Osprey - General Military - Knight - The Warrior and ... - Brego-weard

60
KNIGHT
weapon impacts on real armour are obviously reliant on replica weapons and armour,
the quality and composition of which vary and may not match that of the medieval
originals. Such studies have also focused on one of the key debates in medieval military
history, the deadliness of the longbow. As a result tests tend to comprise arrow shots,
with relatively little work being done with close-combat weapons.
Battlefield graves are even more rare than examples of surviving armour and in
only one, that of Wisby, were the corpses buried in the armour they had worn on
the field, allowing us some idea of how much (or how little) protection it afforded.
The skeletal remains, as we shall see later on, give little indication of soft tissue wounds
— thrusts that penetrated the vital organs but left no marks on bone - which might
lead one to conclude that the body armour was more effective than it actually was.
Furthermore, all of these graves contain common soldiers. Those of knightly rank
were almost always recovered from the field and taken elsewhere for individual burial.
The experience of battle, level of protection and the type of combat they would be
engaged in might be totally different, so again any conclusions one makes drawn on
this evidence must be somewhat tentative.
What all ol the source material, archaeological record and practical studies seem
to suggest is that the image of the epic hero cleaving his opponents in two is a grossly
exaggerated one and that, il wearing the most up-to-date form of armour, the knight
was generally well protected against the common weapons of the time. There was,
however, a continuing race, with bows and crossbows becoming more powerful and
numerous hand weapons being designed specifically to penetrate armour. In turn
armour developed in response and the whole cycle repeated.
THE HORSE
The horse is synonymous with the knight. In all European languages except English,
the knight was named for and distinguished by his mount. It is almost inconceivable
to picture the knight without his equally imposing warhorse. Once again, however, we
must be careful not to be too ready to accept the popular images of the lumbering
carthorse-like brute, or the 18- or 19-hand (6 feet to 6 feet 4 inches) giant. These are
based on misapprehensions about the weight of man and armour and the nature of
medieval cavalry tactics as blunt and unsophisticated, requiring a weighty rather than
manoeuvrable mount. Even if such images are based on contemporary illustrations
such as the Luttrell psalter or Ucello's mural of the 14th-century mercenary captain
Sir John Hawkwood, which do appear to show massive mounts, we must be cautious.
As with many medieval artworks, and in common with 18th-century paintings of