Malta – Fort Rinella

Fort Rinella on Malta is the world´s first fully mechanised fort and housed only a single weapon, a 100 tonnes Armstrong gun, one of the most powerful muzzle loading gun ever built. The reason for building this monstrosity were developments in naval technology that prompted the British to build bigger in order to secure the Empire trade with India.

 

Brief History of Malta

To understand why the construction took place, it may be important to understand why Malta is so important. While a small group of islands, Malta is strategically located and houses natural harbours ideal for naval base and for controlling the trade in the Mediteranean Sea. Multiple cultures have tried to control the islands over time. There are remains of cultures from around 5200 BC but the first major power to establish itself on the islands were the Phoenicians who refered to it as Maleth meaning safe haven and which is where the islands take their name. Phoeniecian influence may explain the tradition of painting eyes on fishing boats on Malta for good luck and safety. Later Carthage established trading posts on the islands leading to a bilingual culture which allowed us to be able to read Phoenician from Greek based on a dual inscription on the Cippus stone found on Malta containing both Phoenician and Greek inscriptions. Following the Second Punic War the Romans moved in displacing the Carthagenians and from there it passed to Byzantium in 533 AD. It was conquered by the Arabs in the 9th century until 1091 when Norman crusaders recognised the importance and added it to their Sicilian pocessions. Eventually Malta passed to the Spanish kingdom and was granted as a gift by the Spanish king to the Knightly Order of Saint John as a base for naval operations against the Turks. Although invaded in what became known as the Great Siege in 1565 the knights held on to the island but as the order lost its reasons to exist with a more peaceful co-existence with the Ottomans, its power waned and it became unpopular with the local population. In 1798 Napoleon’s expedition to Egypt stopped over and insisted and resupply. When the knights refused the island was invaded and came under French rule. It was however short lived. Napoleon left a garrision on the island and left for Egypt with the main army and while the French had initially been greeted as liberators the mood swung and instead the garrison came under siege from the local population. While able to force the garrison to hole up in the capital victory was not achieved and the rebels approached the British navy for assistance. Following a naval blockade the French capitulated and the British seized the islands. Although by international treaties requested to leave the island, the British stayed as a protection against French aggressions and although periods of peace did exist Napoleon continued to be a threat and the islands remained garrisoned. Following the end of the Napoleonic Wars Malta had become a permanent British outpost and integrated in the Empire. This was however not considered an important part of the Empire until 1869 when the Suez Canal opened and trade suddenly took new routes.British wanted to protect their lines of communication with the Empire made Malta into a permanent naval base. Grand Harbour became HQ of the British Mediterrainan fleet as the largest natural harbour.

 

Why Fort Rinella?

The big question is why was it necesary to put the world’s biggest gun on Malta? To understand this we need to go back to developments in warships in the 19th century, see for instance: https://playinghistory.wordpress.com/2015/12/20/hms-warrior-1860/

But more importantly is the Battle of Lissa in 1866 where an outnumbered Austrian fleet managed to beat an Italian fleet. Following this humiliating defeat Italian navy looked into  new technology to restore their navy especially in fully turreted iron ships. This because the new Caio Duilio class which was full iron hulled rather than iron clad over wood and boasted 22 inches of steel for protection and 450 mm muzzled loaded rifled guns totally automated by steam hydraulic. The British navy had nothing to match this with and likely the smaller British naval guns  would be rather ineffective against these heavily armoured ships so a naval arms race ensued. In the meantime coastal fortifications were surveyed in Malta and Gibraltar and it was found that the Italian ships could outrange all coastal batteries of the two fortresses so coastal fortifications had to be modernized.

Mechanical Marvel

It was decided to upgun the forts of Malta with 100 tonnes Armstrong guns. Fort Saint Elmo was the proposed sight for the heavy naval guns being the centre of the entrance of Grand Harbour but demands for cost savings reduced to 2 guns from 4 guns and these were instead put on the flanks instead to provide crossfire across the Harbour entrance. Two bew forts were built Cambridge to the West and Rinella to the East.

It took 7 years to construct Rinella and it needed to take in all new technology available. When it was completed in 1886 it was quite a technological marvel.

Low in the ground to make it hard to spot and protect against the naval fire. Vegetation was encouraged to grow on top of the fort for better camoflage and each floor was constructed in concrete as a barreled vault to maximize protection against hits.

The gun was loaded and rammed entirely by steam power and it had two separate gun loading casemates with long rammers to ensure an awesome rate of fire of 1 shell every 6 minutes in contrast to the Italian navy who could manage only 1 shot every 20 minutes with similar guns at sea. The gun would after it was fired be rotated to either left or right casemate where the rammer would be ready to load a 450 kg gun powder charge and a 1 ton shell, after firing it would be rotated to the other casemate which by then would be ready to load. The 9 m barrel had a diameter of 450 mm and could fire 3 types of ammunition: explosive shell, penetration solid shot for punching through hulls, cased shot against smaller vessels with a range of 8 miles.

It took 3 hours to heat steam enough to run the process and 36 crew for operating the gun.

Land Defences

While the fort protected the harbour it was also important to protect the fort from the land side in case of enemy landings around the island to capture the fort and for its defence 100 infantry men were attached to the fort which was also equipped with a dry ditch and counter scarp and bent entry to gate to prevent direct fire and attack. The gate was further strengthened with a draw bridge, a so-called Guthrie bridge, that retracts into the fort and sits behind the gate for protection.

Service History

The gun was never fired in anger and was in fact not fired very often. Because a single shell cost as much as the daily wage of 2400 soldiers, practice firing of the gun was limited to one shot every 3 months. Furthermore it was estimated that 120 rounds would wear out the rifling in the gun and it wass which was unrealistic to ship back to England for refurbishing.

It was fired for the last time on 5 May 1905, and was withdrawn from active service in 1906. The gun was in active service for only 20 years and was superceded by breech loaders something that had already been in existence at the time of its installation.

Navy kept the fort as storage facility during WWII and the fortress received 7 bomb hits from planes but all of them failed to penetrate the vaults.

 

Visiting the Fort

The Cambridge fort is unfortunately gone but Fort Rinella is an active living history site and a very good one at that. I highly recommend a visit if visting Malta. See http://www.wirtartna.org/museums–attractions.html

Polish Winged Hussars

The Polish Winged Hussar or Lancer is a great symbol of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and yet a very misunderstood one. The Winged Hussar existed from 1576 to 1775 when it was decreed that the hussars would be replaced with cheaper Uhlan units which were unarmoured and nationalized in order to ease recruitment. Yet the Uhlans continued the legacy of the Winged Hussar and continued to carry a lance although a lighter and cheaper version.

 

Origins

In Medieval times the Polish armies were relying just as much on lance mounted knight than Western European armies but following the forming of the Commonwealth with Lithuania in 1569 led to an influx of other ideas. It was a vast empire that joined Poland, Lithuania and large parts of modern day Ukraine, a country that spanned from the Baltic to the Black Sea. While under one king and parliament each nation still fielded its own armies with distinct differences and as such Mongol and Byzantine influence and traditions found its way into it the armies but much bigger influences would be found to the south.

It has been speculated that the name hussar came from Husz meaning 20 and referring to recruitment of 1 in 20 but it is more likely from the Byzantine Chossarioi which were Serbian horsemen recruited as light cavalry. As the Serbians were displaced by the Ottomans some were hired as mercenaries in Poland forming the core of the hussars.

 

Battle Records

After forming in 1576 the Winged Hussars quickly proved themselves in the Danzig Rebellion in 1577 this was followed by victories over Muscovite Russia, Danzig and a series of successful battles against the Swedes and other neighbours including a Habsburg army at Byczyna 1588 during this period the heavy hussars may have made up 75% of the cavalry fielded. However in 1620s especially after facing the reformed Swedish armies under Gustav Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus) the Hussars suffered terribly in the face of reliance on firepower rather than shock in the face of this the Polish army reformed to a more Western-style infantry and more reliance on light cavalry and the hussar ratio fell to some 30% of the cavalry. Following the Ukrainian Cossack Rebellion in 1648 to 1654 the Hussars proved to have very limited value against the wagon forts employed by the Ukrainians and furthermore at Batoh 1652 the core of the hussaria some 1000 man strong was captured and executed. It took some 15 years to rebuild to its former glory. Following the uprising Poland was invaded by nummerous enemies Swedes, Ukrainians, Brandenburgers, Russians and more in what became known as the Deluge 1654 to 1660. Again Swedish firepower was devastating but against Eastern armies the lances still brought success. The Turks stille remained vulnerable to the lance and after the deluge Jan Sobieski as the new king oversaw a renationalization of the army and the hussarification of many of the lighter cavalry units leading the their most glorious battle at the Battle of Vienna 1683. But the damaged done to the Polish nation during the Deluge and the costly wars with the Turks bring the economy and state to its knees and although the Hussars fought again in the Great Northern War 1710-1721 the Hussars never against had the unity and strength of previous times and in 1775 in an order to reduce state expenses were replaced by Uhlans.

 

Organisation

In order to understand the organisation, I would like to split the organisation into an early and a late version.

In the early period the Hussars were levied much like the feudal system. The basic unit was the rota or company was organized as by a nobleman. For a battlefield role a number of companies would be combined into a “banner” as a larger unit. The commander of a rota was known as a rotmistrz and would be issued a letter of recruitment by the king to raise a specified number of horses (or fighting men) typically 100, 120 or 150 although more wealthy magnates or hetmans could be required to raise as many of 200 or 300. The idea was that the nobleman was a landowner and as such would help carry part of the cost of the unit. The rotmistrz would then contact a number of lesser nobles to bring into his company, these were known as towarzysz or companions each would in turn bring a poczet or retinue consisting of 2 to 7 men and an unspecified number of camp servants which did not appear on unit strength. It must be noted that it the Polish society at the time 6-8% of the population could claim to be of noble descent although many were impowerished and would not have been able to equip themselves as hussars. More wealthy nobles could possibly buy their way into companies of the king or other high ranking nobles as a way of getting favours or social advancements or notice as all towarzysz would refer to each other as “lord brother”. Service were typically 3-5 years although younger sons wh would not inherrit land often sserved longer hoping to gain political offices. Towarzysz were in theory equal junior officers and from their numbers they chose a lieutenant to act as the second in command. This role was extremely prestigeous and was generally awarded to the most senior towarzysz however duels over the post often ensued. From among their numbers they also chose the standard bearer which was typically one of the promising young towarzysz singled out of the honorable role of no executive power.

According to historical documents the theoretical strength was seldom achieved. It would often list ghost men for example the retinue of the rotmistrz seldom existed. This was an accepted way of covering unexpected expenses that would otherwise have been forced upon the rotmistrz so it has been estimated as much as 13% of horse strength was on paper only. Other sources of revenue was hiberna that allowed the company to claim stabling and feed from the local province in which it was stationed. It was often not provided from the province but instead extorted from the village unfortunate enough to have troops garrisoned.

 

Late organisation

Following the battle of Batoh 1652 where most of the state troops were lost, a massive reorganisation of the hussars took place. The paper strength was reduced (to 8% by some estimates but this is still highly debated), the number of retainers were dropped to 2 per towarzycz and the army unofficially at least opened up to rich non-noble twarzycz. The lieutenant was often hired and appointed directly by the rotmistrz and often took his place on the battlefield while the rotmistrz became more of a sponsor or a honorable title than an actual battlefield role. These changes shall all be viewed as a more professional approach to military formations.

 

Equipment

The weapons and armour were responsibilities of the rotmistrz and start up costs could be quite high although expected to be recovered through loot and war spoils. Armour was to be made in Hungarian style to ensure some unified looks across regiments. These were made in iron and copper and burnished instead of blacked as otherwise common in Western armies. This gave the Winged Hussars a splendid look. The armour consisted of a helmet, plate breast plate and sleeves of mail. Following 1640 Polish features start to emerge such as cheek plates with heart sharped appertures for the ears.

Weapons included the Polish sabre or szabla which was a hacking sword, it evolved from Turkish design but during the 17th century got a more Polish design to make it better for melee, it first grew lighter, than a chain was added to close the hilt and protect the hand, it later evolved into a full metal bar and a thumb ring was added to the side. Futher modification often added a bird shaped pommel although that has likely been more of a ceremonial thing and possibly not every used in the late period. More important weapons that hussars were more likely to grab once the lances were spent would be the warhammer or axe or the koncerz which was a Polish version of the estoc a 130-160 cm long stabbing weapon that could double as a improvised lance or the pallash which was a kind of broadsword that could be both single or double edged with a sabre type hilt, unlike the German version blade tended to be slightly curved.

For firearms the hussars were late to adopt and originally stuck with the bow which also became a prestige object. But following the standardisation in 1576 pistols also became common. Muskets or carbines were late to be adopted although some sources claim that the rear ranks of the formations would forgo lances for carbines by 1650 however it is likely that this was only as a temporary measure against the Tatars, instead these were expected to carry both in order to full multiple roles and it was not until the 18th century that lances disappeared from the rear ranks.

 

Kopia Lance

The Kopia lance has become an almost mythical object. It consisted of two pieces of wood hollowed out and glued together with a ball shaped pommel. This made it extremely light and as a result could be made very long around 5 m. This has given rise to the legend that the lances could outrange pikes and thus allow the hussars to break pikemen. While it did happen a few times, most notably at Kircholm 1610 success were never achieved against steady infantry with pikes. While kopias may have been a bit longer than pikes at some stages of the period, it is unlikely that the slight extra reach would have avoided the horse at speed from impaling itself even if the lance hit home. Furthermore owing the its design the lance was very fragile and while good against unarmoured targets were likely to shatter on impact and could have difficulties penetrating full plate. Therefore lances would after each attack and would need replacements. This was easy enough in friendly territory but on the attack hussar units tended to run out of lances and had to rely on the koncerz or other weapons.

Lances were usually painted and covered with pennants in the company collours.

 

The Wings

The wings is a very misunderstood part of the equipment. First mentioned in 1553 at the wedding of king Zygmunt II it was mentioned as three riders with feathers on their back but never specified whether it was on the horse or rider.

The popular image of the hussar is one with long forward bent wings n the back of the armour which has been further popularized by Warhammer Fantasy in the form of Kislev Winged Lancers with Kislev taking its inspiration from medieval Poland and Russia. But it is not until 1574 that references appear again where sources claim they decorated themselves and their horses with eagle feathers rather than ostrich plumes which were popular in other parts of Europe. This has probably been inspired by Serbian and Bosian deli and grenzer style units which were already using feather decoration.

In 1576 the hussar units of Poland were standardized and as part of this lost their feathered shield but it seems like the feathers at that time was already accepted as a mark of status and thus it was theorized that the feathers were unitially moved to the left forearm (the former shield arm). In 1590 it is mentioned that the decoration has been moved to the back of the horse behind the rider. It was initially a single wing on the left side as not to interfere with the lance. From there it evolved for aesthetic reasons to a second wing until by 1650 it has become the more dominant type with two symmetical wings.

During the crisis of 1650s and 1660s the wings disappeared likely for economical reasons. But following the revival of the hussars under Sobieski it seems like the wings reappeared in a smaller form on the back of the rider in Poland however Lithuania continued to use the sattle mounted wings. Interestingly enough contemporary pictures depicting hussars with wings on their back always show the rider unarmoured which has led to speculations that the wings after the revival were mainly a parade uniform.

The purpose of the wings have been greatly discussed. It has been suggested that riding at speed would make the wings emit a sound that would scare enemy horses however modern reconstruction has not be able to produce any sound that is likely to have been heard over the noise of battle. Other claims have been that it would protect against Tartar lassos and finally as a decoration for units that served in the Turkish Wars. But that seems unlikely as first mentions appear before the wars. In my oppinion it is simply a device to overawe friend and foe and show off the status of the prestigious Winged Hussar companies.

 

The Charge

The main aim in the intial phase was to probe for weaknesses or get around the enemy flank. This was conducted in open order with enough room between horses to allow 90 or 180 degree turns as needed. The formation relied on three lines each divided into a right wing, left wing and centre section with the centre formation the largest of the three. The idea was that if the first line charged and failed to break the enemy they could retire through intervals left in the supporting lines and reform at the rear while second and ultimately third wave would have a go at the enemy. This wave line attack was meant to break even stubborn resistance. Charges were conducted knee-to-knee like most heavy cavalry units (see Napoleonic Heavy Cavalry post https://playinghistory.wordpress.com/2016/02/11/napoleonic-heavy-cavalry-and-tactics/ ).

Meta Gaming – How Players Shape Games

Meta gaming or the meta prefix is often used to indicate a concept within a concept and thus often describe a local practice in a local group of players.

Whenever game designers have made a rule set and launched it out there, it is often up to the players to figure out how the most viable strategies in the game is. If played multiple times in small groups local strategies tend to form almost like an arms race.

For instance core game Settlers of Catan even though it is a relatively simple game where players have to develop a colony faster than other players but cannot attack or generally interfere negatively with each other (a few exceptions like building in a disruptive manner og using the robber) can develop its own meta depending of different practices of the player. An aggressive attitude can steer the game in a certain direction and often force players to equally play disruptive compared to a collaborative attidue where trading fairly is strongly encouraged. If a group of players play together often enough they will tend to go in either an aggressive or collaboration play style.

Similarly the same can be observed in Flames of War where an arms race in small groups seems to develop. In the beginning players tend to pick an army they like but as they start playing games they tend to find a certain unit type may work better in this group and tend to develop a tendency where bringing as many of that type as possible is prefered establishing a meta game. This will in terms breed a reaction so for instance if medium tanks has been the prefered option, the next meta change will be for heavy tanks or tank destroyers to deal with these and gradually players will leviate towards that establishing a new meta until a player brings in infantry to deal with the large amount of heavy tanks there suddenly is present in the group. The same goes for other table top board gaming and PC games.

 

Other things like local practices and landscape can also contribute towards establishing a meta. I had quite an experiece in my Flames of War career. I came from the flat country of Denmark with few and neatly organized woods and a village here and there and our table top terrain seemed to reflect that. our table tops probably close resemble what it would look like if WWII was fought in a flat Danish country side which would likely make for ideal tank country. When I started playing most players used tank armies and seemed to lean towards medium tanks that could move fast across the open fields. Infantry was only encouraged to dig in and hold objectives but with so little terrain they tended to be machine gunned to death in the open if they tried to move far.

When I moved to Canada and found a gaming group in Vancouver I always felt they built their armies in an odd way until I realized it was the local practice of building table tops. They used a lot more forrests than we did and in general had much more dense tables which resultited in quite different armies being favourable. With the denser terrain there were fewer avenues of approach for tanks which made infantry and antitank guns togehter a formiddable defense. As a result the inability of tanks to dash around positions, attacks were often more head on meaning that heavy tanks with more frontal armour were favoured while infantry could move at ease through the woods. Infantry with heavy tanks was something we did not see much in Denmark but would probably have been described as the more common way of playing in Vancouver, being the meta game.

BWS – a common but forgotten bunker type

I have come across the BWS (Brandwachenständ) bunkers in a few places when travelling around Europe and I have always been puzzled by the weird one man bunker design.

I latest came across two in Berlin near the Humboldthain flak tower, so I decided to dig around and find more information about these as I always thought they looked rather impractical for a one man fighting position and actually they never were although as the allies advanced across Europe many of them became improvised fighting positions.

The BWS served a very different purpose. It was for firewardens, fire watcher stand). The idea came around in early 1930s and was developed as a security guard post for German companies. But the German airforce who was in charge of air defense soon found other uses for them. Fire wardens were needed to direct people to shelters and for keeping watch for fires especially from incendiary bombs which could move more devastating them bombs.

Originally made of steel (and a steel example can be seen in Overloon War Museum, Netherlands, I unfortunately do not have pictures from there) because the main requirement at that time was for bullet-proof protection but with more and more stress put on the war industry and steel was reserved for weapons and concrete offering better heat insulation the design changed. They were never designed to be bomb proof but should merely other protecting against splinters.

The concrete type seen here was the more common and was manufactured in the thousands by Dywidag Betonwerke in Desdren, it weighs in at 3.2 tonnes and could easily be deployed to where it was needed. This however also means that after the war they were easy to get rid off and many of them has been demolished.