medieval men-at-arms & dismounted knights

[j2klbs]

I'm planning to buy a medieval French with Scottish allies army. I really like the Corvus Belli models. I had a few questions that I was hoping you all might be kind enough to answer.

1. Scottish "men-at-arms, lesser men-at-arms, and retainers" and dismounted french knights have the Heavy Weapon capability. Does that mean that the models should all be wielding two-handed weapons? Or would it be more accurate to have a mix of figures with two-handed weapons and weapon/shield? (I'm hoping the latter so that I can have more variety in model poses.)

2. What do you think about mixing in the billmen for the "retainers" of the Scottish men-at-arms? Would it be historically accurate to have, for instance, the front rank be the armored men-at-arms and the second rank be the billmen? Or would it be better to just stick with all armored knights.

3. I was thinking of using the "dismounted serjeants" for the French "brigans". I was going to not use the shields to make them less armored. However, are the models still too protected for their status as "protected" since they have a metal helmet, metal greaves and metal shoulders?

Thanks so much!
Jason

[hammy]

I'm planning to buy a medieval French with Scottish allies army. I really like the Corvus Belli models. I had a few questions that I was hoping you all might be kind enough to answer.

1. Scottish "men-at-arms, lesser men-at-arms, and retainers" and dismounted french knights have the Heavy Weapon capability. Does that mean that the models should all be wielding two-handed weapons? Or would it be more accurate to have a mix of figures with two-handed weapons and weapon/shield? (I'm hoping the latter so that I can have more variety in model poses.)

A mix of sword and shield and two handed weapons is fine. Most dismounted men at arms I have seen are modelled in that way.

2. What do you think about mixing in the billmen for the "retainers" of the Scottish men-at-arms? Would it be historically accurate to have, for instance, the front rank be the armored men-at-arms and the second rank be the billmen? Or would it be better to just stick with all armored knights.

Again a mix would IMO be fine. I am not sure that they would be as organised to have pure men at arms in the front then billmen, more of a mix of the two with more of the men at arms at the front.

3. I was thinking of using the "dismounted serjeants" for the French "brigans". I was going to not use the shields to make them less armored. However, are the models still too protected for their status as "protected" since they have a metal helmet, metal greaves and metal shoulders?

Hmm, brigans shouldn't really have much in the way of metal armour at all although some could have more armour like the figures you describe.

Essentially medieval armies were very rarely equiped in a uniform manner. I would go with what looks good and can be distinguished.

[j2klbs]

Thanks Hammy!

Any suggestions on miniatures that would make good "brigans" (from any manufacturer) that would also look good with the larger 18mm scale of the Corvus Belli models?

~Jason

[DanielS]

By the time the Scots were active in the 100YW (1418-1429) the main weapon the the Men-at-arms were either a shortend lance or a polearm such as the pollaxe http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_spot_poleaxe.html. The prefered side arm was a longsword as this was the sword most suited to fighting a man in full plate harness. Indeed a number of men-at-arms would have been going into battle with their longsword as the primary weapon.
A good introduction to the art of armoured longsword fightign can be found at http://www.thearma.org/essays/armoredlongsword.html
Shields and weapons used with only one hand had largely fallen out of favour with the men-at-arms as they were not well suited to fighting heavily armoured opponents. That said they were still highly effective against less well equipped men.

If historical accuracy is big deal for you or were you play the Corvus Belli figures while well made are not all that accurate for the 1418-1429 period. The figures are mostly equipped in a late 14th Century fashion, not 15th Century fashion. While poorer men-at-rms woudl still use similar harness the elite, particularly among the French ould be wearing up to date full plate harness
http://mysite.verizon.net/tulkaz/JamesGArmor072.html

[j2klbs]

Thanks DanielS! Great information. I very much enjoyed reading the site on armored longsword fighting!

Any suggestions out there on well detailed miniatures with a variety of poses that would be more suitable for the 1418-1429 time period? I suppose there is always Essex, but I like the poses and quality of Corvus Belli and Xyston, so I am wondering if there are others of that quality out there. (Of course, our task is made more difficult by the lack of pictures from most manufacturers.)

~Jason

[madaxeman]

Thanks Hammy!

Any suggestions on miniatures that would make good "brigans" (from any manufacturer) that would also look good with the larger 18mm scale of the Corvus Belli models?

~Jason

Museum Miniatures tend to be similarly large - their medievals are very nice as well

There's a listing of manufacturers and some comments on each on my website at http://www.madaxeman.com/general/15mm_a ... pliers.htm

Tim

[j2klbs]

Hi Tim! Great summary of manufacturers!

Do you happen to know if the Museum Miniatures come in different poses? For example, if I order a package of 4 knights, do they all look identical?