What exactly were the "archers" in the late medieval French lance?

[wzfcns]

In the introduction of the French 1445-1465, it is mentioned that a lance of the French army contained 2 or 3 archers who would ride to the battlefield and then dismount to fight, so the cavalry in the game consisted entirely of mounted lance knights.
However, I found that in the Renaissance of WDS (formerly johntiller software), the "archers" were represented as armored cavalrymen with range capabilities, like the Polish knights in FOG2.

This makes me wonder what form such troops were historically composed of? Does anyone have any relevant historical information to provide?

[gribol]

French "Lance" consisted of:
- a Knight/Man-at-arms/Gens'd'armes,
- about 2 "Archers"/Sergeants (heavy cav.),
- coutillier (light cavalrymen, sometimes equipped with bow/crossbow)

Here is a Wiki article, that is not bad i think: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lances_fournies
The same things are in Charles Oman "Military Warfare XVI c.", in some Ospeys (Pawia 1525) and in a lot of other books, because generally speaking they all repeat the same thing.

[SnuggleBunnies]

From George Gush's Renaissance Armies:

ac3330e5-d9b9-471a-a53f-a859f6eeca50.png (116.85 KiB) Viewed 2955 times

[Athos1660]

If you want to learn something about the French army, don’t read those ‘Historians’ (like above) who try to summarize 150 years of Military history of an army (from 1445 on) in a couple of sentences without seemingly having read (or understood) the primary sources in French and end up with a mix of half-truths and nonsense. You'd better read Historians who actually read the primary sources such as Philippe Contamine (1), if not the sources themselves.

For the timeframe that interests us here in FoG: Medieval (1445-1500), that’s simple : the Archers of the French lances were… archers. Plain foot archers (traveling on horseback, fighting on foot). Permanent ones. In game, you’ll find them in the French lists of the period, such as the French 1445-1465, as the ‘Average Longbowmen with stakes’ alongside with the Raw ones who kind of represent another type of French foot archers : les Francs-Archers. They are the counterparts of the English Longbowmen with stakes.

Probably at some point during the last quarter of the century, some of them started being used as mounted light lances when needed, ie. to counter enemy light cavalry such as the Stradiots, to serve as scouts...

This reorganisation of the French army into permanent lances has proved its effectiveness, for example at the end of the HYW.

____
(1) Philippe Contamine, Histoire militaire de la France, 1992
Ph. Contamine, Guerre, Etat et société à la fin du Moyen Âge, 2004.

[Athos1660]

In their Renaissance game, WDS/johntiller software even put dragoons on both sides in their battles of 1495, Seminara and Fornovo ! Way too early for dragoons.

[wzfcns]

If you want to learn something about the French army, don’t read those ‘Historians’ (like above) who try to summarize 150 years of Military history of an army (from 1445 on) in a couple of sentences without seemingly having read (or understood) the primary sources in French and end up with a mix of half-truths and nonsense. You'd better read Historians who actually read the primary sources such as Philippe Contamine (1), if not the sources themselves.

For the timeframe that interests us here in FoG: Medieval (1445-1500), that’s simple : the Archers of the French lances were… archers. Plain foot archers (traveling on horseback, fighting on foot). Permanent ones. In game, you’ll find them in the French lists of the period, such as the French 1445-1465, as the ‘Average Longbowmen with stakes’ alongside with the Raw ones who kind of represent another type of French foot archers : les Francs-Archers. They are the counterparts of the English Longbowmen with stakes.

Probably at some point during the last quarter of the century, some of them started being used as mounted light lances when needed, ie. to counter enemy light cavalry such as the Stradiots, to serve as scouts...

This reorganisation of the French army into permanent lances has proved its effectiveness, for example at the end of the HYW.

____
(1) Philippe Contamine, Histoire militaire de la France, 1992
Ph. Contamine, Guerre, Etat et société à la fin du Moyen Âge, 2004.

So, they were indeed ordinary archers until the 16th century, and then gradually became lightly armed cavalry, am I right? Did they further evolve into fully heavily armed knights later on?

[gribol]

So, they were indeed ordinary archers until the 16th century, and then gradually became lightly armed cavalry, am I right? Did they further evolve into fully heavily armed knights later on?

Long story short: There is only 1 Big Boss (Knight) and a few of wingers.

They (wingers) can have different functions and armament depending on the needs and period of time.
As a last resort they acted as heavy cavalry, (or maybe more correctly armored cavalry), but not so heavy as a Big Boss, because full knight's armor and a decent steed cost a big amount of money.

[Athos1660]

If you want to learn something about the French army, don’t read those ‘Historians’ (like above) who try to summarize 150 years of Military history of an army (from 1445 on) in a couple of sentences without seemingly having read (or understood) the primary sources in French and end up with a mix of half-truths and nonsense. You'd better read Historians who actually read the primary sources such as Philippe Contamine (1), if not the sources themselves.

For the timeframe that interests us here in FoG: Medieval (1445-1500), that’s simple : the Archers of the French lances were… archers. Plain foot archers (traveling on horseback, fighting on foot). Permanent ones. In game, you’ll find them in the French lists of the period, such as the French 1445-1465, as the ‘Average Longbowmen with stakes’ alongside with the Raw ones who kind of represent another type of French foot archers : les Francs-Archers. They are the counterparts of the English Longbowmen with stakes.

Probably at some point during the last quarter of the century, some of them started being used as mounted light lances when needed, ie. to counter enemy light cavalry such as the Stradiots, to serve as scouts...

This reorganisation of the French army into permanent lances has proved its effectiveness, for example at the end of the HYW.

____
(1) Philippe Contamine, Histoire militaire de la France, 1992
Ph. Contamine, Guerre, Etat et société à la fin du Moyen Âge, 2004.

So, they were indeed ordinary archers until the 16th century, and then gradually became lightly armed cavalry, am I right? Did they further evolve into fully heavily armed knights later on?

They were foot archers (a few of them foot crossbowmen) travelling on horseback and at some point during the 15th century or very early 16th century, the captains of their companies decided on occasion to equip them with demi-lances and use them and their horses as mounted scouts, skirmishers… Quite logical.

As for their evolution and possible roles on the battlefield during the 16th century, I can’t say for the moment. I’d need to do more research.

[Sedo]

They were foot archers (a few of them foot crossbowmen) travelling on horseback and at some point during the 15th century or very early 16th century, the captains of their companies decided on occasion to equip them with demi-lances and use them and their horses as mounted scouts, skirmishers… Quite logical.

As for their evolution and possible roles on the battlefield during the 16th century, I can’t say for the moment. I’d need to do more research.

Their evolution from foot archers to lighter heavy cavalry seems to happen through the first quarter of the 16th century, and is not easy to document. At Fornovo (1495) they are still foot archers of the Hundred Years War type, with horses for campaigning but generally not expected to fight mounted. For an offensive campaign abroad, like the 1494 invasion of Italy, some crossbow armed 'adventurers' might have been hired to fill out the ranks. The role of second-class light armored lancers is filled by coustilliers, who are closely integrated with the gendarmes they support.

While not intended as heavy cavalry, Archers of this era were experienced professional soldiers, often with decent armor, and could fight on horseback when they needed to. Most archers at Fornovo fought dismounted, but the Royal Scottish Archers, who were an elite bodyguard unit of this type, remained mounted and helped withstand a charge by Italian gendarmes. There is not much evidence for them shooting from horseback, as the John Tiller game seems to imply.

By Ceresole, in 1544, their main role is as lighter lance-armed cavalry supporting the gendarmes (much like coustilliers had been earlier), or sometimes detached to deploy on the flanks. They differ from cheveau-leger primarily in being recruited and paid through the regular gendarme companies, rather than recruited ad hoc from volunteers or local allies.

The evolution happens sometime in between, as the French become increasingly reliant on Swiss mercenaries for foot troops, then begin to develop their own permanent pike and shot formations. It would be great if we had some better documentation of what they were doing in the battles of the 1510s and 1520s, since this is likely when a lot of the change was happening.

So, they were indeed ordinary archers until the 16th century, and then gradually became lightly armed cavalry, am I right? Did they further evolve into fully heavily armed knights later on?

By the middle of the 16th century, 'archers' were heavy cavalry, probably still lighter than full gendarmes on average, but not by much. They fought in the gendarme units and came from the same social classes - a lot of archers were younger soldiers, essentially waiting their turn for a spot as a gendarme to open up (since the crown would only commit to paying a certain number of men at the gendarme level). After the heavy casualties during the civil wars of the early 1560s, a lot of 'archers' were promoted to gendarmes, and I don't believe this required much changing of equipment.

[wzfcns]

They were foot archers (a few of them foot crossbowmen) travelling on horseback and at some point during the 15th century or very early 16th century, the captains of their companies decided on occasion to equip them with demi-lances and use them and their horses as mounted scouts, skirmishers… Quite logical.

As for their evolution and possible roles on the battlefield during the 16th century, I can’t say for the moment. I’d need to do more research.

Their evolution from foot archers to lighter heavy cavalry seems to happen through the first quarter of the 16th century, and is not easy to document. At Fornovo (1495) they are still foot archers of the Hundred Years War type, with horses for campaigning but generally not expected to fight mounted. For an offensive campaign abroad, like the 1494 invasion of Italy, some crossbow armed 'adventurers' might have been hired to fill out the ranks. The role of second-class light armored lancers is filled by coustilliers, who are closely integrated with the gendarmes they support.

While not intended as heavy cavalry, Archers of this era were experienced professional soldiers, often with decent armor, and could fight on horseback when they needed to. Most archers at Fornovo fought dismounted, but the Royal Scottish Archers, who were an elite bodyguard unit of this type, remained mounted and helped withstand a charge by Italian gendarmes. There is not much evidence for them shooting from horseback, as the John Tiller game seems to imply.

By Ceresole, in 1544, their main role is as lighter lance-armed cavalry supporting the gendarmes (much like coustilliers had been earlier), or sometimes detached to deploy on the flanks. They differ from cheveau-leger primarily in being recruited and paid through the regular gendarme companies, rather than recruited ad hoc from volunteers or local allies.

The evolution happens sometime in between, as the French become increasingly reliant on Swiss mercenaries for foot troops, then begin to develop their own permanent pike and shot formations. It would be great if we had some better documentation of what they were doing in the battles of the 1510s and 1520s, since this is likely when a lot of the change was happening.

So, they were indeed ordinary archers until the 16th century, and then gradually became lightly armed cavalry, am I right? Did they further evolve into fully heavily armed knights later on?

By the middle of the 16th century, 'archers' were heavy cavalry, probably still lighter than full gendarmes on average, but not by much. They fought in the gendarme units and came from the same social classes - a lot of archers were younger soldiers, essentially waiting their turn for a spot as a gendarme to open up (since the crown would only commit to paying a certain number of men at the gendarme level). After the heavy casualties during the civil wars of the early 1560s, a lot of 'archers' were promoted to gendarmes, and I don't believe this required much changing of equipment.

I basically understand that it is an evolution from infantry to cavalry. Thank you all for your answers.
Another question, since in the earliest days these archers fought on foot, that means they were separate from the gendarme when fighting. So what was the point of grouping these men who were not fighting together in a lance?
Was the gendarme responsible for the management of their daily activities?

[gribol]

Another question, since in the earliest days these archers fought on foot, that means they were separate from the gendarme when fighting. So what was the point of grouping these men who were not fighting together in a lance?
Was the gendarme responsible for the management of their daily activities?

I am writing from memory now, so please forgive any simplifications if I do.

This is mainly due to sociological and economic reasons. in the Middle Ages armies were formed somewhat differently than today. In order to ensure the appropriate proportion of the army's condition, the hauls were carried out on the basis of lances, thanks to which it was certain that the army would have an appropriate number of heavy armed men, shooters, etc.
These were also the initial duties of the knight to appear at the call of the ruler with the appropriate number of people (lance), because as a rule the army was built on the basis of personal and not financial obligations, so as a rule, the rulers did not have money to recruit other soldiers.
And than its evolve further and further ...

I hope that what I wrote is quite legible. Google translator is responsible for grammar and logical errors.

[Athos1660]

Another question, since in the earliest days these archers fought on foot, that means they were separate from the gendarme when fighting. So what was the point of grouping these men who were not fighting together in a lance?
Was the gendarme responsible for the management of their daily activities?

It seems to be a rational system. The army of the Ordonnance is a cavalry army. Everybody in this army travel on horseback (the MAA, the Archers, the Coustillers, the Pages and the servants), even if some fight on horseback, others on foot, maybe depending on occasions, their role on the battlefield or during the campaigns evolving over time, not to mention those who don’t fight. This is a professional hierarchised army recruited and paid by the King and organized in Companies having each a certain number of lances, a lance being a group of 6 men and 6 horses (1 MAA, his two servants (the page and the Coustilliers) and three horses ; 2 Archers, his servant and three horses). The King appoints the captains of the companies, the captains recruit and manage their men. Some archers were also MAA's servants.

Being all on horseback makes this army mobile (useful against chevauchées, etc.). Each company is garrisoned in its own area and they can be regrouped into different armies at will. And Coustillers and archers will probe to be able to take on the useful role of (light) cavalry.

Btw the merging of French MAA, crossbowmen and archers into units under the same command seems to go back to 1425, some 20 years before the Ordonnance of 1445.

[Dux Limitis]

Actually,they were literally horse archers(Can fight on foot too)at first,then became lesser Men-at-Arms later.

[wzfcns]

Actually,they were literally horse archers(Can fight on foot too)at first,then became lesser Men-at-Arms later.

In that case, they would have been using regular bows rather than longbows, right? I don't think longbows could be used on horses.

[rbodleyscott]

Actually,they were literally horse archers(Can fight on foot too)at first,then became lesser Men-at-Arms later.

In that case, they would have been using regular bows rather than longbows, right? I don't think longbows could be used on horses.

They were never horse archers. They were foot archers, travelling on horseback until deployed. On the occasions when they did fight mounted, they did so with light lances.

[wzfcns]

Actually,they were literally horse archers(Can fight on foot too)at first,then became lesser Men-at-Arms later.

In that case, they would have been using regular bows rather than longbows, right? I don't think longbows could be used on horses.

They were never horse archers.

So they were archers on horseback, recruited by the knights in the lance to fight as infantry in combat, later taking on some light cavalry functions because they could ride, and eventually gradually becoming lesser MAA.
I think this summary is correct.

[rbodleyscott]

In that case, they would have been using regular bows rather than longbows, right? I don't think longbows could be used on horses.

They were never horse archers.

So they were archers on horseback, recruited by the knights in the lance to fight as infantry in combat, later taking on some light cavalry functions because they could ride, and eventually gradually becoming lesser MAA.
I think this summary is correct.

Yes

[companion]

Later archers were considered 'light' only because their equipment was lighter than that of men at arms. They were actually quite heavy.

Because of their social status and the necessity to have them bolster the line of battle, the extent of their skirmishing duties may have been smaller in scope than the 'true' light cavalries familiar with us modern folks. After all, French had access to specialist light cav mercenaries such as Stradiots for the job.