The great age of feudal cavalry covers the period between 1060 and 1300. There are many problems for historians trying to write about the development of the cavalry and its equipment. The first problem is the stirrup: there is little solid evidence of exactly when and how the stirrup arrived in Europe. The origins of this very important piece of cavalry equipment lie in central Asia, and scholars believe it arrived during the Carolingian period. The Byzantines may have possessed it a few years before that. In antiquity, heavy cavalry troops had used saddle pads and were able to strike with a lance, spear or sword from horseback, using a downward overhand stroke. There is some debate about whether or not such cavalry could break the aligned front of an infantry formation. The stirrup probably arrived with the Avar invasions of central Europe. A saddle with stirrups afforded the rider a firmer seat when attacking. A weapon could be cradled in an underarm position, and the horseman could strike a target more firmly. This technical innovation aided the training of the warrior and his ability to control his horse. The horseman was required to constantly maintain a warhorse. In France or England, this might require the expenditure of a year's income. A knight might travel on a campaign with at least three horses. Besides the warhorse, he needed a saddle horse and a packhorse as well. Originally, neither the knight nor his men were compensated for the loss of animals during their term of service. As armor became heavier, it became necessary to breed larger horses for military purposes.
|
The expertise of feudal armies has been debated through the years. The sources used as evidence about military practices - "Chansons De Geste", chronicles and ordinances - are notoriously unreliable. But it seems certain that the monarch and the lords kept a number of knights and horsemen at their residences. These men were employed in a number of prestigious positions and as a result, they were well practiced in the use of arms. They could fight on foot or on horseback; they were the nucleus of any host that would assemble in the time of war. During the actual fighting, these more or less permanent soldiers would be the first in three cavalry formations that usually made up a feudal army. The traditional method was to employ three banners - two for the attacking force and a third in reserve. The more experienced men would lead the charge; contrary to popular belief, they tried not to run chaotically all about the battlefield. The formation would advance at a walk, then start to trot a few hundred yards from the enemy formation, and then charge the last 75 yards. (No doubt there were always, however some individuals who ignored their orders such as the English troops at the Battle Of Crecy on August 26, 1346. Instead of leading a direct charge they ran around the battlefield throwing stones and shouting insults at their French opponents in an effort to draw out the French cavalry. Instead of charging the English, the French archers unleashed an effective hail of deadly arrowfire.) Another problem faced by feudal armies was one of command and control. The nature of feudal society dictated that the prominent lords and knights step into the first rank during battle, making command difficult if not impossible. The war commanders thus had to be proficient warriors, which quality did not always make them suitable for command. THE NORMAN CONQUESTS The Norman Conquest affords an example of how ell a feudal army could function. During this period, infantry had been replaced by horsemen as the premiere combatant. Anglo-Saxon England still relied on a Germanic infantry host. When the Normans threatened the kigdom, Harold II Godwinson, the last Anglo-Saxon king of England, gathered up his army and went to fight the first of his enemies. He fought and defeated a Viking host that had landed in the north at Stamford-bridge. After this battle the Anglo-Saxons had to make a forced marched south to meet the Normans at Hastings. The Battle Of Hastings is thus a clear case of a well-armed infantry on good ground being attacked by a cavalry-based feudal army. The Anglo-Saxons only used horses as transportation. Harold arrived with his housecarls (bodyguards), the notables and their troops, and called out the militia. The Norman army consisted of William's Vassals; volunteers from France, Brittany and Flanders; and a contingent of archers and spearmen. The Norman army attacked the Anglo-Saxon position on a hill. The battle was very difficult, with the Normans mounting successful attacks on the Anglo-Saxon formation. Despite a number of repulses, the Norman horse units reformed on a number of occasions to resume the attack, an indication that tactical leadership was good and the horses well exercised. The Normans used their infantry to inflict casualties on the Anglo-Saxons by shooting arrows into their formation. The fighting continued amidst rumors that William had been killed or wounded. He took off his helmet and showed himself to silence the rumors of his demise. It was, in fact, Harold who had been slain. With their leader killed, the Anglo-Saxon army was broken. With no commander, there was no control. After Hastings, infantry as a combatant force was eclipsed, but it had not disappeared altogether. Viable infantry still existed in Scotland, Switzerland and northern Italy. The age of the mounted warrior would last until the end of the 14th Century. FORTIFICATION The feudal system brought to England by the Normans was built around the stone castle. These castles were places of political, military and religious authority. The castle extended Norman rule throughout England and into Wales and Ireland. The kings of France and England held hundreds of castles in an effort to maintain and extend their authority. The English kings held extensive lands in France, while the French kings were attempting to consolidate their authority and lands at the expense of the local magnates, including the English kings. Castle-building led to the second most important aspect of warfare in the Medieval Ages - Siege Warfare. In areas such as the Low Countries, great chains of barrier fortresses were constructed. Wars were fought between the armies of the Holy Roman Empire, France, England and local magnates for the possession of the wealthy cities in that region. Sieges were the predominant method of warfare and were conducted on a regular basis. The siege required the employment of pioneers, artificers and engineers. The preferred method was to persuade the castle or city to surrender by offering terms. When all else failed the walls had to be breached and the castle taken by storm and force. Artillery pieces called the "onager" and "trebuchet" were used to hurl large stones, some weighing half a ton, into the walls of the fortress. Dead and diseased animals were also hurled over the walls in order to create panic and start epidemics. Saps and movable towers were used to infiltrate the castle walls and tunnels were dug to undermine them. Siege warfare was made easier with the introduction of gunpowder. Artillery pieces utilizing gunpowder were in use by the late 14th Century. Other methods of siege warfare involved cutting off routes of trade and supply to the castle or city. Eventually this would lead to the starvation of the inhabitants and force surrender. In the tunnels dug beneath castle walls, mixtures of pig fat, lye and oils were used to create fires and explosions to topple the walls. Mining under the walls was also a common practice and invading armies would access the castle or city via these ducts.
|