The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered [6]  |  Archives [1] 
 
Witamy, Guest  |  Members
Home / History   174

Battle of Grunwald 1410 The biggest medieval battle. Germans smashed.



southern 76 | 7,116    
21 Dec 2009  #91

The Germans always lose at the end.But they took revenge for this battle and kept their honor.


musicwriter 5 | 87    
7 Jan 2010  #92

There was a book published on the battle with Polish text entitled "Grunwald 1410-1910"
I inherited this old book but, over the passage of time, it was getting dried out and pages were falling out. Finally I donated it to the Detroit Public Library. It had some nice colored plates in it.

Pozdrawiam
Ogien 6 | 248    
8 Jan 2010  #93

I've always had an interest in warfare before the invention of guns. Why? Well, because back then the winners were the ones who were real men. It didn't depend as much on how much money was invested in military equipment. I'M NOT SAYING INVESTMENTS DIDN'T MATTER BUT THEY DIDN'T MAKE AS MUCH OF AN EFFECT AS TODAY.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
8 Jan 2010  #94

Ever since the time of the roman armies military equipment and tactics decided over victory or defeat (and probably before that).
The romans (just to use a popular example) didn't conquer the known world because they had the men...they had also the better weapons, the better training for their soldiers, the better logistics etc.

The "barbarians" they conquered were equally brave but hadn't by far the same equipment or the skills...
(Okay...Arminius beat them...but he was trained as a roman soldier and knew all about their tactics)
RonWest 3 | 120    
8 Jan 2010  #95

Wins against Germans seem to count double, doesn't happen often - feared warriors we are! :)

Yeah, let's see your future with Imams and Mustafas leading you into battle.........
king polkakamon - | 546    
8 Jan 2010  #96

they had also the better weapons, the better training for their soldiers, the better logistics etc.

Greek weapons were superior.No comparison between greek spear or macedonian sarissa and the roman gladius.
Training is relative.Not all Romans had good training.The army was first made by common people till it became completely professional.But most of the conquests were done by common citizens army.

Logistics was a strength of the roman army,however Alexander the Great managed to conquer the whole Asia despite extremely bad logistics and no transportation vehicles.Long lines etc.

I think the power of roman army relative to Carthagena,Greece and the hellenistic kingdoms was more its discipline and political stability and not any military superiority as Hannibal or Pyrros also proved.
pawian 127 | 6,555    
18 Jan 2010  #97

This year is the 600th anniversary of the battle. They are going to put up a giant reconstruction, I suppose.
For the time being, photo of some older recosntruction.


Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
18 Jan 2010  #98

Oh boy! 600 years between them and for both you needed help (first Lithuanians and then the whole world) You really seem to need those reminders!
Ironside 46 | 8,382    
19 Jan 2010  #99

as if you were fighting alone:D
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
19 Jan 2010  #100

:)

I hope they get out all the nice costumes for the great day again! :)
pawian 127 | 6,555    
19 Jan 2010  #101

600 years between them and for both you needed help (first Lithuanians and then the whole world)

PS. Not only Lithuanians. Also Belarussians.
Today Belarus is even making a film about their victory at Tannenberg 1410.

as if you were fighting alone:D

Exactly::):):):)

You really seem to need those reminders!ROFL

Like air. :):):) Whenever I recall how Poles managed to push back the Teutonic invaders, I feel complacent and work goes faster.
Crow 137 | 5,894    
19 Jan 2010  #102

smashed, smashed
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
19 Jan 2010  #103

Like air. :):):) Whenever I recall how Poles managed to push back the Teutonic invaders, I feel complacent and work goes faster.

Now then...you may proceed! :)

smashed, smashed

The Poles are still glad that there was no Serb in sight. They would had lost again (both).
Crow 137 | 5,894    
19 Jan 2010  #104

what actualy means that nick name of yours, Bratwurst Boy? Is it about brat that got wurst?

The Poles are still glad that there was no Serb in sight. They would had lost again (both).

what i know Serbs contributed to the Polish victory in Grunwald
Mr Grunwald 17 | 1,480    
20 Jan 2010  #105

Crow
Pitty they weren't mentioned in the Film "Krzyżacy"
Do you have any link of Serbian fighters in the battle of Grunwald? (I can read Norwegian, Polish and English)
Exiled 2 | 425    
22 Jan 2010  #106

Serbs participated allegedly in the battle of Grunwald.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Grunwald
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #107

Serbs participated allegedely in the battle of Grunwald.

The only mention is:

....and allegedly Serbs.[citation needed]

So we can forget about that! Probably a Serb putting that into the text.
(And better for Poles, they would had probably lost with Serbs dragging them down) ;)

The real battle:

Polish forces
39,000-50,000 men

Kingdom of Poland[1]
Grand Duchy of Lithuania
Polish-Lithuanian vassals, allies and mercenaries:[2]
Moldavia Principality of Moldavia[3]
Tartars[1]
Bohemians[2],
Moravians[2]
Russians (Ruthenians)[4]

against the Teutonic Order
27,000-32,000 men
Sokrates 8 | 3,352    
22 Jan 2010  #108

Serbs participated allegedely in the battle of Grunwald.

According to Crow maybe.
ShortHairThug - | 1,104    
22 Jan 2010  #109

So we can forget about that! Probably a Serb putting that into the text.

Just because citation is missing that's no proof that Serbs did not participate in that battle.

If we take a look at Polish army at that time it was mainly recruited from local population as conscripts by "Pospolite Ruszenie" which was the duty of every free man (meaning the land owner) of joining the army at call to arms by the King. The call to arms was performed by "Starosta" who issued a proclamation on behalf of the King in his district and each nobleman, knight and land owner had to join Kings Forces for a period of time at his own expense. He was also obligated to recruit few extra soldiers from his land holdings but the rest of the time they were free to take care of their farms so there was no regular army to speak of. This law only applied to the campaigns within kings' realm. Any service performed outside Kings Realm they had to be compensated by the King, provided with food and in case they were taken hostage it was the Kings responsibility to pay the ransom. Army recruited in this fashion usually consisted in 1/3 of nobleman serving only at the time of need.

Very small contingent that can be called a regular army meaning serving King all the time was mainly consisting of mercenaries from within the kingdom, Poles as well as our southern neighbors, Czechs, Hungarians and Serbs. Besides Polish nobleman and Knights mainly formed Heavy cavalry units. Although Polish knight at that time had a lighter armor then western counterpart because of the conflicts with Tartars he still carried a lance, 120cm sword and 30cm dagger protected by articulated metal armor.

At that time there was no home grown Polish light cavalry units. That what one might think of as light cavalry were the servants of the Knights, equipped with lance, sword, some with bow and some with crossbow protected by leather armor. Bulk of the light cavalry units were from the borderlands of the kingdom as well as from Lithuania. The rest of the light cavalry were from the southern kingdoms, of those the Serbs, Hungarians, Moldavians, Wołochowie (sorry don't know the English term for them) as well as Tartars were particularly valued because of their experience fighting Turkish light cavalry units.

We know that the Serbs served in light cavalry units at that time so it would make perfect sense for them to participate in this battle given that they were at the service of one of the Polish nobleman and all of the Polish Lords participated at that battle, after all it was one of the biggest battles in the medieval Europe. Even Sienkiewicz in Krzyżacy mentions them.

Zgromadzili się wielcy sławnirycerze oraz różne narody. Z Witoldem przyszło czterdzieścilicznych chorągwi, polskich wraz z Mazurami było pięćdziesiąt. ByliTatarzy i dzikie watahy Besarabów, Serbowie i Żmudzini

Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #110

Even Sienkiewicz in Krzyżacy mentions them.

Erm....a historical, romantic writer who thought up all his stories totally fictional more than 500 years later is your proof?

Even if Serbs were there they didn't seem to make any contribution to be put alongside the others in the encyclopedias...;)

Maybe Germans fighted alongside the Poles too? It takes Germanics to beat Germanics, you know!
(I read that in a novel)
ShortHairThug - | 1,104    
22 Jan 2010  #111

Forget Sienkiewicz read what's above, besides although his novels are fictional don't you think he had to be knowledgeable in history and do some research before writing his books? It's odd that in the passage I quoted he accurately mentions the numbers of banners participating in the battle just like Długosh who wrote about it as a historian.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #112

and do some research before writing his books?

Well, maybe he took his sources with him into his grave because there are no others to find?

There are alot of allied nationalities mentioned who fighted alongside the Poles, there is no reason to omit the Serbs if they had been there.

Seeing that this battle seems to be a cornerstone of polish myth I guess it's quite widely researched, by Poles no less....still no sources!

And a fictional writer has for me the same value like Crow himself....I too could write alot of stuff only because I would like it to be so!
ShortHairThug - | 1,104    
22 Jan 2010  #113

Like I said Forget Sienkiewicz, that’s just a footnote to what I have wrote.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #114

The polish one? ;) Is there a mention of Serbs in the polish wiki or anywhere else?
ShortHairThug - | 1,104    
22 Jan 2010  #115

No but that does not mean a thing, even Długosz giving the account of the battle wrote the region a given banner was from the Lord it belonged to and maybe if your lucky a name of one or two more famous Knights. Much like today nobility at that time liked to be in the limelight and take all the glory, so we have house of this house of that etc, etc.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #116

That means everything!
Wiki is the main hub to start researching with lots of basic info and especially links for further study.
If one would write into an article about...say....the battle of Grunwald 1410...and puts Serbs innit, there would be others who would demand explanation, sources, etc.

(Sometimes to read the discussions about an article is as interesting as the article itself)

And especially with a subject so dear to so many Poles like this battle (*grin*) I can't believe that there aren't many interested writers who would love to add such facts (if they exist).

That would hold especially even more true in the case of the polish wiki I believe, written by Poles, whereas in the english language Wiki people don't seem to care if someone presents a "...allegedly Serbs" without any sources. For them it's not that important...

What is Dlugoszs source?

if your lucky a name of one or two more famous Knights.

Well, that might be, but the historians managed to find out about all the other nationalities taking part, why not the Serbs?
MareGaea 29 | 2,770    
22 Jan 2010  #117

600 years ago there seems to have been a battle...I wonder what the influence of that battle nowadays would be? Hm...Lemme think...Zero, nada, zilch? Right answer :)

Oh yeah, forgot that it still has importance for some old souls that are at least 650 years old and are partying like it's 1499...

:)

>^..^<

M-G (tiens)
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #118

600 years ago there seems to have been a battle...I wonder what the influence of that battle nowadays would be?

How dare you!!!!
They beat the Teutonic Order!!!!!!
Poles beat the Germans!!
(Only a won football game could be sweeter)

But I can understand it....I feel the same way about the Battle in the Teutoburg Forest 9 AD.
And THAT one had far reaching consequences!
ShortHairThug - | 1,104    
22 Jan 2010  #119

What is Dlugoszs source?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_D%C5%82ugosz

I can't believe that there aren't many interested writers who would love to add such facts (if they exist).

I'm not a historian but I'll bet that a lot of voluble historical sources disappeared during the partition of Poland. Besides not many historians could write anything about Polish history that would not be viewed with suspicion by the governing Power. So stop this nonsense that there's nothing that exist as a source. It does not exist for a reason. I'm sure Kiser or Hitler would allow anything to be published that glorified Polish past. Not ot mention Czarist or Soviet Russia, get real.
Bratwurst Boy 5 | 7,938    
22 Jan 2010  #120

Oh please....the partition is long gone, and again, why are the historians able to point all the others participiants?

Another western/germanic conspiracy against the poor Serbs?
They just missed that one...period!

So stop this nonsense that there’s nothing that exist as a source. It does not exist for a reason.

Oh and Kaiser and Hitler are long gone too...

Jan Długosz (1 December 1415, Stara Brzeźnica – 19 May 1480, Kraków; also known as Joannes, Ioannes or Johannes Longinus

Johannes Longinus! Ah ja :)




Home / History / Battle of Grunwald 1410 The biggest medieval battle. Germans smashed.
Click this icon to move up back to the quoted message. Bold Italic [quote]

 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary and unique username or login and post as a member.