Not realy it was a doomed expeditions that wouldn't have amounted to much even if they defeated the English fleet as the ground force couldn't even start boarding their ships due to the Dutch fleet blocking them
It was a massive expensive and fruitless expedition that even the admirals in charge of it believed was doomed from the start and the Spanish King had to basicaly force the poor guy into the job.
its only major effect was it had a slight genetic change on the western coast of ireland. On their retreat back they sailed round Ireland and lost a ton of ships due to atlantic storms. Thousands were stranded there and hoped fellow catholics would save them. The Irish mass enslaved them instead.
the utter drivel that passed as fact around here never fails to disappoint.
a few hundred Spanish made it to shore in Ireland. most were rapidly rounded up by, or handed over to, the English authorities (who then executed the prisoners). some lone survivors found shelter with native 'wild' tribes such as the O'Flaherty's.
after peace was made between Spain and England, french and Spanish ambassadors travelled around the west coast to round up any that remained (basically fuck all). their diaries make interesting reading for those looking for a glimpse of what life was like among what were still a tribal people in 16th century Europe.
it should go without saying that the armada had literally zero affect on the genetics of any coast.
you are not retarded, you're just stupid and content to be so.
It did have a massive inpact on the 80 years war though considering the amount of money that whent into building it basicaly bankrupted the Spanish King. Again and they could barely maintain their armies in the low countries after its failure untill the next treasure fleet arrived.
The admiral in charge was competent though
that's why he begged Felipe to not send him out and reconsider the plan. Because they had moldy provisions and the situation in the low countries wasn't one that would allow the plan to succeed
The Duke of Medinia Sidonia, the overall commander of the fleet was inexperienced in general regarding military matters.
He was picked cause he was an excellent administrator, a good Catholic and that Philip thought he would preform his instructions to the letter.
He tried to refuse the appointment and when he couldn't get out of it delay it. Because he knew it was doomed to failure due to the lacking provisions, ammo and generally poor state of the ships. Philip wouldn't hear any of it ashe was to convinced God would deliver victory that none of that mattered and sent themof to their doom.
So I'd say the Ultimate blame for what happened is the Kings and not any of the commanders.
The Habsburg kings were fucking retarded from the start even if only became obvious later. While the original iberian born nobility and Conquistadors were turning Spain into a worldwide empire, inbred germanic morons like Charles V and Philip II were wasting its profits and resources in retarded european feuds leaving Spain broke and underdeveloped.
1 month ago
Anonymous
The fact that the castillians refused to do anny actual work and instead just read the bible and become preists was more of the issue here.
While yes the habsburgs did fuck upp by expelling the Moriscos who where the only productive pepole in all south of Spain. You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
Having catholic mediteranean countries leech off of the actually productive countries with a work ethic is a time honored European tradition
1 month ago
Anonymous
>the castillians refused to do anny actual work and instead just read the bible
this is the bullshit teached beyond the Pyrenees? lol
BTW castillians were the first to rebel against Habsburg absolutism and retardation, and were crushed for it.
Spain was as productive as any other kingdom before the retarded Habsburg policies fucked it, breaking all the treaties and laws that bonded the Iberian kingdoms together and had been instrumental in winning against the moors. >You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
You got that wrong, the Habsburg kings USED Spain and his Empire to protect their interest in the Low Countries and fight against Protestants, not really giving a shit about Spain itself until it was too late. Charles V and his court didn't even speak spanish, FFS
The purely extractive economic model created to finance those wars and Habsburg absolutism, was the reason of the spanish nobility becoming unproductive parasites at the same time that the Catholic church influence kept the country from the benefits of the renaissance and the Enlightement.
Problem with that statement is that about half the Spanish budget, before the war came from the Netherlands. They were by far the most economically prosperous part of the empire.
The issue with the Spanish part of the economy was that the Spaniards didn't want to work, they all wanted to be priests or bureaucrats. This is what caused Spain itself to decline economically. The constant wars with the turk and the long one against the Dutch didn't help much but in his younger years Philip had acted as well as could be expected.
In his later life escalating zealotry caused an ever escalating series of blunders culminating in the armada and the followup little armada.
They were basically his hail Mary to win the Dutch war, the plan being to conquer England and then have the English be the ones responsible for financing the pacification of the rebellious Netherlands.
It wasn't q great plan and held together by the prayers of a ageing king that was being stressed to death micromanaging a globe spanning empire.
See above.
>You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
Having catholic mediteranean countries leech off of the actually productive countries with a work ethic is a time honored European tradition
calvinist fanfiction and propaganda. Southern european workers actually work many more hours per year than northeners, the issue is bad productivity due to a incompetent upper class with terrible management skills.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>bad productivity due to a incompetent upper class with terrible management skills.
and inherited from retarded Habsburg, Bourbon, and Ottoman rulers and nobility. There's a reason all the more productive and prosperous southern european regions are coincidentally the ones that were influended the least by those cancerous morons.
1 month ago
Anonymous
The Dutch making up half the empires pre war budget is a fact.
Here's a quote from encyclopaedia britanica regarding the general mood in Spain at the time
> "The arbitristas (literally, “projectors”) were writers who combined an economic analysis of the social ills of Spain with projects for economic recovery and social and moral regeneration. They saw clearly the central weakness of Spain: the attitude of mind that despised productive work and those who engaged in it. Far too many strove to live the life of a hidalgo. The treasures of Mexico and Peru, so far from stimulating investment and industrial production, had only encouraged men to look for shortcuts to riches and to live the life of rentiers, investing their money in the censos, the government annuities."
And that's a summary of what people thought at the time.
Here's link to the page if you're to lazy to find it urself
You're talking about Philip III, which was even more openly retarded than his dad and grandad, and almost a century after than the start of the Habsburg corruption of Spain: >Soon resistance to the Emperor arose because of heavy taxation to support foreign wars in which Castilians had little interest and because Charles tended to select Flemings for high offices in Castile and America, ignoring Castilian candidates. The resistance culminated in the Revolt of the Comuneros, which Charles suppressed. >After its integration into Charles's empire, Castile guaranteed effective military units and its American possessions provided the bulk of the empire's financial resources. However, the two conflicting strategies of Charles V, enhancing the possessions of his family and protecting Catholicism against Protestants heretics, diverted resources away from building up the Spanish economy. Elite elements in Spain called for more protection for the commercial networks, which were threatened by the Ottoman Empire and Barbary pirates. Charles instead focused on defeating Protestantism in Germany and the Netherlands, which proved to be lost causes. Each hastened the economic decline of the Spanish Empire in the next generation.[59] The enormous budget deficit accumulated during Charles's reign, along with the inflation that affected the kingdom, resulted in declaring bankruptcy during the reign of Philip II.[60]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_V,_Holy_Roman_Emperor#Spanish_kingdoms
So yeah, Spain went bankrupt even when it was at the height of extracting resources of its Empire, but it wasn't because "lazy spaniards" bs
1 month ago
Anonymous
Problem with that statement is that about half the Spanish budget, before the war came from the Netherlands. They were by far the most economically prosperous part of the empire.
The issue with the Spanish part of the economy was that the Spaniards didn't want to work, they all wanted to be priests or bureaucrats. This is what caused Spain itself to decline economically. The constant wars with the turk and the long one against the Dutch didn't help much but in his younger years Philip had acted as well as could be expected.
In his later life escalating zealotry caused an ever escalating series of blunders culminating in the armada and the followup little armada.
They were basically his hail Mary to win the Dutch war, the plan being to conquer England and then have the English be the ones responsible for financing the pacification of the rebellious Netherlands.
It wasn't q great plan and held together by the prayers of a ageing king that was being stressed to death micromanaging a globe spanning empire.
Reminder that the next year the England deployed their own Armada to attack Spain and were utterly fucked by the spaniards just as bad.
That's the part brits always forget to mention in their propaganda.
A ship that is sunk whent under in action against the enemy.
A ship that is scuttled is a ship that was sunk by its own crew as they don't think it is posible to repair the ship or make it to a friendly port.
In a military context saying it was scuttled is basicaly a cope by declaring that the enemy didn't sink it I did.
Prime example for this cope is the bismark
Scuttled = sunk by its own side, usually to avoid falling into enemy hands, slowing down the fleet, or sinking on its own at a less opportune time. This is usually code for "damaged beyond repair." Some scuttlings are more or less orderly.
So the real lesson is don't form an armada because you'll lose?
Also, the Spanish lost 3/4ths of their Gallons in the battle, can the merchant ships really pick up the slack?
>So the real lesson is don't form an armada
Pretty much yeah, grand armadas will bankrupt your nation regardless of if it wins or loses. See: Russian armada, Jutland, etc
>Who's empire won?
England wasn't an empire back then, retard, and it ended in a stalemate, just like the following war a generation later in the 1600s.
Unrelated to the topic of the thread but are there detailed sketches of the ships of those time period? Similar to pic rel?
I just can't really picture those ships and was unable to find anything.
I know many were of mercantile origin but weren't there also already purpose built warships?
Ocean-going warships of the period had large Castle like structures in the frond and aft of the ship. So during a boarding action (how most battles where fought) the enemy would first have to get onto the deck only to be stuck between two fortified fortified structures to eather side of them manned by the enemy. And these structures would be considerably larger on a warship
Though realy the diference between a merchant ship and a warship wasn't that significant untill well later and merchant ships could function as warships in an emergency all they way to the rise if the ironclads.
"The Fast Carrier Task Force worked in conjunction with the other two major components of the Pacific Fleet: the Amphibious Force, which was much larger overall and which carried and provided direct support to the Marine forces, and the Service Squadrons of hundreds of support vessels which resupplied and maintained the fleet. The fleet and task group designation changed when the command of the fleet changed hands. When under the umbrella of Fifth Fleet, the invasion force was called the Fifth Amphibious Force. When Halsey had command of the fleet, Third Amphibious Force was the designation. By the time of the Battle of Iwo Jima in early 1945, the Task Force included eighteen aircraft carriers, eight battleships and two Alaska-class large cruisers, along with numerous cruisers and destroyers. TF 58 alone commanded more firepower than any navy in history"
Not realy it was a doomed expeditions that wouldn't have amounted to much even if they defeated the English fleet as the ground force couldn't even start boarding their ships due to the Dutch fleet blocking them
It was a massive expensive and fruitless expedition that even the admirals in charge of it believed was doomed from the start and the Spanish King had to basicaly force the poor guy into the job.
its only major effect was it had a slight genetic change on the western coast of ireland. On their retreat back they sailed round Ireland and lost a ton of ships due to atlantic storms. Thousands were stranded there and hoped fellow catholics would save them. The Irish mass enslaved them instead.
They truly aren't human are they?
the utter drivel that passed as fact around here never fails to disappoint.
a few hundred Spanish made it to shore in Ireland. most were rapidly rounded up by, or handed over to, the English authorities (who then executed the prisoners). some lone survivors found shelter with native 'wild' tribes such as the O'Flaherty's.
after peace was made between Spain and England, french and Spanish ambassadors travelled around the west coast to round up any that remained (basically fuck all). their diaries make interesting reading for those looking for a glimpse of what life was like among what were still a tribal people in 16th century Europe.
it should go without saying that the armada had literally zero affect on the genetics of any coast.
you are not retarded, you're just stupid and content to be so.
It did have a massive inpact on the 80 years war though considering the amount of money that whent into building it basicaly bankrupted the Spanish King. Again and they could barely maintain their armies in the low countries after its failure untill the next treasure fleet arrived.
>terrorised into submission by sea merchant rejects
If thy had been given a competent experienced seaman in command they woulve BTFO England
The admiral in charge was competent though
that's why he begged Felipe to not send him out and reconsider the plan. Because they had moldy provisions and the situation in the low countries wasn't one that would allow the plan to succeed
It was mostly commanded by a guy who was an experienced land commander but not at sea
The Duke of Medinia Sidonia, the overall commander of the fleet was inexperienced in general regarding military matters.
He was picked cause he was an excellent administrator, a good Catholic and that Philip thought he would preform his instructions to the letter.
He tried to refuse the appointment and when he couldn't get out of it delay it. Because he knew it was doomed to failure due to the lacking provisions, ammo and generally poor state of the ships. Philip wouldn't hear any of it ashe was to convinced God would deliver victory that none of that mattered and sent themof to their doom.
So I'd say the Ultimate blame for what happened is the Kings and not any of the commanders.
The Habsburg kings were fucking retarded from the start even if only became obvious later. While the original iberian born nobility and Conquistadors were turning Spain into a worldwide empire, inbred germanic morons like Charles V and Philip II were wasting its profits and resources in retarded european feuds leaving Spain broke and underdeveloped.
The fact that the castillians refused to do anny actual work and instead just read the bible and become preists was more of the issue here.
While yes the habsburgs did fuck upp by expelling the Moriscos who where the only productive pepole in all south of Spain. You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
>You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
Having catholic mediteranean countries leech off of the actually productive countries with a work ethic is a time honored European tradition
>the castillians refused to do anny actual work and instead just read the bible
this is the bullshit teached beyond the Pyrenees? lol
BTW castillians were the first to rebel against Habsburg absolutism and retardation, and were crushed for it.
Spain was as productive as any other kingdom before the retarded Habsburg policies fucked it, breaking all the treaties and laws that bonded the Iberian kingdoms together and had been instrumental in winning against the moors.
>You need to consider that the Dutch made upp half the Spanish crowns income before they rebeled with the other half being from plundering the americas.
You got that wrong, the Habsburg kings USED Spain and his Empire to protect their interest in the Low Countries and fight against Protestants, not really giving a shit about Spain itself until it was too late. Charles V and his court didn't even speak spanish, FFS
The purely extractive economic model created to finance those wars and Habsburg absolutism, was the reason of the spanish nobility becoming unproductive parasites at the same time that the Catholic church influence kept the country from the benefits of the renaissance and the Enlightement.
See above.
calvinist fanfiction and propaganda. Southern european workers actually work many more hours per year than northeners, the issue is bad productivity due to a incompetent upper class with terrible management skills.
>bad productivity due to a incompetent upper class with terrible management skills.
and inherited from retarded Habsburg, Bourbon, and Ottoman rulers and nobility. There's a reason all the more productive and prosperous southern european regions are coincidentally the ones that were influended the least by those cancerous morons.
The Dutch making up half the empires pre war budget is a fact.
Here's a quote from encyclopaedia britanica regarding the general mood in Spain at the time
> "The arbitristas (literally, “projectors”) were writers who combined an economic analysis of the social ills of Spain with projects for economic recovery and social and moral regeneration. They saw clearly the central weakness of Spain: the attitude of mind that despised productive work and those who engaged in it. Far too many strove to live the life of a hidalgo. The treasures of Mexico and Peru, so far from stimulating investment and industrial production, had only encouraged men to look for shortcuts to riches and to live the life of rentiers, investing their money in the censos, the government annuities."
And that's a summary of what people thought at the time.
Here's link to the page if you're to lazy to find it urself
https://www.britannica.com/place/Spain/The-reign-of-Philip-III
Forgot the link
You're talking about Philip III, which was even more openly retarded than his dad and grandad, and almost a century after than the start of the Habsburg corruption of Spain:
>Soon resistance to the Emperor arose because of heavy taxation to support foreign wars in which Castilians had little interest and because Charles tended to select Flemings for high offices in Castile and America, ignoring Castilian candidates. The resistance culminated in the Revolt of the Comuneros, which Charles suppressed.
>After its integration into Charles's empire, Castile guaranteed effective military units and its American possessions provided the bulk of the empire's financial resources. However, the two conflicting strategies of Charles V, enhancing the possessions of his family and protecting Catholicism against Protestants heretics, diverted resources away from building up the Spanish economy. Elite elements in Spain called for more protection for the commercial networks, which were threatened by the Ottoman Empire and Barbary pirates. Charles instead focused on defeating Protestantism in Germany and the Netherlands, which proved to be lost causes. Each hastened the economic decline of the Spanish Empire in the next generation.[59] The enormous budget deficit accumulated during Charles's reign, along with the inflation that affected the kingdom, resulted in declaring bankruptcy during the reign of Philip II.[60]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_V,_Holy_Roman_Emperor#Spanish_kingdoms
So yeah, Spain went bankrupt even when it was at the height of extracting resources of its Empire, but it wasn't because "lazy spaniards" bs
Problem with that statement is that about half the Spanish budget, before the war came from the Netherlands. They were by far the most economically prosperous part of the empire.
The issue with the Spanish part of the economy was that the Spaniards didn't want to work, they all wanted to be priests or bureaucrats. This is what caused Spain itself to decline economically. The constant wars with the turk and the long one against the Dutch didn't help much but in his younger years Philip had acted as well as could be expected.
In his later life escalating zealotry caused an ever escalating series of blunders culminating in the armada and the followup little armada.
They were basically his hail Mary to win the Dutch war, the plan being to conquer England and then have the English be the ones responsible for financing the pacification of the rebellious Netherlands.
It wasn't q great plan and held together by the prayers of a ageing king that was being stressed to death micromanaging a globe spanning empire.
nopeDrakeG
>a.k.a. the Invincible Armada
For me, it's the invincible Aegir Fleet
CRISP
Reminder that the next year the England deployed their own Armada to attack Spain and were utterly fucked by the spaniards just as bad.
That's the part brits always forget to mention in their propaganda.
The English speaking histories usually don't mention annything about the 80 years war outside of the armada and the English adventure.
Whats the difference betveem a ship being sunk or scuttled?
Sunk is by the enemy, scuttled is you sinking your own ship to deny the enemy seizing it
A ship that is sunk whent under in action against the enemy.
A ship that is scuttled is a ship that was sunk by its own crew as they don't think it is posible to repair the ship or make it to a friendly port.
In a military context saying it was scuttled is basicaly a cope by declaring that the enemy didn't sink it I did.
Prime example for this cope is the bismark
It’s not cope, you sink it so the enemy can’t seize it and use it against you
Scuttled = sunk by its own side, usually to avoid falling into enemy hands, slowing down the fleet, or sinking on its own at a less opportune time. This is usually code for "damaged beyond repair." Some scuttlings are more or less orderly.
And the brtsh did it TWICE gettng fucked twice.
So the real lesson is don't form an armada because you'll lose?
Also, the Spanish lost 3/4ths of their Gallons in the battle, can the merchant ships really pick up the slack?
>So the real lesson is don't form an armada
Pretty much yeah, grand armadas will bankrupt your nation regardless of if it wins or loses. See: Russian armada, Jutland, etc
Who's empire won? How is latin america doing vs north america?
Which North America? The one Spain discovered, controlled more than 50% of the territory and decisively helped in its war against UK?
>Who's empire won?
England wasn't an empire back then, retard, and it ended in a stalemate, just like the following war a generation later in the 1600s.
Technically on the empire front the Dutch won the 80 years war, same as on the continent.
They had conquered like half of Brazil by the end of it and taken control of the Hispanice trade.
The Brazilian colony was then abandoned in the peace treaty but the they held onto the Hispanices for a long time afterwards.
Wtf. I have been living a lie?
Unrelated to the topic of the thread but are there detailed sketches of the ships of those time period? Similar to pic rel?
I just can't really picture those ships and was unable to find anything.
I know many were of mercantile origin but weren't there also already purpose built warships?
Ocean-going warships of the period had large Castle like structures in the frond and aft of the ship. So during a boarding action (how most battles where fought) the enemy would first have to get onto the deck only to be stuck between two fortified fortified structures to eather side of them manned by the enemy. And these structures would be considerably larger on a warship
Though realy the diference between a merchant ship and a warship wasn't that significant untill well later and merchant ships could function as warships in an emergency all they way to the rise if the ironclads.
Was there a way to breach the fore- and aftcastle? It seems like the ultimate killing zone.
Thx! But aren't there any more technical drawings? The ones in the Anthony Roll are quite stylized.
Yes. As one example look up the "Anthony Roll". That is a scroll illustrating all the ships in the English Tudor navy around 1540 or so.
The Hispanic Armada
>What is the most powerful Hispanic military?
>the United States Marine Corps
US Pacific fleet during World War II
>Was it the most bad ass naval force ever assembled in history?
did it actually do something?
>jobbed to bongs
No, I don't think it was.
"The Fast Carrier Task Force worked in conjunction with the other two major components of the Pacific Fleet: the Amphibious Force, which was much larger overall and which carried and provided direct support to the Marine forces, and the Service Squadrons of hundreds of support vessels which resupplied and maintained the fleet. The fleet and task group designation changed when the command of the fleet changed hands. When under the umbrella of Fifth Fleet, the invasion force was called the Fifth Amphibious Force. When Halsey had command of the fleet, Third Amphibious Force was the designation. By the time of the Battle of Iwo Jima in early 1945, the Task Force included eighteen aircraft carriers, eight battleships and two Alaska-class large cruisers, along with numerous cruisers and destroyers. TF 58 alone commanded more firepower than any navy in history"