WOTR Pikemen and Scottish allies

[Andreas Johansson]

Anybody get their slingshot copy the latest one is supposed to cover Bosworth?

Yes - that's where Duncan made the aforementioned argument.

found the book re-pikemen. Bosworth 1485 by Michael Jones. "The army’s backbone was a force of over a thousand French pikemen recruited from a disbanded war camp at Pont-de-l’Arche in upper Normandy."

Andreas, are those the troops who you were talking about, that Duncan Head argues were a mixture of voulgiers and archers?

Yes.

The shortish version:

There is almost nothing known for certain about Henry's French troops. However, in a now-lost letter, one of them called himself an archer du camp. This presumably means he was an archer and one of the gens du camp that Louis XI recruited to replace the francs-archers (the T! Later French Ordonnance list calls these men "Retrained Francs bowmen") after the battle of Guinegatte. Since Swiss experts were brought in to train them they're usually assumed to be pikemen (so in the T! list), but Duncan's dug out documentary and chronicle evidence to the effect their main weapons were bows and polearms.

That most/all of Henry's troops, and not just that guy, were gens du camp is - whether you think they were pikemen or voulgiers or whatever - something of a leap of faith, but a reasonable one in that the camps were wound down after Louis XI's death, so there'd presumably be plenty of veterans of them looking for alternative employment in time for Bosworth.

While our letter-writer claims the French contingent won the battle for Henry, on the Continent the gens du camp were not conspicuously successful, and if distinguishing them from English bows and bills is desired classing them as Heavy Foot and Bow Levy (rather than Elite Foot and Archers) seems reasonable. They might still decide the battle if, as in one reconstruction, they launch a flank attack on Richard's forces.

ETA: Of course, if Henry's French weren't gens du camp, they're even less likely to be pikemen. You'd presumably have some combination of men-at-arms, voulgiers, and shooters (possibly including artillery), because those are the typical French troop-types of the time.

[David Kuijt]

I'll try to get my hands on this Slingshot, then, as well as the Michael Jones book mentioned earlier. One possibility is to add in 0-2 stands of pike or bow levy or heavy foot (French gens du camp) for Tudor only in 1485. No commitment, of course.

[Bill Hupp]

Mike Ingram authored a 2019 book on the battle. It has an order of battle and detailed maps reflecting the latest archeology. I bought as per the recommendations of the Society of Ancient discussions.

In short at the left of the line, The Vanward, are French and Scots. The details are confusing. He does try to reconcile the conflicting sources.

There is a color plate of an armored Burgundian handgunner and a French longspear. “These included men armed with Longspears, halberds and handgunners. They wore little armor in battle. The Illustration shows one of these men with his longspear but without the breastplate he would have worn in combat.” The author believes there were 2,000 of these men.

[David Kuijt]

I've read Duncan Head's article now (thanks to Bill Hupp); I recommend it strongly.

It looks like the evidence for a French contingent is moderately good. The evidence for them having any pikes is shaky at best. We'll take a look at how they might be represented; Bow Levy and Heavy Foot seem reasonable.

[DanielMoreno]

Good compromise