Knight's weapons and armor. Sword: history of weapons, two-handed and bastard swords

German armor of the 16th century for knight and horse

The field of weapons and armor is surrounded by romantic legends, monstrous myths and widespread misconceptions. Their sources are often a lack of knowledge and experience of communicating with real things and their history. Most of these ideas are absurd and based on nothing.

Perhaps one of the most notorious examples is the belief that “knights had to be mounted by crane,” which is as absurd as it is a common belief, even among historians. In other cases, certain technical details that defy obvious description have become the object of passionate and fantastically inventive attempts to explain their purpose. Among them, the first place seems to be occupied by the spear rest, protruding from the right side of the breastplate.

The following text will attempt to correct the most popular misconceptions and answer questions often asked during museum tours.

1. Only knights wore armor

This erroneous but common belief probably stems from the romantic idea of ​​the “knight in shining armor,” a picture that itself gives rise to further misconceptions. First, knights rarely fought alone, and armies in the Middle Ages and Renaissance did not consist entirely of mounted knights. Although the knights were the dominant force in most of these armies, they were invariably - and increasingly over time - supported (and countered) by foot soldiers such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen and firearms soldiers. On campaign, the knight depended on a group of servants, squires and soldiers to provide armed support and look after his horses, armor and other equipment, not to mention the peasants and artisans who made a feudal society with a warrior class possible.

Armor for a knight's duel, late 16th century

Secondly, it is wrong to believe that every noble man was a knight. Knights were not born, knights were created by other knights, feudal lords or sometimes priests. And under certain conditions, people of non-noble birth could be knighted (although knights were often considered the lowest rank of nobility). Sometimes mercenaries or civilians who fought as ordinary soldiers could be knighted for demonstrating extreme bravery and courage, and later knighthood could be purchased for money.

In other words, the ability to wear armor and fight in armor was not the prerogative of knights. Infantry from mercenaries, or groups of soldiers consisting of peasants, or burghers (city dwellers) also took part in armed conflicts and accordingly protected themselves with armor of varying quality and size. Indeed, burghers (of a certain age and above a certain income or wealth) in most medieval and Renaissance cities were required - often by law and decrees - to purchase and store their own weapons and armor. Usually it was not full armor, but at least it included a helmet, body protection in the form of chain mail, fabric armor or a breastplate, and a weapon - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.

Indian chain mail of the 17th century

IN war time this popular militia was required to defend the city or perform military duties for feudal lords or allied cities. During the 15th century, when some rich and influential cities began to become more independent and self-reliant, even the burghers organized their own tournaments, in which they, of course, wore armor.

Because of this, not every piece of armor has ever been worn by a knight, and not every person depicted wearing armor will be a knight. It would be more correct to call a man in armor a soldier or a man in armor.

2. Women in the old days never wore armor or fought in battles.

In most historical periods, there is evidence of women taking part in armed conflicts. There is evidence of noble ladies turning into military commanders, such as Joan of Penthièvre (1319-1384). There are rare references to women from lower society, who stood “under the gun.” There are records of women fighting in armor, but no contemporary illustrations of this topic survive. Joan of Arc (1412-1431) will perhaps be the most famous example of a female warrior, and there is evidence that she wore armor commissioned for her by King Charles VII of France. But only one small illustration of her, made during her lifetime, has reached us, in which she is depicted with a sword and banner, but without armor. The fact that contemporaries perceived a woman commanding an army, or even wearing armor, as something worthy of recording suggests that this spectacle was the exception and not the rule.

3. The armor was so expensive that only princes and rich nobles could afford it.

This idea may have come from the fact that most of the armor displayed in museums is equipment High Quality, and most of the simpler armor that belonged to ordinary people and the lowest of the nobles was hidden in storage or lost through the centuries.

Indeed, with the exception of obtaining armor on the battlefield or winning a tournament, acquiring armor was a very expensive undertaking. However, since there were differences in the quality of armor, there must have been differences in their cost. Armor of low and medium quality, available to burghers, mercenaries and the lower nobility, could be bought ready-made at markets, fairs and city stores. On the other hand, there was also high-class armor, made to order in imperial or royal workshops and from famous German and Italian gunsmiths.

Armor of the King of England Henry VIII, XVI century

Although we have extant examples of the cost of armor, weapons and equipment in some of the historical periods, it is very difficult to translate historical costs into modern equivalents. It is clear, however, that the cost of armor ranged from inexpensive, low-quality or obsolete, second-hand items available to citizens and mercenaries, to the cost of the full armor of an English knight, which in 1374 was estimated at £16. This was equivalent to the cost of 5-8 years of rent for a merchant's house in London, or three years the salary of an experienced worker, and the price of a helmet alone (with a visor, and probably with an aventail) was more than the price of a cow.

At the higher end of the scale one finds examples such as a large suit of armor (a basic suit that, with the help of additional items and plates, could be adapted for various uses, both on the battlefield and in tournament), commissioned in 1546 by the German king (later - emperor) for his son. Upon completion of this order, for a year of work, the court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer from Innsbruck received an incredible sum of 1200 gold moment, equivalent to twelve annual salaries of a senior court official.

4. The armor is extremely heavy and greatly limits the mobility of its wearer.

A full set of combat armor usually weighs between 20 and 25 kg, and a helmet between 2 and 4 kg. This is less than a firefighter's full oxygen outfit, or what modern soldiers have had to carry into battle since the nineteenth century. Moreover, while modern equipment usually hangs from the shoulders or waist, the weight of well-fitted armor is distributed over the entire body. It was not until the 17th century that the weight of combat armor was greatly increased to make it bulletproof due to the improved accuracy of firearms. At the same time, full armor became increasingly rare, and only important parts of the body: the head, torso and arms were protected by metal plates.

The opinion that wearing armor (which took shape by 1420-30) greatly reduced the mobility of a warrior is not true. The armor equipment was made from separate elements for each limb. Each element consisted of metal plates and plates connected by movable rivets and leather straps, which allowed any movement without restrictions imposed by the rigidity of the material. The widespread idea that a man in armor could barely move, and having fallen to the ground, could not get up, has no basis. On the contrary, historical sources tell about the famous French knight Jean II le Mengre, nicknamed Boucicault (1366-1421), who, dressed in full armor, could, by grabbing the steps of a ladder from below, on the reverse side, climb it using only hands Moreover, there are several illustrations from the Middle Ages and the Renaissance in which soldiers, squires or knights, in full armor, mount horses without assistance or any equipment, without ladders or cranes. Modern experiments with real armor of the 15th and 16th centuries and with their exact copies have shown that even an untrained person in properly selected armor can climb on and off a horse, sit or lie, and then get up from the ground, run and move his limbs freely and without discomfort.

In some exceptional cases, the armor was very heavy or held the wearer in almost one position, for example, in some types of tournaments. Tournament armor was made for special occasions and was worn for a limited time. A man in armor would then climb onto the horse with the help of a squire or a small ladder, and the last elements of the armor could be put on him after he was settled in the saddle.

5. Knights had to be placed in the saddle using cranes

This idea appears to have originated in the late nineteenth century as a joke. It entered popular fiction in subsequent decades, and the picture was eventually immortalized in 1944, when Laurence Olivier used it in his film King Henry V, despite the protests of historical advisers, including such eminent authorities as James Mann, chief armorer of the Tower of London.

As stated above, most armor was light and flexible enough not to bind the wearer. Most people wearing armor should have no problem being able to place one foot in the stirrup and saddle a horse without assistance. A stool or the help of a squire would speed up this process. But the crane was absolutely unnecessary.

6. How did people in armor go to the toilet?

One of the most popular questions, especially among young museum visitors, unfortunately, does not have an exact answer. When the man in armor was not busy in battle, he did the same things that people do today. He would go to the toilet (which in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was called a privy or latrine) or other secluded place, remove the appropriate pieces of armor and clothing and surrender to the call of nature. On the battlefield, everything should have happened differently. In this case, the answer is unknown to us. However, it must be taken into account that the desire to go to the toilet in the heat of battle was most likely low on the list of priorities.

7. The military salute came from the gesture of raising the visor

Some believe that the military salute originated during the Roman Republic, when contract killing was the order of the day, and citizens were required to raise their right hand when approaching officials to show that they were not carrying a concealed weapon. The more common belief is that the modern military salute came from men in armor raising the visors of their helmets before saluting their comrades or lords. This gesture allowed recognition of the person, and also made him vulnerable and at the same time demonstrated that his right hand (which usually held a sword) did not have a weapon. These were all signs of trust and good intentions.

Although these theories sound intriguing and romantic, there is virtually no evidence that the military salute originated from them. As for Roman customs, it would be virtually impossible to prove that they lasted fifteen centuries (or were restored during the Renaissance) and led to the modern military salute. There is also no direct confirmation of the visor theory, although it is more recent. Most military helmets after 1600 were no longer equipped with visors, and after 1700 helmets were rarely worn on European battlefields.

One way or another, military records in 17th century England reflect that “the formal act of greeting was the removal of headdress.” By 1745, the English regiment of the Coldstream Guards appears to have perfected this procedure, making it "putting the hand to the head and bowing upon meeting."

Coldstream Guards

Other English regiments adopted this practice, and it may have spread to America (during the Revolutionary War) and continental Europe (during the Napoleonic Wars). So the truth may lie somewhere in the middle, in which the military salute evolved from a gesture of respect and politeness, paralleling the civilian habit of raising or touching the brim of a hat, perhaps with a combination of the warrior custom of showing the unarmed right hand.

8. Chain mail - “chain mail” or “mail”?

German chain mail of the 15th century

A protective garment consisting of interlocking rings should properly be called “mail” or “mail armor” in English. The common term "chain mail" is a modern pleonasm (a linguistic error meaning the use more words than necessary for description). In our case, “chain” and “mail” describe an object consisting of a sequence of intertwined rings. That is, the term “chain mail” simply repeats the same thing twice.

As with other misconceptions, the roots of this error should be sought in the 19th century. When those who began to study armor looked at medieval paintings, they noticed, as it seemed to them, many different types armor: rings, chains, ring bracelets, scale armor, small plates, etc. As a result, all ancient armor was called “mail”, distinguishing it only by its appearance, which is where the terms “ring-mail”, “chain-mail”, “banded mail”, “scale-mail”, “plate-mail” came from. Today, it is generally accepted that most of these different images were just different attempts by artists to correctly depict the surface of a type of armor that is difficult to capture in painting and sculpture. Instead of depicting individual rings, these details were stylized using dots, strokes, squiggles, circles and other things, which led to errors.

9. How long did it take to make a full suit of armor?

It is difficult to answer this question unambiguously for many reasons. First, there is no surviving evidence that can paint a complete picture for any of the periods. From around the 15th century, scattered examples survive of how armor was ordered, how long orders took, and how much various pieces of armor cost. Secondly, a complete armor could consist of parts made by various armorers with a narrow specialization. Armor parts could be sold unfinished and then customized locally for a certain amount. Finally, the matter was complicated by regional and national differences.

In the case of German gunsmiths, most workshops were controlled by strict guild rules that limited the number of apprentices, thereby controlling the number of items that one master and his workshop could produce. In Italy, on the other hand, there were no such restrictions and workshops could grow, which improved the speed of creation and the quantity of products.

In any case, it is worth keeping in mind that the production of armor and weapons flourished during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Gunsmiths, manufacturers of blades, pistols, bows, crossbows and arrows were present in any big city. As now, their market depended on supply and demand, and efficient operation was a key parameter for success. The common myth that simple chain mail took several years to make is nonsense (but it cannot be denied that chain mail was very labor intensive to make).

The answer to this question is simple and elusive at the same time. The production time for armor depended on several factors, for example, the customer, who was entrusted with the production of the order (the number of people in production and the workshop busy with other orders), and the quality of the armor. Two famous examples will serve to illustrate this.

In 1473, Martin Rondel, possibly an Italian gunsmith working in Bruges who called himself "armourer to my bastard of Burgundy", wrote to his English client, Sir John Paston. The armorer informed Sir John that he could fulfill the request for the production of armor as soon as the English knight informed him which parts of the costume he needed, in what form, and the time frame by which the armor should be completed (unfortunately, the armorer did not indicate possible deadlines ). In the court workshops, the production of armor for high-ranking persons appears to have taken more time. The court armorer Jörg Seusenhofer (with a small number of assistants) apparently took more than a year to make the armor for the horse and the large armor for the king. The order was made in November 1546 by King (later Emperor) Ferdinand I (1503-1564) for himself and his son, and was completed in November 1547. We do not know whether Seusenhofer and his workshop were working on other orders at this time.

10. Armor details - spear support and codpiece

Two parts of the armor most spark the public's imagination: one is described as "that thing sticking out to the right of the chest," and the second is referred to, after muffled giggles, as "that thing between the legs." In weapon and armor terminology they are known as the spear rest and codpiece.

The spear support appeared shortly after the appearance of the solid chest plate at the end of the 14th century and existed until the armor itself began to disappear. Contrary to the literal meaning of the English term "lance rest", its main purpose was not to bear the weight of the spear. It was actually used for two purposes, which are better described by the French term "arrêt de cuirasse" (spear restraint). It allowed the mounted warrior to hold the spear firmly under his right hand, preventing it from slipping back. This allowed the spear to be stabilized and balanced, which improved aim. In addition, the combined weight and speed of the horse and rider were transferred to the tip of the spear, which made this weapon very formidable. If the target was hit, the spear rest also acted as a shock absorber, preventing the spear from "firing" backwards, and distributing the blow across the chest plate over the entire upper torso, rather than just the right arm, wrist, elbow and shoulder. It is worth noting that on most battle armor the spear support could be folded upward so as not to interfere with the mobility of the sword hand after the warrior got rid of the spear.

The history of the armored codpiece is closely connected with its counterpart in the civilian men's suit. From the middle of the 14th century, the upper part of men's clothing began to be shortened so much that it no longer covered the crotch. In those days, pants had not yet been invented, and men wore leggings clipped to their underwear or a belt, with the crotch hidden behind a hollow attached to the inside of the top edge of each leg of the leggings. At the beginning of the 16th century, this floor began to be filled and visually enlarged. And the codpiece remained a detail men's suit until the end of the 16th century. On armor, the codpiece as a separate plate protecting the genitals appeared in the second decade of the 16th century, and remained relevant until the 1570s. It had a thick lining on the inside and was joined to the armor at the center of the bottom edge of the shirt. Early varieties were bowl-shaped, but due to the influence of civilian costume it gradually transformed into an upward-pointing shape. It was not usually used when riding a horse, because, firstly, it would get in the way, and secondly, the armored front of the combat saddle provided sufficient protection for the crotch. The codpiece was therefore commonly used for armor intended for fighting on foot, both in war and in tournaments, and while it had some value for protection, it was used just as much for fashion.

11. Did the Vikings wear horns on their helmets?

One of the most enduring and popular images of the medieval warrior is that of the Viking, who can be instantly recognized by his helmet equipped with a pair of horns. However, there is very little evidence that the Vikings ever used horns to decorate their helmets.

The earliest example of a helmet being decorated with a pair of stylized horns comes from a small group of Celtic Bronze Age helmets found in Scandinavia and what is now France, Germany and Austria. These decorations were made of bronze and could take the form of two horns or a flat triangular profile. These helmets date back to the 12th or 11th century BC. Two thousand years later, from 1250, pairs of horns gained popularity in Europe and remained one of the most commonly used heraldic symbols on helmets for battle and tournaments in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. It is easy to see that the two periods indicated do not coincide with what is usually associated with the Scandinavian raids that took place from the end of the 8th to the end of the 11th centuries.

Viking helmets were usually conical or hemispherical, sometimes made from a single piece of metal, sometimes from segments held together by strips (Spangenhelm).

Many of these helmets were also equipped with face protection. The latter could take the form of a metal bar covering the nose, or a face sheet consisting of protection for the nose and two eyes, as well as the upper part of the cheekbones, or protection for the entire face and neck in the form of chain mail.

12. Armor became unnecessary due to the advent of firearms

In general, the gradual decline of armor was not due to the advent of firearms as such, but due to their constant improvement. Since the first firearms appeared in Europe already in the third decade of the 14th century, and the gradual decline of armor was not noted until the second half of the 17th century, armor and firearms existed together for more than 300 years. During the 16th century, attempts were made to make bulletproof armor, either by reinforcing the steel, thickening the armor, or adding individual reinforcements on top of the regular armor.

German arquebus from the late 14th century

Finally, it is worth noting that the armor never completely disappeared. The widespread use of helmets by modern soldiers and police proves that armor, although it has changed materials and may have lost some of its importance, is still a necessary part of military equipment throughout the world. Additionally, torso protection continued to exist in the form of experimental chest plates during the American civil war, plates of gunner pilots in World War II and bulletproof vests of our time.

13. The size of the armor suggests that people were smaller in the Middle Ages and Renaissance

Medical and anthropological research shows that the average height of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, a process that has accelerated over the past 150 years due to improvements in diet and public health. Most of the armor that has come down to us from the 15th and 16th centuries confirms these discoveries.

However, when drawing such general conclusions based on armor, many factors must be considered. Firstly, is the armor complete and uniform, that is, did all the parts fit together, thereby giving the correct impression of its original owner? Secondly, even high-quality armor made to order for a specific person can give an approximate idea of ​​his height, with an error of up to 2-5 cm, since the overlap of the protection of the lower abdomen (shirt and thigh guards) and hips (gaiters) can only be estimated approximately.

Armor came in all shapes and sizes, including armor for children and youth (as opposed to adults), and there was even armor for dwarfs and giants (often found in European courts as "curiosities"). In addition, other factors must be taken into account, such as the difference in average height between northern and southern Europeans, or simply the fact that people have always been unusually tall or unusually tall. short people, when compared with their average contemporaries.

Notable exceptions include examples from kings, such as Francis I, King of France (1515-47), or Henry VIII, King of England (1509-47). The latter’s height was 180 cm, as evidenced by contemporaries has been preserved, and which can be verified thanks to half a dozen of his armor that have come down to us.

Armor of the German Duke Johann Wilhelm, 16th century

Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I, 16th century

Visitors to the Metropolitan Museum can compare German armor dating from 1530 with the battle armor of Emperor Ferdinand I (1503-1564), dating from 1555. Both armors are incomplete and the dimensions of their wearers are only approximate, but the difference in size is still striking. The height of the owner of the first armor was apparently about 193 cm, and the chest circumference was 137 cm, while the height of Emperor Ferdinand did not exceed 170 cm.

14. Men's clothing It wraps from left to right, because that’s how the armor was originally closed.

The theory behind this statement is that some early forms of armor (plate protection and brigantine of the 14th and 15th centuries, armet - a closed cavalry helmet of the 15th-16th centuries, cuirass of the 16th century) were designed so that left-hand side was superimposed on the right to prevent the blow of the enemy’s sword from penetrating. Since most people are right-handed, most of the penetrating blows would have come from the left, and, if successful, should have slid across the armor through the scent and to the right.

The theory is compelling, but there is little evidence that modern clothing was directly influenced by such armor. Additionally, while the armor protection theory may be true for the Middle Ages and Renaissance, some examples of helmets and body armor wrap the other way.

Misconceptions and questions about cutting weapons

Sword, early 15th century

Dagger, 16th century

As with armor, not everyone who carried a sword was a knight. But the idea that the sword is the prerogative of knights is not so far from the truth. Customs or even the right to carry a sword varied depending on time, place and laws.

In medieval Europe, swords were the main weapon of knights and horsemen. In times of peace, carry swords in in public places Only persons of noble birth were eligible. Since in most places swords were perceived as “weapons of war” (as opposed to the same daggers), peasants and burghers who did not belong to the warrior class of medieval society could not carry swords. An exception to the rule was made for travelers (citizens, traders and pilgrims) due to the dangers of traveling by land and sea. Within the walls of most medieval cities, the carrying of swords was forbidden to everyone - sometimes even nobles - at least in times of peace. Standard rules of trade, often present at churches or town halls, often also included examples of the permitted length of daggers or swords that could be carried without hindrance within city walls.

Without a doubt, it was these rules that gave rise to the idea that the sword is the exclusive symbol of the warrior and knight. But due to social changes and new fighting techniques that appeared in the 15th and 16th centuries, it became possible and acceptable for citizens and knights to carry lighter and thinner descendants of swords - swords, as an everyday weapon for self-defense in public places. And until the beginning of the 19th century, swords and small swords became an indispensable attribute of the clothing of the European gentleman.

It is widely believed that the swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were simple tools of brute force, very heavy, and as a result, impossible to handle for the “ordinary person”, that is, very ineffective weapons. The reasons for these accusations are easy to understand. Due to the rarity of surviving specimens, few people held them in their hands. real sword the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. Most of these swords were obtained from excavations. Their rusty current appearance can easily give the impression of roughness - like a burnt-out car that has lost all signs of its former grandeur and complexity.

Most real swords from the Middle Ages and Renaissance tell a different story. A one-handed sword usually weighed 1-2 kg, and even a large two-handed "war sword" of the 14th-16th centuries rarely weighed more than 4.5 kg. The weight of the blade was balanced by the weight of the hilt, and the swords were light, complex and sometimes very beautifully decorated. Documents and paintings show that such a sword is in experienced hands could be used with terrible efficiency, from cutting off limbs to penetrating armor.

Turkish saber with scabbard, 18th century

Japanese katana and wakizashi short sword, 15th century

Swords and some daggers, both European and Asian, and weapons from the Islamic world, often have one or more grooves on the blade. Misconceptions about their purpose led to the emergence of the term “bloodstock.” It is claimed that these grooves speed up the flow of blood from an opponent's wound, thus enhancing the effect of the wound, or that they make it easier to remove the blade from the wound, allowing the weapon to be easily drawn without twisting. Despite the entertainment of such theories, in fact the purpose of this groove, called the fuller, is only to lighten the blade, reducing its mass without weakening the blade or impairing flexibility.

On some European blades, in particular swords, rapiers and daggers, as well as on some fighting poles, these grooves have a complex shape and perforation. The same perforations are present on cutting weapons from India and the Middle East. Based on scanty documentary evidence, it is believed that this perforation must have contained poison so that the blow was guaranteed to lead to the death of the enemy. This misconception has led to weapons with such perforations being called “assassin weapons.”

While references to Indian poison-bladed weapons exist, and similar rare cases may have occurred in Renaissance Europe, the true purpose of this perforation is not at all so sensational. Firstly, perforation eliminated some material and made the blade lighter. Secondly, it was often made in elaborate and intricate patterns, and served as both a demonstration of the blacksmith's skill and as decoration. To prove it, it is only necessary to point out that most of these perforations are usually located near the handle (hilt) of the weapon, and not on the other side, as would have to be done in the case of poison.

Few other types of weapons have left such a mark in the history of our civilization. For thousands of years, the sword was not just a murder weapon, but also a symbol of courage and valor, a warrior’s constant companion and a source of pride. In many cultures, the sword represented dignity, leadership, and strength. Around this symbol in the Middle Ages, a professional military class was formed and its concepts of honor were developed. The sword can be called the real embodiment of war; varieties of this weapon are known to almost all cultures of antiquity and the Middle Ages.

The knight's sword of the Middle Ages symbolized, among other things, the Christian cross. Before knighting, the sword was kept in the altar, cleansing the weapon from worldly filth. During the initiation ceremony, the weapon was presented to the warrior by the priest.

Knights were knighted with the help of a sword; this weapon was necessarily part of the regalia used during the coronation of crowned persons of Europe. The sword is one of the most common symbols in heraldry. We see it everywhere in the Bible and the Koran, in medieval sagas and in modern fantasy novels. However, despite its enormous cultural and social significance, the sword primarily remained a melee weapon, with the help of which it was possible to send the enemy to the next world as quickly as possible.

The sword was not available to everyone. Metals (iron and bronze) were rare, expensive, and production costs good blade it took a lot of time and skilled labor. In the early Middle Ages, it was often the presence of a sword that distinguished the leader of a detachment from an ordinary commoner warrior.

A good sword is not just a strip of forged metal, but a complex composite product consisting of several pieces of steel of different characteristics, properly processed and hardened. European industry was able to ensure the mass production of good blades only towards the end of the Middle Ages, when the importance of bladed weapons had already begun to decline.

A spear or battle ax was much cheaper, and it was much easier to learn how to use them. The sword was a weapon of the elite, professional warriors, and definitely a status item. To achieve true mastery, a swordsman had to train daily, for many months and years.

Historical documents that have come down to us say that the cost of a sword of average quality could be equal to the price of four cows. Swords made by famous blacksmiths were much more valuable. And the weapons of the elite, decorated with precious metals and stones, cost a fortune.

First of all, the sword is good for its versatility. It could be used effectively on foot or on horseback, for attack or defense, and as a primary or secondary weapon. The sword was perfect for personal protection (for example, on trips or in court battles), it could be carried with you and, if necessary, quickly used.

The sword has a low center of gravity, which makes it much easier to control. Fencing with a sword is significantly less tiring than swinging a club of similar length and weight. The sword allowed the fighter to realize his advantage not only in strength, but also in agility and speed.

The main drawback of the sword, which gunsmiths tried to get rid of throughout the history of the development of this weapon, was its low “penetrating” ability. And the reason for this was also the low center of gravity of the weapon. Against a well-armored enemy, it was better to use something else: a battle axe, a hammer, a hammer, or a regular spear.

Now we should say a few words about the very concept of this weapon. A sword is a type of bladed weapon that has a straight blade and is used to deliver cutting and piercing blows. Sometimes the length of the blade is added to this definition, which should be at least 60 cm. But a short sword was sometimes even smaller; examples include the Roman gladius and the Scythian akinak. The largest two-handed swords reached almost two meters in length.

If a weapon has one blade, then it should be classified as a broadsword, and a weapon with a curved blade should be classified as a saber. The famous Japanese katana is not actually a sword, but a typical saber. Also, swords and rapiers should not be classified as swords; they are usually classified into separate groups of bladed weapons.

How does a sword work?

As mentioned above, a sword is a straight, double-edged bladed weapon designed to deliver piercing, slashing, slashing and stabbing blows. Its design is very simple - it is a narrow strip of steel with a handle at one end. The shape or profile of the blade changed throughout the history of this weapon, it depended on the fighting technique that prevailed in a given period. Combat swords of different eras could “specialize” in slashing or piercing blows.

The division of bladed weapons into swords and daggers is also somewhat arbitrary. We can say that the short sword had a longer blade than the dagger itself - but drawing a clear line between these types of weapons is not always easy. Sometimes a classification based on the length of the blade is used, according to which the following are distinguished:

• Short sword. Blade length 60-70 cm;
• Long sword. The size of his blade was 70-90 cm, it could be used by both foot and horse warriors;
• Cavalry sword. The length of the blade is more than 90 cm.

The weight of the sword varies within a very wide range: from 700 grams (gladius, akinak) to 5-6 kg (large sword of the flamberge type or slasher).

Swords are also often divided into one-handed, one-and-a-half and two-handed. A one-handed sword usually weighed from one to one and a half kilograms.

The sword consists of two parts: the blade and the hilt. The cutting edge of the blade is called the blade; the blade ends with a point. As a rule, it had a stiffener and a fuller - a recess designed to lighten the weapon and give it additional rigidity. The unsharpened part of the blade adjacent directly to the guard is called the ricasso (heel). The blade can also be divided into three parts: the strong part (often it was not sharpened at all), the middle part and the tip.

The hilt includes a guard (in medieval swords it often looked like a simple cross), a handle, and a pommel, or pommel. The last element of the weapon has great importance for proper balancing and also prevents the hand from slipping. The cross also performs several important functions: it prevents the hand from sliding forward after striking, protects the hand from hitting the enemy’s shield, the cross was also used in some fencing techniques. And only last but not least did the crosspiece protect the swordsman’s hand from the blow of the enemy’s weapon. So, at least, it follows from medieval fencing manuals.

An important characteristic of the blade is its cross-section. Many variants of the section are known; they changed along with the development of weapons. Early swords (during barbarian and Viking times) often had a lenticular cross-section, which was more suitable for cutting and slashing. As armor developed, the rhombic section of the blade became increasingly popular: it was more rigid and more suitable for thrusting.

The sword blade has two tapers: in length and in thickness. This is necessary to reduce the weight of the weapon, improve its controllability in battle and increase the efficiency of use.

The balance point (or equilibrium point) is the center of gravity of the weapon. As a rule, it is located a finger's distance from the guard. However, this characteristic can vary quite widely depending on the type of sword.

Speaking about the classification of this weapon, it should be noted that the sword is a “piece” product. Each blade was made (or selected) for a specific fighter, his height and arm length. Therefore, no two swords are completely identical, although blades of the same type are similar in many ways.

An invariable accessory of the sword was the scabbard - a case for carrying and storing this weapon. Sword sheaths were made from various materials: metal, leather, wood, fabric. At the bottom they had a tip, and at the top they ended at the mouth. Typically these elements were made of metal. The sword scabbard had various devices that made it possible to attach it to a belt, clothing or saddle.

The birth of the sword - the era of antiquity

It is unknown when exactly man made the first sword. Wooden clubs can be considered their prototype. However, the sword in the modern sense of the word could only arise after people began to smelt metals. The first swords were probably made of copper, but this metal was very quickly replaced by bronze, a more durable alloy of copper and tin. Structurally, the oldest bronze blades were not much different from their later steel counterparts. Bronze resists corrosion very well, which is why today we have a large number of bronze swords discovered by archaeologists in different regions of the world.

The oldest sword known today was found in one of the burial mounds in the Republic of Adygea. Scientists believe that it was made 4 thousand years BC.

It is curious that before burial with the owner, bronze swords were often symbolically bent.

Bronze swords have properties that are in many ways different from steel ones. Bronze does not spring, but it can bend without breaking. To reduce the likelihood of deformation, bronze swords were often equipped with impressive stiffening ribs. For the same reason, it is difficult to make a large sword from bronze; usually such weapons had relatively modest dimensions - about 60 cm.

Bronze weapons were made by casting, so there was no special problems create blades of complex shapes. Examples include the Egyptian khopesh, the Persian kopis and the Greek mahaira. True, all these samples of edged weapons were cutlasses or sabers, but not swords. Bronze weapons were poorly suited for piercing armor or fencing; blades made of this material were more often used for cutting rather than piercing blows.

Some ancient civilizations also used a large sword made of bronze. During excavations on the island of Crete, blades more than a meter long were found. They are believed to have been made around 1700 BC.

They learned to make swords from iron around the 8th century BC. new era, and in the 5th century they were already widespread. although bronze was used along with iron for many centuries. Europe switched to iron more quickly because the region had much more of it than the tin and copper deposits needed to create bronze.

Among the currently known blades of antiquity, one can highlight the Greek xiphos, the Roman gladius and spatha, and the Scythian sword akinak.

The xiphos is a short sword with a leaf-shaped blade, the length of which was approximately 60 cm. It was used by the Greeks and Spartans, later this weapon was actively used in the army of Alexander the Great; the warriors of the famous Macedonian phalanx were armed with the xiphos.

The Gladius is another famous short sword that was one of the main weapons of the heavy Roman infantry - legionnaires. The gladius had a length of about 60 cm and the center of gravity was shifted towards the handle due to the massive pommel. These weapons could deliver both slashing and piercing blows; the gladius was especially effective in close formation.

Spatha is a large sword (about a meter long) that apparently first appeared among the Celts or Sarmatians. Later, the Gauls' cavalry, and then the Roman cavalry, were armed with spatami. However, spatha was also used by foot Roman soldiers. Initially, this sword did not have an edge, it was a purely chopping weapon. Later, spatha became suitable for stabbing.

Akinak. This is a short one-handed sword, which was used by the Scythians and other peoples of the Northern Black Sea region and the Middle East. It should be understood that the Greeks often called all the tribes roaming the Black Sea steppes Scythians. Akinak was 60 cm long, weighed about 2 kg, and had excellent piercing and cutting properties. The crosshair of this sword was heart-shaped, and the pommel resembled a beam or a crescent.

Swords from the era of chivalry

The “finest hour” of the sword, however, like many other types of edged weapons, was the Middle Ages. For this historical period, the sword was more than just a weapon. The medieval sword developed over a thousand years, its history began around the 5th century with the advent of the German spatha, and ended in the 16th century, when it was replaced by the sword. The development of the medieval sword was inextricably linked with the evolution of armor.

The collapse of the Roman Empire was marked by the decline of military art and the loss of many technologies and knowledge. Europe plunged into dark times of fragmentation and internecine wars. Battle tactics were significantly simplified, and the number of armies was reduced. In the Early Middle Ages, battles mainly took place in open areas; opponents, as a rule, neglected defensive tactics.

This period is characterized by an almost complete absence of armor, unless the nobility could afford chain mail or plate armor. Due to the decline of crafts, the sword is transformed from the weapon of an ordinary soldier into the weapon of a select elite.

At the beginning of the first millennium, Europe was in a “fever”: the Great Migration of Peoples was underway, and barbarian tribes (Goths, Vandals, Burgundians, Franks) created new states in the territories of the former Roman provinces. The first European sword is considered to be the German spatha, its further continuation is the Merovingian type sword, named after the French royal dynasty of the Merovingians.

The Merovingian sword had a blade approximately 75 cm long with a rounded tip, a wide and flat fuller, a thick cross and a massive pommel. The blade practically did not taper to the tip; the weapon was more suitable for delivering cutting and chopping blows. At that time, only very wealthy people could afford a combat sword, so Merovingian swords were richly decorated. This type of sword was in use until about the 9th century, but already in the 8th century it began to be replaced by a Carolingian type sword. This weapon is also called the Viking Age sword.

Around the 8th century AD, a new misfortune came to Europe: regular raids by Vikings or Normans began from the north. These were fierce fair-haired warriors who knew no mercy or pity, fearless sailors who plied the expanses of the European seas. The souls of the dead Vikings were taken from the battlefield by golden-haired warrior maidens straight to the halls of Odin.

In fact, Carolingian-type swords were produced on the continent, and they came to Scandinavia as military booty or ordinary goods. The Vikings had a custom of burying a sword with a warrior, which is why a large number of Carolingian swords were found in Scandinavia.

The Carolingian sword is in many ways similar to the Merovingian, but it is more elegant, better balanced, and the blade has a well-defined edge. The sword was still an expensive weapon; according to the orders of Charlemagne, cavalrymen must be armed with it, while foot soldiers, as a rule, used something simpler.

Together with the Normans, the Carolingian sword also entered the territory Kievan Rus. There were even centers on Slavic lands where such weapons were made.

The Vikings (like the ancient Germans) treated their swords with special reverence. Their sagas contain many stories about special magical swords, as well as about family blades passed down from generation to generation.

Around the second half of the 11th century, the gradual transformation of the Carolingian sword into a knightly or Romanesque sword began. At this time, cities began to grow in Europe, crafts developed rapidly, and the level of blacksmithing and metallurgy increased significantly. The shape and characteristics of any blade were primarily determined by the enemy’s protective equipment. At that time it consisted of a shield, helmet and armor.

To learn to wield a sword, the future knight began training with early childhood. At about the age of seven, he was usually sent to some relative or friendly knight, where the boy continued to master the secrets of noble combat. At the age of 12-13 he became a squire, after which his training continued for another 6-7 years. Then the young man could be knighted, or he continued to serve with the rank of “noble squire.” The difference was small: the knight had the right to wear a sword on his belt, and the squire attached it to the saddle. In the Middle Ages, the sword clearly distinguished a free man and knight from a commoner or slave.

Ordinary warriors usually wore leather armor made from specially treated leather as protective equipment. The nobility used chain mail shirts or leather armor, onto which metal plates were sewn. Until the 11th century, helmets were also made of treated leather, reinforced with metal inserts. However, later helmets were mainly made from metal plates, which were extremely difficult to break through with a chopping blow.

The most important element of a warrior’s defense was the shield. It was made from a thick layer of wood (up to 2 cm) of durable species and covered with treated leather on top, and sometimes reinforced with metal strips or rivets. This was a very effective defense; such a shield could not be penetrated with a sword. Accordingly, in battle it was necessary to hit a part of the enemy’s body that was not covered by a shield, and the sword had to pierce the enemy’s armor. This led to changes in sword design in the early Middle Ages. Typically they had the following criteria:

• Total length about 90 cm;
• Relatively light weight, which made it easy to fencing with one hand;
• Sharpening blades designed to deliver an effective cutting blow;
• The weight of such a one-handed sword did not exceed 1.3 kg.

Around the middle of the 13th century, a real revolution took place in the armament of the knight - plate armor became widespread. To break through such a defense, it was necessary to inflict piercing blows. This led to significant changes in the shape of the Romanesque sword; it began to narrow, and the tip of the weapon became more and more pronounced. The cross-section of the blades also changed, they became thicker and heavier, and received stiffening ribs.

Around the 13th century, the importance of infantry on the battlefield began to increase rapidly. Thanks to the improvement of infantry armor, it became possible to dramatically reduce the shield, or even abandon it altogether. This led to the fact that the sword began to be taken in both hands to enhance the blow. This is how the long sword appeared, a variation of which is the bastard sword. In modern historical literature it is called the “bastard sword.” Bastards were also called “war swords” - weapons of such length and weight were not carried with them just like that, but taken to war.

The bastard sword led to the emergence of new fencing techniques - the half-hand technique: the blade was sharpened only in the upper third, and its lower part could be intercepted by the hand, further enhancing the piercing blow.

This weapon can be called a transitional stage between one-handed and two-handed swords. The heyday of long swords was the era of the late Middle Ages.

During the same period, two-handed swords became widespread. These were real giants among their brothers. The total length of this weapon could reach two meters and weight – 5 kilograms. Two-handed swords used by infantrymen, they did not have a scabbard made for them, but were worn on the shoulder, like a halberd or a pike. Disputes continue among historians today as to exactly how these weapons were used. The most famous representatives of this type of weapon are the zweihander, claymore, spandrel and flamberge - a wavy or curved two-handed sword.

Almost all two-handed swords had a significant ricasso, which was often covered with leather for greater ease of fencing. At the end of the ricasso there were often additional hooks (“boar’s tusks”), which protected the hand from enemy blows.

Claymore. This is a type of two-handed sword (there were also one-handed claymores) that was used in Scotland in the 15th-17th centuries. Claymore means "great sword" in Gaelic. It should be noted that the claymore was the smallest of the two-handed swords, its total size reached 1.5 meters, and the length of the blade was 110-120 cm.

A distinctive feature of this sword was the shape of the guard: the arms of the cross were bent towards the tip. The claymore was the most versatile “two-handed weapon”; its relatively small dimensions made it possible to use it in various combat situations.

Zweihander. The famous two-handed sword of the German Landsknechts, and their special unit - the Doppelsoldners. These warriors received double pay; they fought in the front ranks, cutting down the enemy's peaks. It is clear that such work was mortally dangerous; in addition, it required great physical strength and excellent weapon skills.

This giant could reach a length of 2 meters, had a double guard with “boar tusks” and a ricasso covered with leather.

Slasher. A classic two-handed sword, most often used in Germany and Switzerland. The total length of the slasher could reach up to 1.8 meters, of which 1.5 meters was on the blade. To increase the penetrating power of the sword, its center of gravity was often shifted closer to the tip. The weight of the sledge ranged from 3 to 5 kg.

Flamberge. A wavy or curved two-handed sword, it had a blade of a special flame-like shape. Most often, these weapons were used in Germany and Switzerland in the 15th-17th centuries. Currently, flamberges are in service with the Vatican Guard.

The curved two-handed sword is an attempt by European gunsmiths to combine best properties sword and saber. Flamberge had a blade with a number of successive curves; when delivering chopping blows, it acted on the principle of a saw, cutting through armor and inflicting terrible, long-lasting wounds. The curved two-handed sword was considered an “inhumane” weapon, and the church actively opposed it. Warriors with such a sword should not have been captured; at best, they were killed immediately.

The flamberge was approximately 1.5 m long and weighed 3-4 kg. It should also be noted that such a weapon was much more expensive than a regular one, because it was very difficult to manufacture. Despite this, similar two-handed swords were often used by mercenaries during the Thirty Years' War in Germany.

Among the interesting swords of the late Middle Ages, it is also worth noting the so-called sword of justice, which was used to carry out death sentences. In the Middle Ages, heads were most often chopped off with an ax, and the sword was used exclusively for beheading members of the nobility. Firstly, it was more honorable, and secondly, execution with a sword brought less suffering to the victim.

The technique of beheading with a sword had its own characteristics. The scaffold was not used. The condemned man was simply forced to his knees, and the executioner cut off his head with one blow. One might also add that the “sword of justice” had no edge at all.

By the 15th century, the technique of wielding edged weapons was changing, which led to changes in bladed edged weapons. At the same time, firearms are increasingly used, which easily penetrate any armor, and as a result it becomes almost unnecessary. Why carry a bunch of iron on you if it can't protect your life? Along with armor, heavy medieval swords, which clearly had an “armor-piercing” character, are also becoming a thing of the past.

The sword becomes more and more a piercing weapon, it tapers towards the tip, becomes thicker and narrower. The grip of the weapon changes: in order to deliver more effective piercing blows, swordsmen grasp the cross from the outside. Very soon special arches appear on it to protect the fingers. This is how the sword begins its glorious path.

At the end of the 15th - beginning of the 16th centuries, the sword guard became significantly more complex in order to more reliably protect the fencer’s fingers and hand. Swords and broadswords appeared in which the guard looked like a complex basket, which included numerous bows or a solid shield.

Weapons become lighter, they gain popularity not only among the nobility, but also large quantity townspeople and becomes an integral part of everyday costume. In war they still use a helmet and cuirass, but in frequent duels or street fights they fight without any armor. The art of fencing is becoming significantly more complex, new techniques and techniques are appearing.

A sword is a weapon with a narrow cutting and piercing blade and a developed hilt that reliably protects the fencer’s hand.

In the 17th century, the rapier evolved from the sword - a weapon with a piercing blade, sometimes even without cutting edges. Both the sword and the rapier were intended to be worn with casual clothing, not with armor. Later, this weapon turned into a certain attribute, a detail of the appearance of a person of noble origin. It is also necessary to add that the rapier was lighter than the sword and gave tangible advantages in a duel without armor.

The most common myths about swords

The sword is the most iconic weapon invented by man. Interest in it continues today. Unfortunately, there are many misconceptions and myths associated with this type of weapon.

Myth 1. The European sword was heavy; in battle it was used to inflict concussion on the enemy and break through his armor - like an ordinary club. At the same time, absolutely fantastic figures for the mass of medieval swords are voiced (10-15 kg). This opinion is not true. The weight of all surviving original medieval swords ranges from 600 grams to 1.4 kg. On average, the blades weighed about 1 kg. Rapiers and sabers, which appeared much later, had similar characteristics (from 0.8 to 1.2 kg). European swords were convenient and well-balanced weapons, effective and convenient in battle.

Myth 2. Swords do not have a sharp edge. It is stated that against the armor the sword acted like a chisel, breaking through it. This assumption is also not true. Historical documents that have survived to this day describe swords as sharp weapons that could cut a person in half.

In addition, the very geometry of the blade (its cross-section) does not allow sharpening to be obtuse (like a chisel). Studies of the graves of warriors who died in medieval battles also prove the high cutting ability of swords. The fallen were found to have severed limbs and serious chop wounds.

Myth 3. “Bad” steel was used for European swords. Today there is a lot of talk about the excellent steel of traditional Japanese blades, which are supposedly the pinnacle of blacksmithing. However, historians absolutely know that the technology of welding various types of steel was successfully used in Europe already in antiquity. The hardening of the blades was also at the proper level. The technologies for making Damascus knives, blades and other things were also well known in Europe. By the way, there is no evidence that Damascus was a serious metallurgical center at any time. In general, the myth about the superiority of eastern steel (and blades) over western steel was born back in the 19th century, when there was a fashion for everything eastern and exotic.

Myth 4. Europe did not have its own developed fencing system. What can I say? You should not consider your ancestors more stupid than you. The Europeans waged almost continuous wars using edged weapons for several thousand years and had ancient military traditions, so they simply could not help but create a developed combat system. This fact is confirmed by historians. To this day, many manuals on fencing have been preserved, the oldest of which date back to the 13th century. Moreover, many of the techniques from these books are more designed for the dexterity and speed of the fencer than for primitive brute strength.

Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. And so it seems - through narrow slits in helmets decorated with magnificent plumes, stern warrior-knights from ancient times, clad in steel from head to toe, warily watch everyone who enters. The war horses are almost completely covered with heavy armor - as if they were just waiting for the trumpet signal to rush into battle.

However, what is perhaps most striking is the exquisite craftsmanship of finishing the armor: they are decorated with niello, and expensive gilding, and embossing.

And you can’t take your eyes off the knightly weapons in the glass cases - there are precious stones, silver, gilding on the hilts of the swords, and the mottos of their owners are engraved on the blued blades. The long narrow daggers amaze with the elegance of their work, the perfection and proportionality of their form - it seems that it was not a blacksmith-gunsmith who worked on them, but a skilled jeweler. The spears are decorated with flags, the halberds with lush tassels...

In a word, in all its splendor, in all its romantic beauty, distant knightly times are resurrected before us in one of the museum halls. So you won’t believe it right away: all this colorful, festive splendor belongs... to the worst period of chivalry, to its decline, extinction.

But it really is so! These armor and these weapons of amazing beauty were forged at a time when knights were increasingly losing their importance as the main military force. The first cannons were already thundering on the battlefields, capable of scattering at a distance the armored ranks of a mounted knightly attack; already trained, well-prepared infantry, with the help of special hooks, easily pulled knights from their saddles in close combat, turning the formidable fighters into a pile of metal, helplessly stretched out on the ground.

And neither the weapons masters, nor the knights themselves, accustomed to battles that broke up into separate hand-to-hand duels with the same knights, could no longer oppose the new principles of warfare.

Regular armies appeared in Europe - mobile, disciplined. The knightly army was always, in fact, a militia that gathered only at the call of its lord. And to XVI century- and most of the shiny armor and weapons date back to this time - all that remained for the knightly class was to shine at royal parades as an honorary escort, and go to tournaments in the hope of earning the favorable glance of some of the court ladies on a luxuriously decorated platform .

And yet, for more than half a thousand years, knights were the main force of medieval Europe, and not only military. Much has changed during this time - a person’s worldview, his way of life, architecture, art. And the knight of the 10th century was not at all similar to the knight of, say, the 12th century; Even their appearance was strikingly different. This is due to the development of knightly weapons - both protective armor and offensive weapons were constantly improved. In the military sphere, the eternal competition between attack and defense has never ceased, and gunsmiths have found many original solutions.

True, it is now not so easy to judge how European weapons changed before the 10th century: historians rely mainly only on miniatures of ancient manuscripts, which are not always accurately executed. But there is no doubt that European peoples used the main types of ancient Roman weapons, slightly changing them.

What were knightly weapons like at the dawn of chivalry?

Roman warriors used a double-edged sword with a width of 3 to 5 centimeters and a length of 50 to 70 centimeters as an offensive weapon. The cone-shaped edge of the sword was well sharpened; such a weapon could both chop and stab in battle. Roman legionnaires were armed with throwing spears and used bows and arrows.

Defensive weapons consisted of a helmet with a high crest, a slightly curved rectangular shield and a leather tunic covered with metal plaques. Probably, the protective weapons of a warrior were similar in Europe in the early Middle Ages.

Starting from the X-XI centuries, the development of armor and offensive weapons can be traced much more clearly. Queen Matilda, the wife of William the Conqueror, leader of the Normans who conquered England in the 11th century, did a lot for future historians.

According to legend, it was Matilda who personally wove a huge carpet, now kept in the museum of the French city of Bayeux, which depicts in detail the episodes of the conquest of the British Isle by her husband, including the legendary Battle of Hastings in 1066. Samples of weapons of both warring sides are also clearly shown on the carpet.

The offensive weapon of this era was a long spear, decorated with a flag, with two or even more points on a steel tip, as well as a straight, long sword, slightly beveled at the end. Its handle was cylindrical, with a disc-shaped knob and a straight steel crossbar. A bow and arrows were also used in battle; its design was the simplest.

Protective weapons consisted of a long leather shirt, onto which iron scales or even just iron strips were riveted. This shirt with short wide sleeves hung freely on the warrior and should not have hampered his movements. Sometimes such armor was complemented by short, knee-length leather pants.

On the warrior's head was a leather hood, over which was worn a conical helmet with a wide metal arrow covering the nose. The shield was long, almost full-length, almond-shaped. It was knocked together from strong boards and upholstered on the outside with thick leather with metal fittings. A warrior protected in this way was almost invulnerable to modern offensive weapons.

Sometimes, instead of iron scales or stripes, rows of iron rings were sewn onto the leather base; in this case, the rings of one row covered half of the next one. Later, gunsmiths began to make armor consisting of only steel rings, each of which captured four adjacent rings and was tightly sealed.

However, in fairness, it must be emphasized that this idea was borrowed by Europeans in the East. Already in the first crusade, at the very end of the XI, the knights encountered an enemy dressed in light and flexible chain mail, and appreciated such weapons at their true worth. They got a lot of this eastern armor as war trophies, and later the production of chain mail was established in Europe.

If we turn again to Walter Scott's novel Ivanhoe, we can read how one of the heroes, the knight Briand de Boisguillebert, who fought in Palestine for a long time and took his armor from there, was armed:

“Under the cloak one could see a coat of chain mail with sleeves and gloves made of small metal rings; it was made extremely skillfully and fit as tightly and elastically to the body as our sweatshirts, knitted from soft wool. As far as the folds of the cloak could be seen, his hips were protected by the same chain mail; the knees were covered with thin steel plates, and the calves with metal chain mail stockings.”

Knights dress in chain mail

By the middle of the 12th century, knighthood was completely dressed in chain mail. Engravings of that time show that steel chain mail literally covered the warrior from head to toe: they were used to make leg guards, gloves, and hoods. This flexible steel garment was worn over a leather or quilted undershirt to protect against bruises, and they could be very sensitive, even if a sword or battle ax did not cut through the steel rings. On top of the chain mail they wore a linen tunic, which protected the armor from damage, as well as from heating by the sun's rays.

At first, the tunic looked very modest - it was intended for battle, after all - but over time it became a luxurious, dandy attire. It was sewn from expensive fabric and decorated with embroidery - usually with images of the family knight's coat of arms.

The chain mail weapons were incomparably lighter than before. Contemporaries claimed that it was as easy and comfortable to move in it as in ordinary clothes. The knight received greater freedom of action in battle and was able to inflict quick and unexpected blows on the enemy.

In such conditions, a large shield covering almost the entire body was, rather, a hindrance: the chain mail weave already sufficiently protected the knight’s body. The shield, gradually becoming smaller, began to serve only as additional protection from blows from a spear or sword. The shape of the shields was now very diverse. The coat of arms was depicted on the outside, and straps were fastened on the inside so that the shield could be held comfortably and firmly on the left hand.

For rectangular or elongated shields, the arrangement of such handle-belts was transverse. In six- or octagonal, as well as round shields, the belts were positioned so that when worn, the base of the coat of arms was always at the bottom. The widest belt fell on the forearm, and the shortest and narrowest was clamped with the hand.

The helmet also changed; now it was not conical, but tub-shaped. Its lower edges rested on the knight's shoulders. The face was completely covered, leaving only narrow slits for the eyes. Decorations also appeared on helmets made of wood, bone, metal - in the form of horns, huge claws, wings, iron knight's gloves...

However, even this seemingly quite advanced, reliable and convenient weapon had its drawbacks. The tub-shaped helmet provided too little air for breathing. At the height of the fight, I even had to take it off so as not to suffocate. It was not easy to navigate through the narrow eye sockets; It happened that the knight could not immediately distinguish enemy from friend. In addition, the helmet was not fastened with other armor in any way, and with a deft blow it could be turned so that the blind side appeared in front of the eyes instead of slits. In this case, the knight was at the complete mercy of the enemy.

And offensive weapons have now also become different. In the 10th century, protective armor was easier to cut than to pierce. But if the enemy is protected by chain mail, then the chopping blow, instead of strips of iron riveted on the skin, meets a continuous sliding and hanging flexible metal surface in folds.

Here, a piercing blow was much more effective, pushing apart and piercing the relatively thin rings of chain mail. Therefore, the sword takes on a shape more convenient for thrusting: the blade ends with a sharp end, and the entire strip of the blade is reinforced by a convex rib running in the middle from the tip to the handle.

Such a sword was forged from a steel strip from 3 to 8 centimeters wide and up to a meter long. The blade was double-edged, well sharpened at the end. The handle was made of wood or bone, protected by a small cross-shaped cover - a guard, and ended with a thickening counterweight to make the sword more comfortable to hold.

They wore the sword in a sheath on the left side on a special sling fastened with a buckle. By the end of the 13th century, the sword, as well as the dagger, was sometimes equipped with thin but strong steel chains, which were attached to the knight's armor. There was less chance of losing them in battle. Each knight's sword had its own given name, as if from an animated being. The sword of the knight Roland, the hero of the famous “Song,” was called Durandal, the sword of his faithful friend Olivier was called Altclair.

Another main knightly weapon - the spear - became longer. The painted shaft sometimes reached four meters; the tip was, as a rule, narrow and tetrahedral.

Gunsmiths now had to look for protection specifically from a piercing blow. As often happens, I again had to remember something that seemed to have already been abandoned - scale armor. True, they have changed beyond recognition.

The basis for additional protective weapons was an elegant tunic, which was worn over chain mail. But they began to sew it from very durable material, or even leather. However, it was covered on top with silk or velvet, and lined with metal scales underneath. Each of the scales was attached to a separate pin, and the ends of the pins were passed out and were gilded, or even decorated with precious stones.

Such weapons, which complemented the chain mail shirt, turned out to be very reliable, but also, of course, prohibitively expensive. Not every knight could afford it. And the one who had it took care of it in every possible way, using it no longer in battle, but in tournaments or solemn court ceremonies. However, it was precisely such weapons that influenced the further evolution of knightly armor.

Armor becomes metal

Over time, additional metal strips began to be strengthened directly on the chain mail. The chain mail thighs were also strengthened. Particular attention was paid to protecting those parts of the armor that were most open to attack in battle. This is how another type of additional weapons appeared - shoulder pads, bracers, knee pads with leggings.

The bracers - from the shoulder to the elbow, and the greaves - from the knee to the foot, were already so large that they covered the arms and legs to the middle of their thickness, completely protecting the front. They were fastened at the back with strong belts and buckles. It was no longer possible to put on such armor without the help of a squire.

Sometimes small movable parts were attached to the bracers from narrow transverse strips connected to each other according to the principle of the same scales, covering the shoulder and elbow. The leggings were also lengthened - the instep of the leg was protected. Leather knight's gloves were made with wide bells and reinforced on the outside with solid metal scales.

By the beginning of the 15th century, there was already so much metal on the basis of chain mail that it made sense to abandon chain mail altogether. The individual metal parts were fastened together with strips of hard, pressed leather boiled in oil.

Under such a shell the knight wore a thick quilted jacket made of leather or some dense material. A smart tunic was still worn on top, but now it consisted of two parts - upper and lower. The front half of the top was significantly shortened to open the bottom, and narrowed so that it fit smoothly, without folds, to the body. One or two metal plaques began to be sewn onto the upper tunic, to which chains from a helmet, sword and dagger were attached. The knight was girded wide belt in a metal frame and with a buckle. They wore it without tightening it, but loosely lowering it on the hips. On such a sword hung a sword and a dagger in a scabbard.

The shield at this time was still small, but its shape almost everywhere became triangular.

But the shape of the spurs, which served as a necessary accessory for the rider, and in addition were the main distinction of the knighthood - upon initiation, the knight was given golden spurs as a symbol - almost did not change. They were a round, or even faceted, spike, or a gear wheel on a short neck. The spurs were secured with straps that were fastened quite high above the heel.

Changes also affected the weapons used to protect the knight’s warhorse. Here, as with the horseman, chain mail was replaced by metal strips fastened with leather.

There was, of course, a good reason for the constant improvement of knightly offensive and defensive weapons in the 14th-15th centuries. It was the Hundred Years' War between England and France, during which the British captured vast French territory, owned Paris, but were eventually expelled and retained only the seaside city of Calais. The war was replete with bloody battles and losses on both sides were so great that gunsmiths had to show a lot of ingenuity. However, precisely because the clashes between the British and the French were too frequent, any improvement made by either side was immediately adopted by the other, and the chances were again equalized.

By the way, the development of weapons was also influenced by some other factors - for example... changes in the cut of secular clothing. When tight camisoles, tight trousers with puffs at the belly and long, sometimes even turned-up shoe toes were in fashion, knightly armor was also adjusted to this standard. As soon as wider, looser clothing became widespread, armor was forged in this manner.

The development of weapons was even influenced by the fact that at the beginning of the war success constantly accompanied the British, and this strengthened the already developing tendency among English knights to flaunt beautiful and richly decorated military equipment. In this they wanted, if not to surpass, then at least to compare with the French knights, who had such panache, as they say, in their blood, and who, of course, accepted the enemy’s challenge here too.

But the German knights were distinguished by obvious conservatism in fashion. They lived in their castles rather secludedly; French innovations reached their lands with a great delay. However, the penchant for ostentation was not entirely alien to them: German knights loved to decorate their armor with bells and bells.

Knightly weapons in the 15th century

In the 15th century knightly weapons quickly changed, and its individual parts continued to be improved.

The bracers were significantly improved by the addition of round convex plaques that protected the elbow. Later, complementary parts were added to the formerly half-shaped bracers, connected to them by hinges and straps with buckles. Now the knight's entire arm from shoulder to hand, with the exception of the elbow, was covered with steel. But the elbow was also covered with narrow transverse strips of iron. With the help of hinges they were made movable.

In exactly the same way as bracers, leggings were also improved. With the help of small side plates, the knee pads became movable. If previously the metal covered the legs only in front and half, now another metal half is added, fastened to the first with hinges and straps, which were gradually replaced by more convenient and reliable hooks. Now, from the popliteal cavity to the heel, the knight’s leg was protected with steel.

In the end, the knight's spurs also changed - they became longer and with very large wheels.

The uncomfortable tub-shaped helmet was replaced by a helmet with a metal visor equipped with eye and breathing holes. The visor was hinged on the sides of the helmet, and if necessary, it could be raised up, revealing the face, and lowered again in case of danger.

However, the old heavy helmet did not completely go out of use, but began to be used in tournaments, for which armor, unlike combat ones, was made even more massive. True, it did undergo some changes: the tournament helmet began to be attached to the shoulder pads, there were larger slits for the eyes, but for greater safety they were covered with an additional metal grill.

With such improved knightly weapons, the shield, it seems, became less necessary; it continued to be worn rather according to tradition. But gradually the former triangular shield was completely replaced by another - quadrangular, with a rounded lower edge and a cutout for a spear, which was made in the upper right corner. And such a shield was worn in a special way - not on the left hand, but hung on a short belt worn over the shoulder. It only protected the upper right chest and right arm. Subsequently, they also abandoned the belt from which it was suspended - the shield was attached to the shell on hooks or screwed in with screws. And from the second half of the 15th century, like the old-fashioned tub-shaped helmet, it began to be used only in tournaments.

Individual metal plates of protective weapons became more and more enlarged and assembled together. In the end, the knight found himself completely clad in iron.

The chest and back were covered with a solid cuirass, fastened with side hooks. The lower abdomen and upper legs were protected by additional plates attached to the cuirass. Individual parts of the cuirass were riveted onto belts, and therefore, in general, the armor was quite flexible.

The helmet changed again - gunsmiths invented the so-called “salad”. It looked like an overturned bowl with slightly sloped sides and an elongated back plate. When the salad was pulled over the head, it covered it entirely up to the line of the nose. To protect the lower part of the face, a special chin guard was attached to the bottom of the breastplate. In this way, both the head and face were completely protected, and for the eyes there was a narrow gap between the lower edge of the salad and the upper edge of the chin.

The salad could be thrown back a little to the back of the head, opening the face and allowing more air access, and in case of danger, it could be quickly pulled back over the head.

Armor of this type, of course, required considerable skill and time to manufacture and was very expensive. In addition, the new weapons also gave rise to a special type of decoration: individual parts of the armor began to be covered with artistic embossing, gilding, and niello. This fashion originated from the court of the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, and quickly spread. Now there was no need to wear an embroidered rich tunic, since the armor itself looked much more luxurious. Of course, they were available only to the most noble and wealthy knights. However, anyone else could get them, as a trophy on the battlefield or at a tournament, or even as a ransom for a prisoner.

Such armor did not weigh that much - 12-16 kilograms. But at the end of the 15th century it became much more massive, and for good reason: the knight had to defend himself from firearms. Now the weight of defensive weapons could exceed 30 kilograms; individual parts in armor reached one and a half hundred. Of course, it was possible to move in it only on horseback; there was now no point in thinking about fighting on foot.

And although such super-heavy armor really dates back to the decline of chivalry, one cannot help but be amazed not only artistic decoration armor, but also the perfection and thoughtfulness of their design itself.

The most advanced armor

By the end of the 15th century, gunsmiths finally found an extremely comfortable and perfect form of helmet, which replaced the salad. Here all the parts that already existed, but had previously been worn separately, were successfully combined together.

The knight's helmet took on an almost spherical shape and was equipped with a high crest. A visor was attached to it on hinges, which could move up and down along the ridge. The chin was connected to the helmet with loops and covered the lower face and neck.

A round metal “necklace” protected the upper chest, back and shoulders. It was made with a vertically standing “collar”, forged along the upper edge with a flagellum. There was a corresponding groove on the lower edge of the helmet, and this made it possible to connect the helmet with the necklace very firmly and securely.

The cuirass consisted of a breastplate and a backrest, connected with clasps. The breastplate was shaped in such a way that it seemed to deflect a direct blow from a spear or sword, softening it.

A support hook was riveted to the breastplate on the right side to support the heavy and long spear. Abdominal plates were attached to the front, covering the upper abdomen. Legguards were their continuation, and a lumbar cover was attached to the backrest.

The mantles were attached to the necklace using straps or using special pins. The right mantle was always smaller than the left, to make it more convenient to hold a spear under the right armpit. Sometimes the mantles were equipped with high ridges that protected the neck from side blows.

The bracers were divided into two parts. The upper one was a blank metal tube, and the lower one consisted of two halves, fastened from the inside. The elbow was covered with a special ulnar shell, allowing the arm to bend freely.

The hands were protected with metal gloves. Sometimes they were even made with separated fingers.

The legs up to the knees were covered with so-called half-tube covers. Below were knee pads with a side “socket” that protected the bend of the leg, and finally leg guards, which were a detachable tube that reached from the knee to the ankle. Leggings that completely protected the top of the feet were made at different times various shapes, depending on how the fashion for secular shoes changed.

Horse armor

The war horse, the knight's faithful companion, was now also almost completely hidden by armor. To carry him, and even an equally heavily armed rider, the horse, of course, required special strength and endurance.

The headrest or browband for a horse was usually forged from a single sheet of metal and covered its forehead. It had large eye holes with convex edges, covered with iron bars.

The horse's neck was covered with a collar. It was made up of transverse striped scales and most of all resembled... the tail of a crayfish. This armor completely covered the mane underneath and was attached to the forehead with a metal latch.

A special bib was also provided. Composed of several wide transverse stripes, it closed with the collar and, in addition to the chest, protected the upper part of the front legs. The sides of the horse were covered by two solid steel sheets connected by the upper concave edges. The side parts of the armor were closely connected to the breastplate.

From behind, the horse was also protected from possible attacks by very wide and convex armor, forged from solid sheets or assembled from separate narrow strips. To keep such armor firmly in place and not harm the horse, a special support base was placed under it, made of wood and upholstered in fabric or leather, or made entirely of whalebone.

The saddles on such armor were large, massive, with a wide shield-shaped pommel that reliably covered the rider’s hips, and with a high back. The reins and bridle straps were very wide, with metal plaques densely riveted on them, which served both for decoration and for additional protection from the chopping blows of the sword.

At ceremonial parades, tournaments or some other celebrations, knightly war horses were covered over armor with luxurious, richly embroidered blankets, which could, in addition to this, be decorated in some other way.

There truly was no limit to imagination here. As contemporaries testify, in 1461, during the ceremonial entry of Louis XI into Paris for coronation, the horses of his knightly retinue were covered partly with brocade, partly with velvet blankets, descending to the very ground and completely studded with small silver bells. And one of the knights close to the king named La Roche, wanting to stand out especially, hung bells the size of a human head around the blanket of his horse, which, as an eyewitness writes, “caused a terrifying ringing.”

How did offensive weapons change?

Here the external changes were not as striking as in defensive weapons. The main weapon always remained the sword. By the second half of the 14th century, its blade was lengthened and, to enhance the blow, it became not double-edged, but sharpened only on one side; the other turned into a wide butt. For greater convenience, the previously wide handle became thinner and was wrapped with wire. The scabbard was made of hard leather, which was painted or covered with fabric, and then covered with metal plates and decorations.

Interestingly, fashion also changed in the way of wearing a sword. In the middle of the 14th century, for example, and then in the second half of the 15th century, knights wore swords not on the left hip, as was customary in all other times, but in front, in the middle of the belt...

The spear, another main weapon of a knight, gradually divided into two main types: combat and tournament. The tournament constantly varied in the length, thickness and shape of the tip, which could be either blunt or sharp. The battle spear retained its original shape for a long time and consisted of a strong wooden shaft 3 to 5 meters long, usually ash, and a metal tip. Only the advent of solid metal armor forced gunsmiths to improve the spear. It became much shorter and thicker. The knight's hand holding the spear was now protected by a funnel-shaped steel cap on the shaft.

A mandatory accessory for a knight was a dagger with a narrow and long quadrangular blade. They could hit a defeated enemy in the slightest opening in the armor. Such a weapon was called the “dagger of mercy,” because it happened that a defeated knight, not wanting to beg for mercy, asked the winner to finish him off, which he did, showing the enemy the last mercy as a sign of respect for his valor and honor.

Other types of offensive weapons eventually appeared in medieval Europe - for example, a huge sword that reached up to two meters in length. It could only be wielded with two hands, which is why it was called two-handed. There was a sword and “one and a half hands”. Special types of striking weapons also became widespread - the club, the ax, the reed. It was intended to break through metal armor and helmets. However, as a rule, all these types of weapons were not used by knights. They were used by hired regular troops and infantry.

Weaponsmith

Unfortunately, not many names of those who created knightly weapons have survived to our time. It’s a pity - it was made with skillful hands, and many of the armor, swords, spears, daggers, helmets, shields that are now on display in the best museums in the world can rightfully be called real masterpieces. They happily combine carefully thought-out functionality and complete artistic beauty. True, we still know something, albeit a little.

In the late period of chivalry, gunsmiths began to put marks on their products, and thanks to this, it can be argued that hereditary masters Aguirro, Hernandez, Martinez, Ruiz, and some others worked in the Spanish city of Toledo.

In northern Italy, Milan became a major weapons center, where the Piccinino and Missaglia families of craftsmen were especially famous. And the famous brand of another Italian city - Genoa - was even counterfeited by less conscientious gunsmiths in other places in Europe for the purpose of better sales.

In Germany, the city of Solingen has always been a famous weapons center.

Tactics of knightly battles

However, each knight had his own, individual weapons. The knight relied only on himself in a one-on-one duel. However, in a big battle, the knights acted as a single force, interacting with each other. Therefore, of course, the knightly army also had special tactics for conducting general combat. Moreover, unlike weapons, it remained almost unchanged for centuries.

Now, from the height of our time, it is easy to judge its primitiveness and monotony, reproaching the knights for carelessly following elementary discipline, for complete contempt for the infantry, and for their own too. However, it was the knights who decided the outcome of any battle. What could the infantry, albeit numerous, oppose to a detachment of professional warriors clad in armor, sweeping away everything in their path? When the principles of combat began to change, chivalry had to leave. Not only from the battlefields, but also from the stage of history.

The knightly army gathered like this: each knight brought several squires under the banner of his lord, who during the battle remained behind the battle line, keeping several spare horses and spare weapons at the ready. In addition, the knight was accompanied by lightly armed horsemen, who were none other than household servants, as well as a detachment of infantry recruited from serfs.

The knights themselves usually formed into wedge units before battle. In the first row there were no more than five horsemen, in the next two there were seven, followed by rows of nine, eleven and thirteen horsemen. Behind, forming a regular quadrangle, followed the rest of the knight's cavalry.

These formations, as everyone probably remembers from the film by Sergei Eisentstein, were the knights of the Teutonic Order advancing on the army of Alexander Nevsky in the famous Battle of the Ice in 1242. But, by the way, the Russian squads eagerly used the same principle when they were the first to attack the enemy.

With such a narrow wedge it was easy to ram the enemy’s defenses; especially since the defending side usually fielded poorly armed and poorly trained infantry. In order to maintain formation for the decisive moment of the battle, the wedge initially moved very slowly, almost at a walk, and only when approaching the enemy almost closely did the knights start their horses into a gait.

The huge mass of the wedge easily broke through the infantry, and immediately the horsemen turned around in a wide front. That's when the real battle began, breaking up into many separate fights. It could continue for hours, and often the leaders of both sides could not intervene in its course.

How did knightly martial arts take place?

At first, the knights fought on horseback: two horsemen with spears at the ready, covering themselves with shields, rushed at each other, aiming at the enemy’s shield or helmet. The blow, amplified by the weight of the armor, the speed and mass of the horse, was terrible. The less agile knight, stunned, flew out of the saddle with a split shield or knocked off helmet; in another case, both of their spears broke like reeds. Then the knights threw their horses, and a sword fight began.

During the Middle Ages it was quite different from the graceful, relaxed fencing of the later age of musketeers. The blows were rare and very heavy. The only way to repel them was with a shield. However, in close combat, the shield could serve not only as a defensive weapon, but also as an offensive one: it could, seizing the moment, unexpectedly push the enemy so that he lost his balance, and immediately deal him a decisive blow.

Quite reliable ideas about what a knightly duel looked like can be obtained, for example, from famous novel Henry Rider Haggard's "Beautiful Margaret", where in one of the scenes they came face to face sworn enemies the Englishman Peter Brook and the Spaniard Morella - true, not on the battlefield, but on the lists, in the presence of the king himself and many spectators, but the battle was nevertheless fought to the death:

"The collision was so strong that Peter's spear was shattered into pieces, and Morell's spear, sliding along the enemy's shield, got stuck in his visor. Peter staggered in the saddle and began to fall backwards. It seemed that he was about to fall, the strings of his helmet burst The helmet was torn from his head, and Morella rode past with the helmet on the point of a spear.

But Peter didn't fall. He threw away the broken spear and, grabbing the saddle strap, pulled himself back up. Morella tried to stop his horse in order to turn and attack the Englishman before he recovered, but his horse was rushing quickly, it was impossible to stop him. Finally the opponents turned to each other again. But Peter did not have a spear or helmet, and on the tip of Morell’s spear hung the helmet of his enemy, from which he tried in vain to free himself.

Morell's spear was aimed at Peter's unprotected face, but when the spear was very close, Peter dropped the reins and struck with his shield the white plume that fluttered at the end of Morell's spear, the same one that had previously been torn from Peter's head. He calculated correctly: the white feathers swayed very low, but enough so that, bending in the saddle, Peter could slip under his deadly spear. And when the opponents drew level, Peter threw out his long right arm and, grasping Morell like a steel hook, pulled him out of the saddle. The black horse rushed forward without a rider, and the white horse with a double burden.

Morella grabbed Peter by the neck, the opponents rocked in the saddle, and the frightened horse rushed until it finally turned sharply to the side. The opponents fell on the sand and lay for some time, stunned by the fall...

Peter and Morella jumped away from each other and drew their long swords. Peter, who had no helmet, held his shield high to protect his head and calmly awaited the attack.

Morella struck first, his sword clashing with steel. Before Morella could get back into position, Peter struck back at him, but Morella ducked and the sword only cut the black feathers off his helmet. With the speed of lightning, the tip of Morell's sword rushed straight into Peter's face, but the Englishman managed to deflect slightly, and the blow missed him. Morella attacked again and struck with such force that, although Peter managed to substitute his shield, the Spaniard's sword slid across him and struck his unprotected neck and shoulder. Blood stained the white armor and Peter staggered.

Apparently enraged by the pain of the wound and the fear of defeat, with the battle cry: “Long live the Brums!” - Peter gathered all his strength and rushed at Morell. Spectators saw that half of the Spaniard's helmet was lying on the sand. This time it was Morell's turn to sway. Moreover, he dropped his shield..."

But even though the blows inflicted by the knight’s hand were powerful, knights died in battle much less often than peasant infantrymen or lightly armed horsemen. And the point here is not only that the knights were reliably protected by armor.

Each of the knights saw in the other knight an opponent equal to himself, a member of the same common knightly brotherhood, a closed caste for which borders and kings mattered little. Borders were constantly changing, lands passed from one sovereign to another, and the knights owned the same castles and villages and were all considered faithful servants of one Saint Christian Church. There was no point in killing the enemy, except in those cases when he was the enemy of enemies or did not want to give up and asked to finish him off in the name of knightly honor. However, much more often the defeated knight recognized himself as a prisoner, and the winner received a horse, expensive armor, or even lands with villages as a ransom for his freedom...

Did knights use “stratagems” on the battlefield?

But, of course, there were battles in the Middle Ages when the fate of entire countries was at stake, and sometimes the enemy could not be considered equal to oneself - for example, the “infidels” during the crusades for the liberation of the Holy Land. So the knights were quite capable of various military tricks: flanking maneuvers, false attacks and retreats that lured the enemy.

In 1066, Duke William of Normandy laid claim to the English throne. But since the Anglo-Saxon king Harold was not going to voluntarily give it up, William called all the Norman knights under his banner. The assembled army was also joined by many poor, landless knights from all over France, hoping for rich booty. On equipped ships, William sailed across the English Channel and landed in southeastern England near the city of Hastings.

Harold, not supported by the majority of his vassals, managed to gather only a small squad and a peasant militia armed with battle axes. However, the Norman knightly army, which attacked Harold’s detachment on October 14, 1066, did not manage to gain the upper hand for a long time. The Anglo-Saxons successfully fortified themselves on the hillside and, one after another, repelled the attacks of the horsemen with long spears.

Then Wilhelm had to resort to a military trick: part of his army took a feigned flight. Believing that victory was already in his hands, Harold set off to pursue the enemy, and in the open the ranks of the Anglo-Saxon infantry were mixed. A new battle ensued, and now the Norman knights were complete masters of the situation. Harold died, and his army fled. In December 1066, William was crowned on the English throne.

Another medieval battle is famous for its skillful maneuver that ensured victory. It dates back to the Hundred Years' War and happened in 1370 near the town of Valen. The French knights suddenly attacked the English camp, but the enemy managed to form a battle formation, and at first the French attack was repulsed. But still, the leader of the French knightly army, Bertrand Du Guesclin, managed to carry out a distracting flank maneuver. The ranks of the British, as at Hastings three centuries ago, mixed up, and they were defeated, losing - a huge number at that time - 10,000 soldiers, killed, wounded and surrendered.

It must be assumed that the French knight Bertrand Du Guesclin was a capable and skillful military leader, since such an unexpected maneuver was not the first in his record. Six years earlier, near the town of Cocherel, his ten-thousand-strong knightly army was attacked by a large detachment of English mercenaries and Navarrese cavalry acting in alliance with them. Du Guesclin retreated, and then completely surrounded the enemy and forced him to surrender.

When did knightly troops begin to lose their former importance?

At the same time, in the same XIV century, the knightly army, alas, increasingly lost its claims to a primary role on the battlefield.

As early as 1302, the Battle of Courtrai in Flanders demonstrated just how powerful a well-organized, disciplined infantry could be. The French army that invaded Flanders was completely defeated by the people's militia, and the losses among the knights were so great that after the battle, seven hundred golden spurs were hung as trophies in the cathedral of the city of Courtrai. In history, this battle is often called the “Battle of the Golden Spurs.”

And as it turned out, the English nobility, during the Hundred Years' War, much earlier than the French, realized that for success it was necessary not to despise their own infantry, but to act with it, as well as with archers from bows and crossbows, in unity and cooperation. The French did not trust their militia at all. Even at the height of the war, the authorities sometimes forbade townspeople to practice archery, and when the Parisians once volunteered to field 6 thousand crossbowmen, the knights arrogantly refused the help of the “shopkeepers.”

August 26, 1346 entered the history of France as a black date. It was then, at the Battle of Crecy, the main role In the actions of a small, nine thousand-strong detachment of the British, commanded by King Edward III himself, infantry was assigned for the first time. The French army, under the command of King Philip VI, consisted of twelve thousand knights, twelve thousand hired foreign infantry, which included six thousand Genoese crossbow shooters, and fifty thousand weakly armed townspeople with almost no military training.

The defeat of the French army turned out to be terrible and at the same time instructive. The opponents acted in completely different ways in the battle.

Edward III, in front of his entire detachment, lined up a long chain of English archers, who brought their art to amazing perfection and were famous for the fact that they could hit any target from three hundred steps.

Behind the shooters, knights mixed with infantry and other shooters were placed in three battle lines. The horses of the dismounted knights remained in the convoy behind the army.

When Philip moved his army against the English, it obeyed very unfriendly, the last ranks were just about to set out, and the front ones were already far away. But when the French came close enough to the British, Philip suddenly decided to postpone the battle and give the scattered detachments the opportunity to unite and rest overnight.

However, the French knights, carried away by the thirst for battle, continued to move forward - without any order, overtaking and pushing back one another. Finally they came close to the British. It seemed to them the greatest disgrace to their honor to delay the battle, and by this time the king himself had already forgotten his first prudent decision and gave the order to attack.

According to the previously planned disposition, the Genoese riflemen were supposed to move forward, and the ranks of the French parted to give them way. However, the mercenaries moved without much desire. They were already tired from the march, and their shields remained in the lagging carts, because, following the first royal order, they expected to fight only the next day.

The leaders of the mercenaries loudly cursed the new order. Hearing this, the Count of Alençon arrogantly said, as the chroniclers report: “That’s all the benefit of this bastard, she’s only good for eating, and for us it will be more of a hindrance than a help.”

The Genoese, however, came close to the British and uttered their wild war cry three times, hoping to terrify them. But in response, they calmly began murderous shooting from their bows.

Long arrows with feathers hit the Genoese before they had time to pull the bowstrings of their crossbows. The English bows were so powerful that the arrows pierced the armor of the mercenaries.

When the Genoese finally fled, the French knights themselves began to trample them with their war horses - the mercenaries prevented them from rushing to attack. All military formations had collapsed, and now the English archers were shooting not only the Genoese, but also the knights, and they especially tried to hit the horses.

Soon in front of the ranks of the British there was only a shapeless mass of horsemen and dead mercenaries stretched out under fallen horses. It was then that the English infantry rushed onto the battlefield, calmly finishing off the defeated. The rest of the French army fled in disarray.

French losses were horrific. 11 dukes and counts, representatives of the highest nobility of the kingdom, 1,500 knights with simpler titles and 10,000 infantry remained on the battlefield.

The Hundred Years' War - the decline of chivalry

And more than once during the Hundred Years' War, the English side showed the French what discipline, thoughtful tactics and unity of action mean on the battlefield. On September 19, 1356, the French knighthood suffered another terrible defeat at the Battle of Poitiers.

An English detachment of six thousand, commanded by the eldest son of Edward 111, nicknamed the Black Prince because of the color of his armor, took up a very advantageous position in the vicinity of Poitiers behind hedges and vineyards in which archers were hidden. The French knights moved to attack along a narrow passage between the hedges, but a hail of arrows fell on them, and then the English knights hit the French knights huddled in a disorderly crowd. About five thousand soldiers died, not counting the huge number taken prisoner. King John II himself, who by this time had replaced Philip VI on the French throne, also surrendered to the mercy of the winner.

The French army outnumbered the enemy almost five times, but this time the English archers were hiding behind a specially constructed palisade, which prevented the advance of the heavily armed knights. At Agincourt, the French lost six thousand killed, among whom were the Dukes of Brabant and Breton, and another two thousand knights were captured, including the king's closest relative, the Duke of Orleans.

And yet, in the end, the French were the victors in the Hundred Years' War, conquering vast territories of the kingdom that the British had owned for many years. Having learned the lessons taught, France relied in the war against the invaders not so much on chivalry as on the entire people; It was not without reason that the greatest successes in the war were associated with a simple village girl named Joan of Arc. Time changed inexorably, and chivalry left the historical stage, where it had played the main roles for so long, giving way to other forces.

Knight's Armament

On the battlefield, a heavily armed knight had all the advantages. Riders of junior ranks (sergeants who were not knights) tried to imitate them in everything, although their armor and weapons were inferior to those of knights. The troops, recruited from urban and rural militia, consisted of archers, crossbowmen, whose role in battles was constantly increasing, and auxiliary infantry units armed with spears, spears and knives. Their armor consisted of an iron helmet and short chain mail woven from rings or armor made of leather and covered with metal plaques.

Knight's Battle Dress

Knight's weapons

The rider's equipment consisted of a spear about three meters long, which he pressed with his hand to his body and, leaning on the stirrups, in a fight with the enemy, he tried to knock him out of the saddle, piercing his shield and armor with the spear. A similar practice of attacking with a spear at the ready, illustrated by embroideries from Bayeux, appeared in the 11th century, although at a later time there were knights fighting using the ancient method of spear throwing.

In addition to the spear, the knight was armed with a straight and wide-bladed sword; sometimes he had another shorter sword attached to his belt. By the end of the 13th century. armor has become so strong that piercing and cutting blows have lost their effectiveness, and the sword becomes a slashing weapon. In battle, the massiveness of the sword was also of great importance, making it possible to knock down the enemy on the spot. In foot combat, the so-called “Danish axe” (introduced by the Vikings) was used, which was usually held with both hands. Being an offensive weapon, the sword also had a symbolic meaning for each knight: it was usually given a name (Roland's sword Durendal), it was blessed on the day of knighting, and it was passed down as part of the lineage.

Defensive knightly armor included chain mail, which went down in the form of a shirt to the knees with slits in the front and back for ease of movement or formed something like pants. It was made of many intertwined iron rings and sometimes had sleeves and a hood. Hands were protected by gloves-mittens, also woven from rings. The total weight of the knight's armor reached 12 kilograms.

Under the chain mail the knight wore a sweatshirt, and on top - something like a sleeveless tunic, tied at the waist, on which, starting from the 13th century, the warrior's coats of arms were attached. The protection of the most vulnerable parts of the body with metal plates also dates back to this time; connected to each other, they became widespread starting from the end of the 14th century. Around 1300, half armor or light chain mail appeared, which was a short garment made of linen or leather, covered inside or outside with metal plaques or plates. The helmet was worn over the hood and had a wide variety of shapes; initially it was conical, then cylindrical with a nosepiece, and later it almost completely covered the back of the head and face. Small slits for the eyes and holes in the helmet allowed breathing and orientation in battle. The shield was almond-shaped and made of wood, lined with copper and reinforced with iron. It almost disappeared from use when the wearing of armor became common.

From book Everyday life knights in the Middle Ages by Flory Jean

From the book Daily Life of Knights in the Middle Ages by Flory Jean

Chapter five. From horseman to knight 1 Bumke J. Op. cit. R. 29.

From the book Another History of Wars. From sticks to bombards author Kalyuzhny Dmitry Vitalievich

Weapons and armor of a knight And now let's see what and in what the knights fought. Literature, especially fiction, widely spreads the opinion that European knightly weapons were terribly heavy and inconvenient. As soon as novelists do not mock knights: the poor

From the book Great Secrets of Civilizations. 100 stories about the mysteries of civilizations author Mansurova Tatyana

The sad image of a knight Who do most modern women dream of? That's right, about a noble knight who is ready to do anything for his beautiful lady: fight a dragon, throw all the riches of the world at her feet and love until death. Alas, this is all just a beautiful fairy tale,

From the book Sword through the Centuries. The Art of Weaponry by Hutton Alfred

Chapter 14 The merry joke of Long Meg of Westminster, and how she, with sword and buckler, defeated a Spanish knight “In the time of the memorable Henry VIII, the family was very worthy people a daughter was born, who later received the nickname Long Meg for her height, because she not only

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book The Knight and His Armor. Plate vestments and weapons by Oakeshott Ewart

Chapter 1 ARMAMENT OF THE KNIGHT French knights died in hundreds under the terrifying hail of English arrows, fell, struck by blows of swords, axes and maces, which were skillfully used by heavily armed English horsemen. Piles of dead and wounded warriors and their horses

author Livraga Jorge Angel

Vadim Karelin Look for the Knight, or Eternal Watch After its release, the film “Day Watch,” as expected, broke all records. In the first nine days of release alone, it was watched by five million viewers. And if you can talk about the idea of ​​the film and its artistic merits

From the book The Path to the Grail [Collection of articles] author Livraga Jorge Angel

Ilya Molostvov The Path of the Jedi Knight A dull landscape of an almost deserted distant planet. Young Luke Skywalker stands in front of his future teacher Obiwan Kenobi and listens with silent surprise about the secret of the Force that permeates everything, connects everything and is inexhaustible.

author Vorobyovsky Yuri Yurievich

VISIT OF THE KNIGHT OF REVENGE I remember my long-ago interview with Vladimir Ivanovich “the bricklayer”. At first we agreed with N.N., but at the last moment he decided to “keep a low profile.” They say that what the foreign “brothers” will say, there are already enough ill-wishers there. But - gave the go-ahead for

From the book The Fifth Angel Sounded author Vorobyovsky Yuri Yurievich

Now this Kadosh Knight ribbon will fly to the floor. Signs of Masonic revenge fly on the dirty

From the book Vikings. Sailors, pirates and warriors by Hez Yen

Weapons Typical offensive weapons found in Viking habitats are swords, battle axes, spears and bows. Weapons are recovered mainly from burials. Early Danish finds include the same assortment of weapons as

From the book History of the Crusades in documents and materials author Zaborov Mikhail Abramovich

Letter from an unknown knight, participant in the events Let it be known to you that Alexei Barisiak, as I already told you, came to us in Corfu and here, kneeling and shedding tears, humbly and urgently asked us to go with him to Constantinople, to help him,

From the book Ancient China. Volume 2: Chunqiu Period (8th-5th centuries BC) author Vasiliev Leonid Sergeevich

The honor of a knight and the dignity of an aristocrat of knightly duels and especially duels Ancient China I didn’t know, at least the texts don’t say anything about it. Nevertheless noble people sometimes they measured their strength and killed each other. This is not about fighting in the heat of battle (such

The most popular among the knights was sword, a cold piercing and chopping metal weapon with a long, up to one and a half meters, straight, double-edged blade. The scabbards of swords are usually wooden and covered with leather or cloth; they were attached to a belt belt on a baldric, each end of which, cut into straps, formed a woven leather ring. The belt straps are usually covered with velvet, silk and embroidered with gold, and sometimes decorated with enamel.
In the 12th century, a special class of knightly weapons was formed. Knight's swords stood out for their beauty; only noble gentlemen could wield them; the weapon took part in church liturgies, was consecrated by the clergy. The origin of unique examples of knightly weapons was often attributed to supernatural forces; some swords were endowed with magical qualities. These kinds of weapons were kept in the treasuries of monasteries under the altars, on the graves of their former owners, and they were given their own names.
The classic knightly long sword finally took shape by the 13th century. The average length of his blade was 75-80 cm, the maximum - 90 cm. The sword was flat, five centimeters wide and had a fuller. The guard was a simple crossbar, the arms of which could be slightly bent upward. The handle, designed for one palm, was 10 cm long and ended with a pommel-counterweight, which was often used as a hiding place for storing relics. The weight of the sword was 1.25-1.8 kg.
In the first quarter of the 14th century, after the introduction plate armor, the blade of the knight's sword becomes longer, which increases the power of his blow. The hilt of the sword is also lengthened, allowing a two-handed grip. This is how the one-and-a-half-handed sword appeared, first in Germany, then in England, then in the rest of Western Europe.
A sword with a handle designed to be grasped exclusively with two hands is called two-handed. The length of the two-handed sword reached two meters, it was worn without a sheath on the shoulder. The two-handed sword was, in particular, the weapon of the 16th century Swiss infantrymen. Warriors with two-handed swords were in the front ranks of the battle formation: their task was to cut and knock down the long spears of the enemy's landsknechts. Two-handed swords as military weapons did not survive the 16th century and were subsequently used as honorary weapons with the banner.
In the 14th century, a sword appeared in the cities of Spain and Italy, intended not for knights, but for townspeople and peasants. It differed from the usual one in its lighter weight and length and was called the “civilian sword.”

Medieval swords
1. Wide single-edged sword made of iron. Found in a swamp. Denmark. 100-300
2. Double-edged iron sword with a bronze hilt and scabbard fittings. Denmark. 400-450
3. Single-edged Viking sword. Norway. Around 800
4. Double-edged iron sword from Scandinavia. 9th or 10th century
5. German double-edged sword with an American walnut-shaped pommel. 1150-1200
6. English folchen 1260-1270, kept in Durham Cathedral. A short, heavy sword with a curved blade. The back of the blade can be straight, curved or beveled near the tip.
7. Double-edged sword with a triangular pommel. Around 1380

The following weapons are a spear, cold, piercing or throwing weapon - a shaft with a stone, bone or metal tip, with a total length of one and a half to five meters.
The spear has been known since the Early Paleolithic era and was originally a pointed stick; later a stone tip was attached to the shaft. IN Bronze Age metal tips appear, the method of attaching the tip to the shaft has changed; if in the Stone Age it was tied on the outside of the shaft by the shank, then in the Bronze Age the tip was either put on the shaft or wedged out of the shaft itself. In addition, if there were external ring-shaped ears, the tip was tied to the shaft with a cord. Here are some types of spears and other polearms.

1. Spear with a leaf-shaped tip. Switzerland. XV century
2. Pike. Europe. Around 1700
3. Subulate tetrahedral peak. Switzerland or Germany. XV century
4. Boarding pike. Spain. XIX century
5. Rogatina for a wild boar. Germany. XVI century
6. Spear of the East African Maasai. XX century
7. Spear of Sudanese dervishes with a bamboo shaft. Around 1880
8. Protazan “bull tongue”. Presumably Switzerland. 1450-1550
9. Protazan “bull tongue” with the coat of arms of Luivenoord. Netherlands.

No less good was (French arbalete from Latin arcus - bow and ballista - throwing projectile), a cold throwing weapon in the Middle Ages, a steel or wooden bow mounted on a wooden machine (stock).
Shooting from a crossbow is carried out with short arrows with leather or wooden fletching (or without it). The first crossbows in Europe appeared in the ninth century. The accuracy and power of crossbow shooting made such a strong impression on contemporaries that in 1139 the Pope at the Second Lateran Council condemned the crossbow as an “ungodly weapon” and proposed to exclude it from the armament of Christian troops. However, subsequently, crossbows not only did not go out of use, but, on the contrary, received widespread recognition. They began to be abandoned only in the sixteenth century as firearms spread and improved. German landsknechts used the crossbow until the end of the sixteenth century, and British riflemen fought with it even in 1627.
The medieval crossbow consisted of a wooden stock with a butt that allowed it to be thrown over the shoulder. A longitudinal groove was arranged in the stock, where a short heavy arrow was placed. A bow was attached to the stock. A strong, thick bowstring was usually woven from ox sinew or hemp. Depending on the method of cocking the bowstring, medieval crossbows were divided into three main types. In the simplest version, the bowstring was pulled using an attached iron lever called a “goat’s leg.” For a more powerful crossbow, the bowstring was pulled by a gear mechanism. And the most formidable and long-range was the crossbow, equipped with a collar - a block device with two handles.
In the twentieth century, the crossbow was sometimes used as a military weapon in wars of national liberation, most often as a trap crossbow. During the First World War of 1914-1918, the Germans used the easel crossbow as a grenade launcher.
Since the mid-1950s in Western countries crossbow sport is developing. Sports crossbows served as a model for the creation of modern military crossbows. In terms of their dimensions and weight, they are close to machine guns and submachine guns and are used in reconnaissance and sabotage units. Combat crossbows are often made dismountable, which simplifies their transportation and camouflage.

No less powerful mace(from Latin bulla - ball), a bladed impact weapon about 0.5-0.8 m long in the form of a heavy stone or metal head on a wooden handle, a type of club.
The mace appeared in the Neolithic, it was widely used in the countries of the Ancient East. It was used less frequently in the ancient world. Its Roman variety, the clave, appeared in the 2nd century. In medieval Europe, the mace became widespread in the 13th century; in Rus' it was used in the 13th-17th centuries. A mace with a spherical head divided into ribs-plates (six-pin) was very widely used in Central Asia. The Cossacks had a mace (nasek) until the beginning of the 20th century. Until the 19th century, the mace served as a symbol of power: it was worn by Turkish pashas, ​​Polish and Ukrainian hetmans, as well as Cossack village and village atamans in Russia. According to their structure, clubs are divided into five types.
1. A simple, non-metallic mace that is made of a single material, most often wood.
2. A composite mace with a rigidly fixed pommel, made of several materials.
3. A mace of a movable design.
4. All-metal mace.
5. Ceremonial mace, symbol of power.