Tournament of armies: Difference between revisions

From An Tir Culture Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "'''THE ORIGIN OF THE IDEA OF "A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES''' It all comes from an essay written in 1991 by Squire Logan Vortigern ben Joseph (who is now known as Sir Yusuf) and Lord ..."
 
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''THE ORIGIN OF THE IDEA OF "A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES'''
'''Tournament of Armies''' may refer to:


It all comes from an essay written in 1991 by Squire Logan Vortigern ben Joseph (who is now known as Sir Yusuf) and Lord Steffano da Gucci D.G.E (who is now known as Baron Master Steffano).
[[Tournament of Armies]] - An event held by [[Lions Gate]].


This text is a revision written after the first reading copies of the essay were shared - still way back in 1991.
[[Tournament of Armies Essay]] - An essay written by [[Yusuf ben Josef|Sir Yusuf]] and [[Steffano da Gucci al Khabeelah|Baron Master Steffano]].
 
I have not reviewed it nor changed a word - it is a 20 year old historical document.
 
BS, OP
 
 
ON THE IDEA OF A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES:
A Revision in light of Comments received
Benefits to the Kingdom
The Tournament of Armies
Potential Problems
Implementation
 
Addenda and Points That Have Been Raised
 
ON THE IDEA OF A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES
Benefits to the Kingdom
The Tournament of Armies
Potential Problems
Implementation
 
Addenda and Points That Have Been Raised
ON THE IDEA OF A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES:
A Revision in light of Comments received
By Squire Logan Vortigern ben Joseph
and Lord Steffano da Gucci D.G.E
 
Our Society claims to be a medieval recreation, yet we lack many of the features of the period.  Mass combat was one of the keystones of the Middle Ages, yet it has never really developed, at least in Antir, to a level where it would be something to be proud of, much less brag about.  And we like bragging about our Kingdom.  We like our Kingdom to be the best. So when Logan, Squire to Eirik, then Rex Antir, came up with the idea for a Tournament for armies this article became necessary. 
This paper attempts to explain Squire Logan's idea and to explore some of its ramifications.  We propose a new contest to inspire the tacticians of this Kingdom.  We go on to discuss the prize, the benefit to the Kingdom, how it would be run, some potential problems, and how a King could implement it.  At the end there is a section dealing with questions that have already been raised in relation to previous drafts.  The proposal springs from the idea that competition and friendly rivalry produce excellence.
Individuals or groups compete when there is a prize worth having that only one of them will get.  Tourney fighting has reached the level that it has because of the impetus to win- prizes, prestige, the Crown, etc.  The goal is worth the effort to be the best.  So competitors will work to be the best.
There is no serious war fighting now because there is no real competition.  There is no real competition because there are no real prizes. A Tournament of Armies could encourage the development of real units if there was real competition.  There would be real competition if there was a real prize.  If the prize offered real rights, it could require real duties. The goal is to create a position granting rights and requiring service, won by a group by right of arms. We propose that the King create such a greater Kingdom Office- General of the Armies of Antir.
 
THE PRIZE:
To be the King's General - a rank equivalent to Champion for mass combat.  Selected at a Tournament for armies of up to twenty men. The rank conveys the right to lead the Army of Antir in foreign wars and dress his men in the Kingdom colours.  The rank conveys the duty to defend the King and the Kingdom of Antir in war against foreigners, and in peace to give such service as the Crown requires.  The Victor will swear fealty to the King on behalf of his Army and receive certain rights and duties in return.
The winning army becomes the King's Guard. The Pride of Antir, perhaps?  Members get to wear matching livery with the Kingdom's colours on them.  They defend the King at Antir West and other wars.  Their Captain becomes the King's General.  He uses his skills to advise the King and lead the forces of the Kingdom in War.  When he steps down he receives an award, like the Honour of the Lion's Sword, for service to the Crown. 
The Army must attend the King's Call in War and help the Champion to Protect Him.  The General must give the King good Counsel in War and organize and manage his armies.  In peace, the King's Guard is responsible for protecting the borders of the Kingdom and any place where the King is encamped.  The King's General would be like the King's Constable in England, responsible for defending the King in War and defending the King's land in peacetime.
As an aside, we would love to call the General the King's Constable but it would cause too much confusion.  Not as much confusion as Marshal, but still we fear it would be impractical.  If there is a better period word than General it should be found and used instead.  Thus far we have mentioned the benefits to the victors of this competition, but these are far outweighed by the benefits to the Kingdom.
 
BENEFITS TO THE KINGDOM:
The principal benefit of this is the application of Crown level training and fighting to warfare.  Antir would produce an army that would kick the ass off the Known World. This proposal would produce better units, better Captains, and a command structure for use in major wars.
A Tournament of Armies would improve the calibre of units radically. They would strive to win the competition and would have to become better at unit fighting.  The Tournament would be a reason to practice together just like Crown is a reason to practice individually.  Right now, the Antirian style of warfare depends upon numbers too much. Any group of assembled individuals is called an army.  In period it was the calibre of your troops and their experience as a unit, not just the numbers, that won battles and command was an essential skill.
The Tournament creates a reason to put an Army together, hold it together, and be good at warfare.  It makes tactics a rewarding field of study.  It is a less ceremonial position than the Champion that is also less bureaucratic than being King. So if you're a Duke who won't be King again it is a prize to strive for. It gives a military prize that is not for single combat.  So if you're a tactician who will never win Crown it is a prize to strive for.  Basically, a whole bunch of individuals and groups are going to want to win.  This desire will make them work.  This work will benefit the Kingdom by producing a better Royal Army that is organized and useable.
At a war, the King would have a group of Captains of various armies that could get together to plan strategy with the General of the Army.  Each Captain would know his men and their strengths and weaknesses before he got to the war.  This would allow the General to actually know what was going on before the battle (troop strength, capabilities etc.). The General would be an individual who really knew about tactics and the operation of an Army.  An expert proven in mass combat leading trained units.
Antir could field an army like it mattered because in period it really did and that effected their social structure.
Right now a good army conveys very little power or prestige.  This was not the case in period.  The calibre of mass fighting produced by a Tournament would make our Kingdom more authentic in structure.  We like the idea of a successful army making its leader an important person. We also like the idea of leaders rallying men together and forming military units.
The Tournament would encourage the formation of military groups.  They would want to be liveried for field recognition.  This would spread off the field as well  when it became worthwhile to be identified with your group all the time. It encourages the formation of military organizations larger than that of a household or a Knight and his Squires.  The size of unit that a Barony or a Ducal Retinue would want to field. These military units would also provide a way to study period military styles and formations.
Different areas and time periods produced different weapons and tactics for warfare.  Just as single combat goes through fads and phases Antir could have the same evolution of style in mass combat.  This competition would encourage the development of specialized units as well. 
Pike squares, Landsknect, Berserkers, Romans, Shield Walls, Missile troops, Chargers etc.  You could fight as a unit with standardized weapons/style if you wanted or as a mixed group.  Different groups would develop styles and earn reputations just as individual fighters have.  We love the thought of units like the Madrone Pike, Lions Gate Light, House Stellari, Seagirt Heavy, etc., processing up in front of the Thrones in an Invocation of the Lists like at Crown.  It would be a mark of prestige to belong to a successful unit, like being the squire of a great knight, and this would draw people into units and into feudal relationships.
We find that there are too many independent mercenaries in our style of warfare.  In period there tended to be much more group cohesion.  If the unit can be made the best way to fight in battle this will devalue independent mercenaries.  They would become less valuable than regular troops as training and cohesion became more important.  Mercenaries would still be viable but as trained groups.  We think that a mercenary company of Landsknechts fighting as a unit for the highest bidder would be perfect. If they won the Tournament of Armies we're sure that they would enjoy the right to be His Majesty's Guard. 
Being King is a right earned by combat and so is being Champion.  To hold the position you must earn it.  We think that the same should be true of King's Guard.  If the King is to have a Guard, surely it should know how to fight.  The McFlandry Guard is a purely ceremonial Guard.  The Tournament would produce a real Guard for the King, chosen by combat as he was.  If any group wants the right to really Guard the Throne, let them earn it. 
Much has been said of the Captains of these armies.  They are the leaders who are vying for the title of General through their armies.  To be a Captain you would need to be a member, because you'll be an Officer of the Kingdom if you win.  You would not have to be a peer, but we expect the winners will be.  The most important thing to have would be an army that will fight for you and acclaim you as General if they win. This is how a Captain is chosen and the rank is awarded.  A Captain is someone who can raise, equip and train 20 men.
If the limit is 20 men on the field then most units will try to be up near the limit.  Holding 20 men together on the field well enough to be the best in the Kingdom will require an enormous amount of work and resources. There is only one grand prize so it will require a great deal of social and political skill to be the Captain of such a unit as well as a great deal of personal charisma, brains and effort.  All of this in addition to fighting skill.  A collection of skills that is beyond most non-peers.  Any man who can raise an army, command it, and beat all the peers is certainly their equal and deserving of notice.  Which seems reasonable because military success in mass combat was a period way of bettering your rank.  If a Captain cannot field 20 men of his own then he will get to practice another period art form, diplomacy. 
If your shire has only 6 fighters it would still be your shire army, it just wouldn't be a great army.  But it would be a chance to practice your diplomatic skills.  A 6 man army could band together with a 12 man army, if they could decide upon a Captain (to become General). This would give both units a better chance to win.  But we don't expect such hybrid units to win, especially once the sport of army fighting establishes itself.
We think the real contenders will be 20 man armies from a single location such as a Barony (Lions Gate), or formed under a Royal Peer (Torgul, Eirik), or an exceptional Knight (Oak, Korwyn).  A Large Barony might have two or three armies under knights sworn to the Baron that fight independently at the Tournament of Armies but together in interbaronial war. So there could be rivalry between the armies within a Barony, or, if the Baron was strong, there might be an "A" team and a "B" team.  But he could only personally command one of them in the Tournament of Armies.
 
THE TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES:
A Tournament between armies instead of individuals.
An army is a unit of up to twenty men with a leader. The Tournament could be a round robin or a double elimination depending upon the number that show up.  We suspect that it would have to be double elimination because many areas will field units of less than 20 men, perhaps less than 10.  These units will fight just like individuals fight in Crown, but with the addition of terrain.
At first we thought that the King, and the dictates of Nature, could simply choose a terrain for the battles.  It might be woods one year, bridge the next, open field, hill, boats, whatever.  It would be a surprise to the contestants, just like real warfare.  But we realized that if there was only one area used then the King's bias might be too important.  So instead we suggest that The King choose more than one battle site at the event and let the Lists distribute the battles randomly.
The Lists could randomly determine the site of each battle from the areas chosen by the King.  So a pairing might read "Stellari fights Lions Gate in the Woods".  If Stellari has pikes, and Lions Gate has chiltrons, Lions Gate picks up an advantage through luck of the draw.  If it was "on the Bridge" then the Stellari Pikes would probably massacre Lions Gate.  Just like in real war it would be a combination of luck and skill. 
The site copy could announce that the site contains "A field, a bridge and a defile for His Majesty's approval" or whatever. The autocrats would know in advance that the skirmishes would involve up to forty men, but no more, so large enough areas could be chosen and described in the event bids.  Multiple battle areas are important because much of the game is dealing with terrain advantage and disadvantage and making quick tactical decisions.   
We would suggest that the first one be run in conjunction with a Crown Tourney. We think it should be done at September Crown, after Antir-West War.  The new General and Guard could step up immediately.  They would have the winter to plan and train, then a whole season of fighting, Antir-West War in July, then perhaps Pennsic in August. Within Antir, the August Wars (Clinton and Ducal) would allow units to fine tune before the next Tournament at September Crown.
It could be done at each Crown, but then only the September Victor would get to fight Antir-West War.  The problem with doing it more than once per year is that the War season runs with the Tourney Season and there is only one major international war. That war should be near the end of a General's term.  We think the quiet part of the Year should be near the beginning. Thirdly, it will require/encourage high attendance but require only one day.  So it should be done at September Crown because Labour Day Weekend is an international Long Weekend. September Crown is currently the only guaranteed three day event.  We would have Crown on Saturday, the Tournament on Sunday, and Curia (and a squire's Tourney) on Monday in the morning. This will produce a very busy weekend so we expect that if the Tournament idea catches on it will rapidly become its own event.
It could very quickly become its own Kingdom level event and will probably have to because it will be such an exhausting day of fighting.  It will also be big.  Very big. If you can have up to twenty fighters for an Army, every Army will want to field twenty fighters.  So they will get every possible man.  Every man will have people with him so if the event is a success it will grow.  But will it be a success?
We think that it will be very successful if it is created correctly and supported by the Kingdom.  In the last section we raise some potential problems and try to answer them in advance.
 
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS:
Factions- some will say that this will encourage factionalism.  We do believe that it will strengthen groups and group identification so in a sense it might intensify inter-group rivalry.  Healthy rivalry exists anywhere there is competition, like in the Crown Lists.  If the rivalry between groups is the kind that produces factionalism then it will produce it regardless of this new chance to show it. We think that the need to produce a 20 man army will probably restrict it to Kingdom level organizations where the lines for factional battles are already drawn by other things such as mundane geography and political maneuvering. Armies may be used in factional struggles but we don't believe that they will create them.
 
Few competitors- some may feel that there aren't enough armies available.  There are almost no well organized military forces in existence that practice enough to be real units.  We suspect that we will see a large number of small, bad armies at the first Tournament. If just the Baronies and the Ducal Households field armies there will still be at least 10.  If there are only 5 at the first Tournament then it means that armies are harder to raise than we thought. It also means that next year there will be more because the prize will be seen as easy to reach.  This is the reason for announcing the Tournament as early in the reign as possible.  To give time for the raising and training of armies.
 
Twenty men is too few- because Antir fights without tactics currently it is important for us to have large armies.  The best  army means the largest number of bodies on the field.  But these armies are too big to personally command and it shows.  Some may also feel that twenty is not enough to allow real tactics.  We think that it is, especially when the sport of mass combat is in its infancy.  If the future allows (or demands) larger units then the Tournament will evolve.  But for now we believe that twenty is a good number because it is large enough to require tactics but small enough for personal command.
 
Twenty men is too many- many areas may not have twenty men to field.  But twenty is only the maximum, there is no minimum.  If the Shire of Ne'er do Well has only 6 fighters it can stand alone if it wants, but the Army of Lions Gate will wipe it out.  However, Ne'er do Well can ally with the Shire of Woebegone and the Shire of Nowhere and field 18 men in an alliance.  All they would have to do is choose a Captain.  They would still be the underdogs but at least they would have a chance.  We like the 20 person maximum because it forces alliances between small armies (Shires, most Knights) but still allows most Barons and Dukes, plus some Knights and others, to form independent competitive armies.
 
Missile troops- We're not sure about including missile troops.  We're tempted to just say a total of twenty men, use missile troops if you want.  But missiles often reduce spectating so it will have to be discussed.
 
Rhino-hiding- People already strive to win battles.  If there is a real prize for the winning team then there will be more hard blows ignored.  This is a reason to encourage spectators because they are a great anti-rhino opinion force.  In general we would say that rhino-hide will be dealt with as it arises, just like it always is.  "If he doesn't die, hit him again harder".  If an army cheats to win then they'll be disliked and disrespected and the populace will let them know it.
 
IMPLEMENTATION: 
To implement this, a King would have to announce, as early as possible, his intention to hold a Tournament of Armies at the Crown to choose his successor.  He should announce it at his Coronation or, even better, right after his investiture as Prince.  He would announce the rules and restrictions and the prize.  It would help if he made it more like an order than an event announcement.  "His Majesty has decreed that every army in the Kingdom shall meet at Crown to decide which is the greatest... ".  This would give time for units to form and Captains to plan. But even with 3 months lead time we should not expect too much from the units because it will be the first competition.
The first one might be more of a brawl than a Crown Tourney.  This is because a new tradition is being created.  The first King of the West, fighting as he fought in the first West Crown Tourney, would be slaughtered in a current West Crown, but this does not mean that he was not the best at the time. The tenth King's Guard will probably be far, far better than the first.  But without a first there will never be a tenth.  This proposal gives birth to melee fighting as a competitive sport rather than just a pastime.  Mass combat would, of course, still be mainly a pastime because the Tournament would only be one event.  At other Wars units would fight based on allegiances or mercenary pay.  At Antir West they would all fight together, led by the General.  And we believe that they would win that war and set a new standard for mass combat in the Known World.
To conclude, our goal in bringing this idea to the attention of the people of Antir has been to create a medium which will encourage mass combat.  We think that this would do that.  We also think that it would make the structure of our Kingdom more like that of a period Kingdom.  As well, we see a variety of collateral benefits (more mass combat, another big event, more feudal ties, etc.) that will help all of us.  Finally, we see no major drawbacks. 
Any comments you could give to us would be appreciated.  Please discuss this with others and help us to make it an easy decision for a King to make.
 
Completed at Lions Gate in the days before the first Coronation of their Hignesses Tjorkill and Hlutwige.
Addenda and Points That Have Been Raised
 
1) Can the King's Guard succeed itself ?
We would say so.  If they are still the best them let them stay on top.
 
2) The size of the units will determine the number of units involved and the amount of diplomacy, political maneuvers and ally gathering necessary. As the maximum size rises the number of composite units goes up and the number of entrants goes down because units will be forced to ally to have a chance of winning. 
3) Who is going to make the livery for the victors ?
We don't know yet.
 
4) Originally, we wanted a peerage to be the General's reward.
The task facing the Captain who wants to be General will be formidable indeed.  Raise an army, train it, equip it, win the Tournament of Armies.  Then, serve the Kingdom in peace and in War.  Any non-peer who succeeded at this in period would certainly be raised to the Peerage.  But, the point was raised, what if he is a jerk?
Personally, we believe that if a jerk can do all that then he still deserves the award.  If the King is a jerk he still gets to be a Royal Peer.  If the Champion is a jerk he is still Champion.  Unlike other competitions in the Arts and Sciences, the selection of the General will not be a popularity contest.  Antir will know who is the best, unequivocally.  Just like after a Crown Tourney.  Besides, jerks are just as period as social advancement by military prowess was.  Another counterpoint suggested that, regardless of the personality of the victor, it was simply not enough work to deserve a peerage.
Some say that the prize is too good for the current level of competition.  That is, that the first General would get an easy peerage.  We think this is mistaken.  The winner will be the best Captain in the Kingdom.  If the level of fighting and tactics appears to be low it is not because a bad Captain won, it is because it is a new sport.  The knights of AS II would not be knighted today, that does not mean that they should not have been knighted in AS II.  If the Kingdom wants competition worthy of a peer, it must offer a prize that is worth the effort.  If the prize is a peerage it will produce intense competition.  The armies might not be so hot the first time, but what about the third time ? or the fifth ?
Unfortunately, regardless of our opinion of the medievalness or the competition enhancing qualities of a peerage as a prize, it is not the prerogative of the Crown to create new peerages.  So even if the Crown wanted to it couldn't.
5) Alternatively, what about a Grant level award for combat.  Currently there are Grants of Arms for service and for Arts/Sciences.  Why not create one for contibution to the evolution of combat in this Kingdom.  In the East Kingdom they have the Order of the Tygre Combattant, or OTC, which serves exactly this purpose.  I would award it to the General of the Army each year, and additionally to any who the Crown feels have significantly  added to the evolution of single or group combat in this Kingdom.  As an aside, the Easterners feel that this makes it far easier for them to avoid knighting people for just being super-death-machine fighters because it is a specific super-death-machine award.
 
6) Can you be Champion and General ?
Sure. If you're the best at mass and single combat, then you're the best.
 
7) Could the King field an Army ?
Yes, but he could not join them on the field because it's wrong to raise a weapon against your Sovereign so he would have an unfair advantage.
 
8) Could the Crown Prince field an army ?
Yes.  We think it's fine for the Crown Prince to fight on the field.  Besides, it wouldn't be fair to a well trained army to lose their commander on Sunday at Crown for the Tournament because he won the Crown Tourney on Saturday. 
 
9) Other possible dates ?
It could be run at Alpine Pass War the first time because it is in the same part of the year as September Crown.  It could also be started as its own event.  But this would require a great deal of preparatory and promotional work.  We still prefer Crown because of the guaranteed high turnout.
 
10) Name for the Winner?
Sir Roger fitzLion thinks that he should be called the
Captain-General.
 
11) Restricting the make-up of the Army
Some think that the armies should only be allowed a certain number of peers or Royal Peers per unit.  We disagree with this.  Restricting the make-up of the units artificially lowers the level of competition. 
 
ON THE IDEA OF A TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES
By Squire Logan Vortigern ben Joseph
and Lord Steffano da Gucci D.G.E
 
Our Society claims to be a medieval recreation, yet we lack many of the features of the period.  Mass combat was one of the keystones of the Middle Ages, yet it has never really developed, at least in Antir, to a level where it would be something to be proud of, much less brag about.  And we like bragging about our Kingdom.  We like our Kingdom to be the best. So when Logan, Squire to Eirik Rex Antir, came up with the idea for a Tournament for armies this article became necessary. 
This paper attempts to explain Squire Logan's idea and to explore some of its ramifications.  We propose a new contest to inspire the tacticians of this Kingdom.  We go on to discuss the prize, the benefit to the Kingdom, how it would be run, some potential problems, and how a King could implement it.  At the end there is a section dealing with questions that have already been raised in relation to previous drafts.  The proposal springs from the idea that competition and friendly rivalry produce excellence.
Individuals or groups compete when there is a prize worth having that only one of them will get.  Tourney fighting has reached the level that it has because of the impetus to win- prizes, prestige, the Crown, etc.  The goal is worth the effort to be the best.  So competitors will work to be the best.
There is no serious war fighting now because there is no real competition.  There is no real competition because there are no real prizes. A Tournament of Armies could encourage the development of real units if there was real competition.  There would be real competition if there was a real prize.  If the prize offered real rights, it could require real duties. The goal is to create a position granting rights and requiring service, won by a group by right of arms. We propose that the King create such a greater Kingdom Office- General of the Armies of Antir.
 
 
THE PRIZE:
To be the King's General - a rank equivalent to Champion for mass combat.  Selected at a Tournament for armies of up to twenty men held on the day after September Crown. The rank conveys the right to lead the Army of Antir in foreign wars and dress his men in the Kingdom colours.  The rank conveys the duty to defend the King and the Kingdom of Antir in war against foreigners, and in peace by guarding the King's Land. The Victor will swear fealty to the King on behalf of his Army and receive certain rights and duties in return.
The winning army becomes the King's Guard. The Pride of Antir, perhaps?  Members get to wear matching livery with the Kingdom's colours on them.  They defend the King at Antir West and other wars.  Their Captain becomes the King's General.  He leads the forces of the Kingdom in War.  He is, of course,  subordinate to the King but the King will recognize his technical skill. 
When he steps down he receives an award like the Honour of the Lion's Sword.  We suggest that if he is not already a peer he be considered for a Peerage as well, although that cannot easily be legislated.  Perhaps a Knighthood for mass, rather than single, combat or a Laurel for the science of Tactics.  We suggest this because it will produce tactical science (art ?) worthy of recognition.  As well, it will be an important Office that requires far more of the winner than being Champion, especially if the idea of King's Constable, or duty off the field, is added. But duty on the field will be the main focus of the position.
The Army must attend the King's Call in War and help the Champion to Protect Him.  The General must give the King good Counsel in War and organize and manage his armies.  In peace, the King's Guard is responsible for protecting the borders of the Kingdom and any place where the King is encamped.  This could be expanded to include collecting a toll levied by the King on the road to great gatherings. That is, providing Gate Guards at the Kingdom events and other major events (Antir West, Crowns, Coronation) during their tenure.  The King's General would be like the King's Constable in England, responsible for defending the King in War and defending the King's land in peacetime.
As an aside, we would love to call the General the King's Constable but it would cause too much confusion.  Not as much confusion as Marshal, but still we fear it would be impractical.  If there is a better period word than General it should be found and used instead.  Thus far we have mentioned the benefits to the victors of this competition, but these are far outweighed by the benefits to the Kingdom.
 
 
BENEFITS TO THE KINGDOM:
The principal benefit of this is the application of Crown level training and fighting to warfare.  Antir would produce an army that would kick the ass off the Known World. This proposal would produce better units, better Captains, and a command structure for use in major wars.
A Tournament of Armies would improve the calibre of units radically. They would strive to win the competition and would have to become better at unit fighting.  The Tournament would be a reason to practice together just like Crown is a reason to practice individually.  Right now, the Antirian style of warfare depends upon numbers too much. Any group of assembled individuals is called an army.  In period it was the calibre of your troops and their experience as a unit, not just the numbers, that won battles and command was an essential skill.
The Tournament creates a reason to put an Army together, hold it together, and be good at warfare.  It makes tactics a rewarding field of study.  It is a less ceremonial position than the Champion that is also less bureaucratic than being King. So if you're a Duke who won't be King again it is a prize to strive for. It gives a military prize that is not for single combat.  So if you're a tactician who will never win Crown it is a prize to strive for.  Basically, a whole bunch of individuals and groups are going to want to win.  This desire will make them work.  This work will benefit the Kingdom by producing a better Royal Army that is organized and useable.
At a war, the King would have a group of Captains of various armies that could get together to plan strategy with the General of the Army.  Each Captain would know his men and their strengths and weaknesses before he got to the war.  This would allow the General to actually know what was going on before the battle (troop strength, capabilities etc.). The General would be an individual who really knew about tactics and the operation of an Army.  An expert proven in mass combat leading trained units.
Antir could field an army like it mattered because in period it did.
Right now a good army conveys very little power or prestige.  This was not the case in period.  The calibre of mass fighting produced by a Tournament would make our Kingdom more authentic in structure.  We like the idea of a successful army making its leader an important person. We also like the idea of leaders rallying men together and forming military units.
The Tournament would encourage the formation of military groups.  They would want to be liveried for field recognition.  This would spread off the field as well  when it became worthwhile to be identified with your group all the time. It encourages the formation of military organizations larger than that of a household or a Knight and his Squires.  The size of unit that a Barony or a Ducal Retinue would want to field. These military units would also provide a way to study period military styles and formations.
Different areas and time periods produced different weapons and tactics for warfare.  Just as single combat goes through fads and phases Antir could have the same evolution of style in mass combat.  This competition would encourage the development of specialized units as well. 
Pike squares, Landsknect, Berserkers, Romans, Shield Walls, Missile troops, Chargers etc.  You could fight as a unit with standardized weapons/style if you wanted or as a mixed group.  Different groups would develop styles and earn reputations just as individual fighters have.  We love the thought of units like the Madrone Pike, Lions Gate Light, House Stellari, Seagirt Heavy, etc., processing up in front of the Thrones in an Invocation of the Lists like at Crown.  It would be a mark of prestige to belong to a successful unit, like being the squire of a great knight, and this would draw people into units and into feudal relationships.
We find that there are too many independent mercenaries in our style of warfare.  In period there tended to be much more group cohesion.  If the unit can be made the best way to fight in battle this will devalue independent mercenaries.  They would become less valuable than regular troops as training and cohesion became more important.  Mercenaries would still be viable but as trained groups.  We think that a mercenary company of Landsknechts fighting as a unit for the highest bidder would be perfect. If they won the Tournament of Armies we're sure that they would enjoy the right to be His Majesty's Guard. 
Being King is a right earned by combat and so is being Champion.  To hold the position you must earn it.  We think that the same should be true of King's Guard.  If the King is to have a Guard, surely it should know how to fight.  The McFlandry Guard is a purely ceremonial Guard.  The Tournament would produce a real Guard for the King, chosen by combat as he was.  If any group wants the right to really Guard the Throne, let them earn it.  And let them be willing to serve his Majesty and the Kingdom off the field as well.
We propose that off the field the King's Guard should be responsible for protecting the King's Lands.  They should also collect tolls, to support the King, from those who use the King's Road to come to his great gatherings and Wars.  This would provide a group of enthusiastic young men in matching garb to man the Gate at the major events.  These same young men would form the core of the King's Army in war. They would look good and serve the Kingdom both on and off the field. This would solve the problem of finding people to do Gate Duty at Kingdom Level events. The Gate would always be manned because the General would have that duty as part of his Oath of Fealty.  The King's Army would have the privilege of Gate Duty and would rapidly turn it into a prestigious job, done for the glory of the unit and the honour of their Captain and the King. The honour of the Captain had better be important to the members of the army because he is going to demand far more than Gate Duty from them. 
Much has been said of the Captains of these armies.  They are the leaders who are vying for the title of General through their armies.  To be a Captain you would need to be a member, because you'll be an Officer of the Kingdom if you win.  You would not have to be a peer, but we expect the winners will be.  The most important thing to have would be an army that will fight for you and acclaim you as General if they win. This is how a Captain is chosen and the rank is awarded.  A Captain is someone who can raise, equip and train 20 men.
If the limit is 20 men on the field then most units will try to be up near the limit.  Holding 20 men together on the field well enough to be the best in the Kingdom will require an enormous amount of work and resources. We think that any non-peer who can do it deserves the rank.  There is only one grand prize so it will require a great deal of social and political skill to be the Captain of such a unit as well as a great deal of personal charisma, brains and effort.  All of this in addition to fighting skill.  A collection of skills that is beyond most non-peers.  Any man who can raise an army, command it, and beat all the peers is certainly their equal and deserving of the recognition. The peerage should consider this seriously because military success in mass combat was a period way of bettering your rank.  If a Captain cannot field 20 men of his own then he will get to practice another period art form, diplomacy. 
If your shire has only 6 fighters it would still be your shire army, it just wouldn't be a great army.  But it would be a chance to practice your diplomatic skills.  A 6 man army could band together with a 12 man army, if they could decide upon a Captain (to become General). This would give both units a better chance to win.  But we don't expect such hybrid units to win, especially once the sport of army fighting establishes itself.
We think the real contenders will be 20 man armies from a single location such as a Barony (Lions Gate), or formed under a Royal Peer (Torgul, Eirik), or an exceptional Knight (Oak, Korwyn).  A Large Barony might have two or three armies under knights sworn to the Baron that fight independently at the Tournament of Armies but together in interbaronial war. So there could be rivalry between the armies within a Barony, or, if the Baron was strong, there might be an "A" team and a "B" team.  But he could only personally command one of them in the Tournament of Armies.
 
 
THE TOURNAMENT OF ARMIES:
A Tournament between armies instead of individuals.
An army is a unit of up to twenty men with a leader. The Tournament could be a round robin or a double elimination depending upon the number that show up.  We suspect that it would have to be double elimination because many areas will field units of less than 20 men, perhaps less than 10.  These units will fight just like individuals fight in Crown, but with the addition of terrain.
At first we thought that the King, and the dictates of Nature, could simply choose a terrain for the battles.  It might be woods one year, bridge the next, open field, hill, boats, whatever.  It would be a surprise to the contestants, just like real warfare.  But we realized that if there was only one area used then the King's bias might be too important.  So instead we suggest that The King choose more than one battle site at the event and let the Lists distribute the battles randomly.
The Lists could randomly determine the site of each battle from the areas chosen by the King.  So a pairing might read "Stellari fights Lions Gate in the Woods".  If Stellari has pikes, and Lions Gate has chiltrons, Lions Gate picks up an advantage through luck of the draw.  If it was "on the Bridge" then the Stellari Pikes would probably massacre Lions Gate.  Just like in real war it would be a combination of luck and skill. 
The site copy could announce that the site contains "A field, a bridge and a defile for His Majesty's approval" or whatever. The autocrats would know in advance that the skirmishes would involve up to forty men, but no more, so large enough areas could be chosen and described in the event bids.  Multiple battle areas are important because much of the game is dealing with terrain advantage and disadvantage and making quick tactical decisions.   
We would suggest that the first one be run in conjunction with a Crown Tourney. We think it should be done at September Crown, after Antir-West War.  The new General and Guard could step up immediately.  They would have the winter to plan and train, then a whole season of fighting, Antir-West War in July, then perhaps Pennsic in August. In Antir, the August Wars (Clinton and Ducal) would allow units to fine tune before the next Tournament at September Crown.
It could be done at each Crown, but then only the September Victor would get to fight Antir-West War.  The problem with doing it more than once per year is that the War season runs with the Tourney Season and there is only one major international war. That war should be near the end of a General's term.  We think the quiet part of the Year should be near the beginning. Thirdly, it will require/encourage high attendance but require only one day.  So it should be done at September Crown because Labour Day Weekend is an international Long Weekend. September Crown is currently the only guaranteed three day event.  We would have Crown on Saturday, the Tournament on Sunday, and Curia (and a squire's Tourney) on Monday in the morning. This will produce a very busy weekend so we expect that if the Tournament idea catches on it will rapidly become its own event.
It could very quickly become its own Kingdom level event and will probably have to because it will be such an exhausting day of fighting.  It will also be big.  Very big. If you can have up to twenty fighters for an Army, every Army will want to field twenty fighters.  So they will get every possible man.  Every man will have people with him so if the event is a success it will grow.  But will it be a success?
We think that it will be very successful if it is created correctly and supported by the Kingdom.  In the last section we raise some potential problems and try to answer them in advance.
 
 
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS:
Factions- some will say that this will encourage factionalism.  We do believe that it will strengthen groups and group identification so in a sense it might intensify inter-group rivalry.  Healthy rivalry exists anywhere there is competition, like in the Crown Lists.  If the rivalry between groups is the kind that produces factionalism then it will produce it regardless of this new chance to show it. We think that the need to produce a 20 man army will probably restrict it to Kingdom level organizations where the lines for factional battles are already drawn by other things such as mundane geography and political maneuvering. Armies may be used in factional struggles but we don't believe that they will create them.
 
Few competitors- some may feel that there aren't enough armies available.  There are almost no well organized military forces in existence that practice enough to be real units.  We suspect that we will see a large number of small, bad armies at the first Tournament. If just the Baronies and the Ducal Households field armies there will still be at least 10.  If there are only 5 at the first Tournament then it means that armies are harder to raise than we thought. It also means that next year there will be more because the prize will be seen as easy to reach.  This is the reason for announcing the Tournament as early in the reign as possible.  To give time for the raising and training of armies.
 
Twenty men is too few- because Antir fights without tactics currently it is important for us to have large armies.  The best  army means the largest number of bodies on the field.  But these armies are too big to personally command and it shows.  Some may also feel that twenty is not enough to allow real tactics.  We think that it is, especially when the sport of mass combat is in its infancy.  If the future allows (or demands) larger units then the Tournament will evolve.  But for now we believe that twenty is a good number because it is large enough to require tactics but small enough for personal command.
 
Twenty men is too many- many areas may not have twenty men to field.  But twenty is only the maximum, there is no minimum.  If the Shire of Ne'er do Well has only 6 fighters it can stand alone if it wants, but the Army of Lions Gate will wipe it out.  However, Ne'er do Well can ally with the Shire of Woebegone and the Shire of Nowhere and field 18 men in an alliance.  All they would have to do is choose a Captain.  They would still be the underdogs but at least they would have a chance.  We like the 20 person maximum because it forces alliances between small armies (Shires, most Knights) but still allows most Barons and Dukes, plus some Knights and others, to form independent competitive armies.
 
Missile troops- We're not sure about including missile troops.  We're tempted to just say a total of twenty men, use missile troops if you want.  But missiles often reduce spectating so it will have to be discussed.
 
Rhino-hiding- People already strive to win battles.  If there is a real prize for the winning team then there will be more hard blows ignored.  This is a reason to encourage spectators because they are a great anti-rhino opinion force.  In general we would say that rhino-hide will be dealt with as it arises, just like it always is.  "If he doesn't die, hit him again harder".  If an army cheats to win then they'll be disliked and disrespected and the populace will let them know it.
 
Gate Duty- some may worry that giving Gate Duty to the King's Guard takes a job away from the Kingdom Constabulary.  To be honest, we wish it took more away from them. 
The radical version of this proposal would make the General and the Guard (and their vassals etc.) the Constabulary at Kingdom events.  They would be responsible for the maintenance of order and the protection of the Populace from the Mundane World.  We think it would work if it was done right.  Antirians do not shy away from service, especially when it comes with the admiration of the populace as part of a Tourney prize.  We would leave local Constables in place as seneschal's deputies and kill the Office at the Kingdom level.  Antir doesn't need more cops. But we don't think we could get this to happen.  So all we've suggested is Gate Duty, a small but necessary job that has to be done and involves some public relations, some information dispensing, but mostly just effort. Some people may think this is asking too much of the Guard.
Gate Duty, for those who have done it alone or for far too long,  is awful.  Will the Guard be willing to do this at the 4 major events?  We think so, for two reasons.  One, if they have to do it they will make it fun. 
If the duty is shared between the Guard and their supporters and vassals it will be broken up between 35-50 people.  This is more than enough for short shifts and large numbers on the Gate.  It will be their chance to brag to everyone else about their status and to wear their Antir livery off the field.  It will be their duty, but it will evolve into a right very quickly.  Once it is seen as their exclusive right it will be something to cherish, not bemoan.  It's not even that bad a job, really.  In Ansteorra the Peers do the Gate.  They don't even have Constables.  Secondly, the Guard will be doing it for the General, not because it's fun.
Being King is an enormous amount of work.  But people still fight in Crown because it is a prestigious, rewarding position. The same will be true of being General.  Armies will fight to make their Captain the General and to make themselves the King's Guard.  The General will require the work of a group of people, his Army, who will not get the award after they step down as he will.  We think the same is true of the King.
There are a lot of people who work with and for their Majesties who do not get to be Royal Peers or wear the Crown. They serve because of their bond to the winner of the Crown or his lady.  They are the Royal retinue.  They serve for personal reasons, because of their relationship to the Victor, and for the prestige of being in the Royal retinue.  We think that exactly the same thing will happen with the General and the Guard.  Being the winning army is prestigious. As is being the King's Guard.  So what if it requires a bunch of work.  The prize will be worth the effort. Especially once it is established and begins to develop its own traditions.  But, to grow and develop, this seed must be planted first.
 
 
 
 
IMPLEMENTATION: 
To implement this, a King would have to announce, as early as possible, his intention to hold a Tournament of Armies at the Crown to choose his successor.  He should announce it at his Coronation or, even better, right after his investiture as Prince.  He would announce the rules and restrictions and the prize.  It would help if he made it more like an order than an event announcement.  "His Majesty has decreed that every army in the Kingdom shall meet at Crown to decide which is the greatest... ".  This would give time for units to form and Captains to plan. But even with 3 months lead time we should not expect too much from the units because it will be the first competition.
The first one might be more of a brawl than a Crown Tourney.  This is because a new tradition is being created.  The first King of the West would be slaughtered by the current King of the West, but this does not mean that he was not the best at the time. The tenth King's Guard will probably be far, far better than the first.  But without a first there will never be a tenth.  This proposal gives birth to melee fighting as a competitive sport rather than just a pastime.  Mass combat would, of course, still be a pastime, because the Tournament would only be one event.  At other Wars units would fight based on allegiances or mercenary pay.  At Antir West they would all fight together, led by the General.  And we believe that they would win that war and set a new standard for mass combat in the Known World.
To conclude, our goal in bringing this idea to the attention of the people of Antir has been to create a medium which will encourage mass combat.  We think that this would do that.  We also think that it would make the structure of our Kingdom more like that of a period Kingdom.  As well, we see a variety of collateral benefits (more mass combat, another big event, more feudal ties, etc.) that will help all of us.  Finally, we see no major drawbacks. 
Any comments you could give to us would be appreciated.  Please discuss this with others and help us to make it an easy decision for a King to make.
 
Completed at Lions Gate in the days before Egil's Tourney, AS XXIV, in the hopes of bringing some small measure of glory to our most beautiful liege lady, Meagan, Regina Antir.
Addenda and points that have been raised.
 
1) Can the King's Guard succeed itself ?
We would say so.  If they are still the best them let them stay on top.
 
2) The size of the units will determine the number of units involved and the amount of diplomacy, political maneuvers and ally gathering necessary. As the maximum size rises the number of composite units goes up and the number of entrants goes down because units will be forced to ally to have a chance of winning. 
3) Who is going to make the livery for the victors ?
We don't know yet.
 
4) Originally, we wanted a peerage to be the General's reward.
The task facing the Captain who wants to be General will be formidable indeed.  Raise an army, train it, equip it, win the Tournament of Armies.  Then, serve the Kingdom in peace and in War.  Any non-peer who succeeded at this in period would certainly be raised to the Peerage.  But, the point was raised, what if he is a jerk?
Personally, we believe that if a jerk can do all that then he still deserves the award.  If the King is a jerk he still gets to be a Royal Peer.  If the Champion is a jerk he is still Champion.  Unlike other competitions in the Arts and Sciences, the selection of the General will not be a popularity contest.  Antir will know who is the best, unequivocally.  Just like after a Crown Tourney.  Besides, jerks are just as period as social advancement by military prowess was.  Another counterpoint suggested that, regardless of the personality of the victor, it was simply not enough work to deserve a peerage.
Some say that the prize is too good for the current level of competition.  That is, that the first General will get an easy peerage.  We think this is mistaken.  The winner will be the best Captain in the Kingdom.  If the level of fighting and tactics appears to be low it is not because a bad Captain won, it is because it is a new sport.  The knights of AS II would not be knighted today, that does not mean that they should not have been knighted in AS II.  If the Kingdom wants competition worthy of a peer, it must offer a prize that is worth the effort.  If the prize is a peerage it will produce intense competition.  The armies might not be so hot the first time, but what about the third time ? or the fifth ?
5) If people object to conveying any of the existent peerages, yet feel that it is worthy of that rank, could the Crown create a new patent of arms level award roughly equivalent to an Earl ?
We don't know.  What do you think ?
 
 
 
6) Can you be Champion and General ?
Sure. If you're the best at mass and single combat, then you're the best.
 
7) Could the King field an Army ?
Yes, but he could not join them on the field because it's wrong to raise a weapon against your Sovereign so he would have an unfair advantage.
 
8) Could the Crown Prince field an army ?
Yes.  We think it's fine for the Crown Prince to fight on the field.  Besides, it wouldn't be fair to a well trained army to lose their commander on Sunday at Crown for the Tournament because he won the Crown Tourney on Saturday. 
 
9) Other possible dates ?
It could be run at Alpine Pass War the first time because it is in the same part of the year as September Crown.  We still prefer Crown because of the guaranteed high turnout.
 
10) Name for the Winner?
Sir Roger fitzLion thinks that he should be called the
Captain-General.

Latest revision as of 23:08, 4 July 2011

Tournament of Armies may refer to:

Tournament of Armies - An event held by Lions Gate.

Tournament of Armies Essay - An essay written by Sir Yusuf and Baron Master Steffano.

Retrieved from "http://antir.sca.wiki/index.php?title=Tournament_of_armies&oldid=33586"