German armor of the 16th century for a knight and a 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 with real things and their history. Most of these notions are absurd and based on nothing.

Perhaps one of the most infamous examples would be the notion that "knights had to be put on horseback with a crane", which is as absurd as it is a common belief, even among historians. In other cases, some technical details that defy obvious description have become the object of passionate and fantastic in their ingenuity attempts to explain their purpose. Among them, the first place, apparently, is occupied by the stop for the spear, protruding from the right side of the breastplate.

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

Misconceptions and questions about armor

1. Only knights wore armor.

This erroneous but common notion probably stems from the romantic notion of the "knight in shining armor", a painting that has itself been the subject of further misconceptions. First, knights rarely fought alone, and armies in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance did not consist entirely of mounted knights. While the knights were the predominant force in most of these armies, they were invariably—and increasingly stronger—supported (and opposed) by foot soldiers such as archers, pikemen, crossbowmen, and firearms soldiers over time. On the campaign, the knight depended on a group of servants, squires and soldiers who provided armed support and looked after his horses, armor and other equipment, not to mention peasants and artisans who made a feudal society with the existence of a military class possible.

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

Secondly, it is wrong to believe that every noble person 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 origin 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 due to a display of extreme bravery and courage, and later knighthood became possible to purchase for money.

In other words, the ability to wear armor and fight in armor was not the prerogative of the knights. Mercenary foot soldiers, or groups of soldiers made up 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 cities of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were obliged - often by law and decree - to buy and keep 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, cloth armor or a breastplate, as well as weapons - a spear, pike, bow or crossbow.

Indian chain mail of the 17th century

In wartime, this people's militia was obliged to defend the city or perform military duties for feudal lords or allied cities. During the 15th century, when some wealthy and influential cities began to become more independent and self-confident, even the burghers organized their own tournaments, in which, of course, they wore armor.

In this regard, not every piece of armor has ever been worn by a knight, and not every person depicted in armor will be a knight. A man in armor would be more correctly called 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 Jeanne de Penthièvre (1319–1384). There are rare references to women from lower society who stood "under the gun". There are records that women fought in armor, but no illustrations of that time on this subject have been preserved. Joan of Arc (1412–1431) is perhaps the most famous example of a female warrior, and there is evidence that she wore armor commissioned for her by the French King Charles VII. But only one small illustration of her, made during her lifetime, has come down to 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, not the rule.

3 Armor Was So Expensive Only Princes And Rich Nobles Could Afford It

This idea may have been born from the fact that much of the armor on display in museums is high quality equipment, and that much of the simpler armor that belonged to the common people and the lowly of the nobles has been hidden in vaults or lost for centuries.

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

Armor of King Henry VIII of England, 16th century

Although examples of the value of armor, weapons, and equipment in some of the historical periods have come down to us, it is very difficult to translate the historical value 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 a full armor of an English knight, which in 1374 was estimated at £16. It was an analogue of the cost of 5-8 years of renting a merchant's house in London, or three years of 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 upper end of the scale, examples can be found such as a large set of armor (a basic set that, with the help of additional items and plates, could be adapted for various uses, both on the battlefield and in the tournament), ordered in 1546 by the German king (later emperor) for his son. For the fulfillment of this order, for a year of work, the court gunsmith Jörg Seusenhofer from Innsbruck received an incredible amount of 1200 gold coins, equivalent to twelve annual salaries of a senior court official.

4. The armor is extremely heavy and severely limits the wearer's mobility.

Thanks for the tip in the comments to the article

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

The opinion that wearing armor (formed by 1420-30) greatly reduced the mobility of a warrior is not true. 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 made it possible to perform any movement without restrictions imposed by the rigidity of the material. The common notion that a man in armor could barely move, and if he fell 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, being dressed in full armor, could, grabbing the steps of a ladder from below, on its reverse side, climb it with the help of some 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 and 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 and dismount from a horse, sit or lie down, and then get up from the ground, run and move limbs freely and without inconvenience.

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

5. Knights had to be saddled with cranes

This idea, apparently, appeared at the end of the nineteenth century as a joke. It entered mainstream fiction in the decades that followed, and the painting was eventually immortalized in 1944 when Laurence Olivier used it in his film King Henry V, despite the protests of history advisers, among whom was such an eminent authority as James Mann, chief armorer of the Tower of London.

As stated above, most of the armor was light and flexible enough not to restrict the wearer. Most people in armor should have been able to put one foot in the stirrup and saddle a horse without assistance. A stool or the help of a squire would hasten this process. But the crane was absolutely not needed.

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

One of the most popular questions, especially among young museum visitors, unfortunately does not have a precise answer. When the man in armor was not engaged in battle, he was doing the same thing that people do today. He would go to the toilet (which in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance was called a latrine or latrine) or to another secluded place, take off the appropriate parts of armor and clothing, and indulge in the call of nature. On the battlefield, things were supposed to be different. In this case, we do not know the answer. However, it must be taken into account that the desire to go to the toilet in the heat of battle was most likely at the bottom of the list of priorities.

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

Some believe that the military salute dates back to the time of the Roman Republic, when assassination by order was the order of the day, and citizens had to raise their right hand when approaching officials to show that there was no weapon hidden in it. It is more commonly believed that the modern war salute came from armored men lifting their helmet visors before saluting their comrades or lords. This gesture made it possible to recognize a person, and also made him vulnerable and at the same time showed that his right hand (which usually held a sword) did not have a weapon. All these were signs of trust and good intentions.

While these theories sound intriguing and romantic, there is little evidence that the military salute originated from them. As far as Roman customs are concerned, it would be practically 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, the military records of 17th-century England reflect that "the formal act of greeting was the removal of the headdress." By 1745, the English regiment of the Coldstream Guards seems to have perfected this procedure, rewriting it as "laying the hand to the head and bowing at the meeting."

Coldstream Guard

This practice was adapted by other English regiments, and then it could 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 originated from a gesture of respect and courtesy, in parallel with the civilian habit of lifting or touching the brim of the 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 intertwined rings should properly be called "mail" or "mail armor" in English. The commonly accepted term "chain mail" is modern pleonasm (a linguistic error meaning the use more words than is necessary for the description). In our case, "chain" (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 must 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 in appearance, from which the terms “ring-mail”, “chain-mail”, “banded mail”, “scale-mail”, “plate-mail” appeared. 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 a painting and in sculpture. Instead of depicting individual rings, these details were stylized with dots, strokes, squiggles, circles, and more, which led to errors.

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

It is difficult to answer this question unambiguously for many reasons. First, no evidence has been preserved that can paint a complete picture for any of the periods. Since about the 15th century, scattered examples of how armor was ordered, how long orders took, and how much various parts of armor cost, have been preserved. Secondly, full armor could consist of parts made by various gunsmiths with a narrow specialization. Parts of the armor could be sold unfinished, and then, for a certain amount, adjusted locally. 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, and thus controlled the number of items that one craftsman 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 production.

In any case, it is worth bearing in mind that the production of armor and weapons flourished during the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Armourers, makers of blades, pistols, bows, crossbows, and arrows were present in any large city. As now, their market was dependent on supply and demand, and efficient operation was a key parameter of success. The common myth that simple chain mail took years to make is nonsense (but it's undeniable that chain mail was very labor intensive to make).

The answer to this question is simple and elusive at the same time. The time it took to make the armor depended on several factors, such as the customer, who was tasked with making the order (the number of people in production and the workshop being busy with other orders), and the quality of the armor. Two famous examples will serve as an illustration.

In 1473 Martin Rondel, possibly an Italian armourer, working in Bruges, who called himself "armourer of my bastard lord of Burgundy", wrote to his English client, Sir John Paston. The gunsmith informed Sir John that he could fulfill the request for the manufacture of armor, as soon as the English knight informed what parts of the suit he needed, in what form, and the date by which the armor should be completed (unfortunately, the gunsmith did not indicate the possible dates ). In the court workshops, the production of armor for the highest persons, apparently, took more time. For the court armourer, Jörg Seusenhofer (with a small number of assistants), the manufacture of armor for the horse and large armor for the king took, apparently, more than a year. The order was placed 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 if Seusenhofer and his workshop were working on other orders at this time.

10. Armor details - spear support and codpiece

Two parts of the armor are more than others inflame the imagination of the public: one of them is described as "that thing sticking out to the right of the chest," and the second is mentioned after a muffled chuckle as "that thing between the legs." In the terminology of weapons and armor, they are known as spear supports and codpieces.

The support for the spear appeared soon after the appearance of a solid chest plate at the end of the 14th century and existed until the armor itself began to disappear. As opposed to the literal meaning English term"lance rest" (spear stand), its main purpose was not to bear the weight of the spear. In fact, it was used for two purposes, which are better described by the French term "arrêt de cuirasse" (spear restraint). She allowed the mounted warrior to hold the spear firmly under the right hand, limiting 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 was transferred to the point 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 "shooting" backwards, and distributing the blow to the chest plate across the entire upper torso, not just the right arm, wrist, elbow, and shoulder. It is worth noting that on most combat armor, the support for the spear could be folded up so as not to interfere with the mobility of the hand holding the sword after the warrior got rid of the spear.

The history of the armored codpiece is closely connected with its brother in a civilian male suit. From the middle of the XIV century, the upper part of men's clothing began to be shortened so much that it ceased to cover the crotch. In those days, pants had not yet been invented, and men wore leggings fastened to their underwear or belt, and the crotch was hidden behind a hollow attached to the inside of the top edge of each of the legs of the leggings. IN early XVI centuries, this floor began to be stuffed and visually enlarged. And the codpiece remained a part of the 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. She had a thick lining inside and joined the armor in the center of the lower edge of the shirt. The early varieties were bowl-shaped, but due to the influence of civil costume, it gradually changed into an upward shape. It was not usually used when riding a horse, because, firstly, it would interfere, and secondly, the armored front of the combat saddle provided sufficient protection for the crotch. Therefore, the codpiece was commonly used for armor designed for foot combat, both in war and in tournaments, and despite some value as a defense, it was no less used because of fashion.

11. Did the Vikings wear horns on their helmets?

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

The earliest example of the decoration of a helmet with a pair of stylized horns is a small group of helmets that have come down to us from the Celtic Bronze Age, found in Scandinavia and in the territory of modern 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 from 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 these two periods 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 equipped with face protection. The latter could take the form of a metal bar covering the nose, or a front sheet consisting of protection for the nose and two eyes, as well as the upper part of the cheekbones, or protection of the entire face and neck in the form of chain mail.

12. Armor was no longer needed due to the advent of firearms.

By and large, the gradual decline of armor was not due to the advent of firearms per se, 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 steel, thickening the armor, or adding separate reinforcing parts on top of conventional armor.

German pishchal late 14th century

Finally, it is worth noting that the armor has not completely disappeared. The ubiquitous use of helmets by modern soldiers and police proves that armor, although it has changed materials and perhaps lost some of its importance, is still a necessary piece of military equipment around the world. In addition, torso protection continued to exist in the form of experimental chest plates during the American Civil War, gunnery pilot plates in World War II, and modern bulletproof vests.

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

Medical and anthropological studies show that average height The number of men and women has gradually increased over the centuries, and this process, thanks to the improvement of the diet and the health of society, has accelerated over the past 150 years. Most of the armor of the 15th and 16th centuries that has come down to us confirms these discoveries.

However, when drawing such general conclusions based on armor, there are many factors to consider. Firstly, is it a complete and uniform armor, that is, did all the parts go with each other, thereby giving the correct impression of its original owner? Secondly, even high-quality armor made to order for a particular person can give an approximate idea of ​​\u200b\u200bhis height, with an error of up to 2-5 cm, since the overlap of the protections of the lower abdomen (shirt and thigh guards) and hips (leg guards) can only be estimated approximately.

Armor came in all shapes and sizes, including armor for children and youths (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 there have always been unusually tall or unusually short people when compared with average contemporaries.

Notable exceptions include kings, such as Francis I, King of France (1515–47), or Henry VIII, King of England (1509–47). The height of the latter was 180 cm, as evidenced by contemporaries, 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, XVI century

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

14. Men's clothing is wrapped from left to right, because armor was originally closed this way.

The theory behind this claim is that some early forms armor (protection from plates and a brigantine of the 14th and 15th centuries, armet - a closed cavalry helmet of the 15th-16th centuries, a cuirass of the 16th century) were designed so that the left side overlapped the right side to prevent the enemy's sword from penetrating. Since most people are right-handed, most of the penetrating blows should have come from the left, and, with luck, should have slipped over the armor through the smell and to the right.

The theory is compelling, but there is not enough evidence that modern clothing has been directly affected by such armor. Also, while the armor protection theory may be true for the Middle Ages and the 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 the knights is not so far from the truth. Customs or even the right to carry a sword varied according to time, place and laws.

In medieval Europe, swords were the main weapon of knights and horsemen. In peacetime, only persons of noble birth had the right to carry swords in public places. 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 wear swords. An exception to the rule was made for travelers (citizens, merchants and pilgrims) because of 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 noble ones - at least in times of peace. The standard rules of trade, often found on churches or town halls, often also included examples of the permitted lengths of daggers or swords that could be carried freely 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 a daily 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 clothes of a European gentleman.

It is widely believed that the swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were uncomplicated tools of brute force, very heavy, and as a result, not tractable for " ordinary person”, that is, a very ineffective weapon. The reasons for these accusations are easy to understand. Due to the rarity of surviving specimens, few people held a real medieval or Renaissance sword in their hands. Most of these swords were obtained in excavations. Their rusty appearance today can easily give the impression of rudeness - like a burned-out car that has lost all signs of its former grandeur and complexity.

Most of the real swords of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance say otherwise. One handed sword usually weighed 1-2 kg, and even a large two-handed "military sword" of the XIV-XVI 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 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 have led to the emergence of the term "bloodstream". It is claimed that these grooves speed up the flow of blood from the opponent's wound, thus increasing the effect of injury, or that they make it easier to remove the blade from the wound, allowing the weapon to be easily drawn without twisting. While such theories are entertaining, the real purpose of this groove, called a fuller, is simply to lighten the blade, reduce its mass without weakening the blade or compromising 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 perforation is present on cutting weapons from India and the Middle East. Based on scant documentary evidence, it is believed that this perforation must have contained poison in order for the impact to be guaranteed to result in the death of the opponent. This misconception led to the fact that weapons with such perforations began to be called "assassin weapons".

Although there are references to Indian weapons with a poisoned blade, and such rare cases may have occurred in Renaissance Europe, the true purpose of this perforation is not at all sensational. Firstly, perforation led to the disposal of part of the material and lightened the blade. Secondly, it was often made in the form of exquisite and complex patterns, and served both as a demonstration of the blacksmith's skill and decoration. For proof, 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 be the case with poison.

Let's leave people for a while, and let's talk about soulless objects, about objects that made up knightly weapons. And in this matter we shall confine our interest chiefly to the twelfth and partly to the thirteenth centuries. Let's get acquainted first with offensive weapons. There were two of them: a sword and a spear.

The sword in the shape of a cross is an exclusively knightly weapon. It consists of three parts; steel blade, handle and disc-shaped addition to the latter at the very top. Particles of relics or some kind of relics were often placed in a disk-shaped appendage to the handle. In ancient times, single-edged blades were made, and then double-edged blades came into use. Various inscriptions and figures were carved on the blades. Either the name of the sword was inscribed (since there was a custom to call them by their names), or some short saying. The figures were made different: so, we meet the mention of a sword, on the blade of which three crosses were depicted on one side, and three leopards on the other. Carved inscriptions and figures, as a rule, were covered with gilding. The sword was usually put into a sheath made of leather, or wood, upholstered in rich material, or even gold. The scabbard used to be decorated with precious stones.

The knight prayed in front of the sword, sticking it with the tip into the ground, took an oath, putting his hand on the cruciform hilt of it. A wonderful monument of medieval poetry - "The Song of Roland" - unusually vividly and touchingly depicts the ardent love that a true knight had for his sword. The mortally wounded Roland thinks of his sword and speaks to it as to a sentient being dear to his heart. Not wanting Durendal - that was the name of his sword - to get to the enemies, he decides with pain in his heart to break it on a rock. But the sword is strong, it bounces off the stone. Then the knight begins to mourn him:

... How beautiful you are, how holy, my damask sword,

In your golden, heavy handle

Relics are kept...

You should not get to the pagans;

Christ's servant should only own you!

But Roland's strength is weakening.

The count felt that the hour of death was near:

Deadly cold embraced the forehead and chest ...

Roland runs, - and now, under the canopy of ate

He fell on a green ant.

Lies prone, to the chest with his hands

He drew his sword...

The sword was generally looked upon as a sacred object. Yes, this should not be surprising, if we recall that knightly swords were consecrated in the church. If a knight was buried in a church, the sword was placed on his tomb.

In addition to the sword, a dagger was also used in battle. But the dagger, like the reed, was not considered a real knightly weapon.

Another offensive weapon was the spear. It also consisted of three parts; staff, iron tip and badge or flag. The shaft reached a large size, up to eight feet, and later even up to fifteen. It was made from different types of wood, but it was considered the best made from ash. The shaft was usually painted - mostly green or blue. It ended with a metal tip, which was easily stuck into the ground. The iron tip of the spear was most often made in the shape of a rhombus, but there were also tips in the form of a high cone. A badge or flag was nailed under the tip with three or more silver or gilded carnations. It reached a great length, descending to the very knight's helmet, and ended with three long tongues. His most common colors were green, white and blue. Sometimes a long ribbon was attached instead of a flag. Here is how Roland's spear is described:

Great Count,

He suits battle armor;

In his hands he holds a sharp spear,

Plays them and to the blue sky

He lifts the steel point;

A snow-white badge is attached to the spear,

And from him to the very hands fall

Golden Ribbons...

The badge (flag) should not be confused with the banner in any way. The first was a generally accepted subject, while the second belonged only to those knights who owned large lands and brought a certain number of armed people with them to war. In the 13th century, coats of arms appeared on both flags and banners.

The knight on foot carried a spear on his right shoulder; the equestrian held it vertically, and during the battle - horizontally, above the thigh, and later under the arm. The spear was an exclusively knightly weapon; a squire could only fight with a shield and a sword (but not a knight's). Sometimes a spear, like a sword, had its own given name.

Defensive weapons were a shield, chain mail and a helmet. Until the second half of the 11th century, round shields were used, and then oblong shields, designed to cover the knight in its entire length, starting from the shoulders, became generally accepted. Usually the shields were not flat, but curved. They were made of wooden boards, upholstered on the inside with something soft, and on the outside with leather, which was often painted; it depicted lions, eagles, crosses, flowers, which at first were only simple decorations that had nothing to do with coats of arms. WITH inside two leather handles were attached to the shield, here there was also a wide baldric made of leather or richly decorated fabric. Outside of battle, the knight threw this sling over his shoulder. Those who fell in battle were carried from the battlefield on shields.

Chain mail was a long shirt made of iron rings that reached and even descended below the knees. From the first half of the 12th century, it came into general use, replacing the previously used leather shirt with metal plaques sewn on it. In order for chain mail to better withstand the blows of the enemy, it was made from double and triple rings. The chain mail was supplied with a hood to protect the head. Like other parts of knightly weapons, chain mail was not left without decorations. Along the lower edge of it, as well as along the edges of the sleeves, some kind of lace or sewing was made of wires passed through the holes of the rings. Seniors and princes silvered and gilded their chain mail. Chain mail was also worn by squires, but they had it lighter, and therefore, protected them worse from enemy attacks.

A helmet was an egg-shaped or conical helmet made of steel. The lower edge of the helmet was bordered by a metal rim. From the front side of it, a metal plate descended onto the knight’s face, the French name of which nasal (nasal) clearly indicates its purpose - to serve as protection for the nose. Sometimes another plate descended from the back of the helmet, in which a piece of thick cloth was attached to protect the back of the head. The nasal plate was used until the very end of the 12th century, and later a visor came into use - a kind of lattice - which served as protection for the entire face. It goes without saying that it is impossible to indicate a sharp boundary when the visor changed the nasal plate. There was a time when both objects were in use. Already in Jerusalem Assisah there is an indication of a helmet with a visor.

Knight in fully armed

We have already spoken above about the hood, which ended at the top of the chain mail. Usually the helmet was attached to this hood by leather loops, threaded through the rings: the number of these loops varied between fifteen and thirty. The helmet was laced only for the duration of the battle. In the event that a knight received a wound in battle, the first thing they did was unlace his helmet, which was never worn directly on his head. Under it, they usually put on a downy hat, and on top of it a linen or silk cap. Noble and wealthy people, mainly leaders, had a helmet gilded, and the rim was richly decorated, and precious stones were also used. At the top, the helmet was sometimes decorated with a ball made of some kind of metal or colored glass. Sometimes some kind of inscription was carved on the rim of the helmet. The squires wore an iron cap on their heads, which was lighter than a knight's helmet and did not have any decorations.

Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. It seems so - through the narrow slits in the helmets, decorated with lush sultans, stern warrior-knights from distant times, clad in steel from head to toe, are cautiously watching 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 finest craftsmanship of armor finishing: they are decorated with niello, expensive gilding, and embossing.

And you can’t take your eyes off the knight’s weapons in glassed-in windows - on the hilts of swords there are precious stones, silver, gilding, on the blued blades the mottos of their owners are engraved. Long narrow daggers amaze with the elegance of work, perfection and proportionality of the form - it seems that not a blacksmith-gunsmith worked on them, but a skilled master jeweler. Spears are decorated with flags, halberds - with magnificent tassels ...

In a word, in all its brilliance, 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 refers ... to the worst period of chivalry, to its decline, extinction.

But indeed it is! This armor and this weapon 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 dispersing the armored ranks of a knightly attack at a distance, already trained, well-trained infantry with the help of special hooks easily pulled the knights from their saddles in close combat, turning the formidable fighters into a heap of metal, helplessly stretched out on the ground.

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

Regular armies appeared in Europe - mobile, disciplined. The knightly army has always been, in fact, a militia, gathering only at the call of its lord. And by the 16th century - and most of the brilliant armor and weapons belong to this time - the only thing left for the knightly class was to shine at royal parades as an honorary escort, and go to tournaments in the hope of earning a favorable look from one of the ladies of the court on a luxuriously cleaned podium.

And yet, for more than half a thousand years, the knights were the main force of medieval Europe, and not only the military. Much has changed during this time - and the worldview of a person, and his way of life, and architecture, art. And a knight of the 10th century was not at all like a knight, say, of 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 age-old competition of attack and defense has never stopped, 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 on miniatures of ancient manuscripts, which are not always accurately executed. But there is no doubt that the European peoples used the main types of ancient Roman weapons, slightly changing it.

What was the knight's weapons at the dawn of chivalry

Roman soldiers used a double-edged sword 3 to 5 centimeters wide and 50 to 70 centimeters long as an offensive weapon. The cone-shaped edge of the sword was well honed, with such a weapon it was possible to cut and stab in battle. The Roman legionnaires were armed with throwing spears, they used a bow and arrows.

The defensive armament consisted of a helmet with a high crest, a slightly curved rectangular shield, and a leather tunic covered with metal plaques. Probably, the defensive armament of a warrior was similar in Europe of 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, the leader of the Normans who conquered England in the 11th century, did a lot for future historians.

According to legend, it was Matilda who wove a huge carpet with her own hands, which is now stored 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. The samples of weapons of both warring parties are clearly shown on the carpet.

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

Protective weapons consisted of a long leather shirt, on 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 supplemented with short, knee-length leather pants.

On the warrior's head was a leather hood, over which was put on a conical helmet with a wide metal arrow covering the nose. The shield was long, almost full-length, almond-shaped. It was made of strong boards and upholstered on the outside with thick leather with metal fittings. Protected in this way, the warrior was almost invulnerable to contemporary offensive weapons.

Sometimes iron rings were sewn in rows instead of iron scales or stripes on a leather base; while the rings of one row half covered the next. Later, gunsmiths began to make armor consisting of steel rings alone, each of which captured four adjacent rings and was tightly soldered.

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

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

“Under the cloak, chain mail was visible with sleeves and gloves made of small metal rings; it was extremely skillfully made, and fitted as snugly and resiliently to the body as our jerseys, knitted from soft wool. As far as the folds of the cloak could be seen, his thighs were protected by the same mail; the knees were covered with thin steel plates, and the calves were covered with metal mail stockings.

Knights dress in armor

Already by the middle of the XII century, chivalry was completely dressed in chain mail. The engravings of that time show that steel chain mail covered the warrior literally from head to toe: they were used to make cuffs, gloves, and hoods. These flexible steel garments were worn over leather or quilted undergarments to protect against bruises, and they could be very sensitive even if a sword or battle ax did not cut the steel rings. On top of the chain mail, a linen tunic was worn, protecting the armor from damage, as well as from heating by the sun's rays.

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

Chainmail 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 great freedom of action in battle, was able to inflict quick and unexpected blows on the enemy.

Under such conditions, even a large shield covering almost the entire body was already rather a hindrance: chain mail weaving already sufficiently protected the knight's body. The shield, gradually decreasing, began to serve only as additional protection against blows from a spear or sword. The shape of the shields was now the most diverse. The coat of arms was depicted on the outer side, and straps were strengthened on the inner side so that the shield could be comfortably and firmly held on the left hand.

For rectangular or elongated shields, the location of such belt handles was transverse. In six- or octahedral, as well as round shields, the belts were arranged so that when worn, the base of the emblem was always at the bottom. The widest belt fell on the forearm, and the shortest and narrowest was clamped with a brush.

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

However, even such seemingly perfect, reliable and convenient weapons had their drawbacks. The tubular helmet provided too little air to breathe. In the midst of the fight, he even had to be removed 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 the enemy from the friend. In addition, the helmet was not fastened to other armor in any way, and with a deft blow it could be turned so that instead of slits, the blind side appeared in front of the eyes. In this case, the knight was at the complete mercy of the enemy.

Yes, 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 a chopping blow instead of strips of iron riveted on the skin meets a solid sliding and hanging in folds of a flexible metal surface.

Here, a stabbing blow was much more effective, pushing apart and piercing relatively thin chain mail rings. Therefore, the sword takes on a form that is more convenient for an injection: 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 itself.

Such a sword was forged from a steel strip 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 - guard, and ended with a thickening-counterweight to make it easier to hold the sword.

They carried a 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 that were attached to knightly armor. In battle, there was less chance of losing them. Each knight's sword had its own name, as if it were 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 Altclair.

The other main knightly weapon - the spear - has become longer. The shaft painted with paints sometimes reached four meters, the tip was, as a rule, narrow, tetrahedral.

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

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 matter, and even from leather. From above, however, it was covered with silk or velvet, and from below it was lined with metal scales. Each of the scales was fastened on a separate pin, and the ends of the pins were let through and gilded, or even decorated with precious stones.

Such weapons, which supplemented the chain mail shirt, turned out to be very reliable, but, 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 at 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 the protection of those parts of the armor that were most open to attack in battle. So there was another kind additional weapons- shoulder pads, bracers, knee pads with greaves.

Bracers - from the shoulder to the elbow, and leggings - 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. At the back they were fastened with strong belts with 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 interconnected according to the principle of the same narrow scales. transverse stripes ok covering the shoulder and elbow. Leggings were also lengthened - the instep of the leg was protected. Leather knight's gloves were made with wide bells and reinforced from 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 completely abandon chain mail. Separate metal parts were fastened together with strips of hard pressed leather boiled in oil.

Under such a shell, the knight put on a thick quilted jacket made of leather or some dense material. From above, they still wore an elegant tunic, but now it consisted of two parts - upper and lower. The front half of the top was shortened considerably to open the bottom, and narrowed so that it fit smoothly, without folds, to the torso. One or two metal plaques were sewn onto the upper tunic, to which chains from a helmet, sword and dagger were attached. The knight was belted with a wide belt in a metal frame and with a buckle. They wore it, not tightening it, but loosely lowering it on the hips. On such a sword a sword and a dagger hung in a scabbard.

The shield at that 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 besides, they were the main difference between the knighthood - at the initiation, the knight was presented with 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 fastened with straps, which were fastened quite high above the heel.

The changes also affected the weapons with which the knight's war horse was defended. Here, as with the rider, chain mail weaving was replaced by metal strips fastened with leather.

For the constant improvement of knightly offensive and defensive weapons in the XIV-XV centuries, of course, there was a good reason. 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 full of bloody battles and the losses on both sides were so great that the 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, some other factors also influenced the development of weapons - for example ... changes in the cut of secular clothes. When tight camisoles, tight trousers with puffs at the stomach and long, sometimes even turned up toes of shoes were in fashion, knightly armor was also fitted to such a measure. As soon as wider, loose clothing became widespread, armor was also forged in this manner.

The development of armaments was even influenced by the fact that at the beginning of the war success was constantly accompanied by the British, and this strengthened the already developing tendency among the English knights to show off beautiful and richly finished combat 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 challenge of the enemy here too.

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

Knightly weapons in the 15th century

In the 15th century, knightly weapons were rapidly changing, and its individual parts continued to improve.

The bracers were significantly improved by the fact that round, convex plaques protecting the elbow appeared on them. Later, to the previously half-hearted bracers, complementary parts were added, connected to them by hinges and belts with buckles. Now the whole arm of the knight from shoulder to hand, with the exception of the elbow bend, was covered with steel. But the elbow was also covered with narrow transverse strips of iron. With the help of hinges, they were made mobile.

Leggings were improved in the same way as bracers. With the help of small side plates, the knee pads became movable. If before 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 very heel, the knight's leg was protected by steel.

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

An uncomfortable tub-shaped helmet was replaced by a helmet with a metal visor, equipped with eye and respiratory 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 former heavy helmet did not completely go out of use, but began to be used in tournaments, for which the armor, unlike combat, was made even more massive. True, he nevertheless underwent some changes: the tournament helmet began to be attached to the shoulder pads, there were more 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, was no longer so 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 to which it was hung - they attached the shield to the shell on hooks or screwed it on 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.

Separate metal plates of protective weapons were becoming more and more enlarged, gathered together. In the end, the knight was 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. Separate parts of the cuirass were riveted to the belts, and therefore, in general, the armor was quite mobile.

The helmet has changed again - gunsmiths have invented the so-called "salad". It was like an overturned bowl with somewhat sloping sides and an elongated back-plate. When the sallet 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 chinrest was fastened to the bottom of the bib. Thus, 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 chinrest.

Salad could be thrown back a little to the back of the head, opening the face and giving greater access to air, and in case of danger, again quickly pulled over the head.

Armor of this type, of course, required considerable skill and time to manufacture and was very expensive. In addition, new weapons gave rise to special kind decorations: individual parts of the armor began to be covered with artistic chasing, gilding, and niello. This fashion went from the court of the Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, and quickly spread. Now there was no need to wear a rich embroidered 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 in a tournament, or even as a ransom for a prisoner.

Such armor weighed not so 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 protective weapons could exceed all 30 kilograms; individual parts in the armor reached one and a half hundred. Of course, it was possible to move in it only on horseback; now there was nothing to think about foot combat.

And although such super-heavy armor really belonged to the times of the decline of chivalry, one cannot help but be amazed not only by the artistic decoration of the armor, but also by the perfection and thoughtfulness of their very device.

The most perfect armor

By the end of the 15th century, gunsmiths finally found an exceptionally comfortable and perfect form of a helmet, which replaced the sallet. Here, all the parts that already existed, but were previously dressed separately, were successfully connected together.

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

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

The cuirass consisted of a breastplate and a backplate, connected with clasps. The breastplate was of such a shape that, as it were, it deflected a direct blow from a spear or sword, softening it.

On the right side, a support hook was riveted to the breastplate to support a heavy and long spear. Abdominal plates were attached to the front, covering the top of the abdomen. Legguards were their continuation, and a lumbar cover was attached to the back.

The mantles were attached to the necklace on belts or with the help of special pins. The right shoulder was always smaller than the left, so that it was more convenient to hold a spear under the right armpit. Sometimes the shoulders were supplied with high crests that protected the neck from side impacts.

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 closed with a special ulnar shell, allowing the arm to bend freely.

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

Legs up to the knees were covered with the so-called half-pipe caps. Below were knee pads with a side "rosette" that protected the bend of the leg, and finally the leg guards, which were a detachable tube that reached from the knee to the ankle. Leggings, which completely protected the feet from above, were made in different shapes at different times, depending on how the fashion for secular shoes changed.

Mount armor

war horse, faithful comrade knight, now also almost completely hidden by armor. To carry it on itself, and even an equally heavily armed horseman, of course, special strength and endurance were required from the horse.

A headband or headband for a horse was usually forged from a single sheet of metal and covered his forehead. It had large eye holes with convex edges, covered with iron bars.

The neck of the horse was covered with a collar. It was made up of transverse scales-strips and most of all resembled ... the tail of a cancer. Such armor completely covered the mane under it and was attached to the forehead with a metal latch.

A special bib was also provided. Composed of several wide transverse strips, it closed with a 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 upper concave edges. The side parts of the armor were closely connected with the breastplate.

Behind the horse was also protected from possible blows by very wide and convex armor, forged from solid sheets or assembled from separate narrow strips. In order for such armor to hold firmly in place and not harm the horse, a special support base was placed under it, hammered together from wood and upholstered in fabric or leather, or entirely made of whalebone.

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

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

There really was no limit to the imagination. As contemporaries testify, in 1461, during the solemn entry of Louis XI into Paris for the coronation, the horses of his knightly retinue were covered with partly brocade, partly velvet blankets, descending to the very ground and completely humiliated 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 on his horse's blanket, which, as an eyewitness writes, "made a terrifying ringing."

How offensive weapons have changed

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

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

The spear, another main weapon of the knight, gradually divided into two main types: combat and tournament. Tournament constantly changed in length, thickness and shape of the tip, which could be both blunt and sharp. The combat 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 point. Only the appearance of solid metal armor forced gunsmiths to improve the spear. It has become much shorter and thicker. The arm of the knight holding the spear was now protected by a funnel-shaped steel cap on the shaft.

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

In the end, other types of offensive weapons appeared in medieval Europe - for example, a huge sword, reaching 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." A special kind of percussion weapon - a club, an ax, a reed - has also become widespread. It was intended for breaking through metal armor and helmets. However, as a rule, all these types of weapons were not used by knights. They were armed with hired regular troops, infantry.

Weaponsmith

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

In the late period of chivalry, gunsmiths began to stamp their products, and thanks to this, it can be argued that in Spanish city Hereditary masters Aguirro, Hernandez, Martinez, Ruiz, and some others worked in 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 forged by less conscientious gunsmiths in other parts of Europe in order to better sell.

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

Tactics of knightly battles

However, armament with weapons, each knight had his own, individual. 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 a special tactic for conducting a general battle. 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, moreover, 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 everything in their path? When the principles of warfare began to change, chivalry had to leave. Not only from the battlefields, but also from the stage of history.

The knightly army was assembled as follows: each of the knights brought several squires under the banner of his liege, 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 were usually built before the battle in wedge detachments. In the first row there were no more than five horsemen, in the next two there were seven, then there were rows of nine, eleven and thirteen horsemen. Behind, lined up in a regular quadrangle, the rest of the knightly cavalry followed.

These formations, as everyone probably remembers from the film by Sergei Eisentstein, were advancing on the army of Alexander Nevsky by the knights of the Teutonic Order in the famous Battle of the Ice in 1242. But, by the way, the Russian squads willingly 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 put up poorly armed and poorly trained infantry in front of it. In order to maintain formation by the decisive moment of the battle, the wedge at first moved very slowly, almost at a pace, and only when they got close to the enemy did the knights trot their horses.

With a huge mass, 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 go on for hours, and often the leaders of both sides could no longer intervene in its course.

How did the jousting

At first, the knights fought on horseback: two riders with spears at the ready, hiding behind shields, rushed at each other, aiming at the enemy in a shield or helmet. The blow, reinforced by the weight of the armor, the speed and mass of the horse, was terrible. A less dexterous knight, stunned, flew out of the saddle with a split shield or a knocked down helmet; in another case, the spears of both broke like reeds. Then the knights threw their horses, and the duel with swords began.

In medieval times, it was nothing like the graceful, casual swordsmanship of the later age of musketeers. The blows were rare and very heavy. The only way to get them out was with a shield. However, in close combat, the shield could serve not only as a defensive weapon, but also as an offensive one: seizing the moment, they could suddenly push the enemy so that he lost his balance, and immediately deliver a decisive blow to him.

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 the sworn enemies of the Englishman Peter Brook and the Spaniard Morella came face to face - though not on the battlefield, but on the stadium, in the presence of the king himself and many spectators, but the battle is not less went not to life, but to death:

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

But Peter didn't fall. He tossed aside the shattered spear and, grabbing the saddle strap, hauled himself back up. Morella tried to stop his horse in order to turn and attack the Englishman before he recovered, but his horse raced fast, it was impossible to stop him. Finally, the opponents again turned to each other. But Peter did not have a spear and a helmet, and on the tip of Morell's spear hung the helmet of his opponent, from which he tried in vain to free himself.

Morell's spear was pointed at Peter's unprotected face, but when the spear was very close, Peter dropped the reins and struck with his shield at the white plume fluttering at the end of Morell's spear, the same one that had previously been torn from Peter's head. He had timed it right: the white feathers swung very low, but just enough so that, crouched in the saddle, Peter could slip under his deadly spear. And when the opponents caught up, Peter threw out his long right arm and, clasping Morell like a steel hook, pulled him out of the saddle. The black horse rushed forward without a rider, and the white one with a double burden.

Morella grabbed Peter by the neck, the opponents swayed in the saddle, and the frightened horse raced until he 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 back from each other and drew their long swords. Peter, who didn't have a helmet, held his shield up high to protect his head and calmly waited for the attack.

Morella struck first, and his sword screeched against the steel. Before Morella could get back into position, Peter retaliated, but Morella ducked and the sword only cut the black feathers from his helmet. With the speed of lightning, the point of Morell's sword rushed straight into Peter's face, but the Englishman managed to deviate a little, and the blow missed him. Morell attacked again and struck such a blow that although Peter had time to substitute his shield, the Spaniard's sword slid over him and fell on 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 a battle cry: "Long live the Brooms!" - Peter gathered all his strength and rushed at Morell. Spectators saw that half of the Spaniard's helmet lay on the sand. This time it was Morella's turn to sway. Moreover, he dropped his shield..."

But although the blows inflicted by the knight's hand were mighty, the knights still died in battles 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 adversary equal to himself, a member of the same common brotherhood of knights, 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 Holy Christian Church. There was no point in killing the enemy, with the exception of only those cases when he was an enemy of enemies or did not want to surrender in any way and himself 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, and even land with villages as a ransom for his freedom ...

Did the knights use "tricks of war" on the battlefield?

But there were, of course, 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, "infidels" during crusades for the liberation of the Holy Land. So the knights were quite capable of various military tricks: roundabout maneuvers, false attacks and retreats that lure 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 cede it, William called all the Norman knights under his banner. Many poor, landless knights from all over France joined the assembled army, hoping for rich booty. On equipped ships, William crossed the English Channel and landed in southeastern England near the city of Hastings.

Harold, not supported by most 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, repulsed the attacks of the riders with long spears.

Then Wilhelm had to go to a military trick: part of his army turned into a feigned flight. Considering 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 mixed up. 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 battle of the Middle Ages is famous for the skillful maneuver that ensured victory. It refers 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 line up in battle formation, and at first the French attack was repulsed. But still, the leader of the French knightly troops, Bertrand Dugueclin, 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 for those times - 10,000 soldiers killed, wounded and surrendered.

It must be assumed that the French knight Bertrand Dugueclin was a capable and skillful commander, since such an unexpected maneuver was no longer the first on his track record. Six years earlier, near the town of Kocherel, his 10,000-strong knightly army was attacked by a large detachment of English mercenaries and the 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, was increasingly losing its claims to the primary role on the battlefield.

Already in 1302, at the battle of Courtrai in Flanders, it was clearly shown how great the strength of well-organized, disciplined infantry can be. The French army that invaded Flanders was utterly 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 out as trophies in the cathedral of the city of Courtrai. In history, this battle is often referred to as the “Battle of the Golden Spurs”.

And as it turned out, during the Hundred Years War, much earlier than the French, the English nobility realized that for success it was necessary not to despise their own infantry, but to act with it, as well as with arrows from bows and crossbows, in unity and interaction. The French did not trust their militia at all. Even at the height of the war, the authorities sometimes forbade the townspeople to practice archery, and when one day the Parisians volunteered to put out 6,000 crossbowmen, the knights arrogantly refused the help of the “shopkeepers”.

A black date in the history of France was the day of August 26, 1346. It was then, at the Battle of Crecy, the main role in the actions of a small, nine thousandth detachment of the British, commanded by King Edward III himself, for the first time was assigned to the infantry. 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 poorly armed and almost untrained citizens.

The defeat of the French army was terrible and at the same time instructive. Opponents acted in the battle in completely different ways.

Edward III, in front of his entire detachment, lined up a long line of English archers, who brought their art to amazing perfection and were famous for being able to hit any target from three hundred paces.

Behind the arrows, knights interspersed with infantry and other arrows were placed in three battle lines. The horses of the dismounted knights remained in the wagon train behind the troops.

When Philip moved his army against the English, it obeyed very unfriendly, the last ranks were just about to come 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 connect and rest for the night.

However, the French knights, carried away by the thirst for battle, continued to move forward - without any order, overtaking and pushing one another. Finally, they came close to the British. It seemed to them the greatest shame for 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 a previously planned disposition, the Genoese riflemen were to move forward, and the ranks of the French parted to give them the way. However, the mercenaries moved reluctantly. They were already tired from the crossing, and their shields were left behind in the lagging wagons, because, following the first royal order, they expected to fight only the next day.

The leaders of the mercenaries loudly cursed what the world stands for, the new order. Hearing this, the Count of Alençon arrogantly said, as the chroniclers report: "That's all the use of this bastard for you, it is only suitable for eating, and it will be more of a hindrance to us than a help."

The Genoese, nevertheless, came close to the British and issued their wild war cry three times, hoping to instill terror in them. But in response, they cold-bloodedly began deadly shooting from their bows.

Long feathered arrows hit the Genoese before they could draw back the bowstrings of their crossbows. The English bows were so powerful that the arrows pierced through 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 the attack. All battle formations collapsed, now the English archers shot not only the Genoese, but also the knights, and they especially tried to hit the horses.

Soon before the ranks of the English there was only a shapeless mass of riders and dead mercenaries stretched out under the fallen horses. It was then that the English infantry rushed onto the battlefield, calmly finishing off the defeated. The rest of the French army began to flee in disorder.

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

The Hundred Years' War - the decline of chivalry

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

The 6,000-strong English detachment, commanded by Edward's eldest son 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 hid. The French knights were about to attack along a narrow passage between the fences, but a hail of arrows fell on them, and then the English knights hit the French, who had huddled in a disorderly crowd. About five thousand soldiers died, not counting the huge number taken prisoner. Surrendered to the mercy of the winner and King John II himself, who by this time had replaced Philip VI on the French throne.

The French army almost five times outnumbered the enemy, but this time the English archers were hiding behind a specially constructed palisade, which prevented the advance of heavily armed knights. Under 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 closest relative of the king, the Duke of Orleans.

And yet, in the end, the winners in the Hundred Years War were the French, who conquered vast territories of the kingdom, with which long years owned by the British. Having learned the lessons taught, France relied in the war against the invaders not so much on chivalry as on the whole people; 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.

Knightly weapons

How does it usually appear to us?

Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. It seems so - through the narrow slits in the helmets, decorated with lush sultans, stern warrior-knights from distant times, clad in steel from head to toe, are cautiously watching 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 finest craftsmanship of armor finishing: they are decorated with niello, expensive gilding, and embossing.

And you can’t take your eyes off the knight’s weapons in glassed-in windows - on the hilts of swords there are precious stones, silver, gilding, on the blued blades the mottos of their owners are engraved. Long narrow daggers amaze with the elegance of work, perfection and proportionality of the form - it seems that not a blacksmith-gunsmith worked on them, but a skilled master jeweler. Spears are decorated with flags, halberds - with magnificent tassels ...

In a word, in all its brilliance, 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 refers ... to the worst period of chivalry, to its decline, extinction.

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

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

Such armor now decorates museums

Regular armies appeared in Europe - mobile, disciplined. The knightly army has always been, in fact, a militia, gathering only at the call of its lord. And by the 16th century - and most of the brilliant armor and weapons belong to this time - the only thing left for the knightly class was to shine at royal parades as an honorary escort, and go to tournaments in the hope of earning a favorable look from one of the ladies of the court on a luxuriously cleaned podium.

And yet, for more than half a thousand years, the knights were the main force of medieval Europe, and not only the military. Much has changed during this time - and the worldview of a person, and his way of life, and architecture, art. And a knight of the 10th century was not at all like a knight, say, of 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 age-old competition of attack and defense has never stopped, 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 on miniatures of ancient manuscripts, which are not always accurately executed. But there is no doubt that the European peoples used the main types of ancient Roman weapons, slightly changing it.

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

Knightly weapons How does it usually appear to us? Anyone who has ever visited the St. Petersburg Hermitage will certainly not forget the impression left by the famous Knights' Hall. It seems so - through narrow slots in helmets decorated with lush

From the book 100 great wonders of technology author Mussky Sergey Anatolievich

From the book Big Soviet Encyclopedia(AR) author TSB

Knightly weapons in the 15th century In the 15th century, knightly weapons changed rapidly, and their individual parts continued to improve. The bracers were significantly improved by the fact that round, convex plaques protecting the elbow appeared on them. Later to half before

From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (FOR) of the author TSB

WEAPONS

From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (PA) of the author TSB

From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (RY) of the author TSB

From the book Great Soviet Encyclopedia (TE) of the author TSB

From the book Fundamentals of Guerrilla Warfare author author unknown

From the book Medieval France author Polo de Beaulieu Marie-Anne

From the book Knights author Malov Vladimir Igorevich

From the book Encyclopedia of Modern military aviation 1945-2002: Part 2. Helicopters author Morozov V.P.

Armament To give any recommendations on what kind of weapons the partisans should (or should not) arm themselves with is senseless and stupid. A partisan fights with what he has managed to acquire, seize from the enemy, make on his own, steal or get by some other means.

From book Airborne Troops. History of the Russian landing author Alekhin Roman Viktorovich

From the author's book

What was the knight's weapons at the dawn of chivalry Roman soldiers 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 honed, such a weapon could be used in

From the author's book

Knightly weapons in the 15th century In the 15th century, knightly weapons quickly changed, and their individual parts continued to improve. Bracers were significantly improved by the fact that round convex plaques protecting the elbow appeared on them. Later to half before

From the author's book

BOMB WEAPONS

From the author's book

WEAPONS OF THE AIRBORNE AND SPECIAL FORCES By this time, a significant number of engineering and special ammunition and weapons systems, with which saboteurs were supposed to destroy nuclear attack weapons

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 fabric; they were attached to the waist belt on a sling, each end of which, cut into belts, formed a woven leather ring. The 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. Knightly swords stood out for their beauty, they could only be owned by noble gentlemen, weapons took part in church liturgies, were consecrated by the clergy. The origin of unique samples of knightly weapons was often attributed to supernatural forces, some swords were endowed with magical qualities. Such weapons were kept in the treasuries of monasteries under the altars, on the graves of their former owners, 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 valleys. A simple crossbar served as a guard, the arms of which could slightly bend upwards. The handle, designed for one palm, was 10 cm long and ended with a counterweight pommel, 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 of plate armor, the blade of the knight's sword became longer, which increased the force of its blow. The hilt of the sword is also lengthened, allowing a two-handed grip. This is how a one and a half hand sword appeared, first in Germany, then in England, then in other countries of Western Europe.
A sword with a handle designed to be gripped exclusively with two hands is called a two-handed sword. The length of the two-handed sword reached two meters, it was worn without a scabbard on the shoulder. The two-handed sword was, in particular, the weapon of the Swiss foot soldiers of the 16th century. Warriors with two-handed swords were in the front ranks of the battle formation: their task was to cut and shoot down the long spears of the enemy landsknechts. Two-handed swords as a military weapon did not survive the 16th century and were later used as an honorary weapon with a 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 lower weight and length and was called the "civilian sword".

medieval swords
1. Wide single-edged iron sword. Found in a swamp. Denmark. 100-300 AD
2. Double-edged iron sword with a bronze handle and scabbard fittings. Denmark. 400-450 AD
3. Single-edged sword of the Vikings. Norway. Around 800
4. Double-edged iron sword from Scandinavia. 9th or 10th century
5. German double-edged sword with an American walnut pommel. 1150-1200
6. English folchen 1260-1270, stored 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. About 1380

The following weapons- a spear, cold, piercing or throwing, weapons - 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 and was originally a pointed stick, later a stone tip was tied to the shaft. In the Bronze Age, metal tips appear, the way the tip is attached 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 the shaft itself. In addition, in the presence of external ring-shaped lugs, the tip was tied to the shaft with a cord. Here are some types of spears and other pole implements.

1. A spear with a leaf-shaped tip. Switzerland. 15th century
2. Pick. Europe. About 1700
3. Awl-shaped tetrahedral peak. Switzerland or Germany. 15th century
4. Boarding peak. Spain. 19th century
5. Rogatin for a wild boar. Germany. 16th century
6. Spear of the East African Masai. 20th 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 (bed).
Shooting from a crossbow is carried out with short arrows with leather or wooden plumage (or without it). The first crossbows in Europe appeared in the ninth century. The accuracy and power of shooting from a crossbow made such a strong impression on contemporaries that in 1139 the Pope of Rome, at the Second Lateran Council, cursed the crossbow as a "blasphemous weapon" and proposed that it be excluded from the armament of Christian troops. However, in the future, crossbows not only did not go out of use, but, on the contrary, received widespread recognition. They began to abandon them only in the sixteenth century, as firearms spread and improved. The German landsknechts used the crossbow until the end of the sixteenth, and the British arrows 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 bed, where a short heavy arrow was placed. A bow was attached to the bed. 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, the bowstring was pulled with the help of an attached iron lever, called the "goat's leg". In 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 the wars of national liberation, most often as a crossbow-trap. During the First World War of 1914-1918, the Germans used the easel crossbow as a grenade launcher.
From the mid-1950s in Western countries crossbow sport develops. Sports crossbows served as a model for the creation of modern combat crossbows. In their dimensions and weight, they are close to machine guns and submachine guns and are used in reconnaissance and sabotage units. Often combat crossbows are made collapsible, which simplifies their transportation and disguise.

No less powerful mace(from lat. bulla - ball), edged weapons about 0.5-0.8 m long in the form of a heavy stone or metal head on a wooden handle, a kind of club.
The mace appeared in the Neolithic, it was widely used in the countries of the Ancient East. In the ancient world, it was used less often. 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 rib-plates (shestoper) was very widely used in Central Asia. Among the Cossacks, a mace (notch) existed 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 stanitsa and village atamans in Russia. According to their structure, maces are divided into five types.
1. A simple, non-metal mace that is made from a single material, most commonly wood.
2. A compound mace with a rigidly fixed pommel made of several materials.
3. Mace of a mobile design.
4. All-metal mace.
5. Ceremonial mace, a symbol of power.