A chapter from the book of the Belgian historian Verbruggen "The Art of Warfare in Western Europe During the Middle Ages" (J.F. Verbruggen. The Art of Warfare in Western Europe During the Middle Ages). The book was first published in 1954.
Thanks to the work of Delbrück and Lot, we can get an idea of the size of the medieval armies. They were small, as they existed in relatively small states. They were professional armies composed of people of the same class; the number of such people was accordingly limited. On the other hand, the economy was underdeveloped, the cities were just forming or were still small. First of all, the limited financial resources of the princes did not allow them to deploy large professional armies, consisting of mercenaries or their vassals. The recruitment of such an army would take a long time, supply would become a difficult problem, there would not be enough transport to transport supplies, and agriculture was not sufficiently developed to support large armies.
For military history, the problem of the number of armies is key. It is quite uncommon for an inferior army to defeat a superior enemy: therefore, it is necessary to find out who had a large army. Medieval sources constantly report the victories of inferior armies, while speaking about the help of God or at least a patron saint. God's help is constantly mentioned in connection with the Crusades, as are references to the Maccabees. St. Bernard of Clairvaux is superior to all. Campaigning to join the Order of the Temple, he wrote about the Templars: "They want to conquer by the power of God ... And they have already tested it, so that one single overthrew a thousand, and two put 10,000 enemies to flight."
Based on the reports of some chroniclers, who saw the judgment of God in the outcome of the battle, it was long believed that the Flemings and the Swiss defeated their powerful enemies with outnumbered armies. These ideas appeal to the national pride of the winners, and therefore are readily accepted. From a critical point of view, the ratio of the number of fighters tends to the diametrically opposite: the infantry was more numerous than the knights, which was the reason for these significant victories. There was a revolution in the art of war - a revolution that was preceded by another, in the way the army was recruited, its social structure. To the greatest extent, this was a consequence of the rise of a new class, which possessed the awareness of its own strength, capable of improving its position.
It is generally accepted that medieval man did not attach importance to numbers, and that even commanders were rarely interested in accurate statistics. Fantastically huge numbers were received and repeated on their behalf in the chronicles. The case of the chronicler Richer is typical: where he follows the Annals of Flodoard, Richer arbitrarily changes the numbers, almost always upward. Nevertheless, there were clerics who gave accurate numbers, which provides valuable information on the small number of cavalry. This was true of the First Crusade and the Kingdom of Jerusalem that followed. Heermann, based on a comparison of all sources, obtained the following results:
Completely - on my
This work briefly highlights the main points of the development of the army in the Middle Ages in Western Europe: changes in the principles of its manning, organizational structure, basic principles of tactics and strategy, social status.
A detailed description of this battle has come down to us in the presentation of Jordan.
Of greatest interest to us is Jordan's description of the battle formations of the Roman army: the army of Aetius had a center and two wings, and on the flanks of Aetius he placed the most experienced and proven troops, leaving the weakest allies in the center. Jordan motivates this decision of Aetius by the concern that these allies do not leave him during the battle.
Soon after this battle, the Western Roman Empire, unable to withstand military, social and economic cataclysms, disintegrated. From this moment in Western Europe the period of the history of the barbarian kingdoms begins, 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 Barbarian Kingdoms to the Carolingian Empire.
In the end of the 5th-6th centuries. on the territory of Western Europe, a number of barbarian kingdoms are formed: 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.
In the military sphere at this time, complete chaos reigns, since three forces were simultaneously present in the same space: on the one hand, the forces of barbarian kings, which were still poorly organized armed formations, consisting of almost all free men of the tribe.
On the other hand, there are the remnants of the Roman legions headed 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 church magnates, consisting of armed slaves ( antrustionov), or from the soldiers who received land and gold from the tycoon for service ( bucellaria).
Under these conditions, armies of a new type are beginning to form, which included the three above-mentioned components. A classic example of the European army of the VI-VII centuries. can be considered an army of Franks.
Initially, the army was composed of all the free men of the tribe, capable of handling weapons. For their service, they received from the king land plots from the newly conquered lands. Every spring the army gathered in the capital of the kingdom for a general military review - "March fields".
At this meeting, the leader, and then the king, announced new decrees, announced campaigns and their dates, checked the quality of the weapons of his soldiers. The Franks fought on foot, using their 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 VIII century. significant changes are taking place in the structure of the Frankish army, which entailed changes in other armies of Europe.
In 718, the Arabs, who had previously captured the Iberian Peninsula and conquered the Visigoth kingdom, 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 the soldiers, 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 would go to war, but only people capable of acquiring a complete set of riders' weapons: a war horse , spear, shield, sword and armor, which included greaves, plate and helmet.
Medieval battles have slowly evolved from clumsy warband clashes into real battles using maneuvers and tactics. Part of the reason for this evolution was the emergence of different types of troops, wielding different weapons and, accordingly, different skills and advantages. The first armies of the Middle Ages were simply hordes of foot soldiers. With the development of cavalry, knights appeared in the armies. Foot soldiers still remained in the army in large numbers to destroy weakened enemies and to do the hard work of a siege. In open battles, foot soldiers were at great risk from all sides, unlike knights, who usually fought one-on-one. But this only applies to the early feudal infantry, which consisted mainly of servants and untrained peasants. Archers were also very useful in sieges, but they too risked being trampled on the battlefield. By the end of the 15th century, the commanders managed to discipline the knights somewhat and make the army work as a single team. In the English army, reluctantly, but still showed respect for archers, especially those who wielded large bows, as they showed their value in many decisive battles. Discipline also improved as more knights fought for money rather than glory. Italian mercenaries became known for pursuing lengthy military campaigns without noticeable bloodshed. By that time, soldiers of all ranks had become too expensive to be spoiled unwisely. Feudal armies longing for glory were gradually replaced by armies of mercenaries who wanted to survive in order to be able to spend the money they earned.
Cavalry tactics
The cavalry was usually divided into three groups, which were sent into battle one after the other. The first group broke through the enemy's line or inflicted great damage on him so that the second or third wave could still break through. When the enemy took to flight, a real massacre and the capture of prisoners began. Initially, the knights acted at their own discretion, often disrupting the plans of the command. The knights were mainly interested in fame and honor, so they even argued for the right to go in the first squad of the first group. Overall victory in battle was a secondary goal for them. Fight after fight, the knights rushed forward only when they saw the enemy, thereby destroying any tactical plans of the commander. On occasion, the commanders hurried the knights in order to somehow maintain control over them. This was widely practiced in small armies that did not hope to withstand a series of cavalry raids. The knights on foot raised morale and greatly strengthened the infantry. The infantry used special military fortifications or terrain features to protect themselves from cavalry raids. An example of the undisciplined behavior of the knights was the Battle of Crécy in 1346. The French army significantly outnumbered the English (40,000 versus 10,000), and possessed a large number of mounted knights. The British were divided into three groups of archers with large bows, protected by wooden fortifications dug into the ground. Between these three groups were two groups of dismounted knights. The third group of knights on foot was in reserve. The French king sent mercenaries of Genoese crossbowmen to fire on the English foot knights while he tried to divide his mounted knights into three groups. However, the crossbows soon got wet and ineffective. The French knights ignored their king's attempts to build an army and, seeing the enemy, entered themselves into a trance by shouting "Kill! Kill!" Dissatisfied with the ineffectiveness of the crossbowmen, the French king yielded to the onslaught of his knights and let them into battle, and they, rushing forward, immediately trampled their crossbowmen. Although the battle lasted all day, the foot English knights and archers (who nevertheless managed to keep the bowstrings dry) nevertheless defeated the French cavalry, who fought like a crowd of savages. By the end of the Middle Ages, heavy cavalry was no more important on the battlefield than archers or infantry. By this time, military leaders had already realized the futility of raiding a well-organized and fortified infantry. The rules have changed. For the defense of the cavalry army, more and more they used dug sharpened sticks, dug ditches and rolling logs. Cavalry attacks against properly formed groups of spearmen and riflemen ended in the defeat of the cavalry. The knights were forced to fight on foot or wait for the right moment. Crushing cavalry attacks were possible, but only when the enemy was fleeing, disorganized, or leaving their fortifications to attack.
Shooters tactics
For most of this era, arrows were represented by archers using one type of bow. First it was a short bow, then a crossbow and a long bow. Archers had the advantage of being able to kill and injure enemies without engaging in hand-to-hand combat. The value of such troops was generally recognized in ancient times, but they were forgotten in the early Middle Ages. In the early Middle Ages, knights outnumbered archers in strength, and their code of honor required one-on-one hand-to-hand combat with a worthy enemy. Killing with arrows at a distance was unworthy of the ruling class, so military leaders initially made little effort to improve bows and skills in their use. However, it gradually became apparent that archers are very effective and are often simply necessary, both during a siege and in battle. More and more armies included archers in their ranks. William the First's decisive victory at Hastings in 1066 could have been won by archers, although traditionally most of the fame went to knights. The Anglo-Saxons occupied the hillside and placed their shields so tightly that the Norman knights could not penetrate their defenses. The battle lasted all day. The Anglo-Saxons came out from behind their shield wall, in part to attack the Norman archers. And when the Anglo-Saxons left, they were easily killed. For a while it seemed that the Normans were about to be defeated, but the Norman archers won the battle. One shot mortally wounded Harold, King of the Anglo-Saxons, and the battle ended shortly thereafter. Foot archers fought in large groups of several hundred or even thousands. At a distance of about a hundred meters from the enemy, crossbows and long bows could already cause significant damage. At this distance, the archers fired at individual targets. Such damage simply drove enemies crazy, especially if they had nothing to answer. In an ideal situation, the archers managed to destroy the enemy formation by shooting at it for some time. The enemy could defend against cavalry with wooden fortifications, but it was impossible to defend against all arrows and javelins. If the enemy left the defenses and launched an attack on the archers, the friendly cavalry, which had to have time to save the archers, got down to business. If the enemies simply sat in their positions, they nevertheless gradually weakened to the point where the cavalry could destroy them in the fortifications. Bow skills and the education of archers were encouraged in England, as Angilian troops were often outnumbered in wars on the continent. When the British learned to use large groups of archers, they began to gain victories, even though the enemy was outnumbered. Using long bows, the British developed a barrage system. Instead of aiming at individual enemies, archers fired long distances into the midst of the enemy army. Making up to six shots per minute, three thousand archers could fire 18 thousand shots at the enemy formation. The result of such a shelling was amazing, as both people and horses died. The French knights who took part in the Hundred Years War said that the sky at times turned black from arrows and nothing was heard except the loud whistle of these flying shells. Crossbowmen were widespread in the armies of the continent, especially in the militia and professional troops recruited by cities. Even with minimal training, the crossbowman became an effective soldier. By the 14th century, the first primitive hand-held firearms began to appear on the battlefield. When it was possible to use them, they were even more effective than bows. The main difficulty in using archers was their protection when they fired. To be effective, they had to be fairly close to the enemy. English archers took long poles with them to the battlefield, which they hammered into the ground where they were going to shoot. These poles provided them with some protection against enemy cavalry. They relied on their firepower to deal with enemy archers on their own. However, they started to get in trouble if they were attacked by enemy infantry. The crossbowmen carried a large passive shield with them. From these shields it was possible to build walls, because of which it was convenient to shoot. Towards the end of the medieval period, archers fought in groups united with spearmen. The lances prevented foot and horse enemies from attacking the archers, while the archers shot at the enemies. These mixed formations have learned to maneuver and even attack. The enemy cavalry retreated in front of well-organized groups of spearmen and riflemen. If the enemy did not have their own groups of spears and riflemen, the battle most likely turned out to be lost.
Infantry tactics
At the beginning of the Middle Ages, the tactics of the infantry were simple to the point of stupidity - they approached the enemy and began to chop. The Franks threw axes at the enemy before the collision to cause confusion. Warriors relied primarily on their strength and fury. The growing role of the knights led to a temporary decline in the infantry, mainly because there was still no well-disciplined and trained infantry. The infantry in the armies of the early Middle Ages were mostly peasants who were neither trained nor properly armed. The Saxons and Vikings used a defensive formation called the Shield Wall. The warriors stood close to each other and held their shields to form a barrier. This allowed them to defend themselves against archers and cavalry, which were lacking in their armies. The infantry resurgence took place in countries that lacked the resources to build or use armies of heavy cavalry, such as hilly countries such as Scotland and Switzerland, as well as developing cities. Out of necessity, these two groups learned to form effective armies with little or no cavalry. They learned that horses would not attack if there was a picket fence or pointed poles driven into the ground in front of them. A trained squad of spearmen could stop the outnumbered cavalry from richer countries or lords. The Shiltron formation is the circular formation of the spearmen used by the Scots in wars in the late 13th century (shown in the Lionheart painting). They realized that the shiltron was a very effective defensive formation. Robert Bruce challenged the English knights to battle only in swampy areas, which did not allow the effective use of heavy cavalry. The Swiss are renowned for their ability to use pikes and spears. They revived the traditions of the Greek phalanxes and achieved great skill in wielding long peaks. They lined up the spearmen in squares. The outer rows kept their pikes almost horizontal, tilting them slightly downward. This was an effective defense against cavalry. The rear ranks used long, pointed poles to fend off enemy infantry attacks. The Swiss trained to such an extent that they could form such a formation very quickly and mix without disturbing the structure. In this way they made the defensive formation a powerful means of attack. The response to the masses of the spearmen was artillery, which swept away the formation. The Spaniards were the first to learn how to effectively use artillery. The Spaniards also learned how to effectively fight against spearmen using swords and small shields. These were warriors in light armor who could quickly slip through the thick of the rush and wield their short swords effectively in the crowd. Their shields were small and light. At the end of the Middle Ages, the Spaniards were also the first to experiment with the unification of spearmen, swordsmen and archers in one formation. It was a very effective army that could withstand any weapon in any terrain, both offensively and defensively. At the end of the Middle Ages, the Spanish army was the most effective in Europe.
1. Bilmen
Source: bucks-retinue.org.uk
In medieval Europe, the Vikings and Anglo-Saxons often used in battles numerous detachments of bilmen - infantry warriors, whose main weapon was a battle sickle (halberd). Derived from a simple peasant harvest sickle. The battle sickle was an effective melee weapon with a combined tip of a needle spear point and a curved blade, similar to a battle ax, with a sharp butt. During battles, it was effective against cavalry well protected by armor. With the advent of firearms, the bilmen (halberd) detachments lost their importance, becoming part of beautiful parades and ceremonies.
2. Armored boyars
Source: wikimedia.org
The category of service people in Eastern Europe during the X-XVI centuries. This military class was widespread in Kievan Rus, the Moscow state, Bulgaria, Wallachia, Moldavian principalities, in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The armored boyars come from "armored servants" who served on horseback in heavy ("armored") weapons. Unlike servants, who were freed from other duties only in wartime, the armored boyars did not bear the duties of the peasants at all. In social terms, the armored boyars occupied an intermediate stage between peasants and nobles. They owned land with peasants, but their civil legal capacity was limited. After the annexation 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 of the professional warrior-monks - members of the "order of the mendicant knights of the Temple of Solomon." It existed for almost two centuries (1114-1312), emerging 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 to protect the pilgrims who visited the "Holy Land". Knights-"Templars" were famous for their military training, skillful use of weapons, clear organization of their troops and fearlessness, bordering on insanity. However, along with these positive qualities, the Templars became known to the world as tight-fisted usurers, drunkards and libertines, who took their many secrets and legends with them into the depths of the 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 a conventional bow in shooting accuracy and destructive power, but, with rare exceptions, it lost a lot in terms of rate of fire. This weapon received real recognition only in Europe since the XIV century, when numerous units of crossbowmen became an indispensable part of the knightly armies. A decisive role in raising the popularity of crossbows was played by the fact that from the XIV century their bowstring began to be pulled by the collar. Thus, the restrictions imposed on the pulling force by the physical capabilities of the shooter were removed, and the light crossbow became heavy. His advantage in penetrating power over the bow became overwhelming - bolts (shortened arrows of crossbows) began to pierce even solid armor.
The composition of 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.
"Wicked war" - this is how winter campaigns were called in the Middle Ages. The army was critically dependent on weather and food supplies. If the enemy captured a wagon train with food, the soldiers on enemy territory were doomed. Therefore, large campaigns began after the harvest, but before heavy rains - otherwise carts and siege machines would get bogged down in the mud.
"The army marches while the stomach is full" - Napoleon Bonaparte.
French engraving during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453). Source: Wikipedia
During World War II, the daily allowance of soldiers of the Red Army was supposed 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 of mixed fat or lard, 20 g of vegetable oil, 35 g of sugar. In total, according to the documents - 3450 calories. On the front lines, the diet could change significantly.
Wartime diet
For a soldier on a campaign to be able to remove and hang packs on a horse, push a cart, swing an ax, drag stakes and set up tents, he needed up to 5,000 calories. No food, no army. Therefore, in a successful campaign, the soldiers ate better than most of the medieval estates.
Today, 3000 calories are considered the norm for a man with an active lifestyle.
Each day, each was given up to 1 kilogram of good bread and 400 grams of salted or smoked meat. The stock 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, down to the entrails and tails, from which they cooked porridge and soups. The constant use of rusks causes diarrhea, so the dried bread was thrown there, into the common cauldron.
Pepper, saffron, dried fruit and honey were given to the sick and wounded. The rest seasoned their food with onions, garlic, vinegar, less often mustard. In the north of Europe, fighters were also given lard or ghee, and 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" 1480. Source: Wikipedia
Drunken sea
In galleys, even slaves and convicts ate better than commoners on land. The rowers were fed with bean stew, stew with beans, and bread crumbs. About 100 grams of meat and cheese were given out per day. In the late Middle Ages, the meat rate increased and lard appeared in the diet. The zagrebnykh had the most satisfying food - this is how the sailors were motivated to fight for this place.
The food on the ships was plentifully poured with wine - from 1 liter per day for officers, 0.5 for sailors. At the signal of the admiral of the squadron, for good work, all the rowers could be poured another bonus glass. The beer was used to get the calorie intake. In total, the sailor drank a liter or two of alcohol per day. Not surprisingly, there were frequent fights and riots.
Loading...
