Author Topic: The Psychology of Knights on the Battlefield ( 7 parts )  (Read 8049 times)

Longmane

  • Noble Lord
  • ***
  • Posts: 237
  • Longmane Family.
    • View Profile
pt 5

Fear in Knights Facing Foot-soldiers

Another sort of fear is that of knights who find themselves faced by well-disciplined foot-soldiers, who stand waiting for the charge in dense ranks, armed with long weapons. The first example of this comes from the battle of Hastings, in which tightly-packed English foot-soldiers awaited the charge of William the Conqueror's knights on a hilltop.

After preliminary action by the archers, the cavalry went into action. But the English put up such a stout resistance that the left flank of William's army, made up of knights and soldiers from Brittany, fled, and the whole attacking army gave way. Knights who managed to penetrate the close formation, including the famous bard Taillefer, who stirred the troops with his martial songs, were killed. The English were armed with fearful battleaxes which 'easily hewed a way through shields and other weapons of defence'. William had to urge on his men, pointing out that general flight could not save them from death.

At the battle of Bouvines the Brabanciones of Renaud de Dammartin were drawn up in double ranks in the form of a crown, and kept the French knights out of their formation with their long lances. These mercenaries were the last of any troops on the battlefield to hold their ground, because the knights, after an initial mishap, did not dare to charge the close formation.

'Our knights were much afraid of these foot-soldiers armed with lances, whom they had to fight with their swords and short weapons. The lances were longer than the swords and daggers and their impenetrable ranks in the form of a crown were as strong as a wall.'

In the survey of the tactics of the foot-soldiers it will be seen how the French knights modified their tactics after the battle of Courtrai. This was also the case with the Anglo-Norman knights after their defeat by the Scots at Bannockburn in 1314. In this battle there was a notable conversation between Henri de Beaumont and Thomas Gray, who had raised an objection to a manoeuvre proposed by de Beaumont. Henri said 'If you're frightened, then flee!' 'Sire,' answered Gray, 'I shall not flee today because I am frightened,' and to show that he was not afraid of the Scottish foot-soldiers he joined the charge, in which his neighbour, Sir William Dayncourt, was killed, while Thomas's horse was killed by the Scottish pikes and he himself was captured.

At Cassel in 1328 the French thought that they were riding to their deaths, or at least that they would lose their horses in a charge against the crown-formation of Zannekin's closely packed troops. They opened up their own encircling formation to let the Flemings get away, and so to kill them more easily.

Not only fear for their own lives, but for their horses too and all that their loss would entail might sometimes also make the knights refrain from pressing home a charge against determined and closely packed foot-soldiers. Jean le Bel gives a remarkable example of this. At Vottem on 18 July 1346, the men of Liège and Huy had taken up their position beyond ditches, where they were attacked by a number of the prince-bishop's dismounted knights. Other knights stayed on horse-back, but did not dare make an attack for fear their horses would be killed. A splendid army of the prince-bishop, reinforced by German allies, fled in panic.

Besides these fears for their horses and themselves, there was another reason why the knights did not like fighting against confident foot-soldiers. The Flemings, Scots, and Swiss did not usually take prisoners, but killed their enemies. It was said that the French lords advised their king, Philip the Fair, to put an end to the war in 1304 against the Flemings because those cruel people would not take the knights prisoner.

The Austrian knights feared the Swiss for the same reason. In time past the Welsh and Irish used similar methods with their enemies. Giraldus Cambrensis describes the difference in the usages of war thus: 'Whereas in France knights are taken prisoner, here they are beheaded: over there they are ransomed, here they are killed.'  But in the invasion of Ireland (1166–72) the knights were infinitely better armed than the Irish foot-soldiers, and they had not much to fear from their enemies.

It has been shown that knights as individuals knew fear of death, wounds, and capture, and that individual fear could develop into panic affecting a whole unit, or putting a great part of the army to flight. Fear exerts great influence on warfare: discipline on the march, tactics and behavior in battle, all are affected by it. In order to intercept fugitives and get them re-grouped, a second and possibly a third line were formed in drawing the troops up before battle. The second and third line also made it possible to attack the enemy in the flank or the rear, for such attacks had far greater effect than frontal ones on enemy morale. Lastly, the use of standards on the battlefield reflects the human urge to feel attached to a visible unit.

The conviction of many scholars that the knights completely lacked discipline is well-known. They ascribe this to the individualistic behavior of the nobles and their seeking after personal honour and fame. In reality, knightly armies took insufficient precautions on various occasions, but it is doubtful whether this is to be ascribed to the behavior of individual knights: it stemmed rather from their optimism and the over-confidence they felt in their numbers.

But this over-confidence in military might was not the general rule, for in the cold light of reality it was tempered by the fear of death and the instinct for self-preservation. Jean Le Bel's description of the expedition to Scotland in 1327 supports this. As likewise the dispute discussed earlier between the nobles from Hainault and the English archers at York when, 'never did men live in such fear, and in so great danger of their lives,. Fear made those knights act cautiously and wisely.

Fear and its influence are not the sole causes of all the problems which arise concerning the behavior of knights in battle. Some attention must also be paid to the ways in which the nobles managed to suppress their fear. Chivalry gave countless examples of magnificent courage, gallantry and such heroic deeds as belong to the greatest feats of arms. Despite fear of death and wounds, the princes found enough volunteers for their expeditions. What made the knights go on such campaigns?

What enabled them to overcome their own fear? What lay behind their martial spirit? Let us first consider a few fundamental factors in this spirit, which may explain why they fought so bravely. First of all the knights were professionals who were fighting for a living. It was possible to become an emperor, a king, a duke, a count, a baron by conquest and a successful military career.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.  "Albert Einstein"