p2 Solidarity in the Knightly Families and Clans, and in a Lord's Retinue (4 parts )
It is common knowledge that the old Germans in their mighty Geschlechter (clans) united in solid formations in time of war, thanks to the natural cohesiveness or solidarity which had developed among them from living close together in time of peace. The same men were leaders of society inpeace and in war. There was firm mutual trust, for the warriors were fighting by the side of companions whom they had known for years. Strict discipline, as imposed by the Romans to counteract fear, was not necessary, for anyone who fled from the field of battle was expelled from society, and had to live as an outlaw. Besides, if a people is warlike by nature, such characteristics of daily life may compensate for many other qualities which in an army of more civilized folk would have to be artificially fostered by long drilling under strict discipline, as in the case of the Romans.
The head of a family was also a military leader, so that if he was in command of a unit of men bound by ties of blood, he did so as the leader of a clan or tribe. 'Neither chance nor a haphazard grouping makes up the unit of cavalry or foot-soldiers, but families or clans.' The men so grouped from one family advanced under a sign or banner, the fano, gundfano, or bandwa.
After the Franks had settled in Gaul, this family organization and its concomitant military qualities disappeared. The warriors became farmers, and it has been thought that there was no question of the influence of the clans upon the art of war in the new military class which then arose, and later evolved towards chivalry. This however is a widely held misconception, sharply contradicted by trustworthy sources well into the thirteenth century.
The role of knightly clans in private wars has already been mentioned. In these conflicts between noble families there appear not only the actual family members, but also men of the retinue, the vassals who were maintained by the lord and lived with the family proper.
In comparison with the old Geschlechter, the medieval aristocratic clan or lignage did not perhaps have the same solidarity, but this is hard to decide, and other characteristics which the old Germans certainly did not possess compensated for what was lost. The knightly clan was smaller, making for greater solidarity. It was provided with better weapons and had much more efficient equipment. As warriors, the knights had greater individual dexterity, and better training in tournaments, which were held more often than the old Germans' war games. The knights were also conscious of belonging to the ruling class: for in their eyes they naturally occupied a lofty position far above the common people and even above the clergy. Many texts show this:
'That is well done', says the archbishop,
That is how a knight should behave,
Who is armed and well mounted:
He must be strong and proud in battle,
Otherwise he is not worth a groat,
And should go into a monastery and become a monk
And pray for our sins every day.
And elsewhere:
The archbishop …
Likes buying horses and fine weapons
For dubbing squires knights better
Than heaping up riches….
He explains this to the pope:
'Reverend Father, do not worry too much about this:
We ought to think well of knights,
When we are sitting down to dine,
Or are at matins,
They are fighting for the defence of our land.
You and I and our abbot Fromer
Ought to empty the treasure chest for them.
Each of us should give them so much
So that they will come and serve and honour us.'
The same sense of superiority comes out in a military form in mounted combat - the cavalryman always feels superior to the foot-soldier.
There are many texts which show the value of the ties binding the clan to the lord. The best known of these dates from the end of the thirteenth century, proving that these conditions lasted for a very long time. Joinville tells us that at the time of the battle of Mansurah in Egypt in 1250, during the first Crusade of St Louis, the bataille of Guy de Mauvoisin achieved splendid results: he adds that this should cause no surprise, for this formation consisted entirely of members of this clan and vassals of this lord. This was not of course true of all lords, since they were accompanied on Crusades by volunteers only.
To Ambroise the knightly clans and closely serried units were synonymous:
The clans advanced together
And regrouped themselves together
This made the army so tightly packed
That it could scarcely be harmed.
In the battle of Arsuf the great hero of the day was James of Avesnes, who fought with his clan and perished with three members of his family. During one of the battles of the Third Crusade, the Knights Templar were surprised by the enemy. Since they had had plenty of experience of fighting in the East, and were used to fighting in units, they dismounted and drew themselves up in crown formation, in which the men stood back to back to repel the enemy attack. They fought then, not as we should expect of a professional army, in very close units, but rather 'as if they all sprang from one father'. The poet shows that he considers that units formed from family members were much more closely united than those which the Templars could form as a military order, with their own rules for the conduct of war. The Schavedries clan began the battle of Worringen, and remained on the battlefield until the end. Jan van Heelu wrote in the same vein about the men of Brabant, who fought as brothers under the leadership of their father, duke John I.
