Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXII

[Tobtor]

Yep. But as I said: "Even the french Gendarmes were professional soldiers". Old feudal mesnadas led by knights became obsolete and were replaced by professional armies.

This might be true (at least partially) of the very late 15th and 16th century, but during the Hundred Years War noble armies was still prominent. At Agincourt both the English (the men-at-arms on foot as well as the longbowmen) and the French (knights on horses) consisted of traditional feudal armies (granted buffed up by mercenaries for specific roles). Agincourt is in the 15th century...

The king no longer sent heralds to the knights' castles asking them to gather their retinue and come for their 40 days of feudal service, but instead hired professional soldiers.

Hence that XV century danish knight didn't really need his guards for anything else but for personal protection, defense of his property against robbers and for ceremonial purposes.

It might be true that large military campaigns relied upon mercenaries as support, however the 15th century and even the 16th century see the use of smaller more quickly assembled noble armies fighting smaller wars/battle.

Most wars during the period was: a) smaller skirmishes. b) battles to crush peasant rebellions (Christoffer III king 1439-1448 crushed a few with mainly nobles and their men, he also fought against Count Adolf of Holstein, who used a mix of mercenaries and nobles), or c) civil wars between nobles (either against each other or the nobles against the king etc).

It is true mercenaries played a major roles, for instance at the Battle of Visby, already in the late 14th century, but still backed up by an army of nobles and men-at-arms. Armies of knights, nobles and their men also played a role during Count's feud. Though it was ultimately won by mercenaries.

A knight from two or three centuries before, on the other hand, had the responsability of recruiting, training and keeping soldiers for his king, and probably had a larger retinue.

There wasn't "knights" three centuries earlier.... The knighthood was in Scandinavia just forming around 1200, thus during the 12th century (three centuries before the 15th century) you wouldn't really have knights. Also the retinues of knights grew in both Denmark and France/England (and as far as I can tell non-city parts of Germany) during the 14th/15th century, compared to earlier. The Norman "knights" at Hastings for example didn't have a large retinue (you could in fact be a knight without one).

For almost a century, cavalry was seen as subordinate to infantry, and useful mostly during special circunstances (attacking a foe before it had formed properly, chasing defeated enemies before they could reorganize...etc.).

While perhaps true that heavy cavalry was less important than infantry: that is exactly a reason for the nobles to employ crossbowmen, men with pole weapons and handgunners!

Both for defence of their land, but also for taking to war against the peasants OR the king (and quite often the king AND the peasants). Nobles gathering together to challenge the King happened routinely. Sometimes they lost to a mix of mercenaries and other nobles, sometimes they won. But they definately made up the bulk of many wars. This is not unique to Danmark during the 15th century, both French and English nobles where still very much a central part of the army.

As far as I can tell nobles (with their retinues, men-at-arms and other local troops such as levied peasants, yeoman farmers etc) made up quite a bit of the troops during the War of the Roses (though certainly mercenaries played a role). War of the Roses is very much 15th century!

In other regions (such as Italy) knights with their own troops might have had a quicker decline, and armies had a faster transition to mercenaries (I don't know enough of southern European history during that period to tell). But in northern Europe nobles still participated, for example: mercenaries did play a vital role in the conflict between the Hanse and Danish king, both burgher armies consisting of militias and noble armies formed by knights and their soldiers formed the backbone of many of the armies. It is true however than in the late 14th and 15th century peasant musters became mnuch rarer and less important; they where replaced by a COMBINATION of knights (professional soldiers) with their household men (also professinal soldiers) and mercenaries (also professional soldiers).

While fortified cities and military fortresses remained relevant the knightly manor-castle, the aristocratic home that doubles as fortress and administration center became utterly obsolete during Modern Age.

Yes, but not during the 15th century (or at least not before the end of it, star forts is only becoming popular during the 15th century, and is not widespread before the end 15th/early 16th century as far as I can see the various constructing times).