-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
anti_strunt said:
The name is used for both, the mace with nails and the ball at a chain ending in a wooden holder. I dunno which is correct. I guess the later.
Someone has told me Turkish names for the "flail" were "tope" and "güle". "Tope" seems to be called the spiked version, we've just seen, while "güle" were a type without spikes, a reused cannon ball. 
Last edited:
Väinö I said:
Why, thank you. Well-read would be more appropriate, since it is virtually impossible to achieve an education in medieval military history.
Bear in mind that this post is written from memory, I don't have any sources available here.
The 'peasants with hayforks' myth has probably grown out from good old prejudice and belief in the stupidity of the medieval man. The problem is that pure peasant revolts are almost nonexistent in medieval history. Even famous peasant rebellions like the Jaquerie were joined by out-of-work mercenaries, lesser nobles, brigands and townsmen.
The written sources usually do not speak much of the equipment of the fighting man anyway(most of our knowledge of medieval weaponry and armor come from pictorial sources and surviving examples), and when they do it is often difficult to understand exactly what they are talking about. Wills and muster requirements are of some help, but these concern mostly townsmen and nobles, so no written source goes much into what civilian peasants-turned-fighters used. Determining what a peasant rebel would use therefore becomes a matter of speculation. It should be remembered, as I've stated before, that even dirt-poor 250-person large Montaillou in the Pyrenees by the early 14th century had a few swords; the richer families in the village(this is very relative; Montaillou is a backwater) all had proper weapons available.
Why "rebel"? Well, there are a lot of documents and laws concerning the equipment a peasant should bring to the muster, but one should always remember that this often represents the pooled resources of several families or even villages. Althought the laws sometimes require every man of a certain wealth to appear in person, the sources indicate that this was the exception; far safer and less catastrophic for the village to equip a fighting man with a better chance of survival. Additionally, not all regions used the muster.
The norwegian Landslov(mid-13th century) requires the poorest of men to appear with a spear, an iron-rimmed "red"(probably meaning well-made) shield, and an axe or sword. The next level is required to bring all the above and helmets, and the next level again should bring body armour on top of it all. No mention if made of missile weapons, but when the king's hird were required to bring them(from the Hirdskraa) it seems reasonable that men skilled with the bow or crossbow brougth these as well.
Thus, the worst-equipped levy soldier in Norway has some amount of protection, a polearm, a sidearm and likely a missile weapon.
This is probably not representative of all of Europe, though. Norway is peripheral and maintains its freeman peasant levy a long time. When one looks at the Holkham picture book(early 14th century), however, we have a famous illumination of the Apocalypse, "The noble fight the noble and the low fight the low", in which the 'low' seem to bear helmets and fight with swords and bucklers on foot, some carrying polearms, some missile weapons and some being armoured. These warriors could is probably the closest we get to the townmens' militia.
As for serfs, our view on medieval serfs is often colored by the conditions russian or germans serfs lived under from the rise of the modern states(17th century onward); even in France, serfdom did not get this far in the middle ages. The jaquerie, though defeated, actually halted the development of serfdom in France for almost half a century and ensured that the french peasants would never be as oppressed as their east european counterparts.
What would the poorest french serf have to carry to battle, if he for some strange reason was required to go to war instead of supplying his master so he could go to war for him?
Possibly a bow. He might not be as skilled with it as a professional mercenary, but bows are common as dirt in the archaeological record and were somewhat despised as a 'low' weapon by chivalric writers.
Possibly an axe. Everyone has one because wood has to be cut. A woodcutting as is a very poor combat weapon, though. Then again, the local blacksmith, if capable of making a woodcutting axe, probably could make a slimmer version more usable in combat. Is not an axe, why not a club or mace? A metal-headed pole is very easy to produce and makes for a hefty weapon.
Very certainly a knife or dagger as a sidearm. These are also very common, peasantry seem to carry them around
Probably a spear or other polearm. Spears are not difficult to make and can be improvised from agricultural implements. The "scythe to glaive" stories one sometimes reads of in manuscripts are not all that unlikely.
So a peasant of the very poorest category could well bring something more substantial than an unconverted hayfork. In all likelyhood, though, he would not be called out at all. He and his neighbours could equip a figthing man or hire a mercenary instead, if they weren't just exempted because they are the ones who support the local landowners' forces in the final equation.
I have to agree with you if it was a levy or muster but I find it very possible that if you're out in the fields and enemies appeared that you would use what was at hand (pitchfork, agricultural flail, wood axe etc.) assuming the bad guy's numbers were small enough (say a raiding party or brigands and not an army) that fight might occur instead of flight. A fork with reach beats the knife in my book as you don't have armor and you could use the fork to thrust and keep your enemy at bay (you wouldn't swing it unless throwing yourself offbalance and dying is something you like). Reach is pretty important to a mostly untrained and totally unarmored warrior as it keeps a foe away and that space is basically your armor.
It probably didn't happen all that much at all but the times it did it probably made such a good funny story that it got all blown out of proportion. "And the bloody peasant tried to stick me with a pitchfork, har har."
Now this is all just hypothesis, I don't have any primary sources of peasant pitchforkings and doubt I'd find any if I tried (though I'll keep an eye open). I sadly admit I am not even well versed on pitchfork lore or the construction of a medieval pitchfork but have been assuming iron fork and wooden handle.
Anyways, maybe this shows a situation where this 'myth' might have been born. Most myths have an element of truth to them. As for levies, peasants and such that were required to go as I understand it tended toward spears, bows and axes while city levies were much better off having crossbows and armored swordsmen and infantry with specialty polearms.
The Battle on the Morgarten (1315, Schwyzers vs Habsburgs) was a pretty early battle having the halberd as the principle weapons. I read a couple good accounts of this battle and the 'halmbarte' is mentioned. I think someone said the halberd developed late 14th Century but more likely it developed very late 13th or very early 14th.
My additions to this informative and ofttimes amusing thread for what they are worth.
It probably didn't happen all that much at all but the times it did it probably made such a good funny story that it got all blown out of proportion. "And the bloody peasant tried to stick me with a pitchfork, har har."
Now this is all just hypothesis, I don't have any primary sources of peasant pitchforkings and doubt I'd find any if I tried (though I'll keep an eye open). I sadly admit I am not even well versed on pitchfork lore or the construction of a medieval pitchfork but have been assuming iron fork and wooden handle.
Anyways, maybe this shows a situation where this 'myth' might have been born. Most myths have an element of truth to them. As for levies, peasants and such that were required to go as I understand it tended toward spears, bows and axes while city levies were much better off having crossbows and armored swordsmen and infantry with specialty polearms.
The Battle on the Morgarten (1315, Schwyzers vs Habsburgs) was a pretty early battle having the halberd as the principle weapons. I read a couple good accounts of this battle and the 'halmbarte' is mentioned. I think someone said the halberd developed late 14th Century but more likely it developed very late 13th or very early 14th.
My additions to this informative and ofttimes amusing thread for what they are worth.
Halberds as we tend to see them(axe/pick combo on pole) appear in the 14th century. Earlier polearms were of a staggering variety, and many were actually based off agricultural implements.
I think most peasants would seek out their local landowner or protector against bandits, and of course a hayfork lying about could be used as a weapon; but given just a few days of time many agricultural tools can be converted to polearms. The hayfork legend appears only in modern times; no medieval source describe it. Some do mention converted tools though; treshers, scythes and so forth, converted for combat.
I think most peasants would seek out their local landowner or protector against bandits, and of course a hayfork lying about could be used as a weapon; but given just a few days of time many agricultural tools can be converted to polearms. The hayfork legend appears only in modern times; no medieval source describe it. Some do mention converted tools though; treshers, scythes and so forth, converted for combat.
I've seen a small collection of pole-weapons recently.
Among the objects were two "morningstars/goedentags". They had a length of about six to eight feet. The upper segment was spicked with quadrangular iron nails. This section of the weapon took about one sixth of its entire length.
There was unfortunately no information available regarding the date and origin of the morningstars. But as other pole-weapons (mostely halbards) in the collection dated at the begin of the 16th century, these "morningstars/goedentags" might be of a similar age, too.
Two things surprised me. First the size of the objects. The "morningstars/goedentags" were as long as the halbards in the collection. Then, the assumed late provenance of these quite primitive designed objects.
How were they used on the battlefield? Were they placed among the halbardiers in a more or less close formation? Which was the purpose to use them, when you had already halbards in the armoury?
Among the objects were two "morningstars/goedentags". They had a length of about six to eight feet. The upper segment was spicked with quadrangular iron nails. This section of the weapon took about one sixth of its entire length.
There was unfortunately no information available regarding the date and origin of the morningstars. But as other pole-weapons (mostely halbards) in the collection dated at the begin of the 16th century, these "morningstars/goedentags" might be of a similar age, too.
Two things surprised me. First the size of the objects. The "morningstars/goedentags" were as long as the halbards in the collection. Then, the assumed late provenance of these quite primitive designed objects.
How were they used on the battlefield? Were they placed among the halbardiers in a more or less close formation? Which was the purpose to use them, when you had already halbards in the armoury?