[Alain D.]

I'm wondering about arms ownership from Swiss mercenaries and German Landsknecht up to mercenary armies of the Thirty Years War. From what I've read it sounds like mercenaries from 1450-1650 sometimes armed themselves and other times were provided roughly standardized weapons from their employers and officers. I don't know if any such ratios could be determined, but I'm curious about the numbers of soldiers who armed themselves versus those were received or rented weaponry from their employers. Presumably only wealthy, professional mercenaries could arm themselves while peasant conscripts were likely reliant on whatever their employers provided.
Burgher guards and city militias also seem to have provided some of their own weaponry and wealthier individuals like those in Rembrandt's The Night Watch seem likely to have used their own ornate arms and armor. How common would it have been for Early Modern soldiers to own their own equipment?


-Alain

[Elling Polden]

The price of arms and armour had dropped drasticaly by the renaisance, and landsknecht mercenaries where very well paid. Their wages started at about 4 florins a month, twice that of a common labourer. The Doppelsoldners recieved twice this amount, the trabants (captains bodyguards) three times.

For comparison, a cheap sett of 3/4 "alemain rivet" plate could cost as little as 1,5 florins. So, basically, even a regualr speistrager og reislaufer could afford his full equipment of his first monthly pay. Which he recieved in advance.
A smart Warlord could of course buy supplies in bulk, and sell them to his own men simply by deducting it from their first payment.

A thread on prices in the 16th c:
http://www.myArmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=7265

[Lafayette C Curtis]

It was a very gradual change. In 1450 most would-be soldiers were expected to show up at the recruiter's place with their own gear, although they could be resupplied by the employer if their weapon broke or ran out of ammunition. Note the swords lost in the River Dordogne; one plausible theory for their origins is that they came from a consignment intended for the English garrisons along the river, probably to be sold to soldiers who had lost their swords or simply wanted to acquire a new one. On the other hand, by the 1650 most recruits probably showed up at the regimental recruiter as clueless civilians who had to be equipped and trained from scratch (except for the relatives of older soldiers who might have had the chance to learn something while they tagged along as camp followers). However, even then officers and some of the most elite cavalrymen still followed the older practice of joining up already furnished with arms, if not necessarily fully trained in their use. And it's worth noting that firearm-using soldiers were originally expected to pay for their own powder and shot, sometimes well into the 17th century!

[Jean Henri Chandler]

Alot of mercenaries came out of town militias, in Central Europe (Holy Roman Empire, Flanders, Bohemia, Hungary, Poland, Switzerland) these were required by law to be armed and armored with their own gear going back to the 12th or 13th Centuries. Members of the craft guilds made up most of the infantry and part of joining the guild included the obligation to own harness and weapons, usually either a polearm or a crossbow (or by the 15th Century increasingly, a firearm)

In certain places like Bruges, Ghent, Bologna and some other towns, they had armed guilds which were associated with the craft guilds as part of the town defense. Most Central European towns also had Konstafler societies which provided cavalry to the militia. These people, the wealthier citizens of the town, were obligated to provide a horse and armor for a 'lance' or heavy cavalryman.

You can read a little big about the urban militias in this article.

http://www.medievalists.net/2011/01/13/towns-...l-germany/

It was more mixed in rural zones, where often the peasants were not well armed, but in places like Switzerland where there were landsgemeinde the peasants were also armed and part of a militia like in the towns. So for example while the urban militias of Zurich and Berne were very prominent in the Swiss military machine (both as mercenaries and in their own wars) so were the rural miltiias from Uri, Schwyz, Zug and so on. This was also the cases in certain parts of Saxony, Sweden, Bohemia and Swabia where many of the Landsknechts were recruited from.

J

[Jean Henri Chandler]

Here is a muster roll from 1615 (a bit late, since as Lafayette mentioned, these things changed in the 17th Century) but you can still see where each individual in all of these districts is listed in the militia roll with the type of weapon and / or armor he has

http://www.reichsstadt-rottweil.de/musterung1615.htm

J

[Joshua Spencer]

Everything I have read about the Swiss and Germans is that initially they were required to provide their own basic equipment. Not saying that this is the law, only that its what I have read. With a pay rate of four guilders a month plus pillaging rights, that would have changed dramatically though. It can be assumed that a fairly successful Reislaufer or Landsknecht after just a couple months on campaign, could have a dramatically different equipment set. Given the mindsets of the two I would guess the Swiss would have had more potential for better equipping themselves. The Landsknecht were notorious for their love of camp pleasures which could get rather expensive.

[Alain D.]

Thanks for the responses everyone, those are the answers I was looking for. Great links, I particularly like that muster roll. The thread on prices also helps put things into perspective. It seems that militias were much better armed than I had imagined.

At what point do Landsknecht really disappear? I always imagine Landsknecht as mostly late 15th century to late 16th century, but don't really imagine the mercenaries of the Thirty Years War as Landsknecht anymore. I think of Landsknecht as self-equipped and prepared for war while Thirty Years War recruits seem closer to the "clueless civilians" described by Lafayette. What happened to the Landsknecht and their mercenary culture? Too expensive?

-Alain

[Joshua Spencer]

The Landsknechts really start to see a decline after 1550 and effectively wiped out by 1590.

[Paul Hansen]

[Daniel Staberg]

[Paul Hansen]

Thanks. Regarding the carpenters, I was a bit confused by the addition of "Friesen" which usually means people from Frisia.

Perhaps some of the carpenters were from that area, but it still seems strange to me, as it shouldn't be too difficult to find local carpenters as well.

[Jean Henri Chandler]

[Jean Henri Chandler]

I suspect the economy of a mercenary company may have been distorted like the economy of a gold-rush town in California in the 19th Century....

J

[Joshua Spencer]

There were some controls put in place to control things. The Landsknecht had their own staff to help keep things in working order, including people to move ahead of the train to negotiate deals with towns along the campaign trail to prevent price gouging. How often it all worked out is questionable, but controls did exist.

[Elling Polden]

[Jean Henri Chandler]

[Lafayette C Curtis]

[Daniel Staberg]

[Joshua Spencer]

[Alain D.]

Great responses everyone, this is answering a lot of questions I had. Thank you for that explanation on the decline of the landsknecht and move toward centralized armories, Daniel, that greatly clarifies the transitions over time.

-Alain