Feudal Europe at war: feudalism and medieval warfare

Seite 1

Feudal Europe at War

Key Objectives

- To identify and explain the connections between feudalism, as a medieval socio-political system, and medieval warfare

- To analyze the connection between war and society from around the 8th century to the 16th century

Christian Europe or The Latin World

- Charles Martel was a political and military leader of a germanic tribe known as The Franks, who rose up to the status of a king in the early eight century

- He was one of the first people to forge a large European kingdom after the collapse of the Roman Empire

- He started The Carolingian Dynasty, the first great dynasty of French kings

- They covered a vast territory of western and central Europe

- Charles Martel eventually found himself threatened by Islamic armies coming up through Spain

- He needed to come up with a way to continually produce armies, so he developed The Feudal System, which was roots in a lord and vassal relationship

- He would give a chunk of land to his followers and they would offer military and political loyalty in return

- The land ought to be enough that those who owned it could afford to become mounted elite warriors, heavy cavalry

- The lord would swear an oath to Charles Martel, get peasants to work the land for him and then he could train to become a warrior

- This system defined how European society would function, recognized political authority based on whoever was giving out the land and produced heavy cavalry as the dominant warriors

- The system was quite flawed:

- Knights would train individually so there was no sense of tactical cooperation or cohesion

- There was a ride range of skilled warriors as some would train diligently and others would not

- There was also no standard for armour or the terms of how long a knight was supposed to serve for

- There was competition between feudal lords under the same king, often going to war against one another

- It was unpredictable, how many people would show up to battle

Chivalry

- Despite the flaws, there was an established code of behaviour for the mounted elites, which defined their interactions in fighting, talking and respecting one another

- The code of behaviour, Chivalry, is rooted in Christian ethics, blended with practicality of interactions of the elite

Chivalry - the codification of idealistic notions of warfare

Chansons de geste - a French phrase which translates to songs of great deeds; epic poems which mix mythology and history, dealing with the likes of Charlemagne, William or Orange and a theme of barons’ revolts

Feudal Kingdoms

- The Feudal system also created a patchwork of numerous rivalling feudal kingdoms throughout Europe

- This led to a period of constant warfare among the kingdoms

The Hierarchy

- Kings commanded lords, who commanded vassals, who were above commoners

- The Church was an everyday part of the system, overseeing everything

The Knights

- There were massive economic barriers to becoming a knight due to the extreme costs of their armour, weaponry, horses, squires, footmen or bowmen and servants

- The knights were the wealthy elites of Feudal Europe, not everyday people

- Most knights needed 300-400 acres of fertile land with 10-15 families working the land, in order to afford the basic setup for a knight

How to Become a Knight

- Be born into the right noble family

- Have enough money to afford all of the associated costs

- Train as a squire under a senior knight from a different family, gaining experience and proficiency as a mounted warrior before being knighted

- Get on the tournament circuit, performing your role as a fighter, gaining respect and proving yourself as worthy mounted elite

- Consider William Marshal, an English knight who lived during the late 12th century

- He was born the younger son of a minor noble family with lineage but without money or land

- He trained to become a knight and then became a knight errant, without a lord

- He served a variety of lords and went on the tournament circuit, winning time and time again

- He became a sports celebrity of Feudal Europe, known all over the land

- Through his winnings, he built up his wealth and rose up to become an Earl under Henry III, later serving as the Regent of England until Henry III become of age

- He fought only one or two real battles in his entire life, spending most of his time on the tournament circuit or in raids

Tournaments

- These were a polished, perfect version of what combat should be

- Success meant earning money, armour, prestige, reputation and more

Knights in Culture

- The sword was a potent symbol, an extension of the knight, imbued with a name and featured in legendary tales

- Knightly culture becomes an important part of popular culture in the courts of Feudal Europe

- Troubadours were wandering poets, musicians and storytellers who shared gossip, told stories and spread the message of knightly culture

- Knights would hire troubadours to write poems about them and spread the word of their deeds and achievements

- The Feudal courts of Europe embraced the Troubadours, their stories and the chivalry of the knights

The Brutal Reality

- Chivalry was an idealized discourse for the times, which spoke to ideals, above the reality of battle

- Knights spoke of chivalry and some even believed it but most did not behave with chivalry, instead brutally murdering and raping villagers while they plundered

- Consider how in modern day social media, we have influencers who present an idealized discourse of beauty and perfection

- In reality, many of these people are regular human beings who have good and bad days, without forever sun and flawless beauty

Medieval Warfare

- Predominantly, there were battles, sieges and raids

- The most common form of warfare in the Medieval period were raids, not battles

- During raids, lords would call up their men and the knights would ride into enemy territory to loot and pillage

- The armies were quite small and expensive, less than 8,000 men

- A knight riding into battle is like a modern day tank, expensive and not that expendable

- There were logistical problems in feeding and supplying the armies, which were a key feature of Medieval warfare

- Armies therefore lived off the land, so the longer their campaigns were, the harder it became to logistically support the army

- There were also limited communications, with messages delivered by runners on horseback and leaders often out in the battlefield, unreachable

- Due to the challenges, there were limited war aims and strategies

- Leaders could campaign for a few weeks or months at most

- The most common strategy would be to bring together your army, ride out into enemy territory and attack the civilians, then return home

- The damage to the civilian territory could cripple a feudal leader, through reduced taxes

- Additionally, an army could march out and siege a town, or perhaps go out and seek a battle, drawing out the enemy by plundering their towns

- Most warfare was conducted by soldiers against civilians, contrary to the common misconception of knights fighting knights

- Destruction, theft, murder and rape were the common characteristics of medieval warfare

- Armies march on their stomachs

Knights in Combat

- Knights engaged in ritualized warfare

- The knights were the deciding outcome for conflict

- At a key point in each battle, it was expected that the knights would charge ahead and take down the final resistance, deciding on the outcome of the battle

- Terrain also had to be appropriate for large horse-bearing units

- Two armies would meet on open fields, in more open terrain

- It was considered dishonourable to hide in the woods and ambush a army instead of meeting them head on

- Conduct in battle, between knights, was highly ritualized

- Personal honour, reputation and prestige was incredibly important

- In battle, knights would seek one another out for capture

- If two knights were fighting and one became disarmed, it was honourable to take him prisoner or wait until the disarmed knight got his weapon back and then continue the battle

- The chivalric code only applied in battle between knights, whereas knights would simply cut down commoners

- Killing a knight meant prestige, but capturing a knight could mean wealth

- The concept of ransom and taking prisoners is fascinating because it meant upward mobility

- Therefore, capture was more enticing than killing, which contributed to the ritualization of knightly combat

- Despite all of the trained that knights did, there was very limited discipline or drill, movement and cooperation as a body

- Some knights trained their whole lives to fight, but not necessarily to fight alongside others

- For example, if a knight had captured another extremely wealthy knight then the successful knight may just leave the battle

- The Charge was an organized movement where knights charged forward with their lances or spears and drove the enemy from the battlefield, winning the day

- Once the charge was complete, combat devolved into individual action, a hack and slash of brutal, bloody chaos

- If the charge was not completely successful, then all cohesion was lost

- If there was one thing that knights were taught, it was how to charge

- During the charge, the mounted knights would try to maintain a line with their lances poised in the air, held high for as long as possible because they were quite heavy

- Mandy Feudal European armies focused on this idea of the cavalry as the decisive blow, in contrast to the ancient Greeks and the Vikings, where the infantry were considered the dominant weapons system

Vulnerability for Knights

- Knights had mobility issues on foot, with laborious and slow movement

- They also had limited visibility due to the helmet designs

- Once they were knocked off horseback, knights became much more vulnerable

- There was also a long preparation process what with all of the armour

- They could still inflict serious damage while on foot but had some weaknesses

Archers: The Bane of Knights

- Every army had archers, either bowman or crossbowman

- Archers were highly effective against knights

- They were very tough fighters, mobile, often commoners, armed with swords and daggers

- Archers were not part of the chivalric code or culture because they were commoners

- They were considered to be lacking chivalric code

- Knights did not gain any prestige or wealth by killing or capturing an archer, but they were extremely effective at killing knights from 150 to 300 yards away

- Archers would also shoot in teams, with arrows streaming down onto knights during their entire charge

- Archery is challenging and a person needed to dedicate years to their training

- In contrast, someone could learn how to use a crossbow within about ten minutes

- In Whales, archery was part of the culture, but in countries such as France, there was no history of excellence or training

- Crossbows could shoot up to about 150 yards but were so powerful that they could pierce most armour

- Crossbows were seen as deadly technological inventions, so much that the Catholic Church banned the use of crossbows between rivalling Christian armies

Crécy and Agincourt

- The greatest examples of the power of archery occurred during the Hundred Years War between England and France:

- Crécy, 1346

- Agincourt, 1415

- Both battles followed a similar pattern

- The French had larger armouries with heavy contingents of knights

- During both battles, the charge of the knights was stopped in its tracks by English longbowmen

- Both battles are problematic from a socio-political perspective

- The knights were the warrior elite on the battlefield, but off the field they were the political elite

- In both cases, the economic, social and political inferiors and commoners defeated their superior elite knights

- This caused immense anxiety and existential crises for the French

Poor Bloody Infantry

- The infantry were social inferiors armed with spears and swords, charging into battle

- They were often workers of the land, called upon by their lords

- Throughout the medieval period, their is a lack of historical documentation of the infantry because they were considered inferiors socially, politically and economically

- The painters, storytellers and writers focused on the elite because they needed financial support from the nobility

- The infantry came from the common class

- Many of the lower class people could not read or participate in the cultural records

- The infantry was there, but the focus was on the elite knightly class

- Broadly speaking, there was limited training and discipline for the infantry

- There were trained mercenary infantry units, but most units were a mass of commoners who were ordered into battle at crucial moments

- They were poorly equipped unless they had weapons that were in their families for many generations

- Infantry was more prevalent depending on the wealth of the kingdom and how many knights they could afford

- For example, France was quite wealthy but countries such as Scotland and Whales were much poorer

- The infantry were also outside of the chivalric code

The Value of Foot

- In siege warfare, infantry become very valuable at climbing ladders and getting into a castle

- Infantry can be used effectively against cavalry if they are well trained and are willing to stand their ground

- Scottish soldiers, because it was a poorer country, developed schiltrons which were formations of individuals with long spears

- If soldiers were willing to hold their spears and not run away, they could effectively fight the cavalry

- Broadly speaking, an infantry unit would not want to go to war against cavalry

Myth and Reality

- Most medieval conflict was a chaotic combination of cavalry, infantry and archers, known as combined arms

- It would have been difficult in the middle of battle to even tell who was fighting against one another

- In Roman times, armies were cohesive, unified and uniformed but the Feudal period was much more chaotic

- The period saw a tactical shift away from infantry as the dominant weapon system, toward cavalry as the focus of medieval battles

- The elites established an idealized chivalric culture, how they interacted with one another, their codes of behaviour and their music and art

- Chivalric culture plays out realistically in the tournaments, whereas medieval combat was a brutal reality of murder, rape and plundering

- The commoners were outside the chivalric code, but as seen in the battles of Crécy and Agincourt, commoners could be the deciding factor in a battle

Summary

- The Feudal system is a socio-military system, defining the social and political structures of the day as well as promoting the key weapons systems of the times as cavalry, supported by infantry and archers