![Il_Condottiere[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CRFsaNe.jpg "Il_Condottiere[1].jpg")
Were mercenary armies a thing?
Did medieval/renaissance nations who were at war send armies of mercenaries at other nations' mercenaries, or were paid fighters mostly used as bodyguards/rebellion-crushers while the citizens of the state in question were the ones involved in actual country-on-country combat?
>>852410
yes, see the following
http://pastebin.com/q3NKTU7J
>>852410
I don't think it was as common in the medieval era, but by the renaissance it was standard procedure to bolster your army with mercenaries.
>>852410
BANE?
>>852425
It was pretty much common amongst Merchant Republics in Italy, since most of their armies were composed of peasant militias.
> Machiavelli explains that mercenary and auxiliary troops "are useless" and he encourages rulers to avoid employing them. Machiavelli states that mercenary troops are dangerous because "there is no loyalty or inducement to keep them on the field apart from the little they are paid . . . [which] is not enough to make them want to die for you." Machiavelli believes that mercenaries are more likely to desert and he blames "the present ruin of Italy" on its rulers' reliance on mercenary forces. When Charles VIII of France invaded and conquered Italy, he showed the Italians that their mercenaries are worthless and the Italians suffered the consequences for their misguided dependence on these forces.
>>852410
Not all mercenaries were soldiers of fortune.
Sometimes what happens is neighboring Duke has an army. You bribe said duke. Duke uses his influence and power to rally an army, and sends them to fight for you. They're under the same kind of chain of command as if their were fighting for their out country.
>>852410
Off the top of my head.
Swiss Guard
Varangian Guard
Tartars
Roman Auxillaries
Irish brigades
A good portion of Alexander the Great's troops
>>852410
professional armies are a very expensive thing. Most societies relied on levies and perhaps a small number of nobles who could serve as professionals.
With mercenaries however you get a pre-made set of professional soldiers who you can keep around as long as you need them. They already have decent weapons and armor, and presumably some actual experience.
For most rulers it made sense to hire some
Yes and they ran rampant across the North Italian country side, switching sides constantly, sacking cities and just destroying much of Italy.
i.e John Hawkwood
>>852519
Machieavelli was a twat with an agenda.
Italies fractured and faction filled political scene was more responsible for Italies defeats than it'd merc armies. The condotierri of places like Venice served as a model for what could be done with a stable army (which is what many of the condotierri companies became)
Florence was also a stingy and poor employer way behind in terms of admin and supporting it's merc armies
>>852519
>since most of their armies were composed of peasant militias.
>since most of their armies were composed of peasant militias.
No.jpg
Urban Militiaman =/= Peasant """""""militia"""""""" if that even existed.
Italian Citizens of republics like Milan, Venice and Florence had Citizen Militia armies who
1) had to buy their own weapons
2) Undergo a semi-annual/annual season of military training
3) serve for a term in some duty (outpost guard, night watch,)
This is true for citizens of other medieval cities, like in Flanders or the Holy Roman Empire.
You see, citizens are often not ruled by nobles but by a body politic of burghers with representatives from influential civic groups & urban nobility. Meaning: citizens don't have meme knights & castles to rely upon to defend themselves, ergo having to defend themselves.
Mercs take up the professional slack & brunt of the fighting/casualties for Italian Civic Armies during the medieval ages. Funnily enough the military situation in italy turned to shit when by the late 1400's cunts just relied on them and the civic armies declined (With the exception of Venice's)
It's funny when you think about today how rural classes have a R TUFFER THAN CITY BOI attitude, but back in the medieval ages, the citizen considered himself/was considered greater than a peasant for his ability to own arms and have extensive civil rights, while the peasant is a cowardly cunt who runs to his lord and is almost to the level of indentured servants.
>>852787
Correction: I remembered Milan isn't a republic, but did have a senate nonetheless
How common was it for the Byzantine empire to hire mercenaries?
>>852787
haha oh wow, how many different kinds of whacky blades does he need
>>852787
>>852792
Oh and btw the Civilianization of the military term "Company" came from Urban Militias.
Because Urban Militias are roughly organized around the jobs of the people in certain units, or even their guild would pool money and buy arms and armour. So fishermen would be in one "Company of saint this/lord that/distict this" while merchants, urban nobility would be in another "company."
Eventually company became associated with commercial entities due to it being organized around trades.
Pic related, "The Company of St. George." A Flanders Guild Militia consisting of wool merchants.
>>852787
>it's funny how things are different 600 years ago
Is it?
