The siege and 'The Siege'

I've decided that the previous two periods for which I recommended books were insufficiently niche, so today we are going to consider Ottoman sieges of the fifteenth century.

For non-fiction we are going to go for the big one, the Fall of Constantinople in 1453. There are first hand accounts available, but they are not accessible by me or, I suspect, you, so we need someone else's interpretation. Top of my list would be Roger Crowley's 'Constantinople', a very vivid account that brings to life not just the major figures such as the Sultan and the Emperor, but a whole host of supporting characters. Runciman's 'The Fall of Constantinople' is very good as well; treat yourself and read them both.

'The Siege' by Ismail Kadare is a cracking, and literary prize-winning, historical novel about a fictional siege during the Ottoman invasion of what is now Albania, full of detailed descriptions of what was done and how. Narrated by a variety of characters from both besiegers and besieged and ranging from those directing events to those whose only task is to fight and die, the writing really brings alive not just action, but also motivation.

Blitzkrieg bashing

I have enhanced further my growing reputation as the grumpy old man of wargaming. We had a crack at Blitzkrieg Commander II last week and when my tactics didn't work I may possibly have complained a bit. My irritation drove me to re-read the rules, searching for confirmation that I had been wronged by our errant interpretation thereof. Instead I found that what I had done was not just ineffective, but was actually specifically forbidden. As anyone who remembers our (many) refights of Sidi Rezegh can testify I have never pretended to be an expert on the Second World War. Anyway, expect James' blog to contain much ranting about artillery drift, about which he is prone to carry on like a drunk in a pub looking for a fight. Speaking of which, whilst we were en route to Vapnartak he regaled Peter and I with amusing and colourful stories of his life as a young man in the Channel Islands.

The organisers of the show have apparently made the decision to switch from demo games to participation games, the net effect of which was that there wasn't a great deal to look at. I'm rather partial to having a go at participation games, but there wasn't time as it was a flying visit; Peter being keen to return in order to muck out his horse. There was some meeting and greeting of those others who had made the journey from Ilkley - epicentre of wargaming in the lower Wharfe Valley - across to York, and I was somewhat impressed to be introduced to the author Angus Konstam; certainly more impressed than he was to be introduced to me. As it happens I have been reading his new book on The Barbary Pirates, and very interesting it is too. I have some half baked ideas for games based on their raids on southern England using my small fleet of Zvezda medieval life boats; none of which have seen the light of day so far. But then again I have all sorts of projects in hand, and my shopping reflected that. I picked up some pre-ordered trench sections for the next trench raid scenario, some MDF bases (admittedly with multiple possible applications), some ladders from Irregular (for the Siege of Constaninople, a game that you will remember I couldn't make work and actually packed away) and a copy of Square Bashing (with the intention of using my existing stuff to game at a different scale). Add in the wish to test the new C&C Napoleonics rules and rewrite the Romans in Britain rules and it's a bit of a long list. You won't surprised therefore to hear that I continue to paint 15th century English longbowmen, which address no item appearing on it.

I'm walking backwards for the Sultan

Culture is all very well, but there has also been a low level of wargaming related stuff going on in the background; a very low level. I have finished off the Roman casualty markers for To The Strongest!, although for some long forgotten reason I have never started the final batch of their Celtic equivalents. I have in addition painted and based a further unit of Janissaries for the Siege of Constantinople game that I've given up as a bad job while they were in progress, and I've started painting some of the fifteenth century longbowmen that I bought for no real reason and have no specific plans to use. Focus is the key.

I've never been any good at painting, but I seem to be losing such other modelling abilities as I once had. I believe that I previously mentioned an inadvertency with a Vickers machine gun and I now have to report another incident. One of the new Janissary bases turns out, upon closer inspection, to contain a figure facing in completely the opposite direction to his colleagues. Now I know at least one other wargamer who would have immediately started again and rebased everything, but I am pleased to say that I at least have my OCD under control. This base will - as will the Vickers - fight on regardless.

In one of Donald Featherstone's books he advised personalising ones troops - awarding battle honours to specific units, medals to individual figures and so on. When I read that I thought "Oh dear, he's lost the plot; it must be the paint fumes.", and until now have never given it a second thought. However I am tempted to give this particular unit the permanent ability to turn and face when attacked in the rear. Although of course if they did that, this poor sod would still be looking in the wrong direction. Altogether now:

"I've tried walking sideways,
And walking to the front,
But people just look at me,
And say it's a publicity stunt."

Premature and perpetual decay

That's how Gibbon described the entire millennium that the empire of the East lasted between Arcadius and Mehmet. It also describes the state of my Siege of Constantinople game which has rather fallen into desuetude.

As a recap, the game was based on the Ottoman final assault on May 29th 1453, via the approach suggested in the WHAB Siege & Conquest supplement. The scenario features the three successive attacks which the Ottomans launched on the same section of wall, the intention being that the defenders would be so worn down that they would eventually be overwhelmed (1). The problem that I have been encountering is that my chosen rules - To the Strongest! - aren't very good at slow degradation over a period of time. Their two hits and you're dead structure combined with the ability to rally back to full strength don't really fit the bill, which is a shame because everything else can be handled quite nicely within the framework of activations at differing levels of difficulty.

I tried a proxy whereby the first wave - the bashi-bazouks - made the job of subsequent attacker easier, rather than causing casualties to the defenders as such. I got the mechanics to work, but it just didn't gel thematically for me. Much pondering has failed to deliver a solution, so I think I shall pack it all away, set something else up and let the problem simmer in the background of my mind for a while.


(1) This may or may not be what happened on the day. You can take your pick from sally ports left open, artillery breaches in the walls and/or the fanaticism of Hasan the Giant.

May 29th, 1453

My plans for the couple of weeks or so - the school holidays in effect - are up in the air for a variety of reasons, so I thought I would set up a solo game in the annexe which I could dip in and out of as time allowed. Something compact and small scale would seem to be in order and therefore I have chosen to have a go at the Siege of Constantinople, which I have promised myself for many years that I wouldn't do. As a digression, does anyone else remember that one of Donald Featherstone's books contained photos of a chap who was refighting Stalingrad at 1:1. Even as a naive and credulous youth I regarded that as a bit of a stretch.

My scenario is loosely based on that in the Siege & Conquest supplement for Warhammer Historical. I've only used one row of walls for no better reason than I've only got enough walls to make one row. My Hexon terrain does however allow for a fairly decent looking 3D moat to be laid out.

The scenario deals with the final assault in the area around the Gate of Saint Romanus. Sadly there is no place for many of my siege related toys such as the Ram, the Tower, the Pick and of course, the Crow. However, I couldn't resist finding room for the Boiling Oil.

The Great Gun of Orban naturally features for the attackers.

I'm going to play it using To the Strongest! and you can see the grid laid out using the markers which I use for the purpose. Piquet would normally be my ruleset of choice for solo games, but it's such a faff to prepare the cards decks for the first time, and I just wanted to get on with it and take my mind off things. I do own a copy of Warhammer Ancient Battles, but have never been tempted by them.

The attack will take place in three waves: Bashi Bazouks, Christian allies and finally the Janissaries. Each will continue until they reach the command becomes demoralised (is that the term?) at which point they will be removed to be replaced by the next. I have some ideas regarding crossing/filling the moat, escalade, the role of the Emperor, and not forgetting Hasan the Giant of Ulabad; but the advantage of playing solo is that one can change the rules as one goes along. Oh, hang a trout, that's what we do anyway.

Cegorach

As Woody Allen said "If you want to make God laugh, tell him about your plans". I have now transferred all of my wargaming junk/goodies from the garage of the former marital home to the wargaming annexe. Having decided not to even think about Constantinople I naturally find that I have painted far more Ottomans than I remember including a number specifically equipped for escalade.

Well, I thought, perhaps not Constantinople per se, but perhaps a smaller example, such as that featured in Ismail Kadare's 'The Siege'. However, nowhere among my boxes of scenery can I find any walls. I definitely used to have some, but they aren't there now. Bugger!

Still, as a great philosopher - OK it was Epictetus - once reflected: "He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things that he has not, but rejoices for those that he has".

The Battle of the Pelennor Fields

OK, time for another complete digression coupled with a futile attempt to make it look as if this blog has some sort of planning involved. The last two postings have concerned the Fall of Constantinople and Wagner's Ring Cycle. The former prompted MS Foy to refer in a comment to the sinister and superhuman dread that the Ottomans inspired then and now. As for the second, Wagner was clearly one of the sources for Tolkien's later ring based epic although the elf-fancier rather strangely denied it when asked.

Gandalf the Orangey-Brown

There has always been speculation - also strongly refuted by the author - that Lord of the Rings was allegorical. As a callow youth I indulged myself in a large number of pointless and no doubt erroneous conversations regarding the ring as atomic bomb or orcs as the Japanese in the second world war. Now it seems obvious that a more likely parallel would be between Gondor and Byzantium and between Minas Tirith and Constantinople, with Tolkien - a devout Christian - rewriting the events of 1453 as a counter-factual more to his taste; this time the west does come to the aid of the besieged city, the heathens are seen off and civilisation (as JRR would understand it) is saved.

This isn't an especially original thought, but if completely new stuff was all the blog contained then postings would be pretty damned infrequent.

'Nothing worse than this has ever happened or ever will happen'

My determination not to wargame the events of 1453 has not been helped by reading the special edition of Medieval Warfare on the subject. Of the dozen articles one deals with the siege and the others with the context, personalities and after effects. It's well illustrated with a large number of photographs and paintings although there could perhaps have been more maps.

I'm not going to review it in detail; OK, I admit that I'm not in any way qualified to review it in detail. However, for me it stands as a useful companion to the Osprey hardback collection entitled 'The Fall of Constantinople' (as inevitably are all books on the subject) which has the benefit of more maps. Runciman is essential of course and I would also recommend Crowley.

A chap with a beard

What I wouldn't recommend is reading it just when one has decided that the period is not for you.