Quote Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy View Post
I still would feel even though an Archer was not free they were cheaper than a man at arms.
You may be right. I found some info;

Quote Originally Posted by wiki
The social stratification of men who served as men-at-arms is illustrated by their rates of pay on campaign, in the mid 1340s a knight was paid 2 shillings a day, an ordinary man-at-arms was paid half this amount; for comparison a foot archer received 2 or 3 pence (12 pennies to the shilling). A man-at-arms was also recompensed differentially according to the quality of his principal war-horse, if the horse was to die or was killed in battle. An ordinary esquire might own a war-horse worth only 5 pounds whilst a great nobleman might own a horse worth up to 100 pounds.

...

Such men could serve for pay or through a feudal obligation.
Yahoo question about longbowmen;

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question...8105442AASvndN

I guess it would be fair to say that it really depended on the man doing the hiring, and then also on the success of the campaign. I also don't know the difference between pence, pennies, or shillings. There is some conflicting information between the two articles (2-3 pence vs. 6?).