The Medieval Knight

Although history has made much of the individual knight’s martial skills, in reality the success, or otherwise, of a campaign often depended upon far more mundane matters. The truth was, campaigning could be difficult.

Life for the knight on campaign could be miserable or comfortable, depending on several factors. The actual rank of a knight would play a large part. A duke took several tents, campaign furniture, even hangings for the interior of his tent, and copious supplies of food and wine. A poor knight took what he could afford: a tent for himself, and supplies for his few followers.

KNIGHT, c.1290

By the late 13th century, many knights were wearing a coat of plates, or occasionally even a cuirie, beneath their surcoat but over their mail coat. This figure is of a knight of the Hastings family. 1) Helm, Italian, c.1300. 2) Kettle hat. 3) Separate coif, with rear slit tightened by a lace, obviating the need for a ventail. 4) Couter, from effigy of William Longespée the Younger, Salisbury Cathedral. 5) Suggested appearance of a reinforced surcoat. 6) Coat of plates, showing vertical plates riveted inside. 7) Reconstruction of a gauntlet covered in whalebone plates. 8) Reconstruction of a rowel spur, from fragments, c.1300. 9) Sword belt secured to scabbard by two laces. 10) Great sword, Burrell Collection, Glasgow, c.1270–1330. 11) Great sword, c.1250–1350. 12) Sword, Royal Armouries, c.1250–80. 13) Garnache with hood.

The setting for the campaign also affected the way a knight lived. English armies in France could, when necessary, take food from the surrounding countryside or from captured towns, in which case a knight with a keen eye could see himself and his men well stocked. The chevauchée, a mounted raid deep into enemy territory, was also a good way to deny the enemy his own provisions, and it was a slap in the face to the lord supposedly protecting the area. Similarly, booty was forthcoming, either from battlefield plunder, items from towns or else from ransoming important prisoners, who were far more willing to give themselves up to another knight than to a ruffian archer or billman. The benefits of plunder, however, might be offset by the knowledge that the army could be on campaign for weeks or months, that sieges were liable to drag on, and that, especially in the latter case, disease was very likely to strike. The campaigning season for medieval armies was traditionally the months from spring until autumn, but in reality knights found themselves on campaign in less than ideal conditions. The battle at Towton in Yorkshire, fought in a bitter blizzard in March 1461, is well known; the battle of Wakefield fought the December before is less so.

It was a captain’s duty to ensure that his men were kept under control where possible. Henry V forbade plundering in France and hanged an archer who stole a pyx from a church. However, Henry did endeavour to ensure that his men were paid and adequately fed, though even he could not always prevent the slaughter and looting that followed the fall of a town, as happened at Caen in 1417. Since this was accepted practice in cases where surrender had initially been refused, there was little even the king could do. When a town was taken, a garrison was installed, including knights, all commanded by a captain. Some knights might remain in the town for years, or at least until their contract expired. If single they might even marry French women. During Henry V’s reign some knights would have settled in Normandy, being granted estates in return for military duties. Nobles would also have received large parcels of land in return for duties such as the upkeep of the local castle and its garrison.

LOGISTICS OF 15TH-CENTURY WARFARE

In order to carry enough provisions for a large force, many wagons were needed, sometimes more than could reasonably be procured. The armour of the captains, armoured knights and other retainers would be carried in carts, the pieces perhaps wrapped in hay in locked barrels, but other soldiers, both mounted and foot, carried their own, together with any spares, a blanket and a day’s food ration. Food was an obvious essential, together with ale and wine casks. However, room also had to be made for the large number of arrow sheaves carried for the use of the archers, each bound sheaf consisting of about 24 shafts. Spare heads and shafts were also necessary.

A well-armed force might also have cannon in its train, for which specially cut stone balls, cast lead or, towards the end of the century, cast iron balls, had to be carried, as well as gunpowder and all the paraphernalia necessary to lay and fire the guns: rammers, powder ladles, sponges, scourers, linstocks, etc. Occasionally older forms of siege engines, such as catapults (some built on site or from transported sections) and sheds were called upon, requiring ropes, grease and nails. Mobile forges were a necessity both for armourers and farriers. Bedding and tents for the wealthier men, together with creature comforts – folding chairs, beds, sideboards, chests of various sizes – added to the bulk of material carried. As well as food for the troops, fodder was sometimes also carried for the horses used by mounted contingents, and for pack animals and draught horses or oxen. When supplies ran short, they had either to be taken by force or bought, so large amounts of money had to be carried in barrels or chests.

Much of a campaign was taken up in marching, in hot sun and soaking rain, over unmade roads sometimes turned to bogs.

In siege actions, knights often sat in front of a castle for weeks with little to do unless an assault was planned, but the chance to win renown via a scaling ladder was also highly dangerous. Sometimes knights would ride off with their escorts to visit a tournament, where rules of chivalry would prevent them being arrested. A typical knight had several followers, at least one of whom would have been a valet, whose duty it was to look after his master. Damaged armour would need repairing by the armourers who moved with the army; swords had to be honed. The knight’s followers would find him lodgings or tents that could be paid for with coin, or else would erect his own tent.

A knight’s status meant that he also had money enough to pay for food or other items. However, a noble had to rely on his retainers and his household to supply the core of his forces. These were the only reliable followers he had; some of them were knights like himself, who went with him in peace or war. The retainers themselves also brought tenants, but if these tenants refused to come, or deserted, if the arrayed troops supplied to the lord did not materialize, then he could not deliver an effective force for a campaign.

In England during the Wars of the Roses, the campaigns tended to be much shorter. For one thing England is much smaller than France, but there were significantly few sieges of towns or cities during this period, most of the conflict taking the form of violent battles or skirmishes. Despite this, some historians have calculated that an average campaign lasted only 23 days. However, it was not foreign soil over which the armies marched, and therefore any pillaging would cause widespread distrust and unrest among the king’s subjects; the only exception was campaigns into Scotland during this period.

Commanders were aware that if money ran short then pay and food supply suffered and men would desert. It meant that the troops were best recruited and moved swiftly while they were relatively happy. The author of the Boke of Noblesse, which was addressed to Edward IV before his French expedition in 1475, suggests that unpleasant excesses by troops in earlier campaigns were caused by a lack of proper and regular pay. One factor made these campaigns different from those in the earlier part of the century. Lords and arrayed troops often chose the opposite side to that of a rival so they could resolve differences by force. Thus a number of titled men perished, being killed on the field or executed afterwards instead of being taken prisoner for ransom, such was the sense of revenge felt by families for one another. The chivalric code between knights was passed over in the pursuit of bloody retribution, and the chance of dying a violent death during a campaign was perhaps greater than had previously been the case.

KNIGHT AND EQUIPMENT, c.1390

Sir Hugh Calveley, based on his effigy at Bunbury, Cheshire, wears a tight padded jupon over his armour. Beneath it, are separate breast- and backplates, the former with a skirt hanging from internal leather straps. A full mail coat and padded aketon were usually still worn underneath. The sabaton is tied to the shoe, and also laced to the hinged greave. The poleyn is attached to a plate cuisse by pivoting rivets, and the cuisse has a tab to tie it to points from the undergarment. Plate vambraces are laced at the shoulder by two points threaded through holes in a leather tab riveted to the top of the enclosing upper cannon. The helmet visor can be removed by pulling out the pin on each arm near the pivot. The jewelled sword belt probably hung from hidden hooks at the hips, balanced by a rondel dagger. 1) A loose form of jupon. The aventail is covered by a decorative cloth covering. 2) German basinet showing the form of the Klappvisier. 3) Basinet with aventail. The top of the mail was stitched to a leather band. Slits in the band were forced over vervelles along the edge of the helmet, and secured by a cord through the vervelles. 4) Late 14th-century great basinet with plate collar. 5) Breastplate riveted to a covering, with attached fauld and holes for a lance-rest, based on a German example. 6) Independent breastplate, late 14th century. 7) Cuisse, poleyn, greave and sabaton for right leg, from the boy’s armour in Chartres Cathedral. The deep lower plate of the poleyn now articulates with the greave, probably by a turning pin. 8) Hour-glass latten gauntlets of the Black Prince. A plate was shaped to cover the back and sides of the hand. Overlapping plates (scales) were riveted to leather strips that were stitched to the glove and riveted to the main plate. 9) Reconstructed tinned rowel spur, late 14th century. 10) Sword from the Great Ouse at Ely, c.1370–1400. 11) Sword belt, from effigy of Sir Humphrey Littlebury (1360), at Holbeach, Lincs. 12) Sword belt with smaller belt now twisted round scabbard, from effigy of Lord Montacute (1389), Salisbury Cathedral. 13) Hammer and mace. 14) Long houppelande with side vents, piked soled hose and hood-turban. 15) Short houppelande, piked soled parti-coloured hose, and hood-turban.

Flags took several forms. The pennon or pennoncelle was a small triangular flag nailed to the lance behind the head, and was painted with the owner’s arms. Bannerets had a banner, in the 13th century usually a slim rectangular flag with the longest side against the staff, where it was nailed or tied in place. Banners bore their owner’s arms and were carried by banner bearers whose duty was to stay close to their lord. The lord’s arms during the 13th century could also be carried by all of his followers. In 1218 a robber is recorded buying 100 marks’ worth of cloth for his band as though he were a baron or an earl, suggesting that followers could be equipped in coats of the same colour at least. Barons and knights had the right to have their knights and squires wear a badge or uniform.

In battle men looked to their lord’s banner, which was usually carried furled and only broken out when fighting was expected. Its symbolism was of high import: if it fell or was captured there was a risk of panic, and it would be protected by several tough men. Signals were given by trumpet or by hand, especially if the noise made shouting ineffective. Trumpets were also used to call the troops to arms before battle. War cries were used to frighten the enemy and bolster courage.

When fighting on foot the knight relied in part on his following – his squires, household and retained men – to watch his back. In the 14th century he might wear a jupon with his coat-of-arms displayed on front and rear, but equally some were plain and a warrior with his visor down was then difficult to recognize. As well as the banner, for his followers, a man of rank might, by the end of the century, also have a standard, a long flag perhaps carrying the red cross of St George next to the fly, then elements of his heraldic coat, such as main charges and colours, and perhaps his motto, the war-cry shouted to rally and encourage his men.

By the 15th century, surcoats were increasingly discarded and, with a lack of shields, it was essential that the banner-bearer remain close to his master, following his horse’s tail, as it was said. A lord might give the order not to move more than 10 feet (or a similar measurement) from the standards, but if the line slightly shifted it would not be too difficult in the confusion of battle to strike out accidentally at an ally.

In order to carry out heraldic identification and to deliver messages, important nobles employed their own heralds wearing tabards of their master’s arms, and trumpeters with the arms on hangings below the instruments.

The outcome of a war in the medieval age hung not merely upon skill at arms; in fact, this could actually be a secondary factor. John made an abortive attempt to invade Wales in 1211 that failed because of a lack of supplies; Llywelyn and the Welsh collected their belongings and cattle and withdrew into the mountains. In 1265 Simon de Montfort’s troops were unable to get their normal food and suffered from having to live off the land in Wales. Edward I fought no major battles in Wales – the ground was wrong for cavalry and the Welsh fought more as guerrillas. Knights were often hampered by the mountainous terrain but the English were nevertheless victorious in two engagements. Edward instead used attrition. He launched his first campaign against Wales both by land and sea, using labourers and woodcutters to make a road through the forests, building castles and cutting off the grain supply from Anglesey. In 1282 a bridge of boats was built to cross to Anglesey.

The king used similar tactics against the Scots. The first campaign in 1296 was completed in just over five months, with Scotland annexed to England. After his victory at Falkirk in 1298 he was able to provision his garrisons. He was in Scotland again in 1300, besieging Caerlaverock Castle and leading his armies across the country, but the Scots withdrew and refused battle. English armies would always be hampered by problems of supply in Scotland: the further they ventured, the longer the lifeline to England became. Moreover, many English-held castles were scattered and remote, making it difficult to march swiftly from one to another, or to relieve a fortress if besieged.

Scouts were used to locate enemy forces, after which the commanders tried to work out the best way to proceed. Armies made use of terrain where possible, and were careful to protect a flank if feasible. William Marshal, in a speech to his troops before the second battle of Lincoln in 1217, pointed out how the enemy’s division of his force meant that Marshal could lead all his men against one part alone. Other commanders were less prudent or simply hotheaded. The decision by the Earl of Surrey in 1297 to cross Stirling Bridge with the Scots in near proximity was foolhardy, since there was a wide ford 2 miles upstream that would have allowed a flank attack, and indeed Sir Richard Lundy had suggested this move. As it turned out, William Wallace and Andrew Murray attacked before even half the English force was across the bridge and the majority of those caught on the wrong bank were crushed.

When Edward was in direct control he proved a good tactician, as he showed at Evesham in 1265. He advanced to stop Simon de Montfort reaching Kenilworth, and divided his army into three battles to block his escape. Caught in a loop of the River Avon, Simon’s vain hope of killing Edward was dashed when the second battle swung into his flank while the third blocked any escape back south.

In his Scottish campaign of 1298, Edward brought 2,500 heavy cavalry and probably about 15,000 infantry. At Falkirk he faced the Scots arrayed in their schiltrons, tightly packed formations presenting a hedge of spears towards any attacker. They may have additionally fortified the position with wooden stakes. Again, disagreement was found among the division leaders: having skirted to the right of wet ground, the Bishop of Durham sensibly wanted to wait for the earls of the left-hand division to come level, and for the king who was bringing up the centre. But the impetuous young Ralph Bassett urged the cavalry on. Swinging out round the flanks, the two English divisions rode down the Scottish archers stationed between the schiltrons, and the Scottish cavalry broke and fled. However, the horsemen could not break the determined Scottish ranks of spears and it was the move by the king to bring up his archers and crossbowmen that helped prevent his knights dashing themselves to pieces. English cavalry deterred the Scots from breaking their ranks, and they were then forced to stand their ground until the archers withdrew, allowing the cavalry finally to break through. Even so, over 100 horses were killed. It should be noted that there appear to have been more cavalrymen in the battle than archers, and that crossbowmen were also used. Edward does not seem as yet to have developed his tactic of using massed longbows to decimate enemy ranks.

Knights at this time still often fought from horseback, changing to their destriers or coursers from the palfreys they used for riding. There is no evidence that cavalry routinely dismounted during the Welsh wars.

When delivered correctly the charge of the heavy horse was a formidable weapon that could smash a hole in enemy ranks. The charge began as a walk, increasing speed when within suitable range so that the horses would not be blown or the formation disorganized when the final push came. The mounted charge could still be highly effective, the knights riding almost knee to knee with lowered lances in the hope of steam-rollering over the opposition. The lance usually shattered during the first charge, the stump being dropped and, if need be, the sword was drawn, or perhaps a mace or horseman’s axe. Inventories from the 13th century show that horses killed in battle largely belong to knights and those with mounts of quality; in other words, the knights formed the front line.

Another problem with a mounted charge was discipline. As happened at Lewes, the charge by Prince Edward’s cavalry was successful but the elated horsemen kept going, pursuing their opponents so far as to put themselves out of the battle as well. The threat of the front line being completely penetrated was one reason commanders sometimes used a reserve, as did Simon de Montfort at Lewes. The knights who burst through might turn and strike the rear of the enemy line. The reserve was also quite often the position of the commander, with subordinates controlling the forward battles.

During the 14th century war was conducted in a number of ways. The chevauchée was one method. Like the well-tried feudal tactics that preceded it, the aim was to disrupt the economy of the area by swift movement, seizing food for the soldiers and destroying crops, villages and peasants (thereby insulting the lord of the place into the bargain) while evading danger to oneself by avoiding castles unless they were easy to capture.

Successful battles for the English required the use of cavalry to smash a hole in the enemy ranks, and the matchless skills of the English archers. However, as in the previous century, there were times when the cavalry shock manoeuvre could not be used effectively, for example in the bogs and mountains of Wales or against the Scottish schiltrons.

The young Edward III composed his forces so that the bulk of infantry were bowmen, and were mostly mounted to assist swift movement on the march. His men-at-arms were much more likely now to dismount on the battlefield to form the front divisions (called ‘battles’). Where possible, they stood in a naturally defended position with their archers, thus forcing the enemy to wear themselves out attacking them, a style of warfare first tested in battle against the Scots. Froissart describes how, in 1327, when Edward’s troops encountered the Scots, they were ordered to dismount and take off their spurs before forming themselves into three battles. In 1332 a force of the ‘disinherited Scots’ under the pretender Balliol (in fact pretty much an English force) invaded Scotland and after an abortive attack on the Scottish camp on the River Earn, formed a single block of dismounted men-at-arms at Dupplin Muir, with wings of archers and a small mounted reserve. The Scots, under the Regent, Donald, Earl of Mar, withered under the archery, and many of Balliol’s men-at-arms remounted to chase the routed enemy.

When Edward launched his main campaign against France, the English took their new double-pronged strategy with them. The first encounter in France was in 1342 when the English, driven back from the siege of Morlaix, formed up with a wood at their backs, a stream on one flank and dug a ditch to protect the front. Despite being pushed back to the woods, the English held their enemies off. At Crécy in 1346, dismounted men-at-arms and archers beat off repeated attacks by French cavalry, whose horses were a prime target for arrows. That same year this combination defeated a Scottish invasion at Neville’s Cross near the city of Durham, but there was heavy pressure on the English centre and right until a mounted English reserve was brought up and caught the Scots by surprise, the victory made complete by the arrival of reinforcements. At Poitiers in 1356 a mounted reserve swung the battle for the English, who were hard pressed in their defensive array by dismounted Frenchmen. The reserves turned the battle round and King John himself was captured.

ARROWS VERSUS ARMOUR

Archers carried specialist arrows, bodkins with needle-pointed heads to punch through mail links, or armour-piercing heads perhaps tipped with steel to penetrate steel plates. Tests have shown that the spin of the arrow in flight enables the head, striking at right angles, to drill a hole into armour plate. The range at which an arrow was shot, as well as whether iron- or steel-tipped heads were used, would determine its potency. Most surviving oxidized red bodkins seem to be of iron, which tests suggest curl up when they strike plate. If they struck mail they would burst the rings apart as they went through, a serious threat to anyone in plate armour, exposing a mail gusset, for example, at the armpit. Crossbows were equally powerful although they did not employ bodkins. Handguns were also appearing in armies in the 15th century, though not in any great number at this period.

In 1351 at Saintes the French retained mounted wings of horse to try to break up the archers on the flanks, and retained this formation for the rest of the century. At Nogent-sur-Seine in 1359 they succeeded in breaking into the English formation of archers in this way, whereas the men-at-arms kept tightly packed.

The significance of English archers in the French theatre is shown by the defeat at Ardres in 1351, where Sir John Beauchamp, caught by a dismounted French force as he returned from a raid, lined a ditch and held them off until they came to close quarters and another force broke up the archers.

In 1345 an English relieving force under the Earl of Derby charged into a French siege camp before Auberoche, the archers and men-at-arms doing much damage, while a sortie from the garrison finally broke the French forces. This form of surprise attack would occur again at La Roche Derien in 1347 during the Breton War of Succession, when an English relieving force fell on the French siege camp at night.

After Poitiers there were no further major battles between England and France until Agincourt in 1415. It was not battles that won a country as much as hard sieges: the French generally refused to fight in the open, instead shutting themselves up in castles and fortified towns, and forcing the English to besiege them, or else wander the countryside.

With the Treaty of Bretigny in 1360 garrisons emptied, and groups of soldiers formed free companies under captains such as Sir Robert Knollys (perhaps the earliest) and Sir John Hawkwood. These ‘rutters’, as the English called them, or routiers, actually consisted of men from many nationalities, though the French often referred to them all as ‘English’. Each company often consisted of only a few hundred men, archers, infantry and men-at-arms. A typical ploy was to seize one or two strong castles and use them as bases from which to terrorize an area. They hired their services out to rulers, and according to Froissart, the Black Prince used 12,000 of them in Castile. At the end of the 14th century they tended to disappear until their rebirth on a smaller scale after the renewal of war by Henry V.

English forces were also involved in Spain. At Najera in 1367 the army of the Black Prince formed three entirely dismounted lines, the main battle in the centre, to face a Castilian force including many French soldiers, also in three lines but with many cavalry. The men-at-arms again fought well, ably supported by archers who out-ranged the Spanish javelin-wielding mounted jinetes. They also out-shot crossbowmen and slingers, who drew back, allowing the English men-at-arms to overlap the enemy division. When the English rearguard swung in on the flank, the Spanish and French lines shattered.

By the 15th century, the knight often fought on foot. He had been trained to fight mounted, with a lance, but it was often more effective to dismount most of the men-at-arms and to keep only a small mounted reserve. This was partly due to the increasing threat from missiles. In France during the early 15th century, the English forces used tactics learned the previous century. If the armoured fighting men were kept near the blocks of archers and all waited for the enemy to advance, it meant the latter arrived in a more tired state, all the while harassed by the arrows from the archers and compressed by a natural tendency to shy away from them. This bunching could then work to the advantage of the English who used their archers to strike at the press of French soldiers, now aggravated by those behind pushing forward, as happened at Agincourt. The groups of mounted men-at-arms who tried to outflank the archers at the start of the battle were foiled by the woods which protected each end of the English line, and found to their cost the price of facing archers when mounted.

When archers were in a strong position, ideally defended by stakes, hedges or ditches, a cavalry charge was extremely dangerous. Even when the horses were protected by armour, there was always some exposed part that an arrow could strike, and arrows went deep. Shafts fitted with broad hunting heads made short work of flesh, and the horses became unmanageable even when not mortally wounded. The mounted knight then became useless as he fought for control or was thrown to the ground as the animal collapsed. It is worth noting that only a few hundred at each end of the French line attacked, and of these a few still reached the stakes despite the volleys of presumably thousands of arrows launched at them. Yet it was the dismounted men-at-arms who did most of the fighting in this battle, and it was they who, according to one chronicler, pushed the English line back a spear’s length before everything became jammed up:

But when the French nobility, who at first approached in full front, had nearly joined battle, either from fear of the arrows, which by their impetuosity pierced through the sides and bevors of their basinets, or that they might more speedily penetrate our ranks to the banners, they divided themselves into three troops, charging our line in three places where the banners were: and intermingling their spears closely, they assaulted our men with so ferocious an impetuosity, that they compelled them to retreat almost at spear’s length.

Since plate armour obviated the need for a shield, and fighting dismounted meant the rein hand was free, it became common for knights on foot to carry a two-handed staff weapon in addition to the sword hanging at their side. At first this was often a lance cut down to a length of around 6–7ft (1.8–2.1m). Increasingly, other staff weapons were carried, which could deal more effectively with plate armour. One of the most popular was the pollaxe, designed to dent or crush the plates, either to wound the wearer or so damage the plates that they ceased to function properly.

Mounted men were very useful in a rout, for they could catch up a fleeing enemy and cut him down with minimum risk to themselves, especially if he was lightly armoured. Indeed, catching archers out of position was the best way for cavalry to scatter them before they got a chance to deploy. In the Hundred Years’ War this was not too much of a problem for English knights, since the French did not use archers on a large scale. During the Wars of the Roses, archers fought on both sides in Yorkist and Lancastrian armies and, for the most part, the men-at-arms found it best to stick with the tried-and-trusted methods and fight on foot.

Sieges were more prevalent than set-piece battles. There was less worry of losing all in a single engagement, though a protracted siege was expensive and it became increasingly difficult to hold troops together. Great keeps, or donjons, were, by their size, difficult to take, as King John found at Rochester in 1215 when he arrived to confront the rebel barons. Having undermined a corner of the donjon, his men found the defenders still resisted for a time from behind the cross-wall inside. The siege lasted almost two months. By the end of the 13th century castles had perhaps reached their peak of development, as witness the imposing constructions of Edward I in Wales. Several of these, such as Harlech and Beaumaris, were of concentric form, with an inner and outer wall supporting one another all round, and with every defensive trick, such as arrow loops, overhanging wooden hoardings to command the base of the wall, and projecting mural towers to enfilade the wall and effectively cut it into separate sections that could be closed off if gained by an enemy.

But castles were not just for defence; they were bases for mounted knights who could ride out perhaps 10 miles and back in a day, or as temporary bases for royal troops to operate against rebels, or vice versa. Edward’s Welsh strongholds were as much instruments of conquest as defended bases. Similarly castles provided fortified resting places for field forces, and their garrisons could be used to enlarge such a force. Harrying the lands of one’s enemy was sometimes a prelude to a siege, and was a way to deny food, kill peasants and so his economy, and insult his lordship.

Sieges could be costly and involve much organization, sometimes drawing craftsmen from all over England, as that of Bedford by Henry III in 1224 shows. The king summoned much of the kingdom’s resources, with carpenters, miners, stone-cutters and quarriers brought to the scene together with all sorts of equipment, such as timber, ropes and tallow for siege engines. We also glimpse the necessary luxuries of the lords: as well as his armour, King Henry’s tents were sent by cart from London, together with comforts such as wine, pepper, almonds, cinnamon, saffron and ginger.

Yet the real business was dangerous. Lord Richard de Argentan was hit in the stomach by a crossbow bolt that went through his armour, and six other knights were killed. It took four assaults, each time advancing further into the castle, before the defenders yielded. Quarter was usually given if a place surrendered but was in the gift of the besiegers if a castle was taken by force. At Bedford the garrison had already been excommunicated by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and King Henry, angry at the resistance he had met in a siege lasting eight weeks, hung William de Bréauté outside the gates with his knights. As a note of leniency he did, however, allow them to be absolved of their excommunication. At Rochester, too, John seems to have wanted to hang the garrison, until it was pointed out that this might prompt other rebels to do the same to royal garrisons.

Perhaps the most celebrated siege in 13th-century England was that of Kenilworth in 1266, when supporters of Simon de Montfort took refuge there after their leader’s death at Evesham. The siege by Henry III and the Lord Edward lasted six months and only ended on terms of surrender. Mining was impossible because of the wide water defences. As well as using siege towers and catapults, several attacks were launched by knights on the siege lines, causing much damage and loss of life. This was one reason knights were important to the defence of a castle. Yet food was equally important, and lack of provisions was a major reason the defenders asked for a truce, saying that if no help came in 40 days, they would surrender. They were then allowed to march out with full military honours. Without water defences, mines posed a deadly threat.

When Edward III arrived before Calais in 1346 he found the defences so daunting that he built a second town of wooden huts, shops and streets. English ships cut off supplies by sea but supplied the besiegers. Edward allowed 1,700 poor people through and even gave them a meal, before the lines closed. Calais was finally starved into submission; six rich citizens came out to be executed but were saved by Edward’s queen.

Clever tricks sometimes worked. At the French siege of La Rochelle in 1372 the mayor showed the English garrison commander Philip Mansel an old letter with the seal of Edward III which, the mayor said, ordered Mansel to parade in the square next morning. Mansel was illiterate and believed him. The mayor also promised to provide all the soldiers’ back pay. When the English garrison paraded, the French cut off their route back to the castle and forced their surrender.

As always, disease posed a threat: dysentery attacked Henry V’s army besieging Harfleur in 1415, and at Meaux in 1421 he contracted probably the same disease, which killed him the following year. By the 15th century, catapults were being replaced by cannon but, unlike in some areas of Europe, there were no major changes in fortification design to meet this new threat. Moreover, there were relatively few sieges during the Wars of the Roses.

Although in siege warfare, engineers in charge of machines, and latterly gunners with new-fangled cannon, were as important as the knight, knights were still needed for escort duty, for forays to lay waste surrounding countryside and procure food, or for an attack should a mine or machine collapse a wall, or should ladders or siege tower be required. In captured strongholds they helped to provide the garrison.

Knights who were injured or sick faced two obstacles on any road to recovery. First, dependent on their rank, they might or might not get the chance to see a surgeon. Second, if they did get medical attention, a great deal depended on the quality of the physician and the nature of the wound. The king and the great nobles would have surgeons in their pay and such men would travel with their master when they were on the move. Thomas Morestede is styled as the King’s Surgeon in his agreement with Henry V for the invasion of France in 1415, where he is also to provide three archers and 12 ‘hommes de son mestier’ (men of his service). In addition, William Bradwardyn is listed as a surgeon and both he and Morestede came with nine more surgeons each, making a total of 20 for the army. Some surgeons were retained by indenture in the same way as the soldiers. John Paston, who was hit below the right elbow by an arrow during the battle of Barnet in 1471, managed to escape with other fleeing Yorkists but lost his baggage. His brother sent a surgeon who stayed with him and used his ‘leechcraft’ and ‘physic’ until the wound was on the mend, though John complained it cost £5 in a fortnight and he was broke.

The medical care itself was a mixture of skill and luck, since astrology and the doctrine of humours played a large part in medical care. Surgeons of repute were taught at the school of Montpellier in the Languedoc-Roussillon region of southern France, but even these men would have had limited skills. Many could treat broken legs or dislocations successfully, even hernias, and carried out amputations, though a lack of knowledge of bacteria made it a risky business for the patient. Some used alcohol, opium or mandragora to dull the pain. Neither instruments nor hands were necessarily washed. Open wounds could be treated by stitching, and egg yolks were recognized as a soothing balm. However, blood flow was staunched by the use of a hot iron.

Arrows might go deep, though by the 15th century it was less common to be hit by one with a head bearing barbs, especially when wearing armour. Yet arrows were often stuck in the ground for swift reloading, and conveyed on their tips a lethal dose of dirt which, together with cloth fragments, would be carried into the wound. Abdominal wounds were usually fatal, and surgery in this area was fairly lethal, since any tear in the gut would allow material into the abdominal cavity (not to mention dirt from the weapon used), resulting in peritonitis and death. However, skeletons from the battle of Towton in 1461 show that men did survive quite horrendous wounds. Bones show evidence of slashing blows which bit through muscle into the bone itself, in some cases shearing off pieces. One individual in particular had been in battle before, having been struck across the jaw with such force that the blade cut across to the other side of the mouth. He also had wounds to the skull, but survived all of these, with some disfigurement, to face action once more at Towton, knowing what that might entail – in this instance his own death. Although knights might wear better armour, it was (theoretically) their job to lead from the front. Some unfortunate knights neither escaped nor perished, but were left for dead, robbed and left half-naked in the open unless by chance they were discovered and succoured.

Much of the Towton evidence comes from men who were infantry. Compression of the left arm bones strongly suggests that some were almost certainly longbowmen. They appear to have been killed during the rout or after capture, and some have several wounds, especially to the head, suggesting that once cut down, further blows were delivered to finish them off. Presumably they had no helmet, or had discarded or lost it while being pursued. The victims were then placed in grave pits. Knights and men of rank might escape such a fate. After Agincourt, the Duke of York’s body was boiled and the bones brought back to England for burial. Similarly those of lords would be found either by their retainers or else by heralds, whose job it was to wander the field and book the dead (meaning those with coats-of-arms), which gave the victor a good indication of how he had fared. The families would then transport the body back to be buried on home ground, in the case of the nobility next to their ancestors. Otherwise they were buried locally, usually in a churchyard.

During the turmoil of the Wars of the Roses, with men supporting rivals to the throne, treason was an easy and swift charge to bring. For example, after the battle of Wakefield in 1460, Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury, was captured and executed next day. Men of rank killed while in revolt might also undergo the degradation of public humiliation. This was not common during the first part of the 15th century, since much of the time knights fought in France, where they were usually treated as honourable opponents. Warwick the Kingmaker, however, having been slain at Barnet in 1471, was brought to London and displayed for all to see, before his body was allowed to rest at Bisham Abbey with other family members. Richard III was exposed for two days in the Church of St Mary in the Newarke in Leicester, naked except for a piece of cloth, and then buried in a plain tomb in the house of the Grey Friars nearby. Salisbury’s head, with those of the Duke of York and his young son, the Earl of Rutland, both killed at Wakefield, was stuck on a spike on the walls of York, the Duke’s complete with a paper crown.

Being treated to the indignity of having one’s head spiked on London Bridge or on other town gates served as a warning to all those passing beneath. However, a number of attainders (loss of civil rights following a sentence for treason) were reversed, such as that of Sir Richard Tunstall who, despite being placed in the Tower, managed to persuade Edward IV that he was more use alive and gained his favour. Children of those who died accused of treason did not usually suffer because of it, though their father’s lands might pass to the crown until they inherited them.

In contrast to this brutality, there is evidence that humanity and regret did exist. Chantry chapels were set up on various battlefields to pray for the souls of those who died, for example at Barnet, some half a mile (800m) from the town, where the corpses were buried. Richard III endowed Queen’s College, Cambridge, for prayers to be said for those of his retinue who perished at Barnet and Tewkesbury. Nobles might make provision for men of their retinues to be cared for if wounded; Henry of Northumberland told his executors to carry out such wishes if he should be killed at Bosworth.