Slitherine

I am currently reading Michael Mallett's "Mercenaries and Their Masters" which is about the the Condotta armies of Italy. On page 108 he writes this about the military reforms of Charles VII of France in 1439 and 1445 . . .

"They also created a selected conscript infantry force; these men were mainly equipped with crossbows and were exempt from taxation, hence their name - francs archers."

Now in the game the francs archers are portrayed as "poor" longbowmen (!), not crossbowmen at all. I was wondering if this might be an error or are there other sources that describe them as longbowmen?

They are classed as longbowmen in the TT list so you would need to raise the question in the TT forums. I beleive the original intent in raising them was to be an equivalent of the English longbowmen and hence they were so equipped. I think they may have adopted the crossbows at a later time.

Chris

This link on The Miniatures Page about Franc archers http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=194047 has some more information.

Chris

batesmotel wrote:This link on The Miniatures Page about Franc archers http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=194047 has some more information.

Chris

Thanks Chris. This contribution from that discussion you linked to seems quite concise and shows what a mixed force the Francs archers really were . . .

"The Francs-Archers were infantry, raised from the 1440's onward (the Bretons actually raised theirs from the 1420's) to provide the French with additional archers they were manily armed with longbows together with a small part armed with crossbows. Orginaly 8000 strong they were expanded to 16000 strong in 1466. At the same time the equipment was made much more diverse. Alongside the original archers & crossbowmen men were now accepted into service armed with pike or voulge. A small number of handgunners is also recorded in the musters though handguns were not mentioned in the equipment regulations.

Following the defeat in the battle of Guinegate 1479 Louis XI rearmed most of the Francs-Archers with pike and halberd and only kept a small 'elite' armed with bow. The sources get confusing as the Francs-archers began to be reorganised, suppressed and re-raised in a very confusing manner. Hence later day writers will provide somewhat diffrent details about their fate. Sufficent to say the Francs-Archers were on a downward slope from the 1480's ownard regardless of when one think that their existence ended."

With reference to the extract in the post above and the rest of the discussion on that forum, I have a number of further questions about Francs archers, Chris . . .

i) if they were first raised by France in the 1440s then why are they included in the two earlier Medieval French lists, 1300-49 and 1350-99? I can see the case for including them in the Later Medieval list 1400 to 1455.

ii) in the medieval lists the francs archers constitute only 2 BG's but in the French Ordonnance lists they constitute up to 9 BG's. One of the contributions to that discussion says the francs archers were doubled in number in 1466 (from 8 to 16,000) so is 9 BG's for the earlier French Ordonnance army too many or is 9BG's for the later French Ordonnance army too few?

iii) should the francs archers in the later French Ordonnance list actually be pikemem, or maybe mixed units of pikes and longbows?

iv) should the francs archers be rated "poor" throughout this period?

stockwellpete wrote:With reference to the extract in the post above and the rest of the discussion on that forum, I have a number of further questions about Francs archers, Chris . . .

i) if they were first raised by France in the 1440s then why are they included in the two earlier Medieval French lists, 1300-49 and 1350-99? I can see the case for including them in the Later Medieval list 1400 to 1455.

ii) in the medieval lists the francs archers constitute only 2 BG's but in the French Ordonnance lists they constitute up to 9 BG's. One of the contributions to that discussion says the francs archers were doubled in number in 1466 (from 8 to 16,000) so is 9 BG's for the earlier French Ordonnance army too many or is 9BG's for the later French Ordonnance army too few?

iii) should the francs archers in the later French Ordonnance list actually be pikemem, or maybe mixed units of pikes and longbows?

iv) should the francs archers be rated "poor" throughout this period?

The archers in the Medieval French list should be French Archers rather than Francs Archers. (This is what they are called in the TT list. ) In the TT list the Francs Archers are only included in the Ordannance list and the list doesn't differentiate between the number available between early and late in the period covered by the list. I think it is reasonable to grade the Francs Archers as poor since the retinue archers and English longbowmen are only rated as average. (English War of the Roses Militia archers are also only rated as poor for comparison.) I think you could make an argument that the Francs Archers should have the option to be drilled compared to the earlier French archers but apparently the list author didn't think this was justified. As it is, as undrilled it makes them fairly cost effective filler for the French Ordonance list.

Chris

batesmotel wrote: The archers in the Medieval French list should be French Archers rather than Francs Archers. (This is what they are called in the TT list. ) In the TT list the Francs Archers are only included in the Ordannance list and the list doesn't differentiate between the number available between early and late in the period covered by the list. I think it is reasonable to grade the Francs Archers as poor since the retinue archers and English longbowmen are only rated as average. (English War of the Roses Militia archers are also only rated as poor for comparison.) I think you could make an argument that the Francs Archers should have the option to be drilled compared to the earlier French archers but apparently the list author didn't think this was justified. As it is, as undrilled it makes them fairly cost effective filler for the French Ordonance list.

Chris

OK, thanks. And this point made in that discussion you linked to,

"Following the defeat in the battle of Guinegate 1479 Louis XI rearmed most of the Francs-Archers with pike and halberd and only kept a small 'elite' armed with bow."

If that is correct then should the Later French Ordonnance list really show them as pikes or halberds - or even as mixed pike/archers?

The French Ordonnance(later) list has the option for pikes (representing the pike and bill/halberd mix) that aren't included in the earlier list. They replace spearmen available in the earlier period. None of these are specifically labeled as "Francs Archers" but can be assumed to represent the portions of these not primarily armed as missile troops.

Chris

batesmotel wrote:The French Ordonnance(later) list has the option for pikes (representing the pike and bill/halberd mix) that aren't included in the earlier list. They replace spearmen available in the earlier period. None of these are specifically labeled as "Francs Archers" but can be assumed to represent the portions of these not primarily armed as missile troops.

Chris

Hmm . . . the Later French Ordonnance list has provision for up to 6 x "poor" pikemen (drilled and protected) which must be the newly designated "francs archers" - but that list also has provision for up to 9 x "poor" longbowmen (named as "francs archers" in the DAG) even though that chap from the discussion reckons after 1479 the French only kept " a small 'elite' armed with bow". So I think that 9 longbow BG's is probably too many at this historical juncture (maybe 3 is more appropriate) and maybe there is also a case for saying that these smaller number of archers should now be rated as "medium" because the era of English longbow dominance was well and truly over by the end of the 15th century.

Should I place a query in the Army design section of the TT forum and reference this discussion just to see if there are any other ideas about the subject?