Whilst in enemy territory, supplies that were needed to feed the army were presumably taken by force, but what about when the army is marching or encamped in friendly territory? Was it still essentially plunder, or were the peasants (or their lord?) compensated for the goods? Was any consideration ever given to ensure that the villages supplying the army weren't starved ?
Hello!
As you might expect, your question is a very broad one. Considering both its geographical and chronological extent, I cannot give you a definitive answer on the subject. What I can try to give you, though, is an answer focused on late medieval France and Burgundy.
This period however might not be completely representative of the whole Middle Ages (if such a period could exist in the first place) because it takes place at the end of a long and progressive transformation of both armies and institutions. In some of my previous answers I’ve explained more about how France and the French administration evolved during the course of the Hundred Years War and you must bear in mind that I’ll talk about a period where war, its regulation and the management of men of war had become a concern and even a central affair.
Now, let’s dive in, shall we?
So as always during the medieval period, there is theory and there is practice. The problem of supplies has long been in the mind of French kings during the course of the war. As I’ve expanded here, the king could only summon his nobles for free for a short duration and they were expected to come at their own expenses and those of their men. That included food. They were expected to bring supplies with them or to make the necessary preparations in the field. As mentioned, in hostile territory that generally amounted to plundering. The English early tactics of chevauchées were a weaponized example of that: an expedition was sent to France to raid, plunder and devastate the countryside while running away from the French army.
When it came to friendly territory, soldiers were supposed to have brought their own supplies or to pay for what they needed. If you were part of a lord’s retinue, your lord would be expected to provide for you, as it fell in his feudal obligations to answer his own master’s (being another lord or the king himself) call to war with a sufficient number of troops. That meant your lord’s reputation and honor could be on the line if you misbehaved and plundered everything in sight. As I mentioned in the previous answer, past the 40 mandatory days of military service your lord owed the king, he was to be paid for his expenses, and so were you. Those payments were not intended as a modern salary but rather as a way to pay for your expenses (and, of course, as a compensation for your time, the risk you took,etc.).
If you were part of a mercenary company, that meant your captain got a contract that included clauses about how you were paid. Generally, though, the system was the same as a noble’s retinue: your captain was given the total sum of money for the company and he was expected to provide food and supplies and to divide the “salary” between the soldiers according to one’s rank, stature or contract.
In general, armies would then be expected, in friendly territory, to pay for their expanses. They were not to ransom or sack the local friendly towns and villages and so on. They could however expect to be housed in private homes along the way, when practicable. For instance, in the campaign that led to the battle of Crécy (1346), the French army counting between 30 000 and 50 000 men pursued the English army across Picardy. No town could have housed such a force. The highest names in such an army could however hope to be welcomed as guests of honor by the local nobility, bourgeoisie, and so.
In addition to FrenchMurazor's elaborate answer, and at a risk of veering slightly beyond late medieval period, I'd like to offer a perspective, focused more on how foraging was organized out of interaction between urban governments and royal/military officials.
Here is a sketch of provisioning schemes, employed during French campaigns of ~1500-1550. Although communities across the whole kingdom made contributions (through actual supplies, transport or financial help), the towns in frontier regions bore the brunt of supplying an army.
Two types of provisioning were expected from local communities: 1 supplying army on the march or encamped in their vicinity (just outside the town walls, or at a distance, in the field). 2 providing lodgings (in the town), food, fodder for lances (cavalry units, composed of man-at-arms – heavy cavalryman, a coutilier, two mounted archers and several pages. Up to eight horses. Composition changed throughout period) and mercenaries during winter, leave, on their way to muster, etc.
The military-fiscal machine constantly evolved, in a trial-and-error fashion. Hence, details varied in space and time. The marching routes and camp sites became planned in advance, and by ~1530 there was established a network of étapes – supply depots. Towns were obliged (by royal decree):
Before the advent of étapes and lodging regulations the process was the same, but more improvised and messy.
Army commander ordered a magistrate (urban governing body) in advance to provide certain supplies over certain period. For example, duke of Vendôme in August 1521 demanded from Beauvais to provide 50000 loaves per day and 40 muids of wine in September; from Abbevile – grain for 10000 loaves. In April-May the duke ordered several towns to arrange their butchers to get beef and lamb ready for a certain date.
In case of lodgings the magistrate was ordered in advance to accept certain contingent for a period of time.
The actual quantity supplied depended on several factors:
1 Outcome of bargaining between commander and magistrate
Towns usually resisted. In July 1536 Vendôme demanded 4000 loaves per day from Chauny. The town asked to reduce the burden. The duke compromised to 3000 loaves and five pieces of wine. Being vexed by delays in supply though, he reverted to 4000. In few weeks Chauny supplied nothing. Then local governor intervened personally and conveyed duke’s frustration to the magistrate. It worked.
On another occasion magistrate agreed to provide 3000 loaves per day for two months on the promise they would be exempted from further contribution of oats and transport.
Towns actively lobbied for exemption from stationing troops and stiffly resisted captains’ orders. It was done through royal petitions, contacts at court, trading other exemptions and taxes and refusal to comply. In one case they locked the gates and refused to let soldiers in, as was ordered by military commander’s official. Magistrate insisted they would only obey written letter from royal officials and sent their petition to the court.
Some intentionally dismantled stables and attempted other measures of this sort to be exempted.
2 Local circumstances
Often towns were unable to supply what was demanded because of shortages (sometimes due to shortage/inflated prices of fodder, needed for transportation) or unrest among population.