Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Medieval Adventures => Topic started by: Cubs on 06 February 2014, 10:51:21 AM
-
Basically I'm trying to find out when it became commonplace for a soldier to wear his lord's livery in battle.
I'm painting up some archers to use as very early 12th century Kingdom of Antioch dudes. My first instinct was to paint them up in whatever colours because I didn't think they would have had specific liveries then, but now I'm starting to question.
I know that by the 3rd Crusade - the end of that century - it was more common, but I'm a bit uncertain of when it began.
Anyone know?
And yes Janner, I'm looking at you.
-
Basically I'm trying to find out when it became commonplace for a soldier to wear his lord's livery in battle.
I'm painting up some archers to use as very early 12th century Kingdom of Antioch dudes. My first instinct was to paint them up in whatever colours because I didn't think they would have had specific liveries then, but now I'm starting to question.
I know that by the 3rd Crusade - the end of that century - it was more common, but I'm a bit uncertain of when it began.
Anyone know?
And yes Janner, I'm looking at you.
These are very big questions that you are asking. If i get time today I'll go into a bit of detail but it may be unlikely as I'm very, very busy.
I'll help if I can.
Darrell.
-
I'm not certain... but it makes sense that it began when a Lord equipped his paid soldiers at his own expense, rather than when they were required to serve at their own expense. So you buy 20 or 30 tunics in the same colour and perhaps the same number of hoods in a contrasting colour, because it looks smart. Sir Over The Hill has chosen similar colours, so to set them apart you need a symbol. Your coat of arms is a bit complicated and expensive to stitch onto each one, so maybe a torch to symbolise your notorious short-temper? So it goes...
Potentially you 'could' have some form of unifying colour scheme as early as the 12th Century, at least for the professionals. I would imagine however that formally it would be the 14th Century where it became common... I do say 'imagine' though as I really don't have a clue.
;)
-
Thanks guys, an answer of "I'm not really sure," or 'Nobody knows," is actually very helpful too, because it just confirms what I'm thinking. Where there's uncertainty, the painter gets the choice!
-
Troops wore field signs at Otterburn in 1388, those following Percy wearing a silver crescent, but as for a uniform coat bearing livery I think you're looking a bit later. Probably around the War of the roses.
-
I read recently that livery was originally for the Lords Staff and that during the Hundred years it became more common as money was available to equip the soldiers. But if your a rich Lord at an earlier time it would have made sense to have the same livery, even if was for rallying purposes alone.
I, from the information I have read over the years, would say it started a lot earlier, most likely just after 1100 would be my best guess.
So the crusades is a great place to begin and as you say the painter has the choice. ::)
-
Troops wore field signs at Otterburn in 1388, those following Percy wearing a silver crescent, but as for a uniform coat bearing livery I think you're looking a bit later. Probably around the War of the roses.
Not so, as far back as the English expedition into France in 1346 we have evidence that Edward of Woodstock (the future Black Prince) kitted out his Welsh and Cheshire archers in green and white, though they were only supplied with the cloth and would have had to make their own garments. This is just one notable example there are many others, amongst the lesser Nobility too. It is certainly feasible that the concept of livery was introduced earlier then 1346!! The aristocracy saw the wearing of badges and livery as a mark of ownership (they literally saw themselves as owning the men beneath them) so it would be no surprise to me if evidence for the wearing of livery was discovered at an earlier date then the beginnings of the HYW (which technically began long before the Crecy campaign). This attitude of ownership is something that is often overlooked by students of Late Medieval warfare and shouldn't be underestimated.
Darrell.
-
I can't argue against that at all, but I will point out that it was a two-way thing and while the Lord would like to infer possession, the guys would also like it to be known who they worked for, not unlike wearing 'gang colours', or being 'connected' in the best traditions of organised crime.
;)
-
Cool. I think thus far it all points to -
1) Around 1100 is very early for soldiers to be wearing retinue colours, but it's possible.
2) Thus I can do what the hell I like!
Thanks guys, I think what I'll do is have most of the retinue with at least one garment in the red and blue of Antioch, but without a strict sort of uniform or surcoat. Knights will be in their own colours.
-
Well, you learn something every day. Thanks for the reply Darrell. :D
-
I'll do is have most of the retinue with at least one garment in the red and blue of Antioch,
As long as you paint the Holy hand grenade the right colour, you are onto a winner, Cubs!! :D
-
According to R. Jones: Bloodied Banners, "By the 1150s it was common for lords to provide uniforms for their households, both civil and military" (p. 58). That's about the earliest he has. He refers to different sources, some literary and some chronicles. Btw, I found this to be a most excellent book, covering all sorts of martial display, including audible!
Cheers,
Shandy
-
I can't argue against that at all, but I will point out that it was a two-way thing and while the Lord would like to infer possession, the guys would also like it to be known who they worked for, not unlike wearing 'gang colours', or being 'connected' in the best traditions of organised crime.
;)
Absolutely true, but I think it's very clear who the real beneficiary of this relationship really was! ;) :)
Darrell.
-
I normally have onions with my livery.....I will get my coat now ;) ;D
-
I normally have onions with my livery.....I will get my coat now ;) ;D
Wah..... wah..... waaaaaaaaa :D.
Darrell.
-
Cool. I think thus far it all points to -
1) Around 1100 is very early for soldiers to be wearing retinue colours, but it's possible.
2) Thus I can do what the hell I like!
Thanks guys, I think what I'll do is have most of the retinue with at least one garment in the red and blue of Antioch, but without a strict sort of uniform or surcoat. Knights will be in their own colours.
1100 is the period of Henry II, which means his son Richard the Lionhearted would be on Crusade in that century. Are there any accounts of livery in the Crusades that Richard was part of?
-
That's a neat trick, going on crusade 57 years before you're born. I'm afraid you're a couple of generations out and Richard was one of the leading figures of the 3rd Crusade nearly a century later.
Henry I was on the throne in 1100, taking over from his brother William Rufus. They were William the Conqueror's sons.
-
That's a neat trick, going on crusade 57 years before you're born. I'm afraid you're a couple of generations out and Richard was one of the leading figures of the 3rd Crusade nearly a century later.
Henry I was on the throne in 1100, taking over from his brother William Rufus. They were William the Conqueror's sons.
Sure, H II was what 1170 or so? I meant the 12th century as a whole. I wasnt suggesting that Richard invented the practice of livery for the Crusades, but my guess what if he had used it, it probably predated him as well. Since you're not going for strict historical accuracy, that would push the date back to the beginning of the 12th century, ie 1100, for painting purposes.
-
Pretty much my thinking - it's a stretch, but the verge of possible is enough for fun with toy solders.
Besides, the models I'm using are from at least a century later (at least) so it would be silly to quibble about 50yrs or so.
-
Here are some contemporay 12th century illuminations from Liber ad honorem Augusti, by Pietro da Eboli, Sicily, c.1197 (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti.htm) showing matching patterns worn on helmet and/or shield:
Folio 113r. Public discourse of Count Richard of Acerra and the Archbishop of Salerno. (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f113r.htm)
Folio 130r. Storming of S. Germano by Diepold von Schweinspeunt (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f130r.htm)
Folio 131r. The army and the fleet of the Emperor Henry VI to conquer the kingdom of Sicily. (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f131r.htm)
Folio 138r. The Empress Constance, when leaving for Sicily, entrusts the little Frederick Roger (the future Frederick II) to the Duchess of Spoleto. (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f138r.htm)
Folio 145r. Chancellor Conrad talking to the nobles of the kingdom to his right, behind him two armed with swords in hand. (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f145r.htm)
Druzhina
12th Century Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers (http://warfare.uphero.com/12C.htm)
-
Here are some contemporay 12th century illuminations from Liber ad honorem Augusti, by Pietro da Eboli, Sicily, c.1197 (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti.htm) showing matching patterns worn on helmet and/or shield:
Folio 113r. Public discourse of Count Richard of Acerra and the Archbishop of Salerno. (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f113r.htm)
Folio 130r. Storming of S. Germano by Diepold von Schweinspeunt (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f130r.htm)
Folio 131r. The army and the fleet of the Emperor Henry VI to conquer the kingdom of Sicily. (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f131r.htm)
Folio 138r. The Empress Constance, when leaving for Sicily, entrusts the little Frederick Roger (the future Frederick II) to the Duchess of Spoleto. (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f138r.htm)
Folio 145r. Chancellor Conrad talking to the nobles of the kingdom to his right, behind him two armed with swords in hand. (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti-f145r.htm)
MIRROR SITE
Liber ad honorem Augusti, by Pietro da Eboli, Sicily, c.1197 (http://warfare.uphero.com/Medieval/Liber_ad_honorem_Augusti.htm)
Druzhina
12th Century Illustrations of Costume & Soldiers (http://warfare.atspace.eu/Medieval2/12C.htm)
Excellent Stuff Druzhina 8). only thing is we are seeing the depiction of a lot of royalty, aristocracy and knights, no pics of the common soldier as is usual (unless I've missed something, which is very possible at this time in the morning!!). The question as i understood it was about the possible livery of the common soldier? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Darrell.
-
Don't forget that the line between 'Knight' and professional soldier was a lot more blurred in the 12th Century. The fact that there is apparently a common design does imply that these are not Knights, who would each have had their own unique design, nor are they the 'levied commoners' which accompany them.
While they're not quite liveries as I would call them, it is however a degree of uniformity. :)
-
Yes, in short, I don't know for sure when it comes to common troops for the era you are looking at lol
The giving of robes (such as a Michaelmas) was a common way for a lord to reward his household troops. I suspect this became less prevalent to lower one went down the social scale/decreasing wealth of the patron.
We have sources to show that is was well-established by the third quarter of the twelfth century and I would be very comfortable fielding troops in a, somewhat haphazard, livery in the early twelfth century, eg shields showing a similar design matched with the odd painted helm in the same colour scheme, with commanders (and perhaps musicians) in livery. If someone was expected to turn up in their own gear, such as under assizes, then I would expect them to be pretty diverse. If their equipment came from a city armoury, or the lord's stocks, then if you would have a stronger case for a degree of uniformity.
When it comes to archers, you might consider a field sign rather than livery - as has been suggested :)
-
Here are some contemporay 12th century illuminations
Thanks for going to so much effort fella, very much appreciated.
It's tricky to know whether the degree of uniformity shown in some of the illustrations (lots of diagonal green and red sripes on show) is down to the artist's lack of palette and imagination as much as the subjects themselves.
In the illustrations, however, the men-at-arms (or knights, or whatever they are) have similar, colourful, designs whereas the peasants are in drab shades. Again, perhaps as much a social statement by the artist and what he wants people to concentrate on.
I pondered a field sign Janner, but then couldn't be bothered. I once modelled Milliput heather sprigs on my Highlanders and then deccided they looked poo and chipped them all off again!
-
Thanks for going to so much effort fella, very much appreciated.
It's tricky to know whether the degree of uniformity shown in some of the illustrations (lots of diagonal green and red sripes on show) is down to the artist's lack of palette and imagination as much as the subjects themselves.
In the illustrations, however, the men-at-arms (or knights, or whatever they are) have similar, colourful, designs whereas the peasants are in drab shades. Again, perhaps as much a social statement by the artist and what he wants people to concentrate on.
I pondered a field sign Janner, but then couldn't be bothered. I once modelled Milliput heather sprigs on my Highlanders and then deccided they looked poo and chipped them all off again!
Just to add more fuel to the fire, so's to speak, it's also worth remembering that most of the illustrations would have been made by the clergy who would have had little if any military experience.
Darrell.
-
Success evidence wise, the Kings troops at the battle of Evesham 4 August 1265 had copied Simon de Montfort trick at the battle of Lewes. At Lewes de Montforts troops had painted a white cross on their livery and at Evesham the Knigs men painted a red cross on their livery.
So with the information posted by Atheling c 1197 were in the right ball park at least.
M
-
Indeed, the use of the white cross by the king of England's contingent goes back to the agreement made at Gisors in the run up to the Third Crusade with the Capetians wearing a red cross and the Count of Flanders' chaps in a green one. So de Montfort was being a bit cheeky in using the king's colours so to speak ;-)
-
Indeed, the use of the white cross by the king of England's contingent goes back to the agreement made at Gisors in the run up to the Third Crusade with the Capetians wearing a red cross and the Count of Flanders' chaps in a green one. So de Montfort was being a bit cheeky in using the king's colours so to speak ;-)
A deliberate provocation?
Darrell.
-
I think so. The use of the cross was probably provocative by itself, as it was still the mark of someone who had taken a crusader vow at this time. Given de Montfort's own crusader heritage, to then select of colour of cross worn by Henry III's grandfather and uncle was unlikely to have been a coincidence.
-
I'll chalk my comments up to an educated guess then :D
-
I think so. The use of the cross was probably provocative by itself, as it was still the mark of someone who had taken a crusader vow at this time. Given de Montfort's own crusader heritage, to then select of colour of cross worn by Henry III's grandfather and uncle was unlikely to have been a coincidence.
That's exactly what I was thinking. When you think of the importance to the nobility of the family history (which was often bound up with family mythology) it seems entirely plausible.
I'll chalk my comments up to an educated guess then :D
When it comes to Medieval history and the oft lack of evidence we all do that to some extent- it's part of the fun- putting in place the pieces of the puzzle ;) :).
Darrell.
-
@Atheling
A deliberate provocation?
Now that is a thought isn't it, wind your enemy up so he makes a mistake...!
-
@Atheling
A deliberate provocation?
Now that is a thought isn't it, wind your enemy up so he makes a mistake...!
It would be very Sun Tzu...
“The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain”
-
It would be very Sun Tzu...
“The general, unable to control his irritation, will launch his men to the assault like swarming ants, with the result that one-third of his men are slain”
Or in Henry III's case, numberoneson charges off and destroys the enemy left wing, but pursues them off the battlefield, returning in time to find the battle lost and be captured alongside his father. ;)
-
Or in Henry III's case, numberoneson charges off and destroys the enemy left wing, but pursues them off the battlefield, returning in time to find the battle lost and be captured alongside his father. ;)
:D
Darrell.
-
Or in Henry III's case, numberoneson charges off and destroys the enemy left wing, but pursues them off the battlefield, returning in time to find the battle lost and be captured alongside his father. ;)
It was timeless advice....