Osprey - General Military - Knight - The Warrior and ... - Brego-weard

The distinction between the 'marshal of the realm' and the 'marshal of the host' is
an important one. In England the titles of constable and marshal were held by
hereditary right. The privilege was jealously guarded. It was the basis for the argument
between the earls of Hereford and Gloucester at Bannockburn; the former held the
hereditary title of constable of England but Edward II appointed his nephew the Earl
of Gloucester as constable of the army, and the men quarrelled over who had the right
to lead the vanguard.
In France the ranks of marshal and constable, along with that of the 'master of the
king's crossbows', were permanent positions within the royal household. The constable
was effectively the king's military lieutenant, with responsibility for the organization
of royal armies, supported by the two marshals. The master of the king's crossbows
seems to have had authority over all of the foot troops in royal armies, not just the
archers. In all cases the men appointed to the positions seem to have been experienced
and capable. Charles V gave the office of constable to Bertrand du Guesclin, a Breton-
born knight whose military abilities had brought him to the king's attention. That he
had difficulties asserting his authority over the greater nobility is indicative of the
aristocracy's proprietorial feeling about military command.
Beyond the ranks of marshal and constable, and the French master of the
crossbows, there are very few examples of formal ranks, and given the impermanence
of medieval armies, this is unsurprising. It would appear that when leadership of
specific units or special tasks was required an ac) hoc appointment was made from
amongst the attendant noble and knightly ranks. When the English army formed for
battle against the French at Agincourt in 1415, for example, Henry V appointed the
58-year-old Sir Thomas Erpingham (who had been Marshal of England between 1404
and 1405) to command the archers.
Whilst experience and knowledge were key factors in the choice of commanders,
social position and political considerations also had a part to play. Even when an army
was led by a king or prince of royal blood the greater nobles serving under him felt
they had the position and right to be involved in any decision-making. Command could
be collegiate, with many of the key martial decisions being made by a council of war.
Narrative sources recount the debates that took place in such councils and, although
such reported speech should not be taken at face value (chroniclers being fond of
writing what men should have said rather than their actual words), they suggest
something of how such councils might have run and certainly how contentious they
could be. Before Courtrai the great nobles within the French army gathered together
to discuss how the battle should be fought. The constable, Raoul de Nesle, warned of
the danger of a mounted charge across the streams, and the master of the king's
crossbows, Jean de Burlats, argued for an attack by the footsoldiers, a proposition