"How would retinues have fought?" Topic

Sounds like an elementary question, but I am stupid like that. Would each retinue have fought together as its own little army, or would they have been broken up with knights from all the retinues all going here and archers from all the retinues all going over there and all the billmen/pikemen in the center, etc.?

The technically correct answer is that we don't know.

However, assuming you are talking about the Wars of the Roses, we do know that an army was formed up in 3, sometines 4, battles. Each battle under the command of a high ranking noble. How each battle was formed from the constituent retinues is purely conjecture. As a wargamer, my gut feeling is that the structure would depend on the tactical situation but in general terms, each retinue would fight as two or three bodies – the archers, the billmen, and the men-at-arms. Sometimes the billmen and men-at-arms would be combined in a single body. These bodies would then form up into a battle. I imagine the archers would try and stay close to their close fighting comrades. It seems there were all sorts of rivalries between the various retinues which were effectively private armies belonging to their lord. Given the number of times that one or more nobles defected to the other side, even in the midst of battle, it is likely that the only guys you would really trust would be the other men in your own retinue.

and all the billmen/pikemen in the center,

In the WOTR, the pike was not an indigenous English weapon. The pikemen would be either Scottish or French mercenaries. They would thus fight separately.

Now what I now about the WotR I could write on a postage stamp with a 6 inch brush. But one flash of the bleeding obvious – troops will fight better amongst folk they know. So what Major B says makes good sense to me…

Sounds like good advice from the Major.

That is always the way I have envisioned medieval warfare.

Another agreement with MajorB

OK, makes sense to me. I always found that forming a unit or two or archers and a unit or two of billmen and a unit or two of men-at-arms seemed rather artificial. I can see why it would be done for a larger game, but for smaller games, seems to me it would make more sense to keep retinues (at least decent sized ones) intact, and combine smaller ones.

Don't know if it was still relevant by the WoTR, but for armies operating in mainland Britain in the 14th C. you would expect to find the MAA divided into (usually) four bodies; one nominally under the king and the other three under magnates (such as Earls) or well-known leaders (generally more up-market barons).MAA with a relationship with a specific leader would be most likley to serve under his command.
Most of the infantry would be recruited from a region, not according to considerations of lordship, but perhaps that may not be applicable to the WOTR given some degree of competition over control of regions.
The infantry would be organised in bodies (nominally 1000 strong)that consisted of both close-combat troops and archers, but might well be deployed as bodies of archers and bodies of spearmen for a major battle. a

Very interesting. So, for a war game purpose with, perhaps, 3 retinues forming one battle, each retinue would have its archers on both of its wings and it's MAA/bill men in the middle with the other two retinues deployed in a similar way?

So that could look like – archers/MAA and bill men/ archers * archers/MAA and bill men/archers * archers/MAA and bill men/archers ?

(Sorry if I am dumming down this post)

Uglyfatbloke,

…you would expect to find the MAA divided into (usually) four bodies; one nominally under the king and the other three under magnates…

Do you mean that the king would have a 'reserve' of MAA and the three magnates would effectively control the van, main, and rearguard battles with their body of MAA? In which case, the king would likely be found in the main battle?

I am particularly interested in the period 1388 – 1415. Thank you.

I agree with what MajorB and uglyfatbloke say.

Captain DEwell I don't think you would see true billmen units in the late 14th century and early 15th century; guys holding various polearms (including bill-shaped etc) yes, but not collectively trained as from the mid-15th C.

Most of the infantry would be recruited from a region, not according to considerations of lordship, but perhaps that may not be applicable to the WOTR given some degree of competition over control of regions.

Generally not the case in the WOTR, although there are records of troops being raised by "Commission of Array" in particular areas for purposes of defence. The bulk of the fighting troops though were from the Lords' retinues.

So, for a war game purpose with, perhaps, 3 retinues forming one battle, each retinue would have its archers on both of its wings and it's MAA/bill men in the middle with the other two retinues deployed in a similar way?

It is far more likely that the archers would not be deployed on the wings but rather ranked in front of the MAA/billmen. They would then engage the opposing battle with archery and on command (or when the enemy get too close) would withdraw through them. The concept of "archers on the wings" is much more a HYW tactic and even then some historians would dispute that it was used at all. (See Hardy & Strickland, "The Warbow")

I am particularly interested in the period 1388 – 1415. Thank you.

Ah.
I assumed you were talking about the WOTR. Indeed when I postulated that in my first reply, you did not correct me.
1388 – 1415 falls in the period of the HYW. WOTR did not start until 1455.

I see no evidence to suggest that English armies at home fought/arrayed differently than they did across the Channel during the HYW. The WotR armies were essentially the same as the continental armies, only not as professional or handpicked. You had all the troops at the battles, not just the cream of the crop as in the selected armies of the HYW.

Arraying and engaging in battle would not be changed, imho. And yes, smaller engagements involving one or a few retinues would see them remaining in their lord's control entirely. How he arranged his own troops would depend on the particular situation, and we have no details. I would expect small retinues to fight as a single, mixed unit as they were wont. And larger retinues would look more like miniature armies with "battles", i.e. more than a single body, possibly divided into cavalry and infantry. Archers would intermix or go out in front or on the flanks, etc.

The evidence for larger battles is all saying that archers when numerous (and English armies of say thousands included lots of archers) were mustered into large bodies. The debate is about where those bodies formed up, with proponents of archers on the flanks of each body of MAA, on the flanks of the entire army as wings, and drawn up in front; with some ascribing that all three array types were used, it just isn't clear where and when.

"Billmen", seem to be a later clarification, elucidation, or creation of seminal writers based on references to such in the original sources. Right now, I have the opinion that "billmen" were just one of several infantry types, along with hobilars and Welsh "spearmen", etc. They were not a distinct, separated infantry "arm", but with the other types of infantry referred to, formed up with or behind the MAA. This would be true of retinues and larger armies….