War is the normal state of the Middle Ages, but the weak development of the economy, and therefore the small number of heavily armed combatants (full knightly weapons were very expensive) led to the fact that the wars were protracted and boiled down for the most part to the destruction of enemy areas or to long sieges. Wars in general, as a rule, they did not give a solution to those controversial issues because of which they began, and military force served as only one of the arguments in the negotiations.
Big battles were very rare. During the wars of Charlemagne with the Saxons, which lasted more than 30 years (772-804), there were only two battles, his campaigns in Italy (773 and 774) and on the Duke of Tassilon of Bavaria (778) cost no battles at all .Major battles were considered as "God's judgment", and therefore the defeat was understood as a condemnation of the wrong and led to the end of the war. The lack of a developed communication technology led to the fact that troop movements were often chaotic, fronts in the modern sense did not exist, the space of military operations (detachments on a marching march, convoy, reconnaissance groups, gangs of marauders, more or less secretly accompanying the army, etc.) n.) covered a width of no more than 20 km. The commander was required to more or less successfully find a place for the battle and determine the time of its beginning. This was the end of his strategic and tactical possibilities. However, the desire to maintain knightly honor, the desire to give the enemy equal opportunities with themselves, had a lot of influence on the choice of time and place of the battle and its conditions. A fully armed knight does not have the right to retreat, having met with any number of enemies, therefore they went for reconnaissance without armor in order to be able to flee without damaging honor. It was considered very noble to agree with the enemy on the time and place of the battle, preferably on an open field, so that the conditions of the terrain would not give anyone an advantage, and only strength and courage would decide the outcome of the battle. The pretender to the Castilian throne, Henry (Enrique) of Trastamarsky, in 1367, in the fight against his rival, King Peter (Pedro,) the Cruel, deliberately sacrificed an advantageous position in the mountains, descended into the valley and lost the battle of Najere (Navaretta).
Conscious strategy and tactics did not exist in the Middle Ages. The writings on organization and tactics had little to do with reality. The authors either accurately retell Vegetius, or state something that has absolutely nothing to do with reality at all. In the “Treatise on War” compiled around 1260 by order of the King of Castile Alphonse X the Wise, without any irony, it is stated that the foot soldiers should have their legs tied before the battle so that they cannot flee from the battlefield; then they, however, will not be able to pursue the enemy, but this will only demonstrate contempt for him. The teacher of the King of France Philip IV the Handsome, a student of Thomas Aquinas, a prominent church leader Egidio Colonna, in his treatise “On the Principles of Government” addressed to his royal student (late 13th century), seriously describes the “round” and “triangular” construction of the legions. Typical for the Roman army construction in dense groups was revived again only in modern times. Barbarian detachments fought not in formation, but in gangs. The formation of a “wedge”, repeatedly mentioned in medieval sources, also called “boar’s head”, “pig”, dates back to barbarian times and does not carry any tactical plan: the leader goes ahead of the detachment, a little behind him are close associates, then - the rest of the warriors. The appearance of heavy cavalry does not change the tactical principles in the least. The description of the wedge-shaped formation of knights riding so tightly that, as one poem said, "a glove thrown into the air could not fall to the ground" refers only to the marching formation.
Since the battle is "God's judgment" between 2 overlords, it was they who, ideally, should have fought in front of the formation, and the outcome of the duel decided the matter. In reality, fights, often proclaimed, almost never took place. Fights between warriors were not uncommon. Sometimes the battle itself was replaced by something like a tournament: in 1351, near the city of Ploermel in Brittany, the French and English detachments who came together elected 30 people from their midst, whose fight, which took place according to toughened tournament rules, was supposed to replace the battle; the battle was called the “Battle of the Thirty.” With the transition from knightly wars to state wars, the value of such a tradition is questioned, although it itself persisted until the beginning of the 17th century. If you believe the text of the 12th century, the last Anglo-Saxon king of England Harold on the eve of the battle of Hastings (1066) refused his opponent the Duke of Normandy Guillaume the Illegitimate (soon to become King of England William the Conqueror) in a decisive duel, saying that the fate of the country cannot be made dependent on the chances of a fight between 2 people. In ХУв. the French leader rejected the proposal of the English commander-in-chief to allocate 12 people from each army, so that their fight would solve the issue of supremacy, saying: “We have come to drive you out of here, and it’s enough for us.” Then the French commander Jean de Buey banned one of his subordinates to participate in a duel before the battle, adding that the combatant “desires to inflict damage on the enemy, namely, to take away his honor, in order to ascribe to himself empty glory, which costs little, but in fact neglects the service of the king and the public good (been public).
The battle began with an attack by heavily armed horsemen, during which the marching formation fell apart, turning into a disorderly chain of cavalry, galloping at a not very fast gait; the battle ended with the same attack. The rarely used reserve was used to send to the most dangerous battlefields, where the enemy pressed especially hard, and almost never - for a surprise attack from the flanks or, even more so, for an ambush, because all this was considered a military trick unworthy of a knight.
Controlling the battle was practically impossible. Knightly armor included a deaf helmet, a slot in which (or in its visor) gave a very small view, its design did not allow turning the head, so the knight saw only the one in front of him, and the battle turned into a series of fights. A deaf helmet made it impossible to hear commands, cavalry vaulting, i.e. the training of horses and riders to keep the formation during an attack arose only in modern times. In addition, it is more than difficult to manage a barbarian warrior, in a fighting ecstasy, or a knight fighting for personal glory. The only command that Roland gives in "The Song of Roland" is "Lord, barons, slow down!".
Each sought to be the first to fight the enemy, not paying attention to the fact that, exposing himself, as befits a knight, to increased danger, he weakened the chain of riders as far as it could exist. The right to start a battle was a privilege first attested in Germany in 1075, where was assigned to a certain family, and in the Holy Land during the era of the Crusades in 1119, under which the chronicler mentions a special detachment of St. Peter, who had such a right.
The knight's army is a collection of individuals, where everyone gave a personal oath of allegiance to the commander, and not a structure welded together by discipline. The goal of the knight is an individual fight for the sake of honor and glory and for ransom, and not the victory of his army. The knight fights without looking back at his comrades and commander. At the battle of Poitiers (1356), two French commanders argued about the right to start a battle and rushed to the attack without waiting for the royal order, without agreement with others and interfering with each other. The British counter-attack led to their retreat, and they faced the continuing advance of their troops, which caused confusion and panic, which turned into a swift flight, including those who did not even join the battle. Sometimes the victors were so carried away by robbing the enemy convoy that they let the enemy leave or regroup and attack again, often successfully. Attempts to impose at least some kind of discipline were unproductive and consisted only of punishments for individual violations. During the First Crusade, its leaders ordered to cut off the noses and ears of those who would engage in robbery until the end of the battle; before the aforementioned battle of Bouvina, Philip Augustus ordered the gallows to be erected for those who would grab prey from the enemy convoy before the end of the battle. Even in spiritual knights orders, whose members had to follow monastic discipline, one of the few military prohibitions was the prohibition at the beginning of the battle to gallop horses without orders.
The battle ended with a flight, which marked the defeat of the enemy; long pursuit was very rare, and the symbol of victory was spending the night at the battlefield. As a rule, there were few killed. Heavy weapons protected the knight well, and the purpose of the fight was, as noted, to capture the enemy, and not to kill him. Only two knights died in the Battle of Buvina, but either 130 or 300 noble prisoners were captured.
In the bloody battle of Crecy (1346), about 2000 knights and about 30 thousand infantry fell from the side of the French who lost this battle. However, the latest figures should not be unconditionally trusted, because the authors were prone to exaggeration. One of the chroniclers claimed that the British put up 1 million 200 thousand people in the battle of Hastings (in reality, this is slightly less than the population of England at that time), another stated that in the Battle of Grunwald (1410) the combined Polish-Lithuanian army numbered 5 million 100 thousand people, and only 630 thousand fell in this battle on both sides. In fact, medieval armies were very small because there was a small number knightly fiefs due to the low productivity of agriculture. About 5 thousand people participated in the battle of Hastings from the Norman side, including about 2 thousand knights, Harold's army was smaller. In the Battle of Buvin, the French had about 1300 knights, the same number of lightly armed horsemen and 4-6 thousand infantrymen on the side of the French. In the battle of Crecy, the British had 4 thousand knights, 10 thousand archers AND 18 thousand infantrymen, the French had about 10 thousand knights, but the infantry is most likely smaller than the British, and therefore the above figures of French losses look doubtful.
The descriptions of the battles spoke most of the knights, although, as can be seen from the calculations, other combatants participated in them. However, until the end of the Middle Ages, it was the heavily armed horsemen that formed the basis of the army, it was they who determined the nature of the battle, and only the knighthood was considered a "fighting" class (bellatores). Among the fighters were also lightly armed horsemen of ignoble origin, servants of knights or ignoble fetters (in France they were called sergeants). It was believed that war was an occupation of exclusively noble people, therefore the opportunity to engage in battle with a commoner was rejected with contempt. When the fief sergeants of the abbey of Saint-Denis began the battle of Bouvin, their opponents - the Flemish knights - considered this an insult and mercilessly killed horses and riders. Heavy weapons, as noted, were expensive, so fighting non-knights, who did not have sufficient income, were easily vulnerable in battle. Their main weapon was a weapon that struck from afar - a bow and (from the 12th century) a crossbow. The use of such weapons was contrary to the traditions of martial arts and was not used by knights. In 1139, the bow and crossbow were generally banned by the Church in battles between Christians - another example of the combination of Christian and knightly ethics. However, by the end of the 13th c. this weapon became widely used, especially by the British, who initially used it in the wars in Wales and Scotland, where the hilly or mountainous terrain did not leave room for large horse battles. The dispute between the combat qualities of the bow and crossbow went on throughout the Middle Ages (bow was faster, the crossbow was long-range) and did not come to a resolution. In any case, in the battles of Crecy and Agincourt (1415), the English archers proved their superiority over the French crossbowmen, and it was the powerful flow of English arrows that made the attacks of the French knights choke in both battles and made it possible for the British to successfully counterattack.
Archers fought on foot, their horses were vehicles. Horse archers, borrowed from the East in the era of the Crusades, did not take root in Europe. Infantrymen, i.e. foot soldiers armed with non-small weapons made up the bulk of the army until the advent of heavy cavalry in the 8th century.
The foot soldiers were the servants of the knights, they helped them get on the horse if they were knocked down to the ground, they guarded the camp and the convoy. One of the forms of participation of the infantry was that the infantrymen pulled the knights off the horses with pointed hooks and killed or captured them. For the first time, this was recorded in 1126 in Palestine, but soon appeared in Europe. The chronicler who tells about the battle of Buvin, a witness to this battle, considers the weapon used in this - the hook - as "unworthy" and says that it can only be used by supporters of evil , adherents of the devil, for it violates the hierarchy and allows the commoner to drop - down! - a noble horseman. The main function of foot soldiers was to create bristling with spears, tightly closed, from the ranks of a relatively wide formation, sometimes in the form of a square, behind which or inside which the retreating knights could hide from prosecution. In the battle of Legnano in 1176 between the army of the emperor Frederick I Barbarossa, on the one hand, and the Italian knights and the militia of the northern Italian cities, on the other, the Milanese infantrymen, after the flight of their riders, held the attack of the German knights until the fugitives regrouped, again attacked the German knights and defeated them. Until the XIV century. yet the infantry performed only defensive functions.
On June 11, 1302, the first battle in the Middle Ages took place, where the main role was played by the attacking infantry. The foot militia of the Flemish cities - 13 thousand people won the battle of Courtrai against 5-7 thousand French knights, swiftly attacking them when they crossed the stream and climbed onto the clay bank - i.e. in violation of all the rules of knightly combat. However, the Flemings' two-time attempt to repeat such a success - in 1328 at Kassel and in 1382 at Roosebek - was unsuccessful, and the knights defeated the foot soldiers. The spread of infantry in the XIV-XV centuries. explained by the above-mentioned transition from knightly wars to nation-state wars. A centralized state needed significant armed forces, not excessively expensive and more or less controlled. The infantry demanded less expense than the cavalry, the common people were more accustomed to submission than the nobles, less obsessed with the thirst for glory. The foot army could huddle in tight ranks, it was easier to control the mass of people in it, and this gave an advantage over better armed, but uncontrollable cavalry, Knightly combat (not tournament) weapons were, contrary to popular belief, not so heavy (12-16 kg; for comparison: the full calculation of a fighter of modern special forces - 24 kg), so that it was impossible to fight on foot in it. For the first time the knights fought dismounted in the battle of the English with the Scots at Northallerton in 1.138; the English knights repulsed the attack of their northern neighbors, but did not go on the counteroffensive. At the battle of Crécy, the English king Edward III forced his knights to dismount and distributed them among the archers. This measure had not so much tactical as psychological significance. The infantrymen were afraid to let the enemy cavalry close to them, because, having collided with it, they could neither defend nor run; the defeated knights relied on the speed of their horses, that is, the noble ones left commoners to their fate. By placing the knights between the footmen, Edward III strengthened the moral factor: it was believed that a sense of honor would not allow the knights to escape and they would help the foot soldiers to the end; the nobles supported the courage of the common people, sharing with them all the dangers. Thus, the English king for the first time demonstrated the unity of the army, not divided into privileged and unprivileged, but united by the single task of victory and the single will of the monarch.
The army consisted of detachments brought by the direct vassals of the monarch - such an army was called a "ban"; in exceptional cases, an arrier ban was convened, including vassals (arrier vassals). In some places, especially in England, the principle of general militia was preserved, by virtue of which every free man, however ignoble, was required, in accordance with his income, to have certain weapons and to go to war at the call of the king. But in reality, such a militia was practically not used, and participation in it was replaced by contributions to the treasury. From the 8th c. the basis of the army was vassals, but already at the end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century. mercenaries appear. In accordance with the vassal agreement, the liens were supposed to serve the overlord on campaigns only a certain number of days a year, and if the 80 time of hostilities expired, then the overlord had to support the vassal and pay for his military services. Here the germ of mercenarism was already concluded, although the fighting vassal , unlike the later mercenary, bound by a contract, he might not have agreed to such an extension of service. In the 12th century, mercenary units formed by their commanders appeared. The creation of a military force directly subordinate to the sovereign caused dissatisfaction with influential social groups, and, for example, the English Magna Carta (1215) forbade mercenarism, but in general such opposition was unsuccessful. Early (XII-XIII centuries) mercenarism was not considered shameful if the mercenary was a person of noble birth. It was quite within the norms of knightly honor, moreover, it was considered quite honorable such a situation in which a poor knight, in search of glory and food, entered the service of a large seigneur. where the reward is clearly specified. The trade of a mercenary becomes condemned only in the late Middle Ages, when the number of ignoble among the mercenaries increases, when in general the border between the noble and the ignoble in the troops is erased. People who lived exclusively in war were condemned, because it was believed that their morals were very different from truly knightly ones. The Battle of the Thirty was a clash of mercenary detachments, but it was carried out according to all knightly rules (the leaders of the detachments said that they would fight in the name of glory). The best warrior of the losing English side (selecting the most valiant separately among the winners and the vanquished was typical for tournaments) was declared the commoner Crokar ( this, perhaps, is not even a name, but a nickname), a former domestic servant, and the king of France offered him the nobility and a noble bride if he left the service of England.
The spread of mercenaries in the late Middle Ages is explained by their independence from the feudal structure. As for non-knightly morals, this is generally characteristic of the transition from knightly wars to national state wars, from feudal civil strife to civil conflicts, for a period of changing values and priorities. However, only a professional regular army could become a reliable military support of the monarchs, which did not provide for an agreement of equals, like a vassal union, or a mercenary contract (in Italy, mercenaries were called condottieri, from it. condotta “agreement”) and submission to the commander was assumed by the very fact of receipt to the service. For the first time, such an army arose in France after, in 1439, the General States established a permanent tax intended for the maintenance of such an army. This TROOP, created in 1445, was a heavily armed cavalry, mainly from the nobility, but it was no longer a knightly army. The soldiers of this army were called "gendarmes" (French homme d "armes - "armed man", plural gens d armes - "armed people"). Ban and arrier-ban were not formally canceled, but they lost all meaning. In In 1448, Dauphin Louis first tried to organize in his inheritance something like a recruiting system, and after becoming King Louis XI of France in 1461, he extended this principle to the whole country. At first, their obligatory weapons were bows and arrows, then it became more diverse - pikes, halberds, firearms. Recruits retained the name "free arrows" due to their original weapons and due to the fact that the state exempted their families from paying taxes. Thus, it was not possible to create them, and in 1480 the king dismissed them.
In modern times, the modern division of the army into formations, units and subunits was also carried out - detachments of soldiers, led by officers, equal in number, and into branches of service. In the Middle Ages, the branches of the armed forces - horsemen, arrows - turned out to be such not organizationally, but according to the functional principle of division during the campaign. among mercenaries. The composition of these initial "spears" is unknown, but it can be assumed that it did not differ much from the composition of the later "copies" created in the standing troops. The French "gendarmes" were divided into companies, or "companies", of approximately 60 people each, and those into 10 "spears" of 6 people each. The "spear" included: 1 heavily armed horseman, 1 lightly armed, 3 riflemen equipped with transport horses, page .sometimes, instead of one of the shooters, a servant. In 1471, the Duke of Burgundy Charles the Bold, like his overlord and main opponent, King Louis XI of France, but less successfully than that, attempted to create a permanent army. It was very small, only 1000 people, divided the axis into 4 "squadrons", "squadron" into 4 "chambers", "chamber" into 6 "copies" of 10 people; in addition, each “squadron” had one additional “spear” of its commander. The “spear” included: 1 heavily armed horseman, 1 lightly armed, page, servant, 3 archers, crossbowman, arquebusier and pikeman. It should be noted, however, that The "spear" was not a military unit in the modern sense, and a heavily armed cavalryman was not its commander, like a modern officer. Nomme d arme is the main fighter, and the remaining members of the "spear" are auxiliary.
Separate parts in the late Middle Ages were only gun servants. Until the New Age, the importance of artillery was not too great. The first mention of the use of cannons dates back to the beginning of the 14th century: cannons served as siege weapons during the siege of Gibraltar by the Castilians in 1308.
There is evidence that at the battle of Crécy the British used 6 cannons for a volley, which caused panic among the French. If this is true, then the impact was purely psychological, nothing is reported about the dead. it became widespread, however, despite its relative range - 230-250 steps versus 110-135 for a crossbow, it was used mainly by the besieged in the defense of fortresses, because this weapon was inferior to the crossbow in rate of fire and ease of handling.
The effect of the use of firearms was not so much tactical or strategic as socio-cultural: as already noted, in order to hit the enemy, neither courage, nor strength, nor nobility was required, but only certain professional skills. Losses from the use of artillery were small: in Orleans, besieged for more than six months, in 1428-1429. there were no more than 50 people killed and wounded by cannonballs out of 5-6 thousand, the garrison and about 30 thousand of the population of the city. The situation changed only at the turn of the 15-16 centuries. with the advent of field artillery. As for handguns, they completely replaced the cold ones - the pike, the bayonet. sword, saber - only in the twentieth century.
D.E.Kharitonovich "War in the Middle Ages" // MAN AND WAR: War as a phenomenon of culture
1. The Billmen
Source: bucks-retinue.org.uk
In medieval Europe, the Vikings and Anglo-Saxons often used in battles numerous detachments of bilmen - foot soldiers, whose main weapon was a combat sickle (halberd). Derived from a simple peasant sickle for harvesting. The combat sickle was an effective edged weapon with a combined tip of a needle-shaped spear point and a curved blade, similar to a battle ax, with a sharp butt. During battles, it was effective against well-armored cavalry. With the advent of firearms, the units of bilmen (halberdiers) lost their significance, becoming part of beautiful parades and ceremonies.
2. Armored boyars
Source: wikimedia.org
The category of service people in Eastern Europe in the period of the X-XVI centuries. This military estate was common in Kievan Rus, Muscovy, Bulgaria, Wallachia, the Moldavian principalities, and in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Armored boyars come from "armored servants" who served on horseback in heavy ("armored") weapons. Unlike the servants, who were released from other duties only in wartime, the armored boyars did not bear the duties of the peasants at all. Socially, armored boyars occupied an intermediate stage between peasants and nobles. They owned land with peasants, but their civil capacity was limited. After the accession of Eastern Belarus to the Russian Empire, the armored boyars became close in their position to the Ukrainian Cossacks.
3. Templars
Source: kdbarto.org
This was the name given to professional warrior-monks - members of the "order of the mendicant knights of the Temple of Solomon." It existed for almost two centuries (1114-1312), having arisen after the First Crusade of the Catholic army in Palestine. The order often performed the functions of military protection of the states created by the crusaders in the East, although the main purpose of its establishment was the protection of pilgrims visiting the "Holy Land". The Knights Templars were famous for their military training, mastery of weapons, clear organization of their units and fearlessness bordering on insanity. However, along with these positive qualities, the Templars became known to the world as tight-fisted usurers, drunkards and debauchees, who took their many secrets and legends with them into the depths of centuries.
4. Crossbowmen
Source: deviantart.net
In the Middle Ages, instead of a combat bow, many armies began to use mechanical bows - crossbows. The crossbow, as a rule, surpassed the usual bow in terms of shooting accuracy and lethal force, but, with rare exceptions, it lost a lot in terms of rate of fire. This weapon received real recognition only in Europe from the 14th century, when numerous detachments of crossbowmen became an indispensable accessory of knightly armies. The decisive role in raising the popularity of crossbows was played by the fact that from the 14th century their bowstring began to be pulled with a collar. Thus, the restrictions imposed on the force of tension by the physical capabilities of the shooter were removed, and the light crossbow became heavy. Its advantage in penetrating power over the bow became overwhelming - bolts (shortened crossbow arrows) began to pierce even solid armor.
This work briefly highlights the main points in the development of the army in the Middle Ages in Western Europe: changes in the principles of its recruitment, organizational structure, basic principles of tactics and strategy, and social status.
A detailed description of this battle has come down to us in the presentation of Jordanes.
Of greatest interest to us is Jordan's description of the battle formations of the Roman troops: the army of Aetius had a center and two wings, and on the flanks Aetius placed the most experienced and proven troops, leaving the weakest allies in the center. Jordanes motivates this decision of Aetius by taking care that these allies do not leave him during the battle.
Shortly after this battle, the Western Roman Empire, unable to withstand the military, social and economic cataclysms, collapsed. From this moment on, the period of the history of the barbarian kingdoms begins in Western Europe, and in the East the history of the Eastern Roman Empire continues, which received the name of Byzantium from the historians of modern times.
Western Europe: From the Barbarian Kingdoms to the Carolingian Empire.
In the V-VI centuries. a number of barbarian kingdoms are formed on the territory of Western Europe: in Italy, the kingdom of the Ostrogoths, ruled by Theodoric, on the Iberian Peninsula, the kingdom of the Visigoths, and on the territory of Roman Gaul, the kingdom of the Franks.
At that time, complete chaos reigned in the military sphere, since three forces were simultaneously present in the same space: on the one hand, the forces of the barbarian kings, which were still poorly organized armed formations, consisting of almost all the free men of the tribe.
On the other hand, there are the remnants of the Roman legions, led by the Roman governors of the provinces (a classic example of this kind is the Roman contingent in Northern Gaul, led by the governor of this province, Siagrius, and defeated in 487 by the Franks under the leadership of Clovis).
Finally, on the third side, there were private detachments of secular and ecclesiastical magnates, consisting of armed slaves ( antrustions), or from warriors who received land and gold from the magnate for their service ( buccellaria).
Under these conditions, a new type of army began to form, which included the three components mentioned above. A classic example of a European army VI-VII centuries. can be considered an army of the Franks.
Initially, the army was recruited from all the free men of the tribe who were able to handle weapons. For their service, they received from the king land allotments from the newly conquered lands. Every year in the spring, the army gathered in the capital of the kingdom for a general military review - the “March fields”.
At this meeting, the leader, and then the king, announced new decrees, announced campaigns and their dates, and checked the quality of the weapons of their soldiers. The Franks fought on foot, using horses only to get to the battlefield.
Battle formations of the Frankish infantry "...copied the shape of the ancient phalanx, gradually increasing the depth of its construction...". Their armament consisted of short spears, battle axes (francisca), long double-edged swords (spata) and scramasaxes (a short sword with a long handle and a single-edged leaf-shaped blade 6.5 cm wide and 45-80 cm long). Weapons (especially swords) were usually richly decorated, and the appearance of the weapon often testified to the nobility of its owner.
However, in the eighth century Significant changes are taking place in the structure of the Frankish army, which entailed changes in other armies in Europe.
In 718, the Arabs, who had previously captured the Iberian Peninsula and conquered the kingdom of the Visigoths, crossed the Pyrenees and invaded Gaul.
The actual ruler of the Frankish kingdom at that time, Major Karl Martell, was forced to find ways to stop them.
He faced two problems at once: firstly, the land reserve of the royal fiscal was depleted, and there was nowhere else to take land to reward warriors, and secondly, as several battles showed, the Frankish infantry was unable to effectively resist the Arab cavalry.
To solve them, he carried out the secularization of church lands, thus obtaining a sufficient land fund to reward his soldiers, and announced that from now on, not the militia of all free Franks was going to war, but only people who were able to purchase a complete set of horseman weapons: a war horse , spear, shield, sword and armor, which included leggings, armor and a helmet.
1. The Billmen
Source: bucks-retinue.org.uk
In medieval Europe, the Vikings and Anglo-Saxons often used in battles numerous detachments of bilmen - foot soldiers, whose main weapon was a combat sickle (halberd). Derived from a simple peasant sickle for harvesting. The combat sickle was an effective edged weapon with a combined tip of a needle-shaped spear point and a curved blade, similar to a battle ax, with a sharp butt. During battles, it was effective against well-armored cavalry. With the advent of firearms, the units of bilmen (halberdiers) lost their significance, becoming part of beautiful parades and ceremonies.
2. Armored boyars
Source: wikimedia.org
The category of service people in Eastern Europe in the period of the X-XVI centuries. This military estate was common in Kievan Rus, Muscovy, Bulgaria, Wallachia, the Moldavian principalities, and in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. Armored boyars come from "armored servants" who served on horseback in heavy ("armored") weapons. Unlike the servants, who were released from other duties only in wartime, the armored boyars did not bear the duties of the peasants at all. Socially, armored boyars occupied an intermediate stage between peasants and nobles. They owned land with peasants, but their civil capacity was limited. After the accession of Eastern Belarus to the Russian Empire, the armored boyars became close in their position to the Ukrainian Cossacks.
3. Templars
Source: kdbarto.org
This was the name given to professional warrior-monks - members of the "order of the mendicant knights of the Temple of Solomon." It existed for almost two centuries (1114-1312), having arisen after the First Crusade of the Catholic army in Palestine. The order often performed the functions of military protection of the states created by the crusaders in the East, although the main purpose of its establishment was the protection of pilgrims visiting the "Holy Land". The Knights Templars were famous for their military training, mastery of weapons, clear organization of their units and fearlessness bordering on insanity. However, along with these positive qualities, the Templars became known to the world as tight-fisted usurers, drunkards and debauchees, who took their many secrets and legends with them into the depths of centuries.
4. Crossbowmen
Source: deviantart.net
In the Middle Ages, instead of a combat bow, many armies began to use mechanical bows - crossbows. The crossbow, as a rule, surpassed the usual bow in terms of shooting accuracy and lethal force, but, with rare exceptions, it lost a lot in terms of rate of fire. This weapon received real recognition only in Europe from the 14th century, when numerous detachments of crossbowmen became an indispensable accessory of knightly armies. The decisive role in raising the popularity of crossbows was played by the fact that from the 14th century their bowstring began to be pulled with a collar. Thus, the restrictions imposed on the force of tension by the physical capabilities of the shooter were removed, and the light crossbow became heavy. Its advantage in penetrating power over the bow became overwhelming - bolts (shortened crossbow arrows) began to pierce even solid armor.
The composition of the dry rations of the European armies now resembles the menu of a good restaurant. In the Middle Ages, the diet of a fighter was much more brutal.
"Evil War" - this is how winter campaigns were called in the Middle Ages. The army was critically dependent on the weather and food supplies. If the enemy captured the convoy with food, the soldiers in enemy territory were doomed. Therefore, large campaigns began after the harvest, but before heavy rains - otherwise the carts and siege engines would get bogged down in the mud.
"An army marches while its stomach is full" - Napoleon Bonaparte.
French engraving from the Hundred Years' War (1337–1453). Source: Wikipedia
During the Second World War, the daily allowance of the soldiers of the Red Army was to include 800 g of rye bread (from October to March - 900 g), 500 g of potatoes, 320 g of other vegetables, 170 g of cereals and pasta, 150 g of meat, 100 g of fish, 30 g combined fat or lard, 20 g vegetable oil, 35 g sugar. Total according to the documents - 3450 calories. At the forefront, the diet could change significantly.
Wartime diet
So that a soldier on a campaign could take off and hang packs on a horse, push a wagon, wave an ax, carry stakes and put up tents, he needed up to 5000 calories. No food - no army. Therefore, with a successful campaign, the soldiers ate better than most medieval estates.
Today, 3,000 calories are considered the norm for a man with an active lifestyle.
Each day was allocated up to 1 kilogram of good bread and 400 grams of salted or smoked meat. A supply of "live canned food" - several dozen heads of cattle - was slaughtered in a critical situation or to raise morale before an important battle. In this case, they ate everything, right down to the entrails and tails, from which they cooked porridges and soups. The constant use of crackers causes diarrhea, so the dried bread was thrown there, into the common cauldron.
Pepper, saffron, dried fruits and honey were given to the sick and wounded. The rest seasoned the food with onions, garlic, vinegar, less often mustard. In the north of Europe, the fighters were also given lard or ghee, in the south - olive oil. There was almost always cheese on the table.
The medieval soldier's diet was supplemented by salted herring or cod, dried river fish. All this was washed down with beer or cheap wine.
Medieval military convoy with provisions and equipment. Illustration from the book "Hausbuch" of 1480. Source: Wikipedia
drunken sea
In the galleys, even slaves and convicts ate better than commoners on land. The rowers were fed bean soup, stew with beans, breadcrumbs. About 100 grams of meat and cheese were given out per day. In the late Middle Ages, the norm of meat increased and lard appeared in the diet. The rowers had the most satisfying food - this is how the sailors were motivated to fight for this place.
Food on ships was abundantly poured with wine - from 1 liter per day for officers, 0.5 for sailors. At the signal of the squadron admiral, for good work, all rowers could pour another bonus cup. Beer got the norm of calories. In total, the sailor drank a liter or two of alcohol per day. Not surprisingly, fights and riots were frequent.
- In contact with 0
- Google Plus 0
- OK 0
- Facebook 0
