The knight’s most prized possession was the warhorse, which could cost as much as £300. By contrast, an archer could be fully equipped for about 4 percent of that cost. The equipment of an English knight, by one figure, was worth about 32 Anglo-Saxon pounds by the mid-13th century, about 10 years’ worth of wages for an archer. By the time of the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, knights constituted only about 8 percent of English heavy cavalry.īecause of their elaborate armor, weapons, and powerful horses, knights were incredibly expensive. These men could serve as long as they were paid and were also more experienced and disciplined than knights. In particular, the practice of hiring men-at-arms-mercenaries who had all of the equipment of a knight but were not necessarily nobles-became increasingly widespread. By the Hundred Years’ War, the English army was composed almost entirely of paid men. These limitations were a major reason for the rapid development of infantry tactics in the 14th century as well as the increased use of mercenaries, particularly in England. In 13th-century England, for example, it is estimated that 80 percent of the country’s 5,000 knights chose to pay scutage instead of going to war. Worse yet, knights could refuse service altogether and instead pay a fee called scutage. This was a major limiting factor for both how long, and to what geographical extent, war could be conducted. While the specifics varied from country to country and over time, the feudal obligation of knights only required them to provide military service for about 40 days per year. A great example of these logistical burdens comes from the Crusades, where one of the leading causes of death for knights was actually lack of fodder and water for their horses, rather than combat. The horses’ need to graze further restricted the speed of an army’s movement and made warfare a difficult proposition in winter or in arid climates. As a result, medieval armies had to feed not only the knight himself, but also his horses and retinue. To make matters worse, knights took at least two horses with them-a riding horse and a warhorse, which was used exclusively for battle. At the very least, he brought a squire, who would carry his armor and tend to his horse but wouldn’t participate in combat. For starters, a knight never went to war alone. Logistically speaking, knights were a huge burden. Without centralized control, it was difficult for feudal rulers to marshal enough resources and authority to carry out large-scale military campaigns. If there was one factor that greatly limited the destructive nature of war in the Middle Ages, it was logistics-the supplying, housing, and movement of armies. Below are 10 reasons why knights made absolutely terrible warriors. What many don’t realize, however, is that knights weren’t actually all that great as a fighting force. They played a key role in the society and warfare of the Middle Ages, and their ideals of chivalry survive to this very day. The knights of medieval Europe are among the most recognized warriors of human history.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |