Mapuche

Author: Luke Ueda-Sarson

Mapuche 1461 AD - 1552 AD (1)

Araucanians: Cold. Ag 0. WW, Rv, H(S), H(G), Wd, M, RGo, compulsory: either H(S) or Wd.

Other Mapuche: Warm. Ag 0. WW, Rv, H(S), H(G), Wd, RGo. (2)

Nominal list scale: 1 element equals 250 men (normal scale) (3)

C-in-C - as warriors, Irr Ax (O) @ 13 AP or as archers, Irr Bw (O) @ 14 AP 1

Sub-general - as above 0-1 per 20 warriors (4)

Warriors - Irr Ax (O) @ 3 AP 12-72 (5)

Archers - Irr Bw (O) @ 4 AP 2 per 2 to 3 warriors (6)

Skirmishing slingers - Irr Ps (O) @ 2 AP 0-12 (7)

Only Araucanians:

Replace warriors as Irr Ax (X) @ 13 AP if a general, otherwise @ 3 AP All

Replace all skirmishing slingers with skirmishing bowmen - Irr Ps (O) @ 2 AP 0-6

Dugouts - Irr Bts (I) @ 1 AP {Ps, Bw, Ax} 0-2 (8)

Ps (O) can support Ax (X).

This list covers Mapuche armies from the Inca invasion until captured

equipment and changing methods of warfare were used against the

Spanish. In the south, bowmen equipped with long two handed clubs for

close combat formed up in distinct units between blocks of spearmen

wielding 5 metre long pikes, formations that were to later evolve into

Spanish-style tercios. In the north, arms were more similar to the

those of the Inca, with most warriors combining short spear and club,

while the sling was also favoured. While the northern Mapuche were

quickly overrun by the Spanish, the Araucanians of the south were never

successfully conquered. Armies of up to 40000 men are reported in

Spanish accounts, and the population is estimated to have been some one

million when the Spanish arrived.

Notes:

This list is almost entirely based on George Smithson's excellent

article in Slingshot 222 (May 2002), pages 8-18, and subsequent

discussions with him. Although George presented a DBM army list in his

article, I didn't think his list was particularly accurate - in

particular being overly permissive in troop categorisation.

Accordingly, I will hereunder discuss changes from George's

recommendations since you should be able to read his article for

yourselves.

1. List dates: George dates the Inca invasion to 1461 but then starts his

army list off in 1460 for some reason, so I have changed the starting

date to 1461. After 1552, the Araucanians not only started making use

of captured Spanish armour, guns and horses, but were changing their

tactics as well, using fortifications for instance, and employing their

pike and 'shot' in imitation tercios.

2. Terrain: I have made a wooded feature compulsory in the south as George

recommended in the body of his article but omitted from his list. I see

no reason why southern armies should be limited to either woods or

marshes as he had it, and hence they are not an either/or choice. Woods

are often found near marshes - a swamp after all is marsh with lots of

trees as opposed to shorter vegetative cover, and from what I know of

Chile, Chile is no exception in this regard.

3. List scale: On my web-site this list is currently drawn up to a scale

of 1:128, where in the minima come to 182 AP and the maxima come to

something like 1000 on the assumption that a smallish army (ie. a

single large tribe {ayllarehue}) is typical, and that it was better to

exceed the usual 600 barrier while keeping to a smaller scale. But I

have changed my mind on this issue; Kevin made some comments at the

time that it seemed odd. The above list at normal scale of 1:250 gives

an AP minimum of 81 AP (with 1 general, but 142 AP with the current

rule-mandated 2 generals) and a maximum of 572 AP. This seems far

better in that the smaller than average minimum does not actually allow

any more choice at large APs than if the minimum were 200 or so AP,

since the troop types in the army are very limited and must be bought

in a rather strict proportion, so it is all just 'more of the same'.

The list maxima total to 40000 men, the largest recorded force; the

minimum with one general works out as 5250 men - a somewhat larger than

average (but not greatly so) ayllarehue. Some 9000 men are needed to

get the first sub-general however, which is more than any recorded

single ayllarehue.

4. Generals: I had thought of making the sub-generals allies, but

discussions with George and others on the DBM-list (I posted the

question there about a year ago) have convinced me against this despite

the C-in-C's position being elective (the C-in-C was called a Toqui).

These extra generals represent Lonko, ayllarehue chiefs. Despite having

political independence, they seem to have had no military independence

on the field - the Toqui was not seemingly a Lonko himself, and all

Lonko were bound by his commands. Four generals are allowed because one

battle has the Araucanians attacking a Spanish force from four

different directions. I have tied the number of generals to the number

of men participating in the army to emphasise that the sub-generals

could only be present if their forces were, representing a substantial

army formed from a coalition of ayllarehue, smaller ones being assumed

to be grouped under the mantle of the Lonkos of the larger ones.

5. Warriors: George grades these as Wb (F) in the north while at the same

time noting their similarity in equipment to the Inca (Ax (O)) and

Chimu (Wb (F)). Since he then notes that they were considered dangerous

to Spanish foot only when present in large numbers, Ax seems much more

appropriate than Wb - Ax (O) require rear rank support to have any

chance of even standing against heavy infantry, and two overlaps in

addition to have a decent chance of defeating them, while Wb (F) are

quite dangerous even in small numbers. They were ridden down easily by

Spanish lancers - and Ax (O) are at least as vulnerable as Wb (F)

against Kn. George also allows any proportion to be graded as Ps (S). I

have two grave problems with this - firstly there is no evidence that

any of the club and spear-armed warriors could skirmish effectively,

let alone all of them, and even if they could, since they seemingly did

not use shields, they should be more properly be graded as Ps (I).

Since I grade the warriors as Ax, any javelin/spear throwing may easily

be subsumed within each element of Ax.

In the south, George allows the option of Pk(I) in addition to Ax (X),

but I believe this is unwarrented. Pk (I) are essentially invulnerable

to lancers while Ax (X) are not, and the subsequent evolution of

Araucanian pikemen shows that their initial fighting style had

weaknesses against lancers as they had not yet adopted the practice of

grounding their pikes when receiving a charge. Allowing a mixture of Pk

and Ax is especially unwarrented, since these really are two different

troop types, and the Araucanians clearly only had one. I believe all

the warriors should be graded as Ax (X) rather than only the

'spearmen', since the southerners are only recorded using slings and

javelins from fortifications adopted after the period covered by this

lists. George's wording would allow a southern army with no spearmen

whatsoever.

6. Archers: I think George allowed a far too permissive range of numbers

of these compared to the close-combat specialists; I have tied the

number much closer to the one to one ratio noted by contemporary

Spanish observers (some variation downwards is there too cover the

'skirmishing' archers). George's troop type classifications also leave

a lot to be desired. The rules have an explicit category for bowmen

with the aptitude and equipment to fight in close combat - Bw (O);

there is no reason to make them half Bd (X) and half Bw (I) or Ps (O)

to get the right effects - especially since in my opinion they would

produce exactly the wrong effects! Bd (X) are the premier foot troop

type in DBM, and no list gets more than 18 (other than the DBEd Early

Swiss); furthermore no list gets more than 4 of them with Ps support;

George would allow 40 of these monsters to appear, and Ps-supported to

boot. In reality, Araucanian archers needed protecting from Spanish

lancers by their accompanying pikemen; if they were Bd (X) supported by

Ps, they would be hunting lancers down on the tabletop rather than

needing protection. Allowing any of them then to be Ps (O) is also over

generous. George notes that some could skirmish ahead of the battle

line and then fall back to use their clubs; I believe these are best

modelled as (a proportion of) Ps who can support the spearmen (and also

skirmish ahead if need be). As their numbers do not seem to have been

that great, I have limited the number of elements allowed accordingly.

7. Slingers: I have graded those in the north using slings as Ps (O).

George subsumes them amongst the warriors; I prefer to keep some

separate, perhaps by analogy with those archers in the south noted as

skirmishing ahead. Howver, I do not make them compulsory to cater for

those that believe they are best represented as being part of the

warrior elements. I have denied them the ability to support their

warriors given their reported weakness against Spanish horsemen.

8. Dugouts: Such canoes are classified as Bts (I) and not (O), as George

had them, unless of unusual size which these were not.