After reading RULED BRITANNIA last wk, with the POD involving the veteran Spanish troops after a successful Armada landing, easily defeating the ad hoc, ill-equipped & partially-trained English militia- would such a result necessarily have been a foregone conclusion, though ?
Armada 1588- Spanish TERCIOs vs Elizabethan levies
- Thread starter Melvin Loh
- Start date
Parma didn't think that the Armada would ever land. In this, he was correct. That isn't to say that he didn't think that the tercios could conquer England. They blatantly would. England's standing army of the time was about 1,000 men organised in bodyguard regiments - the yeomanry, the Royal Archer Company, a few castle garrisons etc. The majority of any English force would be city militia and the London Trained Bands. These units would be stomped all over. Spanish conquest of England would be a foregone conclusion. The only thing is that the ideas for how to get the troops across the Channel were a beautiful addition to the centuries of abortive English invasion attempts. In fact, it was alarmingly similar to both Napoleon and Hitler's plans. They wanted the troops to board these oblong-shaped barges, each to hold 100 men, and to be dragged by the Spanish warships. They believed that this could be done in one go, which was entirely false since Parma's army was 27,000 and the Spanish had 130 ships. On top of this, the Spanish would be forced to refuse combat while dragging the barges as turning much would capsize them. Heck, rough waves would capsize them. It would potentially take four or five hours under decent weather for the Spanish to get half of their army across, and while this half an army alone could conquer England, it would be in disarray, and likely the barges would have been ripped to pieces by the English and Dutch ships, who would be free to attack the barges with the Spanish unable to bring them to bear at all. In fact, it's worse - the army was supposed to embark from Flanders, but Flanders had no deep draft ports to allow the troop barges access to the Armada ships, so the invasion would never even be able to start. The Spanish in Spain blindly believed the Armada would have no trouble completing their goal, even the Admiral (Medina Sidona?) pressed ahead anyway. Parma knew for sure it would fail and gave up before even making an attempt at making it work.
That, ladies and gentlemen, is why Parma stormed off in a grump and marched into Brabant rather than waiting for the Armada to take him across the sea.
But yes, to clearly answer the original question, the Spanish tercios would have no trouble at all in suppressing the English army - if one would even be raised.
Valdemar II
Banned
The Dutch had a better army. Holland had a long tradition to go to war with their neighbour without help from the rest of Burgundian inherience. The defeat of Gelderland and the conquest of most of Northen Netherland was more or less done by Holland alone without help from either Charles V or even Brabant or flandern. The British was isloated on a island with few enemies on.
There is also a difference in how both conflicts would be fought-- the Dutch had a popular revolt which forced the Spanish to play whack-a-mole until they got too tired and gave up, while an invasion of England would start with the Spanish controlling nothing and dealing with a much more straightforward war.
Well, sort of.
Parma knew it would be one long series of battles and sieges. Even Phillip was not expecting total victory as in April 1588 he advised Parma of the minimum Spanish demands if they reached a stalemate.
If Parma could have taken London and captured the Privy Council and the Queen, then he would be in the strongest position. But conquering the countryside would still be difficult if not impossible.
If Parma could have taken London and captured the Privy Council and the Queen, then he would be in the strongest position. But conquering the countryside would still be difficult if not impossible.
The Duke of Parma was rightly hostile to the concept and events confirmed he was correct.
While the Armada was being organized and put together the Duke of Parma's army was put on short rations and late pay for more than eighteen months and, by the time the Armada had set forth, his army had gone from 30,000 men at their best level of morale to 18,000 wondering when they could expect reliable supplies and wages to be forthcoming. Meanwhile he lost more than a year's campaigning season.
He also knew that the Dutch very much liked the idea of the Armada, seeing a chance to catch Parma's army while trapped on barges and while most of the Spanish fleet(save the obsolete galleys) were helpless to intervene.
While the Armada was being organized and put together the Duke of Parma's army was put on short rations and late pay for more than eighteen months and, by the time the Armada had set forth, his army had gone from 30,000 men at their best level of morale to 18,000 wondering when they could expect reliable supplies and wages to be forthcoming. Meanwhile he lost more than a year's campaigning season.
He also knew that the Dutch very much liked the idea of the Armada, seeing a chance to catch Parma's army while trapped on barges and while most of the Spanish fleet(save the obsolete galleys) were helpless to intervene.
But wouldn't a war in England turn pretty quickly into a whack-a-mole? I doubt the English population would accept the Spanish more than the Dutch. Even less actually as the Spanish had a lawful claim to the Netherlands, which they didn't have on England.
The army of holland part I didn't know. Blame the lack of medieval Dutch millitairy history being taught at schools here (and the fact that it wasn't mentioned in "van nul tot nu"). It does surprise me, I thought Brabant and Flanders would have been heavily involved.
They probably also liked them fighting in England and not the Netherlands.
That didn't hurt either but the chance to slaughter them while helpless at sea was even more appealing.
Actually, Philip II claimed to be a direct descendent of King Edward III of England. Plus, Philip had already technically been King of England when married to Queen Mary I between 1554 and '58.
As for the English whack-a-mole, it probably would depend on the area. Remember, Brabant and Flanders dropped out of the Dutch Revolt pretty early on thanks to a combination of Alba's massacres, Parma's shock-and-awe tactics, and lots of money being spent on them by Spain. Something like that could be done in parts of England, too, maybe.
It is a great scenario for the Dutch. You can slaughter your enemies at sea and the ones you don't slaughter are in a completely different country fighting someone else and if they decide to return to fight you again, you can slaughter them at sea again.
You're right (at least I assume you are right about Edward III and Philip II, I never knew it, but knowing the dynastic marriages, it doesn't surprise me), but still I doubt many English would accept him as king, while various people in the Netherlands still would have.
Of course, I never thought it would have been easy for the English to kick the Spanish out. I just say it surprises me that so many people think it will be a piece of cake for the Spanish, when they had so much trouble in the Netherlands.
Granted, by 1588 I think even Philip had started to turn against the idea of having himself installed as King of England, although he was still all for having Spain beat the ever-living snot out of England. There's a couple of candidates for Spanish puppets to be installed on the throne-- a lot of nobles invovled in the Rising of the North had fled to Spanish Flanders after the rebellion failed, and those exiled English Catholics may be a half-decent start to a puppet government.
A Brit would be better suited to answering this than I, but as far as I'm aware English towns themselves weren't as heavily fortified as their counterparts in the Netherlands. Medieval castles could still be found here and there, however, and many of these decaying castles were used to great effect during the English Civil War.
Plus of course I doubt Spain would actually try and annex England.
They didn't have a claim and they were already quite overstretched, they would likely try and put someone with a bit of a claim that they could control on the throne.
Most of these fortifications though would be quite outdated and easily smashed with cannon I'd imagine.
They didn't have a claim and they were already quite overstretched, they would likely try and put someone with a bit of a claim that they could control on the throne.
There's quite a few examples of town walls in England, it was the done thing. England afterall had had the wars of the roses just a century before.
Most of these fortifications though would be quite outdated and easily smashed with cannon I'd imagine.