all residents who were not Roman citizens. In 91 BC Marcus Livius Drusus was elected tribune and proposed a greater division of state lands, the enlargement of the Senate, and a conferral of Roman citizenship upon all freemen of Italy. But Drusus was assassinated, and many of the Italian states then revolted against Rome in the Social War of 91–88 BC. Marius took command (following the deaths of the consul, Publius Rutilius Lupus, and the praetor Quintus Servilius Caepio) and fought along with Sulla against the rebel cities, but retired from the war in its early stages – probably due to poor health (it has been suggested that he suffered a stroke.)

After the Social War, King Mithridates of Pontus began his bid to conquer Rome's eastern provinces and invaded Greece. In 88 BC, Lucius Cornelius Sulla was elected consul. The choice before the Senate was to put either Marius or Sulla in command of an army which would aid Rome's Greek allies and defeat Mithridates. The Senate chose Sulla, but soon the Assembly appointed Marius. In this unsavory episode of low politics, he was helped by the unscrupulous actions of Publius Sulpicius Rufus, whose debts Marius had promised to erase. Sulla refused to acknowledge the validity of the Assembly's action.

Sulla left Rome and traveled to the army waiting in Nola, the army the Senate had asked him to lead against Mithridates. Sulla urged his legions to defy the Assembly's orders and accept him as their rightful leader. Sulla was successful and the legions stoned the representatives from the Assembly. Sulla then commanded six legions to march with him to Rome and institute a civil war. This was a momentous event, and was unforeseen by Marius, as no Roman army had ever marched upon Rome—it was forbidden by law and ancient tradition.

Once it became obvious that Sulla was going to defy the law and seize Rome by force, Marius attempted to organize a defense of the city using gladiators. Unsurprisingly Marius' ad-hoc force was no match for Sulla's legions. Marius was defeated and fled Rome. Marius narrowly escaped capture and death on several occasions and eventually found safety in Africa. Sulla and his supporters in the Senate passed a death sentence on Marius, Sulpicius and a few other allies of Marius. A few men were executed but (according to Plutarch), many Romans disapproved of Sulla's actions; some who opposed Sulla were actually elected to office in 87 BC. (Gnaeus Octavius, a supporter of Sulla, and Lucius Cornelius Cinna, a supporter of Marius, were elected consul). Regardless, Sulla was confirmed again as the commander of the campaign against Mithridates, so he took his legions out of Rome and marched east to the war.

While Sulla was on campaign in Greece, fighting broke out between the conservative supporters of Sulla, led by Octavius, and the popular supporters of Cinna. Marius along with his son then returned from exile in Africa with an army he had raised there and combined with Cinna to oust Octavius. This time it was the army of Marius that entered Rome.

Some of the soldiers went through Rome killing the leading supporters of Sulla, including Octavius. Their heads were exhibited in the Forum. All told some dozen Roman nobles had been murdered. The Senate passed a law exiling Sulla, and Marius was appointed the new commander in the eastern war. Cinna was chosen for his third consulship and Marius to his seventh consulship. After five days, Cinna and the populares general Quintus Sertorius ordered their more disciplined troops to kill the rampaging soldiers.

In his Life of Marius, Plutarch writes that Marius's return to power was a particularly brutal and bloody one, saying that the consul's "anger increased day by day and thirsted for blood, kept on killing all whom he held in any suspicion whatsoever." Among these included former consul Lutatius Catulus and the orator Marcus Antonius, grandfather of Mark Anthony. Plutarch writes that "whenever anybody else greeted Marius and got no salutation or greeting in return, this of itself was a signal for the man's slaughter in the very street, so that even the friends of Marius, to a man, were full of anguish and horror whenever they drew near to greet him."

Plutarch relates several opinions on the end of C. Marius: one, from Posidonius, holds that Marius contracted pleurisy; Gaius Piso has it that Marius walked with his friends and discussed all of his accomplishments with them, adding that no intelligent man ought leave himself to Fortune. Plutarch then anonymously relates that Marius, having gone into a fit of passion in which he announced a delusion that he was in command of the Mithridatic War, began to act as he would have on the field of battle; finally, ever an ambitious man, Marius lamented, on his death bed, that he had not achieved all of which he was capable, despite his having acquired great wealth and having been chosen consul more times than any man before him.

Marius was a successful Roman general and military reformer, but also known as a harsh, ambitious man harboring contempt for the nobility (who occupied the Senate). He played a critical role in the destruction of the Roman Republic, and the birth of the Roman Empire. Plutarch says of him

just as Plato was wont to say often to Xenocrates the philosopher, who had the reputation of being rather morose in his disposition, "My good Xenocrates, sacrifice to the Graces," so if Marius could have been persuaded to sacrifice to the Greek Muses and Graces, he would not have put the ugliest possible crown upon a most illustrious career in field and forum, nor have been driven by the blasts of passion, ill-timed ambition, and insatiable greed upon the shore of a most cruel and savage old age.

His improvements to the structure and organization of the Roman legion were profound and effective. However he was, in part, responsible for the breakdown in relations with Sulla which led to Sulla's march on Rome. He himself had broken with tradition on previous occasions and his effort to reverse the Senate's appointment of Sulla as commander of the Mithridatic War was highly questionable under Roman constitutional tradition. The five days of terror upon his return to Rome saw many hundreds slaughtered in his name.

The Marian reforms to the legions, recruiting among un-propertied urban citizens, was a pivotal step leading in short order to the collapse of the Republic. Marius set the precTautanedent of recruiting among the poor and then granting these veterans land upon the conclusion of the campaign. Thus the legions became more loyal to their generals than to the state. The loyalty of such legions is what allowed Marius himself, Sulla, and about 40 years later Marius' nephew Julius Caesar to march on Rome itself.

The struggle between Marius and Sulla led to the deaths of numerous distinguished Roman senators, equestrians and unknown thousands of Roman soldiers and citizens. It set a precedent for the civil wars to come that led ultimately to the destruction of the Republican form of government and thus to the establishment of the principate system of the Empire.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.heritage-history.com

Hiram Berdan (1824-1893), Inventor and Sharpshooter

2012-08-09T16:09:00.007+07:00

Hiram Berdan (1824 – 1893), engineer and Union Army General, commander of sharpshooters during the American Civil War. Photo taken between 1860 and 1870

Hiram Berdan as an inventor after the war

Hiram Berdan grave in Section 2 of Arlington National Cemetery. He died at the Metropolitan Club in New York City on March 31, 1893. He appeared at the club around 5:00 PM, and mentioned to the club secretary that he was not feeling well. During a game of chess with “Admiral Crosby,” the New York Times reported that at 5:45 PM “suddenly his head dropped and he began to breathe heavily and expired almost instantly.” It was finally determined that his death was caused by a cerebral hemorrhage

Hiram Berdan (September 6, 1824 – March 31, 1893) was an American engineer, inventor and military officer, world-renowned marksman, and guiding force behind and commanding colonel of the famed United States Volunteer Sharpshooter Regiments during the American Civil War. He was the inventor of the Berdan rifle, the Berdan centerfire primer and numerous other weapons and accessories.

Hiram Berdan was a talented inventor with over 30 patents to his name. These range from a collapsable life boat (a patent that was donated to a charity, and never built) to machines to automate the production of bread (these machines were used by some companies at the time of the Civil War to make Army Bread, or Hardtack) to post-war weapons modifications sold to the Russian military. Through these patents, Berdan became a very wealthy man with contacts in important governmental and business positions.

Berdan was a likely choice to form a regiment of expert marksmen because of hid influence, and because he was known to be the best rifle shot in the United States at the time, in formal competition. Target shooting was a popular sport in the northern United States for affluent and common men alike. President Lincoln was also known to be a fair shot. Most of the men who formed the Sharpshooters were not wealthy business men, like Berdan, but rather men who had learned to shoot through hunting, competition shooing, or previous war experience. The call to a Sharpshooter regiments was well received, so well in fact, that the states began keeping their marksmen for volunteer sharpshooting regiments, to the dissatisfaction of Berdan.

At the beginning of the war Hiram Berdan used his recognition to persuade the Federal government to allow him to establish a regiment of Sharpshooters recruited from each of the loyal states and meeting specific marksmen restrictions. It is currently debated by historians and scholars whether this idea actually belonged to Hiram Berdan. It possible that Casper Trepp, who served as Captain of Company A, 1st U.S. Sharpshooters and later Major to Hiram Berdan, brought the idea of rifle regiment from Europe. Trepp came from Switzerland after serving in the Crimean war. He was an experienced infantryman and had witnessed both Napoleonic tactics (a method of fighting developed during the Napoleonic war to intimidate the enemy, still used during the civil war when weapons had surpassed the tactics) and the rifle regiments of the European armies. The tactics used by the Sharpshooters (operating in small teams, using stealth and cover, trying to maintain distance to the enemy) are believe to be the direct parent of later American fighting tactics. Other aspects of the Sharpshooters with European flavor are the green uniforms (tradition European uniform color for riflemen - possible the origin of the Green Berets as a symbol of an elite fighting force), the leather leggings and the hairy calf-skin knapsack that the Sharpshooters carried.

It is likely that Trepp knew he did not have the clout needed to persuade the Union to form these rifle regiments, and so gave Berdan the push needed to campaign for the regiments. There is some evidence of this in the writings of other Swiss Sharpshooters. Regardless of this, there grew a significant level of animousity between the two men, leading Trepp to attempt resignation (Berdan refused to accept Trepp's resignation, several times) and both men to file legal claims against each other.

The claims against Hiram Berdan were largely centered around the fact that he was seldom, if ever, seen on the field of battle. Though Berdan spent a great amount of time and effort to gain the ranks of Brigadier-General and Major-General, these were fought largely on the grounds that Berdan had not actually aided the battles. Berdan was not a military man by nature, and was possible the most difficult Sharpshooter to be taught drill. It was Lieutenant Colonel Frederick Mears who taught the Sharpshooters how to drill and to fight, largely against his will. Mears left the Sharpshooters to command the 4th U.S. Regulars.

Hiram Berdan stayed in Washington (D.C.) for several months of the war, recovering from a wound (that the military records do not mention) and attempting to draw more recruits to fill the ranks of the two Regiments, now depleted by war-time losses. After Gettysburg, Berdan petitioned for discharge and left the army January 2nd, 1864. After the war, Berdan took his family to Europe, where he was successful with several weapons patents.

Casper Trepp was officially given command the 1st U.S. Sharpshooters after Hiram Berdan officially became the Chief of Sharpshooters. He was killed at the Battle of Mine Run, November 30, 1863.

Hiram Berdan's dream was to form and lead a brigade of Sharpshooters, expert marksmen with extremely accurate weapons, in the civil war. To determine the quality of the recruit, a test was devised that each applicant must fire ten consecutive rounds free standing at a ten inch diameter target one hundred yards away and then fire an addition ten rounds at a ten inch diameter target two hundred yards away from a resting position, without missing a single shot. He recuited officers and enough men who could pass the marksmen test to field a full regiment, the 1st U.S. Sharpshooters, and the eight (instead of ten) company 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters. Berdan served as Colonel of the 1st Regiment, and Henry A.V. Post was Colonel of the 2nd regiment. Berdan eventually gained the rank of Brigadier-General over both regiments.
Of the eight companies forming the 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters, they were formed as follows:

Company "A" - Minnesota October 5, 1861
Company "B" - Michigan October 4, 1861
Company "C" - Pennsylvania October 4, 1861
Company "D" - Maine November 2, 1861
Company "E" - Vermont November 9, 1861
Company "F" - New Hampshire November 28, 1861
Company "G" - New Hampshire December 10, 1861
Company "H" - Vermont December 31, 1861

Most, but certainly not all, of the men serving in a company came from the state in which it was mustered. Some states, however, were not able to provide enough soldiers for a whole company and do their recruits were mustered into a company with a neighboring state.

The states did not like losing control of their best marksmen. This, combined with the lack of organization in the driving force behind the Sharpshooters, led the states to begin refusing to allow Berdan to recruit their soldiers. Eventually, lack of replacements for fallen soldiers took it's toll on the regiments.

The 2nd Regiment was part of the Army of the Patomac in the Eastern Theater. Because of the uncertain regimental status of the Sharpshooters and the need to put the marksmen in tactically advantageous positions, they were frequently reassigned. The official assignments were as follows:

Companies moved to Washington, D.C., and duty in the Defenses of that city until April, 1862.
2nd U.S. Sharpshooters attached to Augur's Brigade, King's 1st Division, McDowell's 1st Army Corps, Army of the Potomac, March to April 1862.
2nd U.S. Sharpshooters attached to 1st Brigade, King's Division, Dept. of the Rappahannock, April to June, 1862.
Attached to 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 3rd Army Corps, Army of Virginia, June to September, 1862.
Attached to 1st Brigade, 1st Division, 1st Army Corps, Army of the Potomac, September 1862 to March, 1863.
Attached to 3rd Brigade, 3rd Division, 3rd Army Corps, Army of the Potomac, March to June, 1863.
Attached to 2nd Brigade, 1st Division. 3rd Army Corps, June to September, 1863.
Attached to 3rd Brigade, 1st Division, 3rd Army Corps, September 1863 to March 1864.
Attached to 1st Brigade, 3rd Division, 2nd Army Corps, to February, 1865.

The movements of the 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters and associated battles are as follows:

Moved to Bristoe Station, Virginia, April 5-6, 1862
thence to Falmouth, Virgina, April 15-19, 1862
Duty at Falmouth until May 25, 1862
McDowell's advance on Richmond, Virginia May 25-29, 1862
Operations against Jackson June 1-21, 1862
Duty at Falmouth until August, 1862
Blackburn's Ford July 19, 1862
Reconnaissance to Orange Court House July 24-26, 1862
Pope's Campaign in Northern Virginia August 16-September 2, 1862
Fords of the Rappahannock August 21-23, 1862
Sulphur Springs August 26, 1862
Battle of Groveton August 29, 1862
Bull Run August 30, 1862
Maryland Campaign September 6-22, 1862
Battles of South Mountain September 14, 1862
Antietam September 16-17, 1862
Camp near Sharpsburg until October 29, 1862
Movement to Falmouth, Virginia, October 29-November 17, 1862
Battle of Fredericksburg December 12-15, 1862
"Mud March" January 20-24, 1863
At Falmouth until April, 1863
Chancellorsville Campaign April 27-May 6, 1863
Battle of Chancellorsville May 1-5, 1863
Gettysburg Campaign June 11-July 24, 1863
Battle of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania July 1-3, 1863
Pursuit of Lee July 5-24, 1863
Action at Wapping Heights, Virginia July 23, 1863
Bristoe Campaign October 9-22, 1863
Auburn and Bristoe October 14, 1863
Advance to line of the Rappahannock November 7-8, 1863
Kelly's Ford November 7, 1863
Brandy Station November 8, 1863
Mine Run Campaign November 26-December 2, 1863
Payne's Farm November 27, 1863
Demonstration on the Rapidan February 6-7, 1864
Campaign from the Rapidan to the James River May 4-June 15, 1864
Battles of the Wilderness May 5-7, 1864
Laurel Hill May 8, 1864
Spotsylvania May 8-12, 1864
Po River May 10, 1864
Spotsylvania Court House May 12-21
Assault on the Salient, "Bloody Angle," May 12, 1864
Harris Farm, Fredericksburg Road, May 19, 1864
North Anna River May 23-26, 1864
On line of the Pamunkey May 26-28, 1864
Totopotomoy May 28-31, 1864
Cold Harbor June 1-12, 1864
Before Petersburg June 16-19, 1864
Siege of Petersburg June 16, 1864 to February 20, 1865
Jerusalem Plank Road, Weldon Railroad, June 22-23, 1864
Demonstration north of the James River July 27-29, 1864
Deep Bottom July 28-29, 1864
Demonstration north of the James August 13-20, 1864
Strawberry Plains, Deep Bottom, August 14-18, 1864
Poplar Springs Church, Peeble's Farm, September 29-October 2, 1864
Boydton Plank Road, Hatcher's Run, October 27-28, 1864
Expedition to Weldon Railroad December 7-12, 1864
Dabney's Mills, Hatcher's Run, February 5-7, 1865

The 2nd U.S. Sharpshooters were "discontinued" (the organization as a whole disbanded, and the soldiers reassigned to other companies and regiments) on February 20, 1865. Companies were consolidated as follows:

Company "A" transferred to 1st Minnesota Infantry
Company "B" to 5th Michigan Infantry
Company "C" to 105th Pennsylvania Infantry
Company "D" to 17th Maine Infantry
Company "F" to 5th New Hampshire Infantry
Company "G" to 5th New Hampshire Infantry
Company "H" to 4th Vermont Infantry.

The 2nd Regiment lost during service: 8 Officers and 117 Enlisted men killed and mortally wounded and 2 Officers and 123 Enlisted men lost to disease. Total 250.

Company D was organized in Augusta, Maine on November 2, 1861, to serve for three years. They left the state November 13, and on their arrival in Washington, D.C. were sworn into service with the Second Regiment of U.S. Sharpshooters at the Sharpshooters School of Instruction.

On December 31, 1863 all the men present reenlisted for an additional term of three years. On January 6, 1864, left for Maine, having been granted a furlough of 30 days. They reassembled in Augusta, where the remained until February 24. They left for the front and rejoined their regiment at Brady's Station, Virginia on March 1, 1864.

They remained attached to the Second Regiment, U.S. Sharpshooters participating in all the actions and movements in which the Regiment was engaged until February 18, 1865 when in accordance with the War Department Special Order #47 of January 30, 1865 the Company was then transferred and consolidated with several companies, to the Seventeenth Infantry Regiment, Maine Volunteers.

Berdan resigned his commission January 2, 1864, and returned to his career as an engineer and inventor. On December 8, 1868, President Andrew Johnson nominated Berdan for appointment to the brevet grade of brigadier general of volunteers, to rank from March 13, 1865, for the Battle of Chancellorsville, at which he led a brigade, and the U.S. Senate confirmed the appointment on February 16, 1869. Although President Johnson also nominated Berdan for appointment to the brevet grade of major general of volunteers to rank from the same date for his services at the Battle of Gettysburg, at which he also led a brigade, the U.S. Senate did not confirm the appointment. Despite the lack of necessary Senate confirmation of the appointment to make it official, many sources refer to Berdan as a brevet major general and even his grave stone in Arlington National Cemetery indicates he was a brevet major general.

He was considered by many to be a crack marksman and innovator, but unfit for field command. Berdan subsequently invented numerous engines of war, including a twin-screw submarine gunboat, a torpedo boat for evading torpedo nets, a long-distance rangefinder and a distance fuse for shrapnel.

Berdan died unexpectedly on March 31, 1893 and was buried in Arlington National Cemetery. A recent film created by Silver Domino Productions was based on Berdan and his men.

The part of Hiram Berdan was played by Kurtwood Smith in the 1986 ABC miniseries

Sources :
www.arlingtoncemetery.net
www.berdansharpshooters.org
www.cwartifax.com
www.ebay.com
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.gettysburgdaily.com
www.maine.gov

Tuvia Bielski (1906-1987), Leader of Bielski Partisan

2012-08-07T04:36:00.006+07:00

Tuvia Bielski

The Bielski partisans

Partisans operating in the forests of Belarus

Daniel Craig stars as Tuvia Bielski in Defiance

Tuvia Bielski (May 8, 1906 – June 12, 1987) was the leader of the partisan group the Bielski partisans who were situated in the Naliboki forest in pre-war Poland (now Western Belarus) during World War II.

Tuvia grew up in the only Polish Jewish family in Stankiewicze, a small village in Eastern Poland (now Western Belarus) located between towns of Lida and Navahrudak (both housed Jewish ghettoes during World War II). He was the son of David and Beila Bielski, who had twelve children: ten boys and two girls. Tuvia was the third eldest. His brothers Asael, Alexander ('Zus') and Aron were later to become members of his partisan group.

During the First World War, Bielski served as an interpreter for the Imperial German Army, which were occupying the western territories of the Russian Empire. Already a speaker of Yiddish, he learned to speak the German language from these men and remembered it all his life. In 1927, he was recruited into the Polish Army, where he eventually became a corporal in the 30th Infantry Battalion. After his military service was over, Tuvia returned home. In an effort to add to his family's income, Tuvia rented another mill. This was still inadequate, so in 1929, at the age of twenty-three, he married an older woman named Rifka who owned a general store and a large house. The couple lived in the nearby small town of Subotniki. They were conducting retail business in the store.

During the Soviet occupation in 1939, Tuvia was fearing that he would be arrested by the NKVD due to his "bourgeois capitalist" occupation, so he moved to Lida. Before Tuvia left Subotniki he urged his wife, Rifka, to join him in the move to Lida. She refused.

In Lida, under Soviet control, Tuvia met and fell in love with another woman named Sonia. The love affair became serious. In late 1939, Tuvia divorced his wife, Rifka. He married Sonia, though they were not "officially" married due to wartime conditions.

When Operation Barbarossa broke out, Tuvia, Zus, and Asael were called up by their army units to fight against the Nazi German occupiers. Tuvia recalls: "Suddenly about fifty planes (Luftwaffe) flew over the town dropping incendiary bombs. In a very few minutes the entire place was on fire. The commander called us in, ordered us to leave the burning town and regroup in a forest about five kilometers from there. We were to continue working. We carried out his command but soon after we began our job in the forest another wave of planes flew over the area and set the woods on fire. The commander called us in and said: 'Friends, you are on your own!'" After the units disbanded, the Bielski brothers fled to Stankiewicze, where their parents lived. In early July 1941, a German army unit arrived in Stankiewicze.

During World War II, Tuvia Bielski led a group of Jewish refugees. He saved more than 1,200 Jews by hiding them in forests. Although always hunted by Nazis, the numbers of the refugees continued to grow. In their camp, they built a school, a hospital, and a nursery. The refugees lived in the forests for more than two years. As leader of the Bielski partisans, his aim was not to attack railroads and roads that the German Nazis were using as supply routes, although there were some such attacks, but to save Jews, who were under persecution from the Nazis during the Holocaust.

After the war, Tuvia Bielski was offered a high position in the Israel Defense Forces for his great acts of leadership; but he declined the offer, instead running a small trucking firm with his brother Zus in New York City for 30 years until his death in 1987. He married Lilka, another Jewish escapee; they remained married for the remainder of their lives. They had at least three children—sons Michael and Robert and a daughter, Ruth—and at least one granddaughter, Sharon Rennert, who herself has made a documentary about her family called In Our Hands: The Legacy of the Bielski Partisans.

He is portrayed by Daniel Craig in the 2008 film Defiance, which has been criticised in Poland due to its omission of the alleged involvement of the Bielski group in a massacre of Polish civilians conducted by Soviet-aligned partisans in Naliboki. The Bielski partisan group was the subject of an official inquiry by the Polish Institute of National Remembrance's Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation after witnesses testified that Bielski partisans were among the perpetrators of the Naliboki massacre; however, the investigation found no conclusive evidence linking the Bielski group to the crime.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.holocaustresearchproject.com
www.screentrek.com

Louis Lazare Hoche (1768-1797), One of the Best of the Revolutionary Generals

2012-06-17T11:38:00.007+07:00

"Portrait of General Louis-Lazare Hoche (1768-97)" by Francois Gerard

Oil on canvas "Portrait of General Louis-Lazare Hoche (1768-97)" by Ary Scheffer (1795-1858). Paris, Musee de l'Armee

In "End of the Irish Invasion" ; — or — "the Destruction of the French Armada" (20 January 1797), James Gillray caricatured the failure of Hoche's Irish expedition. French warships, labeled "Le Révolutionaire", "L'Egalité" and "The Revolutionary Jolly Boat", being tossed about during a storm blown up by Pitt, Dundas, Grenville and Windham, whose heads appear from the clouds. Charles Fox is the figurehead on Le Révolutionaire which is floundering with broken mast. "The Revolutionary Jolly Boat" is being swamped, throwing Sheridan, Hall, Erskine, M.A. Taylor and Thelwall overboard.

Bust of Louis-Lazare Hoche, général en chef

Statue of Hoche commemorating his victory in Quiberon, by Jules Dalou, 20 July 1902

AKA Louis-Lazare Hoche

Born: 24-Jun-1768
Birthplace: Versailles, France
Died: 18-Sep-1797
Location of death: Wetzlar, Nassau, Germany
Cause of death: Pneumonia

Gender: Male
Race or Ethnicity: White
Sexual orientation: Straight
Occupation: Military

Nationality: France
Executive summary: French General

Military service: French Army (1784-97)
Wife: Anne Adelaide Dechaux (m. 11-Mar-1794)

Louis Lazare Hoche (24 June 1768 – 19 September 1797) was a French soldier who rose to be general of the Revolutionary army and often considered one of the best of them.

Born of poor parents near Versailles, he enlisted at sixteen as a private soldier in the Gardes Françaises. He spent his entire leisure in earning extra pay by civil work, his object being to provide himself with books, and this love of study, which was combined with a strong sense of duty and personal courage, soon led to his promotion.

When the Gardes françaises disbanded in 1789 he had reached the rank of corporal, and thereafter he served in various line regiments up to the time of his receiving a commission in 1792. In the defence of Thionville in that year Hoche earned further promotion, and he served with credit in the operations of 1792 - 1793 on the northern frontier of France, including the Battle of Wissembourg. At the Battle of Neerwinden (1793) he served as aide-de-camp to General le Veneur, and when Charles Dumouriez deserted to the Austrians, Hoche, along with le Veneur and others, fell under suspicion of treason. But after being kept under arrest and unemployed for some months he took part in the defence of Dunkirk, and in the same year (1793) he was promoted successively chef de brigade, general of brigade, and general of division. In October 1793 he was provisionally appointed to command the Army of the Moselle, and within a few weeks he was in the field at the head of his army in Lorraine. He lost his first battle at Kaiserslautern on 28–30 November 1793 against the Prussians, but even in the midst of the Reign of Terror the Committee of Public Safety retained Hoche in his command. Pertinacity and fiery energy, in their eyes, outweighed everything else, and Hoche soon showed that he possessed these qualities.

On 22 December 1793 he stormed the lines of Fröschweiler, and the representatives of the National Convention with his army at once added the Army of the Rhine to his sphere of command. On 26 December 1793 the French carried by assault the famous lines of Weissenburg, and Hoche pursued his success, sweeping the enemy before him to the middle Rhine in four days. He then put his troops into winter quarters.

Before the following campaign opened, he married Anne Adelaide Dechaux at Thionville (11 March 1794). But ten days later he was suddenly arrested, charges of treason having been preferred by Charles Pichegru, the displaced commander of the Army of the Rhine, and by his friends. Hoche escaped execution, however, though imprisoned in Paris until the fall of Maximilien Robespierre. Shortly after his release he was appointed to command against the Vendéans (21 August 1794). He completed the work of his predecessors in a few months by the peace of Jaunaye (15 February 1795), but soon afterwards the war was renewed by the Royalists. Hoche showed himself equal to the crisis and inflicted a crushing blow on the Royalist cause by defeating and capturing de Sombreuil's expedition at Quiberon and Penthièvre (16–21 July 1795). Thereafter, by means of mobile columns (which he kept under good discipline) he succeeded before the summer of 1796 in pacifying the whole of the west, which had for more than three years been the scene of a pitiless civil war.

After this Hoche was appointed to organise and command the troops sent to assist the United Irishmen in their rebellion against British rule. A tempest, however, separated Hoche from the expedition, and after various adventures the whole fleet returned to Brest without having effected its purpose. Hoche was at once transferred to the Rhine frontier, where he defeated the Austrians at the Battle of Neuwied in April 1797, though operations were soon afterwards brought to an end by the Preliminaries of Leoben. Later in 1797 he was minister of war for a short period, but in this position he was surrounded by obscure political intrigues, and, finding himself the dupe of Paul Barras and technically guilty of violating the constitution, he quickly laid down his office, returning to his command on the Rhine frontier. But his health grew rapidly worse, and he died at Wetzlar on 19 September 1797 of consumption. The belief spread that he had been poisoned, but the suspicion seems to have had no foundation. He was buried next to his friend François Marceau in a fort on the Rhine.

He is commemorated by a statue in Place Hoche, a gardened square not far from the main entrance to the Palace of Versailles. Another statue, the last major work by Jules Dalou, is in Quiberon, Brittany. In Les Invalides where Napoleon's tomb is enshrined, there is also a memorial to Hoche. A station on the Paris Metro is also called 'Hoche.'

Napoleon once said that Hoche was a true man of war and one of the best generals that France had ever produced.

Hoche's motto was Res non verba, which is Latin for "Deeds, not words."

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.europeana.eu
www.nndb.com
www.paintingsoncanvas.net
www.repro-tableaux.com
www.virtualarc.com

Friedrich Karl von Preußen (1828-1885), Prussian Generalfeldmarschall

2012-06-16T18:19:00.008+07:00

Prinz Friedrich Karl von Preußen (1828–1885), Kgl. Preuß. Generalfeldmarschall, from "Krieg gegen Frankreich 1870-71" von Th. Lindner, Berlin 1895

Prince Frederick Charles of Prussia (Prinz Friedrich Karl von Preußen) wearing Hussar uniform

Prince Frederick Charles of Prussia (Prinz Friedrich Karl von Preußen) by Richard Brend'amour, 1895-1896. Source from "Krieg und Sieg 1870-71, Herausgeber Julius von Pflugk-Harttung" , self scanned

Opening of the monument of Friedrich Karl of Prussian. The picture was taken by Albert Bode in 1899

Prinz Friedrich Carl Nikolaus von Preußen (Prince Frederick Charles Nicolaus of Prussia) (20 March 1828 – 15 June 1885) was the son of Prince Charles of Prussia (1801–1883) and his wife Princess Marie of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (1808–1877). Prince Frederick Charles was a grandson of King Frederick William III of Prussia and a nephew of Frederick William IV and William I. He was born at Schloss Klein in Berlin.

From 1842 to 1846, Frederick Charles was under the military tutelage of then major Albrecht von Roon, who accompagnied the Prince to the University of Bonn in 1846. After his studies, the Prince served as a captain on Wrangel's staff during the Schleswig campaign of 1848. Promoted to major on the general staff, he partook in a campaign in Baden during which he was wounded. During the following peace years he was promoted to colonel in 1852, major general in 1854 and lieutenant general in 1856. In 1860, the Prince published a military book, titled, "Eine militärische Denkschrift von P. F. K.". Promoted to General der Kavallerie, the Prince took part in the Second Schleswig War of 1864 against Denmark, where he held command over the Prussian troops in the Austro-Prussian expeditionary force.

He served with distinction in the Austro-Prussian War, where he commanded the First Army; consisting of 2nd, 3rd and 4th corps. Arriving first at Königgrätz, he held the numerically superior Austrians at bay until his cousin Crown Prince Frederick William and his Second army came up and attacked the Austrians in the flank.

At the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War, the Prince was given command of the Second Army, with which he distinguished himself at the Battle of Spicheren and the battles of Vionville-Mars le Tour and Gravelotte-St.Privat and the following Siege of Metz. After the fall of Metz, his army was sent to the Loire to clear the area around Orléans, where French troops, first under Aurelle de Paladines, then under Chanzy, were trying to march north to relieve Paris. He won battles at Orleans and Le Mans. For his services he was promoted to the rank of Generalfeldmarschall. After the war, the Prince was made Inspector-General and was given the rank of Field Marshal of Russia by Alexander II of Russia.

In 1878 he was created an honorary Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath.

He died at Jagdschloss Glienicke.

Family and Children
On 29 November 1854 at Dessau he married Princess Maria Anna of Anhalt-Dessau (1837–1906), daughter of Leopold IV, Duke of Anhalt. They had five children amongst which:

Princess Marie Elisabeth Luise Friederike of Prussia (1855-1888),
Princess Elisabeth Anna of Prussia (1857-1895),
Princess Anna Victoria Charlotte Augusta Adelheid of Prussia (1858-1858),
Princess Luise Margarete Alexandra Victoria Agnes of Prussia (1860-1917),
Prince Joachim Carl Wilhelm Friedrich Leopold of Prussia (1865-1931).

Sources :
www.de.wikipedia.org
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.explow.com
www.loc.gov

Nogi Maresuke (1849-1912), The Conqueror of Port Arthur

2012-06-15T14:08:00.007+07:00

Portrait of Nogi Maresuke (乃木希典, 1849 – 1912) standing before his house in Nogizaka, Tokyo

Two admirals and six generals surrounding YAMAGATA Aritomo, on his inspection tour to Mukden, Manchuria (fourth from left is OYAMA Iwao) (from L to R, KUROKI Tamemoto, Commander of 1st Army, NOZU Michitsura, Commander of 4th Army, YAMAGATA Aritomo, General Chief of Staff, OYAMA Iwao, OKU Yasukata, Commander of 2nd Army, NOGI Maresuke, Commander of 3rd Army, KODAMA Gentaro, Manchurian Army General Chief of Staff, KAWAMURA Kageaki, Yalu River Army Commander) 26 July 1905 (Meiji 38) Papers of OYAMA Iwao, #62-18

The Russo-Japanese front: The man in the center is Maresuke Nogi(乃木希典) — photographed in his travel from from Dalny to Port Arthur (Russian Empire), on January 2 1905, by Ernesto Burzagli (1873-1944), Italian naval attaché in Tokio, who sailed from Yokohama (Japan) on a diplomatic mission to Port Arthur, during the Russo-Japanese War. The original picture, scanned by Emiliano Burzagli, belongs to the Private archive of Burzaghi family, Italy.

The Japanese general 乃木希典 (Nogi Maresuke) and the Russian general Aнатолий Михайлович Стессель (Anatolii Mikhailovich Stoessel) (both in the center) after the capitulation of the Russian forces in the Chinese city 旅順口區 / 旅顺口区 (Lǚshùnkou qu), (European name: Port Arthur),(Japanese name: Ryojun) on 2 January 1905. (Russo-Japanese War 1904-1905). This picture taken from the Japanese book "國の光" (The light of our nation) published in 1909, foto first published by 朝日新聞 (Asahi Newspaper)

General Nogi Maresuke and his wife relaxing at their Aoyama home

Count Nogi Maresuke, GCB (乃木希典?), also known as Kiten, Count Nogi, (25 December 1849–13 September 1912) was a general in the Imperial Japanese Army, and a prominent figure in the Russo-Japanese War.

Nogi was born as the son of a samurai at the Edo residence (present day Tokyo), of the Chōfu clan from Chōshū (present day Yamaguchi Prefecture). He was born on 11 November 1849, according to the old Japanese lunar calendar, or Christmas day, according to the new one. His childhood name was Mujin, literally "no one", to prevent evil spirits from coming to harm him! On turning 18, he was renamed Nogi Bunzō.

In November 1869, by the order of the Nagato domain's lord, he enlisted in Fushimi Goshin Heisha (lit. the Fushimi Loyal Guard Barrack) to be trained in the French style for the domainal Army. After completing the training, he was reassigned to the Kawatō Barrack in Kyoto as an instructor, and then as Toyōra domain's Army trainer in charge of coastal defense troops.

In 1871, Nogi was commissioned as a major in the fledgling Imperial Japanese Army. Around this time, he renamed himself Maresuke taking a kanji from the name of his father. In 1875, he became the 14th Infantry Regiment's attaché. The next year (1876), Nogi was named as the Kumamoto regional troop's Staff Officer, and transferred to command the 1st Infantry Regiment, and for his service in the Satsuma Rebellion, against the forces of Saigō Takamori in Kyūshū, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel. In a fierce battle at that time, he lost the 14th Infantry Regiment’s regimental banner to the enemy, which was considered an extreme disgrace. Nogi considered this such a grave mistake that he listed it as one of the reasons for his later suicide.

On 27 August 1876, Nogi married Shizuko, the fourth daughter of Satsuma samurai Yuji Sadano, who was then 20 years old. As Nogi was 28 years old, it was a very late marriage for that time, considering that the average age to marry was in the early 20s. On 28 August 1877, their first son Katsunori was born, and Nogi bought his first house at Nizakamachi, Tokyo. In 1878, he became a colonel. The next year, his second son, Yasunori, was born.

In 1887, Nogi went to Germany with Kawakami Soroku to study European military strategy and tactics.

In 1894, during the First Sino-Japanese War, Nogi served as major general in command of the First Infantry Brigade, which penetrated the Chinese defenses and successfully occupied Port Arthur in only one day of combat. The following year, he was promoted to lieutenant general and assigned to the Second Infantry Brigade, tasked with the invasion of Taiwan. Nogi remained with the occupation forces in Taiwan until 1898. In 1899, he was recalled to Japan, and placed in command of the newly formed 11th Infantry Brigade, based in Kagawa.

After the war, he was elevated to danshaku (baron); and he was conferred with the Order of the Golden Kite, 1st class.

Nogi was appointed as the third Japanese Governor-General of Taiwan from 14 October 1896 to February 1898. When moving to Taiwan, he moved his entire family, and during their time in Taiwan, his mother contracted malaria and died. This led Nogi to take measures to improve on the health care infrastructure of the island.

However, unlike many of his contemporary officers, Nogi expressed no interest in pursuing politics.

In 1904, Nogi was recalled to active service on the occasion of the Russo-Japanese War, and was promoted to army general in command of the Japanese Third Army, with an initial strength of approximately 90,000 men and assigned to the capture of the Russia port of Port Arthur on the southern tip of Liaodong Peninsula, Manchuria. Nogi's forces landed shortly after the Battle of Nanshan, in which his eldest son, serving with the Japanese Second Army, was killed. Advancing slowly down the Liaodong Peninsula, Nogi encountered unexpectedly strong resistance, and far more fortifications than he had experienced ten years earlier against the Chinese.

The attack against Port Arthur quickly turned into the lengthy Siege of Port Arthur, an engagement lasting from 1 August 1904 to 2 January 1905, costing the Japanese massive losses, including Nogi's second son. Due to the mounting casualties and failure of Nogi to overcome Port Arthur's defenses, there was mounting pressure within the Japanese government and military to relieve him of command. However, in an unprecedented action, Emperor Meiji spoke out during the Supreme War Council meeting, defending Nogi and demanding that he be kept in command.

After the fall of Port Arthur, Nogi was regarded as a national hero. He led his 3rd Army against the Russian forces at the final Battle of Mukden, ending the land combat phase of operations of the war.

British historian Richard Storry noted that Nogi imposed the best of the Japanese samurai tradition on the men under his command such that "...the conduct of the Japanese during the Russo-Japanese War towards both prisoners and Chinese civilians won the respect, and indeed admiration, of the world."

At the end of the war, Nogi made a report directly to Emperor Meiji during a Gozen Kaigi. When explaining battles of the Siege of Port Arthur in detail, he broke down and wept, apologizing for the 56,000 lives lost in that campaign and asking to be allowed to kill himself in atonement. Emperor Meiji told him that suicide was unacceptable, as all responsibility for the war was due to imperial orders, and that Nogi must remain alive, at least as long as he himself lived.

After the war, Nogi was elevated to the title of count and awarded the Order of the Rising Sun with Paulownia Flowers, Grand Cordon, 1917.

As head of the Peers' School from 1908–1912, he was the mentor of the young Hirohito, and was, perhaps, the most important influence on the life of the future emperor of Japan.

Nogi spent most of his personal fortune on hospitals for wounded soldiers and on memorial monuments erected around the country in commemoration of those killed during the Russo-Japanese War. He also successful petitioned the Japanese government to erect a Russian-style memorial monument in Port Arthur to the Russian dead of that campaign.

General Nogi is significant to Scouting in Japan, as in 1911, he went to England in attendance on Prince Higashifushimi Yorihito for the coronation of King George V. The General, as the "Defender of Port Arthur" was introduced to General Robert Baden-Powell, the "Defender of Mafeking", by Lord Kitchener, whose expression "Once a Scout, always a Scout" remains to this day.

Nogi and his wife committed respectively seppuku and jigai shortly after the Emperor Meiji's funeral cortege left the palace. The ritual suicide was in accordance with the samurai practice of following one's master to death (junshi). In his suicide letter, he said that he wished to expiate for his disgrace in Kyūshū, and for the thousands of casualties at Port Arthur. He also donated his body to medical science.

All four members of the Nogi family are buried at Aoyama Cemetery in Tokyo. Under State Shinto, Nogi was revered as a kami and Nogi Shrine, a Shinto shrine in his honor, still exists on the site of his house in Nogizaka, Tokyo. His memory is also honored in other locations such as the Nogi Shrine in Kyoto.

Nogi's seppuku immediately created a sensation and a controversy. Some writers claimed that it reflected Nogi’s disgust with the profligacy and decline in moral values of late Meiji Japan. Others pointed to Nogi's own suicide note, calling it an act of atonement for mistakes in his military career. In either case, Nogi's suicide marked the end of an era, and it had a profound impact on contemporary writers, such as Mori Ōgai and Natsume Sōseki. For the public, Nogi became a symbol of loyalty and sacrifice.

Honors
1897 - Order of the Sacred Treasure, 1st class.
1906 - Order of the Golden Kite, 1st class.
1906 - Order of the Rising Sun with Paulownia Flowers, Grand Cordon.
1906 - Pour le Mérite.
1907 - Legion of Honour.
1911 - Knights Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order.
1911 - Order of the Bath, Knight Grand Cross, Military Division (UK).

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.ndl.go.jp
www.oldtokyo.com

Raimondo Montecuccoli

2012-06-09T10:04:00.005+07:00

General Raimondo Montecuccoli continues to accompany us on our virtual journey both in and around Modena and across Europe. Churches, museums, archives and libraries conserve the memory of this great condottiere who had a major influence on the story of the 1600s and who became so European that Italians almost forgot about him.

The importance of this personality can also be deduced from the vast iconography that carries his likeness in the portrait style of the full-blown 1600s school to be found right across Europe. One interesting portrait is on show at Pavullo’s Palazzo Comunale, the town hall: painted by an unknown local artist in the late 1600s, it portrays Raimondo in the martial and peremptory guise of a fully-armed condottiere. In Modena, at its Palazzo Comunale, is one of the best known paintings of Montecuccoli, the one by Girolamo Vannulli, a brilliant interpreter of the Italian figurative style of the 1700s.

Instead, in the Paradisino church, we find the altar of Sant'Antonio, bestowed in the 1670s as a votive offering by Raimondo Montecuccoli to the Church of Santa Margherita, the original location of the work, while Raimondo’s parents, Galeotto and Anna Bigi, were buried in the monumental Church of San Pietro, finished in 1506.

There are also several works showing Raimondo’s life as a condottiere at the Imperial court. At Vienna’s Kunsthistorishes Museum is a remarkable painting, cut down to an oval, in which Raimondo is wearing armour with on top the Golden Fleece, the symbol of the prestigious order of chivalry that reproduces the ram’s fleece of legend, granted by the royal houses of Austria and Spain. Raimondo was awarded this decoration by the King of Spain in 1666.

Another full-length portrait is to be found at the Museum Hafnerbach, again in Austria, where a white marble bust and various paintings portray other members of the Montecuccoli family including Princess Margarethe, Raimondo’s wife.

At Vienna’s Military History Museum, in the majestic atrium that serves as the “Room of the Condottieri” are marble statues representing General Montecuccoli and other illustrious military heads of the Hapsburg Empire and the Austro-Hungarian reign. This museum also keeps the field marshal’s baton used by Raimondo at the Battle of Saint Gotthard against the Turks.

Of enormous value are the literary works the General left us – including the important Treatise on War, written during his long imprisonment in Sweden and his On the War Against the Turks in Hungary from 1670, with much studied and highly appreciated translations produced in Germany, France and Spain. The manuscripts of his works are kept in various places around Europe: in Vienna’s War Archives and National Library, where we can find the original manuscript of his Military Tables and Axiomatic Tables of War, and in Modena’s Este Library which keeps On Battles. Other writings are kept at the Vatican Apostolic Library, while the state archive of Brno in the Czech Republic keeps important correspondence from Raimondo, his wife and his family.

During Raimondo Montecuccoli’s long life his diplomatic activities at the courts of the Central European and Scandinavian capitals were far from negligible. His acute observations, his descriptions of personalities, his insight into political machinations, all of this in his writings which was particularly successful in his volume Aphorisms, revealed the rich cultural milieu which inspired Montecuccoli.

In 1680, when Raimondo died in Linz – having followed the Imperial Court which had fled Vienna because of an outbreak of plague – his viscera were interred in the Church of the Cappuccini, while his corpse was taken to Vienna, where, on the 4 November, it was buried at a solemn funeral in the presence of the Emperor and the whole of the Court at the Am Hof Church.

Thanks to his acute political sensitivity, intellectual finesse and a shrewdness born of the grand strategy, Raimondo had lived enough to take in just what Europe and the sweeping changes of the 17th century really meant. His writings constitute an extraordinary, abundant testimony of this.

Raimondo dei conti di Montecuccoli, 17th century artwork

The Castello Montecuccoli in Modena

Raimondo, Count of Montecúccoli or Montecucculi (German: Raimondo Graf Montecúccoli) (21 February 1608 or 1609 – 16 October 1680) was an Italian military general who also served as general for the Austrians, and was also a prince of the Holy Roman Empire and Neapolitan Duke of Melfi.

Montecuccoli was born in the castle of the same name in Pavullo nel Frignano, near Modena. His family was of Burgundian origin and had settled in north Italy in the 10th century.

At the age of sixteen Montecuccoli began as a private soldier under his uncle, Count Ernest Montecuccoli, a distinguished Austrian general (d. 1633). Four years later, after much active service in Germany and the Low Countries, he became a captain of infantry. He was severely wounded at the storming of New Brandenburg, and again in the same year (1631) at the first battle of Breitenfeld, where he fell into the hands of the Swedes.

He was again wounded at Lützen in 1632, and on his recovery was made a major in his uncle's regiment. Shortly afterwards he became a lieutenant-colonel of cavalry. He did good service at the first battle of Nordlingen (1634), and at the storming of Kaiserslautern in the following year won his colonelcy by a feat of arms of unusual brilliance, a charge through the breach at the head of his heavy cavalry.

He fought in Pomerania, Bohemia and Saxony (surprise of Wolmirstadt, battles of Wittstock and Chemnitz), and in 1639 he was taken prisoner at Melnik and detained for two and a half years in Stettin and Weimar. In captivity he studied military science, and also geometry in Euclid, history in Tacitus, and architecture in Vitruvius, and planned his great work on war.

Returning to Italy and to the field in 1642, Montecuccoli commanded mercenaries loyal to the Duke of his native Modena during the First War of Castro but when that conflict ground to an unproductive stalemate he departed. His involvement, though understandable given his allegiance to Modena, was nonetheless unusual in that his service pitted him against the papal forces of Pope Urban VIII.

In 1643 he was promoted to lieutenant-field-marshal and obtained a seat in the council of war. In 1645-46 he served in Hungary against Prince Rákóczy of Transylvania, on the Danube and Neckar against the French, and in Silesia and Bohemia against the Swedes. The victory of Triebel in Silesia won him the rank of General of Cavalry, and at the battle of Zusmarshausen in 1648 his stubborn rearguard fighting rescued the imperialists from annihilation.

For some years after the Peace of Westphalia Montecuccoli was chiefly concerned with the business of the council of war, though he went to Flanders and England as the representative of the emperor, and to Sweden as the envoy of the pope to Queen Christina, and at Modena his lance was victorious in a great tourney.

In 1657, soon after his marriage with Countess Margarethe de Dietrichstein, he was ordered by the Emperor to take part in the Hapsburg expedition (as agreed between King of Poland and Emperor) against prince Rákóczy, Charles X Gustav of Sweden and the Cossacks, who had already, in 1655, attacked the Kingdom of Poland in the war known in Poland as The Deluge or elsewhere as the Second Northern War. During the conflict he was promoted to commanding officer of the division.

He became field-marshal in the imperial army and his division, along with Stefan Czarniecki's division, Frederick William's army and Danish forces, participated in the struggle in Denmark against the invading Swedes. Eventually the war ended with the Peace of Oliva in 1660 and Montecuccoli returned to his sovereign.

From 1661 to 1664 Montecuccoli, with inferior numbers, defended Austria against the Turks but at St. Gotthard Abbey, on the Rába, he and Carl I. Ferdinand Count of Montenari defeated the Turks so comprehensively that they entered into a twenty-year truce. They were given the Order of the Golden Fleece, and Montecuccoli became president of the council of war and director of artillery. He also devoted much time to compiling his various works on military history and science. He opposed the progress of the French arms under Louis XIV, and when the inevitable war broke out he received command of the imperial forces. In the campaign of 1673 he completely out-manoeuvred his rival Turenne on the Neckar and the Rhine, captured Bonn and joined his army with that of the prince of Orange on the lower Rhine.

He retired from the army when, in 1674, the Great Elector was named command in chief, but the brilliant successes of Turenne in the winter of 1674 and 1675 brought him back. For months the two famous commanders manoeuvred against each other in the Rhine valley, but on the eve of a decisive battle Turenne was killed and Montecuccoli promptly invaded Alsace, where he engaged in another war of manoeuvre with the Great Condé. The siege of Philipsburg was Montecuccoli's last achievement in war.

The rest of Montecuccoli's life was spent in military administration and literary and scientific work at Vienna. In 1679 the emperor made him a prince of the empire, and shortly afterwards he received the dukedom of Melfi from the King of Spain.

Montecuccoli died in an accident at Linz in October 1680.

With the death of his only son Leopold Philip Montecuccoli in 1698 the principality became extinct, but the title of count descended through his daughters to two branches, Austrian and Modenese. As a general, Montecuccoli shared with Turenne and Condé the first place among European soldiers of his time. His Memorie della guerra profoundly influenced the age which followed his own; nor have modern conditions rendered the advice of Montecuccoli wholly valueless.

The Memorie della guerra was published at Venice in 1703 and at Cologne in 1704. A French edition was issued in Paris in 1712 and a Latin edition appeared in 1718 at Vienna, and the German Kriegsnachrichten des Fürsten Raymundi Montecuccoli was issued at Leipzig in 1736. Of this work there are manuscripts in various libraries, and many memoirs on military history, tactics, fortification, written in Italian, Latin and German, remain still unedited in the archives of Vienna. The collected Opere di Raimondo Montecuccoli were published at Milan (1807), Turin (1821) and Venice (1840), and include political essays and poetry.

In 1934 the Italian navy launched the Raimondo Montecuccoli, a Condottieri class light cruiser named in his honour which served with the Regia Marina during World War II.

Montecuccoli noted one of the obvious problems of military conflict:
“ For war, you need three things; 1. Money. 2. Money. 3. Money. ”

Wars became much more expensive to fund as armies grew larger; they required more training and state investment to be effective. Warfare of Montecuccoli's time also involved significant numbers of mercenaries loyal to differing fiefdoms. Paying them became exceptionally expensive.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.europeana.eu
www.raimondomontecuccoli.galmodenareggio.it

Henri de la Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne (1611-1675), Marshal of France

2012-06-06T08:03:00.008+07:00

Henri de la Tour d'Auverge, Vicomte Turenne

Henri de la Tour d'Auverge, Vicomte Turenne

Henri de la Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne, 17th century oil on canvas painting by Circle of Philippe de Champaigne

Battlefield death of Henri de La Tour d’Auvergne, vicomte de Turenne, who was killed by a cannon shot on July 27, 1675

Grave of Henri de la Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne (1611-1675), better known as Turenne, Marshal General of France under Louis XIV and one of France's greatest military leaders inside La cathédrale Saint Louis des Invalides at Hôtel des Invalides, Paris. (23/2/07)

Henri de la Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne, often called simply Turenne (11 September 1611, Sedan, Ardennes – 27 July 1675) was the most illustrious member of the La Tour d'Auvergne family. He achieved military fame and became a Marshal of France. He was one of six marshals who have been made Marshal General of France.

The second son of Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne, vicomte de Turenne, duc de Bouillon, sovereign Prince of Sedan, by his second wife Elizabeth, daughter of William the Silent, Prince of Orange, he was born at Sedan. He received a Huguenot education and the usual training of a young noble of the time, but physical infirmity, and particularly an impediment of speech (which he never lost), hampered his progress, though he showed a marked partiality for history and geography, and especial admiration of the exploits of Alexander the Great and Caesar. After his father's death in 1623, he devoted himself to bodily exercises and in a great measure overcame his natural weakness. At the age of fourteen he went to learn war in the camp of his uncle, Maurice of Nassau the Stadtholder of Holland and Prince of Orange, and began his military career (as a private soldier in that prince's bodyguard) in the Dutch Revolt.

Frederick Henry of Nassau, who succeeded his brother Maurice as Stadtholder and Prince of Orange in 1625, gave Turenne a captaincy in 1626. The young officer took his part in the siege warfare of the period, and won special commendation from his uncle (one of the foremost commanders of the time) for his skill and courage at the celebrated siege of 's-Hertogenbosch (Bois-le-Duc) in 1629. In 1630 Turenne left the Netherlands and entered the service of France, motivated not only by the prospect of military advancement but also by his mother's desire to show the loyalty of the Bouillon dominions to the French crown.

Cardinal Richelieu at once made him colonel of an infantry regiment. He still continued to serve at short intervals with the prince of Orange, who at the time had an alliance with France, and his first serious service under the French flag occurred at the siege of La Mothe in Lorraine by Marshal de la Force (1634), where his brilliant courage at the assault won him immediate promotion to the rank of maréchal de camp (equivalent to the modern grade of major-general). In 1635 Turenne served under Louis de Nogaret, Cardinal de la Valette in Lorraine and on the Rhine. The French and their allies raised the Imperial siege of Mainz (8 August 1635), but the French army had to fall back on Metz for want of provisions. In the retreat Turenne measured swords with the famous imperial General Gallas, and distinguished himself greatly by his courage and skill. The reorganised army took the field again in 1636 and captured Saverne (Zabern), at the storming of which place Turenne suffered a serious wound. In 1637 he took part in the campaign of Flanders, including the capture of Landrecies (26 July). In the latter part of 1638, serving under Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar (1608–1639), he directed the assault on Breisach (reputedly the strongest fortress on the upper Rhine), which surrendered on December 17. He had now gained a reputation as one of the foremost of the younger generals of France, and Richelieu next employed him in the Italian campaign of 1639–1640 under "Cadet la Perle", Henri de Lorraine, count of Harcourt (1601–1666). On 19 November 1639 he fought in the famous rearguard action called the battle of the "Route de Quiers", and during the winter re-victualled the citadel of Turin, held by the French against the forces of Prince Thomas of Savoy. In 1640 Harcourt saved Casale Monferrato and besieged Prince Thomas' forces in Turin, which meanwhile besieged in their turn another French force in the citadel. The latter held out, while Prince Thomas had to surrender on 17 September 1640, a fourth army which had invested Harcourt's lines being at the same time forced to retire. Turenne, who had by now become a lieutenant-general, played a major role in achieving the favourable result of these complicated operations. He himself commanded during the campaign of 1641 and took Coni (Cuneo), Ceva and Mondovì.

In 1642 he served as second-in-command of the French troops which conquered Roussillon. At this time Richelieu discovered the conspiracy of Cinq Mars in which Turenne's elder brother, the duc de Bouillon, had become implicated.

The relations of the principality of Sedan to the French crown markedly influenced the earlier career of Turenne; sometimes it proved necessary to advance the soldier to conciliate the ducal family, at other times the machinations of the ducal family against Richelieu or Mazarin prevented the king's advisers from giving their full confidence to their general in the field. Moreover his steady adherence to the Protestant religion provided a further element of difficulty in Turenne's relations with the ministers. Cardinal Richelieu nevertheless entrusted him with the command in Italy in 1643 under Prince Thomas (who had changed sides in the quarrel). Turenne took Trino in a few weeks before his recall to France towards the end of the year. He gained the rank of Marshal of France (19 December 1643) and soon departed to Alsace to re-organize the "Army of Weimar" (the remnant of the late Duke Bernhard of Saxe-Weimar's troops) which had just suffered a severe defeat at Tuttlingen (November 24/25, 1643). At this time, having reached thirty-two years of age, Turenne had served under four famous commanders. The methodical prince of Orange, the fiery Bernhard, the soldierly Cardinal de la Valette and the stubborn and astute Harcourt had each contributed much to the completeness of Turenne's training, and he took the field in 1644 prepared by genius and education for the responsibilities of high command.

The work of re-organization over, Marshal Turenne began the campaign in June 1644 by crossing the Rhine at Breisach, but almost instantly an army under the duc d'Enghien (afterwards the great Condé) joined him. The Duke, as a prince of the royal house, took the chief command of the united armies of "France" and "Weimar". The four famous campaigns which followed brought to an end the Thirty Years' War. The desperately fought battle of Freiburg against Franz von Mercy's Bavarians (3, 5 and 9 August 1644) proved the chief event of the first campaign, after which the French successfully besieged Philippsburg. Before the capitulation Enghien withdrew and left Turenne in command. The marshal opened the campaign of 1645 with a strong forward movement, but Mercy surprised and defeated him at Mergentheim (Marienthal) on 2 May. Enghien again came to the front with the army of France, and Turenne's army received substantial reinforcement with the arrival of a Swedish force and of a contingent from Hesse-Kassel (or Hesse-Cassel). The Swedes soon departed, but Enghien commanded 20,000 men when he met the Bavarians in a battle even more stubbornly contested than Freiburg. The French forces killed Mercy and decisively defeated his army at Allerheim (3 August 1645).

Ill-health forced Enghien to retire soon afterwards, leaving Turenne for the third time left in command of the French army. Again he did not fare well against the larger forces of the imperialists, but the campaign ended with a gleam of success in his capture of Trier (Trèves). In the following year (1646) he obtained more decided successes, and, by separating the Austrians from the Bavarians, compelled Maximilian I, Elector of Bavaria to make peace (signed on 14 March 1647). In 1647 he proposed to attack the thus weakened army of the emperor, but the strategists ordered him into Flanders instead. Not only did France thus lose an opportunity, but a serious mutiny broke out amongst the Weimar troops, who had not received their pay for many months. The marshal showed great tact and firmness in his treatment of the disaffected regiments, amongst whom in the end he succeeded in restoring order with little bloodshed. He then marched into Luxembourg, but soon received orders to switch to the Rhine, for in 1648 Bavaria had returned to her Austrian alliance and had taken up arms again. Turenne and his Swedish allies made a brilliant campaign, crowned by the decisive action of Zusmarshausen (17 May). Troops subsequently wasted Bavaria with fire and sword until a second and more secure armistice was obtained. This devastation, for which many modern writers have blamed Turenne, appeared no more harsh a measure than the spirit of the times and the circumstances of the case permitted.

The Peace of Westphalia (1648) brought little peace to France, which soon became involved in the civil war of the Fronde (1648–1653). Few of Turenne's actions caused sharper criticism than his adhesion to the party of revolt. The army of Weimar refused to follow its leader and he had to flee into the Spanish Netherlands, where he remained until the treaty of Rueil (March 1649) put an end to the first war of the Fronde. The second war began with the arrest of Condé and others (January 1650). Turenne, intended for arrest with them, escaped in time, and with the duchesse de Longueville held Stenay for the cause of the "Princes" — Condé, his brother Conti, and his brother-in-law the duc de Longueville. Love for the duchess seems to have ruled Turenne's action, both in the first war, and, now, in seeking Spanish aid for the Princes. In this war Turenne sustained one of his few reverses at Rethel (15 December 1650); but the second conflict ended in the early months of the following year with the collapse of the court party and the release of the Princes.

Turenne became reconciled and returned to Paris in May 1651, but the trouble soon revived and before long Condé again raised the standard of revolt in the south of France. In this, the third war of the Fronde, Turenne and Condé stood opposed to each other, the marshal commanding the royal armies, the prince that of the Frondeurs and their Spanish allies. Turenne displayed the personal bravery of a young soldier at Jargeau (28 March 1652), the skill and wariness of a veteran general at Gien (7 April), and he practically crushed the civil war in the Battle of the Faubourg St Antoine (2 July) and in the re-occupation of Paris (21 October). He still needed to deal with Condé and the Spaniards, however, and the long drawn-out campaigns of the "Spanish Fronde" gave ample scope for the display of scientific generalship on the part of both the famous captains. In 1653 Turenne had the advantage: he captured Rethel, Sainte-Menehould and Mouzon, while Condé succeeded only at Rocroi. The short campaign of 1654 again favoured the French; on 25 July 1654 they defeated the Spanish at Arras. In 1655 French armies gained more ground, but in 1656 Turenne suffered a serious defeat at Valenciennes, and though the causes of the defeat had been largely outside his control, he again showed his ability to recover from an outcome that would have overwhelmed lesser generals. The war eventually concluded soon after Turenne's victory at the Battle of the Dunes near Dunkirk in 1658, in which a corps of English veterans sent by France's ally Oliver Cromwell played a notable part (3–14 June); a victory which, followed by another successful campaign in 1658, led to the peace of the Pyrenees in 1659.

On the death of Cardinal Mazarin in 1661 Louis XIV took the reins of government into his own hands, and as one of his first acts appointed Turenne "marshal-general of the camps and armies of the king". He had offered to revive the office of connétable of France (suppressed in 1627) in Turenne's favour if the marshal would become a Roman Catholic. Turenne declined. Born of Calvinist parents and educated a Protestant, he had refused to marry one of Richelieu's nieces in 1639 and subsequently rejected a similar proposal from Mazarin.

Turenne married in 1652 Charlotte de Caumont, a daughter of the Protestant Marshal de la Force, to whom he remained deeply attached. But he sincerely deplored the division of Christianity into two hostile camps. He had always distrusted the influence of many dissident and uncontrolled sects; the history of independence in the English army and people made a deep impression on his mind, and the same fear of indiscipline which drove the English Presbyterians into royalism drew Turenne more and more towards the Roman Catholic Church. The letters between him and his wife show how closely both studied available evidence on the matter, and in the end, two years after her death, the eloquence of Bossuet and the persuasions of his nephew, the Cardinal de Bouillon prevailed upon him to give his adhesion to the Roman Catholic faith (October 1668). In 1667 he had returned to the more congenial air of the "Camps and Armies of the King", directing (nominally under Louis XIV) the famous Promenade militaire in which the French overran the Spanish Netherlands. Soon afterwards Condé, now reconciled with the king, rivaled Turenne's success by the rapid conquest of the Franche-Comté, shortly before the end the War of Devolution in February 1668.

In Louis XIV's Dutch War of 1672 Turenne accompanied the army commanded by the king which overran the Dutch United Provinces up to the gates of Amsterdam. The terms offered by Louis to the Prince of Orange only aroused a more bitter resistance. The Dutch opened the dikes and flooded the countryside around Amsterdam. This measure completely checked Turenne, whom the king had left in command. News of this event roused Europe to action, and the conflict spread to Germany. Turenne fought a successful war of manoeuvre on the middle Rhine while Condé covered Alsace. In January 1673 Turenne assumed the offensive, penetrated far into Germany, and forced the Great Elector of Brandenburg to make peace; later in the year, however, the famous imperial general Montecuccoli completely out-manoeuvred Turenne: Montecuccoli evaded his opponent, joined the Dutch and took the important place of Bonn. In June 1674, however, Turenne won the battle of Sinzheim, which made him master of the Palatinate. Under orders from Paris the French wasted the country far and wide, and this devastation with the sack of Türckheim usually counts as the gravest blot on Turenne's fame. In the autumn the anti-French allies again advanced, and though they again outmanoeuvered Turenne, the action of the neutral city of Strasbourg occasioned his failure by permitting the enemy to cross the Rhine by the bridge at that place. The battle of Enzheim followed; this proved a tactical victory, but hardly affected the situation, and, at the beginning of December, the allies remained in Alsace. The old marshal now made the most daring campaign of his career. A swift and secret march in mid-winter from one end of the Vosges to the other took the allies by surprise. Sharply following up his first successes, Turenne drove the enemy to Turkheim, and there inflicted upon them a heavy defeat (5 January 1675). As revenge for the active resistance the inhabitants of the city had shown, he let his troops loot it and massacre the remaining population during two weeks. In a few weeks he had completely recovered Alsace. In the summer campaign he once more faced Montecuccoli, and after the highest display of "strategic chess-moves" by both commanders, Turenne finally compelled his opponent to offer battle at a disadvantage at Salzbach. There, on 27 July 1675, one of the first shots fired killed him. The news of his death produced universal sorrow.
Legacy

Turenne's most eloquent countrymen wrote his éloges, and Montecucculi himself exclaimed: "II est mort aujourd'hui un homme qui faisait honneur à l'homme !" (A man is dead today who did honour to Man!) His body, taken to St Denis, was buried with the kings of France. Even the extreme revolutionists of 1793 respected it, and, while they ignominiously reburied the bodies of the monarchs in a mass grave, they preserved the remains of Turenne at the Jardin des Plantes until 22 September 1800, when Napoleon had them removed to the church of the Invalides at Paris, where they still rest.

Napoleon recommended all soldiers to "read and re-read" the campaigns of Turenne as one of the great captains. His fame as a general rivaled that of any other in Europe at a period when the populace studied war more critically than ever before, for his military character epitomized the art of war of his time (Prince de Ligne). Strategic caution and logistic accuracy, combined with brilliant dash in small combats and constancy under all circumstances - of success or failure - perhaps emerge as the salient points of Turenne's genius for war. Great battles he avoided. "Few sieges and many combats" he used as his own maxim. And, unlike his great rival Condé, who appeared as brilliant in his first battle as in his last, Turenne improved day by day. Napoleon said of him that, his genius grew bolder as it grew older, and a later author, the duc d'Aumale (Histoire des princes de la maison de Condé), took the same view when he wrote: "Pour le connaître il faut le suivre jusqu'à Sulzbach. Chez lui chaque jour marque un progrès."

In his personal character Turenne showed little more than the nature of a simple and honorable soldier, endowed with much tact; but in the world of politics and intellect he seemed almost helpless in the hands of a skilful intriguer or casuist. His morals, if not beyond reproach, were at least more austere than those prevalent in the age in which he lived. He operated essentially as a commander of regular armies. He spent his life with the troops; he knew how to win their affection; he tempered a severe discipline with rare generosity, and his men loved him as a comrade no less than they admired him as a commander. Thus, though Condé's genius appeared far more versatile, Turenne's genius best represents the art of war in the 17th century. For the small, costly, and highly trained regular armies, and for the dynastic warfare of the age of Louis XIV, Turenne functioned as the ideal army leader.
In fiction

Marshal of France Turenne is depicted in several alternative history novels written by Eric Flint and David Weber. These include 1633 and 1634: The Baltic War. Vicomte de Turenne is also written about in a historical fiction novel by G.A. Henty called "Won by the Sword".

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.ericflint.wikia.com
www.flickr.com
www.histoire-fr.com

William 'Billy' Mitchell (1879-1936), The Father of the U.S. Air Force

2012-05-30T07:15:00.005+07:00

Brigadier General Billy Mitchell, United States Army Air Service

Mitchell as Assistant Chief of Air Service (in non-regulation uniform)

Col. Archie Miller, Benedict Crowell, Lt. Ross Kirkpatrick, Gen. Wm. Mitchell, Sgt. E.N. Bruce

A scene taken from Mitchell's court-martial, 1925. This scene was recreated for the 1955 movie The Court-Martial of Billy Mitchell. Note the "turned-down" collar uniform worn by Mitchell, for which the Air Service had campaigned for several years

Monument for the Mitchell family plot at en:Forest Home Cemetery in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It is shared by patriarch Alexander Mitchell, son Senator John Mitchell and grandson General Billy Mitchell

William "Billy" Mitchell (December 29, 1879 – February 19, 1936) was a United States Army general who is regarded as the father of the U.S. Air Force. He is one of the most famous and most controversial figures in the history of American airpower.

Mitchell served in France during World War I and, by the conflict's end, commanded all American air combat units in that country. After the war, he was appointed deputy director of the Air Service and began advocating increased investment in air power, believing that this would prove vital in future wars. He argued particularly for the ability of bombers to sink battleships and organized a series of bombing runs against stationary ships designed to test the idea.

He antagonized many people in the Army with his arguments and criticism and, in 1925, was returned to his permanent rank of Colonel. Later that year, he was court-martialed for insubordination after accusing Army and Navy leaders of an "almost treasonable administration of the national defense." He resigned from the service shortly afterward.

Mitchell received many honors following his death, including a commission by President Franklin Roosevelt as a Major General. He is also the only individual after whom a type of American military aircraft, the North American B-25 Mitchell, is named.

Born in Nice, France, to John L. Mitchell, a wealthy Wisconsin senator and his wife Harriet, Mitchell grew up on an estate in what is now the Milwaukee suburb of West Allis, Wisconsin. His grandfather Alexander Mitchell, a Scotsman, was the wealthiest person in Wisconsin for his generation and established what became the Milwaukee Road along with the Marine Bank of Wisconsin. Mitchell Park and the important shopping precinct Mitchell Street were named in honor of Alexander.

Billy Mitchell graduated from Columbian College of George Washington University, where he was a member of the DC Alpha chapter of the Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity. He then enlisted as a private at age 18 during the Spanish American War. Quickly gaining a commission due to his father's influence, he joined the U.S. Army Signal Corps. Following the cessation of hostilities, Mitchell remained in the army. He predicted as early as 1906, while an instructor at the Army's Signal School in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, that future conflicts would take place in the air, not on the ground.

A member of one of Milwaukee's most prominent families, Billy Mitchell was probably the first person with ties to Wisconsin to see the Wright Brothers plane fly. In 1908, when a young Signal Corps officer, Mitchell observed Orville Wright's flying demonstration at Fort Myer, Virginia. Mitchell took flight instruction at the Curtiss Aviation School at Newport News, Virginia. One of Mitchell's flight instructors was Walter Lees, an aviator from Mazomanie, Wisconsin.

After tours in the Philippines and Alaska Territory, Mitchell was assigned to the General Staff—at the time, its youngest member at age 32. He became interested in aviation and was assigned to the Aeronautical Division, U.S. Signal Corps, a predecessor of the Army Air Service. In 1916 at age 38, he took private flying lessons because the Army considered him too old and too high-ranking for flight training.

On April 6, 1917, the United States declared war on Germany, and Mitchell, by then a lieutenant colonel, was in Spain en route to France as an observer. He immediately went to Paris and set up an office for the Aviation Section, from which he collaborated extensively with British and French air leaders such as General Hugh Trenchard, studying their strategies as well as their aircraft. He made the first flight by an American officer over German lines on April 24, flying with a French pilot. Before long, Mitchell had gained enough experience to begin preparations for American air operations. Mitchell rapidly earned a reputation as a daring, flamboyant, and tireless leader. He eventually was elevated to the rank of Brigadier General and commanded all American air combat units in France. In September 1918, he planned and led nearly 1,500 British, French and Italian aircraft in the air phase of the Battle of Saint-Mihiel, one of the first coordinated air-ground offensives in history. He ended the war as Chief of Air Service, Group of Armies, and became Chief of Air Service, Third Army after the armistice.

Recognized as one of the top American combat airmen of the war alongside aces such as his good friend, Eddie Rickenbacker, he was probably the best-known American in Europe. He was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross, the Distinguished Service Medal, the World War I Victory Medal with eight campaign clasps, and several foreign decorations. Despite his superb leadership and his fine combat record, he alienated many of his superiors during and after his 18 months in France.

Returning to the United States in January 1919, it had been widely expected throughout the Air Service that Mitchell would receive the post-war assignment of Director of Air Service. Instead he returned to find that Maj. Gen. Charles T. Menoher, an artilleryman who had commanded the Rainbow Division in France, had been appointed director on the recommendation of his classmate General Pershing, to maintain operational control of aviation by the ground forces.

Mitchell received appointment on February 28, 1919, as Director of Military Aeronautics, to head the flying component of the Air Service, but that office was in name only as it was a wartime agency that would expire six months after the signing of a peace treaty. Menoher instituted a reorganization of the Air Service based on the divisional system of the AEF, eliminating the DMA as an organization, and Mitchell was assigned as Third Assistant Executive, in charge of the Training and Operations Group, Office of Director of Air Service (ODAS), in April 1919. He maintained his temporary wartime rank of brigadier general.

When the Army was reorganized by Congress on June 4, 1920, the Air Service was recognized as a combatant arm of the line, third in size behind the Infantry and Artillery. On July 1, 1920, Mitchell was promoted to the permanent rank of colonel, Signal Corps, but also received a recess appointment (as did Menoher) to become Assistant Chief of Air Service with the rank of brigadier general. On July 30, 1920, he was transferred and promoted to the permanent rank of colonel, Air Service, with date of rank from July 1, placing him first in seniority among all Air Service branch officers. On March 4, 1921, Mitchell was appointed Assistant Chief of Air Service by new President Warren G. Harding with consent of the Senate.

Mitchell did not share in the common belief that World War I would be the war to end war. "If a nation ambitious for universal conquest gets off to a flying start in a war of the future," he said, "it may be able to control the whole world more easily than a nation has controlled a continent in the past."

He returned from Europe with a fervent belief that within a near future, possibly within ten years, air power would become the predominant force of war, and that it should be united entirely in an independent air force equal to the Army and Navy. He found encouragement in a number of bills before Congress proposing a Department of Aeronautics that included an air force separate from either the Army and Navy, primarily legislation introduced in August 1919 by Senator Harry New (Rep-Indiana), influenced by the recommendations of a fact-finding commission sent to Europe under the direction of Assistant Secretary of War Benedict Crowell in early 1919 that contradicted the findings of Army boards and advocated an independent air force.

Mitchell believed that the use of floating bases was necessary to defend the nation against naval threats, but Chief of Naval Operations Adm. William S. Benson had dissolved Naval Aeronautics as an organization early in 1919. However, senior naval aviators feared that land-based aviators in a "unified" independent air force would no more understand the requirements of sea-based aviation than ground forces commanders understood the capabilities and potential of air power, and vigorously resisted any alliance with Mitchell.

The Navy's civilian leadership was equally opposed, if for other reasons. On April 3, Mitchell met with Assistant Secretary of the Navy Franklin D. Roosevelt and a board of admirals to discuss aviation, and Mitchell urged the development of naval aviation because of the growing obsolescence of the surface fleet. His assurances that the Air Service could develop whatever bomb was needed to sink a battleship, and that a national defense organization of land, sea, and air components was essential and inevitable, were met with cool hostility. Mitchell found his ideas publicly denounced as "pernicious" by Roosevelt. Convinced that within as soon as ten years strategic bombardment would become a threat to the United States and make the Air Service the nation's first line of defense instead of the Navy, he began to set out to prove that aircraft were capable of sinking ships to reinforce his position.

His relations with superiors continued to sour as he began to attack both the War and Navy Departments for being insufficiently farsighted regarding airpower. He advocated the development of a number of aircraft innovations, including bombsights, sled-runner landing gear for winter operations, engine superchargers and aerial torpedoes. He ordered the use of aircraft in fighting forest fires and border patrols, and encouraged the staging of a transcontinental air race, a flight around the perimeter of the United States. He also encouraged Army pilots to challenge speed, endurance and altitude records. In short, he encouraged anything that would further develop the use of the aircraft, and that would keep aviation in the news.

In February 1921, at the urging of Mitchell, who was anxious to test his theories of destruction of ships by aerial bombing, Secretary of War Newton Baker and Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels agreed to a series of joint Army-Navy exercises, known as Project B, to be held that summer in which surplus or captured ships could be used as targets.

Mitchell was concerned that the building of dreadnoughts was taking precious defense dollars away from military aviation. He was convinced that a force of anti-shipping airplanes could defend a coastline with more economy than a combination of coastal guns and naval vessels. A thousand bombers could be built at the same cost as one battleship, and could sink that battleship. Mitchell infuriated the Navy by claiming he could sink ships "under war conditions", and boasted he could prove it if he were permitted to bomb captured German battleships.

The Navy reluctantly agreed to the demonstration after news leaked of its own tests. To counter Mitchell, the Navy had sunk the old battleship Indiana near Tangier Island, Virginia, on November 1, 1920, using its own airplanes. Daniels had hoped to squelch Mitchell by releasing a report on the results written by Captain William D. Leahy stating that, "The entire experiment pointed to the improbability of a modern battleship being either destroyed or completely put out of action by aerial bombs." When the New York Tribune revealed that the Navy's "tests" were done with dummy sand bombs and that the ship was actually sunk using high explosives placed on the ship, Congress introduced two resolutions urging new tests and backed the Navy into a corner.

In the arrangements for the new tests, there was to be a news blackout until all data had been analyzed at which point only the official news report would be released; Mitchell felt that the Navy was going to bury the results. The Chief of the Air Corps attempted to have Mitchell dismissed a week before the tests began, reacting to Navy complaints about Mitchell's criticisms, but the new Secretary of War John W. Weeks backed down when it became apparent that Mitchell had widespread public and media support.

On May 1, 1921, Mitchell assembled the 1st Provisional Air Brigade, an air and ground crew of 125 aircraft and 1,000 men at Langley, Virginia, using six squadrons from the Air Service:

Air Service Field Officers School, Langley Field, Virginia, (SE-5 fighters)
50th Squadron (later 431st Bomb Squadron)
88th Squadron (later 436th Bomb Squadron)
1st Day Bombardment Group (later 2nd Bomb Group), Kelly Field, Texas (SE-5 fighters, Martin NBS-1, Handley-Page O/400, and Caproni CA-5 bombers)
49th Squadron
96th Squadron
7th Observation Group (Second Corps Area), Mitchel Field, New York (DH-4 and Douglas O-2 observation planes)
1st Squadron
5th Squadron

Mitchell took command on May 27 after testing bombs, fuses, and other equipment at Aberdeen Proving Ground and began training in anti-ship bombing techniques. Alexander Seversky, a veteran Russian pilot who had bombed German ships in the Great War, joined the effort, suggesting the bombers aim near the ships so that expanding water pressure from the underwater blasts would stave in and separate hull plates. Further discussion with Captain Alfred Wilkinson Johnson, Commander, Air Force, Atlantic fleet aboard USS Shawmut, confirmed that near-miss bombs would inflict more damage than direct hits; near-misses would cause an underwater concussive effect against the hull.

The Navy and the Air Service were at cross purposes regarding the tests. Supported by General Pershing, the Navy set rules and conditions that enhanced the survivability of the targets, stating that the purpose of the tests was to determine how much damage ships could withstand. The ships had to be sunk in at least 100 fathoms of water (so as not to become navigational hazards), and the Navy chose an area 50 mi (80 km) off the mouth of Chesapeake Bay rather than either of two possible closer areas, minimizing the effective time the Army's bombers would have in the target area. The planes were forbidden from using aerial torpedoes, would be permitted only two hits on the battleship using their heaviest bombs, and would have to stop between hits so that a damage assessment party could go aboard. Smaller ships could not be struck by bombs larger than 600 pounds, and also were subject to the same interruptions in attacks.

Mitchell held to the Navy's restrictions for the tests of June 21, July 13 and July 18, and successfully sank the ex-German destroyer G102 and the ex-German light cruiser Frankfurt in concert with Navy aircraft. On each of these demonstrations the ships were first attacked by SE-5 fighters strafing and bombing the decks of the ships with 25-pound anti-personnel bombs to simulate suppression of antiaircraft fire, followed by attacks from twin-engined Martin NBS-1 (Martin MB-2) bombers using high explosive demolition bombs. Mitchell observed the attacks from the controls of his own DH-4, nicknamed The Osprey.

On July 20, 1921, the Navy brought out the ex-German World War I battleship, Ostfriesland. One day of scheduled 230, 550 and 600 lb (270 kg) bomb attacks by Marine, Navy and Army aircraft settled the Ostfriesland three feet by the stern with a five degree list to port. She was taking on water. Further bombing was delayed a day, the Navy claiming due to rough seas that prevented their Board of Observers from going aboard, the Air Service countering that as the Army bombers approached, they were ordered not to attack. Mitchell's bombers were forced to circle for 47 minutes, as a result of which they dropped only half their bombs, and none of their large bombs.

On the morning of July 21, in accordance with a strictly orchestrated schedule of attacks, five NBS-1 bombers led by 1st Lt. Clayton Bissell dropped a single 1,100 lb bomb each, scoring three direct hits. The Navy stopped further drops, although the Army bombers had nine bombs remaining, to assess damage. By noon, Ostfriesland had settled two more feet by the stern and one foot by the bow.

At this point, 2,000 lb (910 kg) bombs were loaded and a flight was dispatched consisting of two Handley-Page O/400 and six NBS-1 bombers. One Handley Page dropped out for mechanical reasons, but the NBS-1s dropped six bombs in quick succession between 12:18 p.m. and 12:31 p.m., aiming for the water near the ship. There were no direct hits but three of the bombs landed close enough to rip hull plates as well as cause the ship to roll over. The ship sank at 12:40 p.m., 22 minutes after the first bomb, with a seventh bomb dropped by the Handley Page on the foam rising up from the sinking ship. Nearby the site, observing, were various foreign and domestic officials aboard the USS Henderson.

Although Mitchell had stressed "war-time conditions", the tests were under static conditions and the sinking of the Ostfriesland was accomplished by violating rules agreed upon by General Pershing that would have allowed Navy engineers to examine the effects of smaller munitions. Navy studies of the wreck of the Ostfriesland show she had suffered little topside damage from bombs and was sunk by progressive flooding that might have been stemmed by a fast-acting damage control party on board the vessel. Mitchell used the sinking for his own publicity purposes, though his results were downplayed in public by General of the Armies John J. Pershing who hoped to smooth Army/Navy relations. The efficacy of the tests remain in debate to this day.

Nevertheless, the test was highly influential at the time, causing budgets to be redrawn for further air development and forcing the Navy to look more closely at the possibilities of naval airpower. Despite the advantages enjoyed by the bombers in the artificial exercise, Mitchell's report stressed facts repeatedly proven later in war:

"...sea craft of all kinds, up to and including the most modern battleships, can be destroyed easily by bombs dropped from aircraft, and further, that the most effective means of destruction are bombs. [They] demonstrated beyond a doubt that, given sufficient bombing planes—in short an adequate air force— aircraft constitute a positive defense of our country against hostile invasion."

The fact of the sinkings was indisputable, and Mitchell repeated the performance twice in tests conducted with like results on obsolete U.S. pre-dreadnought battleship Alabama in September 1921, and the battleships Virginia and New Jersey in September 1923. The latter two ships were subjected to teargas attacks and hit with specially designed 4,300 lb (2,000 kg) demolition bombs.

The bombing tests had several immediate and turbulent results. Almost immediately the Navy and President Harding were incensed by an apparent demonstration of naval weakness just after Harding had announced on July 10 invitations to other naval powers to gather in Washington for a conference on the limitation of naval armaments. Statements asserting the obsolescence of the battleship by disarmament proponents in Congress such as Sen. William Borah heightened official anxiety. Both services tried to defuse the results by reports from the Joint Board and Gen. Pershing dismissing Mitchell's claims, and suppressing Mitchell's report, but the latter was leaked to the press.

Gen. Menoher in September forced a showdown over Mitchell as the bombing tests continued. He confronted Secretary Weeks and demanded that either he relieve Mitchell as Assistant Chief of Air Corps or accept Menoher's resignation. Weeks allowed Menoher to resign on October 4 and return to the ground forces "for personal reasons". A reciprocal resignation offer from Mitchell was refused.

Maj. Gen. Mason Patrick was again chosen by Pershing to sort out a mess in the Air Service and became the new Chief on October 5. Patrick made it clear to Mitchell that although he would accept Mitchell's expertise as counsel, all decisions would be made by Patrick. When Mitchell soon got into a minor but embarrassing protocol rift with R/Adm. William A. Moffett at the start of the naval arms limitation conference, Patrick assigned him to an inspection tour of Europe with Alfred Verville and Lt. Clayton Bissell that lasted the duration of the conference over the winter of 1921-22.

Mitchell was dispatched by President Harding to West Virginia. His mission was to stop the warfare that had broken out between the United Mine Workers, Stone Mountain Coal Company, the Baldwin-Felts Agency, and other groups after the Matewan Massacre.

In 1922, while in Europe for Gen. Patrick, Mitchell met the Italian air power theorist Giulio Douhet and soon afterwards an excerpted translation of Douhet's The Command of the Air began to circulate in the Air Service. In 1924, Gen. Patrick again dispatched him on an inspection tour, this time to Hawaii and Asia, to get him off the front pages. Mitchell came back with a 324-page report that predicted future war with Japan, including the attack on Pearl Harbor. Of note, Mitchell discounted the value of aircraft carriers in an attack on the Hawaiian Islands, believing they were of little practical use as:

not only can they not operate efficiently on the high seas but even if they could they cannot place sufficient aircraft in the air at one time to insure a concentrated operation.

Rather he believed a surprise attack on the Hawaiian Islands would be conducted by land-based airpower operating from islands in the Pacific. His report, published in 1925 as the book Winged Defense, foretold wider benefits of an investment in air power:

Those interested in the future of the country, not only from a national defense standpoint but from a civil, commercial and economic one as well, should study this matter carefully, because air power has not only come to stay but is, and will be, a dominating factor in the world’s development.

Winged Defense sold only 4,500 copies between August 1925 and January 1926, the months surrounding the publicity of the court martial, thus Mitchell did not reach a widespread audience.

Mitchell experienced difficulties within the Army, notably with his superiors when he appeared before the Lampert Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and sharply castigated Army and Navy leadership. The War Department had endorsed a proposal to establish a "General Headquarters Air Force" as a vehicle for modernization and expansion of the Air Service, to be funded through shared appropriations for aviation with the Navy, but shelved the plan when the Navy refused, incensing Mitchell.

In March 1925, when his term as Assistant Chief of the Air Service expired, he reverted to his permanent rank of Colonel and was transferred to San Antonio, Texas, as air officer to a ground forces corps. Although such demotions were not unusual in demobilizations (Patrick himself had gone from Major General to Colonel upon returning to the Army Corps of Engineers in 1919), the move was widely seen as punishment and exile, since Mitchell had petitioned to remain as Assistant Chief when his term expired, and his transfer to an assignment with no political influence at a relatively unimportant Army base had been directed by Secretary of War John Weeks.

In response to the Navy dirigible Shenandoah crashing in a storm, killing 14 of the crew, and the loss of three seaplanes on a flight from the West Coast to Hawaii, Mitchell issued a statement accusing senior leaders in the Army and Navy of incompetence and "almost treasonable administration of the national defense." In October 1925, a charge with eight specifications was preferred against Mitchell on the direct order of President Calvin Coolidge accusing him of violation of the 96th Article of War, an omnibus article that Mitchell's chief counsel, Congressman Frank Reid, declared to be "unconstitutional" as a violation of free speech. The court martial began in early November and lasted for seven weeks.

The youngest of the 12 judges was Major General Douglas MacArthur, who later described the order to sit on Mitchell's court-martial as "one of the most distasteful orders I ever received." Of the thirteen judges, none had aviation experience and three were removed by defense challenges for bias, including Major General Charles P. Summerall, the president of the court. The case was then presided over by Major General Robert Lee Howze. Among those who testified for Mitchell were Edward Rickenbacker, Hap Arnold, Carl Spaatz and Fiorello La Guardia. The trial attracted significant interest, and public opinion supported Mitchell.

However, the court found the truth or falseness of Mitchell's accusations to be immaterial to the charge and on December 17, 1925, found him "guilty of all specifications and of the charge". The court suspended him from active duty for five years without pay, which President Coolidge later amended to half-pay. The generals ruling in the case wrote, "The Court is thus lenient because of the military record of the Accused during the World War." MacArthur later claimed he had voted to acquit, and Fiorello La Guardia claimed that MacArthur's "not guilty" ballot had been found in the judges' anteroom. MacArthur felt "that a senior officer should not be silenced for being at variance with his superiors in rank and with accepted doctrine."

Mitchell resigned instead on February 1, 1926, and spent the next decade writing and preaching air power to all who would listen. However, his departure from the service sharply reduced his ability to influence military policy and public opinion.

Mitchell viewed the election of his one-time antagonist Franklin D. Roosevelt as advantageous for air power, and met with him early in 1932 to brief him on his concepts for a unification of the military in a department of defense that intrigued and interested Roosevelt. Mitchell believed he might receive an appointment as assistant secretary of war for air or perhaps even secretary of defense in a Roosevelt administration, but neither prospect materialized.

In 1926, Mitchell made his home with his wife Elizabeth at the 120-acre (0.49 km2) Boxwood Farm in Middleburg, Virginia, which remained his primary residence until his death. He died of a variety of ailments including a bad heart and an extreme case of influenza in a hospital in New York City on February 19, 1936, and was buried at Forest Home Cemetery in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Mitchell's son, John, served in the Army as a First Lieutenant, dying in 1942. Mitchell's first cousin, the Canadian George Croil, went on to secure an autonomous status for the Royal Canadian Air Force and serve as its first Chief of the Air Staff during the opening year of World War II.

Mitchell's concept of a battleship's vulnerability to air attack under "war-time conditions" would be vindicated after his death; a number of warships were sunk by air attack alone during World War II. The battleships Conte di Cavour, Arizona, Utah, Oklahoma, Prince of Wales, Roma, Musashi, Tirpitz, Yamato, Schleswig-Holstein, Impero, Limnos, Kilkis, Marat, Ise and Hyūga were all put out of commission or destroyed by aerial attack including bombs, air-dropped torpedoes and missiles fired from aircraft. Some of these ships were destroyed by surprise attacks in harbor, others were sunk at sea after vigorous defense. However, most of the sinkings were carried out by aircraft carrier-based planes, not by land-based bombers as envisioned by Mitchell. The world's navies had responded quickly to the Ostfriesland lesson.

The North American B-25 Mitchell bomber, introduced in 1941, is the only American military aircraft type to ever be named after a specific person. Nearly 10,000 Mitchell were produced, including the sixteen bombers which Lt. Colonel Jimmy Doolittle and his raiders used to bomb Tokyo and four other Japanese targets in April 1942.
In 1942, President Franklin Roosevelt, in recognizing Mitchell's contributions to air power, elevated him to the rank of major general (two stars) on the Army Air Corps retired list and petitioned the U.S. Congress to posthumously award Mitchell the Congressional Gold Medal, "in recognition of his outstanding pioneer service and foresight in the field of American military aviation." It was awarded in 1946.
In the 1943 classic World War II movie A Guy Named Joe the unnamed "General" who gives the deceased pilot his new assignment was "probably modeled after Billy Mitchell."
In 1955, the Air Force Association passed a resolution calling for the voiding of Mitchell's court-martial. His son William Jr. petitioned in 1957 to have the court-martial verdict set aside, which the Air Force denied while expressing regret about the circumstances under which Mitchell's military career ended.[citation needed] The Association named their Institute for Airpower Studies for the General and the current director is Dr. Rebecca Grant.
The 1955 motion picture The Court-Martial of Billy Mitchell, directed by Otto Preminger, portrays Mitchell's plight in a dramatic and vindicating light.
Inducted into the National Aviation Hall of Fame in 1966.
In 1971, Pipes and Drums, the Billy Mitchell Scottish, was created in Milwaukee to honor Mitchell and his ties to Scotland and Milwaukee.
General Mitchell International Airport in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is named after him, as is the much smaller Billy Mitchell airstrip in Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.
Mitchell Hall, the cadet dining facility at the United States Air Force Academy, was dedicated in honor of Mitchell in 1959.
William (Billy) Mitchell High School in Colorado Springs, Colorado, is also named after him.
Turn 13 at the Road America race circuit near Elkhart Lake, Wisconsin, is also known as Bill Mitchell Bend. A now-demolished bridge that formerly crossed the track was known as the Billy Mitchell Bridge.
At The George Washington University in Washington, D.C., General Mitchell was honored by his alma mater with the naming of a large residence building, William Mitchell Hall.
The Civil Air Patrol cadet program includes an award called the General Billy Mitchell Award., signifying the rank of Cadet 2nd Lieutenant, and completion of several tests and essays.
The U.S. Air Force Pipe Band, which existed as a free-standing unit within the U.S. Air Force Band between 1960 and 1970, wore a tartan created in honor of Billy Mitchell.
In 1999, General Mitchell's portrait was put on a US postage stamp. Although the 55-cent stamp met an airmail rate and portrayed a figure important to the development of aviation, it was not marked or issued as an airmail stamp. It also met the two-ounce first-class rate in effect at the time.
In 2004, Congress voted to reauthorize the President to posthumously commission Mitchell as a Major General in the Army, which the President did in 2005, although President Franklin Roosevelt had previously done this in 1942.
On May 18, 2006, the US Air Force unveiled two prototypes for new service dress uniforms, referencing the service's heritage. One, modeled on the United States Army Air Service uniform, was designated the "Billy Mitchell heritage coat" (the other was named for Hap Arnold).
Hap Arnold told reporters shortly after Mitchell's death, "People would often say Billy Mitchell was years ahead of his time, but many would forget how it was also true."
In 2007, the Air Force first awarded the Air Force Combat Action Medal, which is based on the insignia painted on Billy Mitchell's own aircraft during World War I.

Sources :
Book "A Concise History of the U.S. Air Force" by Stephen L. McFarland
www.af.mil
www.en.wikipedia.org

Patrick Cleburne (1828-1864), Stonewall of the West

2012-05-14T15:15:00.006+07:00

"Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late... It means the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern schoolteachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision... It is said slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties." - Maj. General Patrick R. Cleburne, CSA, January 1864, writing on what would happen if the Confederacy were to be defeated

"If this cause, that is dear to my heart, is doomed to fail, I pray heaven may let me fall with it, while my face is toward the enemy and my arm battling for that which I know is right." - Major General Patrick R. Cleburne before his fatal wound at the battle of Franklin, Tennessee.

Battle of Franklin, by Kurz & Allison, Art Publishers, 1891. This battle was fought on November 30, 1864, at Franklin, Tennessee, as part of the Franklin-Nashville Campaign of the American Civil War. It was one of the worst disasters of the war for the Confederate States Army. Confederate Lt. Gen. John Bell Hood's Army of Tennessee conducted numerous frontal assaults against fortified positions occupied by the Union forces under Maj. Gen. John M. Schofield and was unable to break through or to prevent Schofield from a planned, orderly withdrawal to Nashville

Statue of Confederate General Patrick R. Cleburne at Ringgold, Georgia. Photographed in 19 November 2011

Patrick Ronayne Cleburne (play /ˈkleɪbɜrn/ KLAY-burn; March 16 or March 17, 1828 – November 30, 1864) was an Irish American soldier, best known for his service in the Confederate States Army during the American Civil War, where he rose to the rank of major general.

Patrick Cleburne was promoted in the Confederate army at an astounding rate – enlisting as a private in early 1861, and rising to the rank of Major General by December 1862. Highly respected by both his soldiers and his enemies, he showed great physical and moral courage. In fact, it took great courage to issue his controversial – but sincere – January 1864 proposal to arm slaves to fight for the Confederacy.

No Irish-born soldier rose higher in the ranks of the army of the Confederacy during the American Civil War than did Major General Patrick Ronayne Cleburne. But this stature only hints at the high esteem in which he was held by nearly all of his subordinates, his fellow officers, historians up until today, and even those who fought against him. Only Federal General Phil Sheridan — if he was actually born in Ireland, which is not certain — could be compared to him.

Cleburne was born March 16, 1828, at Bride Park Cottage, County Cork. His father was a physician. His early life was one of privilege and personal tragedy, for he never knew his mother, who died when he was 18 months old. His father died when he was just 15.

Patrick — called Ronayne by his family — was expected to follow in the footsteps of his father and become a physician. However, after failing in two attempts to enter Trinity College, Dublin, to study medicine, Cleburne, confused and dispirited, enlisted in the British army in 1846. His experiences serving in the army in Ireland, coming as they did during "The Great Hunger," could not have been pleasant.

In 1849, the fourth year of the famine, his family, suffering from financial difficulties, proposed that four of the Cleburne siblings go to America. Patrick agreed, and bought his way out of the army. With brothers William and Joseph and sister Anne, he made his way to the United States, trading a life in the enlisted ranks of the army for the wide-open freedom of the American frontier.

Cleburne would soon make his home in Helena, Arkansas, where he worked his way up from a drugstore clerk to become a lawyer. He involved himself in politics deeply enough to be seriously wounded by a member of the anti-immigrant "Know-Nothing " party in 1856. Fully recovered by the summer of 1860, he enlisted in a militia group that gave itself the unlikely name of the "Yell Rifles," in honor of Archibald Yell, an Arkansas hero of the Mexican-American War , not for any prowess in the soon-to-became renowned "rebel yell."

He enlisted as a private, but his former British military training, and no doubt the strength of his personality, inspired the men of the company to elect him captain. With Abraham Lincoln's election galvanizing the South, Cleburne, like many other Irish immigrants, faced a daunting choice. On April 9, 1861, civil war began when South Carolinians fired on Fort Sumter in Charleston Harbor. The day after, Cleburne wrote his brother Robert, "I am with the South in life or in death, in victory or in defeat."

The Yell Rifles joined with other militia companies from Arkansas to form the 1st Arkansas Infantry (which later became the 15th Arkansas). On May 14, Patrick Cleburne's qualifications for military command were recognized again, and he was elected colonel. In the ensuing months, he drilled them into a unit that many said was the finest Confederate regiment beyond the Eastern states!

In October, Cleburne's regiment moved up to join Confederate forces gathering in Bowling Green, Kentucky, and Cleburne's hard work in training his regiment paid off with his promotion to command a brigade in Hardee's division. In March 1862, he received his promotion to brigadier general to go with the command.

Cleburne proved to be an outstanding brigade commander. He was praised by Hardee for his conduct at Shiloh , where his brigade came within 400 yards of Pittsburg Landing, held desperately by the beleaguered Federals. There his brigade sustained more than 40 percent casualties over the two days of battle, which finally ended in a Northern victory. And we should take note also that, though he had British army experience, the first time that Cleburne experienced actual combat was at Shiloh as the commander of a brigade.

At the Battle of Richmond in August, Cleburne commanded a division, a sure sign that his ability was recognized by others. His performance in his first battle as a division commander proved conspicuous once again, but nearly deadly, too. He took a musket ball through his open mouth and out his cheek, performing a multiple tooth extraction — without novocaine — along the way. But the orders he had given before this wound forced him from the field played a major part in the Confederate victory.

When he returned to duty two months later, just in time for the Battle of Perryville , army commander Braxton Bragg returned him to brigade command, an early indication of Bragg's famous shortcomings as a commander. At Perryville, Cleburne's brigade captured a strongly held Federal position, and he was also instrumental in saving a large amount of supplies during the army's retreat to Tennessee. In December, his stellar performance in 1862 was rewarded with promotion to major general and command of a division.

The year 1863 would be very eventful for Cleburne. At Stones River as the year began, his division drove the opposing Federals several miles back. At Chickamauga in September, Gen. D.H. Hill said, "I have never seen troops behave more gallantly than did his [Cleburne's] division." And it was his division that thwarted the Federal's victorious pursuit of Bragg's army after the debacle at Missionary Ridge in November. During the aftermath of this rear guard action, his brigade gave Joe Hooker a thrashing, fighting in independent command at Ringgold Gap, Ga. He would be voted a resolution of thanks from the Confederate Congress for that action.

As 1863 was fading into 1864, with the cause he loved and served valiantly being inexorably ground to defeat, Cleburne proposed what for many Southerners was the unthinkable to the Confederate government. Cleburne drafted a well-considered, written proposal that would arguably become the nearly invincible Cleburne's ironic legacy, his only failure. In the January 2 proposal, presented to General Joe Johnston and the rest of the command structure of the exhausted Western army, Cleburne suggested that Southern slaves be offered freedom in return for service in the Confederate army.

Though Gen. Johnston declined to send it on to Richmond, Gen. William Walker, who considered the idea close to treason, forwarded a copy to Confederate President Jefferson Davis. Davis ordered Johnston to suppress any mention of the idea, saying it was "injurious to the public service." Bragg, failed as a field commander, yet now a military advisor to Davis, said, "We must mark the men (who backed the idea) ... and feel they will bear watching." Cleburne's advancement into the army's top echelons ground to a halt.

Through 1864, Cleburne continued his stellar performance as a division commander in Johnston's army during the battles around Atlanta, but no promotion to corps command would be forthcoming for the best division commander the Confederate army ever had. This professional disappointment was tempered by personal joy, however, as Patrick met, and became betrothed to Susan Tarleton of Mobile, Alabama. But this relationship, like so many in the war, was star-crossed.

On Nov. 30, the army, now under the command of the irascible, one-legged John Bell Hood , stood before a nearly impregnable Federal fortification at Franklin, Tennessee. Hood ordered a frontal assault. The men of the Army of Tennessee knew they were headed to destruction. "Few of us will ever return to Arkansas," Gen. Daniel Govan told Cleburne. "Well, Govan," Cleburne replied, "if we are to die, let us die like men." Cleburne mounted his horse, and before the day was over he was shot dead.

Gen. William Hardee later said, "Where his division defended, no odds broke its lines; where it attacked, no numbers resisted its onslaught, save only once - and there is the grave of Cleburne and his heroic division."

Cleburne was buried in Columbia, near St. John's Episcopal Church. In 1870, his remains were moved to his native Helena, Arkansan, and buried in the Evergreen Confederate Cemetery, on Crowley's Ridge, where he lies today.

Source:
www.civilwar.org
www.civilwarartist.com
www.confederateamericanpride.com
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.thewildgeese.com

Otto Liman von Sanders (1855-1929), Commander of German-Turkish Forces in World War I

2012-05-09T17:23:00.008+07:00

Equestrian portrait of Otto Liman von Sanders in a picture taken between circa 1910 and circa 1915. Probably before the Kassel Ottoneum

A portrait of Otto Liman von Sanders taken in 1914. As commander of the German Military Mission, Otto von Sanders was given the rank of Turkish marshal and command of the First Army Corps. Under his guidance the mission provided an infusion of experience and professionalism that had previously been lacking in the Turkish Army. Specialist troops, artillery units, armaments and other military supplies were provided as part of this alliance

A portrait of Otto Liman von Sanders taken in 1914. He is wearing Turkish fez, German general jacket and Pour le Mérite in his neck

A portrait of Otto Liman von Sanders taken in 1916. He is wearing Turkish fez and Pour le Mérite in his neck

Otto Liman von Sanders (sitting, 3rd from right) with Turkish officers, 1914. Depicted in this picture: Hüseyin Rauf Bey, chief of staff of the ottoman admirality; Vehib Pasha, Commander of the south group (Gallipoli); Esat Pasha, Commander of the north group (Gallipoli); Süleyman Pasha, head of the medical service; and Cevat Pasha, military governor of İstanbul

Generalleutnant Otto Liman von Sanders (February 17, 1855 – August 22, 1929) was a German general who served as adviser and military commander for the Ottoman Empire during World War I.

He was born in Stolp in Pomerania region in Germany. His father was a Jewish nobleman. Like many other Prussians from aristocratic families, he joined the military and rose through the ranks to Lieutenant General. Like several Prussian generals before him (e.g., Von Moltke and Baron von der Goltz), the unpopular Liman served in numerous staff and divisional commands before being appointed director of a German military mission to Turkey in 1913 intended to reorganise the army of the Ottoman Empire.

Liman's appointment brought a storm of protest from Russia, who suspected German designs on the Ottoman capital. A compromise arrangement was subsequently agreed whereby Liman was appointed to the rather less senior (and less influential) position of Inspector General in January 1914.For nearly eighty years, the Ottoman Empire had been trying to modernize their army along European lines. Liman von Sanders would be the last German to attempt this task.

Liman had little time to organize the defences, but he had two things in his favor. First, the Ottoman 5th Army was the best army they had, some 84,000 well-equipped soldiers in six divisions. Second, he was helped by poor Allied leadership. Instead of using their massive fleet to force a passage through the straits to Istanbul, the British and French admirals called for ground troops to capture the Dardanelles peninsula so their battleships could sail on into the Sea of Marmara unmolested. Liman had just over a month to prepare. Then, on 23 April 1915, the British landed a major force at Cape Helles. One of Liman's best decisions during this time was to promote Mustafa Kemal (later known as Atatürk) to commander of the 19th division. Kemal's division literally saved the day for the Ottomans. His troops marched up on the day of the invasion and occupied the ridge line above the ANZAC landing site, just as the ANZAC troops were moving up the slope themselves. Kemal recognized the danger and personally made sure his troops held the ridge line. They were never forced off despite constant attacks for the next five months.

From April to November 1915 (when the decision to evacuate was made), Liman had to fight off numerous attacks against his defensive positions. The British tried another landing at Suvla Bay, but this also was halted by the Ottoman defenders. The only bright spot for the British in this entire operation was that they managed to evacuate their positions without much loss. However, this battle was a major victory for the Ottoman army and some of the credit is given to the generalship of Liman von Sanders.

Early in 1915, the previous head of the German military mission to the Ottoman Empire, Baron von der Goltz arrived in Istanbul as military advisor to the (essentially powerless) Sultan, Mehmed V. The old Baron did not get along with Liman von Sanders and did not like the three Pashas (Enver Pasha, Cemal Pasha and Talat) who ran the Ottoman Empire during the war. The Baron proposed some major offensives against the British, but these proposals came to nothing in the face of Allied offensives against the Ottomans on three fronts (the Dardanelles, the Caucusus Front, and the newly opened Mesopotamian Front). Liman was rid of the old Baron when Enver Pasha sent him to fight the British in Mesopotamia in October 1915. (Goltz died there six months later just before the British army at Kut surrendered).

In 1918, the last year of the war, Liman von Sanders took over command of the Ottoman army during the Sinai and Palestine Campaign, replacing the German General Erich von Falkenhayn who had been defeated by British General Allenby at the end of 1917.

Liman was hampered by the significant decline in power of the Ottoman army. His forces were unable to do anything more than occupy defensive positions and wait for the British attack. The attack was a long time in coming, but when General Allenby finally unleashed his army, the entire Ottoman army was destroyed in a week of fighting (see the Battle of Megiddo). In the rout, Liman was nearly captured by British soldiers.

After the war ended he was arrested in Malta in February 1919 on charges of having committed war crimes, but he was released six months later. He retired from the German army that year.

In 1927 he published a book he had written in captivity in Malta about his experiences before and during the war (there is an English translation). Two years later Otto Liman von Sanders died in Munich at the age of seventy-four.

Sources :
www.dev.links.com.au
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.firstworldwar.com

Alfred von Schlieffen (1833-1913), Famous Because of His Schlieffen Plan

2012-04-12T08:21:00.006+07:00

Alfred Graf von Schlieffen

Alfred Graf von Schlieffen

Alfred Graf von Schlieffen. Looks like it's the same picture with the previous one, but note the left hand!

grave of Alfred Graf von Schlieffen on Invalidenfriedhof cemetery in Berlin, taken in 22 June 2008

Alfred Graf von Schlieffen, mostly called Count Schlieffen (German pronunciation: [ˈʃliːfən]; 28 February 1833 – 4 January 1913) was a German field marshal and strategist who served as Chief of the Imperial German General Staff from 1891 to 1906. His name lived on in the 1905 Schlieffen Plan for the defeat of the French Third Republic and the Russian Empire.

Schlieffen was born in Berlin on 28 February 1833 as the son of a Prussian army officer. He entered the army in 1854 at the age of 20. Quickly moving to the general staff, he participated in the Austro-Prussian War in 1866, and in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71. In 1884, Schlieffen became head of the military history section of the general staff, replacing Count von Waldersee as chief of the Prussian General Staff in 1891, after thirty-eight years of military service.

In 1905 Schlieffen presented the Schlieffen Plan a scheme to prevent Germany from having to fight a two-front war by first defeating France quickly, then throwing its full weight against Russia.

The rest of Schlieffen’s career was spent inculcating the operational ideas required to make this strategy work. He retired on 1 January 1906 after nearly 53 years of service and died in Berlin on January 4, 1913, just nineteen months before the outbreak of the First World War. In reference to his Schlieffen Plan, Schlieffen's last words were said to have been, "Remember: keep the right wing strong."

Schlieffen was perhaps the best-known contemporary strategist of his time, although criticized for his "narrow-minded military scholasticism." Schlieffen's operational theories were to have a profound impact on the development of maneuver warfare in the twentieth century, largely through his seminal treatise, Cannae, which concerned the decidedly un-modern battle of 216 BC in which Hannibal defeated the Romans.

The plan was not applied in its pure form at the beginning of World War I. Schlieffen’s successor, Helmuth von Moltke, drastically reduced the strength of the attacking armies and thus, is often blamed for Germany’s failure to win a quick, decisive victory.

His theories were studied exhaustively, especially in the higher army academies of the United States and Europe after World War I. American military thinkers thought so highly of him that his principal literary legacy, Cannae, was translated at Fort Leavenworth and distributed within the U.S. Army and to the academic community!

As General Walter Bedell Smith, chief of staff to General Dwight D. Eisenhower, supreme commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in World War II, pointed out, General Eisenhower and many of his staff officers, products of these academies, "were imbued with the idea of this type of wide, bold maneuver for decisive results."

General Erich Ludendorff, a disciple of Schlieffen who applied his teachings of encirclement in the Battle of Tannenberg, once famously christened Schlieffen as "one of the greatest soldiers ever."

Long after his death, the German General Staff officers of the Interwar and World War II period, particularly General Hans von Seeckt, recognized an intellectual debt to Schlieffen theories during the development of the Blitzkrieg doctrine.

Quotations
- "A man is born, and not made, a strategist."—Schlieffen
- "To win, we must endeavour to be the stronger of the two at the point of impact. Our only hope of this lies in making our own choice of operations, not in waiting passively for whatever the enemy chooses for us."—Schlieffen

Sources :
www.britannica.com
www.de.wikipedia.org
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.kingsacademy.com
www.wypracowania24.pl

Hayreddin Barbarossa (1478-1546), the Greatest and most Successful Naval Commander in the History of Islam

2012-04-10T10:06:00.007+07:00

16th century Portrait of Barbaros Hayreddin Pasha (1478-1546)

16th century Western depiction of Hayreddin Barbarossa

A depiction of Hayreddin Barbarossa by Italien painter circa 1580

Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha's force led by Sinan Reis defeats the Holy League of Charles V under the command of Andrea Doria at the Battle of Preveza in 1538

Statue of Khayreddin Barbarossa in Algiers, Algeria next to the Dey Fort. Photo taken on 18 August, 2011, corresponding to 18 Ramadan, 1432 of the Hijri calendar

Hayreddin Barbarossa, or Barbarossa Hayreddin Pasha (Turkish: Barbaros Hayreddin (Hayrettin) Paşa or Hızır Hayreddin (Hayrettin) Paşa; also Khizr Reis before being promoted to the rank of Pasha and becoming the Kapudan-i Derya, born Khizr or Khidr, Turkish: Hızır; c. 1478 – 4 July 1546), was an Ottoman admiral who dominated the Mediterranean for decades. He was born on the island of Lesbos/Mytilini and died in Constantinople (Istanbul), the Ottoman capital. Hayreddin (Arabic: Khair ad-Din خير الدين, which literally means "goodness" or "best of the religion" of Islam) was an honorary name given to him by Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent. He became known as "Barbarossa" ("Redbeard" in Italian) in Europe, a name he inherited from his elder brother Baba Oruç (Father Aruj) after Aruj was killed in a battle with the Spanish in Algeria. This name sounded like "Barbarossa" ("Redbeard") to the Europeans, and Aruj did have a red beard. The nickname then stuck also to Hayreddin's Turkish name, in the form Barbaros.

The Battle of Preveza in 1538 was a major turning point in the history of naval power in the Mediterranean. Taking place on the same body of water where Caesar Augustus claimed final power during the Battle of Actium in 31 BCE, this climactic battle of the ongoing Turkish-European war would be an epic conflict that would definitively determine jurisdiction over the Greek coast, ultimate dominion over the planet's most coveted and lucrative naval trade routes, and near-infinite bragging rights around the beer coolers at the next annual Turkish-Venetian Super Bowl Barbeque Bash.

On one side was the great Italian Admiral and perpetually-shirtless egomaniac Andrea Doria. Widely believed to be the most brilliant seaman Christianity had to offer, this dauntless, self-aggrandizing gut-buster had been whomping Turkish asses up and down the coast of Southern Greece for years, crushing Ottoman warships into sawdust and whacking babies in the face with his pimp-cane, and he now sought to finally exert his power over his hated rivals once and for all by incinerating all that remained of the Turkish Fleet. At his command was a seemingly-endless Death Armada of crusading vessels from the European nations that comprised the powerful Holy League; 300 badass warships from Papacy-Approved locales like Spain, Venice, Genoa, and Malta. Hell, when the Pope heard about the assbeating that was about to go down, he decided to get in on the action himself, sending over a dozen of his own battleships to fight the heathen Turks, and prove once and for all that the Christian God indeed was an Awesome God.

This of course was back in the day when the Pope had his own army and navy. Can you imagine what the world would be like today if Benedict XVI could send a strafing run of A-10s every time somebody pissed him off?

Well this masturbatory Grand Showcase of naval might was great and all, but as Harvey Keitel would say, "let's not start sucking each other's dicks quite yet, gentlemen." You see, across the Gulf of Arta stood the most badass Muslim warlord to ever sail the high seas - a man known to his countrymen simply as Kheir-ed-Din – The Defender of the Faith. Outnumbered and heavily outgunned, on this day the Grand Admiral of the Turkish Navy remained unimpressed by his enemies' vulgar display of power. This brilliant tactician and naval asskicker was determined to smite the fuck out of the infidel crusaders to the fullest extent of his impressive abilities. His beleaguered fleet of 122 battle-hardened warships stood at the ready, eagerly waiting his command. It wouldn't be long before they'd have an opportunity to show the European Nations what it was like to be on the receiving end of a Turkish shoe to the fucking face.

The boy who would become the Defender of the Faith was born on the Isle of Lesbos in the Aegean Sea at the end of the 15th century. Coming from lower-class parents on a tiny, isolated island more well-known for its etymological association with the word "lesbianism" than for it's penchant for producing epic skull-crushing hardasses, young Hizir Reis was more or less received as just one in a long line of male children produced by a nondescript family of little to no importance. His rise to prominence as Grand Admiral started from very humble beginnings - with minimal opportunity for fiscal advancement through legitimate means, the young Reis boys initially opted to turn to adventure, glory, fame, and money by buying a boat, recruiting a crew of cutthroats, and turning to a life of badass piracy on the high seas of the Mediterranean.

Operating of the Tunisian coast in the early 1500s, Hizir Reis and his band of bloodthirsty buccaneer brothers got busy bashing peoples' faces in with their scimitars on a daily basis. Over time, these enterprising asskickers built up a pretty sweet pirate empire, preying on European shipping, kicking the heads off of the Knights Hospitaller, and plundering with relative impunity all over the place like crazy whoah. As news of their success spread, they gained the support of local Moorish seafaring warriors, fought against Spanish expansion into North Africa, and pummeled a bunch of Christian knights unconscious with their own crucifixes.

Hizir eventually took over control of the ever-expanding criminal enterprise after the death of his older brother, and decided to ally himself with the Ottoman Turkish Empire. You see, back in the 16th century, the Turks really had their shit together. The Sultan basically went around to the most badass Muslim pirates in the Middle East and told them, "Hey dude if you promise only to fuck up the Christians and leave Turkish shipping alone, I'll give you a bunch of troops, cannons, supplies, and money in return." This government-sanctioned piracy worked out pretty well for everybody - the Turks gained a powerful ally, and corsairs like Hizir Reis pretty much had free reign to wreak havoc on anybody and everybody who was pissing them off. It was as a badass Turkish privateer that this ferocious corsair made a name for himself as a serious face-melting assbeater, crushing the enemies of the Ottoman Empire like empty soda cans and basically crotchpunching the European powers up and down the coastlines of the Mediterranean.

The notorious Muslim pirate, known to the Europeans as Barbarossa ("Red Beard", because he had, well, red hair. And a beard), became an overnight celebrity when he put together a massive pirate army and captured the heavily-fortified North African city of Algiers in 1517. The Sultan was so mega pumped-up about that awesome shit that he appointed Barbarossa Governor of Algiers and commander of the entire fucking Western Ottoman Fleet, and sent him out to do what he did best – smash European ships until they were no longer capable of flotation. The Empire’s newest admiral got his Darth Vader on pretty much immediately, conquering basically all of North Africa by 1529. The Hapsburg King-Emperor Charles V tried to retake the areas that had fallen to the Turks, but ended up getting kicked in the balls repeatedly by the unstoppable Peasant-turned-Pirate-turned-Admiral.

It was around this time that our buddy Andrea Doria arrived on the scene. At this point in time, Doria’s name wasn’t yet synonymous with sinking ships, but that situation that would soon be remedied by Admiral Barbarossa and his cannon-laden, shit-wrecking warships.

Doria decided he was going to liberate Greece from the Turkish yoke, sailing into the port city of Coron in 1532 and capturing it with relative ease. After hearing about this defeat, the Turkish Sultan was like, "that’s fucking it." He slammed his fist down on a table, swore loudly in basically every language he could think of, and immediately promoted Barbarossa to the position of Grand Mega Super Inane Admiral of the Entire Goddamned Turkish Navy.

Barbarossa didn’t fuck around. He built a huge fleet, relentlessly trained his men, and set out for action. In 1535 he re-captured Coron, conquered Tunis, blew up Sicily, and plundered the shit out of the Italian coast. His raids and assbeatery pissed off the Europeans so badly that they sent Andrea Doria to dish out some much-needed retaliation. Doria assembled a massive Christian Fleet, sailed out to the afore-mentioned harbor of Preveza, and prepared to teach the Muslims a lesson in getting their faces kicked in with a chainmailed boot.

Well Andrea Doria needed to recognize that stepping to Barbarossa is a good way to get one's eye swole up. Off the coast of Preveza in 1538, the Allied galleys of the Holy League were face-smashed into driftwood by the gigantic nutbag of Hayreddin Barbarossa and his Ottoman Fleet. Outnumbered more than three-to-one (six-to-one according to some accounts), Barbarossa not only demolished the invasion force – he made the combined naval might of five mighty Christian nations look like that adorable fleet of rubber duckies that menaced the shores of New England a couple years ago. The Allies were crushed in a humiliating manner, their ships were sunk and/or captured, its galleys were plundered – shit, the Republic of Venice was fucked up so hard it was forced to pay war reparations to the Turks and publicly apologize for wasting Barbarossa’s time with such a pitiful, insignificant military effort.

For his success, Barbarossa was given the top honors of the Ottoman Empire. He was even awarded the right to sit on the Imperial Council and help run the higher-workings of the government. His victory also established the might of the Turkish Navy in the Mediterranean - from that point on, Ottoman ships dominated the Adriatic and Aegean Seas, and the Sultan held sole power over some of the world's most profitable trade routes. Barbarossa continued his adventures for a couple years, sacking Sicilian cities, meddling in petty European succession wars, and plundering Spanish galley squadrons. He eventually retired to a life of luxury, and died in 1546 at the age of 68, the greatest and most successful naval commander in the history of Islam!

Sources :
www.badassoftheweek.com
www.en.wikipedia.org

Turgut Reis (1485-1565), Ottoman Admiral from Greek Descent

2012-04-10T09:57:00.006+07:00

Portrait of Turgut (Dragut) Reis 1485 – 23 June 1565) who was a Turkish Ottoman Admiral and privateer. This is merely a cropped and enlarged version of the original image

Painting of Turgut (Dragut) Reis made by Ali Sami BOYAR (1880-1967) and in the possession of İstanbul Askeri Müze

Turgut Reis landing on Malta by Eugenio Caxes (1575-1634). Photographed at Istanbul Naval Museum

Statue of Turgut Reis in front of the Topkapı Palace in Istanbul

Turgut Reis (1485 – 23 June 1565) was an Ottoman Admiral and privateer who also served as Bey of Algiers; Beylerbey of the Mediterranean; and first Bey, later Pasha, of Tripoli. Under his naval command the Ottoman Empire maritime was extended across North Africa. When Turgut was serving as pasha, he adorned and built up the city of Tripoli, making it one of the most impressive cities along the North African Coast. Known in different languages under such names as Dragut or Darghouth (Arabic: درغوث‎), the name in Turkey is Turgut Reis.

Turgut was a Muslim seaman of Greek descent. He was born in a village near Bodrum, on the Aegean coast of Asia Minor. He was captured and taken prisoner by the corsairs in his youth and had converted to Islam. He was born in the sub-distirct called Saravalos in the western tip of Bodrum peninsula (which is called Turgutreis in his honour today) and most probably in the Karabağ village on the Aegean coast of Asia Minor. At the age of 12 he was noticed by an Ottoman army commander for his extraordinary talent in using spears and arrows and was recruited by him. Under his support the young Turgut became a skilled sailor, an outstanding gunner, and was trained as a cannoneer and master of siege artillery, a skill which would play an important role in Turgut's future success and reputation as a superb naval tactician. The Ottoman Turkish governor eventually carried Turgut off to Egypt in 1517, where he participated in the Ottoman conquest of Egypt as a cannoneer. He further improved his skills in this field during his presence in Cairo. Following the death of his master, Turgut went to Alexandria and began his career as a sailor after joining the fleet of Sinan Reis. He immediately became one of the favourite crewmen of the famous corsair due to his success in hitting enemy vessels with cannons. Turgut soon mastered the skills of seamanship and became the captain of a brigantine, while given 1/4 of its ownership. After several successful campaigns, he became the sole owner of the brigantine. Turgut later became the captain and owner of a galliot, and arming it with the most advanced cannons of that period, he started to operate in the Eastern Mediterranean, especially targeting the shipping routes between Venice and the Aegean islands belonging to the Repubblica Serenissima.

In 1520 he joined the fleet of Hayreddin Barbarossa, who would become his protector and best friend. Turgut was soon promoted to the rank of chief lieutenant by Barbarossa and was given the command of 12 galliots. In 1526 Turgut Reis captured the fortress of Capo Passero in Sicily. Between 1526 and 1533 he landed several times at the ports of the Kingdom of Sicily and the Kingdom of Naples, while intercepting the ships which sailed between Spain and Italy, capturing many of them. In May 1533, commanding four fustas and 18 barques, Turgut Reis captured two Venetian galleys near the island of Aegina.

In June and July 1538 he accompanied Barbarossa on his pursuit of Andrea Doria in the Adriatic Sea, while capturing several fortresses on the coasts of Albania as well as the Gulf of Preveza and the island of Lefkada. In August 1538 Turgut Reis captured Candia in Crete as well as several other Venetian possessions in the Aegean Sea.

In September 1538, with 20 galleys and 10 galliots, Turgut Reis commanded the center-rear wing of the Ottoman fleet that defeated the Holy League under the command of Andrea Doria at the Battle of Preveza. During the battle, with two of his galliots, he captured the Papal galley under the command of Giambattista Dovizi, the knight who was also the abbot of Bibbiena, taking him and his crew as prisoners.

In 1539, commanding 36 galleys and galliots, Turgut Reis recaptured Castelnuovo from the Venetians, who had taken the city back from the Ottomans. During the combat he sank two Venetian galleys and captured three others. Still in 1539, while landing on Corfu, he encountered 12 Venetian galleys under the command of Francesco Pasqualigo and captured the galley of Antonio da Canal. He later landed at Crete and fought against the Venetian cavalry forces under the command of Antonio Calbo.

Later that year, when Sinan Reis, the Governor of Djerba, was appointed by Suleiman the Magnificent as the new Commander-in-Chief of the Ottoman Red Sea Fleet based in Suez, Turgut Reis was appointed as his successor and became the Governor of Djerba.

In early 1540 Turgut Reis captured several Genoese ships off the coast of Santa Margherita Ligure. In April 1540, commanding two galleys and 13 galliots, he landed at Gozo and sacked the island. He later landed at Pantelleria and raided the coasts of Sicily and Spain with a force of 25 ships, inflicting so much damage that Andrea Doria was ordered by Charles V to chase him with a force of 81 galleys! From there, Turgut Reis sailed to the Tyrrhenian Sea and bombarded the southern ports of Corsica, most notably Palasca. He later captured and sacked the nearby island of Capraia.

Turgut Reis later sailed back towards Corsica and docked his ships at Girolata on the western shores of the island. Taken by surprise while repairing his ships, Turgut Reis and his men were attacked by the combined forces of Giannettino Doria (Andrea Doria's nephew), Giorgio Doria and Gentile Virginio Orsini. Turgut Reis was captured and was forced to work as a galley slave in the ship of Giannettino Doria for nearly four years before being imprisoned in Genoa. Barbarossa offered to pay ransom for his release but it was rejected. In 1544, when Barbarossa was returning from France with 210 ships sent by Sultan Suleiman to assist King Francis I in a Franco-Ottoman alliance against Spain, he appeared before Genoa, laying siege to the city and forcing the Genoese to negotiate for the release of Turgut Reis. Barbarossa was invited by Andrea Doria to discuss the issue in his palace at Fassolo, and the two admirals reached an agreement for the release of Turgut Reis in exchange of 3,500 gold ducats.

Barbarossa gave Turgut his spare flagship and the command of several other vessels, and in that same year Turgut Reis landed at Bonifacio in Corsica and captured the city, inflicting particular damage to Genoese interests. Still in 1544 he assaulted the island of Gozo and fought against the forces of knight Giovanni Ximenes while capturing several Maltese ships which were bringing precious cargo from Sicily. In June 1545 he raided the coasts of Sicily and bombarded several ports on the Tyrrhenian Sea. In July he ravaged the island of Capraia and landed at the coasts of Liguria and the Italian Riviera with a force of 15 galleys and fustas. He sacked Monterosso and Corniglia, and later landed at Menarola and Riomaggiore. In the following days he landed at the Gulf of La Spezia and captured Rapallo, Pegli and Levanto. In 1546 he captured Mahdia, Sfax, Sousse and Al Munastir in Tunisia, afterwards using Mahdia as a base to assault the Knights of St. John in Malta. In April 1546 he raided the coasts of Liguria. In May, still in Liguria, he captured Laigueglia, a province of Savona, with a force of 1000 men. He later captured Andora and took the podestà of the town as a prisoner. There he and his troops rested for a brief period, before resuming their assault on the Italian Riviera and landing at San Lorenzo al Mare. He also destroyed the village of Civezza. From there he once again sailed towards Malta and laid siege to the island of Gozo.

In June 1546 Andrea Doria was appointed by Emperor Charles V to force Turgut Reis away from Malta, and Doria based his forces at the island of Favignana. The two admirals, however, did not meet up, as Turgut Reis had sailed to Toulon in August 1546, staying there for several months and letting his men have some rest in the security of a French port.

After Barbarossa's death in July 1546, Turgut succeeded him as supreme commander of Ottoman naval forces in the Mediterranean. In July 1547 he once again assaulted Malta with a force of 23 galleys and galliots, after hearing the news that the Kingdom of Naples was shaken by the revolt against Viceroy Don Pietro of Toledo, which would make a naval support from there to Malta rather unlikely. Turgut Reis landed his troops at Marsa Scirocco, the extreme southern point of the island which faces the shores of Africa. From there the Ottoman troops quickly marched towards the vicinity of the Church of Santa Caterina. The guards of the church tower escaped as soon as they saw the forces of Turgut Reis, which prevented them from igniting the tub of gunpowder—a common method used then to warn the local inhabitants of attacks. After sacking the island, Turgut Reis headed towards Capo Passero in Sicily, where he captured the galley of Giulio Cicala, son of Duke Vincenzo Cicala. He later sailed to the Aeolian Islands, and at Salina Island he captured a Maltese trade ship with valuable cargo. From there he sailed to Apulia and towards the end of July 1547 he assaulted the city of Salve. He later sailed to Calabria, forcing the local population to flee towards the safety of the mountains. From there he went to Corsica and captured a number of ships.

In 1548 he was appointed Beylerbey (Chief Governor) of Algeria by Suleiman the Magnificent. In that same year he ordered the construction of a quadrireme galley at the naval arsenal of Djerba, which he started using in 1549. In August 1548 he landed at Castellamare di Stabia on the Bay of Naples and captured the city along with nearby Pozzuoli. From there he went to Procida. A few days later, he captured a Spanish galley loaded with troops and gold at Capo Miseno near Procida. In the same days he captured the Maltese galley, La Caterinetta, at the Gulf of Naples, with its cargo of 70,000 gold ducats which were collected by the Knights of St. John from the churches of France with the aim of strengthening the defenses of Tripoli, which was then under Maltese control.

In May 1549 he set sail towards Liguria with 21 galleys and in July he assaulted Rapallo, later replenishing his ships with water and other supplies at San Fruttuoso. From there he sailed to Portofino and landed at the port, before appearing at San Remo where he captured an Aragonese galley from Barcelona which was heading towards Naples. From there he first sailed towards Corsica and later towards Calabria where he assaulted the city of Palmi.

In February 1550, sailing with a force of 36 galleys, he recaptured Mahdia along with Al Munastir, Sousse and most of Tunisia. In May 1550 he assaulted the ports of Sardinia and Spain and landed on their coasts with a force of six galleys and 14 galliots. Still in May he unsuccessfully tried to capture Bonifacio in Corsica. On his way back to Tunisia, he stopped at Gozo to replenish his ships with water and to gather information on the activities of the Maltese Knights. He later sailed towards Liguria.

In June 1550, while Turgut Reis was sailing near Genoa, Andrea Doria and Bailiff Claude de la Sengle of the Maltese Knights attacked Mahdia in Tunisia. In the meantime, Turgut Reis was busy assaulting and sacking Rapallo for a third time, before raiding the coasts of Spain. He then sailed to the Tyrrhenian Sea and towards the beginning of July landed at the western shores of Sardinia, before returning to Djerba, where he learned that Doria and Claude de la Sengle had been attacking Mahdia and Tunis. He collected a force of 4500 troops and 60 sipahis and marched on Mahdia to assist the local resistance. He did not succeed and returned to Djerba with his troops.

In September 1550 Mahdia surrendered to the joint Spanish-Sicilian-Maltese force. In the meantime, Turgut Reis was repairing his ships at the beach of Djerba. On October, Andrea Doria appeared with his fleet at Djerba and blocked the entrance of the island's lagoon with his ships, trapping the beached galleys of Turgut Reis inside the Channel of Cantera. Turgut Reis had all his ships dragged overland through hastily dug canals and on a heavily greased boardway to the other side of the island and sailed to Constantinople, capturing two galleys on the way, one Genoese and one Sicilian, which were en route to Djerba in order to assist the forces of Doria. Prince Abu Beker, son of the Sultan of Tunis, who was an ally of Spain, was on the Genoese galley.

After arriving in Constantinople, Turgut Reis, authorized by Sultan Suleiman, mobilized a fleet of 112 galleys and two galleasses with 12,000 Janissaries, and in 1551 set sail with the Ottoman admiral Sinan Pasha towards the Adriatic Sea and bombarded the Venetian ports, inflicting serious damage on Venetian shipping. In May 1551 they landed on Sicily and bombarded the eastern shores of the island, most notably the city of Augusta, as revenge for the Viceroy of Sicily's role in the invasion and destruction of Mahdia, where most inhabitants had been massacred by the joint Spanish-Sicilian-Maltese force. They then attempted to capture Malta, landing with about 10,000 men at the southern port of Marsa Muscietto. They laid siege to the citadels of Birgu and Senglea, and later went north and assaulted Mdina, but lifted the siege after realizing that it was impossible to capture the island with the number of troops in hand. Instead, they moved to the neighboring island of Gozo, where they bombarded the citadel for several days. The Knights' governor there, Galatian de Sesse, realizing that resistance was futile, surrendered the citadel, and the corsairs sacked the town. Taking virtually the entire population of Gozo (approximately 5,000 people) into captivity, Turgut and Sinan set sail from the port of Mġarr ix-Xini in Gozo and headed towards Libya, where they shipped the captives to Tarhuna Wa Msalata. They later sailed towards Tripoli with the aim of conquering the strategic port city and its environs.

In August 1551 Turgut Reis attacked and captured Tripoli (Ottoman Tripolitania, modern Libya) which had been a possession of the Knights of St. John since 1530. Gaspare de Villers, the commander of the fort, was captured, along with other prominent knights of Spanish and French origin. However, upon the intervention of the French ambassador in Constantinople, Gabriel d'Aramon, the French knights were released. A local leader, Ağa Murat, was initially installed as governor of Tripoli, but subsequently Turgut himself took control of the area. In recognition of his services, Sultan Suleiman awarded Tripoli and the surrounding territory to Turgut, along with the title of Sanjak Bey (Province Governor).

In September 1551, Turgut Reis sailed to Liguria and captured the city of Taggia, before capturing other ports of the Italian Riviera, after Ottoman troops landed at the beach of Riva Brigoso. Later that year, he returned to Tripoli and sought to extend his territory, capturing the entire region of Misrata all the way to Zuwara and Djerba to the west. Turning inland, he enhanced his territory until reaching Gebel.

In 1552 Sultan Suleiman appointed Turgut Reis commander-in-chief of the Ottoman fleet which he dispatched to Italy (on the basis of a treaty between the Sultan and King Henry II of France). Turgut Reis first landed at Augusta and Licata in Sicily, before capturing the island and castle of Pantelleria. In July 1552 he landed at Taormina and later bombarded and disabled the ports on the Gulf of Policastro. He later landed at Palmi and captured the city, before sailing to the Gulf of Naples in order to meet with the other branch of the Ottoman fleet under the command of Sinan Pasha and the French fleet under the command of Polin de la Garde. After arriving at the meeting location, Turgut Reis anchored his ships off the beach of Scauri, near Formia, where he met with the fleet of Sinan Pasha, but their French ally did not show up in time. After waiting for several days, Sinan Pasha decided to return to Constantinople, following an order by Suleiman to do so in case of a delay or postponement of the meeting. Turgut Reis convinced Sinan Pasha to join him, and their combined fleet bombarded various ports of Sardinia and Corsica, before capturing the island of Ponza. From there the Turkish fleet sailed towards Lazio and bombarded the ports belonging to the Papal States and the Kingdom of Naples, even though Henry II had guaranteed the Pope that the Ottoman fleet would not damage the Vatican's possessions. Due to bad weather, however, Turgut Reis and Sinan Pasha sailed back to the Gulf of Naples and landed at Massa Lubrense and Sorrento, capturing both towns. They later captured Pozzuoli and the entire coastline up to Minturno and Nola.

In response, Andrea Doria set sail from Genoa with a force of 40 galleys and headed towards Naples. When the two fleets first encountered off Naples, Turgut Reis managed to capture seven galleys, with colonel Madruzzi and many German soldiers of the Holy Roman Empire on board.

The two fleets later went southwards, where, on 5 August 1552, Turgut Reis defeated the Spanish-Italian fleet under Andrea Doria at the Battle of Ponza.

Following this victory, Suleiman appointed Turgut Beylerbey (Chief Regional Governor) of the Mediterranean Sea.

In May 1553 Turgut Reis set sail from the Aegean Sea with 60 galleys, captured Crotone and Castello in Calabria, and from there marched inland. Later he landed on Sicily and sacked most of the island until stopping at Licata for replenishing his ships with water. Afterwards he assaulted Sciacca and Modica in southern Sicily. From there he went to the island of Tavolara and to Sardinia, later headed towards Porto Ercole and landed on the coast, before setting sail towards Elba, where he captured Marciana Marina, Rio and Capoliveri. From there he sailed to Corsica and took Bonifacio, Bastia and Calvi on behalf of France, then ally of the Ottoman Empire, which paid him 30,000 gold ducats for the expense of ammunition in the conquest. Leaving Corsica, Turgut Reis returned to Elba and attempted to capture Piombino and Portoferraio, but eventually gave up and captured the island of Pianosa and recaptured the island and castle of Capri (previously captured by Barbarossa back in 1535) before returning to Constantinople.

In 1554 he sailed from the Bosphorus with 60 galleys and passed the winter in Chios. From there he sailed to the Adriatic Sea and landed at Vieste near Foggia, capturing and sacking the city. He then sailed towards Dalmatia and bombarded the port of Ragusa (Dubrovnik), capital of the maritime Republic of Ragusa. In August 1554 he landed at Orbetello and raided the coasts of Tuscany.

The following year, in July 1555, he landed at Capo Vaticano in Calabria, and from there marched to Ceramica and San Lucido, bombarding these cities, before capturing Paola and Santo Noceto. He then sailed to Elba and captured the city of Populonia before assaulting Piombino. From there he sailed to Corsica and ransacked Bastia, taking 6000 prisoners. He later assaulted Calvi before setting sail towards Sardinia and bombarding the ports of that island. From there he turned towards Liguria and landed at Ospedaletti, capturing the city and the coastline around it. He later landed at San Remo before returning to Constantinople.

In March 1556 Turgut Reis was promoted to the rank of Pasha of Tripoli. There, he strengthened the walls of the citadel surrounding the city and built a gunpowder bastion (Dar el Barud). He also strengthened the defenses of the port and built the Turgut (Dragut) Fortress in place of the old Fortress of San Pietro. In July 1556 he again set sail and landed at Cape Santa Maria at the island of Lampedusa, where he captured a Venetian ship which transported ammunition and weapons for the defense of Malta. He later landed in Liguria and captured Bergeggi and San Lorenzo. In December 1556 he captured Gafsa in Tunisia and added it to his territory.

In the summer of 1557 he left the Bosphorus with a fleet of 60 galleys and, arriving at the Gulf of Taranto, he landed in Calabria and assaulted Cariati, capturing the city. He later landed at the ports of Apulia.

In 1558 he added Gharyan, about 70 miles south of Tripoli, to his territory. He then defeated the Beni Oulid dynasty with a force of janissaries and added their territories to the Ottoman Empire. He later took Taorga, Misrata and Tagiora, before recapturing the island of Djerba and adding it to his province. In June 1558 he joined the fleet of Piyale Pasha at the Strait of Messina, and the two admirals captured Reggio Calabria, sacking the city. From there, Turgut Reis went to the Aeolian Islands and captured several of them, before landing at Amalfi, in the Gulf of Salerno, and capturing Massa Lubrense, Cantone and Sorrento. He later landed at Torre del Greco, the coasts of Tuscany, and Piombino. In August he captured several ships off Malta. In September 1558 he joined Piyale Pasha, and the two admirals assaulted the coasts of Spain before capturing Ciutadella (Minorca) and inflicting particular damage on the island's ports.

In 1559 he repelled a Spanish attack on Algiers and put down a revolt in Tripoli. In that same year he captured a Maltese ship near Messina. Learning from its crew that the knights were preparing for a major attack on Tripoli, he decided to sail back there and strengthen the city's defenses.

In the meantime, he had made enemies of many of the nominally Ottoman, but practically independent rulers in Tunis and the adjoining hinterland, and several of them concluded an alliance in 1560 with Viceroy Cerda of Sicily, who had orders from King Philip II of Spain to join his forces in an effort to capture Tripoli. This campaign ended in failure when the Ottoman fleet under the command of Piyale Pasha and Turgut Reis defeated the fleet of the Holy League of Philip II in the Battle of Djerba.

In March 1561 Turgut Reis and Uluç Ali Reis captured Vincenzo Cicala and Luigi Osorio near the island of Marettimo. In June 1561 Turgut landed on the island of Stromboli. In July 1561 he captured seven Maltese galleys under the command of knight Guimarens, whom he later freed for a ransom of 3,000 gold ducats. After stopping at Gozo to replenish his galleys with water, he sailed back to Tripoli. In August 1561 he laid siege to the city of Naples and blocked the port with 35 galleys.

In April 1562 he sent scout ships to explore all corners of the island of Malta. Still in 1562 he laid siege to Oran which was under Spanish control.

In 1563 he landed at the shores of the province of Granada and captured coastal settlements in the area like Almuñécar, along with 4,000 prisoners. He later landed at Málaga. In April 1563 he supported the fleet of Salih Reis with 20 galleys during the Ottoman siege of Oran, bombarding the Fortress of Mers-el-Kebir. In September 1563 he sailed to Naples and captured six ships near the island of Capri, which carried valuable goods and Spanish soldiers. He later landed at the Chiaia neighbourhood of Naples and captured it. From there he sailed to Liguria and Sardinia, raiding the coastal towns, particularly Oristano, Marcellino and Ercolento. He then sailed to the Adriatic Sea and landed on the coasts of Apulia and Abruzzo. He later landed twice at San Giovanni near Messina with a force of 28 galleys. In October 1563 he sailed towards Capo Passero in Sicily and later landed once more on Gozo, where he briefly fought against the knights.

When Sultan Suleiman ordered the Siege of Malta in 1565, Turgut Reis joined Piyale Pasha and the Ottoman forces with 1,600 men (3,000 according to some sources) and 15 ships (13 galleys and 2 galliots; while some sources mention 17 ships) on 31 May 1565. He landed his troops at the entrance of Marsa Muscietto, a cape which is now named 'Dragut Point' after Turgut Reis. There he met with Lala Mustafa, commander of the Ottoman land forces, who was besieging Fort St. Elmo. He advised him to first capture the citadel of Gozo and Mdina (the old capital city of Malta) as soon as possible, but this advice was not taken. He also arranged for more cannon fire to be concentrated on the recently-built Fort St. Elmo which controlled the entrance of the Grand Harbour and seemed weaker than the other forts; joining the bombardment with 30 of his own cannons. In only 24 hours the Ottomans fired 6000 cannon shots. Realizing that Fort St. Elmo and Fort St Angelo (the main headquarters of the Knights on the other side of the Grand Harbour) could still communicate with each other, Turgut Reis ordered a complete siege of Fort St. Elmo with the aim of isolating it from Fort St. Angelo. On 17 June 1565, during the bombardment of the fort, a cannon shot from Fort St. Angelo across the Grand Harbour struck the ground close to the Turkish battery. Debris from the impact mortally injured Turgut Reis, who lived until 23 June 1565, just long enough to hear the news of the capture of Fort St. Elmo.

Turgut's advice to capture Mdina and Gozo was never taken, to the detriment of the Ottomans. Maltese forces, from Mdina in particular, harried the Turkish troops for the remainder of the siege, and at one point prevented the key city of Senglea from falling into Ottoman hands.

His body was taken to Tripoli by Uluç Ali Reis and buried there.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.turkkorsanlari.com

Mihai Viteazul (1558-1601), One of Romania's Greatest National Heroes

2012-04-10T08:54:00.007+07:00

Alba Iulia Cathedral mural painting of Michael the Brave, made in the beginning of the XXth century

Contemporary copperplate engraving (not a woodcut!), 17th century, of Michael the Brave

Painting from 1601 by Franz Francken II representing Michael the Brave and his daughter, domniţa Florica, at King Rudolf's court

The assassination of Michael the Brave at Câmpia Turzii, 1601. Source: N. Iorga, Portrete şi lucruri Domneşti nou-descoperite, Ed. Cultura Noastră, Bucureşti, 1928

Seal of Michael the Brave during his personal union of Wallachia, Moldavia and Transylvania. The seal comprises the coats of arms of Moldavia, Wallachia, and Transylvania: in the middle, on a shield the Moldavian urus, above Wallachian eagle between sun and moon holding cross in beak, below Transylvanian coat of arms: two meeting, standing lions supporting a sword, treading on seven mountains. The Moldavian shield is held by two crowned figures. There are two inscriptions on the seal. First, circular, in Slavonic using Romanian Cyrillic alphabet "IO MIHAILI UGROVLAHISCOI VOEVOD ARDEALSCOI MOLD ZEMLI", meaning "Io Michael Wallachian Voivode of Transylvanian and Moldavian Lands". Second, placed along a circular arc separating the Wallachian coat from the rest of the heraldic composition, "I ML BJE MLRDIE", could be translated "Through The Very Grace of God"

Michael the Brave (Romanian: Mihai Viteazu(l) pronounced [miˈhaj viˈte̯azu(l)] or Mihai Bravu pronounced [miˈhaj ˈbravu], Hungarian: Vitéz Mihály; 1558 – August 9, 1601) was the Prince of Wallachia (1593–1601), of Transylvania (1599–1600), and of Moldavia (1600). He ruled all three principalities in a personal union for a short period of time.

During his reign, which coincided with the Long War, these three principalities forming the territory of present-day Romania and the Republic of Moldova were ruled for the first time by a single Romanian leader, although the personal union lasted for less than six months. He is regarded as one of Romania's greatest national heroes.

His rule over Wallachia began in the autumn of 1593. Two years a war with the Ottomans began, a conflict in which the Prince fought the Battle of Călugăreni, considered one of the most important battles of his reign. Although the Wallachians emerged victorious from the battle, Michael was forced to retreat with his troops and wait for aid from his allies, Prince Sigismund Báthory of Transylvania and Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II. The war continued until a peace finally emerged in January 1597, but this only lasted for a year and a half. Peace was again reached in late 1599, when Michael was unable to continue the war due to lack of support from his allies.

In 1599 Michael won the Battle of Şelimbăr and soon entered Alba Iulia, becoming the Prince of Transylvania. A few months later, Michael's troops invaded Moldavia and reached its capital, Suceava. The Moldavian leader Ieremia Movilă fled to Poland and Michael was declared Prince of Moldavia. Michael kept the control of all three provinces for less than a year before the nobles of Transylvania and certain boyars in Moldavia and Wallachia rose against him in a series of revolts. Thereafter, Michael allied with the Imperial General Giorgio Basta and defeated an uprising of the Hungarian nobility at Gurăslău in Transylvania. Immediately after this victory, Basta ordered the assassination of Michael, which took place on 9 August 1601.

He was born under the family name of Pătraşcu. In 1601, during a stay in Prague, he was portrayed by the painter Aegidius Sadeler, who mentioned on the portrait the words aetatis XLIII ("in the 43rd year of life"), which indicates 1558 as the year of Michael's birth. Very little is known about his childhood and early years as an adult. He is argued by most historians to have been the illegitimate son of Wallachian Prince Pătraşcu cel Bun, while others believe he merely invented his descent in order to justify his rule. His mother was Teodora Cantacuzino, a member of the Cantacuzino family, an old boyar family of Wallachia and Moldavia, allegedly descended from the Byzantine Emperor John VI Cantacuzenus.

Michael's political rise was quite spectacular, as he became the Ban of Mehedinţi in 1588, stolnic at the court of Mihnea Turcitul by the end of 1588, and Ban of Craiova in 1593 - during the rule of Alexandru cel Rău. The latter had him swear before 12 boyars that he was not of princely descent. Still, in May 1593 conflict did break out between Alexandru and Michael, who was forced to flee to Transylvania. He was accompanied by his half-brother Radu Florescu, Radu Buzescu and several other supporters. After spending two weeks at the court of Sigismund Báthory he left for Constantinople, where with help from his cousin Andronic Cantacuzino and Patriarch Jeremiah II he negotiated Ottoman support for his accession to the Wallachian throne. He was supported by the English ambassador in the Ottoman capital, Edward Barton, and aided by a loan of 200,000 florins. Michael was invested Prince by Sultan Murad III in September 1593 and started his effective rule on October 11.

Not long after he became Prince of Wallachia, Michael turned against the Ottoman Empire. The next year he joined the Christian alliance of European powers formed by Pope Clement VIII against the Turks, and signed treaties with his neighbours: Sigismund Báthory of Transylvania, Aron Tiranul of Moldavia and the Holy Roman Emperor, Rudolf II. He started a campaign against the Turks in the autumn of 1594, conquering several citadels near the Danube, including Giurgiu, Brăila, Hârşova, and Silistra, while his Moldavian allies defeated the Turks in Iaşi and other parts of Moldavia. Mihai continued his attacks deep within the Ottoman Empire, taking the forts of Nicopolis, Ribnic, and Chilia and even reaching as far as Adrianople. At one point his forces were only 24 kilometers from Constantinople!

In 1595 Sigismund Báthory staged an elaborate plot and had Aron of Moldavia removed from power. Ştefan Josica (Báthory's chancellor and an ethnic Romanian) masterminded the operation. Ştefan Răzvan arrested Aron on charges of treason on the night of April 24 (May 5) and sent him to the Transylvanian capital at Alba Iulia (Gyulafehérvár) with his family and treasure. Aron would die poisoned by the end of May in the castle of Vint. Sigismund was forced to justify his actions before the European powers, since Aron had played an active role in the anti-Ottoman coalition. Later on, in the same city of Alba Iulia, Wallachian boyars signed a treaty with Sigismund on Michael's behalf. From the point of view of Wallachian internal politics, the Treaty of Alba Iulia officialized what could be called a boyar regime, reinforcing the already important political power of the noble elite. According to the treaty, a council of 12 great boyars was to take part alongside the voivode in the executive rule of the country.

Boyars could no longer be executed without the knowledge and approval of the Transylvanian Prince and, if convicted for treason, their fortunes could no longer be confiscated. Apparently Michael was displeased with the final form of the treaty negotiated by his envoys but was forced to comply. Prince Michael said in a conversation with the Polish envoy Lubieniecki: ... they did not proceed as stated in their instructions but as their own good required and obtained privileges for themselves. He would try to avoid the obligations imposed on him for the rest of his reign.

During his reign, Michael relied heavily on the loyalty and support of a group of Oltenian lords, the most important were Buzescu Brothers (Fraţii Buzeşti) and on his own relatives on his mother's side, the Cantacuzinos. He consequently protected their interests throughout his reign; for example, he passed a law binding serfs to lands owned by aristocrats. From the standpoint of religious jurisdiction, the Treaty of Alba Iulia had another important consequence, as it placed all the Eastern Orthodox bishops in Transylvania under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Seat of Târgovişte.

During this period the Ottoman army, based in Ruse, was preparing to cross the Danube and undertake a major attack. Michael was quickly forced to retreat and the Ottoman forces started to cross the Danube on August 4, 1595. As his army was outnumbered, Michael avoided to carry the battle in open field, and he decided to give battle on a marshy field, located near the village of Călugăreni, on the Neajlov river. The Battle of Călugăreni started on August 13, and Michael defeated the Ottoman army led by Sinan Pasha. Despite the victory, he retreated to his winter camp in Stoeneşti because he had too few troops to mount a full scale war against the remaining Ottoman forces. He subsequently joined forces with Sigismund Báthory's 40,000-man army (led by István Bocskay) and counterattacked the Ottomans, freeing the towns of Târgovişte (October 8), Bucharest (October 12) and Brăila, temporarily removing Wallachia from Ottoman suzerainty.

The fight against the Ottomans continued in 1596, when Michael made several incursions south of the Danube at Vidin, Pleven, Nicopolis, and Babadag, where he was assisted by the local Bulgarians during the First Tarnovo Uprising.

During late 1596, Michael was faced with an unexpected attack from the Tatars, who had destroyed the towns of Bucharest and Buzău. By the time Michael gathered his army to counterattack, the Tatars had speedily retreated and so no battle was fought. Michael was determined to continue the war against the Ottomans, but he was prevented because he lacked support from Sigismund Báthory and Rudolf II. On January 7, 1597, Hasan Pasha declared the independence of Wallachia under Michael's rule, but Michael knew that this was only an attempt to divert him from preparing for another future attack. Michael again requested Rudolf II's support and Rudolf finally agreed to send financial assistance to the Wallachian ruler. On June 9, 1598, a formal treaty was reached between Michael and Rudolf II. According to the treaty, the Austrian ruler would give Wallachia sufficient money to maintain a 5,000-man army, as well as armaments and supplies. Shortly after the treaty was signed, the war with the Ottomans resumed and Michael besieged Nicopolis on September 10, 1598 and took control of Vidin. The war with the Ottomans continued until June 26, 1599, when Michael, lacking the resources and support to continue prosecuting the war, signed a peace treaty.

In April 1598 Sigismund resigned as Prince of Transylvania in favor of the Holy Roman Emperor, Rudolf II (who was also the King of Hungary), reversed his decision in October 1598, and then resigned again in favor of Cardinal Andrew Báthory, his cousin. Báthory had strong ties to the Polish chancellor and hetman Jan Zamoyski and placed Transylvania under the influence of the King of Poland, Sigismund III Vasa. He was also a trusted ally of the new Moldavian Prince Ieremia Movilă, one of Michael's greatest enemies. Movilă had deposed Ştefan Rǎzvan with the help of Polish hetman Jan Zamoyski in August 1595.

Having to face this new threat, Michael asked Emperor Rudolf to become the sovereign of Wallachia. On September 25 (October 5) Báthory issued an ultimatum demanding that Michael abandon his throne. Michael decided to attack Andrew Cardinal Báthory immediately to prevent invasion. He would later describe the events:

I rose with my country, my children, taking my wife and everything I had and with my army [marched into Transylvania] so that the foe should not crush me here.

He left Târgovişte on October 2 and by October 9 he reached Prejmer in southern Transylvania, where he met envoys from the city of Braşov. Sparing the city, he moved on to Cârţa where he joined forces with the Székelys.

On October 18, Michael won a decisive victory against the army of prince-cardinal Andrew Báthory at the Battle of Şelimbăr, giving him control of Transylvania. As he retreated from the battle, Andrew Báthory was killed by anti-Báthory Székely on 3 November near Sândominic, dying at the age of 38, and Michael gave him a princely burial in the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Alba Iulia. With his enemy dead, Michael entered the Transylvanian capital at Alba Iulia, and received the keys to the fortress from Bishop Demeter Napragy, later depicted as a seminal event in Romanian historiography. Historian Stephen Szamosközy, keeper of the Archives at the time, recorded the event in great detail. He also wrote that two days before the Diet met on October 10, Transylvanian nobles elected Michael the voivode as Prince of Transylvania. As the Diet was assembled, Michael demanded that the estates swear loyalty to Emperor Rudolf, then to himself and thirdly to his son.

Even if he was recognized by the Transylvanian parliament (diet) only as imperial governor subject to the Holy Roman Emperor, he was nonetheless de facto ruler of Transylvania.

Michael used in Transylvania the following signature on official documents: Michael Valachiae Transalpinae Woivoda, Sacrae Caesareae Regiae Majestatis Consiliarius per Transylvaniam Locumtenens, cis transylvaniam partium eius super exercitu Generalis Capitaneus". ("Michael, voivode of Wallachia, the councillor of His Majesty the Emperor and the King, his deputy in Transylvania and General Captain of his troops from Transylvania.")

When Michael entered Transylvania, he did not free or grant rights to the Romanian inhabitants, who were primarily peasants but, nevertheless, constituted more than 60% of the population. Instead he sought to support the Hungarian nobles, the Székelys, and the Saxons by reaffirming their rights and privileges.

There is no evidence that Michael wanted Transylvania's Romanians to play a political role. Indeed, while he brought some of his Wallachian aides to Transylvania, he also invited some Székelys and other Transylvanian Hungarians to assist in the administration of Wallachia, where he wished to transplant Transylvania's far more advanced feudal system.

Michael began negotiating with the Emperor over his official position in Transylvania. The latter wanted the principality under direct Imperial rule with Michael acting as governor. The Wallachian voivode, on the other hand, wanted the title of Prince of Transylvania for himself and equally claimed the Partium region. Michael was, nevertheless, willing to acknowledge Habsburg overlordship.

The Moldavian Prince Ieremia Movilă had been an old enemy of Michael, having incited Andrew Báthory to send Michael the ultimatum demanding his abdication. His brother, Simion Movilă, claimed the Wallachian throne for himself and had used the title of Voivode since 1595. Aware of the threat the Movilăs represented, Michael had created the Banat of Buzău and Brăila in July 1598 and the new ban was charged of keeping an alert eye on Moldavian, Tatar and Cossack moves, although Michael had been planning a Moldavian campaign for several years.

On February 28, Michael met with Polish envoys in Braşov. He was willing to recognise the Polish King as his sovereign in exchange for the crown of Moldavia and the recognition of his male heirs' hereditary right over the three principalities, Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia. This did not significantly delay his attack however, on April 14, 1600 Michael's troops entered Moldavia on multiple routes, the Prince himself leading the main thrust to Trotuş and Roman. He reached the capital of Suceava on May 6. The garrison surrendered the citadel the next day and Michael's forces caught up with the fleeing Ieremia Movilă, who was only saved from being captured by the sacrifice of his rear-guard. Movilă took refuge in the castle of Khotyn together with his family, a handful of faithful boyars and the former Transylvanian Prince, Sigismund Báthory. The Moldavian soldiers in the castle deserted, leaving a small Polish contingent as sole defenders. Under the cover of dark, sometime before June 11, Movilă managed to sneak out of the walls and across the Dniester to hetman Stanisław Żółkiewski's camp.

Neighboring states were alarmed by this upsetting of the balance of power, especially the Hungarian nobility in Transylvania, who rose against Michael in rebellion. With the help of Basta, they defeated Michael at the Battle of Mirăslău, forcing the prince to leave Transylvania together with his remaining loyal troops. A Polish army led by Jan Zamoyski drove the Wallachians from Moldavia and defeated Michael at Năieni, Ceptura, and Bucov (Battle of the Teleajăn River). The Polish army also entered eastern Wallachia and established Simion Movilă as ruler. Forces loyal to Michael remained only in Oltenia.

Michael asked again for assistance from Emperor Rudolf during a visit in Prague between February 23 and March 5, 1601, which was granted when the emperor heard that General Giorgio Basta had lost control of Transylvania to the Hungarian nobility led by Sigismund Báthory, who accepted Ottoman protection. Meanwhile, forces loyal to Michael in Wallachia led by his son, Nicolae Pătraşcu, drove Simion Movilă out of Moldavia and prepared to reenter Transylvania. Michael, allied with Basta, defeated the Hungarian army in Battle of Guruslău. A few days later Basta, who sought to control Transylvania himself, ordered the assassination of Michael, which took place near Câmpia Turzii on 9 August 1601. According to Romanian historian Constantin C. Giurescu:
“ Never in Romanian history was a moment of such highness glory so closely followed by bitter failure. ”

Michael the Brave's rule, with its break with Ottoman rule, tense relations with other European powers and the leadership of the three states, was considered in later periods as the precursor of a modern Romania, a thesis which was argued with noted intensity by Nicolae Bălcescu. This theory became a point of reference for nationalists, as well as a catalyst for various Romanian forces to achieve a single Romanian state. To Romanian Romantic nationalists, he was regarded as one of Romania's greatest national heroes.

The prince, who managed for a short time in 1600 to rule the three territories that were to be united some three centuries later in modern Romania, begins to be perceived as a unifier only towards the middle of the 19th century. Such an interpretation is completely lacking in the historiography of the 17th century chroniclers, and even in that of the Transylvanian School around 1800. What they emphasized, apart from the exceptional personality of Michael himself, were the idea of Christendom and his close relations with Emperor Rudolf. The conqueror's ambition is likewise frequently cited as a motivation for his action, occupying in the interpretative schema the place which was later to be occupied by the Romanian idea.

In the writings of the Moldavian chronicler Miron Costin, Michael the Brave appears in the role of conqueror of Transylvania and Moldavia, "the cause of much spilling of blood among Christians", and not even highly appreciated by his own Wallachians: "The Wallachians became tired of the warful rule of Voivode Mihai".

The perspective of the Wallachians themselves is to be found in The History of the Princes of Wallachia, attributed to the chronicler Radu Popescu (1655–1729), which bundles together all Michael's adversaries without distinction. Romanians and foreigners alike: "He subjected the Turks, the Moldavians, and the Hungarians to his rule, as if they were his asses.". The picturesque flavor of the expression only serves to confirm the absence of any Romanian idea.

Samuil Micu, a member of the Transylvanian School said in his work Short Explanation of the History of the Romanians (written in the 1790s): "In the year 1593, Michael, who is called the Brave, succeeded to the lordship of Wallachia. He was a great warrior, who fought the Turks and defeated the Transylvanians. And he took Transylvania and gave it to Emperor Rudolf".

Panaitescu states that in Mihai's time, the concept of the Romanian nation and the desire for unification did not yet exist. A. D. Xenopol firmly states the absence of any national element in Michael's politics, holding that Michael's lack of desire to join the principalities' administrations proved his actions were not motivated by any such concept.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org

Sun Tzu (544 BC - 496 BC), Author of the ART OF WAR

2012-04-10T07:20:00.005+07:00

Painting of Sun Tzu

Statue of Sun Tzu in Yurihama, Tottori, Japan

A Chinese bamboo book, open to display the binding and contents. This copy of The Art of War (on the cover, "孫子兵法") by Sun Tzu is part of a collection at the University of California, Riverside. The cover also reads "乾隆御書", meaning it was either commissioned or transcribed by the Qianlong Emperor

Sun Wu (simplified Chinese: 孙武; traditional Chinese: 孫武; pinyin: Sūn Wǔ), style name Changqing (長卿), better known as Sun Tzu or Sunzi (simplified Chinese: 孙子; traditional Chinese: 孫子; pinyin: Sūnzǐ; pronounced [swə́n tsɨ̀]), was an ancient Chinese military general, strategist and philosopher who is traditionally believed, and who is most likely, to have authored The Art of War, an influential ancient Chinese book on military strategy. Sun Tzu has had a significant impact on Chinese and Asian history and culture, both as an author of The Art of War and through legend.

Sun Tzu, also known as Sun Tze or Sun Wu in other translations, was a historical figure whose authenticity is questioned by historians. Traditional accounts place him in the Spring and Autumn Period of China (722–481 BC) as a military general serving under King Helü of Wu, who lived c. 544–496 BC. Modern scholars accepting his historicity place the completion of The Art of War in the Warring States Period (476–221 BC), based on the descriptions of warfare in the text, and on the similarity of text's prose to other works completed in the early Warring States period.

Traditional accounts state that his descendant, Sun Bin, also wrote a treatise on military tactics, titled Sun Bin's Art of War. Both Sun Wu and Sun Bin were referred to as Sun Tzu in classical Chinese writings, and some historians believed that Sun Wu was in fact Sun Bin until Sun Bin's own treatise was discovered in 1972. During the 19th and 20th centuries, Sun Tzu's The Art of War grew in popularity and saw practical use in Western society, and his work continues to influence both Asian and Western culture and politics.

The oldest available sources disagree as to where Sun Tzu was born. The Spring and Autumn Annals states that Sun Tzu was born in Qi, while the later Shiji states that Sun Tzu was a native of Wu.

Both sources agree that Sun Tzu was born in the late Spring and Autumn Period of China (722–481 BC), and that he was active as a general and strategist, serving the king of Wu, King Helü, in the late sixth century BC, beginning around 512 BC. Sun Tzu's victories then inspired him to write The Art of War. The Art of War was one of the most widely read military treatises in the subsequent Warring States Period (475–221 BC), a time of constant war among seven nations (Zhao, Qi, Qin, Chu, Han, Wei and Yan) who fought to control the vast expanse of fertile territory in Eastern China.[5]

One of the more well-known stories about Sun Tzu, taken from Shiji, illustrates Sun Tzu's temperament as follows: Before hiring Sun Tzu, the King of Wu tested Sun Tzu's skills by commanding him to train a harem of 180 concubines into soldiers. Sun Tzu divided them into two companies, appointing the two concubines most favored by the king as the company commanders. When Sun Tzu first ordered the concubines to face right, they giggled. In response, Sun Tzu said that the general, in this case himself, was responsible for ensuring that soldiers understood the commands given to them. Then, he reiterated the command, and again the concubines giggled. Sun Tzu then ordered the execution of the king's two favored concubines, to the king's protests. He explained that if the general's soldiers understood their commands but did not obey, it was the fault of the officers. Sun Tzu also said that, once a general was appointed, it was his duty to carry out his mission, even if the king protested. After both concubines were killed, new officers were chosen to replace them. Afterwards, both companies performed their maneuvers flawlessly!

Shiji claims that Sun Tzu later proved on the battlefield that his theories were effective (for example, in the Battle of Boju), that he had a successful military career, and that he wrote The Art of War based on his tested expertise. However, Zuo Zhuan, an earlier historical text which provides a much more detailed account of the Battle of Boju, does not mention Sun Tzu at all.

Sun Tzu's descendant, Sun Bin, also became a famous scholar of the military arts.

The Art of War (simplified Chinese: 孙子兵法; traditional Chinese: 孫子兵法; pinyin: Sūnzǐ Bīng Fǎ) is attributed to Sun Tzu. It presents a philosophy of war for managing conflicts and winning battles. It is accepted as a masterpiece on strategy and frequently cited and referred to by generals and theorists since it was first published, translated, and distributed internationally.

There are numerous theories concerning when the text was completed, and concerning the identity of the author or authors, but archeological recoveries have proven that the Art of War had roughly achieved its current form by at least the early Han dynasty (206 BC – AD 220). Because it is impossible to prove definitively when the Art of War was completed before this date, the differing theories concerning the work's author(s) and date of completion are unlikely to ever be completely resolved. Some modern scholars believe that, contrary to popular belief, it contains not only the writings of the original author, but also commentary and clarifications from later military philosophers, such as Li Quan and Du Mu.

Of the military texts written before the unification of China in the 2nd century BC, six major works survived, including The Art of War. During the Song Dynasty in the late 1st millennium AD, these six works were combined with a Tang Dynasty text into a collection called the Seven Military Classics. As a central part of that compilation, The Art of War formed the foundations of orthodox military theory in China. Illustrating this point, the book was required reading to pass the tests needed for imperial appointment to military positions.

According to Simpkins & Simpkins, Sun Tzu's Art of War uses language that may be unusual in a Western text on warfare and strategy. For example, the 11th chapter states that a leader must be "serene and inscrutable" and capable of comprehending "unfathomable plans". They state that the text contains many similar remarks that have long confused Western readers lacking an awareness of the East Asian context. The meaning of such statements are clearer when interpreted in the context of Taoist thought and practice. Sun Tzu viewed the ideal general as an enlightened Taoist master, which has led to The Art of War being considered a prime example of Taoist strategy.

The book is not only popular among military theorists, but has also become increasingly popular among political leaders and those in business management. Despite its title, The Art of War addresses strategy in a broad fashion, touching upon public administration and planning. The text outlines theories of battle but also advocates diplomacy and cultivating relationships with other nations as essential to the health of a state.

In 1972, scholars uncovered a collection of ancient texts written on unusually well-preserved bamboo slips. Among them were the Art of War and Sun Bin's Military Methods. Although Han Dynasty bibliographies noted the latter publication as extant and written by a descendant of Sun, it had since been lost. The finding of Sun Bin's work is considered to be extremely important, both because of Sun Bin's relationship to Sun Tzu, and because of the work's addition to the body of military thought in late Chinese antiquity. The discovery as a whole significantly expanded the body of surviving Warring States military theory. Sun Bin's treatise is the only known military text surviving from the Warring States period discovered in the twentieth century, and bears the closest similarity to the Art of War of all surviving texts.

Some scholars have expressed doubt in Sun Tzu's historicity and the traditional dating of the Art of War. Their skepticism is fueled by factors that include possible historical inaccuracies and anachronisms in the text, as well as the likelihood of the execution of the king's favorite concubines. This skepticism, which sometimes cause scholars to completely deny the existence of a historical figure named Sun Wu (Sun Tzu), has led to acrimonious debate between skeptics and traditionalists, especially in China. Attribution of the Art of War's authorship varies among scholars, and have included people and movements including Sun; Chu scholar Wu Zixu; an unknown author; a school of thought in Qi or Wu; Sun Bin, and others.

Traditionalists attribute the authorship of The Art of War to the historical figure Sun Wu, who is chronicled in the Records of the Grand Historian and the Spring and Autumn Annals. He was reputedly active in the late 6th century BC, beginning c. 512 BC. The appearance of features from the Art of War in other historical texts is considered to be proof of his historicity and authorship. Certain strategic concepts, such as terrain classification, are attributed to Sun Tzu. Their use in other works, such as by the compilers of the Methods of the Sima, is considered proof of Sun Tzu's historical priority.

Skeptics that identify issues with the traditionalist view point to possible anachronisms in the Art of War that include terms, technology, philosophical ideas, events, and military techniques. They argue that there is a disparity between the large scale wars and sophisticated techniques detailed in the text, and the more primitive small scale battles that many believe predominated the 6th century BC. However, according to Ralph D. Sawyer, it is very likely Sun Tzu did actually exist and not only served as a general, but also wrote the core of the book that bears his name. Sawyer argues that the teachings were probably taught to the succeeding generations in the family or a small school of disciples, including Sun-Tzu's descendant, Sun Bin, and were revised and expanded upon.

Sun Tzu's Art of War has influenced many notable figures. Traditional histories recount that the first emperor of a unified China, Qin Shi Huang, considered the book invaluable in ending the Age of Warring States. The Art of War was introduced in Japan, c. AD 760, and the book quickly became popular among Japanese generals. The work also significantly influenced the unification of Japan. Mastery of its teachings was honored among the samurai, and its teachings were both exhorted and exemplified by influential daimyos and shoguns, such as Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Tokugawa Ieyasu.

Admiral of the Fleet Tōgō Heihachirō, who led Japan's forces to victory against Russia in the Russo-Japanese War, was an avid reader of The Art of War.

Communist Chinese leader Mao Zedong partially credited his victory over Chiang Kai-shek and the Kuomintang in 1949 to The Art of War. The work strongly influenced Mao's writings about guerrilla warfare, which further influenced communist insurgencies around the world.

General Vo Nguyen Giap, the military mastermind behind victories over French and American forces in Vietnam, was an avid student and practitioner of Sun Tzu's ideas. America's defeat here, more than any other event, brought Sun Tzu to the attention of American military leaders. Ho Chi Minh translated the work for his Vietnamese officers to study.

The Department of the Army in the United States, through its Command and General Staff College, has directed all units to maintain libraries within their respective headquarters for the continuing education of personnel in the art of war. The Art of War is mentioned as an example of works to be maintained at each individual unit, and staff duty officers are obliged to prepare short papers for presentation to other officers on their readings.

Sun Tzu's The Art of War is listed on the Marine Corps Professional Reading Program (formerly known as the Commandant's Reading List). During the Persian Gulf War in the 1990s, both General Norman Schwarzkopf, Jr. and General Colin Powell practiced Sun Tzu's principles of deception, speed, and attacking the enemy's weakness.

Mark McNeilly writes in Sun Tzu and the Art of Modern Warfare that a modern interpretation of Sun and his importance throughout Chinese history is critical in understanding China's push to becoming a superpower in the 21st century. Modern Chinese scholars explicitly rely on historical strategic lessons and The Art of War in developing their theories, seeing a direct relationship between their modern struggles and those of China in Sun Tzu's time. There is a great perceived value in Sun Tzu's teachings and other traditional Chinese writers, which are used regularly in developing the strategies of the Chinese state and its leaders.

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.fineartamerica.com

Sasaki Kojiro (1585-1612), Most Remembered for his Death While Battling Miyamoto Musashi

2012-04-03T13:17:00.005+07:00

Sasaki Kojiro in popular culture

Miyamoto Musashi and Sasaki Kojiro. Model miniature by James Harold

Sasaki Kojiro (right) engages Miyamoto Musashi on the shores of Ganryū Island. Note that in this rendering, Musashi is using two bokken

Sasaki Kojirō (佐々木小次郎?, also known as Ganryū Kojirō) (1585? – April 13, 1612) was a prominent Japanese swordsman widely considered a Kensei, born in Fukui Prefecture. He lived during the Sengoku and early Edo periods and is most remembered for his death while battling Miyamoto Musashi in 1612.

He went by the fighting name of Ganryū (巌流 lit. "Large Rock style"), which was also the name of the kenjutsu school he had founded. It is said that Kojirō studied the Chūjō-ryu of sword fighting from either Kanemaki Jisai or Toda Seigen. Toda Seigen was a master of the kodachi. If Kojirō had indeed learned Chūjō-ryu from Seigen, he would have been his master's sparring partner. Due to his master's use of the kodachi, Kojirō used a nodachi, or a long katana, against him, therefore eventually excelling in its use. It was after defeating his master's younger brother that he left and founded the Ganryū. The first reliable account of his life states that in 1610, because of the fame of his school and his many successful duels, including once when he fended off three opponents with a tessen, Kojirō was honored by Lord Hosokawa Tadaoki as the chief weapons master of the Hosokawa fief north of Kyūshū. Sasaki later became skilled in the wielding of a nodachi, and used one he called "Monohoshizao" ("The Laundry-Drying Pole") as his main weapon.

Sasaki Kojirō was a long-time rival of Miyamoto Musashi, and is considered the most challenging opponent Musashi ever faced.

There are a number of accounts of the duel, varying in most details except the essentials, such as Kojirō's defeat.

The age of Kojirō is especially uncertain - the Nitenki says that during his childhood, he

“ ...received the instruction of Toda Seigen, a master of the school of the short sword, and having been the partner of his master, he excelled him in the wielding of the long sword. After having defeated his master's younger brother he left him to travel in various provinces. There he founded his own school, which was called Ganryu. ”

The Nitenki's account initially seems trustworthy, until it goes on to give the age of Kojirō at the time of the duel as 18 years old; it is known that two years earlier he had been a head weapons master for a fief - but then that would imply he had reached such a position at the age of 16, which is extremely improbable. A further complication is that Toda Seigen died in the 1590s. This unreliability of the sources means Kojirō's age could have varied anywhere from his 20s to as late as his 50s. Even worse, a number of scholars contend that identifying Seigen as Kojirō's teacher is a mistake, and that he was actually trained by a student of Seigen's, Kanemaki Jisai.

Apparently, the young (at the time, around 29 years old) Musashi heard of Kojirō's fame and asked Lord Hosokawa Tadaoki (through the intermediary of Nagaoka Sado Okinaga, a principal vassal of Hosokawa) to arrange a duel. Hosokawa assented, and set the time and place as 13 April 1612, on the comparatively remote island of Ganryujima of Funashima (the strait between Honshū and Kyūshū). The match was probably set in such a remote place because by this time Kojirō had acquired many students and disciples, and had Kojirō lost, they would probably have attempted to kill Musashi.

According to the legend, Musashi arrived more than three hours late, and goaded Kojirō by taunting him. When Kojirō attacked, his blow came as close as to sever Musashi's chonmage. He came close to victory several times until, supposedly blinded by the sunset behind Musashi, Musashi struck him on the skull with his oversized bokken (wooden sword), which was over 90 centimeters long. Musashi supposedly fashioned the long bokken, a type called a suburitō due to its above-average length, by shaving down the spare oar of the boat in which he arrived at the duel with his wakizashi (the wood was very hard). Musashi had been late for the duel on purpose in order to psychologically unnerve his opponent (a tactic used by him on previous occasions, such as during his series of duels with the Yoshioka swordsmen).

Another version of the legend recounts that when Musashi finally arrived, Kojirō shouted insults at him, but Musashi just smiled. Angered even further, Kojirō leapt into combat, blinded by rage. Kojiro attempted his famous "swallow's blade" or "swallow cut," but Musashi's oversized bokken hit Kojiro first, causing him to fall down; before Kojiro could finish his swallow cut, Musashi smashed Kojiro's left rib, puncturing his lungs and killing him. Musashi then hastily retreated to his boat and sailed away. This was Musashi's last fatal duel.

Among other things, this conventional account (drawn from the Nitenki, Kensetsu, and Yoshida Seiken's account), has some problems. Kenji Tokitsu discusses a number of obscurities and counterintuitive claims that have been identified in the account by him and previous scholars. Would Musashi only prepare his bokuto while going to the duel site? Could he even have prepared it in time, working the hard wood with his wakizashi? Would that work not have tired him as well? Further, why was the island then renamed after Kojirō, and not Musashi? Other texts completely omit the "late arrival" portion of the story, or change the sequence of actions altogether. Harada Mukashi and a few other scholars believe that Kojiro was actually assassinated by Musashi and his students - the Sasaki clan apparently was a political obstacle to Lord Hosokawa, and defeating Kojirō would be a political setback to his religious and political foes.

The debate still rages today as to whether or not Musashi cheated in order to win that fateful duel or merely used the environment to his advantage. Another theory is that Musashi timed the hour of his arrival to match the turning of the tide. He expected to be pursued by Sasaki's supporters in the event of a victory. The tide carried him to the island then it turned by the time the fight ended. Musashi immediately jumped back in his boat and his flight was thus helped by the tide.

Kojiro's favored weapon during combat was a straight-edged nodachi with a blade-length of over 150 cm. (5 ft) long. As a comparison, the average blade-length of the regular katana are usually 70 cm (2 feet, 3 inches) but rarely longer. It was called the "Monohoshi Zao" (Clothes/Laundry-Drying Pole, often translated into English as "The Drying Pole"). Despite the sword's length and weight, Kojirō's strikes with the weapon were unusually quick and precise.

His favorite technique was both respected and feared throughout feudal Japan. It was called the "Turning Swallow Cut" or "Tsubame Gaeshi" (燕返し lit. "Swallow Reversal / Return"), and was so named because it mimicked the motion of a swallow's tail during flight as observed at Kintaibashi Bridge in Iwakuni. This cut was reputedly so quick and precise that it could strike down a bird in mid-flight. There are no direct descriptions of the technique, but it was compared to two other techniques current at the time: the Ittō-ryū's Kinshi Cho Ohken and the Ganryū Kosetsu To; respectively the two involved fierce and swift cuts downward and then immediately upwards. Hence, the "Turning Swallow Cut" has been reconstructed as a technique involving striking downward from above and then instantly striking again in an upward motion from below. The strike's second phase could be from below toward the rear and then upward at an angle, like an eagle climbing again after swooping down on its prey. Kojiro created this technique around 1605.

Sasaki Kojiro has appeared in many forms in pop culture in Japan. He features in a lot of the films about the life of Miyamoto Musashi, most prominently in Samurai III: Duel at Ganryu Island. In the manga Vagabond, Sasaki Kojiro is portrayed as a deaf man raised by a retired samurai after he is found in the ocean clinging to a long sword. He appears as a cultured and soft speaking psychopath with a white painted face in Samurai Warriors 2. In the Playstation 1 video game Brave Fencer Musashi, Kojiro appears as a result of a second "hero summoning" to save the princess of the Allucaneet Kingdom. Sasaki Kojiro also appeared as one of the servants in the Fate Stay/Night anime of 2006 and played the role of the Assassin Servant. He denied his identity as a fake by saying "he is nothing but a character with fabricated past that has been made into a master swordsman inside of people's memories."

Sources :
www.en.wikipedia.org
www.jamesharoldgalleries.com
www.travelvolunteerblog.net
www.zerochan.net

Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck (1870-1964), Master of Guerrilla Tactics

2012-04-03T12:38:00.007+07:00

Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck photographed by Heinrich Hopffmann in 1933

Painting of Oberstleutnant Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck

World War I poster of German general Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck (1870-1964). "Kolonial-Krieger-Spende. Von Lettow-Vorbeck. Grotemeyer 1918." Library of Congress description: "Poster shows General Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck on horseback leading African soldiers. Text at top reads Colonial War Funds; on bottom is facsimile of von Lettow-Vorbeck's signature."

Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck at a parade in Berlin, March 1919

Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck (right) as guest of General Günther von Kluge at army maneuvers in September 1935

Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck (20 March 1870 – 9 March 1964) was a general in the Imperial German Army and the commander of the German East Africa campaign. For four years, with a force that never exceeded about 14,000 (3,000 Germans and 11,000 Africans), he held in check a much larger force of 300,000 British, Belgian, and Portuguese troops. Essentially undefeated in the field, von Lettow-Vorbeck was the only German commander to successfully invade British Empire soil during World War I. His exploits in the campaign have come down "as the greatest single guerrilla operation in history, and the most successful."

Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck was born into the Pomeranian lower nobility while his father was stationed as an army officer at Saarlouis in the Prussian Rhine Province. He was educated in boarding schools in Berlin and joined the corps of cadets at Potsdam and Berlin-Lichterfelde. In 1890 he was commissioned a Leutnant in the Imperial German Army.

In 1900, von Lettow-Vorbeck was posted to China as a member of the international alliance forces to quell the Boxer Rebellion. He did not like fighting against guerrillas and considered the war a detriment to the discipline of the German Army. He returned from China in 1901 and served as a member of the German General Staff.

Beginning in 1904 he was assigned to German South-West Africa (now Namibia), during the Namaqua and Herero insurrection. However, he did not participate in the subsequent genocide. Having suffered injuries to his left eye and chest, he was evacuated to South Africa for treatment and recovery.

In 1907 he was promoted to major and assigned to the staff of 11th Army Corps. From March 1909 to January 1913 von Lettow-Vorbeck was commander of the marines of II. Seebatallion [2nd Sea Battalion] at Wilhelmshaven in Lower Saxony, Germany. In October 1913, the German army promoted him to Lieutenant Colonel and appointed to command the German colonial forces known as the Schutztruppe (protectorate force) in German Kamerun (today's Cameroon plus a portion of Nigeria). Before he could assume this command, however, his orders were changed and he was posted—effective 13 April 1914—to German East Africa, the mainland of present Tanzania.

While travelling to his new assignment, von Lettow-Vorbeck formed what would prove to be a lifelong friendship with Danish author Isak Dinesen, who was travelling aboard the same liner. Decades later, she recalled, "He belonged to the olden days, and I have never met another German who has given me so strong an impression of what Imperial Germany was and stood for."

Von Lettow-Vorbeck's plan for the war was quite simple: knowing that East Africa would only be a sideshow, he determined to tie down as many British troops as he could. He intended to keep them away from the Western Front, and in this way contribute to Germany's eventual victory.

In August 1914, during the early phases of the World War I, von Lettow-Vorbeck was the commander of a small garrison of just 2,600 German nationals and 2,472 African soldiers in 14 Askari field companies. Realising the need to seize the initiative, he ignored orders from Berlin and the colony's governor, Heinrich Schnee, who had insisted on neutrality for German East Africa. Von Lettow-Vorbeck simply ignored the governor and prepared to repel a major amphibious assault on the city of Tanga. The attack began on 2 November 1914, and for the next four days he fought one of his greatest battles, theBattle of Tanga. He then assembled his men and their scant supplies to attack the British railways in East Africa. He scored a second victory over the British at Jassin on 18 January 1915. These victories gave him badly needed modern rifles and other supplies, as well as critical boost to the morale of his men.

However, von Lettow-Vorbeck also lost many experienced men, including the "splendid Captain Tom von Prince,"whom he could not easily replace.

Von Lettow-Vorbeck knew he could count on his highly motivated officers (their casualty rate was certainly proof of that). Although casualties remained high, Lettow insisted his commanders engage British forces. Unfortunately, the British offered few enticing targets, and forced him to conduct raids into British East Africa (modern Kenya), Uganda and Rhodesia, targeting forts, railways and communications—all with the goal of forcing the Entente to divert manpower from the main theater of war in Europe. He realized the critical needs of guerrilla warfare in that he used everything available to him in matters of supply.

The Schutztruppe recruited new personnel and expanded to its eventual size of some 14,000 soldiers, most of them Askaris, and all well-trained and well-disciplined. Von Lettow-Vorbeck's fluency in the Swahili language earned the respect and admiration of his African soldiers; he appointed black officers and "said—and believed—'we are all Africans here'." In one historian's estimation, "It is probable that no white commander of the era had so keen an appreciation of the African's worth not only as a fighting man but as a man."

He gained the men and artillery of the German cruiser SMS Königsberg (scuttled in 1915 in the Rufiji River delta) which had a capable crew under commander Max Looff, as well as its numerous guns, which were converted into artillery pieces for the land fighting, which would be the largest standard land artillery pieces used in the East African theater. In March 1916 the British under Gen. J. C. Smuts launched a formidable offensive with 45,000 men. Von Lettow-Vorbeck patiently used climate and terrain as his allies while his troops fought the British on his terms and to his advantage. The British, however, kept on adding more troops and forcing von Lettow-Vorbeck to yield territory. Nevertheless, he fought on, including a pivotal battle at Mahiwa in October 1917 where he lost 519 men killed, wounded or missing and the British 2,700 killed, wounded or missing. After the news of the battle reached Germany he was promoted to Generalmajor. The British would recover their losses and continue to hold an overwhelming manpower advantage; for the Schutztruppe it was serious, there were no reserves to again fill the ranks.

Von Lettow-Vorbeck now began a forced withdrawal to the south, with his troops at half rations and the British in pursuit. On 25 November 1917 his advance column waded across the river Rovuma into Portuguese Mozambique. In essence he cut his own supply lines and the Schutztruppe caravan became a nomadic tribe. On their first day across the river they attacked the newly replenished Portuguese garrison of Ngomano and solved all their supply issues for the foreseeable future. When they captured a river steamer with a load of medical supplies, including quinine, at least some of their medical problems were no more. For almost an entire year they had now lived off the land, but mainly with provisions captured from the British and Portuguese; they had replaced their old rifles with new equipment and acquired machine guns and mortars after capturing Namakura (Nhamacurra in modern Mozambique) in July 1918. At the end they had more ammunition than they could carry!

On 28 September 1918 von Lettow-Vorbeck again crossed the Rovuma and returned to German East Africa with the British still in pursuit. He then turned west and raided Northern Rhodesia, thus evading a trap the British had prepared for him in German East Africa. On 13 November 1918, two days after the armistice, he took the town of Kasama which the British had evacuated, and continued heading south-west towards Katanga. When he reached the Chambeshi River on the morning of 14 November, the British magistrate Hector Croad appeared under a white flag and delivered a message from the allied General van Deventer informing him of the armistice. Von Lettow-Vorbeck agreed to a cease-fire at the spot now marked by the Von Lettow-Vorbeck Memorial in present-day Zambia. He was instructed by the British to march north to Abercorn (now Mbala) to surrender his undefeated army, which he did there on 23 November. His remaining army then consisted of 30 German officers, 125 German non-commissioned officers and other enlisted ranks, 1,168 Askaris and some 3,500 porters.

The British and Belgian invasions of German East Africa set off a chain of events with devastating ramifications for the natives and their German overlords. The invasions caused interruptions throughout the colony so that the land no longer "basked in a climate of plenty."

As military commander, Lt. Col. von Lettow-Vorbeck's first obligation was to his army over the objections of Governor Heinrich Schnee. The governor regarded war as the worst possible calamity that could befall German East Africa; it would "undo everything his social and economic reforms had accomplished." Von Lettow-Vorbeck knew he would have to give ground and escape confrontations with Allied forces. He thus established food depots along his intended line of march from Neu Moshi to the Uluguru Mountains, and if the neighboring villages were near starvation, that was a misfortune of war.

Hardly any aid from Germany could penetrate the British blockade to alleviate the enormous supply deficiencies, and only two blockade runners succeeded in reaching the colony. On 14 April 1915 the freighter Kronborg arrived off Tanga at Manza Bay after a two months' journey from Wilhelmshaven, and was promptly attacked by the British cruiser Hyacinth. Fortunately for the Germans, Kronborg had been scuttled by her captain to avoid a coal fire after repeated hits by the British cruiser and the ship settled in shallow water. Nearly its entire cargo could be salvaged. When the steamer Marie von Stettin arrived south of Lindi on 17 March 1916, its precious cargo of 1,500 tons was of only very modest help. A November 1917 attempt to resupply German forces by a Zeppelin airship failed. By late September 1916, all of coastal German East Africa, including Dar es Salaam and the Central Railway, were under British control, with the west occupied by Belgians; then during December 1917 the German colony was officially declared an Allied protectorate.

Von Lettow-Vorbeck and his caravan of Europeans, Askaris, porters, women and children marched on, deliberately bypassing the tribal home lands of the native soldiers in an effort to forestall desertions. They traversed difficult territory, "swamps and jungles ... what a dismal prospect there is in front of me" stated the Allied commander Gen. J. C. Smuts. But Smuts did not flinch. His new approach and objective was not to fight the Schutztruppe at all, but to go after their food supply. The end eventually came some time later with Smuts in London and Gen. J. L. van Deventer in command in East Africa.

In a 1919 book, Ludwig Deppe, a medical doctor campaigning with von Lettow-Vorbeck and former head of the hospital at Tanga, looked back in rue and lamented the tragedy that was imposed by German forces on East Africa in their war with the invading Allies: "Behind us we leave destroyed fields, ransacked magazines and, for the immediate future, starvation. We are no longer the agents of culture, our track is marked by death, plundering and evacuated villages, just like the progress of our own and enemy armies in the Thirty Years' War."

While there was German callousness and harshness, the new British or Belgian masters in German East Africa were by no means benevolent, either. They assumed no responsibility for African welfare and provided little assistance to the malnourished native population; indeed, when food ran short for the Allied formations "the British askaris fell back on the practice of attacking and looting villages." When the worldwide Spanish influenza epidemic swept into eastern Africa in 1918–19 it struck down thousands with impartiality, native and European alike. The weakened state of many natives made them especially susceptible; this included the caged Askaris and porters of the German Schutztruppe, which had been herded together at the Tabora POW camps.

After hostilities ended, the British transferred the German soldiers and POWs to Dar es Salaam for eventual repatriation. In Germany, von Lettow-Vorbeck helped end the Spartacist uprising in Hamburg. This among other minor nefarious activities lost von Lettow-Vorbeck his position in the army. Von Lettow-Vorbeck tried to ensure decent treatment and the briefest time the German Askaris would be caged at Tabora.

Von Lettow-Vorbeck returned home in early March 1919 to a hero's welcome. On a black charger he led 120 officers of the Schutztruppe in their tattered tropical uniforms on a victory parade through the Brandenburg Gate which was decorated in their honor. Though he ultimately surrendered as ordered; he frequently won against great odds and was the only German commander to invade British territory successfully during World War I!

Von Lettow-Vorbeck was a daring yet prudent commander who showed uncanny ability to fight a guerrilla war in unfamiliar terrain. He was respected as a brilliant soldier and a first rate leader by his white officers, non-commissioned officers and Askaris—and beyond that, by his foes. In the field when rations had to be reduced and supplies dwindled,

it was a measure of the Askaris' loyalty to their commander that they accepted the cuts and did not desert en masse. Some did desert, of course ... [as did British, Belgian and Portuguese native troops]. But the German Askaris were by far the most loyal as well as the most effective, and it all went back to von Lettow-Vorbeck's brand of discipline, which bound him and his German officers as much as his black soldiers.

One of von Lettow-Vorbeck's junior officers, Theodor von Hippel, used his experience in Africa to be instrumental in forming the Brandenburgers, the commando unit of the German Abwehr intelligence agency in World War II.

After his return from Africa, von Lettow-Vorbeck married Martha Walroth in 1919; sons were born in 1921 and 1922 and a daughter in 1927. He participated in the chaotic politics of the Weimar Republic, and though he remained in the Army, only fourteen months after his return to Germany, he suppressed a communist uprising in Hamburg, and placed his troops at the disposal of monarchists during the Kapp Putsch. The failure of the putsch forced his resignation from the Reichswehr in May 1920. He then worked at Bremen as an import-export manager.

In June 1926, von Lettow-Vorbeck met Sir Richard Meinertzhagen at Bremen, the British Intelligence officer whom he had fought a battle of wits with until Meinertzhagen was invalided to England in December 1916 (he was later posted to Palestine). Three years later, von Lettow-Vorbeck accepted an invitation to London where he met for the first time face-to-face J. C. Smuts; Von Lettow-Vorbeck and Smuts formed a lasting friendship. When Smuts died in 1950, von Lettow-Vorbeck sent his widow a moving letter of sympathy.

(A similar oft-quoted claim states that von Lettow-Vorbeck also apologized for the "ungentlemanly death" of British hunter Frederick Selous at the hands of one of his snipers, however this claim is not supported by contemporary evidence.)

Between May 1928 and July 1930, the former General served as a Reichstag deputy for the monarchist German National People's Party. He intensely "distrusted Hitler and his movement," even though Hitler offered him the ambassadorship to the Court of St. James's in 1935, he "declined with frigid hauteur." During the 1960s, Charles Miller asked the nephew of a Schutztruppe officer, "I understand that von Lettow told Hitler to go fuck himself." The nephew responded, "That's right, except that I don't think he put it that politely."

After his blunt refusal, he "was kept under continual surveillance" and his home office was searched. The only rehabilitation due to his legendary standing among the populace came in 1938, when at age 68, he was named a General for Special Purposes, but was never recalled into active service.

By the end of World War II, von Lettow-Vorbeck was destitute. His two sons, Rüdiger and Arnd had both been killed in action serving in the Wehrmacht. His house in Bremen had been destroyed by Allied bombs, and he depended for a time on food packages from Meinertzhagen and Smuts. With the German economic miracle, he began to enjoy comfortable circumstances again. In 1953 he visited his other home, East Africa, where he was heartily welcomed by surviving Askaris who greeted him with their old marching song Heia Safari! and was received with full military honours by British colonial officials.

In 1964, Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck died in Hamburg. The West German government and the Bundeswehr flew in two former Askaris as state guests, so that they could attend the funeral of "their" general. Several officers of the Bundeswehr were assigned as an honor guard, and West Germany's Minister of Defense, Kai-Uwe von Hassel, gave the eulogy, saying that the deceased, "was truly undefeated in the field." Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck was buried in Pronstorf, Schleswig-Holstein in the cemetery of Vicelin Church.

In the year of von Lettow-Vorbeck's death, the West German Bundestag voted to deliver back pay to all surviving Askaris. A temporary cashier's office was set up in Mwanza on Lake Victoria. Of the 350 veterans who gathered, only a handful could produce the certificates that von Lettow-Vorbeck had given them in 1918. Others presented pieces of their old uniforms as proof of service. The German banker who had brought the money came up with an idea. As each claimant stepped forward, he was handed a broom and ordered in German to perform the manual of arms. Not one man failed the test!

Four barracks of the Federal German Army, or Bundeswehr, were once named in his honor. They were situated at Leer, Hamburg-Jenfeld, Bremen and Bad Segeberg. Following the recent closure of 178 military installations, the only one remaining is the Lettow-Vorbeck-Kaserne in Leer, East Frisia.

In the spring of 2010, the City Council of Saarlouis renamed Von Lettow-Vorbeck-Straße. In Hanover, "Lettow-Vorbeck Straße" was renamed "Namibia Straße". In Wuppertal, Cuxhaven, Mönchengladbach, Radolfzell and Halle there are still streets named after General von Lettow-Vorbeck.

The dryosaurid species Dysalotosaurus lettowvorbecki was named after von Lettow-Vorbeck.

Von Lettow-Vorbeck in popular cultures:

Von Lettow-Vorbeck appears in a 1993 episode of the television series The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles. The episode, which was titled "The Phantom Train of Doom", begins with Indiana Jones as an officer in the Belgian Army during World War I. Determined to destroy a Schutztruppe armored train, Indiana takes General von Lettow-Vorbeck (Tom Bell) hostage and attempts to return with him to Allied lines. When the Schutztruppe tracks them down, Indy draws his revolver in order to shoot the general, but ultimately decides to let him go. The general magnanimously gives him a compass and the two part as friends.
Von Lettow-Vorbeck is the protagonist of The Ghosts of Africa, a 1980 historical novel by Anglo-Canadian novelist William Stevenson about the East African Campaign which highlighted the long-distance resupply mission of the giant German rigid airship L.59.
Von Lettow-Vorbeck appears as a character in Peter Høeg's short story, "Journey into a Dark Heart", which is the opening story in his 1990 collection, Tales of the Night. In this story Høeg imagines von Lettow-Vorbeck travelling through Africa by train at night accompanied by Joseph Conrad.
Much of the history of von Lettow-Vorbeck's war campaign in Africa is detailed in the 2011 book Speak Swahili, Dammit! by James Penhaligon.
A German film, Lettow-Vorbeck: Der deutsch-ostafrikanische Imperativ, was produced in 1984.

Sources:

www.bundesarchiv.de

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.traditionsverband.de

Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645), Undefeated Samurai

2012-03-15T10:08:00.006+07:00

Miyamoto Musashi in his prime, wielding two bokken. Woodblock print by Utagawa Kuniyoshi

Miyamoto Musashi having his fortune told. Print by Utagawa Kuniyoshi

"Seishin Chokudo" (earnest heart, straight way) monument dedicated to Miyamoto Musashi, located in Kokura. These characters were engraved by Musashi on his bokken. It stands on the place where Musashi is supposed to have lived, at the foot of the castle. The Hombu dojo of a main branch of Hyoho Niten Ichi-ryū is in Kokura and demonstrates every year in front of this monument.

Miyamoto Musashi (宮本武蔵?, c. 1584 – June 13, 1645), also known as Shinmen Takezō, Miyamoto Bennosuke or, by his Buddhist name, Niten Dōraku, was a Japanese swordsman and rōnin. Musashi, as he was often simply known, became renowned through stories of his excellent swordsmanship in numerous duels, even from a very young age. He was the founder of the Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū or Niten-ryū style of swordsmanship and the author of The Book of Five Rings (五輪書 Go Rin No Sho?), a book on strategy, tactics, and philosophy that is still studied today! Miyamoto Musashi is widely considered as a Kensei and one of the greatest warriors of all time!

The details of Miyamoto Musashi's early life are difficult to verify. Musashi himself simply states in Gorin no Sho that he was born in Harima Province. Niten Ki (an early biography of Musashi) supports the theory that Musashi was born in 1584: "[He] was born in Banshū, in Tenshō 12 [1584], the Year of the Monkey." The historian Kamiko Tadashi, commenting on Musashi's text, notes: "[...]Munisai was Musashi's father...he lived in Miyamoto village, in the Yoshino district [of Mimasaka Province]. Musashi was most probably born here." His childhood name was Bennosuke 弁之助.

Musashi gives his full name and title in Gorin no Sho as Shinmen Musashi-no-Kami Fujiwara no Genshin." (新免武蔵守藤原玄信) His father, Shinmen Munisai 新免無二斎, was an accomplished martial artist and master of the sword and jutte (also jitte). Munisai, in turn, was the son of Hirata Shōgen 平田将監, a vassal of Shinmen Iga no Kami, the lord of Takayama Castle in the Yoshino district of Mimasaka Province. Hirata was relied upon by Lord Shinmen, and so was allowed to use the Shinmen name. As for "Musashi," Musashi no Kami was a court title, making him the nominal governor of Musashi province. "Fujiwara" was the lineage from which Musashi claimed nominal descent.

Mysteriously, Munisai's tomb says he died in 1580, which obviously conflicts with the accepted birth date of 1584 for Musashi. Further muddying the waters, according to the genealogy of the extant Miyamoto family, Musashi was born in 1582. Kenji Tokitsu has suggested that the accepted birth date of 1584 for Musashi is wrong, as it is primarily based on a literal reading of the introduction to the Go Rin No Sho where Musashi states that the years of his life "add up to 60" (yielding the twelfth year of the Tensho era, or 1584, when working backwards from the well-documented date of composition), when it should be taken in a more literary and imprecise sense, indicating not a specific age but merely that Musashi was in his sixties when he wrote it.

Because of the uncertainty centering on Munisai (when he died, whether he was truly Musashi's father, etc.), Musashi's mother is known with even less confidence. Here are a few possibilities:

Munisai's tomb was correct. He died in 1580, leaving two daughters; his wife adopted a recently born child, from the Akamatsu clan, intended to succeed Munisai at his jitte school. Omasa, Munisai's widow, was not Musashi's biological mother.

The tomb was wrong. Munisai lived a good deal longer, later than 1590 possibly. Musashi, then, was born to Munisai's first wife, Yoshiko (daughter to Bessho Shigeharu, who formerly controlled Hirafuku village until he lost a battle in 1578 to Yamanaka Shikanosuke). Munisai divorced her after Musashi's birth, whereupon she decamped for her father's house, leaving Musashi with Munisai. Musashi grew up treating Munisai's second wife, Omasa (daughter to Lord Shinmen) as his mother. This second scenario is laid out in an entry to the Tasumi family's genealogy. The daughter of Bessho Shigeharu first married Hirata Muni and was divorced from him a few years later. After that she married Tasumi Masahisa. The second wife of Tasumi Masahisa was the mother of Miyamoto Musashi. Musashi's childhood name was Hirata Den. During his childhood, he went to Hirafuku to find his real mother. He moved in with the Tasumi family.

A variant of this second theory is based on the fact that the tombstone states that Omasa gave birth to Musashi on 4 March 1584, and died of it. Munisai then remarried to Yoshiko. They divorced, as in the second theory, but Yoshiko took Musashi, who was 7 at the time, with her, and married Tasumi Masahisa.

Kenji Tokitsu prefers to assume a birth date of 1581, which avoids the necessity of assuming the tombstone to be erroneous (although this poses the problem of from whom then Musashi received the transmission of the family martial art).

Regardless of the truth about Musashi's ancestry, when Musashi was seven years old, the boy was raised by his uncle, Dorinbo (or Dorin), in Shoreian temple, three kilometers (~1.8 mi.) from Hirafuku. Both Dorin and Musashi's uncle by marriage — Tasumi — educated him in Buddhism and basic skills such as writing and reading. This education is possibly the basis for Yoshikawa Eiji's fictional education of Musashi by the historical Zen monk Takuan. He was apparently trained by Munisai in the sword, and in the family art of the jutte. This training did not last for a very long time, as in 1589, Munisai was ordered by Shinmen Sokan to kill Munisai's student, Honiden Gekinosuke. The Honiden family was displeased, and so Munisai was forced to move four kilometers (~2.5 mi.) away to the village of Kawakami.

In 1592, Munisai died, although Tokitsu believes that the person who died at this time was really Hirata Takehito.

Musashi contracted eczema in his infancy, and this adversely affected his appearance. Another story claims that he never took a bath because he did not want to be surprised unarmed. While the former claim may or may not have some basis in reality, the latter seems improbable. An unwashed member of the warrior caste would not have been received as a guest by such houses as Honda, Ogasawara and Hosokawa. These and many other details are likely embellishments that were added to his legend, or misinterpretations of literature describing him.

His father's fate is uncertain, but it is thought that he died at the hands of one of Musashi's later adversaries, who was punished or even killed for treating Musashi's father badly. However, there are no exact details of Musashi's life, since Musashi's only writings are those related to strategy and technique.

The name "Musashi" was thought to be taken from the name of a warrior monk named Musashibō Benkei who served under Minamoto no Yoshitsune, but this is unconfirmed.

It is said that he may have studied at the Yoshioka-ryū dojo (school), which was also said to be a school Musashi defeated single-handedly during his later years, although this is very uncertain. He did have formal training either by his father until he was 7 years old or from his uncle beginning at the age of 7. Ultimately the name was taken from his own original kanji, 武蔵, which can be read as Takezō or as Musashi, as stated in Eiji Yoshikawa's famous book Musashi.

I have trained in the way of strategy since my youth, and at the age of thirteen I fought a duel for the first time. My opponent was called Arima Kihei, a sword adept of the Shinto ryū, and I defeated him. At the age of sixteen I defeated a powerful adept by the name of Akiyama, who came from Tajima Province. At the age of twenty-one I went up to Kyōtō and fought duels with several adepts of the sword from famous schools, but I never lost.

—Miyamoto Musashi, Go Rin No Sho

According to the introduction of The Book of Five Rings, Musashi states that his first successful duel was at the age of thirteen, against a samurai named Arima Kihei who fought using the Kashima Shintō-ryū style, founded by Tsukahara Bokuden (b. 1489, d. 1571). The main source of the duel is the Hyoho senshi denki ("Anecdotes about the Deceased Master"). Summarized, its account goes as follows:

In 1596, Musashi was 13, and Arima Kihei, who was traveling to hone his art, posted a public challenge in Hirafuku-mura. Musashi wrote his name on the challenge. A messenger came to Dorin's temple, where Musashi was staying, to inform Musashi that his duel had been accepted by Kihei. Dorin, Musashi's uncle, was shocked by this, and tried to beg off the duel in Musashi's name, based on his nephew's age. Kihei was adamant that the only way his honor could be cleared was if Musashi apologized to him when the duel was scheduled. So when the time set for the duel arrived, Dorin began apologizing for Musashi, who merely charged at Kihei with a six-foot quarterstaff, shouting a challenge to Kihei. Kihei attacked with a wakizashi, but Musashi threw Kihei on the floor, and while Kihei tried to get up, Musashi struck Arima between the eyes and then beat him to death. Arima was said to have been arrogant, overly eager to fight, and not a terribly talented swordsman.

—William Scott Wilson, The Lone Samurai

In 1599, three years later, Musashi left his village, apparently at the age of 15 (according to the Tosakushi, "The Registry of the Sakushu Region", although the Tanji Hokin Hikki says he was 16 years old in 1599, which agrees time-wise with the age reported in Musashi's first duel). His family possessions such as furniture, weapons, genealogy, and other records were left with his sister and her husband, Hirao Yoemon.

He spent his time traveling and engaging in duels, such as with an adept called Akiyama from the Tajima Province.

In 1600, a war began between the Toyotomi and Tokugawa clans. Musashi apparently fought on the side of the Toyotomi's "Army of the West", as the Shinmen clan (to whom his family owed allegiance) had allied with them. Specifically, he participated in the attempt to take Fushimi castle by assault in July 1600, in the defense of the besieged Gifu Castle in August of the same year, and finally in the Battle of Sekigahara. Some doubt has been cast on this final battle, as the Hyoho senshi denki has Musashi saying he is "no lord's vassal" and refusing to fight with his father (in Lord Ukita's battalion) in the battle. Omitting the Battle of Sekigahara from the list of Musashi's battles would seem to contradict the Go Rin No Sho's statement that Musashi fought in six battles, however. Regardless, as the Toyotomi side lost, it has been suggested that Musashi fled as well and spent some time training on Mount Hiko.

After the battle, Musashi disappears from the records for a while. The next mention of him has him arriving in Kyoto at the age of 20 (or 21), where he began a series of duels against the Yoshioka School. Musashi's father, Munisai, also fought against a master of the Yoshioka school and won 2 out of 3 bouts in front of the shogun at the time, Ashikaga Yoshiaki who granted him the title of "Unrivaled Under The Sun". The Yoshioka School (descended from either the Tenshin Shōden Katori Shintō-ryū or the Kyo-hachi-ryū) was the foremost of the eight major schools of martial arts in Kyoto, the "Kyo-ryū" / "Schools of Kyoto". Legend has it that these eight schools were founded by eight monks taught by a legendary martial artist resident on the sacred Mount Kurama. At some point, the Yoshioka family also began to make a name for itself not merely in the art of the sword but also in the textile business and for a dye unique to them. They gave up teaching swordsmanship in 1614 when they fought in the Army of the West against Tokugawa Ieyasu in the Battle of Osaka, which they lost. But in 1604, when Musashi began duelling them, they were still preeminent. There are various accounts of the duels — the Yoshioka family documents claim that there was only one, against Yoshioka Kenpō, which Musashi lost.

Musashi challenged Yoshioka Seijūrō, master of the Yoshioka School, to a duel. Seijūrō accepted, and they agreed to a duel outside Rendaiji in Rakuhoku, in the northern part of Kyoto on 8 March 1604. Musashi arrived late, greatly irritating Seijūrō. They faced off, and Musashi struck a single blow, per their agreement. This blow struck Seijūrō on the left shoulder, knocking him out, and crippling his left arm. He apparently passed on the headship of the school to his equally accomplished brother, Yoshioka Denshichirō, who promptly challenged Musashi for revenge. The duel took place in Kyoto outside a temple, Sanjūsangen-dō. Denshichirō wielded a staff reinforced with steel rings (or possibly with a ball-and-chain attached), while Musashi arrived late a second time. Musashi disarmed Denshichirō and defeated him. This second victory outraged the Yoshioka family, whose head was now the 12-year old Yoshioka Matashichiro. They assembled a force of archers, musketeers and swordsmen, and challenged Musashi to a duel outside Kyoto, near Ichijō-ji Temple. Musashi broke his previous habit of arriving late, and came to the temple hours early. Hidden, Musashi assaulted the force, killing Matashichiro, and escaping while being attacked by dozens of his victim's supporters. To escape and fight off his opponents he was forced to draw his second sword and defend himself with a sword in each hand. This was the beginning of his niten'ichi sword style. With the death of Matashichiro, this branch of the Yoshioka School was destroyed.

After Musashi left Kyoto, some sources recount that he travelled to Hōzōin in Nara, to duel with and learn from the monks there, widely known as experts with lance weapons. There he settled down at Enkoji Temple in Banshū, where he taught the head monk's (one Tada Hanzaburo's) brother. Hanzaburo's grandson would found the Ensu-ryū based on the Enmei-ryū teachings and iaijutsu.

From 1605 to 1612, he travelled extensively all over Japan in musha shugyō, a warrior pilgrimage during which he honed his skills with duels. He was said to have used bokken or bokuto in actual duels. Most of the engagements from these times did not try to take the opponent's life unless both agreed, but in most duels, it is known that Musashi did not care which weapon his foe used — such was his mastery.

A document dated 5 September 1607, purporting to be a transmission by Miyamoto Munisai of his teachings, suggests Munisai lived at least to this date. In this year, Musashi departed Nara for Edo, during which he fought (and killed) a kusarigama practitioner named Shishido Baiken. In Edo, Musashi defeated Musō Gonnosuke, who would found an influential staff-wielding school known as Shintō Musō-ryū. Records of this first duel can be found in both the Shinto Muso-ryu tradition and the Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū (Miyamoto Musashi's school). The Shinto Muso Ryu tradition states that, after being defeated by Musashi, Muso Gonnusuke beat Musashi in a rematch. There are no current reliable sources outside the Shinto Muso Ryu tradition to confirm that this second duel took place.

Musashi is said to have fought over 60 duels and was never defeated, although this is a conservative estimate, most likely not accounting for deaths by his hand in major battles. In 1611, Musashi began practicing zazen at the Myōshin-ji temple, where he met Nagaoka Sado, vassal to Hosokawa Tadaoki; Tadaoki was a powerful lord who had received the Kumamoto Domain in west-central Kyūshū after the Battle of Sekigahara. Munisai had moved to northern Kyūshū and became Tadaoki's teacher, leading to the possibility that Munisai introduced the two. Nagaoka proposed a duel with a certain adept named Sasaki Kojirō. Tokitsu believes that the duel was politically motivated, a matter of consolidating Tadaoki's control over his fief.

On April 13, 1612, Musashi (about age 30) fought his duel with Sasaki Kojirō, who was known as "The Demon of the Western Provinces" and who wielded a nodachi. Musashi came late and unkempt to the appointed place — the island of Funajima, in the Kanmon Straits separating Honshū and Kyūshū. The duel was short. Musashi killed his opponent with a bokken that legend says he had carved from an oar used on the boat that carried him to the island. Musashi's late arrival is controversial. Sasaki's outraged supporters thought it was dishonorable and disrespectful, while Musashi's supporters thought it was a fair way to unnerve his opponent. Another theory is that Musashi timed the hour of his arrival to match the turning of the tide. The tide carried him to the island. After his victory, Musashi immediately jumped back in his boat and his flight from Sasaki's vengeful allies was helped by the turning of the tide. Another theory states he waited for the sun to get in the right position. After he dodged a blow, Sasaki was blinded by the sun.

In 1614–1615, Musashi participated in the war between the Toyotomi and the Tokugawa. The war had broken out because Tokugawa Ieyasu saw the Toyotomi family as a threat to his rule of Japan; most scholars believe that, as in the previous war, Musashi fought on the Toyotomi side. Osaka Castle was the central place of battle. The first battle (the Winter Battle of Osaka; Musashi's fourth battle) ended in a truce. The second (the Summer Battle of Osaka; Musashi's fifth battle) resulted in the total defeat of Toyotomi Hideyori's Army of the West by Ieyasu's Army of the East in May 1615. Some reports go so far as to say that Musashi entered a duel with Ieyasu, but was recruited after Ieyasu sensed his defeat was at hand. This may seem unlikely since Ieyasu was in his 70s and was in poor health already, but it remains unknown how Musashi came into Ieyasu's good graces.

Other accounts claim he actually served on the Tokugawa side, but such a claim is unproven, although Musashi had a close relationship with some Tokugawa vassals through his duel with Sasaki Kojirō, and in the succeeding years, he did not drop out of sight as might be expected if he were being persecuted for being on the losing side. In his later years, Ogasawara and Hosokawa supported Musashi greatly — an atypical course of action for these Tokugawa loyalists, if Musashi had indeed fought on behalf of the Toyotomi.

In 1615 he entered the service of Ogasawara Tadanao (小笠原忠直) of Harima Province, at Ogasawara's invitation, as a "Construction Supervisor," after previously gaining skills in craft. He helped construct Akashi Castle and in 1621 to lay out the organization of the town of Himeji. He also taught martial arts during his stay, specializing in instruction in the art of shuriken-throwing. During this period of service, he adopted a son.

In 1621, Musashi defeated Miyake Gunbei and three other adepts of the Togun-ryu in front of the lord of Himeji; it was after this victory that he helped plan Himeji. Around this time, Musashi developed a number of disciples for his Enmei-ryū although he had developed the school considerably earlier; at the age of 22, Musashi had already written a scroll of Enmei-ryū teachings called "Writings on the Sword Technique of the Enmei-ryū" (Enmei-ryū kenpo sho). 円/"En" meant "circle" or "perfection"; 明/"mei" meant "light"/"clarity", and 流/"ryū" meant "school"; the name seems to have been derived from the idea of holding the two swords up in the light so as to form a circle. The school's central idea is given as training to use the twin swords of the samurai as effectively as a pair of sword and jutte.

In 1622, Musashi's adoptive son, Miyamoto Mikinosuke, became a vassal to the Himeji Domain. Possibly this prompted Musashi to leave, embarking on a new series of travels, winding up in Edo in 1623, where he became friends with the Confucian scholar Hayashi Razan, who was one of the Shogun's advisors. Musashi applied to become a swordmaster to the Shogun, but as he already had two swordmasters (Ono Jiroemon Tadaaki and Yagyū Munenori — the latter also a political advisor, in addition to his position as the head of the Shogunate's secret police), Musashi's application was denied. He left Edo in the direction of Ōshū, ending up in Yamagata, where he adopted a second son, Miyamoto Iori. The two then traveled, eventually stopping in Osaka.

In 1626, Miyamoto Mikinosuke, following the custom of junshi, committed seppuku because of the death of his lord. In this year, Miyamoto Iori entered Lord Ogasawara's service. Musashi's attempt to become a vassal to the lord of Owari, like other such attempts, failed.

In 1627, Musashi began to travel again. In 1634 he settled in Kokura with Iori, and later entered the service of the daimyo Ogasawara Tadazane, taking a major role in the Shimabara Rebellion. Iori served with distinction in putting down the rebellion and gradually rose to the rank of karō — a position equal to a minister. Musashi, however was reputedly injured by a thrown rock while scouting in the front line, and was thus unnoticed.

Six years later, in 1633, Musashi began staying with Hosokawa Tadatoshi, daimyo of Kumamoto Castle, who had moved to the Kumamoto fief and Kokura, to train and paint. Ironically, it was at this time that the Hosokawa lords were also the patrons of Musashi's chief rival, Sasaki Kojirō. While there he engaged in very few duels; one would occur in 1634 at the arrangement of Lord Ogasawara, in which Musashi defeated a lance specialist by the name of Takada Matabei. Musashi would officially become the retainer of the Hosokowa lords of Kumamoto in 1640. The Niten Ki records "[he] received from Lord Tadatoshi: 17 retainers, a stipend of 300 koku, the rank of ōkumigashira 大組頭, and Chiba Castle in Kumamoto as his residence."

In the second month of 1641, Musashi wrote a work called the Hyoho Sanju Go ("Thirty-five Instructions on Strategy") for Hosokawa Tadatoshi; this work overlapped and formed the basis for the later Go Rin No Sho. This was the year that his third son, Hirao Yoemon, became Master of Arms for the Owari fief. In 1642, Musashi suffered attacks of neuralgia, foreshadowing his future ill-health. In 1643 he retired to a cave named Reigandō as a hermit to write The Book of Five Rings. He finished it in the second month of 1645. On the twelfth of the fifth month, sensing his impending death, Musashi bequeathed his worldly possessions, after giving his manuscript copy of the Go Rin No Sho to the younger brother of Terao Magonojo, his closest disciple. He died in Reigandō cave around June 13, 1645 (Shōhō 3, 30th day of the 4th month). The Hyoho senshi denki described his passing:

At the moment of his death, he had himself raised up. He had his belt tightened and his wakizashi put in it. He seated himself with one knee vertically raised, holding the sword with his left hand and a cane in his right hand. He died in this posture, at the age of sixty-two. The principal vassals of Lord Hosokawa and the other officers gathered, and they painstakingly carried out the ceremony. Then they set up a tomb on Mount Iwato on the order of the lord.

Musashi died of what is believed to be thoracic cancer, and was not killed in combat. He died peacefully after finishing the Dokkōdō ("The Way of Walking Alone", or "The Way of Self-Reliance"), 21 precepts on self-discipline to guide future generations.

His body was interred in armor within the village of Yuge, near the main road near Mount Iwato, facing the direction the Hosokawas would travel to Edo; his hair was buried on Mount Iwato itself.

Nine years later, a major source about his life — a monument with a funereal eulogy to Musashi — was erected in Kokura by Miyamoto Iori; this monument was called the Kokura hibun. An account of Musashi's life, the Niten-ki 二天記, was published in Kumamoto in 1776, by Toyota Kagehide, based on the recollections of his grandfather Toyota Masataka, who was a second generation pupil of Musashi.

Musashi created and perfected a two-sword kenjutsu technique called niten'ichi (二天一, "two heavens as one") or nitōichi (二刀一, "two swords as one") or "Ni-Ten Ichi Ryu" (A Kongen Buddhist Sutra refers to the two heavens as the two guardians of Buddha). In this technique, the swordsman uses both a large sword, and a "companion sword" at the same time, such as a katana with a wakizashi. Although he had mastership in this style of two swords, he most commonly used a katana in duels.

The two-handed movements of temple drummers may have inspired him, although it could be that the technique was forged through Musashi's combat experience. Jutte techniques were taught to him by his father — the jutte was often used in battle paired with a sword; the jutte would parry and neutralize the weapon of the enemy while the sword struck or the practitioner grappled with the enemy. In his time a long sword in the left hand was referred to as gyaku nito. Today Musashi's style of swordsmanship is known as Hyōhō Niten Ichi-ryū.

Musashi was also an expert in throwing weapons. He frequently threw his short sword, and Kenji Tokitsu believes that shuriken methods for the wakizashi were the Niten Ichi Ryu's secret techniques.

Musashi spent many years studying Buddhism and swordsmanship. He was an accomplished artist, sculptor, and calligrapher. Records also show that he had architectural skills. Also, he seems to have had a rather straightforward approach to combat, with no additional frills or aesthetic considerations. This was probably due to his real-life combat experience; although in his later life, Musashi followed the more artistic side of bushidō. He made various Zen brush paintings, calligraphy, and sculpted wood and metal. Even in The Book of Five Rings he emphasizes that samurai should understand other professions as well. It should be understood that Musashi's writings were very ambiguous, and translating them into English makes them even more so; that is why so many different translations of the Go Rin No Sho can be found. To gain further insight into Musashi's principles and personality, one could read his other works, such as Dokkodo and Hyoho Shiji ni Kajo.

Throughout Musashi's last book, The Book of Five Rings (五輪書 Go Rin no Sho?), Musashi seems to take a very philosophical approach to looking at the "craft of war"; "There are five ways in which men pass through life: as gentlemen, warriors, farmers, artisans and merchants." These falling into one of the few profession groups that could be observed in Musashi's time.

Throughout the book, Musashi implies that the way of the Warrior, as well as the meaning of a "True strategist" is that of somebody who has made mastery of many art forms away from that of the sword, such as tea drinking (sado), laboring, writing, and painting as Musashi practiced throughout his life. Musashi was hailed as an extraordinary sumi-e artist in the use of ink monochrome as depicted in two such paintings: "Shrike Perched in a Dead Tree" (Koboku Meigekizu, 枯木鳴鵙図) and "Wild Geese Among Reeds" (Rozanzu, 魯山図). Going back to the Book of Five Rings, Musashi talks deeply about the ways of Buddhism.

He makes particular note of artisans and foremen. In the time in which he writes the book, the majority of houses in Japan were made of wood. In the use of building a house, foremen have to employ strategy based upon the skill and ability of their workers.

In comparison to warriors and soldiers, Musashi notes the ways in which the artisans thrive through events; the ruin of houses, the splendor of houses, the style of the house, the tradition and name or origins of a house. These too, are similar to the events which are seen to have warriors and soldiers thrive; the rise and fall of prefectures, countries and other such events are what make uses for warriors, as well as the literal comparisons of the: "The carpenter uses a master plan of the building, and the way of strategy is similar in that there is a plan of campaign".

Throughout the book, Go Rin No Sho, the idea which Musashi pushes is that the "way of the strategist" (Heihō 兵法) is similar to how a carpenter and his tools are mutually inclusive, e.g. — a carpenter can do nothing without his tools, and vice versa. This too, he compares to skill, and tactical ability in the field of battle.

Initially, Musashi notes that throughout China and Japan, there are many "sword fencers" who walk around claiming they are strategists, but are, in fact, not — this may be because Musashi had defeated some such strategists, such as Arima Kihei.

The idea is that by reading his writings, one can become a true strategist from ability and tactical skill that Musashi had learned in his lifetime. He argues that strategy and virtue are something which can be earned by knowing the ways of life, the professions that are around, to perhaps learn the skills and knowledge of people and the skills of their particular professions.

However, Musashi seems to state that the value of strategy seems to be homogeneous. He notes that:

The attendants of the Kashima Kantori shrines of the province Hitachi received instruction from the gods, and made schools based on this teaching, travelling from province to province instructing men. This is the recent meaning of strategy.

As well as noting that strategy is destined to die;

Of course, men who study in this way think they are training the body and spirit, but it is an obstacle to the true way, and its bad influence remains forever. Thus the true way of strategy is becoming decadent and dying out.

As a form, strategy was said to be one of "Ten Abilities and Seven Arts" that a warrior should have, but Musashi disagrees that one person can gain strategy by being confined to one particular style, which seems particularly fitting as he admits "I practice many arts and abilities — all things with no teacher" — this perhaps being one of the reasons he was so highly regarded a swordsman.

Musashi's metaphor for strategy is that of the bulb and the flower, similar to Western philosophy of "the chicken or the egg", the "bulb" being the student, the "flower" being the technique. He also notes that most places seem to be mostly concerned with their technique and its beauty. Musashi writes, "In this kind of way of strategy, both those teaching and those learning the way are concerned with coloring and showing off their technique, trying to hasten the bloom of the flower" (as opposed to the actual harmony between strategy and skill.)

With those who are concerned with becoming masters of strategy, Musashi points out that as a carpenter becomes better with his tools and is able to craft things with more expert measure, so too can a warrior, or strategist become more skilled in his technique. However, just as a carpenter needs to be able to use his tools according to plans, so too must a strategist be able to adapt his style or technique to the required strategy of the battle he is currently engaged in.

This description also draws parallels between the weapons of a trooper (or soldier) and the tools of a carpenter; the idea of "the right tool for the right job" seems to be implied a lot throughout the book Go Rin No Sho. Musashi also puts into motion the idea that when a carpenter is skilled enough in aspects of his job, and creates them with expert measure, then he can become a foreman.

Although it is not expressly mentioned, it may be seen that Musashi indicated that when you have learned the areas in which your craft requires, be it carpentry, farming, fine art or battle, and are able to apply them to any given situation, then you will be experienced enough to show others the wisdom of your ways, be it as a foreman of craftsmen, or as a general of an army.

From further reading into the book, the idea of "weapons within strategy," as well as Musashi referring to the power of the writer, may seem that the strategy which Musashi refers to does not exclusively reside within the domain of weaponry and duels, but within the realm of war and battles with many men:

Just as one man can beat ten, so a hundred men can beat a thousand, and a thousand can beat ten thousand. In my strategy, one man is the same as ten thousand, so this strategy is the complete warrior's craft.

Within the book, Musashi mentions that the use of two swords within strategy is mutually beneficial between those who utilize this skill. The idea of using two hands for a sword is an idea which Musashi disagrees with, in that there is not fluidity in movement when using two hands — "If you hold a sword with both hands, it is difficult to wield it freely to left and right, so my method is to carry the sword in one hand"; he as well disagrees with the idea of using a sword with two hands on a horse, and/or riding on unstable terrain, such as muddy swamps, rice fields, or within crowds of people.

In order to learn the strategy of Ni-Ten Ichi Ryu, Musashi employs that by training with two long swords, one in each hand, you will be able to overcome the cumbersome nature of using a sword in both hands. Although difficult, Musashi agrees that there are times in which the long sword must be used with two hands, but if your skill is good enough, you should not need it. The idea of using two long swords is that you are starting with something to which you are unaccustomed, and that you will find difficult, but will adapt to after much use.

After using two long swords proficiently enough, Musashi then states that your mastery of a long sword, and a "companion sword", most likely a wakizashi, will be much increased — "When you become used to wielding the long sword, you will gain the power of the Way and wield the sword well.".

In short, it could be seen that from the excerpts from Go Rin No Sho, the real strategy behind Ni-Ten No Ichi Ryu, is that there is no real iron-clad method, path, or type of weaponry that is specific to the style of Ni-Ten No Ichi Ryu:

You can win with a long weapon, and yet you can also win with a short weapon. In short, the Way of the Ichi school is the spirit of winning, whatever the weapon and whatever its size.

The strategy of the long sword is different than other strategies, in that it is much more straightforward. In the strategy of the longsword, it seems that Musashi's ideal was, that by mastering gripping the sword with two fingers, it could become a platform used for moving onto the mastery of Ni-Ten Ichi Ryu, as well as being able to use two broadswords, or more masterfully use a companion sword.

However, just because the grip is to be light, it does not mean that the attack or slash from the sword will be weak. As with any other technique in the Ni-Ten Ichi Ryu, he notes:

If you try to wield the long sword quickly, you will mistake the way. To wield the long sword well, you must wield it calmly. If you try to wield it quickly, like a folding fan or a short sword, you will err by using "short sword chopping". You cannot cut down a man with a long sword using this method.

As with most disciplines in martial arts, Musashi notes that the movement of the sword after the cut is made must not be superfluous; instead of quickly returning to a stance or position, one should allow the sword to come to the end of its path from the force used. In this manner, the technique will become freely flowing, as opposed to abrupt.

Musashi also discouraged the use of only one sword for fighting, and the use of over-large swords like nodachi because they were cumbersome and unwieldy.

Even from a late age, Musashi separated his religion from his involvement in swordsmanship. Excerpts such as the one below, from The Book of Five Rings, demonstrate a philosophy that is thought to have stayed with him throughout his life:

There are many ways: Confucianism, Buddhism, the ways of elegance, rice-planting, or dance; these things are not to be found in the way of the warrior.

However, the belief that Musashi disliked Shinto is inaccurate, as he criticises the Shintō-ryū style of swordsmanship, and not Shinto, the religion. In Musashi's Dokkodo, his stance on religion is further elucidated: "Respect Buddha and the gods without counting on their help."

In his later years, Musashi claimed in his Go Rin No Sho: "When I apply the principle of strategy to the ways of different arts and crafts, I no longer have need for a teacher in any domain." He proved this by creating recognized masterpieces of calligraphy and classic ink painting. His paintings are characterized by skilled use of ink washes and an economy of brush stroke. He especially mastered the "broken ink" school of landscapes, applying it to other subjects, such as his Kobokumeikakuzu ("Shrike Perched on a Withered Branch"; part of a triptych whose other two members were "Hotei Walking" and "Sparrow on Bamboo"), his Hotei Watching a Cockfight, and his Rozanzu ("Wild Geese Among Reeds").

Even in Musashi's time there were fictional texts resembling comic books. It is therefore quite difficult to separate fact from fiction when discussing his life. There have been numerous works of fiction made about or featuring Musashi, such as the popular fantasy series "The Secrets of The Immortal Nicholas Flamel". Among them are also several dozen films, including several with the title of Miyamoto Musashi. One of these, released in the English-speaking world as Samurai I: Musashi Miyamoto, is the Academy Award–winning film by Hiroshi Inagaki starring Toshirô Mifune. Eiji Yoshikawa's novelization has greatly influenced successive fictional depictions (including the ongoing manga Vagabond by Takehiko Inoue) and is often mistaken for a factual account of Musashi's life.

Source:

www.en.wikipedia.org

Takeda Shingen (1521-1573), Preeminent Daimyo in Feudal Japan

2012-03-15T09:15:00.007+07:00

Portrait of Takeda Harunobu (or Shingen)

Takeda Shingen from "Samurai Warriors"

"Takeda Harunobu Nyūdō Shingen" from "One hundred generals, brave at battle, at Kawanakajima" by artist Utagawa Kuniyoshi

Battle of Kawanakajima in 1561

Takeda Shingen (left) versus Uesugi Kenshin (right) in Kawanakajima bronze statue, Kawanakajima, Nagano-shi, Nagano, Japan

Takeda Shingen (武田信玄?, December 1, 1521 – May 13, 1573), of Kai Province, was a preeminent daimyo in feudal Japan with exceptional military prestige in the late stage of the Sengoku period.

Takeda Shingen was the eldest son of the aggressive warlord Takeda Nobutora (1493-1573). A competent if not especially well-liked leader, Nobutora had secured the position of the Takeda in Kai and established his headquarters in Fuchu in 1519, building a castle called Yogai-jo on Maruyama, an 820-meter height north of the town. In the course of his career Nobutora fended off attacks against her borders by the Imagawa (1521) and the Hôjô (1526). During the campaign in 1521, Nobutora defeated an Imagawa general named Fukushima Ujikatsu at the Battle of Iidagawara and soon afterwards learned of the birth of his first son, whom he named Katsuchiyo.

When Katsuchiyo turned 13, Nobutora arranged for him to marry the daughter of Ogigayatsu-Uesugi Tomooki, who still held considerable lands in the Kanto. This unfortunate young woman would die the following year, terminating what would, in time, come to seem a highly ironic union. Katsuchiyo's coming of age ceremony (around 1535) was something of an affair, and a number of court notables were in attendance, including a certain Sanjô Kinyori, a retired Dainogon, whose daughter Katsuchiyo would soon marry. The Shôgun, Ashikaga Yoshiharu, sent permission for Katsuchiyo to incorporate 'Haru' in his adult name, and Katsuchiyo thus became known as Harunobu. He was also given the honorific title Shinano no Kami (an appropriate moniker, as it would turn out). Despite this memorable coming of age ceremony, it would seem that Nobutora took a disliking to his eldest son. The reasons for this (however embellished this part of Shingen's life may have become over the centuries) are not clear, but were not eased by Harunobu's valuable role in the defeat of Hiraga Genshin in 1536. The events between 1536 and 1540 are entirely murky, with the Imagawa figuring into the controversy, possibly as agitators. It would appear that Nobutora planned to name his second son Nobushige heir, and perhaps ship Harunobu off to the Imagawa clan in Suruga (for adoption?). For years, Harunobu had been under the guardianship of Obu Toramasa, a tough warrior who may well have been at the center of what transpired next. In 1541 Harunobu suddenly rebelled, supported by a great many of his father's retainers. Nobutora submitted with little bloodshed and Harunobu exiled his father to Suruga. In this act he had the aid of the top Takeda retainers, many of whom held personal grudges against Nobutora or at least saw some gain in assisting the young usurper to power. Nobushige, for his part, seems to have borne his brother no ill will, and became a valued retainer. Sources conflict on what the exact events where which led to the replacement of Nobuhide with Harunobu. One version of events is that in the 5th month of 1541, Nobutora and Harunobu went on a campaign together to attack Unno Munetsuna in Shinano province. Unno Munetsuna lost and fled the province, and by the 4th day of the 6th month, they were on their way back to Kai. However, on the 10th day of thier trip back to Kai province, Harunobu suddenly rebelled in a coup supported by his ashigaru and retainers, forcing Nobutora to flee to Suruga Province, and in to the care of his daughter's husband, Imagawa Yoshimoto. This generally follows the Koyogunkan, which essentialy states that Harunobu uncovered a plot by Nobutora to dispose of him and eventually give control of the Takeda clan to his younger brother, Nobushige. According to the Koyogunkan, Harunobu and loyal vassals drove Nobutora out of Kai province into Suruga. Another version of events states that during the 6th month of 1541, Harunobu and Nobutora travelled to Suruga province to visit upon Nobutora's son in law, Imagawa Yoshimoto. Little did Nobutora know, Shingen and Yoshimoto had a secret agreement, and upon arrival, Nobutora was forcibly retired to Suruga castle, and his son Harunobu was given control of the Takeda clan. Although what really happened is not clear, historians seem to be in agreement that Imagawa Yoshimoto had a hand in the removal of Nobutora. Regardless , Harunobu took control of the clan in what is often specifically cited as a 'bloodless coup'.

Harunobu's chief ambition was the subjugation of Shinano but resistance in that quarter would prove fierce. A number of Shinano warlords, including Murakami Yoshikiyo (1510-1573), Ogasawara Nagatoki (1519-1583), Suwa Yorishige (? -1542), and Kiso Yoshiyasu, made a move designed to hopefully nip any further Takeda aggression in the bud. In April 1542 the four daimyo combined forces and marched to the border of Kai, encouraged by news that Harunobu was strengthening his defenses and preparing to make a stand in Fuchu. In fact, Harunobu's activities had been a ruse - far from waiting passively in Kai, Harunobu led his men out and caught the Shinano warriors by surprise, defeating them at Sezawa. Emboldened by the results of Sezawa, Harunobu made a drive into Shinano later that same year, focusing on the territory of the Suwa clan. He first took Uehara in a surprise attack and then moved on to the Suwa headquarters at Kuwahara, located 2 kilometers to the east. Caught completely off-balance, Suwa Yorishige had little choice but to surrender when Harunobu made a promise of safe conduct. Yorishige and his brother were taken to Kai where the Takeda general Itagaki Nobutaka arranged for their deaths; both Suwa were either made to commit suicide or were murdered outright.

Harunobu, with the aid of Yamamoto Kansuke's strategies, further expanded his territory through the defeat of both Tozawa Yorichika (1542) and Takato Yoritsugu of central Shinano (1544-45). The acquisition of Takato Castle was of particular value, as it provided a secure staging area into southern Shinano, as well as a buffer against any southern aggression. In 1544 the Takeda marched into Suruga in support of the Imagawa and faced Hôjô Ujiyasu. No actual fighting occured as a result of this confrontation, and later Harunobu was compelled to arrange for a peace treaty between the Hôjô, Imagawa, and himself due to his wars in Shinano. Over the next decade Harunobu kept up a relentless pressure on the Shinano warlords. Only at Uehara would he be checked, if only briefly. In 1548 Murakami Yoshikiyo, perhaps the most formidable of Harunobu's Shinano enemies, moved on Ueda and defeated the Takeda in a bitter clash which saw the use (on the part of the Murakami) of a number of Chinese arquebuses, the first such weapons ever deployed in a Japanese battle! While the defeat at Uehara left two of his best generals dead, Harunobu rebounded quickly, and by 1552 the Murakami and Ogasawara clans had fled Shinano outright to Echigo.

In 1551, Harunobu had adopted the name Shingen and a monk's habit, adding even more color to this up-and-coming Sengoku warlord, who was already known for his taste for women, penetrating judgment, skill at calligraphy, and wise government. Perhaps all that was now required was a great rival. This came, too, in the form of Uesugi Terutora of Echigo - the famed Kenshin.

According to tradition, the defeated Murakami and Ogasawara presented themselves before Terutora and protested Shingen's aggressions. Terutora, uneasy at Shingen's northern expansion and obligated to the two refugees, took the field. That Murakami figures into the Uesugi's roll even many years later gives some substance to this belief, and, certainly, Terutora had reason to worry about Echigo's borders. In June and October 1553 The Takeda and Uesugi armies clashed near the Kawanakajima plain in northern Shinano, and while the two sides withdrew after a few rounds of inconclusive skirmishing, a legend was born. In total, the Takeda and Uesugi would face each other at the Kawanakajima five times (1554, 1555, 1557, 1561, 1564) and while not exactly the nearly annual staring matches as they are sometimes portrayed, only the 4th (1561) resulted in an all-out contest! In that engagement, both sides suffered heavy losses and while not individually decisive, those losses no doubt slowed both warlords down for some years. In particular, Shingen must have felt the loss of Nobushige and Yamamoto Kansuke, both killed in action at the battle.

Internally, the Takeda suffered two grim moments within the span of five years. In 1560 Shingen had uncovered a plot against him led by his cousin Katanuma Nobumoto, whom he ordered put to death. In 1565, another plot came to light - this one headed by his own son Yoshinobu and Obu Toramasa. Tormasa was made to commit suicide, while Yoshinobu was confined to the Tokoji. Two years later Yoshinobu died, either from illness or, as many believe, because Shingen had forced him to commit suicide. The event left Shingen heirless for the time being and the Takeda retainers uneasy.

By 1564, Shingen had subdued all of Shinano and shifted his attention to Kôzuke, where he took a number of castles from the Uesugi. For the next five years, he limited himself to raids and local conquests (including land grabs in mountainous Hida Province), concentrating on internal affairs. In the 1560's, Shingen's greatest achievement was the Fuji River damming project, the largest and most ambitious of his many innovative domestic endeavors. The benefit of the Fuji River project far-outlived its mastermind, and is ranked as one of the greatest domestic initiatives of the 16th Century!

By 1568, the Takeda army was on the move again, this time to the south against the faltering Imagawa. The daimyô of that clan was Ujizane, the incompetent son of the late Imagawa Yoshimoto (killed in 1560 by Oda Nobunaga), whose political ineptness had already cost the Imagawa their Matsudaira (Tokugawa) vassals and Mikawa province. Years before, Shingen's son Yoshinobu had married Ujizane's sister but after the suicide of the former in 1567, relations between the families had grown sour. It would appear that Shingen and Tokugawa Ieyasu struck up a deal whereby the two would split up the Imagawa's remaining lands (Tôtômi and Suruga), an agreement that in the event quickly fell through. In addition, the Hôjô of Sagami took a dim view to this shift in the balance of power, and sent troops to defy Shingen, which they did with varying degrees of success for a year or so. In 1569 Shingen responded by invading Sagami and besieging Odawara (the Hôjô's capital). While this effort was quite short-lived (lasting around a week), the Takeda army did manage to crush an attempt at an ambush by the Hôjô at Mimasetoge on their way back to Kai.

Thus, in 1570, the Takeda's lands now included Kai, Shinano, Suruga, and pieces of Kozuke, Tôtômi, and Hida. Shingen, at 49, was something more than a regional power - he was the most important warlord east of Mino, and the one who was in a position to derail Oda Nobunaga's march to national hegemony. Shingen alone possessed the strategic position, the generalship, and the solid retainer band necessary. In 1570, the formidable Hôjô Ujiyasu died and his heir, Ujimasa, quickly made peace with Shingen, an act that might have all but assured the ultimate destruction of Tokugawa Ieyasu had not Shingen died in 1573. In the meantime, the Takeda and Oda, after an abortive diplomatic courtship designed to check the Uesugi, initiated a war of words, possibly with the shogun, Ashikaga Yoshiaki, at the center of the storm. Shingen stepped up the pressure against Tokugawa, and in 1572 launched an attack into Tôtômi that resulted in the capture of Futamata. The following January, Shingen returned to the province and enticed Tokugawa Ieyasu to come out and fight. The Battle of Mikatagahara, conducted on 6 January to the north of Hamamatsu, ended in a near-complete defeat for Ieyasu (and the allied Oda troops present). Though often presented as the opening moves in a march on Kyôto, Shingen's intentions were no doubt more conservative. He probably aimed to test the responses of both Ieyasu and Nobunaga and deal the two a defeat if possible. Either way, within days of winning the battle, he recieved news that Asakura Yoshikage had elected not to take the field against Nobunaga at this time. Shingen is reported to have been displeased, and might have counted on Yoshikage - and Asai Nagamasa - to keep Nobunaga preoccupied. This may have played a role in his decision to strike camp and return to Kai - thus granting the bloodied Tokugawa a reprieve.

Unfortunately, time ran out on the man who had come to epitomize the best and, in some ways, the worst qualities of the Sengoku warlord. In 1573, while laying siege to Noda Castle in Mikawa, Shingen was either wounded by a sniper or fell sick (possibly with TB); a point modern scholars are divided on. He died at Kobama in Shinano in May of 1573, to be succeded by his fourth son, Takeda Katsuyori.

Shingen had been a warlord of great domestic skill and competent military leadership. He was a complicated figure, at times utterly cruel. Earlier in his life, he had forced Suwa Yorishige to commit suicide (or had him murdered) after the two warlords had signed a peace treaty, and then proceeded to take Suwa's daughter as a mistress, ignoring the fact that she was techincally his own niece. In 1565, as mentioned above, he ordered his own son, Yoshinobu, confined to a temple and evidently made him commit suicide for treasonous activity, as well as the man who had once been his guardian, Obu Toramasa. His domestic policies demonstrate the duality of Takeda Shingen. On one hand, he kept two iron cauldrons on hand to boil alive certain criminals (a practice considered sufficiently cruel enough to provoke Tokugawa Ieyasu to have the cauldrons destroyed years later!). On the other, he did away with corporal punishment for most minor offences, instituting in it's place a system of fines - an act that earned him considerable praise from the peasants and townspeople of Kai. Shingen's law was not considered overly harsh, and his was one of the few Sengoku Period administrations prior to 1582 to tax most of his subjects evenly (most exempted powerful samurai families and/or religious establishments) and with the option of payment in either gold or rice (a forerunner, in some ways, to the later Kandaka system).

Perhaps the greatest praise paid Shingen was by Tokugawa Ieyasu himself. Following the defeat of Katsuyori in 1582 and the death of Oda Nobunaga, Ieyasu assumed control of Kai, and borrowed freely from Shingen's style and techniques of governance, which he later included in his model for the Tokugawa Shôgunate.

Just prior to his death, Shingen had called from his bed for Yamagata Masakage, one of ablest men, to raise his flags at Seta Bridge (the traditional eastern gate to Kyôto). He then collapsed back into his bed and died soon afterwards. In lieu of a death poem, he left the following words, borrowed from Zen literature, "It is largely left to her own natural bodily perfection, and she has no special need to resort to artificial coloring and powdering to look beautiful."

Sources :

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.giantbomb.com

www.samurai-archives.com

Craterus (370 BC-321 BC), Alexander The Great's General

2012-03-15T08:21:00.004+07:00

Alexander 3rd century B.C. Mosaic Depiction of Craterus (right) saving Alexander (left) from a Persian lion, at Sidon in 333. From Pella Museum, in Greece

Craterus was born as the son of a Macedonian nobleman named Alexander, in Orestis (the mountainous 'lake district' between modern Greece and Albania). His career started as commander of one of the phalanx brigades. In this capacity, he was present during the battle near the river Granicus (June 334), where Alexander and Parmenion defeated the Persian satraps of Asia Minor.

He must have been a capable commander (or knew how to deal with his king), because in November 333, during the battle near Issus, he commanded not only his own brigade, but the complete phalanx and all infantry on the left wing. This meant that only Parmenion, the commander of the left wing as a whole, was between him and Alexander.

During the naval attack on Tyre, he commanded the ships on the left wing. Probably, this was because Parmenion was away; there are no indications that Craterus had surpassed his former superior, because during the battle of Gaugamela (1 October 331), Craterus was again Parmenion's inferior. During this battle, he was, again, commander of a phalanx battalion, of the phalanx and all infantry on the left wing.

In the last weeks of 331, Craterus is mentioned in two fights during the invasion of Persia proper (against the Uxians and near the Persian gate). In both cases, he and Alexander are the supreme commanders. The same happened during the pursuit of the Persian king Darius III: Alexander commanded the vanguard, Craterus the main body of the army (early July 330). During the war in Hyrcania, he was sent on a mission against the Tapurians -his first independent command- and when the Macedonian army had reached Aria, he commanded the rearguard during the campaign against the rebel satrap Satibarzanes.

A famous anecdote tells that Craterus loved Alexander as a king (philobasileus) but that Alexander's lover Hephaestion loved him because he was Alexander (philalexandros). This suggests that there was some rivalry -perhaps even hostility- among the Macedonian commanders!

At this stage of Alexander's war in the Achaemenid empire, Craterus' most important rival was the commander of the Companion cavalry, Philotas, the son of Parmenion. When Philotas failed to report a conspiracy he had discovered, Craterus was one of those who accused him. The general feeling among the judges was that Philotas was guilty and ought to be stoned to death, but Craterus, Hephaestion and Coenus believed that Philotas was part of a larger conspiracy, and should first be tortured. As was to be expected, Philotas told many things, but the truth could not be established. In the end, he was executed, and so was his father Parmenion, who was certainly innocent but could no longer be relied upon. It should be pointed out that Craterus' role in the Philotas affair is not mentioned by our best source, Arrian of Nicomedia; we know about it from Quintus Curtius Rufus, who is less reliable - but this does not mean that he is a liar.

In July 329, the Macedonian army marched through Sogdia and reached the river Jaxartes, the modern Syrdar'ya. Seven towns had to be captured, and Craterus took the largest one of these, Cyreschata, which had been founded two centuries before by the founder of the Achaemenid empire, Cyrus the Great. Craterus also fought against the Massagetes, a tribe of nomads that usually lived north of the Jaxartes in modern Kirgizistan, but had probably moved to the south. During this campaign, he commanded a cavalry unit. In 328, he oversaw the construction of military settlements in Margiana, which secured the northern border of Alexander's empire. A similar action took place in the east of Sogdia, where Craterus defeated the Pareitecanians (Persian Paritâkanu, 'mountain people').

In 326, Alexander invaded Gandara, the west of the Punjab (more). Craterus played a role during the campaign in the Swat valley, where he fortified several towns - a job he had already had at hand in Margiana. At this moment, he was Alexander's most important and reliable commander. And yet, we see him falling away from his favor.

A first sign may have been his task during the battle on the Hydaspes river (modern Jhelum). Craterus commanded the rearguard, which stayed on the western bank; Alexander and Coenus did the real fighting, and Craterus' men only crossed the battle during the final stages of the battle. But perhaps, this is no sign of disfavor: after all, Alexander had taken with him only a small army, and the fact that he took Craterus with him may suggest that the latter was still in the king's favor.

But after the battle, Craterus was sent on very honorable missions that kept him far from court. He was ordered to built the cities Nicaea and Bucephala on the site of the battlefield; and during Alexander's campaign to the east, Craterus was to look for supplies. He was not present when the Macedonian army revolted on the banks of the Hyphasis (Beas), and we hear from him again during the march downstream along the rivers Hydaspes, Acesines and Indus. During that campaign, he commanded one of the two armies: it was marching on the west bank. The other army was commanded by Craterus' rival Hephaestion and was campaigning on the east bank. Alexander was on the ships between the two armies.

In June 325, Alexander ordered Craterus' army to go back to the west. (His own army was to reach the Indian Ocean and return partly by ship, partly through the Gedrosian desert.) It was a very important task: it was the first time since the death of Parmenion that Alexander entrusted a general with responsibilities like these. And yet, it also meant that Craterus was far away from court!

Craterus, his army and the elephants crossed the Bolan pass, and passed through Arachosia and Drangiana, and arrived in Carmania, where his army met that of Alexander. During his march, Craterus arrested Ordanes, an otherwise unknown rebel (text).

Alexander's army arrived in Susa in March 323. There were large festivities to celebrate the return from the far east, and Alexander invited his officers to marry Persian princesses. Craterus was married to Amestris, the daughter of Oxyathres, the brother of Darius. Again, this was a very honorable thing: Alexander, Hephaestion and Craterus were the only ones to marry a princess from the Achaemenid family, the royal dynasty of ancient Persia!

But again, he was sent away. This time, he and an officer named Polyperchon were to lead 11,500 veteran soldiers back to Macedonia, where Craterus should, from then on, be the supreme commander of the Macedonian forces in Europe. (A function that had been occupied by Antipater until then.) When the veterans were in Cilicia, they were to build a large navy that Alexander could use to attack Carthage.

Craterus had arrived in Cilicia and was building the fleet, when he heard that in Babylon, Alexander had unexpectedly died (11 June 323). Almost immediately, the Greeks revolted (the Lamian or Hellenic war). In Babylonia, Alexander's generals were discussing the future, but Craterus was not there, and even though it was agreed that he would be one of the two regents of the new king, Alexander's mentally deficient brother Philip Arridaeus, it was easy for his colleague Perdiccas to seize the sole rule. This was the beginning of the era of the Diadochi, the 'successors'.

Craterus may have been angry about the fact that he had been ignored, but it does not show from his acts. (At least not now.) When Antipater requested his help in the Lamian war, he sailed with his Cilician navy to Greece and helped suppressing the revolt (322).

In the last months of 322, Antipater rose in rebellion against Perdiccas, and he was joined by Craterus (who may have resented the fact that he had been ignored), Antigonus (the satrap of Phrygia, who had been expelled from his satrapy by Perdiccas), and Ptolemy (the satrap of Egypt). The men cemented their alliance by marriage: Craterus married Phila, a daughter of Antipater. This was a serious civil war, but is could not be prevented: Perdiccas had become too powerful.

Perdiccas decided to attack Ptolemy, and left the war against Antipater, Craterus and Antigonus Monophthalmus to Eumenes, the new satrap of Phrygia. Eumenes was not an experienced soldier. He had been Alexander's secretary and nothing more. In 321 or 320, he was forced to fight a battle against Craterus, somewhere near the Hellespont. To everybody's surprise, he was not defeated: it was Craterus who was killed! He was killed in battle against Eumenes in Asia Minor when his charging horse fell over him, somewhere near the Hellespont, in 321 BC

Craterus and Phila had one son, Craterus (321-250). This second Craterus ordered the statue of his father and Alexander in a lion hunt that was made by the famous sculptor Lysippus, to be placed in Delphi. The statue is known from a mosaic that was found in the capital of Macedonia, Pella.

Sources :

www.ancienthistory.about.com

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.livius.org

Abu Muslim Al-Khurasani (700-755), The Best Abbasid General

2012-01-26T21:24:00.003+07:00

Abu Muslim Abd Rahman ibn Muslim Khorasani or al-Khurasani (Persian: ابومسلم خراسانى, Arabic: أبو مسلم عبد الرحمن بن مسلم الخراساني‎, c. 700 – 755) was a Abbasid general of Persian origin, who led the first major and organized liberal movement against the Umayyad dynasty.

Abu Muslim was born in the city of Balkh in the state of Khorasan. He still after more than 1200 hundred years remain to be a legendary and highly respected revolutionary figure. There are different accounts of his origin and background by different sources but the definite truth is that he was an ethnic Tajik of the state of Khorasan which was dominated by Tajiks at the time. It was during his imprisonment for anti Umayyads activities that he met the Abbasid imam who was also briefly incarcerated in 741. The Abbasid imam were set out to overthrow the Umayyad dynasty so taking advantage of the situation Abu Muslim sided with Abbasids and led to numerous revolts in Khorasan that eventually led to the demise of Umayyad dynasty.

Abu Muslim was an energetic and capable leader who overcome the initial resentment caused among Arabs by his non-Arab origin. He very well took advantage of deep social division and anti Arab, and freedom seeking sentiments in Khorasan. He recruited from various discontented and dispossessed social groups and created a coalition of rebellious Arabs and Khorasanians.

On June 15, 747, Abu Muslim raised the banner of revolution and the revolt quickly spread throughout Khorasan and to other provinces. The revolt eventually led to the overthrow of Umayyad caliph and the last Umayyad caliph, Marwan II was defeated and killed in 750. Abu Muslim was the leading factor in defeat of Umayyads and rise of Abbasids. As as-Saffah became the first Abbasid caliph in 749, Abu Muslim was given the governorship of Khorasan in reward for his services. The Abbasids still depended on him on all affairs of the state specially the military and political affairs.

The Abbasids were basically enthroned and to a great extend influenced by Abu Muslim as he was a leading politician, powerful military leader and a very popular figure in many provinces specially among non-Arabs. As Abu Muslims's power and popularity grow the Abbasids became more and more suspicious of him specially that he was inclined to separate Khorasan from the rest of Abbasid states.

Al Mansur the second Abbasids Caliph was in fear of Abu Muslim's ever increasing popularity. After having Abu Muslim quell an uprising by the uncle of Al Mansur, stripped away the governorship of Khorasan from him. When Abu Muslim arrived at his invitation to his court, al Mansur treacherously put him to death and in this way eliminated a potential rival for the throne and the possibility of losing the province of Khorasan.

The unavenged and cowardly murder of Abu Muslim, a legendary hero among Khorasanians, inspired many later uprising against Abbasids.

There was an Arab by the name Sharikh ibn Shaikh in Bukhara, who wanted to spread Shia Islam firmly and oppose anyone against him. Soon, he got the support of several local rulers and many local people.

When this news reached Abu Muslim (Khorasani), he along Ziyad ibn Salih came there to find out what the details, and soon they got involved in a fight. Abu Muslim fought against them for 37 days with no victory, everyday Abu Muslim's side was losing soldiers and several were taken as prisoners. After that, all of a sudden Sharikh ibn Shaikh died, and his supporters started to crumble & fear, but they were still hostile. The rebellion was eventually crushed and most of the Shia supporters were hanged.

Abu Muslim was a major supporter of the Abbasid cause, having met with their Imam Ibrahim ibn Muhammad in Mecca, and was later a personal friend of Abu al-'Abbas Al-Saffah, the future Caliph. He observed the revolt in Kufa in 736 tacitly. With the death of the Umayyad Caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik in 743, the Islamic world was launched into civil war. Abu Muslim was sent to Khorasan by the Abbasids initially as a propagandist and then to revolt on their behalf. He took Merv in December 747 (or January 748), defeating the Umayyad governor Nasr ibn Sayyar, as well as Shayban al-Khariji, a Kharijite aspirant to the caliphate. He became the de facto Abbasid governor of Khorasan, and gained fame as a general in the late 740s in defeating the peasant rebellion of Bihafarid, the leader of a syncretic Persian sect that were Mazdaism. Abu Muslim received support in suppressing the rebellion both from purist Muslims and Zoroastrians. In 750, Abu Muslim became leader of the Abbasid army and defeated the Umayyads at Battle of the Zab. Abu Muslim stormed Damascus, the capital of the Umayyad caliphate, later that year.

His heroic role in the revolution and military skill, along with his conciliatory politics toward Shia, Sunnis, Zoroastrians, Jews, and Christians, made him extremely popular among the people. Although it appears that Abu al-'Abbas trusted him in general, he was wary of his power, limiting his entourage to 500 men upon his arrival to Iraq on his way to Hajj in 754. Abu al-'Abbas's brother, al-Mansur (r. 754-775), advised al-Saffah on more than one occasion to have Abu Muslim killed, fearing his rising influence and popularity. It seems that this dislike was mutual, with Abu Muslim aspiring to more power and looking down in disdain on al-Mansur, feeling al-Mansur owed Abu Muslim for his position. When the new caliph's uncle, Abdullah ibn Ali rebelled, Abu Muslim was requested by al-Mansur to crush this rebellion, which he did, and Abdullah was given to his nephew as a prisoner. Abdullah was ultimately executed.

Relations deteriorated quickly when al-Mansur sent an agent to inventory the spoils of war, and then appointed Abu Muslim governor of Syria and Egypt, outside his powerbase. After an increasingly acrimonious correspondence between Abu Muslim and al-Mansur, Abu Muslim feared he was going to be killed if he appeared in the presence of the Caliph. He later changed his mind and decided to appear in his presence due to a combination of perceived disobedience, al-Mansur's promise to keep him as governor of Khorasan, and the assurances of some of his close aides, some of whom were bribed by al-Mansur. He went to Iraq to meet with al-Mansur's in Madain in 755. al-Mansur proceeded to enumerate his grievances against Abu Muslim, who kept reminding the Caliph of his efforts to enthrone him. Against al-Muslim were also charges of being a zindiq or heretic. al-Mansur then signaled five of his guards behind a portico to kill him. Abu Muslim's mutilated body was thrown in the river Tigris, and his commanders were bribed to acquiesce to the murder!

His murder was not well-received by the Kurds, particularly not by the residents of Khorasan and Kurdistan, and there was resentment and rebellion among the population over the brutal methods used by al-Mansur. He became a legendary figure for many in Persia, and several Persian heretics started revolts claiming he had not died and would return; the latter included his own propagandist Ishaq al-Turk, the Zoroastrian cleric Sunpadh in Nishapur, the Abu Muslimiyya subsect of the Kaysanites Shia, and al-Muqanna in Khorasan. Even Babak claimed descent from him.

At least three epic romances were written about him:

Marzubānī, Muḥammad ibn ʻImrān, Akhbār shuʻarāʾ al-Shīʻah
Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan, Abū Ṭāhir Ṭarsūsī, Abū Muslimʹnāmah
Zidan, Jorji, Abu Muslim al Khorasani

Sources:

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.pdfbooksfree.blogspot.com

</iframe</font>></font></div>

Francis Drake (1540-1596), Bitter Enemy of Spanish Armada

2011-12-23T15:47:00.010+07:00

A 16th century oil on canvas portrait of Sir Francis Drake in Buckland Abbey, painting by Marcus Gheeraerts the Younger

Sir Francis Drake, circa 1581. This portrait may have been copied from Hilliard's miniature—note that the shirt is the same—and the somewhat oddly proportioned body added by an artist who did not have access to Drake. National Portrait Gallery, London

Sir Francis Drake knighted by Queen Elizabeth. One of 4 bronze relief plaques on the base of the Drake statue in Tavistock, Devon. By Joseph Boehm (d.1890), donated by Hastings Russell, 9th Duke of Bedford (d.1891)

Sir Francis Drake buried at sea. One of 4 bronze relief plaques on the base of the Drake statue in Tavistock, Devon. By Joseph Boehm (d.1890), donated by Hastings Russell, 9th Duke of Bedford (d.1891)

Bronze statue of Sir Francis Drake in Tavistock, in the parish of which he was born. By Joseph Boehm (d.1890), donated by Hastings Russell, 9th Duke of Bedford (d.1891)

Sir Francis Drake, Vice Admiral (1540 – 27 January 1596) was an English sea captain, privateer, navigator, slaver, and politician of the Elizabethan era. Elizabeth I of England awarded Drake a knighthood in 1581. He was second-in-command of the English fleet against the Spanish Armada in 1588. He also carried out the second circumnavigation of the world, from 1577 to 1580. He died of dysentery in January 1596 after unsuccessfully attacking San Juan, Puerto Rico.

His exploits were legendary, making him a hero to the English but a pirate to the Spaniards to whom he was known as El Draque, 'Draque' being the Spanish pronunciation of 'Drake'. His name in Latin was Franciscus Draco ('Francis the Dragon'). King Philip II was claimed to have offered a reward of 20,000 ducats, about £4,000,000 (US$6.5M) by modern standards, for his life!

Francis Drake was born in Tavistock, Devon, in February or March 1544 at the earliest, when his namesake godfather Francis Russell, 2nd Earl of Bedford was but age 17. Although Drake's birth is not formally recorded, it is known that he was born while the Six Articles were in force. "Drake was two and twenty when he obtained the command of the Judith" (1566). This would date his birth to 1544. As with many of Drake's contemporaries, the exact date of his birth is unknown and could be as early as 1535, the 1540 date being extrapolated from two portraits: one a miniature painted by Nicholas Hilliard in 1581 when he was allegedly 42, the other painted in 1594 when he was said to be 53.

He was the eldest of the twelve sons of Edmund Drake (1518–1585), a Protestant farmer, and his wife Mary Mylwaye. The first son was reportedly named after his godfather Francis Russell, 2nd Earl of Bedford.

Because of religious persecution during the Prayer Book Rebellion in 1549, the Drake family fled from Devonshire into Kent. There the father obtained an appointment to minister to men in the King's Navy. He was ordained deacon and made vicar of Upnor Church upon the Medway. Drake's father apprenticed Francis to his neighbour, the master of a barque used for coastal trade transporting merchandise to France. The ship master was so satisfied with the young Drake's conduct that, being unmarried and childless at his death, he bequeathed the barque to Drake.

Francis Drake married Mary Newman in 1569. She died 12 years later, in 1581. In 1585, Drake married Elizabeth Sydenham—born circa 1562, the only child of Sir George Sydenham, of Combe Sydenham, who was the High Sheriff of Somerset. After Drake's death, the widow Elizabeth eventually married Sir William Courtenay of Powderham. As Sir Francis Drake had no children, his estate and titles passed on to his nephew (also named Francis).

At age twenty-three, Drake made his first voyage to the New World, sailing with his second cousin, Sir John Hawkins, on one of a fleet of ships owned by his relatives, the Hawkins family of Plymouth. In 1568 Drake was again with the Hawkins fleet when it was trapped by the Spaniards in the Mexican port of San Juan de Ulúa. He escaped along with Hawkins.

Following the defeat at San Juan de Ulúa, Drake vowed revenge. He made two voyages to the West Indies, in 1570 and 1571, of which little is known.

In 1572, he embarked on his first major independent enterprise. He planned an attack on the Isthmus of Panama, known to the Spanish as Tierra Firme and the English as the Spanish Main. This was the point at which the silver and gold treasure of Peru had to be landed and sent overland to the Caribbean Sea, where galleons from Spain would pick it up at the town of Nombre de Dios. Drake left Plymouth on May 24, 1572, with a crew of 73 men in two small vessels, the Pascha (70 tons) and the Swan (25 tons), to capture Nombre de Dios.

His first raid was late in July 1572. Drake and his men captured the town and its treasure. When his men noticed that Drake was bleeding profusely from a wound, they insisted on withdrawing to save his life and left the treasure. Drake stayed in the area for almost a year, raiding Spanish shipping and attempting to capture a treasure shipment.

In 1573, he joined Guillaume Le Testu, a French buccaneer, in an attack on a richly laden mule train. Drake and his party found that they had captured around 20 tons of silver and gold. They buried much of the treasure, as it was too much for their party to carry. (An account of this may have given rise to subsequent stories of pirates and buried treasure). Wounded, Le Testu was captured and later beheaded. The small band of adventurers dragged as much gold and silver as they could carry back across some 18 miles of jungle-covered mountains to where they had left the raiding boats. When they got to the coast, the boats were gone. Drake and his men, downhearted, exhausted and hungry, had nowhere to go and the Spanish were not far behind.

At this point Drake rallied his men, buried the treasure on the beach, and built a raft to sail with two volunteers ten miles along the surf-lashed coast to where they had left the flagship. When Drake finally reached its deck, his men were alarmed at his bedraggled appearance. Fearing the worst, they asked him how the raid had gone. Drake could not resist a joke and teased them by looking downhearted. Then he laughed, pulled a necklace of Spanish gold from around his neck and said "Our voyage is made, lads!" By August 9, 1573, he had returned to Plymouth.

With the success of the Panama isthmus raid, in 1577 Elizabeth I of England sent Drake to start an expedition against the Spanish along the Pacific coast of the Americas. He set out from Plymouth on 15 November 1577, but bad weather threatened him and his fleet. They were forced to take refuge in Falmouth, Cornwall, from where they returned to Plymouth for repair. After this major setback, he set sail again on the 13th of December, aboard Pelican, with four other ships and 164 men. He soon added a sixth ship, Mary (formerly Santa Maria), a Portuguese merchant ship that had been captured off the coast of Africa near the Cape Verde Islands. He also added its captain, Nuno da Silva, a man with considerable experience navigating in South American waters.

Drake's fleet suffered great attrition; he scuttled both Christopher and the flyboat Swan due to loss of men on the Atlantic crossing. He made landfall at the gloomy bay of San Julian, in what is now Argentina. Ferdinand Magellan had called here half a century earlier, where he put to death some mutineers. Drake's men saw weathered and bleached skeletons on the grim Spanish gibbets. They discovered that Mary had rotting timbers, so they burned the ship. Following Magellan's example, Drake tried and executed his own 'mutineer' Thomas Doughty. Drake decided to remain the winter in San Julian before attempting the Strait of Magellan.

The three remaining ships of his convoy departed for the Magellan Strait at the southern tip of South America. A few weeks later (September 1578) Drake made it to the Pacific, but violent storms destroyed one of the three ships in the strait and caused another to return to England, leaving only the Golden Hind. After this passage, the "Golden Hind" was pushed south and discovered an island which Drake called Elizabeth Island. Drake, like navigators before him, probably reached a latitude of 55°S (according to astronomical data quoted in Hakluyt's The Principall Navigations, Voiages and Discoveries of the English Nation of 1589) along the Chilean coast. Despite popular lore, it seems unlikely that he reached Cape Horn or the eponymous Drake Passage, because his descriptions do not fit the first and his shipmates denied having seen an open sea. The first report of his discovery of an open channel south of Tierra del Fuego was written after the 1618 publication of the voyage of Willem Schouten and Jacob le Maire around Cape Horn in 1616.

He pushed onwards in his lone flagship, now renamed the Golden Hind in honour of Sir Christopher Hatton (after his coat of arms). The Golden Hind sailed north along the Pacific coast of South America, attacking Spanish ports and rifling towns. Some Spanish ships were captured, and Drake used their more accurate charts. Before reaching the coast of Peru, Drake visited Mocha Island, where he was seriously injured by hostile Mapuche. Later he sacked the port of Valparaíso further north in Chile where he also captured a ship full a Chilean wine.

Near Lima, Drake captured a Spanish ship laden with 25,000 pesos of Peruvian gold, amounting in value to 37,000 ducats of Spanish money (about £7m by modern standards). Drake also discovered news of another ship, Nuestra Señora de la Concepción, which was sailing west towards Manila. It would come to be called the Cacafuego. Drake gave chase and eventually captured the treasure ship, which proved their most profitable capture. Aboard Nuestra Señora de la Concepción, Drake found 80 lb (36 kg) of gold, a golden crucifix, jewels, 13 chests full of royals of plate and 26 tons of silver.

On 17 June 1579, Drake landed somewhere north of Spain's northern-most claim at Point Loma. He found a good port, landed, repaired and restocked his vessels, then stayed for a time, keeping friendly relations with the natives. He claimed the land in the name of the Holy Trinity for the English Crown as called Nova Albion—Latin for "New Britain". Assertions that he left some of his men behind as an embryo "colony" are founded on the reduced number who were with him in the Moluccas.

The precise location of the port was carefully guarded to keep it secret from the Spaniards, and several of Drake's maps may have been altered to this end. All first-hand records from the voyage, including logs, paintings and charts, were lost when Whitehall Palace burned in 1698. A bronze plaque inscribed with Drake's claim to the new lands -Drake's Plate of Brass- fitting the description in his account, was discovered in Marin County, California, but was later declared a hoax. The generally accepted location of Drake's New Albion is Drakes Bay, California, although nearly a score of other notions have been offered.

Drake headed westward across the Pacific, and a few months later reached the Moluccas, a group of islands in the south west Pacific, in eastern modern-day Indonesia. While there, Golden Hind became caught on a reef and was almost lost. After the sailors waited three days for expedient tides and dumped cargo, they freed the barque. Befriending a sultan king of the Moluccas, Drake and his men became involved in some intrigues with the Portuguese there. He made multiple stops on his way toward the tip of Africa, eventually rounded the Cape of Good Hope, and reached Sierra Leone by 22 July 1580.

On 26 September, Golden Hind sailed into Plymouth with Drake and 59 remaining crew aboard, along with a rich cargo of spices and captured Spanish treasures. The Queen's half-share of the cargo surpassed the rest of the crown's income for that entire year. Drake was hailed as the first Englishman to circumnavigate the Earth (and the second such voyage arriving with at least one ship intact, after Elcano's in 1520). The Queen ordered all written accounts of Drake's voyage to be considered classified information, and its participants sworn to silence on pain of death; she intended to keep Drake's activities away from the eyes of rival Spain. Drake presented the Queen with a jewel token commemorating the circumnavigation. Taken as a prize off the Pacific coast of Mexico, it was made of enameled gold and bore an African diamond and a ship with an ebony hull. For her part, the Queen gave Drake a jewel with her portrait, an unusual gift to bestow upon a commoner, and one that Drake sported proudly in his portrait by Marcus Gheeraerts, 1591. On one side is a state portrait of Elizabeth by the miniaturist Nicholas Hilliard, on the other a sardonyx cameo of double portrait busts, a regal woman and an African male. The "Drake Jewel", as it is known today, is a rare documented survivor among sixteenth-century jewels; it is conserved at the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich.

Queen Elizabeth awarded Drake a knighthood aboard Golden Hind in Deptford on 4 April 1581; the dubbing being performed by a French diplomat, Monsieur de Marchaumont, who was negotiating for Elizabeth to marry the King of France's brother, Francis, Duke of Anjou. By getting the French diplomat involved in the knighting, Elizabeth was gaining the implicit political support of the French for Drake's action. During the Victorian era, in a spirit of nationalism, the story was promoted that Elizabeth I had done the knighting.

In September 1581, Drake became the Mayor of Plymouth, and was a Member of Parliament in 1581, for an unknown constituency (possibly Camelford), and again in 1584 for Bossiney. and Plymouth in 1593. In 1580 Drake purchased Buckland Abbey, a large manor near Yelverton in Devon. He lived there for fifteen years, until his final voyage, and it remained in his family for several generations. Buckland Abbey is now in the care of the National Trust and a number of mementos of his life are displayed there.

War broke out between Spain and England in 1585. Drake sailed to the New World and sacked the ports of Santo Domingo and Cartagena in present-day Colombia. On the return leg of the voyage, he captured the Spanish fort of San Augustín in Spanish Florida. These acts encouraged Philip II of Spain to order planning for an invasion of England.

In a pre-emptive strike, Drake "singed the beard of the King of Spain" by sailing a fleet into Cadiz and also Corunna, two of Spain's main ports, and occupied the harbours. He destroyed 37 naval and merchant ships. The attack delayed the Spanish invasion by a year. Over the next month, Drake patrolled the Iberian coasts between Lisbon and Cape St. Vincent, intercepting and destroying ships on the Spanish supply lines. Drake estimated that he captured around 1600–1700 tons of barrel staves, enough to make 25,000 to 30,000 barrels (4,800 m3) for containing provisions.

Drake was vice admiral in command of the English fleet (under Lord Howard of Effingham) when it overcame the Spanish Armada that was attempting to invade England in 1588. As the English fleet pursued the Armada up the English Channel in closing darkness, Drake broke off and captured the Spanish galleon Rosario, along with Admiral Pedro de Valdés and all his crew. The Spanish ship was known to be carrying substantial funds to pay the Spanish Army in the Low Countries. Drake's ship had been leading the English pursuit of the Armada by means of a lantern. By extinguishing this for the capture, Drake put the fleet into disarray overnight.

On the night of 29 July, along with Howard, Drake organised fire-ships, causing the majority of the Spanish captains to break formation and sail out of Calais into the open sea. The next day, Drake was present at the Battle of Gravelines. He wrote as follows to Admiral Henry Seymour after coming upon part of the Spanish Armada, whilst aboard Revenge on 31 July 1588 (21 July 1588 O.S.):

"Coming up to them, there has passed some common shot between some of our fleet and some of them; and as far as we perceive, they are determined to sell their lives with blows".

The most famous (but probably apocryphal) anecdote about Drake relates that, prior to the battle, he was playing a game of bowls on Plymouth Hoe. On being warned of the approach of the Spanish fleet, Drake is said to have remarked that there was plenty of time to finish the game and still beat the Spaniards. There is no known eyewitness account of this incident and the earliest retelling of it was printed 37 years later. Adverse winds and currents caused some delay in the launching of the English fleet as the Spanish drew nearer, perhaps prompting a popular myth of Drake's cavalier attitude to the Spanish threat.

In 1589, the year after defeating the Armada, Drake and Sir John Norreys were given three tasks. They were ordered to first seek out and destroy the remaining ships, second they were to support the rebels in Lisbon, Portugal against King Philip II (then king of Spain and Portugal), and third they were to take the Azores if possible. Drake and Norreys destroyed a few ships in the harbour of La Coruña in Spain but lost more than 12,000 lives and 20 ships. This delayed Drake, and he was forced to forgo hunting the rest of the surviving ships and head on to Lisbon.

Drake's seafaring career continued into his mid-fifties. In 1595, he failed to conquer the port of Las Palmas, and following a disastrous campaign against Spanish America, where he suffered a number of defeats, he unsuccessfully attacked San Juan de Puerto Rico, eventually losing the Battle of San Juan (1595).

The Spanish gunners from El Morro Castle shot a cannonball through the cabin of Drake's flagship, and he survived; but a few weeks later, in January 1596, he died of dysentery when he was about 55, while anchored off the coast of Portobelo, Panama, where some Spanish treasure ships had sought shelter. Following his death, the English fleet withdrew.

Before dying, he asked to be dressed in his full armour. He was buried at sea in a lead coffin, near Portobelo. Divers continue to search for the coffin this days!

Drakes Bay and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard of Marin County, California are both named after him, as well as the high school in San Anselmo, California. The boulevard runs between Drakes Bay at Point Reyes to Point San Quentin on San Francisco Bay. A large hotel in Union Square, San Francisco also bears his name. In Devon, England there are various places named after him, especially in Plymouth, where a roundabout has been named Drake Circus. Additionally, the Sir Francis Drake Channel in the British Virgin Islands bears his name.

Drake's will was the focus of a vast confidence scheme which Oscar Hartzell perpetrated in the 1920s and 1930s. He convinced thousands of people, mostly in the American Midwest, that Drake's fortune was being held by the British government, and had compounded to a huge amount. If their last name was Drake they might be eligible for a share if they paid Hartzell to be their agent. The swindle continued until a copy of Drake's will was brought to Hartzell's mail fraud trial and he was convicted and imprisoned.

Modern workings of stories involving Drake include the 1961 British television series Sir Francis Drake, and the 2009 US television movie The Immortal Voyage of Captain Drake.

Nathan Drake, a fictional descendant of Sir Francis Drake, searches for lost treasure supposedly found by Sir Francis during his circumnavigation in the video game Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, and again in Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception.

Drake accompanied his second cousin Sir John Hawkins in making the third English slave-trading expeditions, making fortunes through the abduction and transportation of West African people, and then exchanging them for high-value goods. The first Englishman recorded to have taken slaves from Africa was John Lok, a London trader who, in 1555, brought to England five slaves from Guinea. A second London trader taking slaves at that time was William Towerson whose fleet sailed into Plymouth following his 1556 voyage to Africa and from Plymouth on his 1557 voyage. Despite the exploits of Lok and Towerson, John Hawkins of Plymouth is widely acknowledged to be an early pioneer of the English slave trade. While Hawkins made only three such trips, ultimately the English were to dominate the trade.

Around 1563 Drake first sailed west to the Spanish Main, on a ship owned and commanded by John Hawkins, with a cargo of people forcibly removed from the coast of West Africa. The Englishmen sold their African captives into slavery in Spanish plantations. In general, the kidnapping and forced transportation of people was considered to be a criminal offence under English law at the time, although legal protection did not extend to slaves, non-Protestants or criminals. Hawkins' own account of his actions (in which Drake took part) cites two sources for their victims. One was military attacks on African towns and villages (with the assistance of rival African warlords), the other was attacking Portuguese slave ships.

During his early days as a slave-trader, Drake took an immediate dislike to the Spanish, at least in part due to their Catholicism and inherent distrust of non-Spanish. His hostility is said to have increased over an incident at San Juan de Ulúa in 1568, when Drake was sailing with the fleet of his second cousin John Hawkins. Whilst negotiating to resupply and repair at the Spanish port, the fleet were attacked by Spanish warships, with all but two of the English ships lost. Drake survived the attack by swimming. The most celebrated of Drake's adventures along the Spanish Main was his capture of the Spanish Silver Train at Nombre de Dios in March 1573. With a crew including many French privateers and Maroons—African slaves who had escaped the Spanish—Drake raided the waters around Darien (in modern Panama) and tracked the Silver Train to the nearby port of Nombre de Dios. He made off with a fortune in gold, but had to leave behind another fortune in silver, because it was too heavy to carry back to England. It was during this expedition that he climbed a high tree in the central mountains of the Isthmus of Panama and thus became the first Englishman to see the Pacific Ocean. He remarked as he saw it that he hoped one day an Englishman would be able to sail it—which he would do years later as part of his circumnavigation of the world.

When Drake returned to Plymouth after the raids, the government signed a temporary truce with King Philip II of Spain and so was unable to acknowledge Drake's accomplishment officially.

Drake was considered a hero in England and a pirate in Spain for his raids.

In 1575, Drake was present at Rathlin Island, part of the English plantation effort in Ulster where 600 men, women, and children were massacred after surrendering.

Francis Drake was in charge of the ships which transported John Norreys' troops to Rathlin Island, commanding a small frigate called Falcon, with a total complement of 25. At the time of the massacre, he was charged with the task of keeping Scottish vessels from bringing reinforcements to Rathlin Island. The people who were massacred were, in fact, the families of Sorley Boy MacDonnell's followers.

“ And after this holy repast, they dined also at the same table together, as cheerfully, in sobriety, as ever in their lives they had done aforetime, each cheering up the other, and taking their leave, by drinking each to other, as if some journey only had been in hand. ”

—Francis Fletcher in his account of the Communion

In 1578 Drake accused his co-commander Thomas Doughty of witchcraft in a shipboard trial. Doughty was charged with mutiny and treason. Drake then denied his requests to see Drake's commission from the Queen to carry out such acts and was denied a trial in England. The two main pieces of evidence against Doughty were the testimony of the ship's carpenter, Edward Bright, and also that Doughty admitted to telling Lord William Burghley of the voyage. Drake consented to his request of Communion and dined with him. Thomas Doughty was beheaded on 2 July 1578.

Sources :

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.fi.wikipedia.org

José de Urrea (1797-1849), Undefeated In Battle During Texas Revolution

2011-12-20T17:03:00.003+07:00

José de Urrea

José de Urrea (March 19, 1797 – August 1, 1849) was a noted general for Mexico. He fought under General Antonio López de Santa Anna during the Texas Revolution. Urrea's forces were never defeated in battle during the Texas Revolution. His most notable success was that of the Goliad Campaign, in which James Fannin's 300 soldiers were surrounded and induced to capitulate under terms, but were massacred in Urrea's absence on the orders of Santa Anna.

Urrea was born at El Presidio de San Augustín de Tucson (present day Tucson, Arizona). Despite being born on the northern frontier of Mexico, his family had deep roots in the state of Durango.

In 1807 Urrea entered the Spanish army. In 1824 he rose to the rank of captain, but he resigned from the army and entered private life. In 1829 he rejoined the military as a major and helped to liberate the city of Durango, allying himself with Antonio López de Santa Anna. He was promoted to colonel for his actions. In 1835 he reluctantly took part in Santa Anna's attack on the state of Zacatecas (the state had openly rebelled against his rise to power). He was promoted to Brigadier General for his role in this.

When the Mexican state of Texas also revolted against Santa Anna's Centralist government, Urrea was sent there to help put down the colonists. He defeated the Texas forces at the Battle of San Patricio, Battle of Refugio, Goliad and Battle of Coleto. The last, also known as the "Goliad Massacre", included the deliberate slaughter of Texans who had surrendered. The execution of prisoners, however, was not Urrea's choice, but an order by General Santa Anna.

Due to Urrea's string of victories, Santa Anna decided to stay in Texas and personally finish off the rebellious Texas government. His motives were personal and political as Urrea was getting all the headlines and would be seen back in Mexico as a more popular figure.

The military defeat of Santa Anna's forces at the Battle of San Jacinto resulted in Santa Anna's capture, and him being forced to order all Mexican forces to withdraw from Texas soil. Urrea was infuriated and after linking up with Vicente Filisola's forces, wanted to continue the war against the Texans since the Mexicans still had over 2,500 troops in Texas against less than 900 of Sam Houston's Texans. But Urrea and Filisola had no choice but to comply with Santa Anna's orders, and by June, Urrea and all Mexican forces had withdrawn from Texas. In 1837, Urrea turned against Santa Anna upon his return to Mexico, and fought against him at the Battle of Mazatlán in 1838. The attempted uprising resulted in his eventual arrest, and he was sent to Perote Prison. He later revived his military career with the invasion of French forces into Mexico, and another failed coup attempt followed.

The Mexican-American War saw Urrea leading a cavalry division against invading American troops. Urrea died in 1849 of cholera shortly after the war ended.

Diary of the Military Operations of the Division which under the Command of General José Urrea Campaigned in Texas February to March 1836:

".......I was unable, therefore, to carry out the good intentions dictated by my feelings.....overcome by the difficult circumstances that surrounded me. I authorized the execution.....of thirty adventurers taken prisoners......setting free those who were colonists or Mexicans

.....These orders always seemed to me harsh, but they were the inevitable result of the barbarous and inhuman decree which declared outlaws those whom it wished to convert into citizens of the republic......I wished to elude these orders as far as possible without compromising my personal responsibility......They doubtlessly surrendered confident that Mexican generosity would not make their surrender useless, for under any other circumstances they would have sold their lives dearly, fighting to the last. I had due regard for the motives that induced them to surrender, and for this reason I used my influence with the general-in-chief to save them, if possible, from being butchered......"

Sources :

www.en.wikipedia.org

www.labatallademonterrey1846.blogspot.com

www.tamu.edu

Flavius Stilicho (359-408)

2011-11-24T23:00:00.006+07:00

Stilicho Parleying with the Goths--Drawn by H. Leutemann. Depicts Roman general Flavius Stilicho in conversation with Goth commanders. Image published: 1901

Goths leaving Italy

Germanic-Roman general Stilicho with his wife Serena and his son Eucherius. Copy of an ivory carving. The original dyptich, carved circa 395, is in Monza (Italy)

Flavius Stilicho (occasionally written as Stilico) (ca. 359 – August 22, 408) was a high-ranking general (magister militum), Patrician and Consul of the Western Roman Empire, notably of Vandal birth. Despised by the Roman population for his Germanic ancestry and Arian beliefs, Stilicho was in 408 executed along with his wife and son. The subsequent massacre of tens of thousands of Gothic civilians in Italy provoked Alarics invasion of the country the same year.

Stilicho was the son of a Vandal father and a Roman mother. Despite his father's origins there is little to suggest that Stilicho considered himself anything other than a Roman, and his high rank within the Empire suggests that he was probably not Arian like many Germanic Christians but rather a Nicene Christian like his patron Theodosius I, who declared Nicene Christianity the official religion of the Empire. Stilicho joined the Roman army and rose through the ranks during the reign of Theodosius I, who ruled the Eastern half of the Roman Empire from Constantinople, and who was to become the last Emperor to rule both the Eastern and Western halves of the Empire jointly. In 383, Theodosius sent him as an envoy to the court of the Persian king Shapur III in Ctesiphon to negotiate a peace settlement relating to the partition of Armenia. Upon his return to Constantinople at the successful conclusion of peace talks, Stilicho was promoted (to comes stabuli) and later to general (magister militum). The Emperor recognized that Stilicho could be a valuable ally, and to form a blood tie with him, Theodosius married his adopted niece Serena to Stilicho. The marriage took place around the time of Stilicho's mission to Persia, and ultimately Serena gave birth to a son, who was named Eucherius, and two daughters, Maria and Thermantia.

After the death of the Western Emperor Valentinian II in 392, Stilicho helped raise the army that Theodosius would lead to victory at the Battle of the Frigidus, and was one of the Eastern leaders in that battle. One of his comrades during the campaign was the Visigothic warlord Alaric, who commanded a substantial number of Gothic auxiliaries. Alaric would go on to become Stilicho's chief adversary during his later career as the head of the Western Roman armies. Stilicho distinguished himself at the Frigidus, and Theodosius, exhausted by the campaign, saw him as a man worthy of responsibility for the future safety of the Empire. The last emperor of a united Rome appointed Stilicho guardian of his son, Honorius, shortly before his death in 395.

Following the death of Theodosius, Honorius became emperor of the Western Roman Empire, and his brother Arcadius of the Eastern Roman Empire. Neither proved to be effective emperors, and Stilicho came to be the de facto commander-in-chief of the Roman armies in the West while his rival Rufinus became the power behind the throne in the East. In this capacity, Stilicho proved his abilities energetically, although political manoeuverings by agents of the two imperial courts would hinder him throughout his career.

His first brush with such court politics came in 395. The Visigoths living in Lower Moesia had recently elected Alaric as their king. Alaric broke his treaty with Rome and led his people on a raid into Thrace. The army that had been victorious at the Frigidus was still assembled, and Stilicho led it toward Alaric's forces. The armies of the eastern Empire were occupied with Hunnic incursions in Asia Minor and Syria so Rufinus attempted to negotiate with Alaric in person. The only results were suspicions in Constantinople that Rufinius was in league with the Goths. Stilicho now marched east against Alaric. According to Claudian, Stilicho was in a position to destroy the Goths, when he was ordered by Arcadius to leave Illyricum. Soon after Rufinus was hacked to death by his own soldiers.

Two years later, in 397, Stilicho defeated Alaric's forces in Macedonia, although Alaric himself escaped into the surrounding mountains. The same year saw him successfully quell the revolt of comes Gildo in Africa. The year 400 saw Stilicho accorded the highest honour within the Roman state by being appointed Consul.

Around this time Stilicho may have campaigned successfully against the Scots, Picts, and Saxons in Britain.

In 401, two barbarian leaders planned the joint invasion of the Roman Empire - Alaric and the Ostrogoth, Radagaisus. Radagaisus, with Alans, Sueves, and Vandals, attacked first, and invaded Raetia (Rhaetia). Stilicho rushed his soldiers to the area, crossed the Danube River, and crushed Radagaisus. Wasting no time, Stilicho turned his attention towards Alaric and his Visigoths, who had invaded Italy. Bravely hastening on in advance of his main body of troops (30,000), he hurled his crack units in a surprise night attack against Alaric's position around Milan. Alaric had to raise the siege of the city. One of his chieftains implored him to retreat, but Alaric refused.

On Easter Sunday in 402, Stilicho defeated Alaric at the Battle of Pollentia, capturing his camp and his wife. Alaric managed to escape with most of his men. This battle was the last victory celebrated in a triumphal march in Rome, which was saved for the time being. In 403 at Verona, Stilicho again bested Alaric, who as Gibbon said only escaped by the speed of his horse. A truce was made and Alaric went to Illyricum. In late 406, Stilicho demanded the return of the eastern half of Illyricum ( which had been transferred to the administrative control of Constantinople by Theodosius), threatening war if the Eastern Roman Empire resisted. The exact reasons for this are unclear, but it is possible that Stilicho planned to employ Alaric and his battle-hardened troops as allies against the bands of Alans, Vandals and Sueves that were threatening to invade the West. To do so, Stilicho may have needed to legitimize Alaric's control of Illyricum.

In 405, according to Rutilius Namatianus, De Reditu 51-60, Stilicho ordered the destruction of the Sibylline Books. The reasons for this are unknown, and the story cannot be verified.

Despite his successes against the Goths he failed to stop the barbarians from crossing of the Rhine on 31 December 406. This crossing initiated a wave of destruction of Roman cities and military revolt in Britannia and Gaul. Stilicho persuaded the Roman Senate to approve a gold payment to Alaric (who again was threatening to invade Italy since Stilicho had been unable to provide economic and military support in 406/407 as promised) since he wanted to send the Goths to Gaul as foederati. His unsuccessful attempts to deal with usurper Constantine III, rumors that he had earlier planned the assassination of Rufinus and that he planned to place his son on the Byzantine throne following the death of Emperor Arcadius in 408 caused a revolt. The Roman army at Ticinum mutinied on August 13, killing at least seven senior imperial officers (Zosimus 5.32). This was followed by events which John Matthews observed "have every appearance of a thoroughly co-ordinated coup d'état organized by Stilicho's political opponents." Stilicho retired to Ravenna, where he was taken into captivity. Although it was within his ability to contest the charges, Stilicho did not resist, either because of loyalty to Rome or for fear of the consequences to the already precarious state of the Western Empire. He was decapitated on August 22, 408. His son Eucherius was murdered in Rome shortly afterwards.

In the disturbances which followed the downfall and execution of Stilicho, the wives and children of barbarian foederati throughout Italy were slain by the local Romans. The natural consequence was that these men (estimates describe their numbers as perhaps 30,000 strong) flocked to the protection of Alaric, clamoring to be led against their cowardly enemies. The Visigothic warlord accordingly crossed the Julian Alps and began a campaign through the heart of Italy. By September 408, the barbarians stood before the walls of Rome.

Without a strong general like Stilicho to control the by-now mostly barbarian army, Honorius could do little to break the siege, and adopted a passive strategy trying to wait out Alaric, hoping to regather his forces to defeat the Visigoths in the meantime. What followed was two years of political and military manoeuvering, Alaric, king of the Goths, attempting to secure a permanent peace treaty and rights to settle within Roman territory. He besieged Rome three times without attacking while the Roman Italian Army watched helplessly, but it was not until the deal had fallen through a fourth time that he attacked and sacked the city in August 410. The removal of Stilicho was the main catalyst leading to this monumental event, the first barbarian capture of the city in nearly eight centuries and a presage of the final collapse of the imperial west!

Sources :