Happy 'Guldensporenslag' (Battle of the golden spurs)!

DeepO · July 11, 2002, 09:45

As there were a few threads celebrating the 4th of July and the Canadian national day, I thought it would be cool to celebrate the Flemish day as well. After all, today is the 700th anniversary of one of the most historical battles of the middle ages, and very few people know about it. To make it Civ-related, I'll try tell the story in Civ terms, with maybe some usefull tactics as well.

The larger setting
In the 13th century, Flanders (only part of what Flanders is today) was one of the richest regions of Europe, more or less independant. The Count of Flanders was a vassal of the King of France, but was allowed to follow his own course. However, when Phillipe IV needed more money to fuel his war with England, he raised additional taxes on the Flemish cities. Count Gwijde of Flanders reacted by declaring Flanders' independance in 1297, signing a pact with the English to battle the French. However, Philippe IV sends an army, and defeats the small Flemish army, taking the count and most of his family as prisoners of war. Flanders is no longer a vassal state, but annexed into France.

The battle
The following years, a few Flemish cities revolt, but the revolts are repressed by French troops. In 1302, however, the whole of Flanders revolts, all cities 'culture flip', and an army of Flemish citizens is formed under the leadership of a poor weaver, Pieter de Coninck. The army consisted mostly of pikemen, crossbowmen, and citizens wielding a 'Goedendag' (litteraly 'goodday', in the meaning of 'hello'), a heavy club with one end reinforced with an iron spike. In total, this footarmy is 9000 men strong. Further, some 40 knights join, which is neglectable against the 2500 French knights and 4000 footmen the French king sends to claim Flanders again.

The 11th July 1302, these two armies meet at a field outside Kortrijk, strategically choosen by the Flemish because of a small river that splits the field in two. The French, overconfident because of the much larger army of knights (a knight was considered to be equal to 10 footmen) attack, but are slowed considerably by the 3m-wide river, and are slaughtered by the Flemish ranks of pikemen and Goedendags. The Flemish tactic was rather simple, but unconventional for that time: pikemen and Goedendags were alternated in the first rank, and while the pikemen embedded their pike into the ground to break the knight's rush, the citizens bashed the horses' or knight's heads with their goedendags. The result was astounding, nearly no French knight escaped.

What happens next
After the battle, the spurs of all knights are collected, and over 1000 golden spurs (coming from 500 French nobles, the shieldbearers (?) had silver spurs at best) are gathered as trophy. This is what gave the battle it's name, those spurs are still on display in a church in Kortrijk.
Flanders is independant for good, and remains so until it is annexed by the Burgundies in the 15th century.
In 1838, Hendrik Conscience writes a novel, the Lion of Flanders, which becomes both the basis of Flemish patriotic feelings, and an incentive to get all Flemish people to learn how to read. It is still more or less obliged literature for the whole of Flanders.

Historical importance
Historically, there are a number of reasons why this battle is so important. Of course, the independance of Flanders is one of them, but this is rather local, and of no interest to the rest of the world. But, the guldensporenslag is also the first ever battle in which footmen defeat a large army of knights, troops that were considered allmighty at the time. The tactic of embedding pikes into the ground to break the rush, while using clubs to bash heads is later used by many armies (BTW, clubs are better then swords here: with a sword you are more likely to hit one of the pikemen as it is most useful when slashing in big sweeps horizontally).
Further, this battle is what most historians describe as the turning point in power: not the nobles, but the cities have true power from now on.

Civ notes
In civ terms: fortified pikeman behind a river, aided with some sort of finishers is the best to counter knights. And while in 1302 the river made retreat of knights impossible, in civ you can finish the knights with some low cost warriors or swordmen.
Cities can culturally flip, as they did in many occasions irl, the independance of Flanders is just one of them (that I haven't seen mentioned here before).
This battle would be great for a scenario, but without scripting it will never play right: the French wanted to break al resistance in one big battle, no AI would do so in civ. But at least they would pillage all Flemish land, just like the French did in 1302.
If there would ever be a Flemish Civ, please make their UU carry a goedendag, those were devastating weapons! Crude, but a so effective...

more info can be found at this site (sorry, only in Dutch)

DeepO

Arrian · July 11, 2002, 10:00

vondrack · July 11, 2002, 10:15

Interesting post. Reminds me of the Braveheart movie... the Scotts lead by William Wallace used pikes successfully against English knights there too. Dunno if the movie was historically correct, but I liked it.

DeepO · July 11, 2002, 11:16

I've seen that movie too, and have asked myself many times whether that would have been historically accurate. It sure made a good cinematic effect

If it was accurate, it was before the guldensporenslag, I think the movie depicted the batlle of Stirling in 1297. But I doubt it was such a decisive victory as the Flemish one: the 40 Flemish knights descended, and fought on foot. I thought Wallace had a cavalry of his own.

Maybe some Scottish people can help out on this one

DeepO

dunk · July 11, 2002, 12:30

The battle of Stirling was fought on a bridge. Braveheart is completely inaccurate as far as the battle goes. The English were trying to cross Stirling Bridge and the Scots stayed on their side and picked them off as they crossed. I saw this on a TV special about history and movies. So, actually, the two battles (Stirling and Guldensporenslag) are actually quite similar. Footmen taking on heavy cavalry and winning with the aid of a river.

Very cool information. Those darn Frenchies.

alva · July 11, 2002, 13:26

Quote:

more info can be found at this site (sorry, only in Dutch)

btw: there is an option to read the in English aswell

Nice article DeepO

'ZO lang de leeuw kan klauwen, zo lang de vlaming leeft'

DeepO · July 11, 2002, 14:21

Aha, thanks dunk999. No pikes, then

This only shows how strategically important rivers are to warfare, not only the big rivers that for centuries defined borders between for instance the Roman Empire and the German tribes, or the Wolga(?) between the Nazis and Russia, but small, 3 meter wide, easily crossable brooks like the Groeninghenbeek in Kortrijk can be very important if used wisely. It is very cool that this was also taken into account with Civ3. Don't you just love this game

alva, thanks for noticing there was an English translation of the site as well, I can't believe I missed it! So, if interested, read it here . I just noticed that in English, the battle is also known as 'The Battle of Courtrai', Courtai being the translation of Kortrijk, the city in which all of this took place.

Another correction: where I used shieldbearer above, it should have been squire.

DeepO

Marquis de Sodaq · July 11, 2002, 16:43

Quote:

Originally posted by DeepO
Pieter de Coninck.

A very appropriate name for a leader!

Quote:

a 'Goedendag' (litteraly 'goodday', in the meaning of 'hello'), a heavy club with one end reinforced with an iron spike.

Good humor...

Interesting story, bedankt!

DeepO · July 11, 2002, 18:02

Marquis, if I am right in thinking you are Dutch, you do know we saved your asses back then, don't you? If those guys with goedendags (indeed, how ironic of them to call it like that

) hadn't stopped the French, we would all be speaking French right now. Not that that would necessarily be a bad thing, but I like my motherlanguage

DeepO

Marquis de Sodaq · July 11, 2002, 22:38

Quote:

Originally posted by DeepO
Marquis, if I am right in thinking you are Dutch,

Nee, maar jaren geleden woonde ik in Nederland, dus de taalkennis. Misschien spraken jullie dan nog iets als engels, een mengsel van germanisch en frans...

DeepO · July 12, 2002, 06:26

Aha, sorry to call you Dutch, then

(In Belgium, calling someone Dutch is some kind of a joking insult)

Actually, in 1302 we spoke 'Diets', which only lately formed into Dutch... but every city had it's own dialect (some of these remained relatively unchanged over the centuries, and are still spoken today). If we had become a French province, probably Flemish would have been a French dialect, like the Welsh (Wallon, not what the speak in Wales) is today. But who is to say that the English wouldn't have invaded us, as they did with the French... History is such a messy business, based in large on luck, it is impossible to predict.

DeepO

Flandrien · July 12, 2002, 06:53

Very well written article.

Don't have anything to add to it, except maybe Jan Breydel.
(Jan Breydel and Pieter de Coninck are almost always mentioned together.)

DeepO · July 12, 2002, 07:31

Maestro, glad you liked it. I specifically left out Jan Breydel. Although he was a historical figure, he had little to do with the Guldensporenslag. It was Conscience's artistic freedom that made him into the hero he is today. There are more of these kind of myths introduced by him in his famous book, one of the things I was most surprised to learn as untrue was that the French knights did not trample their own footmen when crossing the brook. Conscience says that that is one of the main reasons why the Flemish won, but it was a gross exageration. It was partly the impatience of the French nobles that made them rush while they would have been better of if they outflanked the Flemish instead of going through the river, but they did not kill any French infantry in doing so, these just stepped aside before the charge started.

More well-known is that Robrecht of Bethune, the Flemish Lion, was most likely not present at the battle, he was in a French prison at the time. It is ironic that the man who became the Flemish symbol was not only not present at the battle, but also didn't speak Flemish!

DeepO

Stuie · July 12, 2002, 07:49

Excellent post, DeepO. I must admit that my knowledge of the medieval period is usually limited to England, France and the crusades. Nice to learn another aspect of the wider picture.

Funny thing is, this makes me want to play Medieval: Total War more than civ. The battle should be fully and accurately recreatable in that game. But then I have to wait until the end of August for that....

DeepO · July 12, 2002, 09:01

Thanks Stuie. It surprises me that so many think this was a good thread, I thought it would only have appealed to the Flemish people on this board... and would have been closed off by an admin by now.

If you are interested in medieval history, make sure you check out the referenced site. It is absolutely amazing what this group collected on their site, they surely are fanatic... specialising in Flemish culture from 1302, in Living History as they calls it themselves. You can find pictures of (self-made) clothing, descriptions of living styles, military things, even how to cook medieval. And of course the description of the Guldensporenslag, plus tons of books they used. And, all in both Dutch and English (I still can't believe I missed that!)

DeepO

Alex · July 12, 2002, 12:27

Quote:

Originally posted by DeepO
Thanks Stuie. It surprises me that so many think this was a good thread, I thought it would only have appealed to the Flemish people on this board... and would have been closed off by an admin by now.

DeepO

Oh, but aren't we all interested in history? This is one of the pre-requisites to be a Civ player, I guess...

Nice article, indeed.

alva · July 12, 2002, 17:07

Quote:

There are more of these kind of myths introduced by him in his famous book, one of the things I was most surprised to learn as untrue was that the French knights did not trample their own footmen when crossing the brook. Conscience says that that is one of the main reasons why the Flemish won, but it was a gross exageration. It was partly the impatience of the French nobles that made them rush while they would have been better of if they outflanked the Flemish instead of going through the river, but they did not kill any French infantry in doing so, these just stepped aside before the charge started.

You mean they lied to us for all these years??

Never knew that, I alwayss thought they did kill there own soldiers.Ahh that's typical flemish isn't it. We loose --> we blame ourself, We win --> we give someelse credit