Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Pavia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Original text

[edit]

Text seems to be from Jonhays's homepage at http://members.fortunecity.com/jonhays/pavia.htm, copyright is not clear. -- till we *) 01:29, Aug 22, 2003 (UTC)

[edit]

Two of the links dont seem to work for this entry (Battle of Pavia).

Scots?

[edit]

Is there a source for the presence of any significant number of Scottish troops here? I know that the Duke of Albany was involved; but all I can find in Konstam's book, at least, suggests that he was commanding French and Swiss troops, not Scottish ones. Kirill Lokshin 02:42, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German Monarch?

[edit]

He was as Spanish as German why not German-Spanish Monarch then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.36.68.97 (talk • contribs)

And Dutch and Neapolitan as well! In any case, I've changed the wording to avoid focusing on his exact nationality. Kirill Lokshin 19:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Don't be confused by the Spanish connection. Charles may have been Carlos I, but he was more importantly Charles V, Emperor of the German Holy Roman Empire, and the heir of the House of Habsburg. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.198.57.110 (talk • contribs)
Eh, this article isn't a place to debate the relative importance of various chunks of the Habsburg empire. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 18:05, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
But it is the place to resolve the question posed as the preceding post has done, so your remark seems churlish. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.198.56.161 (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2007

(UTC).

This is unbelievable. Is not only that the article cites Empire of Charles V as winner, but also the emperor was German-Spanish, laughable. The victory was reached by the Spanish Empire, which included part of Germany among many other possesions, and the troops were serving the Spanish Emperor (as he called himself) Charles I of Spain and V of Germany. It´s quite ironic that when we talk about killing indians or about the sack of some cities we talk about Spanish Empire and Spanish troops without hesitation, while when we talk about Spanish victories, the word "Spanish" is mesed around among some other nationalities.
Holy Roman Emperor was the highest title he held, so it is quite normal to adress him as such from 1519 on. His actual "name" was Charles d'Ghent/Karl von Gent, which exlains that his 1st language was french - just like his main political interests.

The term spanish empire (imperium hispanorum) wasn't much in use during Karls life, because it somehow included the portuguese entity (which still was quite strong until Philipp II. inherited that very crown). Troops did not serve directly back then, but swore allegiance indirectly by contract to military entrepeneurs - which may explain some caused confusion when spanish sources show other dedications than french or italian ones. Germany was never part of any spanish empire - even when there was such a title as imperator hyspanorum in the 11th century. Just because we might be used to widespread misnomers and hindsighted history it should be clear, that the 16th century wasn't the actual period of nations like France, Spain, England or Germany. It was more the demise of the feudal system with entities like Navarra, the crown of Savoy, the duchies of Saxonia or the kingdom of Bohemia. --77.187.249.84 (talk) 00:10, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, his name was Charles of Hapsburg and his first language was Flemish. Later he learned Latin, French, German, Bohemian, Castilian, etc). After 1519 his contemporaries referred to him as emperor Charles V, even in Castille and Aragon -- Spain did not exist as a country at that time. "The Spains" included Portugal. The term "Spanish Empire" did not appear until Phillip II, whose highest title was king (of Castille, Leon, Aragon, Granada, England (for a while), Portugal, etc). BTW, Phillip's tomb refers to him as "Rex Hisp". Eni2dad (talk) 02:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


The reality is that Carlos I of Spain was Carlos I of Spain until 1520, who was named Emperor after the death of his grandfather Maximiliano.

Carlos Access the imperial throne thanks to the gold of the Spanish americas and the credits of his family in German banks (which were much less valuable than what Spain contributed since the conquest of Mexico)

The term SPAIN is not coined until the first Spanish republic. until then they were "Las Españas" (plural) And Carlos I, before being emperor, was King of Spain by maternal heritage (Juana la Loca daughter of the Catholic kings)

So it is more accurate to say that he was a Spanish-Flemish king than "Spanish-German".

Since it was his brother Fernando I who inherited the imperial throne at his death, and his son Felipe II who inherited the throne of Spain being the Germanic empire, Philip's vassal, because spain having the piece of eight that was the most important currency of the epoch. (You just have to read and find out about the murder of Juan de Escobedo and what happened there with Flandes and Maria Estuardo and the decisions from Juan de Austria, ilegitim son of Carlos I

I am sorry to say, that the Holy Empire, the Austrian kingdom and Spain were the SAME from the death of Maximilano until the war of Spanish succession.

The Same royal House.

http://dbe.rah.es/biografias/6836/juan-de-escobedo <--- Juan de Escobedo Biography of Real Academia de Historia of Spain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ProphetArpista (talk • contribs) 18:04, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Black Band (Landsknechts)

[edit]

I added some information on the Black Band (landsknechts) to the article, as I recently added a wiki page for that regiment. Larry Dunn 02:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice! Thanks for digging that up. Kirill Lokshin 02:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Richard de la Pole -- "Suffolk"

[edit]

Turns out that Richard de la Pole was actually not the Duke of Suffolk -- Konstam is wrong on that. He was, it's true, the son of a Duke of Suffolk, but never was duke himself, so I removed the name Suffolk (after some tinkering). Larry Dunn 03:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D'Avalos and d'Avalos

[edit]

We need to figure out some way of keeping the Fernando d'Avalos and Alfonso d'Avalos straight in the narrative; I'm guessing that just using "d'Avalos" for both is going to be too confusing. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 19:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando d'Avalos was Marquis of Pescara at the time of the Battle. Most contemporaries referred to him as "Pescara", while Alfonso was simply "D'Avalos" (until he inherited the titles in 1525, but then Fernando was dead. Eni2dad (talk) 02:51, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties/Sources

[edit]

There isn't any reliable source for the casualties. This even bitterer since the casualties of Habsburg are estimated 5,000 instead of 500 in the German Wikipedia. Of cousre, unsourced as well. Who can help? --JakobvS (talk) 18:02, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's easy to explain: try to find reliable sources for the casualties of the Gulf War and then think of the possibility to achieve such information through the densed vails of 500 years passed by... Sources would involve the actual numbers of combattants as a start, which is just as hard. Read a contemporary work of history written by the winning side and after that one from the losing perspective. I bet, you'll not only come by some predictable pattern of explanation but also by totally different numbers. Leopold Ranke would emphasize to get grips on venetian accounts on that very subject you're interested in - but to do this one might have to travel a bit. And one might have to cope with the italian language.--77.187.249.84 (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Battle of Pavia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:24, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

an addition

[edit]

here is another drawing of the battle of Pavia 1525:

https://postimg.cc/T5jMzRRG

No diagram of the battle?

[edit]

it would be useful to have (at least one) diagram showing initial positions of the troops and arrows showing their movements

80.17.36.33 (talk) 13:02, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Pavia&oldid=1194059989"