"Tercios - an organization? A formation?" Topic

Hi. Hope you can help clarify my understanding of Tercios.

I have to confess that I always thought the term described the formation where there is a block of Pikes in the middle and sleeves (mangas) of Shot on each corner.

But now i'm thinking Tercio refers to an administrative unit, like a regiment during the Napoleonic Wars.

Which is it? Or is it both?

If it's only the latter, what's the formation I described called?

And when did that formation fall out of use in the Spanish/Imperial army?

Thanks

My understanding is that it was a large block as you described existed. I believe, but not certain, that it was larger than a regiment, though the size varied army to army. Administratively, I know nothing to help you. Others more knowledgeable will be along, I am sure.

There is a recentish Men at Arms about this. "The Spanish Tercios 1536-1704", MAA 481. That might help clarify your understanding.

It's both. Example, Tercio of Cartegena would be the unit, while the formation it's in, a block of pike with sleeves of musketeers on the corners is also a tercio. From my admittedly lame understanding, the formation became more linear as time went on.

Tercios are like super-regiments made up of many companies but like so much military terminology gets used for multiple purposes but I don't think there was ever a formation (even that word has several meanings – I mean an specific troop arrangement of ranks/files) that was called a tercio.

My understanding is the same as mad monkey 1's

It was an administrative unit up until the post TYW period.

It could be split to form smaller battlefield units, or merged with other units when numbers go too low.

However, the term is used for both the administrative unit and the formation in wargamer words.

FWIW my entirely amateur understanding is that the answer is both and it depends (there was an excellent Spanish website a few years that went into great detail about the tercios, but for the life of me I can't find it now).

Bearing in mind the Tercio existed as an organisation for c200 years, I understand that it was an administrative organisation throughout. It was a tactical formation in the 16th century. By the TYW the Spanish field formation was the escaudron, which may or may not have aligned with the Tercio depending on the actual strength of the latter.

The classic pike square with shot 'manga' at each corner appears to have always been just one formation available to the commander. The general consensus now seems to be that Spanish formations in the TYW were no more or less linear than anyone else's – artistic conventions notwithstanding.

Tercio was an administrative unit. The Spanish and Imperial infantry forces were, at the time, innovative and flexible. They adopted different formations for different situations and the traditional formation of a central pike block with sleeves and corner mangas of shot was one of these formations. It's also the iconic formation of the imperial tercios. You could find several units of tercios formed together into a unit on the battlefield. You could have a portion of a tercio detached from the main group to do something else (e.g. a forlorn hope, etc).

To further address the topic, the large formation we know as a tercio was more prevalent in the years leading up to the TYW. Early in the conflict you may see these very large formations on the battlefield but as the war continued, the formations evolved and became smaller.

One of the problems we, as gamers, have is that formations (especially like and shot) were dynamic entities and could change on the field (depending on what was going on). Depending on our basing, our formations may not be able to do that. It's also something that the field commander may not have concerned himself with (so why should we as the tabletop commander).

I have several large bases of imperial infantry in that "tercio" formation but I also have some depicted as smaller groupings as well (in traditional central pike with wings of shot). Hope this helps.

Thanks for all the helpful info

Way back in 2009 Daniel Staberg posted a detailed look at exactly this question here on TMP. I copied it into my files back then and am reposting it here because after an hour of searching I still could not find the thread to be able to post a link.

TYW Formations
Daniel Staberg
TMP 5 Aug 2009

Let's start with the 'Tercios', a Tercio was an administrative unit used by the Spanish army in the 16th & 17th Centuries, not a combat unit or a formation. The actual combat unit was the Escaudron (squadron), in a similar way the Swedish infantry was organized into regiments but fought as squadrons and brigades.
The Escaudron did not have single fixed formation or depth for much of the period.

Instead the Escaudron would be formed up as needed in one of several different formations (Cuadro de Terreno, El Gente, El prolongado, El pronglado de gran frente and so on) depending on which formation fit the battlefield best. The depth of the formation depended on the formation chosen and the number of troops available. The number of troops present also had an impact on how many 'mangas' (the 'blocks' of shot customarily shown at the corners) were deployed. The traditional number was 4 but at Dreux (1562) the Spanish commanders chose to deploy a single strong 'manga' of arquebusiers rather than 4 weak ones.
The Spanish had always known of the value of wider formations, hence the formation known as "El pronglado de gran frente" Indeed Valdes, a highly experienced Spanish soldier, recommended the use of that shallow and wide form of the Escaudron to make the best use of the increased number of musketeers and other shot. (Espeyo y Disciplina Militar published in 1589, written as an instruction for the office of Sargento Mayor at the request of the Duke of Alba. Translated into English as The Sergean Maior in 1590)

There is an excellent description of Spanish tactics and formations at Dr. Pierre Picouet's excellent website. Together with the chapter on battles it shows that the huge lumbering 45-25 deep 'tercios' found in Guthrie and Father Tilly simply did not exist on the TYW battlefield. (Note that Guthrie and Father Tilly both claim that the Spanish used 25 deep tercios as late as Rocroi)

They also show that far from being a waste of shot the 'mangas' were part of a highly flexible tactical formation and instead of being fixed at each corner they could and would move into the position which allowed the most effective use of their firepower.

So there was indeed no combat formation called a 'tercio' in the TYW. The Spanish army fought in ' Escaudrons', 'Spanish squadron' is good term to keep them separate from the ordinary cavalry squadron or the 'Swedish squadron' of Gustavus. And if we can call the Swedish battlefield units 'brigades' then it is surely no problem to use the proper name for the Spanish combinations units.
Furthermore, the Spanish squadron was not used by the Imperial or Leaguist Armies. The German states relied heavily on temporary units raised for a particular campaign or war, so German units tended to lack the training and cohesion needed to make the best possible use of the Spanish squadron. A simpler formation was needed.

Around 1600 they relied on a massive regimental formation in which the 10 companies of a regiment formed up in huge square 30 ranks deep.

However, Protestant and Catholic commanders alike were dissatisfied with this rather clumsy formation and set out to reform it. Drawing upon his experience from the reforms he had helped develop for the Dutch army, Johann von Nassau-Siegen (a cousin of Maurice) divided the huge regiment into 3 battalions, each 1000 men strong, formed up 10 ranks deep.

The 1000 man battalion formed up 10 ranks deep became the preferred fighting formation for most German troops influenced by the Dutch. Even if the size of the battalion varied, the 10 rank depth was standard until it was replaced by Swedish style formations formed 6 ranks deep in the 1630s.

Giogio Basta chose a slightly different road when suggesting reforms to his fellow Imperial/Catholic commanders. He also preferred a 1000 man battalion but used a 12 rank deep formation.

However, as German regiments were just about always under strength the 'Catholic' officers often deployed a regiment as a single over-strength battalion rather than as 3 under-strength battalions.

The impact of the reforms seen on both sides is shown by the French army's deployment at Julich in 1610. Most of the French army adopted the 10 rank formation, including the mercenaries from Catholic Lorraine. Only the Swiss use a truly old fashioned formation with their 25 ranks deep "square".

TMP link

I copied it, too.
BTW it is better to use a google search if you look for something on TMP

link

Very good book on the subject.

I am fairly sure that escaudron should read 'escuadron,' but since he has suggested using the English equivalent 'squadron,' this needn't be problematic

From the Diccionario de la Lengua Española

escuadrón

From escuadra. – a squad, but much larger in scale.

1. A cavalry unit
2. Troops formed in ranks according to principles of military tactics

That was it, Dr. Pierre Picouet's Tercio1617 site. It doesn't seem to be live anymore, but there are still archived versions online.

dogtail, thanks for the link. I started to look for Daniel Staberg's posting with Google, but had no luck with the key words I tried. But how hard could it be to look for postings around the date of 5 August 2009? Unless, as it turned out, the last addition to the thread bumped it up to October 2013.

The spelling should indeed be escuadron. I think the etymology probably lies in cuadro, the Spanish term for square. Thus a escuadron could be formed up in a cuadro de terreno (field square), a cuadro de gente (square of men), a cuadro prolongado (extended square), etc.

I agree with the recommendation of Pierre Picouet's book on the Spanish armies of Philip IV. Note that his website has migrated several times, but it is still available at:

link

Brilliant thread. Many thanks to Ryan T for representing the info. and of course to Daniel S for writing it in the first place.

The Tercio was clearly an administrative organization. The form of arrange the troops on the field with a core of pikes and sleeves of handguns was previous to the born of the Tercios in 1534-36 and was not privative of the Spanish, was common in many armies of west Europe, with some minor differences among them. The way of gave battle of the Spaniards at the XVI century, when there are pikes and handguns availables is substantially the same althoug the troops were not organized in Tercios, as for example in other scenarios as in the Indies or north Africa. And there were a great number of different forms of make the "escuadron" at the disposal of the Maestre de Campo or the Sargento Mayor, that were registered in the teoric manuals of the age, not only the square of pikes surrounded by sleeves of handguns, there were multiple variations, including fantastic circular or spiral forms of arranging the troops and other more conventional with square, rectangular or oblong nucleus of pikes and the same with different forms of grouping the arquebuses or muskets . And when the number of pikes decreased and the system of gave fire with sleeves of musketeers was substituted for more linear tactics, the Tercios survived with that name until the coming of the Borbón dinasty to Spain at the beginning of the XVIII century, when the name "Tercio", perhaps too related with the former Habsburg dinasty, was changed for the more French term "Regiment" (Regimiento in Spanish).

@ryan T not sure if you should be using that link it's hosted on a Ukrainian site with no way to reach top menu of Dr Pierre Picouet's work. Better to find the material via waybackmachine.org