This list covers the Low Countries from the establishment of new

ordonnance companies to the death of Philip the Fair. After the

death of Charles the Bold at Nancy in January 1477, the fractious

Low Countries held out against attacks from Louis XI of France in

the name of Charles' daughter Marie, who married Maximilian, the

Habsburg Archduke of Austria, in that year. During 1477 this defence

was carried out by militia armies best represented by the Low

Countries list. But from 1478 militia infantry were supplemented by

ordonnance companies similar to Charles'. The ordonnance of November

1477 that set them up called for 800 lances. Numbers varied

thereafter, to a maximum of 1200 lances. Each lance contained a man-

at-arms, a coustillier, an unarmed page, two mounted archers, and an

archer on foot – though these last were not a success and gradually

disappeared. At first most of the army's infantry were still Flemish

and other militia pikemen, supplemented by smaller numbers of Swiss

and German mercenaries (mostly pikemen and handgunners,

respectively?) and English archers. The militias were sometimes

competent on the battlefield – especially at Maximilian's victory

over Louis at Guinegatte in 1479, when their confidence was

stiffened by their generals and several hundred other nobles

fighting alongside them on foot. Hence two generals in 1479 can be

represented as pikemen, for the counts of Nassau and Romont. A Pk c-

in-c would represent one of those, treating the young Maximilian as

a figurehead; a Kn c-in-c would represent Maximilian, who at first

fought mounted but joined his infantry after the defeat of his

horse. But the militias were unreliable; for example they disbanded

soon after Guinegatte, preventing any gains from the victory.

Therefore, from 1480 Maximilian gradually replaced them with German

mercenaries, known from c.1486 as landsknechts, though the militia

remained available for emergencies and for defence of their own

towns. Flanders in particular was often rebellious, especially after the death of Marie in 1482 when it championed the cause of hers and Maximilian's son Philip, as the true Burgundian heir, against his father: Maximilian was even held prisoner in Bruges in 1488. In such cases I assume

that ordonnance lances, or equivalent troops, may have been seen on

both sides of struggles which in any case rarely came to open battle.

Aggression –

The "Burgundian" Netherlands were largely on the defensive during

this period against France (French Ordonnance list, Ag. 2). So Ag 1 seems

suitable.

Terrain –

In DBMM "WW" has been split into Waterways, Sea and Lakes; the Low

Countries can definitely justify Sea, and WW should probably stay

for the Lower Rhine, though whether it is part of the core area of

the state might be debatable.

Scale and army size –

Sablon (2003) suggests Maximilian fielded about 30,000 men in 1478.

The next year, Monstrelet claims his army was 60,000 strong at

Guinegatte; but Sablon's 27,000 is far more likely (and matches

Commynes' 20,000-plus). Richert suggests only 19,000. These may have

been the largest armies assembled during the period, others being

the mere 5,000 Maximilian could send against the Luxemburg revolt of

1480 (Sablon 2003) or the 12,000 men besieging Utrecht in 1483

(Ward). This all fits reasonably well into the "normal scale" of the

rules.

Generals –

It was noteworthy that at Guinegatte several of the commanders

fought on foot with the Flemish pikes. Engelbert Count of Nassau,

and Jacques de Savoie, Count of Romont – both veterans of Charles

the Bold's service – seem to have deployed with and commanded the

infantry from the start. However, this does not seem to have been

the universal practice – though it may have inspired the later

willlingness of generals to dismount to encourage their landsknecht

mercenaries.

Maximilian himself apparently fought initially on horseback and then

dismounted to fight with his infantry (Benecke p.33, etc) once his

cavalry had been defeated – Molinet (cited by Rennoldson 2003) says

that Maximilian first broke his lance fighting a French man-at-arms,

then – probably by then fighting afoot – knocked over a franc-archer

and captured a Breton. Philip of Cleves-Ravenstein is identified as

the defeated commander of Maximilian's cavalry; but the maps

attached to Burke's article, at least, show cavalry on both wings of

the army, so it seems possible that Ravenstein commanded one cavalry

wing, Maximilian initially the other. (Alternatively, perhaps the 19-

year-old Maximilian should not be treated as a general at all in a

Guinegatte refight, but as a mere figurehead, Nassau or Romont being

in real command. Hence the option to class generals as pikemen in

1479 is not restricted to sub-generals; a Pk (O) c-in-c would

represent Nassau or Romont, while a Kn c-in-c who can dismount as Pk

would represent Maximilian.)

Maximilian dismounted and marched on foot with his pikemen on other

occasions, notably at the entry into Ghent after the defeat of its

rebellion in 1485 (Richards p,8). Willibrord von Schaumburg, Albert

of Saxony's general, and other officers dismounted and stood in the

front ranks of the landsknechts at a battle in the Netherlands in

1491 (Richards p.32; this is probably during the fighting against

peasant rebels in Holland mentioned by Ward). The Pfalzgraf

Friedrich led a group of noblemen coming to the aid of Philip the

Fair's war against Gelders in 1505, marching on foot with shouldered

pikes; he might have been another such pike general if this force

had actually fought, but they didn't in fact arrive in time to join

the army.

Household –

Sablon (2) mentions the ducal household as an element in the Low

Countries' military resources ("Même avec le renfort de l'hôtel

ducal…"), but how many and what sort of troops that entailed I do

not know. The two elements allowed here (two including the Kn (S) c-

in-c) are a guess following Charles' army. Allowing only the C-in-c

to be (S) would be a possible alternative.

Compagnies d'Ordonnance –

Maximilian's rump Burgundian state re-instituted a professional army

of Ordonnance companies on the model of Charles the Bold's. After

initial attempts to resist French advances with civic militias only,

the provinces' Estates agreed to fund a paid force which an

ordonnance of November 1477 established as 800 lances. Each lance

consisted of a man-at-arms with three horses, two mounted archers

rather than Charles' three, and one foot-archer (Sablon 2003). Since

the lance in 1547 still contained a man-at-arms riding a barded

horse, a coustillier also fighting as a heavy lancer and a non-

combatant page (see Heath), the meaning of "three horses" must be

the same three horsemen – man-at-arms, coustillier and page – as in

Charles' organisation.

Heath (p.127) says that four of Charles' original 12 companies

survived in the Netherlands as late as 1547. Although at least one

company was in the Netherlands at the time of the defeat at Nancy

(Jacques de Visque's company – see McGill p.44), and therefore could

have been available for re-organisation, it seems more likely that

the companies as re-established in November 1477 were completely new

units rather than survivors of Charles' organisation. The only two

captains I have seen mentioned – the Comte de Chimay and the Prince

of Orange (Sablon 2003) – do not seem to feature in the list of

Charles' ordonnance captains (in McGill), and Sablon mentions that

Orange's company was new in 1480. The low ebb that the army had

reached at the time of Marie's death in 1482 (Sablon 2) may also

have necessitated further re-organisations thereafter.

The ordonnance of November 1477 established 800 lances. Numbers

thereafter fluctuated considerably, Sablon (2) suggesting a minimum

of 300 lances and a maximum of 1200, though whether this many were

ever mobilised in one place seems unlikely so I allow a maximum

equiating to 1000 lances. Molinet suggests there were 825 lances at

Guinegatte (Richert), Sablon (2003) opts for 800. For convenience I

have assumed an element represents 200 men, that is the men-at-arms

and coustilliers of 100 lances.

I do not include pages in these calculations. The pages in Charles'

army sometimes rode with the men-at-arms and coustilliers, and

sometimes held the horses of the mounted archers (see Axworthy 105

p.14). Since they were not expected to be armed – they are the only

members of the lance for whom no arms are prescribed in any of

Charles' ordonnances – it is arguable that they should not be

included in any fighting element at all.

{But if a mounted element is more like 150 men, the lower end of the

range now allowed in the DBMM rules, and if you include pages in the

element, as both the published Burgundian Ordonnance list and Luke's

alternative one do, then one Kn element could represent a mere 50

lances, and their numbers should be _doubled_. One would have to

make sure that the same arithmetic was applied to their French

counterparts if their numerical superiority at Guinegatte were not

to be lost.}

The DBR "Maximilian Imperial" list (I/9) implies that "Burgundian

and similar" men-at-arms fought in deep formations that might be

represented in DBM(M) by double basing; but it is not entirely clear

whether this is meant to apply to the "Burgundian" lances of the Low

Countries ordonnance, or to a force Maximilian tried to establish in

Germany on the Burgundian model: "Maximilian thought the existing

cavalry past redemption. Instead of seeking to improve it, he

recruited new gendarmes on the Burgundian model, but still fighting

in the old deep German formations. Accordingly, all lancers in this

list can have rear support, Burgundians only from other

Burgundians…". Not having found a source for applying deep

formations to the "genuine Burgundians" of the 1477 ordonnance, I

make no such provision here.

Ordonnance mounted archers -

Figures suggest that Charles' army had trouble maintaining the

establishment three mounted archers per lance. However without any

specific information on numbers in Maximilian and Marie's armies, I

suggest keeping to their lower establishment figure of two per

lance – Charles' strengths sometimes approximated to this ratio

anyway.

Charles' archers are classed as Bw (S) since they wore armour and

carried longbows and hand-and-a-half swords. At some stage,

certainly by 1547, their successors (though still two to a lance)

ceased to be real archers and became part-armoured lancers or

carabins (Heath). With no information on when this transformation

took place, I assume it was after 1506 and that until then

Maximilian's archers followed the earlier model.

Some of Charles' mounted "archers" were in fact crossbowmen – 600

out of 3,600 by the ordonnance of 1471. I allow an option for some

of Maximilian's archers being either crossbowmen or bowmen of lower

quality than desired, and hence Bw (O) – how many highly-trained

longbowmen the Netherlands could produce is unclear.

Ordonnance foot archers -

The revived lance of November 1477 included one infantry archer,

rather than the three infantrymen of Charles' lances. Perhaps

because so many infantry were available from other sources, these

gradually disappeared – hence are not compulsory in this suggested

list. Sablon (2003) implies that they fell out of use during the

period that article covers, that is by 1482; so Heath's suggestion

that the infantry of the lances may have disappeared in the 1520s

does not seem likely, unless they were not formally abolished until

that date.

Militia pikemen –

In spring 1477, after Charles' heiress Marie of Burgundy had been

obliged to confirm the rights and privileges of the various

provinces, they agreed to raise an army to resist French

advances: "In place of the ducal army which had ceased to exist,

100,000 men were to be levied, of whom Flanders contributed more

than one-third, and the rest in proportion. Raised by means of half-

obsolete feudal obligations, or as communal or rural militia, this

army, though its numbers were helped out by a system of substitutes,

proved inadequate to its purpose; but the fact of its levy not the

less shows that the mind of the Netherlands had been made up to

resist the French advance" (Ward). In fact 100,000 was a distant

target: the Estates of the Burgundian provinces voted to raise

34,000 men at once, increasing to 100,000 in due course; they were

to be composed as follows:

Flanders 12,000

Brabant 8,000

Holland and Zeeland 6,000

Hainault 3,000

Artois and Boulonnais 4,000

Namur 1,000

- and of these, only Flanders and Brabant provided many men to the

field army (Sablon 2003).

This mostly-Flemish army had some successes in 1478, retaking

Tournai (Ward) – though by now it should have been joined by the new

ordonnance lances. In 1479 Jan van Dadizeele, a Flemish noble, "so

effectively reorganised the Flemish forces, of which he was named

captain-general, that Olivier de la Marche describes these well-

disciplined levies as the largest army he ever saw put into the

field by Flanders. Town and country had combined to furnish it

forth; and not less than five hundred nobles served with it on foot"

(Ward).

Militia pikemen remained the mainstay of the army at Guinegatte in

1479. Commynes says there were 20,000 or more Flemings there, most

of whom would be pikemen; Molinet has 11,000 Flemish pike (Richert);

Monstrelet mentions 14-15,000 infantry under the Comte de Romont

(whom Commynes has as one of the two commanders of the infantry).

Thereafter they were replaced by mercenaries, because of the

unreliability the militia had often displayed – though off the

battlefield more than on it. I am not quite sure how to represent

this change: both Flemish pikes and landsknecht pikes-and-halberds

are normally represented as Reg Pk (O): the Flemings are praised in

contemporary sources as good pikemen and certainly fought well at

Guinegatte; the defeats inflicted on Flemish militia pikemen by the

French in 1477 may have been caused by other factors, such as their

lack of cavalry support. But making the militia Pk (I), as being of

uncertain and fluctuating loyalties (given the intermittent

rebellions in Flanders and elsewhere) and of varying levels of

training and experience, also seems justifiable. At Guinegatte,

their greatest success, the militia were reinforced by some hundreds

of dismounted nobles and gentlemen – 200 (Commynes) or 500 (Ward,

probably from Olivier de la Marche), including their generals Nassau

and Romont. The best way to represent this, particularly since the

army of 1479 seems to have been regarded as better than in 1478, is

probably to allow all the pikes, in that year only, to be upgraded

from (I) to (O) as being "stiffened" by the nobles fighting

alongside them. They can then later be replaced with (O)

mercenaries.

In his Burgundian Ordonnance list Luke suggested representing large

Flemish militia forces as allied contingents; but that does not seem

an appropriate solution in this later period, when the militia were

not generalled by their own leaders – although these did command at

lower ranks, Jan van Dadizeele for instance leading a Ghent

contingent of 1,600 men - but by ducal officers such as Nassau and

Romont. (Though admittedly Romont later commanded the Flemings in

rebellion against Maximilian, in the name of his son Philip, in

1484: his loyalties were to the house of Burgundy rather than

Habsburg.)

After 1480, the local troops were less important but do not seem to

have fallen entirely out of use. While Flanders was often

rebellious, Brabant was more loyal partly because of Maximilian's

championing of the commercial interests of Antwerp (Benecke p33;

Ward refers to the joint armies of the Emperor and Maximilian in

1488 as "Germans and Walloons" indicating Maximilian's continuing

support in Brabant). German mercenaries formed only about a quarter

of armies levied in 1480 and 1483. However the militia remained

available for use in emergencies and to defend their own towns –

"Ausi l'arrière-ban roturier n'est-il plus utilisé après 1480 que

pour la garde des villes et des passages, ou en cas d'extrême

urgence" (Sablon 2). They may have been fielded more rarely after

the death of Marie in 1482.

Crossbowmen, handgunners –

Molinet has 3,000 bowmen, crossbowmen, and handgunners to 11,000

pike at Guinegatte (Richert) – roughly one "shot" to four pike

(whether or not the 500 English are included), though 800 or so of

these were (or at least should have been) the ordonnance lances'

foot archers. Burke went for 2,000 German handgunners (perhaps

Commynes' "some few Germans"), without mentioning crossbowmen.

Sablon (2003) says there were 4,000 Swiss and German mercenaries in

the army in 1478, which may have included many handgunners though

the Swiss would have been mostly pikes. In pictures of this battle

from the "Weisskunig", Maximilian's autobiography begun about 35

years later, reproduced in Arquebusier XXVI/VI, archers are quite

prominently shown flanking and occasionally deployed in front of

pike-blocks (in both the French and Flemish-Burgundian armies) while

crossbowmen are entirely absent and handgunners very rare.

I see no need to distinguish between militia and German mercenary

missile-troops.

Archers' stakes –

Burgundian archers were using stakes as least as early as Montl'héry

in 1465 – "all the archers with their boots off and with a stake

driven into the ground before them" (Commynes p70) – and stakes are

illustrated in the prints of Master WA, while the lead mallet

carried by Charles' ordonnance foot-archers was probably intended to

drive in stakes (Axworthy, etc). I exclude stakes from ordonnance

mounted Bw (O), who are intended to be crossbowmen. The English

archers may not have used stakes as regularly as they did during the

Hundred Years' War, but they are frequently mentioned throughout the

first half of the 16th century (Heath p.48) so were clearly still in

the repertoire if required.

Artillery –

I have no numbers for artillery. I assume a mixture of field

guns on Burgundian-style wheeled and elevating carriages, and

smaller pieces. A siege train existed (mentioned by Burke) but I

assume it was not used in the open field.

Camp TF –

Wagon-laagers were a standard north-European tactic by now.

(Commynes mentions baggage-wagons being looted at Guinegatte but

doesn't mention any laagering.) However in the absence of specific

evidence I have not included fortifications other than for the camp,

despite Charles' frequent use of fieldworks.

Ships –

In the militia army to be raised in 1477, the 6,000 men initially

required of Holland and Zeeland were to be replaced by a fleet of 36

ships crewed by 5,000 men (Sablon 2003). How much use they saw I do

not know, but some ships were available to the provincial

authorities in Holland in 1490 to defeat the revolt of the Hoek

faction in a naval battle at Brouwershaven (Ward) so some naval

resources were presumably available throughout the period. Two

elements, however, seems enough as long as there is no good account

of their operating along with land forces.

Swiss –

Swiss mercenaries reinforced the Flemish army in 1478 (numbers

unspecified by Ward, while Sablon (2003) says there were 4,000

taking Swiss and German mercenaries together). I assume about half

of these may have been Swiss pikes, half German missile-men. This

would be too few Swiss to be an allied contingent, and no separate

leadership is mentioned for them.

English –

English archers reinforced the Flemish army in 1478 (Ward). Some

fought at Guinegatte - 300 according to Commynes, 500 according to

Molinet (Richert) – under Sir Thomas Everingham (see Meek; "Abrigen"

in Commynes). A larger force of 1,500 English archers served in 1480-

1481 (Sablon 2003).

Mercenary pikes -

Faced with the unreliability of his militia infantry, shown by their

disbanding after the victory of Guinegatte, Maximilian responded by

hiring mercenaries. The Estates voted 500,000 écus for the hiring of

mercenaries in 1480 and 1,000 German mercenaries were included in

the small army of 5,000 sent against the revolt of Luxemburg in that

year, while 1,500-2,000 served in an army of about 6,000 against

Liègois rebels in 1483 (Sablon 2003). "In 1485 5,000 Germans marched

eight abreast into Ghent, on foot `in very fine order' " (Gravett

p.22). By 1486, when he was elected King of the Romans (and also the

year when the word "landsknecht" is said to be first documented for

such troops), he had two armies of 3-4,000 mercenary infantry each

(Richards p7). They were training in Bruges in 1487 and the

mercenary `Black Guard' which fought in Danish service from 1488,

until defeated by the Dithmarschen at Hemmingstedt in 1500, was

apparently recruited by Maximilian in Friesland originally for use

in the Netherlands (Richards p7) – though much of Friesland was not

yet under his effective control.

Landsknechts are classed as Reg Pk (O) in existing lists, the

halberdiers being subsumed in the pike-blocks. Richards p7 suggests

that some of Maximilian's first mercenary units, raised before 1486,

were "of dubious quality", but whether this justifies a downgrade I

am not sure.

I have allowed for 4-8,000 mercenary pikes, based on Richards'

suggestion of two forces of 3-4,000 each; the smaller contingents of

1480 and 1483 are in turn part of armies too small to be reflected

at normal scale. The verlorene haufe "forlorn hope", a detached body

used as an advanced guard, was a standard landsknecht tactic,

certainly in the early 16th century. Two-handed swords do not yet

seem to have been a common weapon, so the forlorn were probably most

or all halberdiers.

Impact on the main Medieval German list, IV/13 (or its replacements):

- Delete:

These entries are now covered by this Netherlands list.

- Replace with:

While the provision for a Kn c-in-c to dismount as Pk may be

inspired by Maximilian at Guinegatte, an incident now covered by the

Netherlands list, it can stay in the German list as well since he

marched on foot with his pikemen on other occasions when Emperor,

notably at Cologne in 1505 and Milan in 1516 (Richards p8) and other

nobles are often recorded doing the same. However it should probably

be re-dated to Maximilian's accession as King of the Romans in 1486,

his first real political power in Germany.

- Allow the following allies: