Armies of the Middle Ages. Armament of the medieval French army

In 1458, near the Buda fortress on the ice of the Danube River, the burghers and nobility proclaimed Matyas Hunyadi, the 14-year-old heir of the talented commander Janos Hunyadi, king of Hungary. As a result of the national liberation revolution, the teenager, thrown into prison by his competitors in the fight for the Hungarian crown, came to power. Thus appeared a commander whose army would become one of the most combat-ready armies Medieval Europe.

Matyash's father, Janos, was a good warrior and strategist. Thanks to him, the Balkan Peninsula successfully held back the invasion of the Ottomans for a long time, and only death from the plague ended the chronicle of successful battles of this historical figure. Young Matyash was drawn to reading and, as a child, became engrossed in the works of Julius Caesar. This is exactly how the idea of ​​​​creating a professional army, later called "Black Army"(Fekete Sereg).

Historians disagree about the origin of the term "Black Army". The name apparently was not given during King Matthias's lifetime, but appears in documents written immediately after his death. There are various theories that the soldiers were dressed in black or wore black ribbons on their shoulders while mourning King Matthias. Another theory is that the name comes from the black breastplate worn by Captain František Hag, or, alternatively, the name is linked to the nickname of another Black Army officer, Captain Janos "The Black" Haugwitz.

And, if in other countries warriors in peacetime could be farmers, bakers, masons, then the “Black Army” was a highly paid army of professionals who were engaged in purely military matters. The backbone of the army consisted of 6-8 thousand mercenaries; in 1480 this figure increased to 20 thousand, and in 1487 it amounted to 28 thousand. Mostly, the soldiers were Bohemians, Serbs, Poles, Germans, and, starting from the 80s, Hungarians. The key to the victories of the “Black Army” was the widespread use of firearms. One in four soldiers carried an arquebus, an unusual ratio in armies of the time. Even at the beginning of the 16th century, only 10% of European armies used firearms.

The basis of the troops was infantry, artillery, light and heavy cavalry. The heavy cavalry protected the lightly armed infantry and artillery, while the rest of the army made surprise attacks on the enemy. The river fleet consisted of galleys, boats and small ships that could sail along the Danube, Tisza and Sava. In 1475, artillery was installed on river barges: mortars and bombards. In 1479, the fleet consisted of 360 ships, and the crew was 2,600 sailors and 10 thousand soldiers on board.

A regular paid army also had its drawbacks - in case of delay in payment, some soldiers could leave the battlefield or start a riot. However, this was compensated by the high level of training of the soldiers who served in it. For 30 years, the “Black Army” restrained the expansion of the Ottomans into Western Europe, contributed to the unification of Hungary and the conquest of new territories, thus creating a powerful state in the center of Europe, capable of resisting external enemies.

A. Marey

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 recruitment, organizational structure, basic principles of tactics and strategy, and social status.

1. Dark Ages (V-IX centuries)

The collapse of the army of the Western Roman Empire is traditionally associated with two battles: the Battle of Adrianople in 378, and the Battle of Frigidus in 394. Of course, it cannot be said that after these two defeats the Roman army ceased to exist, but it should be recognized that in the 5th century the process of barbarization of the Roman army acquired unprecedented proportions. The fading Roman Empire endured one more, last battle for itself, in which, however, the ranks of the Roman army were already dominated by detachments of barbarians. We are talking about the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields, in which the united army of Romans and barbarians under the command of the “last Roman” Aetius stopped the advance of the Huns led by their previously invincible leader, Attila.

A detailed description of this battle has come to us in the account of Jordan. Of greatest interest to us is Jordan’s description of the battle formations of the Roman army: Aetius’ army had a center and two wings, and Aetius placed the most experienced and proven troops on the flanks, leaving the weakest allies in the center. Jordanes motivates this decision of Aetius with the concern that these allies would not abandon him during the battle.

Soon after this battle, the Western Roman Empire, unable to withstand military, social and economic cataclysms, collapsed. From this moment, the period of the history of barbarian kingdoms begins in Western Europe, and in the East the history of the Eastern Roman Empire continues, which received the name Byzantium from modern historians.

Western Europe: From the Barbarian Kingdoms to the Carolingian Empire.

In the V-VI centuries. A number of barbarian kingdoms are emerging 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 in the territory of Roman Gaul - the kingdom of the Franks.

In the military sphere at this time, complete chaos reigned, since three forces were simultaneously present in the same space: on the one hand, the forces of the barbarian kings, who were still poorly organized armed formations, consisting of almost all the free men of the tribe; on the other hand, the remnants of Roman legions led by Roman provincial governors (a classic example of this kind is the Roman contingent in Northern Gaul, led by the governor of this province Syagrius 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 (antrustions), or warriors who received land and gold from the magnate for their service (buccellarii).

Under these conditions, armies of a new type began to form, which included the three components mentioned above. A classic example of the European army of the 6th-7th centuries. can be considered the army of the Franks. Initially, the army was composed of all free men of the tribe capable of handling weapons. For their service, they received land allotments from the newly conquered lands from the king. Every year in the 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, and checked the quality of the weapons of his warriors. The Franks fought on foot, using horses only to get to the battlefield. The battle formations of the Frankish infantry “... copied the shape of the ancient phalanx, gradually increasing the depth of its formation...”. Their armament consisted of short spears, battle axes (Francis), long double-edged swords (Spatha) and skramasaks (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 appearance weapons often testified to the nobility of its owner.

However, in the 8th century. Significant changes were 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 kingdom of the Visigoths, crossed the Pyrenees and invaded Gaul. The actual ruler of the Frankish kingdom at that time, Majordomo Charles Martell, was forced to find ways to stop them. He was faced with two problems at once: firstly, the land reserves of the royal fiscal were depleted, and there was nowhere else to get land from to reward 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 receiving 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 full set of cavalry weapons: a war horse , spear, shield, sword and armor, which included leggings, armor and a helmet. Such a set, according to Ripuarskaya Pravda, was very, very expensive: its total cost was equal to the cost of 45 cows. Very, very few could afford to spend such a sum on weapons, and people who could not afford such expenses were obliged to equip one warrior from five households. In addition, poor people armed with bows, axes and spears were called up for service. Charles Martell distributed plots to horsemen for their service, but not as full ownership, as was the case before, but only for the duration of their service, which created an incentive for the nobility to continue to serve. This reform of Charles Martell was called beneficial(benefits - i.e. good deed - this was the name of a piece of land given for service). At the Battle of Poitiers (October 25, 732), a new army of Franks under the leadership of Charles Martel stopped the Arabs.

Many historians consider this battle to be a turning point in the military history of the Middle Ages, arguing that from this point on infantry lost its decisive importance, transferring it to heavy cavalry. However, this is not entirely true, both militarily and socially. Although it was from this moment that the formation of a layer of horsemen began not only as an elite combat unit, but also as a social elite - the future of medieval knighthood - it is still necessary to take into account that this was a long process, and for quite a long time the cavalry performed only a supporting role with the infantry taking the main blow of the enemy and wearing him down. The change in the situation in favor of cavalry, both in Western Europe and in Byzantium, was facilitated by the fact that in the 7th century. Europeans borrowed a previously unknown stirrup from the nomadic Avars, which the Avars, in turn, brought from China.

The Carolingian army took its complete form under Charlemagne. The army was still convened for the spring review, although it was postponed from March to May, when there was a lot of grass that served as food for the horses. The entire size of the army, according to historians, did not exceed ten thousand soldiers, and more than 5-6 thousand soldiers never went on campaigns, since such an army “...stretched along with the convoy over a day’s march of 3 miles.” In the border strip and in large cities, scars were stationed - permanent detachments created from professional warriors; similar scars accompanied the emperor and counts. The grandson of Charlemagne, Emperor Charles the Bald, issued an edict in 847 obliging every free person to choose a lord and not change him. This consolidated the vassal-seignorial system of relations already established in society, and in the sphere of recruiting and managing the army, it led to the fact that now each lord brought his own detachment to the battlefield, recruited from his vassals, trained and equipped by him. The combined army was formally commanded by the king, but in fact, each lord himself could give orders to his people, which often led to complete confusion on the battlefield. This system reached its apogee later, in the era of developed feudalism.

2. Armies of the High Middle Ages (X-XIII centuries)

A) Western Europe in the X-XI centuries.

After the division of the Frankish Empire under the terms of the Treaty of Verdun in 843, signed between the grandchildren of Charlemagne, the political development of the French lands was determined by two main factors: the constantly growing external threat from Norman pirates and the decline in the importance of royal power, unable to organize the defense of the country, which directly entailed represents an increase in the influence of local authorities - counts and dukes and their separation from the central government. The transformation of counts and dukes into sovereign hereditary rulers resulted in the progressive feudal fragmentation of French lands, an increase in the number of granted land holdings, proportional to the decrease in the area of ​​each specific allotment, and the transformation of benefices granted for service into hereditary land ownership. In conditions of extreme weakening of royal power, the old custom of electing the king at the council of the nobility is being resurrected. The counts from the Robertin family of Paris, famous for their fight against the Normans, become kings.

These political changes are closely related to changes in military affairs of that era. The decreasing importance of the common people's infantry and the emergence of heavily armed knightly cavalry to the fore led to a sharp social stratification of Frankish society; It was during this period that the idea of ​​dividing society into three classes was finally formed and gained particular popularity: “praying” (oratores), “warring” (bellatores) and “working” (laboratores). In turn, progressive feudal fragmentation could not but affect the reduction in the size of the army, which now rarely exceeded two thousand people. A detachment of one and a half thousand people was already considered a large army: “Thus, there were nine hundred knights. And [Sid] recruited five hundred foot squires of the hidalgo, not counting the other pupils of his house.<…>The Cid ordered to leave his tents and went to settle in San Servan and around it in the hills; and every person who saw the camp that Sid set up said later that it was a large army...”

Battle tactics also changed. Now the battle began with a coordinated strike from the spears of the heavy cavalry, splitting the enemy's formation. After this first attack, the battle broke down into single combats between knight and knight. In addition to the spear, a long, double-edged sword becomes a mandatory weapon for every knight. The defensive equipment of the Frankish knight consisted of a long shield, heavy armor and a helmet worn over the neck cover. The infantry, which played a supporting role in battle, was usually armed with clubs, axes, and short spears. Archers in the West Frankish lands were mostly their own, while in the East Frankish lands they were hired. In Spain, instead of a shell, they often used chain mail borrowed from the Moors with long sleeves and a chain mail hood, over which a helmet was worn: “...Diego Ordonez also, when he felt that he was seriously wounded, stood up against Rodrigo Arias and hit him in the crown with a sword, so that he cut a helmet and a chainmail hood, and half a skull...”

Distinctive feature The weaponry of Italian chivalry was its lightness - short piercing swords, light flexible spears with narrow tips equipped with additional hooks, and daggers were used here. For defensive weapons in Italy, light, usually scaly armor, small round shields and helmets that fit the head were used. These features of the weapons also determined the differences in the tactics of the Italian knights from their French and German colleagues: the Italians traditionally acted in close contact with infantry and archers, often performing not only the attacking function traditional for knights, but also the function of supporting the infantry.

It is impossible not to say about the main opponents of the Western Franks in the period under review - the Normans (Vikings, Varangians). It was the Normans who were one of the most courageous and knowledgeable sailors of medieval Europe. Unlike most continental countries, they used the fleet not only for transporting goods and people, but also for military operations on the water. The main type of Norman ship was the drakkar (several such ships were found, the first of them in Oseberg in 1904, and exhibited in the museum in Oslo) - a sailing-rowing ship 20-23 m long, 4-5 m wide in the middle. It is very stable due to its highly developed keel, thanks to its small draft it can approach the shore in shallow water and penetrate rivers, and due to the elasticity of its structure it is resistant to ocean waves.

The pirate raids of the Normans instilled such horror in the hearts of Europeans that at the end of the 10th century, the church prayer for deliverance from disasters included a request to God for deliverance “from the rage of the Normans” (“De furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine”). In the Norman land army, the main role was played by “mounted infantry,” i.e. infantry who made the transitions on horseback, which gave them a significant gain in mobility. Distinctive feature The Normans' weapons were a helmet with a pointed nose, a tight-fitting shell and a long shield extended downwards. The heavy infantry of the Normans was armed with heavy long spears, axes and the same long shields. The Normans preferred the sling as a throwing weapon.

If mainly squads of the Scandinavian nobility (the so-called “sea kings”) went on campaigns in Western Europe, then at home the distinctive feature of the Scandinavian social structure and military affairs was the preservation of the free peasantry (bonds) and the significant role of the peasant militia (especially in Norway ). The Norwegian king Hakon the Good (d. c. 960), as the saga reports, streamlined the collection of naval militia: the country was divided into ship districts as far from the sea “as the salmon rises” and it was established how many ships each district should field in the event of an invasion to country. For warning, a system of signal lights was created, which made it possible to transmit a message across the whole of Norway within a week.

Another distinctive feature of military affairs of the 10th-11th centuries is the flourishing of castle fortification. In the French lands, the construction initiative belonged to local lords who sought to strengthen their power in their possessions; in the German regions, where royal power was still strong, the king was actively engaged in the construction of fortifications during the period under review (for example, under Henry I the Birdcatcher (919-936) along the borders a whole series of fortified towns - burgs - was built in the German lands). However, it cannot be said that during this period there was a flourishing and rise in the siege skills of Western European armies - siege weapons increase quantitatively, but practically do not change qualitatively. Cities were taken either by starvation or by digging under the walls. Frontal assaults were rare, as they involved heavy losses for the attackers and were successful only in a small number of cases.

Summing up the development of the army and military affairs in the countries of Western Europe during this period, one more important feature of this process can be noted: at the time under review, active borrowing into Western military art of tactical and strategic techniques, details of armor or weapons from the military art of other peoples began, more often all - the peoples of the East. This process will acquire a much greater scope in the next period of European history - the period of the Crusades.

B) Western Europe in the XII-XIII centuries: The Crusades.

End of the 11th century in Western Europe was marked by the beginning of the Crusades, i.e. campaigns for the liberation of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. It is generally accepted that the Crusades began in 1096, when the first campaign of Christian knights began in Palestine, leading to the conquest of Jerusalem, and ended in 1291 with the loss of the city of Acre, the last crusader fortress in Palestine. The Crusades had a huge impact on the entire history of Christian medieval Europe, and their influence was especially noticeable in the military sphere.

Firstly, in the East, Christian knights faced an enemy previously unknown to them: the lightly armed Turkish cavalry calmly avoided the blow of an armored knightly armada and from a safe distance showered the Europeans with arrows from bows, and the Turkish infantry, which used crossbows in battle still unknown to Europeans, the cannonballs of which were pierced knight's armor, caused significant damage in the ranks of the Christian cavalry. Moreover, the Turks, who were inferior to the knights in one-on-one combat, outnumbered the Christians and attacked all at once, rather than one by one. Much more mobile, since their movements were not hampered by armor, they revolved around the knights, striking from different sides, and quite often achieved success. It was obvious that it was necessary to somehow adapt to new methods of combat. The evolution of the Christian army in the East, its structure, weapons, and, therefore, battle tactics followed two main paths.

On the one hand, the role of infantry and archers in military operations is increasing (the bow, undoubtedly, was known in Europe long before the Crusades, but Europeans first encountered such a massive use of this weapon in Palestine), and the crossbow is being adopted. The massive use of archers and infantry by the Turks makes such an impression that the English king Henry II even carries out a military reform in England, replacing the military service of many feudal lords with a tax levy (the so-called “shield money”) and creating a military militia of all free people obliged to join the army at the king's first call. Many knights, trying to equal the Turks in mobility, borrow light weapons from them: chain mail, a light helmet, a round cavalry shield, a light spear and a curved sword. Naturally, knights armed in this way were no longer self-sufficient, and were forced to act in active cooperation with infantry and rifle units.

On the other hand, the weapons of the overwhelming majority of knights are evolving in the direction of weighting: the size and thickness of the spear increases so that it becomes impossible to control it with a free hand - now, in order to strike, it had to be rested against the notch of the shoulder pad, the weight of the sword increases. A pot-like helmet appears in the armor, covering the entire head and leaving only a narrow slit for the eyes, the shell becomes noticeably heavier, and even more restricts the knight’s movements than before. It was with great difficulty that a horse could carry such a rider, which led to the fact that, on the one hand, the Turk with his light weapons could not cause any harm to the knight clad in iron, and on the other hand, the knight, loaded with armor, could not catch up with the Turk. With this type of weaponry, the famous knightly spear strike was impossible - each individual knight, firstly, took up too much space, and secondly, was too clumsy - and thus the battle was immediately divided into many fights in which each the knight chose his opponent and tried to fight him. This direction of weapons development became the main one for European military affairs throughout the 13th century.

Secondly, the Crusades greatly influenced the increase in group solidarity of European chivalry, which suddenly realized itself as a single army of Christ. This awareness manifested itself in several main forms, among which are the formation and widespread expansion of military monastic orders and the emergence of tournaments.

Military monastic orders were monastic-type organizations that had their own charter and residence. The orders were headed by grand masters. Members of the orders took monastic vows, but at the same time lived in peace and, moreover, fought. The Order of the Knights Templar was the first to emerge in 1118, at about the same time the Order of St. John the Knights or Hospitallers appeared, in Spain in 1158 the Order of Calatrava appeared, and in 1170 the Order of Santiago de Compostela, and in 1199 the Teutonic Order of the Swordsmen was founded. The main tasks of the orders in the Holy Land were the protection of pilgrims, the protection of most Christian fortresses, and the war with Muslims. In fact, the orders became the first regular professional armies of Christian Europe.

So, summing up the development of military affairs in Europe in the 12th-13th centuries, we can note several main trends: an increase in the role of infantry and rifle formations and the confinement of the knightly class that occurred at the same time, which was expressed, on the one hand, in the further weighting armor, which turned a single knight into a battle fortress, both in terms of menacingness and mobility, and on the other hand, in the self-organization of knighthood into military monastic orders, in the emergence of a developed system of coats of arms, the meaning of which was clear only to initiates, etc. This growing contradiction ultimately led to several major defeats inflicted on the knights by commoners (for example, at Courtrai in 1302, at Morgarten in 1315) and to a further decline in the military role of knighthood.

3. Europe in the XIV-XV centuries: autumn of the Middle Ages.

Significance of the XIV-XV centuries. for European military history it is comparable, perhaps, only with the 8th-10th centuries. Then we saw the birth of chivalry, now we see its decline. This was due to several factors, the most significant of which are the following: firstly, during this period, in most European states, single centralized monarchies emerged, replacing feudal fragmentation, which, in turn, entailed a gradual but inexorable transformation vassals as subjects, secondly, simple, ignorant people returning from the Crusades understood that chivalry was not as invincible as it seemed, they understood that a lot could be achieved through coordinated actions of the infantry, and, finally, thirdly, it was during this The period included the widespread use of firearms and, above all, artillery, from which even the best knightly armor could no longer save.

All these and some other factors were fully manifested during the longest military conflict in the history of Europe, which took place between England and France. We are talking about the Hundred Years' War of 1337-1453. The war began over the claims of the English king Edward III to the French throne.

Literally in the very first years of the war, France suffered a number of serious defeats: in the naval battle of Sluys (1346), the entire French fleet was killed, and already on land, in the Battle of Crecy (1346), the French knighthood, faced with English archers, suffered a terrible defeat. In fact, in this battle the French were shattered by their own belief in the invincibility of knightly cavalry and the inability of infantry to effectively resist it. When the battlefield was chosen, the English commander stationed his archers and dismounted knights on the hill. The dismounted knights could not move, but they stood, covering their archers with a steel wall. The French, on the contrary, threw their knights into an attack on the hill straight from the march, without allowing them to rest or line up. This led to very sad consequences for them - the arrows of English archers could not pierce the knight's armor itself, but they found a path in horse armor or in the visor of a helmet. As a result, only about a third of the French knights, wounded and exhausted, reached the top of the hill. There they were met by rested English knights with swords and battle axes. The defeat was complete.

Ten years later, at the Battle of Poitiers (1356), the French suffered another defeat. This time the victory of the British was amazing in its results - the King of France John II the Good himself was captured by them. In the midst of the battle, the vassals of the French king, seeing that their military luck had changed, chose to withdraw their troops from the battlefield, leaving the king to fight almost completely alone - only his son remained with him. This defeat once again showed that the feudal army had outlived its usefulness and could no longer adequately resist the recruited militia from ordinary people.

The situation worsened with the beginning of the active use of firearms, first as siege weapons and then as field artillery. The critical situation that had developed in France both in politics and in the field of military affairs at the beginning of the 15th century forced King Charles VII to carry out a military reform that radically changed the appearance of the French and then the European army. According to the royal ordinance issued in 1445, a regular military contingent was created in France. It was recruited from nobles and consisted of heavily armed cavalry. This cavalry was divided into detachments or companies, which consisted of “spears”. The “spear” usually included 6 people: one cavalryman armed with a spear and five auxiliary mounted warriors. In addition to this cavalry, which was called “ban” (i.e. “banner”) and was recruited from the king’s direct vassals, the contingent also included artillery units, archer units and infantry. In case of emergency, the king could convene an Aryerban, i.e. a militia from the vassals of their vassals.

According to the changes in the structure of the army, the algorithm of combat operations also changed: now, when two warring troops met, the first thing to begin was shelling, accompanied by the digging of fortifications for their guns and shelters from enemy cannonballs: “The Count of Charolais set up a camp along the river, surrounding it with carts and artillery..."; “The king’s men began to dig a trench and build a rampart out of earth and wood. Behind her they placed powerful artillery<…>Many of our people dug trenches near their houses...” Patrols were sent in all directions from the camp, sometimes reaching fifty spears, that is, three hundred people in number. In battle, the warring parties sought to reach each other's artillery positions in order to capture guns. In general, we can note that the classical war of the New Age began, a review of which is beyond the scope of this work.

Annotated bibliography

I. Publications of sources (in Russian).

Just like for the previous article in this publication, the selection of sources for this work was complicated by several circumstances. Firstly, it is extremely difficult to find at least one source on the history of the Middle Ages that does not touch on the topic of war; secondly, unlike antiquity, in the Middle Ages there were practically no works devoted specifically to military affairs or the history of any specific war (the exception is the Byzantine tradition, within the framework of which the “Wars” of Procopius of Caesarea were created, as well as works on tactics and strategy of pseudo-Mauritius, Kekavmen and others); finally, thirdly, the situation with sources on the history of the Middle Ages translated into Russian leaves much to be desired. All this together determines the fact that below is only a small selection of sources that we can recommend for reading on the topic of the article. Characteristics of the sources are given only from the point of view of military history. For more details see: Lyublinskaya A.D. Source study of the history of the Middle Ages. – L., 1955; Bibikov M.V. Historical literature of Byzantium. – St. Petersburg, 1998. - (Byzantine library).

1. Agathius of Mirinea. About the reign of Justinian / Trans. M.V. Levchenko. – M., 1996. The work of the successor of Procopius of Caesarea is devoted to a description of the wars of the commander Narses against the Goths, Vandals, Franks and Persians and contains rich information about the Byzantine military art of the second half of the 6th century. However, Agathius was not a military man and his presentation of military events sometimes suffers from inaccuracy.

2. Anna Komnena. Alexiad / Transl. from Greek Ya.N. Lyubarsky. - St. Petersburg, 1996. - (Byzantine library). Despite the rhetorical style and the author's lack of any experience in military affairs, this work remains an important source on the military history of Byzantium in the Comnenos era.

3. Vidukind of Corvey. Deeds of the Saxons. – M., 1975. The source was created in the 10th century by a monk of the Novokorveysky monastery. Information is given primarily of a political nature, wars are described briefly (in the style Veni,vidi,vici), however, there are descriptions of the weapons and military clothing of the Saxons, there is information about the principle of recruiting the Saxon army, about the presence of a navy, cavalry and siege weapons among the Saxons.

4. Villehardouin, Geoffroy de. Conquest of Constantinople / Trans., art., commentary. M.A. Zaborov. – M., 1993. – (Monuments of historical thought). Memoirs of one of the leaders of the IV Crusade. Contains data on the organization, numbers and weapons of the crusader army.

5. Greek polyorcetics. Flavius ​​Vegetius Renatus / Preface. A.V. Mishulina; comment A.A. Novikova. – St. Petersburg, 1996. – (Antique Library). For a detailed commentary on this source, see above in the bibliography for the article on the ancient army. We can only add that the work of Vegetius was the most authoritative treatise on the structure of the army for medieval thinkers - in the ideal legion of Vegetius they saw an ideal model for building a medieval knightly army.

6. Digests of Justinian. Book XLIX. Tit.XVI. About military affairs / Transl. I.I. Yakovkina // Monuments of Roman law: Laws of the XII tables. Guy's Institutions. Justinian's Digests. – M., 1997. – P.591-598. For a commentary on this source, see the bibliography for the article on the ancient army. It can be added that the military law “Digest” not only retained its relevance by the time of Justinian, but was also adopted and used later by many European legislators of the Middle Ages (for example, the king of Castile and Leon Alfonso X the Wise) when drawing up their laws.

7. Jordan. About the origin and deeds of the Getae. “Getica” / Transl., intro. Art., comment. E.Ch. Skrzhinskaya. – St. Petersburg, 1997. – (Byzantine library). – pp. 98-102. From this work, we can only recommend Jordan’s description of the famous battle on the Catalaunian fields, which became a role model for many medieval chroniclers when describing battles.

8. Clary, Robert de. Conquest of Constantinople / Trans., art., commentary. M.A. Zaborov. – M., 1986. – (Monuments of historical thought). The author is one of ordinary knights, who were in the army of the crusaders who stormed Constantinople in 1204, which explains some of the incompleteness and subjectivity of the source’s information. However, the text of the chronicle contains information about the number of knightly detachments, the cost of hiring ships to transport troops, and the structure of the knightly army.

9. Commines, Philippe de. Memoirs / Transl., art., note. Yu.P. Malinina. – M., 1986. – (Monuments of historical thought). The author is a professional military man and diplomat, first served under the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, then went over to the side of King Louis XI and became his adviser on the war with Burgundy. His work contains a lot of information necessary for research French army ser. – 2nd floor XV century, its structure, weapons, tactics and strategy.

10.Konstantin Porphyrogenitus. About managing an empire / Transl. G.G. Litavrina. – M., 1991. – (Ancient sources on the history of Eastern Europe). The work of the Byzantine emperor in 913-959. Contains numerous information on Byzantine diplomacy, military organization, relations with neighboring peoples, as well as military technology (description of Greek fire).

11.Kulakovsky Yu.A. Byzantine camp at the end of the 10th century. // Byzantine civilization in the light of Russian scientists, 1894-1927. – M., 1999. – P.189-216. Annotated publication of a very carefully written small Byzantine treatise from the 10th century. “De castrametatione” (“On setting up camp”). Equipped with diagrams of the Byzantine camp. First published: Byzantine temporary book. – T.10. – M., 1903. – P.63-90.

12.Mauritius. Tactics and strategy: Primary source op. about military art of imp. Leo the Philosopher and N. Machiavelli / Trans. from lat. Tsybysheva; preface ON THE. Geisman. – St. Petersburg, 1903. The fundamental Byzantine work on strategy at the turn of the V-VI centuries. Its attribution to Emperor Mauritius (582-602) is disputed by modern scholars. Of particular interest are the first mention of stirrups in European military literature, as well as information on the military affairs of the ancient Slavs. There is a more accessible abridged edition: Pseudo-Mauritius. Stategikon / Transl. Tsybyshev, ed. R.V. Svetlova // The Art of War: An Anthology of Military Thought. – St. Petersburg, 2000. – T.1. – P.285-378.

13.Peter from Doesburg. Chronicle of the Prussian Land / Ed. prepared IN AND. Matuzova. – M., 1997. An essay telling about the wars of the Teutonic Order in Prussia from the point of view of the crusaders. An extremely valuable source on spiritual knightly orders, superbly translated and annotated.

14. Song of the Nibelungs: epic / Trans. Yu. Korneeva; entry Art., comment. AND I. Gurevich. – St. Petersburg, 2000. The famous Old Germanic epic. From here you can glean both information regarding weapons and the strategy of the medieval army (in particular, regarding the use of reconnaissance).

15. The Song of Roland: based on the Oxford text / Trans. B.I. Yarho. – M. – L.: “Academia”, 1934. From this text you can take information about the weapons of the knights, about battle tactics (arranging ambushes, etc.), as well as about the structure of the army. There is no need to pay attention to the number of troops indicated in the “Song...”.

16. Song of Sid: Old Spanish heroic epic / Trans. B.I. Yarkho, Yu.B. Korneeva; ed. prepared A.A. Smirnov. – M.-L., 1959. – (Lit. monuments). The text of the source dates back to the middle of the 12th century and contains valuable information about the military art of the 11th-12th centuries, about the methods of waging a siege, about the number of troops (unlike the “Song of Roland”, this monument provides reliable information on this subject, confirmed by data from other sources), about the weapons and equipment of knights.

17.Procopius of Caesarea. War with the Goths: 2 vols. / Trans. S.P. Kondratieva. – M., 1996. – T.1-2.

18.Procopius of Caesarea. War with the Persians. War against vandals. Secret history / Transl., art., commentary. A.A. Chekalova. – St. Petersburg, 1998. – (Byzantine library). Procopius of Caesarea is a professional historian of the time of Emperor Justinian, who created the cycle of historical works “History of Wars”, dedicated to the wars of the Byzantine Empire under this emperor. This cycle included the above-mentioned works “War with the Goths”, “War with the Persians” and “War with the Vandals”. A characteristic feature of these works is Procopius’ deep knowledge of the subject described - he long years was the personal secretary of Justinian's greatest commander, Belisarius, and accompanied him on campaigns, and therefore had a direct opportunity to observe the progress of military operations. Procopius' descriptions of sieges of cities are especially successful (both from the point of view of the besieger and from the point of view of the besieged). The author’s information about the size and structure of the Byzantine army is confirmed by other sources, and therefore can be considered reliable.

19.Procopius of Caesarea. About buildings / Per. S.P. Kondratieva // Same. War with the Goths: In 2 volumes. – M., 1996. – Vol.2. – P.138-288. This work by Procopius contains rich information about the construction policy of Emperor Justinian, in particular about the military construction of that era. The principles of Byzantine fortification are covered in detail, and almost all the fortresses built under Justinian are named.

20.Richer of Reims. History / Transl., commentary, art. A.V. Tarasova. – M., 1997. From this work you can glean information about the armament of troops and combat techniques in the 10th-11th centuries, about the use of reconnaissance in military operations. In turn, Richer’s information about the structure of the Frankish army cannot be called trustworthy - Richer clearly borrowed the division of the army into legions and cohorts from Roman authors, and more specifically, from his beloved Sallust.

21. Saga of Sverrir / Ed. prepared M.I. Steblin-Kamensky and others - M., 1988. - (Lit. monuments). History of internecine wars in Norway in the XII-XIII centuries. Continues “The Circle of the Earth” by Snorri Sturluson (see below), contains detailed information on military affairs, which, even after the end of the Viking Age, continued to differ greatly in Norway from the rest of Western Europe.

22. Saxon mirror / Rep. ed. V.M. Koretsky. – M., 1985.

23. Salic Truth / Trans. N.P. Gratsiansky. – M., 1950. These two monuments of the written customary law of the German peoples are included in the list of sources as typical representatives of the “barbarian Truths”. From them, as a rule, it is impossible to glean real information about military affairs, but they contain information about the cost of armor and weapons, which creates an idea of ​​​​the social status of a warrior in German barbarian society.

24.Snorri Sturluson. Circle of the Earth / Ed. prepared AND I. Gurevich and others - M., 1980. - (Lit. monuments). A classic collection of sagas about “the rulers who were in the Nordic Countries and spoke the Danish language,” created in Iceland in the 1st half. XIII century The presentation is updated from ancient times to 1177. In relation to military history, it contains information about the military affairs of the Vikings, their campaigns of conquest, military tricks and weapons, and the mechanism for recruiting the Norman army.

25.Kekavmen's advice and stories. The work of a Byzantine commander of the 11th century. / Prepare text, introduction, translation, comment. G.G. Litavrina. – M., 1972. – (Monuments of the medieval history of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe). The source was written in the 1070s. Contains advice on leading an army (about a quarter of the volume), as well as everyday instructions that give an idea of ​​the Byzantine military aristocracy and, moreover, is often illustrated with examples from the field of military affairs. One of the main sources on Byzantine military history. The only manuscript is kept in the Manuscript Department of the State Historical Museum in Moscow.

II. Literature.

Below is literature on the history of the medieval army, recommended for reading. We selected only general works, which is explained by two main factors: the extraordinary abundance of works devoted to particular issues of the military art of medieval Europe published in the West, on the one hand, and the low availability for domestic readers of works on the national military histories of Western European countries, on the other. . Almost all of the works presented below have a good bibliography, allowing the reader to easily conduct further literature searches.

26.Winkler P. von. Weapons: A Guide to the History, Description and Picture of Hand Weapons from Ancient Times to the Early 19th Century. – M., 1992. A good reference book on medieval weapons, a well-chosen illustrative series, accompanied by professional commentary.

27.Gurevich A.Ya. Viking campaigns. – M., 1966. – (Popular science series of the USSR Academy of Sciences). Although this book was not written by a military historian, it contains numerous information on Viking warfare and military organization, as well as photographs of ships and weapons. The author is one of the largest domestic Scandinavists.

28.Delbrück G. History of military art within the framework of political history: In 4 volumes - St. Petersburg, 1994-1996. – T.2-3. Regarding this publication, see the annotation to it given in the previous article.

29.Dupuis R.E., Dupuis T.N. World War History: Harper's Encyclopedia of Military History. – St. Petersburg; M., 1997. – Book 1-2. This publication can be used only to obtain initial minimum information on the subject of interest. The information collected here concerns, first of all, issues of tactics of medieval armies using the example famous battles. The publication contains battle diagrams and other illustrative material.

30. History of the Crusades / Ed. D. Riley-Smith. – M., 1998. The publication is a translation into Russian of one of the best works on the history of the Crusades, prepared at Oxford University. Separately, it is necessary to note the chapters devoted to military monastic orders, which examine in detail not only the military art of the orders, but also their internal organization, place in society and politics. It must also be said that the book separately touches on the issues of supply and transportation of armies during the Crusades, which have previously been studied quite little. A distinctive feature of the book is its rich illustrative material.

31.Cardini F. The origins of medieval knighthood. – Sretensk, 2000. In this work, it seems possible to recommend for reading the second and third parts, devoted to the formation of the ideology of medieval Christian chivalry and the military art of Europeans (mainly the Franks, Byzantines and their allies) of the period VI-IX centuries, because The author's point of view on the prehistory of chivalry and, in particular, its military art, set out in the first part of the book, is very controversial and ambiguous. Unfortunately, it is also necessary to note that in the Russian translation of this book all historiographical material, scientific polemics and footnotes to sources have been removed, which, of course, deprives many of the author’s statements of a fair amount of evidence.

32.Litavrin G.G. Byzantine society and state in the X-XI centuries. – M., 1977. – P.236-259.

33.It's him. How the Byzantines lived. – St. Petersburg, 1997. – (Byzantine library). - P.120-143. Essays on military affairs in Byzantium in the central period of its history (IX-XII centuries), written by one of the largest domestic Byzantinists (the second of these two books is popular science).

34.Melville M. History of the Templar Order / Trans. from fr. G.F. Tsybulko. – St. Petersburg, 1999. – (Clio). A good study of the history of one of the most famous spiritual knightly orders.

35.Razin E.A. History of military art. – St. Petersburg, 1999. – T.2. – (Military history library). The work was done quite thoroughly, and if you do not pay attention to the numerous Soviet cliches, then you can call it one of the most complete works on the military history of the Middle Ages in Russian. The book provides rich illustrative material, of which the most interesting are diagrams of the main battles of the Middle Ages.

36.Flory J. Ideology of the sword: The background of chivalry. – St. Petersburg, 1999. – (Clio). As the title suggests, this work is devoted to the formation of the ideology of Christian chivalry and the formation of its social structure. One of best works, dedicated to the ideology of chivalry, accompanied, moreover, by a fairly complete bibliography on the military history of the Middle Ages.

37.Yakovlev V.V. History of fortresses: The evolution of long-term fortification. – St. Petersburg, 1995. – Ch. IV-XII. It is better to handle this publication with caution - a professional study of fortifications of the 9th-17th centuries. accompanied by more than dubious historical comments.

38.Beeler J. Warfare in the feudal Europe: 730 – 1200. – Ithaca (N.Y.), 1971. The work of the famous English researcher examines the military affairs of the countries of Western Europe from the Carolingian era to the heyday of military feudalism. Separate chapters are devoted to the development and characteristic features of the art of war in Norman Italy, southern France and Christian Spain. A distinctive feature of the work is the accessibility of the presentation of the material, which, however, does not affect its completeness.

39.Contamine Ph. La guerre au Moyen Age. – P., 1980; 1999. – (Nouvelle Clio: L’histoire et ses problémes). For many years now, this work has rightfully been considered a classic in the field of studying the military history of the Middle Ages. The book covers the development of the army and military art in the countries of Western Europe and in the states of the Latin East in the period V - to the XV centuries. Special attention is paid to the evolution of weapons, the emergence and development of artillery, as well as the connection between war and various aspects of the life of medieval society. An excellent scientific reference apparatus, the most important place in which is occupied by a list of sources and literature totaling more than one hundred pages, gives reason to recommend this work to everyone who wants to get acquainted with the history of military affairs of the Middle Ages.

40.Lot F. L'art militaire et les armées au Moyen Age en Europe et dans le Proche Orient: 2 vols. – P., 1946. A classic work on the history of military art, which has already gone through several editions and has not yet lost its relevance. A special place in the book is given to the comparison of the military art of Christian armies and Muslims during the Crusades.

41.Medieval warfare: A history/Ed. by Maurice Keen. – Oxford, 1999. The book is divided into two main parts, the first of which examines in chronological order the history of military affairs in Europe and the Latin East, starting from the Carolingians and ending with the Hundred Years’ War, and the second contains several chapters devoted to the consideration of individual issues: the art of siege in The Middle Ages, the armament of medieval armies, mercenaries, the navy in the Middle Ages and the emergence of gunpowder artillery and regular armies. The book is richly illustrated, equipped with chronological tables and an excellent bibliographic index.

42.Menendez Pidal R. La España del Cid: 2 vols. – Madrid, 1929. An excellent work by a Spanish philologist dedicated to Spain from the 11th to the 13th centuries. The army is considered as an integral part of Spanish medieval society, its structure, the foundations of its military art, and its weapons are shown. Contrary to the title, the work is based not only on the material from “Song of Sid”, but also on other sources.

43.Nicole D. Medieval warfare: Sourcebook: In 2 vols. – L., 1995-1996. – Vol.1-2. A generalizing summary work devoted to the military affairs of Medieval Europe, starting from the era of the Great Migration of Peoples to the beginning of the Great Geographical Discoveries. The first volume describes military affairs within Europe, the second we're talking about about the military activities of Europeans in other countries. The characteristic features of the work are, firstly, its clear structure, and secondly, the rich illustrative material (each volume contains 200 illustrations for 320 pages of text), making the book almost indispensable for studying the military history of the Middle Ages.

44.Oman C.W.C. The art of war in the Middle Ages: A.D. 378 – 1515 / Rev. ed. by J.H. Beeler. – Ithaca (N.Y.), 1963. The fifth edition of one of the most popular books on military history in Europe. Created at the end of the 19th century, it still attracts readers with its accessibility and, in the good sense of the word, popularity of its presentation. The book pays attention to the military side of the collapse of the Roman Empire, the Great Migration of Peoples, separate chapters are devoted to the military development of Byzantium in the VI-XI centuries, Switzerland in 1315-1515 and England in the XIII-XV centuries. In conclusion, the author writes about the military affairs of the states of Eastern Europe in the 15th century, including the Ottoman Porte. The book is supplied with chronological tables.

45.Prestwich M. Armies and warfare in the Middle Ages: The English experience. – New Haven; L., 1996. The book is interesting because the author specifically focuses on the role of infantry in the Middle Ages, examines in detail the problem of military communications, problems of strategy (in particular, the use of reconnaissance in the Middle Ages). One of the author’s main conclusions is also interesting - he doubts the reality of the so-called “medieval military revolution”, which led to an increase in the role of cavalry in battle, and believes that the role of infantry in the medieval army was greatly underestimated by previous historians. The book is richly illustrated.

Jordan. About the origin and deeds of the Getae. "Getica". – St. Petersburg, 1997. – P. 98-102.

Razin E.A. History of military art. – St. Petersburg, 1999. – T.2. – (Military history library). – P.137.

Winkler P. von. Weapons: a guide to the history, description and depiction of hand weapons from ancient times to the beginning of the 19th century. – M., 1992. – P. 73-74.

For more information on Martel's reform, see the chapter on the strength and weakness of the Carolingian armies in: ContaminePh. La guerre au Moyen Age. – P., 1999.

Lex Ripuaria, XXXVI, 11 // MGH LL. – T.V. – P.231. Quote By: Delbrück G. History of military art within the framework of political history. – St. Petersburg, 1994. – T.2. – P.7.

On the question of the size of the Carolingian armies, see the relevant chapters in: Delbrück G. History of military art... - Vol.2. – St. Petersburg, 1994; ContaminePh. La guerre au Moyen Age. – P., 1999; Oman C.W.C. The art of war in the Middle Ages: A.D. 378 – 1515 / Rev. ed. by J.H. Beeler. – Ithaca (N.Y.), 1963.

For more information on the development of artillery, see the relevant chapters in: ContaminePh. La guerre au Moyen Age. – P., 1999; Medieval warfare: A history / Ed. by Maurice Keen. – Oxford, 1999.

Humanity has been obsessed with wars since ancient times. From the bloody mud of the Colosseum to the sacrificial murders of the Aztec land, it would be quite difficult to find a culture, even in modern times, that was not involved in warfare in some way.

Admit it, this list caught your eye, didn’t it? That's okay, because right now we're going to introduce you to the 25 most fearless and deadliest warriors in human history!

25. Gladiators

"Sword bearers" translated from Latin language, most of these Roman warriors were slaves and survived not only by fighting each other, but also by engaging in combat with wild animals and convicted criminals in huge arenas.

Rarely did any of these warriors, whose fate was decided by the assembled crowd of spectators, survive more than 10 battles and live longer than 30 years.

24. Apache

Known for their bravery and ferocity in battle, Apache warriors were undoubtedly a force to be reckoned with. By the time the Apaches surrendered to the United States in 1886, only about 50 warriors remained, including their fearless leader, the now famous Geronimo.

23. Vikings


The Vikings were terrifying, especially to their European neighbors, because they were very aggressive and used unconventional fighting styles, particularly the use of battle axes.

22. French Musketeers


Combining chic with real lethality, the Musketeers were a group of elite bodyguards for the King of France. Capable of both piercing an enemy at close range and killing from afar, they did their job, and did it well.

21. Spartans

As the Greek historian Thucydides once wrote, when a Spartan went to war, his wife gave him his shield and said: “With the shield or on the shield.”

Trained from the age of 7, boys were taken from their mothers and sent to military training camps. There they faced a number of difficulties, including a lack of food and clothing, which often forced them to turn to the path of thieves. If they were caught, they were severely punished - however, not for theft, but for the fact that they were caught.

20. Medieval knights


The equivalent of a modern tank, the medieval knight was covered in armor and could sneak through enemy lines with ease. However, not everyone could achieve the status of knight, and it was often quite expensive to hold a knighthood. A good war horse could cost as much as a small plane.

19. Russian special forces

Short for "special forces", very little is known about these warriors due to the extreme secrecy of their training and operations. However, they managed to build a formidable reputation for themselves as one of the most elite special forces units in the world.

18. French Foreign Legion

Founded in 1831, the French Foreign Legion is a unit that allows foreign mercenaries to enlist and fight for French interests around the world.

Having achieved its reputation in pop culture as a place where wronged men go to serve in order to start their lives anew, it is in fact an elite fighting force whose members are repeatedly recruited by other armies.

17. Ming Warriors

As one of the first military men to use gunpowder in their ranks, the Ming warriors were a formidable force to be reckoned with and managed to expand the borders of China.

They were not only ruthless, but also very effective warriors, since each division of the Ming army had to support itself and produce its own food.

16. Mongol horsemen


The Mongols had only one mission they were focused on - destruction. Their ruthless mentality led them to conquer more of the world than any other empire in human history. And this is not just because they were skilled riders - they could pierce the enemy’s heart with an arrow while galloping.

15. "Immortals"

According to Herodotus, the "Immortals" were a group of heavy infantry, consisting of 10,000 of the strongest... always. It didn't matter how many of them you killed. As soon as one died, another took his place. Ten thousand - no more, no less. This is how they supposedly got their name. They just seemed to never die.

14. US Army Rangers

Dating back to the days of the colonial army, when American generals combined European technology with Indian warfare tactics, the Rangers are well known for their fearlessness as the world's first light infantry strike force.

13. Rajputs

The word Rajput literally means "son of the king" (or "son of the raj"), so you couldn't just wake up one day and decide to become a Rajput warrior - they had to be born.

These legendary harbingers of death are still active in the Indian Army. It is speculated that their prowess is due to the fact that their homeland, Rajasthan, was located right on the Indian border, making them the first line of defense against enemy invaders.

12. Comanche

As Jay Redhawk, a Comanche Indian, once said, “We are warriors from birth.” Having an almost legendary status, they are often referred to as the "Lords of the Plains". In fact, it is rumored that Comanches could shoot arrows at their enemy while hanging from the neck of their horse.

11. Centurions

The concept of centurions was revolutionary for its time, as it was the first time in history that a person could lead a legitimate life based entirely on warfare and killing. Although in order to earn such a position, a Roman soldier must work his way up the career ladder of the most powerful military force on the planet and prove that there is no one better.

10. Zande Warriors

The Zande were a tribe that struck fear throughout Central Africa with their brutality on the battlefield. They could even polish their teeth to make their appearance even more terrifying; they constantly repeated “yum-yum,” which is why neighboring tribes gave them the nickname “great eaters.”

9. Israeli commandos


Charged with defending one of the smallest nations on the planet from almost every military force within thousands of miles, the Israel Defense Force has no choice - it just has to be good.

Naturally, the best of the best emerge from among the best. Known as Sayret or Commandos for short, this elite group of fighters never rests when engaging the enemy.

8. Aztec Warriors

The Aztecs had two targets to attack. Firstly, they needed land to collect tribute, and secondly, they needed captives to sacrifice during religious ceremonies.

War was such an integral part of their culture that when a new leader was elected, he had to immediately organize military campaign to prove your strength.

7. Maori warriors

With a reputation for eating their enemies to earn their "Mana", their respect, the Maori were fierce warriors who would perform a "Peruperu", or war dance, before attacking their enemies to intimidate them and provide insight into the carnage that followed.

6. Samurai

These Japanese swordsmen lived their lives according to the code of Bushido, which means "the way of the warrior." Although their image has been romanticized in recent years, they were strongly bound by honor.

One notable result of this was seppuku (better known as harakiki), a form of ritual murder in which a warrior rips open his own abdomen to restore his honor.

5. "Green Berets"

Members of the U.S. Army Special Forces, Green Berets are experts in unconventional warfare. As dangerous as they are on the battlefield, they must also be very smart.

Depending on their assignment, they must be fluent in a specific foreign language, which they learn over several months while undergoing military training.

4. Ninja

These secret agents of feudal Japan specialized in the unorthodox art of war. Often their "anything goes" mentality was contrasted with the samurai, who followed a strict code of honor and combat. At their core, being spies,

At the intersection of antiquity and the Middle Ages, the main concern of man, as before, was the protection of his life. Over time, the process of metal processing developed and various crafts improved, as a result of which newer and more modern types of weapons began to be invented, and with it improved protective equipment appeared. One of the most used and famous at the beginning of the Middle Ages was the medieval bladed weapon. These were considered daggers, swords, and bows. There was also specialized protection in the form of a shield and armor.

Protective equipment in the Middle Ages

It is generally accepted that the Celts first invented chain mail armor back in 500 BC. Gradually, as a result of the victorious movement of the Celtic army across the expanses of Europe, this armor appeared in all settlements of the medieval continent. Over time, this type of protective armor was significantly improved - metal plates were added to its design, which protected the owner from slashing and sliding blows. This is where plate armor originated.

However, even with the urgent need for protection from enemy weapons, not all warriors living in the Middle Ages could afford to have medieval protective equipment. Rich residents of those times ordered individual armor that was made exclusively for them. Ordinary soldiers purchased ready-made equipment and then adjusted it to their parameters.

It should be noted that high-quality armor could protect against damage from swords, arrows, and, sometimes, from initial types of firearms in almost one hundred percent of cases. If we talk about the practicality of protective equipment, they began to learn to wear it in their youth, since the mass of such armor was more than 30 kg.

Types of medieval weapons

The basic weapon of a warrior in the Middle Ages was, as before, a sword. These medieval weapons were presented in a huge number of types. The sword could be sharp on both sides, with one blade, with a sharp or flat end, have a ribbed or rounded shape, and of different lengths. What weapon to use depended on what combat tactics the commander chose, as well as on the specific skills of the soldiers.

However, even though there were many types of bladed weapons in the form of swords in those distant times, they all had common details that distinguished these weapons from others. These features were the pommel and knob, as well as the crosspiece and hilt

Even such wide popularity of the sword did not make it possible for every warrior to have it. They were used only by wealthy people, because the method of its implementation was too complex, required a lot of time, effort and human labor, and therefore was very expensive. Also to the common man It was not allowed to carry these weapons at all. It should also be noted that in the Middle Ages, weapons such as a combat sword, which was intended for combat, became a true symbol of the valor and bravery of a warrior.

Along with the sword, other weapons were used - throwing and striking. Siege weapons developed alongside construction technologies. As a result of the invention of gunpowder by the Chinese in the 14th century, the new kind, which is called a firearm.

This discovery made a colossal revolution in the conduct of combat operations, which received completely new techniques.

War was a 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 wars were protracted and mostly came down to the devastation of enemy areas or to long sieges. Wars in general, as a rule, they did not provide a solution to the controversial issues that caused them, and military force served only as one of the arguments in the negotiations.

Big battles were very rare. During Charlemagne's wars with the Saxons, which lasted more than 30 years (772-804), there were only two battles; his campaigns in Italy (773 and 774) and against Duke Thassilon of Bavaria (778) ended without any battles at all .Major battles were viewed as “God’s judgment,” and therefore defeat was understood as the condemnation of the wrong and led to the end of the war.

Conscious strategy and tactics did not exist in the Middle Ages. Writings on the topic of organization and tactics had little relation to reality. The authors either accurately retell Vegetius, or state something that has absolutely nothing to do with reality at all. The Treatise on War, compiled around 1260 by order of King Alfonso X the Wise of Castile, states without any irony that infantrymen should have their legs tied before battle so that they cannot flee from the battlefield; then, however, they will be unable to pursue the enemy, but this will only demonstrate contempt for him. The teacher of the King of France Philip IV the Fair, a student of Thomas Aquinas, a prominent church figure, Egidio Colonna, in his treatise “On the Principles of Government” (late 13th century) addressed to his royal student, seriously describes the “round” and “triangular” formation of the legions. Characteristic of the Roman army formation in dense groups was revived again only in modern times. The barbarian troops fought not in formation, but as a gang. The “wedge” formation, repeatedly mentioned in medieval sources, also called the “boar’s head”, “pig”, dates back to barbarian times and does not carry any tactical intent: the leader is in front of the detachment, a little behind him are his close comrades, then - the rest of the warriors. The appearance of heavy cavalry does not change the tactical principles at all. The description of the wedge-shaped formation of knights riding so closely 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 line, and the outcome of the duel would decide the matter. In reality, the fights that were 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 town of Ploermel in Brittany, the converging French and English detachments selected 30 people from among themselves, whose fight, which took place according to stricter 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 was preserved until the beginning of the 17th century. If you believe the text of the 12th century, the last Anglo-Saxon king of England, Harold, was on the eve of the fatal Battle of Hastings for the Saxons (1066) refused to his opponent Duke of Normandy Guillaume the Illegitimate (who soon became King of England William the Conqueror) in the decisive duel, saying that the fate of the country cannot be made dependent on the accidents of a fight between 2 people. In XVIII. the French leader rejected the proposal of the English commander-in-chief to allocate 12 people from each army so that their fight would decide the issue of supremacy, saying: “We came to drive you out of here, and that’s enough for us.” Then the French military leader Jean de Buey forbade one of his subordinates to participate in the duel before the fight, adding that the combatant “desires to cause damage to the enemy, namely, to take away his honor, in order to ascribe to himself empty glory, which is worth little, but in fact neglects the service of the king and the public good (bien public).

The battle began with an attack by heavily armed horsemen, during which the marching formation crumbled, turning into a disorderly chain of cavalry, galloping at a not very fast gait; The battle ended with the same attack. The reserve, which was rarely used, was used to direct it to the most dangerous places in the battle, to places where the enemy was pressing 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 stratagem unworthy of a knight.

Controlling the battle was almost impossible. The knight's armor included a blind helmet, the slot in which (or in its visor) gave very little visibility, its design did not allow turning the head, so the knight saw only the one who was in front of him, and the battle turned into a series of duels. A blind helmet made it impossible to hear commands, cavalry vaulting, i.e. training horses and riders to stay in line during an attack arose only in modern times. In addition, it is more than difficult to control a barbarian warrior in the ecstasy of battle, or a knight fighting for personal glory. The only command that Roland gives in “The Song of Roland” is “Gentlemen Barons, slow down!”

Each strove to be the first to fight the enemy, not paying attention to the fact that by exposing himself, as befits a knight, to increased danger, he weakened the chain of horsemen as far as it could exist. The right to begin the battle was a privilege first attested in Germany in 1075, where was assigned to a certain clan, and in the Holy Land during the era of the Crusades in 1119, under which the chronicler mentions a special detachment of St. Peter, which had such a right.

The knightly army is a collection of individuals, where everyone has given a personal oath of allegiance to the military leader, and not a structure welded together by discipline. The goal of the knight is an individual fight in the name of honor and glory and to obtain a ransom, and not the victory of his army. The knight fights without regard for his comrades and commander. At the Battle of Poitiers (1356), two French commanders argued about the right to start the battle and rushed to the attack without waiting for the royal order, without coordination with others and interfering with each other. The British counterattack led to their retreat, and they were faced with the continuing advance of their troops, which caused confusion and panic, which turned into a rapid flight, including those who did not even join the battle. Sometimes the victors were so carried away by plundering the enemy convoy that they allowed the enemy to 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

The battle ended with flight, which marked the defeat of the enemy; long pursuit was very rare, and a symbol of victory was spending the night at the battle site. As a rule, there were few killed. Heavy weapons protected the knight well, and the purpose of the battle, as noted, was to capture the enemy, and not to kill him.

In the Battle of Buvin, only two knights died, but either 130 or 300 noble captives were captured.

In the descriptions of the battles, most of the talk was about the knights, although, as can be seen from the calculations, other combatants took part in them. However, until the end of the Middle Ages, it was the heavily armed cavalry that formed the basis of the army, it was they who determined the nature of the battle, and only the knighthood was considered the “fighting” class (bellatores). Among the fighters there were also lightly armed horsemen of ignoble origin, servants of knights or ignoble captives (in France they were called sergeants). It was believed that war was an activity exclusively for the noble, therefore the opportunity to engage in battle with a commoner was rejected with contempt.

When the sergeants-sergeants of the Abbey of Saint-Denis began the Battle of Bouvines, their opponents - the Flemish knights - considered this an insult and mercilessly killed horses and riders. Heavy weapons, as noted, were expensive, so the fighting non-knights, who did not have sufficient income, were easily vulnerable in battle. Their main weapons were weapons 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 prohibited by the Church in battles between Christians - another example of the combination of Christian and knightly ethics. However, by the end of the 13th century. this weapon began to be widely used, especially by the British, who used it initially in wars in Wales and Scotland, where the hilly or mountainous terrain did not leave room for large horse battles. The dispute between the fighting qualities of the bow and crossbow continued throughout the Middle Ages (bow was faster-firing, the crossbow was longer-range) and did not come to a resolution. In any case, in the battles of Crecy and Agincourt (1415), English archers proved their superiority over French crossbowmen, and it was the powerful flow of English arrows that caused the attacks of the French knights to choke in both battles and enabled the British to successfully counterattack.
The foot soldiers were the servants of the knights, they helped them mount their horses if they were knocked to the ground, they guarded the camp and the convoy. One of the forms of infantry participation was that the foot soldiers used sharpened hooks to pull the knights off their horses and kill or capture them. This was first recorded in 1126 in Palestine, but soon appeared in Europe. A chronicler telling about the Battle of Buvin, a witness to this battle, considers the weapon used - a hook - as “unworthy” and says that it can only be used by supporters of evil , followers of the devil, because it violates the hierarchy and allows the commoner to be thrown down - down! - a noble horseman. The main function of foot soldiers was to create a formation bristling with spears, tightly closed, from the ranks of a relatively wide formation, sometimes in the shape of a square, behind which or inside which retreating knights could hide from pursuit. At 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 northern Italian cities, on the other, the Milanese infantry, after the flight of their horsemen, held off the attack of the German knights until the fugitives regrouped, again attacked the German knights and defeated them. Until the 14th century. nevertheless, the infantry performed only defensive functions.

On June 11, 1302, the first battle in the Middle Ages took place, where the attacking infantry played the main role. The foot militia of the Flemish cities - 13 thousand people - won the Battle of Courtrai against 5-7 thousand French knights, quickly attacking them when they crossed the stream and climbed the clay bank - i.e. in violation of all the rules of knightly combat. However, a two-time attempt by the Flemings to repeat a similar success - in 1328 under Kassel and in 1382 under Roosebeek - was unsuccessful, and the knights defeated the infantrymen. The spread of infantry in the XIV-XV centuries. is explained by the transition from knightly wars to national-state wars mentioned above. The centralized state needed significant armed forces, not excessively expensive and more or less controllable. Infantry required less expense than cavalry, commoners were more accustomed to submission than nobles, and less obsessed with the thirst for glory. The foot army could gather in dense ranks, it was easier to control the mass of people, and this gave an advantage over the better armed, but uncontrollable cavalry. Knightly combat (not tournament) weapons were, contrary to general opinion, not so heavy (12-16 kg; for comparison: the full equipment of a modern special forces soldier is 24 kg), so that it is impossible to fight on foot. The knights first fought dismounted in the battle between the English and the Scots at Northallerton in 1.138; The English knights repulsed the attack of their northern neighbors, but did not launch a counteroffensive. At the Battle of Crecy, the English king Edward III forced his knights to dismount and distributed them among the archers. This measure had not so much a tactical as a psychological significance. The infantrymen were afraid to let the enemy's cavalry get close to them, because, having encountered it, they could neither defend nor flee; the defeated knights relied on the speed of their horses, that is, the noble ones abandoned the commoners to their fate. By placing knights between the foot riflemen, 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 commoners, 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 army ban was convened, which included vassals (arrier-vassals). In some places, especially in England, the principle of a general militia was preserved, by virtue of which Every free person, even if ignoble, was required, in accordance with his income, to possess certain weapons and to come 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 century the basis of the army were vassals, but already at the end of the 11th - beginning of the 12th century. Mercenaries appear. In accordance with the vassal agreement, the vassals had to serve the overlord on campaigns only a certain number of days a year, and if the time of hostilities expired, the overlord had to support the vassal and pay for his military services. Here was already the germ of mercenaryism, although the warring vassal , unlike the later mercenary, bound by a contract, may not have agreed to such an extension of service. In the 12th century, mercenary detachments appeared, formed by their commanders. The creation of a military force directly subordinate to the sovereign caused discontent among influential social groups, and, for example, the English Magna Carta (1215) prohibited mercenarism, but in general such opposition was unsuccessful. Early (XII-XIII centuries) mercenaryism was not considered shameful if the mercenary was a person of noble birth. It was quite consistent with the norms of knightly honor, and, moreover, it was considered quite honorable for a situation in which a poor knight, in search of glory and food, entered the service of a large lord. Payment was considered as a gift from the master to his comrade-in-arms, although since 1108 we have known of mercenary agreements , where the remuneration is clearly stated. The craft of the mercenary became condemned only in the late Middle Ages, when the number of ignoble among the mercenaries increased, when in general the border between the noble and the ignoble in the army was erased. People who lived exclusively by 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 declared that they would fight in the name of glory). The best warrior of the losing English side (the election of the most valiant separately among the winners and losers was typical for tournaments) was declared to be the commoner Crokar ( this may not even be a name, but a nickname), a former household servant, and the king of France offered him 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 for 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 the Italian condotta “agreement”) and subordination to the commander was assumed by the very fact of admission for service. For the first time such an army arose in France after, in 1439, the States General established a permanent tax intended to maintain such an army. This ARMY, created in 1445, was a heavily armed cavalry, mainly from nobles, 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”). Formally, the ban and arrière-ban were not abolished, but they lost all meaning. In 1448, the Dauphin Louis first tried to organize something like a conscription system in his domain, and in 1461, when he became King Louis XI of France, he extended this principle to the entire country. One person per 80 families from non-noble groups of the population was conscripted. At first, the mandatory weapons of the peasants were bows and arrows, then they became more varied - pikes, halberds, and firearms. The recruits retained the name “free shooters” due to the original weapons and due to the fact that the state exempted their families from paying taxes. However, they were combat-ready. , in this way it was not possible to create, and in 1480 the king disbanded them. Real armies from recruits arose only in modern times.

In modern times, the modern division of the army into formations, units and subunits was also realized - detachments of soldiers of equal size, led by officers, and into branches of the military. In the Middle Ages, the branches of the army - cavalry, riflemen - turned out to be such not according to the organizational, but according to the functional, during the campaign, principle of division. The division of large detachments into units - the so-called “spears” (Iances), approximately 10 people each - occurred in the 11th century. among mercenaries.

The composition of these initial "COPIES" is unknown, but it can be assumed that it was not too different from the composition of the later "copies" created by the standing troops. The French "gendarmes" were divided into companies, or "companies", of approximately 60 people, and those into 10 "spears" of 6 people each. The "spear" included: 1 heavily armed cavalry, 1 lightly armed, 3 riflemen equipped with transport horses, a page .sometimes, instead of one of the shooters, a servant. In 1471, the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, made, like his overlord and main opponent, King Louis XI of France, but less successfully than him, an attempt to create a permanent army. It was very small, only 1000 people, divided the axis into 4 “squadrons”, a “squadron” into 4 “chambers”, a “chamber” into 6 “spears” of 10 people each; in addition, each “squadron” had one additional “spear” of its commander. The “spear” included: 1 heavily armed cavalry, 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 the heavily armed cavalry was not its commander, like a modern officer. Homme d'arme is the main fighter, and the remaining members of the “spear” are auxiliary.

There is information that at the Battle of Crecy the British used 6 cannons in a salvo, which caused panic among the French. If this is true, then the impact was purely psychological; nothing is reported about the dead. Hand-held firearms - arquebuses - were first mentioned in 1347, and by the end of the XVI century. 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 sociocultural: 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, which was besieged for more than six months in 1428-1429. those killed and wounded by the cannonballs were no more than 50 people out of 5-6 thousand, the garrison and about 30 thousand of the city’s population. The situation changed only at the turn of the 15-16th centuries. with the advent of field artillery. As for hand-held firearms, they completely replaced cold weapons - the pike, the bayonet. sword, saber - only in the twentieth century.