От Skvortsov
К Д.И.У.
Дата 17.02.2021 14:12:57
Рубрики WWII; Искусство и творчество;

Re: Видимо, название...


>Про английское войско 14-15 веков переводят стандартно: 1000 men at arms, 3000 archers, totally 4000 soldiers - 1000 латников, 3000 лучников, всего 4000 солдат.

>Характерно, что у лучников крупных самостоятельных подразделений никогда не было, они всегда придавались подразделениям латников, даже если тех было небольшое меньшинство (порой 1/8 к концу Столетней войны).


THE BATTLE OF CRÉCY, 1346
Andrew Ayton and Sir Philip Preston Bart.

The English Army at Crecy
стр.189

Having surveyed the size and structure of the army that landed at La Hougue, it
would no doubt be helpful to summarise the conclusions that have been reached.
Analysis of the available records suggests that the army probably consisted of
about 14,000 fighting men. There may have been as many as 2,800 men-at-
arms, the majority being knights and esquires of gentle blood, serving in the
retinues of magnates, knights and royal servants. A similar number of mounted
archers and hobelars were also attached to these retinues.

Estimating the number of men in the companies that had been recruited in the English shires and towns and in the Welsh lordships is even more problematic, but based on the reasoning outlined above, it can be suggested that all told more than 8,000 men may have been provided from these sources. The great majority of these were foot
soldiers, and perhaps 5,000 were archers.
От Д.И.У.
К Skvortsov (17.02.2021 14:12:57)
Дата 17.02.2021 19:15:20

Re: Видимо, название...

>>Про английское войско 14-15 веков переводят стандартно: 1000 men at arms, 3000 archers, totally 4000 soldiers - 1000 латников, 3000 лучников, всего 4000 солдат.
>
>>Характерно, что у лучников крупных самостоятельных подразделений никогда не было, они всегда придавались подразделениям латников, даже если тех было небольшое меньшинство (порой 1/8 к концу Столетней войны).
>

>THE BATTLE OF CRÉCY, 1346
>Andrew Ayton and Sir Philip Preston Bart.

>The English Army at Crecy
>стр.189

>Having surveyed the size and structure of the army that landed at La Hougue, it
>would no doubt be helpful to summarise the conclusions that have been reached.
>Analysis of the available records suggests that the army probably consisted of
>about 14,000 fighting men. There may have been as many as 2,800 men-at-
>arms, the majority being knights and esquires of gentle blood, serving in the
>retinues of magnates, knights and royal servants. A similar number of mounted
>archers and hobelars were also attached to these retinues.

>Estimating the number of men in the companies that had been recruited in the English shires and towns and in the Welsh lordships is even more problematic, but based on the reasoning outlined above, it can be suggested that all told more than 8,000 men may have been provided from these sources. The great majority of these were foot
>soldiers, and perhaps 5,000 were archers.

И что не так? Разве что тут (в начале Столетней войны) появляется третья категория - пешие копейщики, в основном голодранцы (как правило, даже в акетон не одетые) из Уэльса; в последующих кампаниях они исчезают и остаются только "латники" и "лучники".
"the majority being knights and esquires of gentle blood" естественно, для тех, кто носит дорогие и требующие привычки латы, но "большинство", а не обязательный признак. Меньшинство таки сержанты из незнатных.
Во Франции вовсе имелись единичные монастыри, выставляющие по 200-300 конных наёмных сержантов в полных латах - и дворян, и не дворян, лишь бы имели навык. И у короля, и даже у графов в постоянной личной охране имелись такие "асоциальные наемники вне феодальной лестницы".

Еще раз: man-at-arms - профессионально подготовленный к рукопашному бою воин в полных латах, предпочтительно конник, но способный сражаться и пешим (как англичане и делали чаще всего). Как правильно пишут в https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-at-arms , "while all knights equipped for war certainly were men-at-arms, not all men-at-arms were knights"
Социальное деление существовало в другой плоскости, хотя и пересекающейся с военной плоскостью.
От Skvortsov
К Д.И.У. (17.02.2021 19:15:20)
Дата 17.02.2021 20:30:41

Re: Видимо, название...


>"the majority being knights and esquires of gentle blood" естественно, для тех, кто носит дорогие и требующие привычки латы, но "большинство", а не обязательный признак. Меньшинство таки сержанты из незнатных.

Ну так в перечень men-at-arms англичане в те времена не включали sergeants-at-arms.

In the College of Arms text, the section that enumerates the sub-knightly personnel of the royal household lacks names; but in content it is nevertheless essentially comparable with other Edwardian pay-rolls. Just how many of these men were accompanying the king when the army landed at La Hougue, and how many arrived later, is unclear, but we would probably be justified in assuming that the majority were with the king from the outset. This is of some relevance to our discussion of ‘strenuous’ personnel, since as well as several dozen clerks and household staff, and several hundred workmen and artisans, this section of the College of Arms text includes over 200 men-at-arms and over 400 archers (mostly mounted) – a substantial contribution to the manpower of the ‘household division’.

In addition to the 230 men-at-arms, there were 67 sergeants-at-arms. Of the 427 archers, 55 were foot soldiers, and 121 were designated ‘king’s archers’.


Half of the men-at-arms (101) were actually household esquires, some of whom would have had other fighting men associated with them, as individuals or in small companies, as would have at least a proportion of the clerks.



>Еще раз: man-at-arms - профессионально подготовленный к рукопашному бою воин в полных латах, предпочтительно конник, но способный сражаться и пешим (как англичане и делали чаще всего). Как правильно пишут в https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man-at-arms , "while all knights equipped for war certainly were men-at-arms, not all men-at-arms were knights"

Да, большинство были эсквайры, не рыцари.



>Социальное деление существовало в другой плоскости, хотя и пересекающейся с военной плоскостью.

Да вот иное утверждают, о наличии "clear separation in economic and social terms":

What do we know of the social and economic standing of the archers at Crécy? Some clues are offered by Edward III’s re-enactments and extensions of the Statute of Winchester (1285). Itself based on earlier assizes of arms, the statute had required every free man between the ages of 15 (later 16) and 60 to possess military equipment appropriate to his means, as determined by the value of his land or chattels; and to appear at a ‘view of arms’ in his hundred twice a year. According to Edward III’s promulgations of the statute during the 1330s, those with land worth from £2 to £5 per annum were to be equipped with a bow and arrows, a sword and a knife. This definition of the section of
society that would be expected to yield foot archers was very much that of the earlier Edwardian kings. What occurred in the years immediately prior to Crécy was the crown’s identification of the socio-economic group that would be called upon to provide mounted archers. This was not done by altering the politically sensitive ‘customary’ scale of wealth-specific categories defined by the Statute of Winchester, the maintenance of which had prompted petitioning (and a statute) in the first parliament of Edward III’s reign. Rather, it was the novel military assessment of the mid-1340s (itself ‘highly contentious’) that laid down that a landowner whose property was worth £5 per annum was to be, or to provide, a mounted archer, while the income threshold for a hobelar was £10, and for a man-at-arms, £25.

There was, therefore, at least in principle, a clear separation in economic and social terms between archers, whether mounted or on foot, and mounted, armoured warriors – the hobelars and men-at-arms.

However, the archers were not themselves a homogeneous group any more than the ‘peasantry’ was; and those who served in the king’s armies cannot have been drawn exclusively from the comparatively narrow socio-economic bands specified in royal proclamations. Indeed, the original Statute of Winchester, and its re-enactments under Edward II and Edward III, appear to cast the net much more widely, by inviting ‘all others’ (that is, those not included in the lowest specifically identified groups, which were ‘less than 40s of land’ and ‘less than 20 marks of chattels’) to have bows and arrows, if living outside the forest and bows and bolts (presumably crossbows), if within. Thus, the very poorest freemen were encouraged to possess a bow, if nothing else; and this aspect of the Statute of Winchester may have proved useful when the heavy recruiting demands of the Edwardian wars began in the mid-1290s.
От Д.И.У.
К Skvortsov (17.02.2021 20:30:41)
Дата 18.02.2021 03:34:17

Re: Видимо, название...

Можно заниматься разной казуистикой, выискивать и по-разному подсчитывать отдельные случаи, однако - хотите верьте, хотите не верьте - в преобладающем большинстве контрактов о найме с капитанами эпохи Столетней войны, равно как в более укрупненных документах (письмах, отчетах, хрониках), и последующих трудах современных историков, присутствуют только две категории - men-at-arms и archers. Редко добавляются "простые пехотинцы" особых видов типа billmen (в большинстве случаев и они учитываются как archers, даже если не с луками). И даже если в списках жалованья значатся персонально рыцари, сквайры, сержанты, в общих ведомостях они все объединяются в общую группу men-at-arms, "латные люди".
Это сам по себе технический термин, вроде рода войск. И не рыцари (для них есть отдельное слово), и не сквайры (для них тоже есть отдельное слово), и не латные сержанты (и для них есть отдельный термин, отделяющий от прочих сержантов, каких было великое множество разновидностей, вплоть до "финансовых сержантов"), а "люди с оружием" вообще, вместе взятые.
Для знати в социальном смысле тоже есть отдельные слова - nobility, gentry/gentlefolk, chivalry/knightage.
От Skvortsov
К Д.И.У. (18.02.2021 03:34:17)
Дата 18.02.2021 09:14:23

Re: Видимо, название...

>Можно заниматься разной казуистикой, выискивать и по-разному подсчитывать отдельные случаи, однако - хотите верьте, хотите не верьте - в преобладающем большинстве контрактов о найме с капитанами эпохи Столетней войны, равно как в более укрупненных документах (письмах, отчетах, хрониках), и последующих трудах современных историков, присутствуют только две категории - men-at-arms и archers.

Роты пеших лучников и копейщиков, а также легкую коницу перед битвой при Креси рекрутировали графства и города по спущенной сверху разнарядке.

"In 1346 mass recruitment of infantry was still necessary if Edward III were to raise an army, from his own kingdom, large enough to challenge Philip of Valois in the field. Just how many men were actually recruited is not known, for our only systematic guide to numbers is an unsatisfactory one. What we have are not the totals that were actually transported to Normandy, but the numbers that the government hoped could be raised by commissions of array. To begin with what was to be the most important recruiting ground: Wales was to supply 7,000 footmen, of whom half would be archers and half spearmen. Just over half of these troops (3,550) were to be drawn from the lands and lordships of Edward, Prince of Wales, while the remainder were to be raised by lords whose lands lay mainly in south Wales and the Marches (see Table 1).The prince was also to
raise a hundred Cheshire archers.In England, 29 shires lying south of the River Trent were ordered to supply, in total, 3,900 foot archers. Individual county targets ranged from 280 archers for Kent to 40 for Rutland. In addition, 50 mounted archers were ordered from Shropshire, Worcester and Hereford to act as a royal bodyguard. Separate orders were issued, on 10 February 1346, to 142 towns in the south and midlands of England. The original combined recruiting target for these towns was a little under 2,000 men, the great majority of whom were to be armati (hobelars). Individual quotas ranged from 600 men for London to two men for Blandford."

И кто такие английские капитаны во времена битвы при Креси? Пример контракта можете привести? Ну, чтобы там были только men-at-arms и archers? Конные лучники и hobelars к какой категории относились в этих контрактах?

>Редко добавляются "простые пехотинцы" особых видов типа billmen (в большинстве случаев и они учитываются как archers, даже если не с луками). И даже если в списках жалованья значатся персонально рыцари, сквайры, сержанты, в общих ведомостях они все объединяются в общую группу men-at-arms, "латные люди".

А что такое "общие ведомости"? Пример можете привести?