WI: Fernandez de Cordoba VS Maurice of Nassau

[hasdrubal barca]

What if Fernandez de Cordoba VS Maurice of Nassau?

Who was the better commander?

Who had more impressive victories?

Who established the greater military system?

 

[Xenophonte]

The great captain

"The great Captain" (El Gran Capitán in spanish) Is considered one of the best military strategists in history. He founded the spanish "Tercios" , fought in the reconquer of Granada in (1482-1492). Fought in Italy, defeating the armies of Nemours in the battle of Cerriñola and conquered the kingdom of Naples for the crown of Spain.

 

[wietze]

maurice of course, he introduced military standardisation, and military drill, he introduced most of the practises that we now associate with the military.

 

[Xenophonte]

The Great Captain

maurice of course, he introduced military standardisation, and military drill, he introduced most of the practises that we now associate with the military.[/QUOTE/}].

Ok, very valuable merits but their candidate related to questions of What If: Who was the better commander?
Who Had more impressive victories?
Who established the Greater military system ?.


The issue of greatness is one to be, for me it is not a singular construct, it can encompass persistent 'Elan', persistent tactical thought, real estate, capability under pressure, tactical innovation, a capacity to win under dissimilar engagements, battlefield management, a capacity to build a superior command team around themselves.

Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba was a Commandant of theatre (He Fought multiple battles being happened concurrently - it isn't a local battle commandant).

The issue of greatness is one to be established by the poster, for me it is not a singular construct, it can encompass persistent 'Elan', persistent tactical thought, real estate, capability under pressure, tactical innovation, a capacity to win under dissimilar engagements, battlefield management, a capacity to build a superior command team around themselves.

A great commander has to show consistency of purpose and a demonstrated capacity to win under duress. Great Commanders also are great situational "politicians" - they have to be able to manage their field staff and to inspire their armies to move under adverse conditions.


http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/204869/Gonzalo-Fernandez-de-Cordobahttp://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/204869/Gonzalo-Fernandez-de-Cordoba


https://books.google.com.uy/books?id=4CBEesvW2okC&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=gonzalo+de+cordoba+british+encyclopedia&source=bl&ots=oc_eF2BZg7&sig=jM5jBKgVktez_3MwML8N87S6Hm4&hl=es&sa=X&ei=NnGLVK3aJ4KqgwS5nYKoDQ&ved=0CEoQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=gonzalo%20de%20cordoba%20british%20encyclopedia&f=false

 

[martin76]

El Gran Capitán, Le Grand Capitain, Il Grand Capitano...
His victories were incredible,He was a predecessor of Napoleon and the concept of total battle (Battle doctrine of annihilation). It is the symbol of a unique weapon, the Spanish infantry. The best of Spanish commanders as Farnese, Verdugo, Alva, Navarro, etc etc were taught by him.
Without Cordoba didn´t exist any Nassau... Nassau learned from the Spanish Infantry. Nassau fougth again one enemy had lot of enemies: France, England, Ottoman Empire, North Africa etc etc and he never won a spectacular victory. maybe his most impressive victory was Nieuwpoort: anglo-Dutch army: 11.400 men and 14 guns vs Spanish Army: 9.000 men and 9 guns. Anglo-dutch casualties: 2.000 Spanish Casualties: 2.400

Battle of Cerignola: Spanish Army: 6.300 and 20 guns. French Army: 9.000 men and 40 guns. Spanish casualties: 100. French Casualties: 4.000 and
Toute l´artillerie, les bagages et les drapeaux restèrent au pouvoir de l´ennemi. A la suite de cette victorie (...) tout le royaume de Naples tomba aux mains des espagnols

Battle of Garigliano: Spanish Army: 15.000 men. French Army: 23.000. Spanish Casualties: 900. French Casualties: 8.000
Les français perdirent 8.000 hommes, touts leurs bagages et l´artillerie, qui était la meilleure d´Europe (French lost 8.000 men, all the baggage and the artillery that was the best in Europe). The Frenchmen said that Gonzalo Fernandez de Cordoba was "Le Grand Capitaine", "Le Vaillant Capitaine" and "Le brave Chevalier".

Gonzalo Fernandez de Cordoba laid the bases of the famous Spanish Infantry whose subsequent victories seem incredible

 

[Xenophonte]

Only to me, it seems strange that only advocates have posted Gran Capitan arguing with historical and military reasons.
Instead it seems to be voted for cultural reasons, for conviction, sympathy or cultural antipathy (toward said candidate), etc. But do not want to post to argue their vote.

 

[Geordie]

I've just written a paper on the "Military Revolution" as defined by Michael Roberts: Maurice innovating infantry tactics, drill and discipline; Gustav II Adolf adding changes to cavalry and artillery.

Now, there are numerous qualifications, rebuttals and quibbles to the whole idea, but everybody seems to agree that Maurice's innovations in drill and training were the real game changers. As a commander, it appears he was more adept at sieges than open battle, although the Dutch Revolt clearly lends itself to sieges more than some of the other conflicts at the times.

Geoffrey Parker has made serious amendments to the idea of the "Military Revolution", especially as Roberts' understanding of the Tercio was, at best, imprecise. Even then, he still acknowledges that Nassau revolutionised the disciplinary aspects of warfare*.

I know less about Il Grand Capitano, but the little I do know suggests I'd rather have him in command on the day of battle. The ideal would be to have de Cordoba leading a force trained by Maurice, though.

 

[martin76]

I've just written a paper on the "Military Revolution" as defined by Michael Roberts: Maurice innovating infantry tactics, drill and discipline; Gustav II Adolf adding changes to cavalry and artillery.

Now, there are numerous qualifications, rebuttals and quibbles to the whole idea, but everybody seems to agree that Maurice's innovations in drill and training were the real game changers. As a commander, it appears he was more adept at sieges than open battle, although the Dutch Revolt clearly lends itself to sieges more than some of the other conflicts at the times.

Geoffrey Parker has made serious amendments to the idea of the "Military Revolution", especially as Roberts' understanding of the Tercio was, at best, imprecise. Even then, he still acknowledges that Nassau revolutionised the disciplinary aspects of warfare*.

I know less about Il Grand Capitano, but the little I do know suggests I'd rather have him in command on the day of battle. The ideal would be to have de Cordoba leading a force trained by Maurice, though.

It is funny to see how still hurt these humiliating defeats...