| Author |
Message |
Jean Henri Chandler
|
 Posted: Sat 27 Aug, 2022 7:15 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Definitely, and... I don't blame you!
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
  |
 |
|
F. Rodel
|
| Posted: Tue 06 Sep, 2022 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Marchae = Mark / Lira / Lb? |
In German are Marks. In that period, a Aquileia's mark worth just over 2 florins.
| Quote: | | Yes in the German speaking towns this would often be by gassen (lane or street) / viertel (quarter), or by the craft organization or guild. Additional arms were often kept in the gate tower, which in turn were controlled by the nearby craft guild or sometimes by a patrician family. For example in Krakow the St. Florian's Gate tower was controlled by the prominent furrier's guild, the carpenter's, joiner's and lace maker's towers by their respective crafts. They contained crossbows, armor, polearms, and later some firearms and cannon, and these were the site of muster for the militia and also where the people from the local neighborhood reported for town watch duty. They also kept some records in there. Same in Rostock, Wismar, Danzig, Torun and several other towns in that region. |
Earlier I talked about a document that listed citizens with the weapons imposed on them. For the same year, we have the decisions of the city council, which, unfortunately, make no mention of the imposition of weapons. We also have a few dozen notebooks with the commune's exits and entrances and never mention officers imposing weapons. For these reasons (but also because we see that the troops were organised according to the neighborhoods and that each neighborhood, at least at the end of the fourteenth century, had its own captain), it is probably that this task is a duty of the neighborhood. We also see that the city imposed on the most suitable (magis habiles) citizens the obligation to buy a crossbow. The city arsenal also had weapons but they were absolutely insufficient in number to equip the citizens.
For example, an inventory of 1385:
Primo spingardas II;
Item bombardas II;
Item scloppum ferreum I;
Item banchettas ad carcandum balistas IIIIor;
Item tulinos magnos III;
Item tulinos parvos III;
Item balistam corneam a duobus pedibus que fuit Lovisini I;
Item balistam corneam ad I pedem I;
Item balistas novas ad duos pedes VI;
Item balistas antiquas a duobus pedibus VI;
Item balistam de cornu debilles et corosam I;
Item balistas ad riginellum novas II;
Item balistas novas ad unum pedem II;
Item circa duo milliaria varetonorum venetorum in quodam bancho logo II;
Item certam quantitatem varetonorum venetorum in una capsa magna penatorum cum pennis;
Item certam quantitatem varetonorum ad balistam duorum pedum;
Item sachutios pulveris ad bombardam vii;
[...]
Item in una capsa certam quantitatem clavorum II petium;
Item in duobus vasculis certam quantitatem sulphuris et salnitrii;
Item meletas novas ad tulinum VIIII;
[...]
In Trieste in the second half of the fourteenth century we find the payment of officers (one for each quarter) who imposed arms. Here too we see that the Commune imposed crossbows on the citizens, on the inhabitants of the countryside (they first decided the total number which was then to be divided) and also on the Confranternites and that it bought weapons for the arsenal but only as a stock.
Also in the Statuta of ALbenga of 1288 we find two officers per district who had to impose weapons on citizens, in Turin in the first half of the fourteenth century we find 8 sapientes that had to worry about the economic possibilities (facultates) of the citizens, in Florence in each Society of the people there must have been 20 people armed with 20 pavises , 20 with crossbows, 20 with long spears and 20 with axes and the others "quam melius et convenientibus potunt, inspecta condictione et qualitatem ipsorum".
Therefore it seems that the military equipment was first of all an individual duty, but there could have been secondary help from the city, or from the neighborhoods (for example in Verona or Brescia) or other organisations (Florence, maybe Bologna).
Unfortunately in Italy the research on military organization in the Middle Ages is almost absent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Tue 06 Sep, 2022 6:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I believe the governance of German speaking town could vary a lot, and that this played out in how it’s citizens armed themselves. A lot of medieval towns were ruled by the guilds, or at least with them being major players. However, some towns, such as Nuremberg, were ruled by a patrician class. This class consisted of 20-30 families that were the only ones allowed to be on the town council. They even had their own tournaments, something usually restricted to the nobility.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Tue 06 Sep, 2022 8:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| F. Rodel wrote: | | Quote: | | Marchae = Mark / Lira / Lb? |
In German are Marks. In that period, a Aquileia's mark worth just over 2 florins.
| Quote: | | Yes in the German speaking towns this would often be by gassen (lane or street) / viertel (quarter), or by the craft organization or guild. Additional arms were often kept in the gate tower, which in turn were controlled by the nearby craft guild or sometimes by a patrician family. For example in Krakow the St. Florian's Gate tower was controlled by the prominent furrier's guild, the carpenter's, joiner's and lace maker's towers by their respective crafts. They contained crossbows, armor, polearms, and later some firearms and cannon, and these were the site of muster for the militia and also where the people from the local neighborhood reported for town watch duty. They also kept some records in there. Same in Rostock, Wismar, Danzig, Torun and several other towns in that region. |
Earlier I talked about a document that listed citizens with the weapons imposed on them. For the same year, we have the decisions of the city council, which, unfortunately, make no mention of the imposition of weapons. We also have a few dozen notebooks with the commune's exits and entrances and never mention officers imposing weapons. For these reasons (but also because we see that the troops were organised according to the neighborhoods and that each neighborhood, at least at the end of the fourteenth century, had its own captain), it is probably that this task is a duty of the neighborhood. We also see that the city imposed on the most suitable (magis habiles) citizens the obligation to buy a crossbow. The city arsenal also had weapons but they were absolutely insufficient in number to equip the citizens.
For example, an inventory of 1385:
Primo spingardas II;
Item bombardas II;
Item scloppum ferreum I;
Item banchettas ad carcandum balistas IIIIor;
Item tulinos magnos III;
Item tulinos parvos III;
Item balistam corneam a duobus pedibus que fuit Lovisini I;
Item balistam corneam ad I pedem I;
Item balistas novas ad duos pedes VI;
Item balistas antiquas a duobus pedibus VI;
Item balistam de cornu debilles et corosam I;
Item balistas ad riginellum novas II;
Item balistas novas ad unum pedem II;
Item circa duo milliaria varetonorum venetorum in quodam bancho logo II;
Item certam quantitatem varetonorum venetorum in una capsa magna penatorum cum pennis;
Item certam quantitatem varetonorum ad balistam duorum pedum;
Item sachutios pulveris ad bombardam vii;
[...]
Item in una capsa certam quantitatem clavorum II petium;
Item in duobus vasculis certam quantitatem sulphuris et salnitrii;
Item meletas novas ad tulinum VIIII;
[...]
In Trieste in the second half of the fourteenth century we find the payment of officers (one for each quarter) who imposed arms. Here too we see that the Commune imposed crossbows on the citizens, on the inhabitants of the countryside (they first decided the total number which was then to be divided) and also on the Confranternites and that it bought weapons for the arsenal but only as a stock.
Also in the Statuta of ALbenga of 1288 we find two officers per district who had to impose weapons on citizens, in Turin in the first half of the fourteenth century we find 8 sapientes that had to worry about the economic possibilities (facultates) of the citizens, in Florence in each Society of the people there must have been 20 people armed with 20 pavises , 20 with crossbows, 20 with long spears and 20 with axes and the others "quam melius et convenientibus potunt, inspecta condictione et qualitatem ipsorum".
Therefore it seems that the military equipment was first of all an individual duty, but there could have been secondary help from the city, or from the neighborhoods (for example in Verona or Brescia) or other organisations (Florence, maybe Bologna).
Unfortunately in Italy the research on military organization in the Middle Ages is almost absent. |
This is wonderful, thanks for posting this data. I agree with you the subject is very inadequately covered, but I have some sources for Central Europe, while I have not yet really started to look in Italy this is very welcome and helpful to me. It actually seems quite similar.
I have one question, when you say "weapons imposed on them" or that the quartermaster "imposed arms", can you explain what you mean a bit more precisely? I'm not sure if this means an obligation to acquire weapons, or if they are being issued weapons or if it means something else.
Interesting that the crossbows seem to be rated as two feet and one foot, does that mean something to do with spanning? And they seem to be distinguishing horn crossbows, as from wood or steel prod?
I remember in some early 15th C craft regulations from Venice I read they distinguished a 'balliste largo" and "ballistae piccolo" or something like that, and these were used to proof armor at two different grades.
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
Last edited by Jean Henri Chandler on Wed 07 Sep, 2022 4:22 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Tue 06 Sep, 2022 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hereis an interesting source from Switzerland. It mentions specific laws, that seem to apply to peasants as well as burghers.
-Berner Mandat von 1494, an example of a law requiring the ownership of weapons.
- Sometimes weapons were confiscated after an uprising, but then later returned.
- In the 15th and 16th century, the inheritance of weapons and harness were specifically part of the law. It was passed from father to son. Sometimes daughters would inherit, when there were no sons. Later in 17th century, when there was no son, the municipality received the arms, but recompensated the heirs.
- In general, the municipality was responsible for making sure the arms would not be sold or inherited out of the municipality.
Also, the Imperial Free Cities as members of the Empire had to provide troops to the Reichsheer, which was different as the Emperor’s troops. The Emperor and the Prince Electors could also recruit from the Imperial Cities. Anyway, every time there was a Reichsheer, it was approved by the Reichstag, and there are records of it, some of which are available on wikisource. Note, that when it is talking about Gleves, it is referring to a unit of men, similar to a lance, that included mounted and unmounted combatants.
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find information on equipment. There seems to be more information on later periods (starting in the late 1600s).
In the wikipedia article about the military in Bremen, it mentions that Since the middle ages, every qualified citizen must have their own weapons and armor. It mentions a „Bürgerrüstung“ an iron helmet, a brigandine or breastplate, braces and greaves, iron gauntlets, a battle sword, a spear, and a shield. I don’t know what the source for that is.
Here is another source, also in German.
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Rodel
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Sep, 2022 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I have one question, when you say "weapons imposed on them" or that the quartermaster "imposed arms", can you explain what you mean a bit more precisely? I'm not sure if this means an obligation to acquire weapons, or if they are being issued weapons or if it means something else. |
The weapons had to be bought by the citizens themselves. Let's see, for example, the statutes of Bologna of 1250: "we inviolably order that it be observed that if any citizen or inhabitant of the countryside was absent after the Commune of Bologna was at war or that weapons and horses had been imposed in the city and in the district and the term or terms given by the "podestà" on the purchase of horses and weapons had expired, ..." ("statuimus et ordinamus inviolabiliter observari quod si quis civis vel comitatinus fuerit absens postquam Comune bononiensis habuerit guerram vel arma vel equi impositi in Civitate bononiense et districtu et terminus sive termini dati a potestate de equis et de armis emendis fuerint elapsi, si fuerit miles ..."). We also find references to public reviews of men and weapons (mostra/monstra/mustra armorum): for example in Trieste in 1323 it was decided that at least once a year all citizens had to present themselves with their own weapons. By the following year, these compulsory "mostre" had risen to two.
| Quote: | | Interesting that the crossbows seem to be rated as two feet and one foot, does that mean something to do with spanning? |
If I'm not mistaken, the foot is usually associated with the length of the bolt. However Marino Sanudo the Elder in his Liber secretorum fidelium Crucis speaks of a different way to hold the crossbows, while loading them (that is, of course, with one or two feet). However both were normally loaded with the use of a belt.
| Quote: | | And they seem to be distinguishing horn crossbows, as from wood or steel prod? |
in the 14th century I haven't found any evidence of steel bows in Italy. What was the situation in Germany?
In the list I have reported we find crossbows with wooden and horn (i.e. composite) bows. But I have also found "de nervo" crossbows (maybe they had the bow made only of wood and sinew) and "bastards" ones (I have no idea how they were made).[/quote]
Last edited by F. Rodel on Sun 11 Sep, 2022 12:43 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Sep, 2022 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| F. Rodel wrote: |
The weapons had to be bought by the citizens themselves. Let's see, for example, the statutes of Bologna of 1250: "we inviolably order that it be observed that if any citizen or inhabitant of the countryside was absent after the Commune of Bologna was at war or that weapons and horses had been imposed in the city and in the district and the term or terms given by the "podestà" on the purchase of horses and weapons had expired, ..." ("statuimus et ordinamus inviolabiliter observai quod si quis civis vel comitatinus fuerit absens postquam omune bononiensis habuerit guerram ve, arma vel equi impositi in Civitate bononiense et districtu et terminus sive termini dati a potestae de equis et de armis emendis fuerint elapsi, si fuerit miles ..."). We also find references to public reviews of men and weapons (mostra/monstra/mustra armorum): for example in Trieste in 1323 it was decided that at least once a year all citizens had to present themselves with their own weapons. By the following year, these compulsory "mostre" had risen to two. |
Thank you excellent. In fact I have maybe the same document from Bologna, or something similar, which gets into some detail about certain arms. This is all basically identical to the Central European towns.
| Quote: | | If I'm not mistaken, the foot is usually associated with the length of the bolt. However Marino Sanudo the Elder in his Liber secretorum fidelium Crucis speaks of a different way to hold the crossbows, while loading them (that is, of course, with one or two feet). However both were normally loaded with the use of a belt. |
That's interesting i would have thought other spanning methods would be in use by then.
| Quote: |
in the 14th century I haven't found any evidence of steel bows in Italy. What was the situation in Germany?
In the list I have reported we find crossbows with wooden and horn (i.e. composite) bows. But I have also found "de nervo" crossbows (maybe they had the bow made only of wood and sinew) and "bastards" ones (I have no idea how they were made). |
I'm not certain of this, and would need to double check, but I believe the first steel prod crossbows were showing up in Central Europe in the late 14th Century. I think there were Teutonic knights records referring to them by the early 15th. I also think there are records of their production by the Venetian arsenal in the 15th Century but I don't know what quarter let alone a precise date (I got that from an academic article I read).
Artistic depictions seem to show a lot of large horn / composite prod crossbows.
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sat 10 Sep, 2022 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | | Interesting that the crossbows seem to be rated as two feet and one foot, does that mean something to do with spanning? And they seem to be distinguishing horn crossbows, as from wood or steel prod? |
Latin crossbows in the 13th and early 14th century are normally divided into one-foot, two-foot, and tour crossbows, a summary of the most likely meaning of those terms is here.
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Rodel
|
| Posted: Sun 11 Sep, 2022 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In fact I have maybe the same document from Bologna, or something similar, which gets into some detail about certain arms |
In the same statuta we find that a specific wealth was associated with a minimum required armamement: " ...sancimus quod quilibet civis vel comitatinus habens in bonis valens CC libras bononienses habeat et teneat hosbergum, si autem minus CC habeat et C autem habeat et teneat panceriam ... Et cuicumque est impositum hosbergum habeat tempore guerre ganberias de plactis vel de maglis, et ille qui habeat panceriam habeat ganberias de panno vel de ferro".
| Quote: | | That's interesting i would have thought other spanning methods would be in use by then. |
It seems that the progressive increase in the power of the crossbows has also required different loading systems. In the 13th century, the belt was not always used to load one-foot crossbows, but by the end of the 14th century things had changed. But we also find, as mentioned by Sean, tour crossbows (ad tornum/ ad tulinum), but also ad lievam (literally with lever. In Florence in 1323), horse crossbows (baliste equestres / ab equo) and, as can be seen in the inventory I have previously entered, crossbows ad riginellum (maybe cranequin?).
| Quote: | | I'm not certain of this, and would need to double check, but I believe the first steel prod crossbows were showing up in Central Europe in the late 14th Century. I think there were Teutonic knights records referring to them by the early 15th. I also think there are records of their production by the Venetian arsenal in the 15th Century but I don't know what quarter let alone a precise date (I got that from an academic article I read). |
Unfortunately I am not familiar with the 15th century. I only know that in the middle of the century the crossbows makers in Genoa complained to the Commune about the competition of the blacksmiths who produced crossbows with a steel bow.
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Sun 11 Sep, 2022 6:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: | | Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | | Interesting that the crossbows seem to be rated as two feet and one foot, does that mean something to do with spanning? And they seem to be distinguishing horn crossbows, as from wood or steel prod? |
Latin crossbows in the 13th and early 14th century are normally divided into one-foot, two-foot, and tour crossbows, a summary of the most likely meaning of those terms is here. |
Interesting. In German speaking areas, by the 14th Century at least, they seem to categorize them by the prod or spanning method. Sven Ekhdal summarizes the terms used in the North based on Teutonic Order records and those of the Prussian and Livonian towns here
but the full article no longer seems to be available to the general public unless you pay the bucks to get past a paywall.
Anyway the terms the Teutonic Order used were:
knottelarmbruste - wood prod crossbows made with heavy solid yew prods. Considered 'munitions grade' by the Order.
steigbügelarmbruste - stirrup crossbows, which could be either steel or horn, the most common type. Could be spanned by belt hook, or (more common over time I think) with a lever like a geißfuß ('goats foot') or a 'wippe' ('seesaw'), notably by horsemen.
stachel - the 'stinger' - the heavier grade crossbow, more expensive and spanned with the (also expensive) cranequin. Could be steel or horn prod. They also called these crossbows 'halbe rüstung' which is confusing because I think in modern High German that translates to 'half armor'. But these were the ones that could kill horses and men at a good distance, maybe they were considered somewhat armor-piercing...?
wallarmbruste - the wall crossbow - these were the really big ones only used from towers or sometimes war-wagons, spanned with a windlass or 'English winder'. These were usually horn prod as I understand.
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sun 11 Sep, 2022 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | | Interesting. In German speaking areas, by the 14th Century at least, they seem to categorize them by the prod or spanning method. Sven Ekhdal summarizes the terms used in the North based on Teutonic Order records and those of the Prussian and Livonian towns here |
I have not seen these terms associated with any date earlier than 1396 in Ekdahl's article https://deremilitari.org/2014/03/horses-and-crossbows-two-important-warfare-advantages-of-the-teutonic-order-in-prussia/ but its been ten years or so since I read the full thing
Crossbow terms after 1350 seems much less standardized from land to land than crossbow terms before 1350 (although that may just reflect that later sources are more likely to be in local languages and earlier sources are usually in Latin or French).
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Mon 12 Sep, 2022 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: |
Interesting. In German speaking areas, by the 14th Century at least, they seem to categorize them by the prod or spanning method. Sven Ekhdal summarizes the terms used in the North based on Teutonic Order records and those of the Prussian and Livonian towns here
but the full article no longer seems to be available to the general public unless you pay the bucks to get past a paywall.
Anyway the terms the Teutonic Order used were:
knottelarmbruste - wood prod crossbows made with heavy solid yew prods. Considered 'munitions grade' by the Order.
steigbügelarmbruste - stirrup crossbows, which could be either steel or horn, the most common type. Could be spanned by belt hook, or (more common over time I think) with a lever like a geißfuß ('goats foot') or a 'wippe' ('seesaw'), notably by horsemen.
stachel - the 'stinger' - the heavier grade crossbow, more expensive and spanned with the (also expensive) cranequin. Could be steel or horn prod. They also called these crossbows 'halbe rüstung' which is confusing because I think in modern High German that translates to 'half armor'. But these were the ones that could kill horses and men at a good distance, maybe they were considered somewhat armor-piercing...?
wallarmbruste - the wall crossbow - these were the really big ones only used from towers or sometimes war-wagons, spanned with a windlass or 'English winder'. These were usually horn prod as I understand. |
I would be interested in the sources that refer to the Stachel. I haven’t been able to find anything about it. Regarding Halbe Rüstung I have found some online information. Most of it is crossbows in museums labelled Halbe Rüstung, but also some labelled Ganze Rüstung (ganze means complete). A German replica builder has Halbe Rüstung under Mid-strength crossbows and Ganze Rüstung under heavy crossbows. An historic arms dealer has the following in the description of a Halbe Rüstung"
| Quote: | | The relatively light and compact proportions of this crossbow are referred to by the German term ‘Halbe Rüstung’. This indicates that it was a smaller bow intended for the lighter game animals, a fact borne out by the engravings of small deer, foxes and hares included within the horn veneers and plaques which ornament the tiller. Thankfully the absence of large game animals in the engraved decoration confirms that this bow was not used for the cruel pastime of the Kampfiagen, in which larger wild beasts were pitted in combat within an enclosure and goaded by spectators shooting crossbows. |
Museum https://www.dhm.de/sammlung/unsere-sammlung/die-jagd-notwendigkeit-und-gesellschaftliches-ereignis/
Crossbow maker https://armbrust-manufaktur.de/schwere_armbrust1.html
Dealer https://www.peterfiner.com/artworks/item/3768
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Sep, 2022 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
https://deremilitari.org/2014/03/horses-and-crossbows-two-important-warfare-advantages-of-the-teutonic-order-in-prussia/
I believe this is the article by Ekdahl. Although it contains no mention of halbe Rüstung or Stachel. According to Duden (the authoritative German dictionary), the word Rüstung dates to the 16th century. It does mean armour, but it can mean more than that. Without going into a deep discussion, it can mean both armour and weapons, as well as the process of preparing or equipping them. For example, a source that I cited, referred to the Bürgerrüstung as what the citizens were required to have. It included weapons and armour.
In the Wikipedia article on the Privilegierte Bogenschützen-Gesellschaft zu Dresden it says explicit that halbe Rüstung refers to the draw weight and says that it was used for shooting at a bird-target on top of a 20-meter pole. This implies that it was relatively weak. However, I don’t think that it made sense for them to have a special crossbow just for special occasions. It is possible that the crossbows were somehow adjustable. I know Brichler doesn’t shoot his crossbows on full strength when he first shoots them. Maybe the term changed over time? I wonder how museums know their old crossbows are halb or ganze Rüstung? Even if they measured the draw weight, what is the cut-off point?
That reminds me, the Ekdahl article is outdated, he says that horn crossbows can only shoot up to 150 kg draw weights.
Here is Ekdahl´s article in German: It is a bit more detailed than the English one. It is 32 pages including tables and graphics and is just about crossbows and not about horses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Sep, 2022 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ryan S. wrote: | https://deremilitari.org/2014/03/horses-and-crossbows-two-important-warfare-advantages-of-the-teutonic-order-in-prussia/
I believe this is the article by Ekdahl. Although it contains no mention of halbe Rüstung or Stachel. According to Duden (the authoritative German dictionary), the word Rüstung dates to the 16th century. It does mean armour, but it can mean more than that. Without going into a deep discussion, it can mean both armour and weapons, as well as the process of preparing or equipping them. For example, a source that I cited, referred to the Bürgerrüstung as what the citizens were required to have. It included weapons and armour. |
One reason why I spend so much time putting sources online is so people can see what is period language, and what is a modern language using ancient or medieval words. Academics often create their own categories using terms from different places and times, or using terms in new ways. Maybe I should put up some inventories with crossbows one day but I am more interested in clothing and armour than swords or crossbows (I do have an Arab description of a two-foot crossbow with a long draw).
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2022 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ryan S. wrote: |
In the Wikipedia article on the Privilegierte Bogenschützen-Gesellschaft zu Dresden it says explicit that halbe Rüstung refers to the draw weight and says that it was used for shooting at a bird-target on top of a 20-meter pole. This implies that it was relatively weak. However, I don’t think that it made sense for them to have a special crossbow just for special occasions. It is possible that the crossbows were somehow adjustable. I know Brichler doesn’t shoot his crossbows on full strength when he first shoots them. Maybe the term changed over time? I wonder how museums know their old crossbows are halb or ganze Rüstung? Even if they measured the draw weight, what is the cut-off point?
|
I made a mistake! on the other hand, I have figured out what halbe Rüstung means!
I thought that Bogenstärke meant draw weight, but it means bow thickness. That is referring to the thickness of the prods. It is possible a Dresden thing, because Holger Richter writes in his book Die Hornbogenarmbrust that in the Dresden Armoury inventories the term shows up from 1575 and 1636. There are ganze(whole) halb(half) and viertel (quarter) and are mostly with steel bows. The different strengths were used for different distances. Richter also writes in the Jahrblatt der Interessegemeinschaft Historische Armbrust that in German speaking lands, that bow weight was used to determine the strength of crossbow. Literally, there are lists of the weights of steel prods used by merchants. There seems to be a lot more information on this topic in German. That also goes for information about town militias.
https://www.google.de/books/edition/Die_Hornbogenarmbrust/bGqxqn4b_SMC?hl=de&gbpv=0 This book is in German, but it has a English language section on the back, and due to the pictures and the fact that most data is in numbers, it would be a real good resource for someone wanting to make their own crossbows.
https://www.google.de/books/edition/Jahrblatt_der_Interessengemeinschaft_His/EJQvEAAAQBAJ?hl=de&gbpv=0[/i]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Wed 21 Sep, 2022 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: |
One reason why I spend so much time putting sources online is so people can see what is period language, and what is a modern language using ancient or medieval words. Academics often create their own categories using terms from different places and times, or using terms in new ways. Maybe I should put up some inventories with crossbows one day but I am more interested in clothing and armour than swords or crossbows (I do have an Arab description of a two-foot crossbow with a long draw). |
That is a very useful resource. I think in this case, it is not so much the period language, but that the terms are getting mixed up as well as the sources, and time period. The one foot, two foot terminology must have been widespread if it was used by Arabs as well as Europeans, however it seems not to have been used by the Teutonic knights. Ekdahl does mention it, but not in a way that suggests it was used by the Order. One of the differences in the German article, which is the academic version, is that it discusses the difficulty of identifying what names for crossbows. One has to be a bit of a philologist. Anyway, I think Jean forgot where he got the terms and to what time and place they applied. That could happen to anybody, especially someone who reads a lot and constantly learns new things.
I have also found out what Stachel means, according to the Basler Zeitschrift für Geschichte und Altertumskunde, it means a steel bow. I was only able to see a snippet of the article, but it appears the theory is that it referred to the bow (aka prod) and that Stahl became Stachel. Apparently, this happened when crossbows were still in use, because there are Stachel-shooting contests. In fact an Austrian crossbow shooting club uses Stachel in the name. All the few sources I found are southern, and most referred to shooting contests.
I have changed my mind about citizens having crossbows just for contests and others for war. Especially in the renaissance, at least some citizens would be rich enough, and the prize money might even justify the expense. It has already been point out here that crossbows were affordable, if expensive. There might have even been a tendency for citizens to buy crossbows with more of an eye to winning contests than to fighting. This trend would have increase as citizens became less likely to fight and firearms became more important.
About crossbows and city militias, in Ulm, new citizens had to donate a crossbow to the city armoury.
In Lucerne, a listing of weapon ownership in 1349 and 1353 was compared to the tax records and only those who had enough money to pay taxes had a crossbow, the 8th richest citizen had two. It is speculated that the poorest citizens couldn’t afford one, but that it was not a luxury item.
According to Beate Sauerbrey, the technological advancements were driven by citizens. That is, the first firearms were bought by citizens before it was required by law. At least some citizens bought the best and newest weapons they could.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Wed 21 Sep, 2022 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jean Chandler knows way more about 15th century military history than i do, I just have not read a lot of sources on crossbows from that period myself. There are few good books in German and Dutch on European crossbows in the 15th/16th century.
| F. Rodel wrote: |
In the list I have reported we find crossbows with wooden and horn (i.e. composite) bows. But I have also found "de nervo" crossbows (maybe they had the bow made only of wood and sinew) and "bastards" ones (I have no idea how they were made). |
Bastard crossbows also show up in this source from Venice without any explanation.
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan S.
|
| Posted: Thu 22 Sep, 2022 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: | Jean Chandler knows way more about 15th century military history than i do, I just have not read a lot of sources on crossbows from that period myself. There are few good books in German and Dutch on European crossbows in the 15th/16th century.
|
I have always assumed that Jean and everyone else on here knows more than me. My point is that, even though his last post in this thread wasn’t completely accurate, no one should hold that against him. I don’t want my posts to be seen as an attack on him. Even experts get things wrong. As far as terms, I am not sure when Stahl became Stachel so I can’t say if it was a period term. Rüstung however seems to have been in use in period and is used by experts today.
As far as books on crossbows, two come up in citations a lot. The Book of the Crossbow by Payne-Gallwey and Die Armbrust by Egon Hartmuth. The first one is widely available, but the Hartmuth book is out of print and used copies can be very expensive.
Do you think it makes sense to make a thread to discuss all the names for crossbows?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Thu 22 Sep, 2022 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ryan S. wrote: | As far as books on crossbows, two come up in citations a lot. The Book of the Crossbow by Payne-Gallwey and Die Armbrust by Egon Hartmuth. The first one is widely available, but the Hartmuth book is out of print and used copies can be very expensive.
Do you think it makes sense to make a thread to discuss all the names for crossbows? |
Ralph Payne-Gallwey's book is easy to get but bad scholarship. If he could not find evidence to answer a question he made it up. I would go directly to the books and articles by Alm, Bachrach, Breiding, de Cosson, Sensfelder on Age of Datini (also the bits of The Great Warbow by Matthew Strickland and Die Hornbogenarmbrust by Holger Richter). Most of these have a pretty strong focus on the 15th/16th centuries but there is info on crossbows from the high middle ages if you dig for it.
I have not seen the new book by Stuart Ellis-Gorman or the little book by Mike Loades.
There are some sources here but in many case you have to find the 19th century publication and read the original language.
www.bookandsword.com
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Thu 22 Sep, 2022 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sean Manning wrote: | Jean Chandler knows way more about 15th century military history than i do, I just have not read a lot of sources on crossbows from that period myself. There are few good books in German and Dutch on European crossbows in the 15th/16th century.
| F. Rodel wrote: |
In the list I have reported we find crossbows with wooden and horn (i.e. composite) bows. But I have also found "de nervo" crossbows (maybe they had the bow made only of wood and sinew) and "bastards" ones (I have no idea how they were made). |
Bastard crossbows also show up in this source from Venice without any explanation. |
Thanks Sean, and sorry I've been absent from the forum and discussion here, I have been dealing with a few business related things that have all my attention. Looks like the terminology in question has been tracked down though. It's worth pointing out that the Teutonic Knights had convents all over Central Europe, and they imported mercenaries from pretty much the entirety of Latinized Europe, including and in particular from Austria, Moravia, and Bohemia. Several of their key mercenary commanders during the 13 Years War were from Austria, notably the highly resourceful Fritz Raweneck who perished at the Battle of Świecino. Their top mercenary captain, Bernhard von Zinnenberg / Bernard Szumborski, was from Moravia.
And they also had Crusader "guests" coming for generations from as far away as France, Burgundy, England, Castile and Aragon, Sweden, the Low Countries, Italy and so on. So they had a lot of loan words especially terms of art related to war. They did use the word 'stachel' in some surviving records, as did some towns in Franconia, Silesia, and Swabia. When I have the time, I'll post some bibliographical sources. I don't know if it's originally a low-German term or some kind of hybrid or what but it was in use since the 15th Century.
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic