"He shot His arrows and scattered them …"
(Psalms 17:15)
Of course, the knights were aware of the power of the bow. There were projects to prohibit the use of bows and crossbows on the battlefield. In 1215, crossbowmen, along with mercenary soldiers and surgeons, were recognized as the most "bloody" warriors. These prohibitions had no practical impact on the use of archers in battle, but a prejudice was born in the minds of the professional military elite that the bow was not a suitable weapon for the defense of honor.
Battle of Beit Khanum. From the "Big Chronicle" by Matthew Paris. Around 1240 - 1253 (Parker Library, Body of Christ College, Cambridge). The retreating under the arrows of the eastern archers and the captive knights-crusaders are the best evidence of the effectiveness of the eastern bow!
Fortunately, the bulk of the Western knights in their countless wars have dealt with opponents armed just like themselves. But for those who fought in Palestine, such a chivalrous prejudice was of fundamental importance. Beginning in the 12th century, Saracen archers began to be hired in the Holy Land and throughout the Mediterranean, such mercenaries were called turcopols, and Frederick II used them many times in Italian campaigns. In the Mediterranean, the skillful skills of archers and crossbowmen took shape by the late Middle Ages, so that archers became the main contingent in most western armies.
Archers in miniature from the "Bible of Matsievsky". Pierpont Morgan Library.
However, they did not shoot from the saddle. They dismounted as soon as they arrived on the battlefield. Their horses provided mobility during the march and gave them the opportunity to pursue a fleeing enemy, but no one expected from them equestrian archery, that is, the tactics of the infidels. Therefore, despite the hiring of Saracen archers, it can be seen that the general prejudice of the knightly class against equestrian shooting dictated tactics even to the socially lower strata, who, of course, were not placed in such difficult conditions. Due to the lack of interest shown by the knights in bows, the skill of equestrian shooting in the West never reached such heights as in the East. It also deprived Western armies of the tactics of hitting heavy horse archers, i.e. warriors, dressed in armor and using first a bow, and then a spear and sword.
Mongolian bow and arrow. When idle, the bow bends in the opposite direction. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
Only a few exceptions to this rule have only reinforced the view that it is dishonorable for a professional equestrian warrior, especially one of the knightly class, to wear a bow. In the VI century. Chronicle of the Franks Gregory of Tours mentions Count Ludasta, who wore a quiver over chain mail. By all other indications, the count was a member of the military elite of the Franks: he had a helmet, armor and, no doubt, he rode a horse. But he also wore a bow. Perhaps this detail was added to show that he was "parvenue". He quickly rose from cook and groom to count and therefore did not possess the decency of a true noble warrior. He was accused by the historian of spreading rumors that the queen was having an intrigue with the bishop.
Stone arrowhead. The era of the late Paleolithic.
In the Middle Ages, knights with a bow were a literary and artistic device, symbolizing cowardice and ignorance, out of any real connection with what was happening.
Siege of Avignon. Miniature from the Chronicle of Saint Denis. Around 1332 -1350 (British Library). Artist Cambrai Missal. Attention is drawn to the great similarity of this miniature with the Assyrian reliefs, where a frequent plot is the siege of the fortress and the archers who fire at it.
In a letter to the Abbot Furland, Emperor Charlemagne advised him to support his army with horsemen equipped with a shield, spear, sword, dagger and bow and arrow. Such a precedent did not convince anyone, and it was considered part of the general revival of Roman culture promoted by the retinue of Charlemagne. The next proof that the Carolingians had horse archers is an illustration in the Golden Psalter of the 9th century. On one of her miniatures, among a detachment of spear-horsemen of the Carolingian army, attacking the city, one heavily armed warrior is shown in a typical chain mail, in a helmet and with a bow in his hands. But on the battlefield, judging by the late medieval manuscripts, equestrian archery for noble warriors becomes possible only if they participate in the hunt. In the Queen Mary's psalter, kept in the British Museum, there is a detail showing the king shooting a grotesque creature from the back of a horse. It is possible that such horse shooting was appropriate in such a case. It was a world separated from battle, since it was not people who were killed, but animals. But it is possible that both of these details were based on figures from oriental manuscripts, used as a curious artistic device.
The ultimate origin of the noble Germanic prejudice can be traced back to the Celtic art of horse archery. This was the influence of the Greek battle. In a play written by Euripides in the 5th century BC, one of the heroes denigrated the valor of Hercules: “He never wore a shield or a spear. He used the bow, the coward's weapon, to strike and run. Bows don't make heroes. A real man is only one who is strong in spirit and dares to stand against the spear. " Hercules' father says in his defense: “A person skilled in archery can send a hail of arrows and keep something else in reserve. He can keep his distance so that the enemy never sees him, only his arrows. He never exposes himself to the enemy. This is the first rule of war - to harm the enemy, and as much as possible, and at the same time remain unharmed. " That is, such an opinion existed among the Greeks even then, and they also belonged to the peoples of lukophobes. The Romans also considered the bow to be an insidious and childish weapon and did not use it themselves, but hired (if necessary) detachments of archers in the East.
Tim Newark cites the words of Xenophon that "for inflicting the greatest harm on the enemy, the saber (the famous Greek copy) is better than the sword, because using the position of the rider to deliver a chopping blow with the Persian saber is more effective than with the sword." Instead of a spear with a long shaft, which is awkward to handle, Xenophon recommended two Persian darts. A warrior armed with them can throw one dart and use another in close combat. “We recommend,” he wrote, “to throw the dart as far as possible. This gives the warrior more time to turn the horse around and draw another dart."
European pavise of the 15th century crossbowman from the Glenbow Museum.
Javelin throwing is becoming a common battle tactic of all pre-Christian western mounted warriors, including the early Romans, Celts, and Germans. In early medieval Europe, horse-drawn warriors throwing spears are encountered right up to the Battle of Hastings. The Bayeux Tapestry shows several Norman knights throwing their spears at the Anglo-Saxons, while the rest left their spears for close combat. The archers on the tapestry are practically all infantrymen and, in addition, are depicted on the border, that is, outside the main field.
Battle of Crecy. The famous miniature from the Chronicle by Jean Froissard. (National Library of France)
The appearance of the stirrup in Western Europe marked a turning point in the history of cavalry. But the stirrup at first did not change the course of the equestrian battle. The transition from javelin throwing to possession took centuries, and in this, again, the prejudice against everything new, rather than the introduction of the stirrup, played a big role. Even when other long-range throwing weapons were invented, the prejudice against the bow as "the most cruel and cowardly weapon" continued to persist, which is why knights and noble warriors refused to use it. Such was the influence of this purely aristocratic prejudice, born of the German military democracy in time immemorial. He determined the nature of the conduct of the battle for a whole thousand years - the most remarkable case of social pretentiousness, outweighing any military logic, believes T. Newark [3].
Barbut - helmet of crossbowmen and archers 1470 Brescia. Weight 2, 21 kg. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
The validity of these views of the English historian seems to be quite obvious, especially in their comparison with the technique of combat and the nature of protective weapons among the peoples of the East, where excessively heavy, all-metal armor never existed precisely because the bow remained the main weapon of battle throughout the Middle Ages. This is especially clearly seen on the example of samurai and ashigaru in Japan, about which Stephen Turnbull constantly writes, and where the concepts of "shooting a bow" and "fighting" have always been identical!
Hugh de Beauves flees from the Battle of Bouvin (1214). "Big Chronicle" by Matthew of Paris., C. 1250 (Parker Library, Body of Christ College, Cambridge). It is believed to be an evil satire on this cowardly knight. After all, none of the characters depicted in this miniature has a quiver with arrows!
The British historian D. Nicole, who also paid a lot of attention to this issue, wrote about the coincidence in the tactics of battle among the Mongols and the horsemen of the Baltic peoples of the 13th century, who used darts for throwing at a gallop. Attacking, throwing darts at the enemy and then feigningly retreat - these are the methods of attack of the Estonians, Lithuanians and Balts, due to which they also used the saddles of the corresponding model [4].
So it is in the field of the use of percussion and throwing weapons that lies the "watershed" that today, in the opinion of most British historians, determines the nature of the development of defensive weapons throughout Eurasia.
The works of English-speaking researchers also confirm the fact that it was plate armor that was the most ancient and widespread. But chain mail - and in this they agree with the opinion of the Italian historian F. Cardini, is the result of the development of ritual vestments of ancient shamans, magicians and sorcerers who sewed metal rings on clothes to protect them from evil spirits and intertwined them with each other in order to enhance the effectiveness of this magical ringed protection. Subsequently, warriors fighting on horseback and not using bows and arrows appreciated its flexibility, which made the chain mail comfortable to wear, while horse archers (and primarily nomads) had to think about how to protect themselves from arrows fired from a powerful bow from a long distance. Where, how and why this division occurred, the very historical point of the above "watershed" is unknown to us today, but this does not mean that it does not indicate the object of the search for ancient artifacts. Perhaps these will be finds of cult burials with a large number of metal rings, both connected to each other and sewn in rows on the skin. In the presence of bone or stone arrowheads in the same burials, which, however, can be considered an exceptional success, the conclusion will be obvious that such protection at that time was very reliable, and this could just give rise to confidence in the extremely high protective capabilities of chain mail … Plates sewn onto a leather or fabric base were more accessible, common, one might even say “traditional”. Because of this, they were used exactly where they were really required, then, as chain mail personified not only physical, but also magical protection, even if in the Middle Ages they did not remember this anymore.
A completely unique miniature, and the only one of its kind (!), Which depicts a knight shooting a bow from a horse, and having a quiver at the same time. That is, this is really a horse archer, which is completely atypical for a Western European knight! What made him do this and, most importantly, why it was reflected in this miniature, is unknown. Interestingly, this miniature also belongs to the Colmariens Chronicle of 1298 (British Library). That is, both the sea battle and this knight were drawn by the same artist. And who knows what was on his mind? Indeed, in other manuscripts on miniatures of other artists, including the same time, we will not see anything like this. That is, it belongs to the category of single sources!
In fact, knightly armor was preserved for the longest time precisely where the development of society was slow in comparison with the rapid progress of market relations in Europe. For example, in North Africa and Tibet, where armor was worn even in 1936. So, in the Caucasus, we have steel helmets, elbow pads, chain mail and shields - i.e. “White” and noble weapons were used by the Imperial Convoy of the Russian Tsar from the mountain peoples until the middle of the 19th century, that is, almost as long as in Japan.
French bascinet 1410 Weight 2891, 2 g. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.
It can be concluded that this typology, based on the division of cultures on the basis of recognizing the bow as a worthy weapon, also has the right to its presence among the numerous cultural typifications, and its use allows us to take a fresh look at many phenomena in the culture of past centuries. After all, the same hatred of Western knights for their eastern opponents, practically in the same knightly armament, was, as we can see, based not only on differences in faith. Eastern horsemen, who saw nothing shameful in using a bow against their peers, looked in the eyes of Western European knights as immoral people who violated the customs of knightly war and therefore unworthy of a chivalrous attitude! Even more hatred, however, in their eyes deserved those who were not directly a "warrior of the East", but used a bow and arrows on a par with ordinary knightly weapons, that is, they borrowed all the best both here and there, and, therefore, were higher traditional knightly prejudices. So from this, it would seem, a purely technical aspect, there is also a difference in the forms of thinking, which is also fundamentally important for improving the typology of cultures in all their specific diversity.
1. Jaspers K. The origins of history and its purpose // Jaspers K. The meaning and purpose of history, 1991. P.53.
2. Shpakovsky V. O. The history of knightly weapons. M., Lomonosov, 2013. S. 8.
3. Newark T. Why knights never used bows (Horse Archery in Western Europe) // Military illustrated. 1995. No. 81, February. PP. 36-39.
4. Nicolle D. Raiders of the Ice War. Medieval Warfare Teutonic Knights ambush Lithuanian Raiders // Military illustrated. Vol. 94. March. 1996. PP. 26 - 29.
