Page 1 of 1

15th century ordinances

Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 3:47 pm
by Bucket
Does any one out there have copies of war of the roses military ordinances or know of a link to any. Also does any one have a copy of Carles the bold 1473 ordinance.
I already have the ordinaces of henry V but there really to early for me.
thanks for your help
bucket

Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 7:44 pm
by Nigel
got the burgundian stuff reams of it

but its somewhere in the hosue will look

Burgundian Ordinances

Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 8:16 pm
by jelayemprins
Abbeville, Bohain en Vermandois and St Maximin de Treves

All 3 are outlined in the Osprey Men at Arms book Armies of Medieval Burgundy 1364 -1477 by Nick Michael & Gerry Embleton

isbn 0-85045-518-9

Is that enough detail or do you require the whole text?

Posted: Tue May 12, 2009 9:11 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
Which goes into what kind of shoes, sleeves, laces, bread, number of bowstrings are required/permitted and to whom!!!

Ian is damn straight to point you to the abv. ver.

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 1:01 pm
by Colin Middleton
There are a few survivsing things, as well as reference in Edward IV's Black Book, but finding accessible versions of them could be quite a fight.

I'd be interested in any guidance on this stuff too, even the very detailed stuff.

Thanks

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 1:01 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
The ordinannces of Charles Valois tell you more about his view of a "perfect Burgundian army" than the more practical french ones of the 1440's. He is clearly a micro manager from Hell and maybe should have spent some more time working on how to fight (and survive) a battle with a complete army (or body). He reminds me of Cpt Manwarin, certainly he talks a good job.
I suspect that the ordiannances were never carried out to the letter, especially given that the greater part of his army was made up of mercenaries from Italy, England and the Germanies and that it suffered pretty hideous set backs at the hands of the French and Swiss on more than one occasion. (Would there have been the time and money to re-equip it following the defeat at Grandison and the Nancy campaighn?)
I finally have all the right gear to portray a Burgundain mercenary gunner but no longer wish to follow that portrayal. There is not a lot of call for it in WOTR re-enactment so I now portray an Italian in soft kit (either an engineer or a merchant) and a ordinary English man at arms.
I don't think either the ordinannces or the lance system was followed in England.

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 1:05 pm
by Colin Middleton
Marcus Woodhouse wrote:I finally have all the right gear to portray a Burgundain mercenary gunner but no longer wish to follow that portrayal. There is not a lot of call for it in WOTR re-enactment so I now portray an Italian in soft kit (either an engineer or a merchant) and a ordinary English man at arms.
I don't think either the ordinannces or the lance system was followed in England.
I thought that we were all for Burgundian and Flemish gunners in the WotR. Isn't there even a quote about Flesmish gunners walking around London covered in soot?

I think you're right about Lances not being used in England.

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 1:22 pm
by Langley
Marcus - you at Tewkesbury? Come see us in the gunner's camp. Burgundian with the piggy. The little perrier we use is based on a description from the Black Book (will try to remember our copy for you to take a peek). Edward IV had four of them "in his bhaggage train". A Burgundian Gunner in al his finery would be fun to play with!

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 4:37 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
Colin they are mentioned twice at 2nd St. Albans and as part of the Arrival. No mention of them fighting at barnet or Tewkesbury and certainly not at any other battle.
I used to think they were but other debates on the subject and my own further research makes me doubt that there was much mercenary activity at all, unless you count Englishmen fighting for money in which case they all are!
I now even wonder how many of the "Burgundian" mercenaries fighting in Yorkist ranks were Burgundian at all, given that most of the "Burgundian" army was not Burgundian. As the English made up a significant force and they were a known fact amongst the bods who went to Bruges with Edward IV I think it would have made more sense for Hastings, Rivers etc to, in effect, re-recruit the English fighting for Duke Charles.
Of course I can't prove that.
I do pop around to talk to gunners but it isn't a direction I wish to follow. If I did want to do that then it would now be as a crossbowman. this year I have no intention of taking part in the fighting at Tewkesbury. If my friend Mark (Badger) is trading then I may go along with the family to give him some support and perhaps check out the market but I am in no desperate rush to.

Posted: Wed May 13, 2009 7:54 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
There's also the tiny problem that there is no way any Burgundian mercenary in Edwards army is going to be a "ordinnnance" trooper given the fact that Charles the Rash had yet got around to writing them.
I suspect that any smokey Flemish handgonner came from the Bruges milita.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 8:50 am
by Ghost
Marcus Woodhouse wrote:.....and that it suffered pretty hideous set backs at the hands of the French and Swiss on more than one occasion. quote]
No doubt someone forgot to tell the French and Swiss "their" role in Charles' micro managed world - is he the first diagnosed case of OCD?

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:42 pm
by Chris, yclept John Barber
Marcus Woodhouse wrote:I now even wonder how many of the "Burgundian" mercenaries fighting in Yorkist ranks were Burgundian at all, given that most of the "Burgundian" army was not Burgundian. As the English made up a significant force and they were a known fact amongst the bods who went to Bruges with Edward IV I think it would have made more sense for Hastings, Rivers etc to, in effect, re-recruit the English fighting for Duke Charles.
Of course I can't prove that.
Perhaps there's a parallel with what the British Army in the late C19th/early C20th knew as 'Indian officers' - as British as anyone else, but having served in India (and generally seen more active service than Home officers) they had a different attitude and were generally looked down upon socially.

By this parallel, the "Burgundian" mercenaries would not be actual Burgundians, but those who favoured the tactics and combat styles they had learned while serving in Europe.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 12:53 pm
by Colin Middleton
It's the Arrival that I'm thinking of. Thanks Marcus.

Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 1:04 pm
by Marcus Woodhouse
I'm not sure if there actually was a Burgundian style of fighting (badly in order to lose and run away as quickly as possible?)
Given that Charles wanted to make a "super army" utilizing the best men and equipment throughout Europe this boils down to:
*dismounted knights and MAA mixed in with archers (and handgunners and crossbowmen) behind a string of stakes-from England.
*missile troops supported by spears/polearms and swordsmen-a bit German.
*heavy cavalry supported by dismounted MAA and missile troops-a bit French.
*cannons, missile troops and infantry behind defensive "earthworks" pavise supported by light infantry and heavy horse-somewhat Italian.
I can't see how he was ever going to "fuse" these elements together and Morat, Grandson and Nancy point that Charles didn't get it right either.
I mean whatever way you look at it the burgundian army of Charles the Rash was a bit crap.

Posted: Mon May 25, 2009 7:48 pm
by behanner
There are no military ordinances from campaigns of the Wars of the Roses. There are ordinances for the French campaigns/expeditions of 1475 and 1492. By and large they are copies of earlier ordinances with only small differences.

Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 8:05 am
by Bucket
Thanks for the info chaps, but does anyone actually have a copy of these ordanances so that i can actually peruse them.......... or know where i can get a copy.