By Alberto Raúl Esteban Ribas
The 17th century is an exciting time in European History. Throughout those 100 years in the Old Continent there were political and warlike events that shaped the countries throughout the following century and until the French Revolution: the decline of Spain as a world power and its replacement by the France of Louis XIV; the consolidation of Dutch independence and its mercantile power; the English Civil War and the bases of England’s expansion during the following century; the defense of the Holy Empire and the end of Ottoman expansionism.
I have always been passionate about military history, and since childhood I had always dreamed of studying and recreating the glorious episodes of the Tercios of Spanish Infantry. Their dominance on the battlefields for almost 150 years is a model hardly comparable in other armies, and despite this, they are relatively little known in European historiography, which generally imagines them as monolithic blocks of pike-armed infantry.
The reality, however, was quite different: the Tercio is an administrative unit and in battle escuadrones (squadrons) were formed, very versatile and versatile, with autonomous offensive and defensive capabilities. The Spanish learned and influenced their Dutch, French and English rivals, and the loss of their hegemony was not caused by the appearance of a superior tactical model, but by the numerical collapse of their armies, which could not follow the gigantic growth of the France of Louis XIV, and the enormous logistical difficulty of operating in distant war scenes (Flanders, Italy, Germany), where there was no territorial continuity to be able to send troops. I set out to investigate Spanish tactics and compare them with those of their enemies, analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of one and the other.
It was a great satisfaction for me that the prestigious publishing house Helion contacted me and offered me the possibility of explaining a battle as interesting as Nördlingen, where the armies of Sweden and their German allies fought against the Imperial troops, the Catholic League and Spain (formed by Spanish, Walloons, Italians and Germans troops).
The Spanish and Swedish military tradition were formed by various influences and events, perhaps under a single common nexus such as the fighting style of the Dutch, in their war of independence against Spain, which exported its deployment model in “battalions” and with companies with a lot of firepower and a very high proportion of officers. Although, it must be said that the continuous confrontations between the Spanish and Dutch infantry motivated innovations on both sides equally.
The Swedes stormed Germany in the 1630s with a highly professional, very experienced, well-equipped army with very high morale. The resounding victories of King Gustavus Adolphus II increased his power and aura of superiority.
The Spanish had been successfully fighting the French and their Swiss and German mercenaries since the end of the 15th century, combining pikes and arquebuses. In addition, they had a lot of experience and logistical capacity to send armies of thousands of men beyond their territories: since 1567 the Spanish Road was used, which allowed troops to be brought from Italy to Flanders. A proof of the strength of the Hispanic military machine was that both in 1633 and 1634 it was possible to recruit armies of more than 10,000 men to enter Germany: first the Duke of Feria, and later the Cardinal-Infante, were able to lead both armies in territories that the Spanish had not previously entered, and were able to face the Protestant armies successfully.
The Swedes were famous for their formation in squadrons, in T-shape, combining companies from the battalions of their regiments. This deployment, in which an important nucleus of pikemen was still maintained, had great firepower, and its musketeers had great fire discipline, which made them very effective on the battlefield. Furthermore, the introduction of regimental cannons was a real boost for firepower in close combat.
On the Spanish side, the constant struggles against the Dutch and the English caused them to understand from very early on the importance of firepower: the detachments of harquebusiers and musketeers, called mangas, which acted independently of the main detachment, or they could also deploy in front of its own Tercio, allowing great tactical flexibility to adapt to any circumstance. As happened in so many battles, and Nördlingen happened the same, the mangas of any Tercio were sent to support another unit, while the pikemen continued to maintain the formation and, therefore, on the defensive against any threat. This great flexibility allowed the Spanish high command to be able to send reinforcements to any point of the battle line, maintaining the general formation if it impaired security.
Having well-fed, trained and motivated troops are essential elements for victory, but they are not enough. The choice of terrain, the weather, the schedule of reinforcements, the evaluation of risks and unforeseen events, etc. they are elements that should always be valued. Napoleon Bonaparte said that “If the Art of War were nothing but the art of avoiding risks, Glory would become the prey of mediocre minds… I have made all the calculations; Fate will do the rest.” For this reason, it is necessary to take into account the “instinct” of the High command, a “psychological quality” that allows generals to know when the right moment has arrived, to execute a certain movement. And this is very difficult to apply…
From the perspective that allows us to analyze the battle four centuries later, we can assess the performance of the generals of the two armies: Gustav Horn was too cautious and conceived no other maneuver than a frontal attack; Bernard of Saxe-Weimar remained inactive too long, waiting for the decisive moment that never came, with the intention of gaining his own glory by the victory obtained by others. The Marquis of Leganés acted responsibly, sending the necessary reinforcements to maintain the defense of the Albuch hill and thus force the enemy to commit all his troops; General Gallas was patient and waited for Bernard’s attack, and then he knew that the time was right to respond with all his troops.
Without a doubt, the battle of Nördlingen constitutes an interesting lesson to learn about the Art of War of the 17th century, but also to learn about the mentality and personality of the people of that time and question whether the adage that “Audaces Fortuna iuvat”.
You can purchase The Battle of Nördlingen: The Bloody Fight Between Tercios and Brigades here.