They found them in random caves, or used their leveled up stealth attribute to pickpocket them from the city guards. Some of them got the dlc so they got theirs right after they left the starting area.
If they went on a campaign their commanders might pay them 20-80 gold to level up so they'd end up with better skills and hundreds or thousands of denaris worth of gear.
I hate that trend in DLC. I like getting better rewards from additional content but starting a game with gear that will make any gear dropped in the first third of the game useless annoys me to no end. I usually just deactivate those *looks at New Vegas*
I can see the question being interpreted two ways: the first is how you answered Matt - with troops being issued gear or providing their own. They might have wanted a more focused answer, as in *where specifically* would someone have gotten a sword; trade, go see the local swordsmith, taken off the field of a battle, etc. He may have been asking more about the commercial market in the early days for swords. Would you like to make a quick supplemental video if that’s the case?
Yeah I was wondering that too. The process of soldier getting a sword, would he visit a "shop" to buy a premade generic sword or would he go custom etc. Of course would vary depending on time, culture, status etc.
What would interest me and of course is, that we would then be looking at was there a hierarchy of manufacturers, would local blacksmiths be making swords. I am assuming that spear points would be being made by local blacksmiths, so is that a possibility?
Rascally Ryan ... a well cared for weapon could last for generations. also, broken weapons could be recycled without the expense of producing high quality steel from scratch. weapons tended to accumulate, just like guns in the usa.
A Zeughaus (armory, literally stuff/hardware house/store) was quite a bit more than a storage facility. They maintained contact to arms and armory producers, procured samples and quality tested them and equally importantly they had to make sure that they had enough armour in the right sizes. However, they couldn't afford custom fitted armour all the time, thus they were actually the first who introduced standard sizes, even if they didn't have labels as such. Such armour tended to be smaller than custom armour of those that could afford it, which indicates that disparity in nutrition resulted in a disparity of size as well!
Not land owning - cattle owning. Irish tribal social hierarchy was based on number of animals owned. Specific numbers of cows, sheep, goats and horses dictated what rank a man could be. "BoAire" the Irish equivalent or a Baron translates as "Cattle Lord". Note if a man's social rank could be adversely effected by a loss of the number of animals owned. In other words upward and downward mobility was possible in tribal Ireland. Steal enough cattle and even a pauper could become a "BoAire". (Cattle raids were a thing among the Irish)
Same with the Scots. My own ancestors had a particular affinity with this practice - it's for this reason that the moon is known as Macfarlane's Lantern, and a song of particular relevance to the Clan Macfarlane is 'Thomgail nam Bo theid sinn', which translates to 'To lift the cattle we shall go'. There seems to have been a lot of pride taken in their ability to 'acquire' cattle.
@@ianmacfarlane1241 Scots/Irish were all Gaelic speaking cattle people. The greatest Irish heroic tale from the Ulster Cycle is the Táin bó cúailnge -The Cattle Raid of Cooley.
Who owned the land for grazing? I understand that the wealth itself was measured in heads of cattle but would the lord actually own the land upon which his livestock grazed or did he receive permission to use it from a higher up?
@@oduffy1939 Not all Scots were Gaelic speaking, though I understand your point. Geographically dependent obviously, but Gaelic was somewhat limited to the Highlands and Western Isles (Innner and Outer Hebrides). There has been a concerted effort to reintroduce Gaelic to a wider range of the Scottish population over the last 25 years with BBC Alba, a Gaelic 'department' within STV, a number of Gaelic Primary schools in Glasgow (probably elsewhere, but I'm from Glasgow, so it's all I'm certain of) and Gaelic translations all across the Scottish transport system (which is a bizarre state of affairs TBH - it must have cost a significant amount of money & time to do all of this when I think that around 3% of the current Scottish population speak Gaelic, and people who speak solely Gaelic can probably be measured in dozens). Years ago I attempted to learn Gaelic as part of a video & TV production course I was doing at college (Gaelic speakers apparently find work quite easily due to the aforementioned BBC Alba and STV Gaelic department) although I gave up when it became clear that it was extremely difficult for an adult to learn, and it was an extremely niche market. Historically I'm guessing that my ancestors quite quickly gave up Gaelic for Scots/ English when they came down to the Lowlands - although Macfarlane 'lands' were never actually in the Highlands, being centered around the Northern part of Loch Lomond, Loch Kathrine etc. As far as I'm aware, (although I've never put any time into researching it) there were Macfarlanes in the land around Omagh, but why this migration / settling happened I'm not sure. I've got a fair bit of Irish in me anyway with my Mother's side being Kellys and there's a good bit on my paternal side too. I'll take a look at the Cattle raid of Cooley. Thanks for the recommendation. Take care.
@@powg3476 That's where the conflict occurred. The tribe/clan owned the grazing land and each member had the right to graze. Clans fought over who had the right to "land use". The problem arose with the coming feudalism, which emphasized inherited land and title, and broke the previous tribal law. You can see the conflict in the movie "Rob Roy" with Liam Neeson; where the stealing of cattle for feeding members of the clan conflicts with the feudal law of property rights.
Ouch, ouch, ouch! The 'broad arrow' used by the War Department was Tiws' rune (A.S. equivalent of Mars, the God of War, the one that Tuesday is named after). The 'hide' was enough land to be comfortably taxed at one pound of silver per year, a Thegn (or Thane) was someone who had been awarded five or more hides for 'services rendered' (usually on the battlefield) or was descended from someone who had and inherited the land (and obligations) from his deceased father. As a landholder he would naturally be expected to defend that land in the event of war and uphold the law in peacetime - hunting Welsh cattle rustlers for example. The Burghal Hideage (I think) sets out the obligation that for every five hides of land he holds he must provide a shield, sword, helmet, chainmail hauberk, two horses (one of them saddled), which would presumeably have been given to one of his servants (cnihts) who would be trained from a young age to use them - hunting was a very useful and productive pastime of the day which would enable these men to get used to the idea of working together against a common 'enemy' a.k.a. dinner. The person chosen for this honour would also be trained to run the estate and quite possibly man the ships that Alfred the Great had decreed that each triple hundred (three hundred hides between them) were to build, presumeably 60 men per ship plus officers (thegns or earls). Worth remembering that only about 1% of the population were 'fighters', that'll be the top 1%, the 1% that invaders were seeking to replace.
You could both be right, but it seems like your comment relies on only one or two sources, so it's probably only true for a particular people during a particular time. I also think that you are trying to espouse too rigid a view of history, one in which 1% of people sit at the top of a feudal pyramid with certain social rules and obligations that remained similar for long periods of time. Simple narratives like that are usually wrong most of the time.
@@maxbachvaroff1967 Before England was united there were kings of Mercia, Wessex, Anglia, Northumbria etc. Usually only one king per kingdom at a time - this was customary practice. Because kings of the time would not be able to micro-manage everything that needed doing in those kingdoms they would need eorls or jarls carrying out tasks necessary at the next level down, and even they wouldn't be able to cover everything so below them would come the thegns or thanes to manage the next level down, and even they would need servants to organise things at a local level to ensure that tasks were being carried out. All of these people would require the authority to ensure compliance thus effectively making them the ruling classes, and it's unlikely that they constituted more than 1% of the population. When England did become unified it merely dropped the number of kings by six, but the one remaining may well have had to hire half a dozen extra servants to filter the extra workload.
@@hrotha Fair point - the eorls replaced the kings of the individual kingdoms, my bad. Doesn't much alter the 'chain of command' or the number of individuals required to implement it though.
When I saw the title, it made me think the subject might be more about where people, assuming they were providing their own gear, would get a sword. How easy was it to find a place where you might order a sword made, and where would you find that place? Were there stores where you could pick a sword off the shelf?
Townsman 1: "Oh no, we're under attack!" Townsman 2: "With the town militia equipped with little more than their bare fists, it is immediately clear to me that only the king's army can rescue us." *dials phone* King: "Yeah?" Townsman 2: "Your majesty, it is the townsfolk of townshire in great need of your help. French are besieging us, we're sitting ducks out here... Spare anything, your majesty!" King: "Okay, I'm driving down, but highway's kinda backed up right now. Could take upwards of an hour to get here, but I'll do my best, since I'm your king." Townsman 1: "Thanks king!" *King arrives* King: "There was a freaking toll bridge this way. Why do you still maintain that? Townsman 1: "My liege! But you're on your own? Why?" King: "What do you mean, I'm here to help. Oh... oh? Shit! I forgot my army! Hold on! Hold on, I'll call my secretary." *dials* King: "Yeah, hi, Clara? Yeah, hey, I just wanted to say about that memo I left on your desk? Yeah, could you forward it to my entire army? Yeah, that'd be great... All you gotta do is hit forward all. Thanks Clara." *hangs up* King: "Well all is said and done. They'll get here when they get here." Townsman 1: "So long as it doesn't take 3 months, because that's how much food we have left." King: "Oh. If they ignore the memo, we're kinda screwed, because then I'd have to go the trouble of calling my secretary again (which would be annoying). Haha! Do you like poker? Since I'm your king, I always bring a deck for times like these." Townsman 2 and 1: "You are our king." King: "Mmmmm"
Another great video. I live in the US and have always been fascinated with history. Especially the Middle Ages!!! I love swords ever since I was a small child!! I love your videos! Please keep up the good work!!
Also, as far as I'm aware, archers did have to bring their own arrows (a sheaf of them; from "Select Casts in the Exchequer of Pleas.") in the 14th century, but the majority of their arrows would have been provided to them by the "Privy Wardrobe in the Tower".
I like how the British take on the Hundred Years War has shifted from "The Blokes did a great job killing French knights until they got bored and left." to "It really wasn't an English war with the French, but a French civil war with some minor English involvement at Crecy, Poiters and Agincourt and it's a mystery how they got there really. Also England did nothing wrong." Still a great video from one of my favorite youtubers.
Oh yeah, I know they were there. The Scots kept France in the fight post Agincort and provided one of Joan of Arc's best units. The Weslh Spearmen and Irish light troops provided useful units to the English Army that get airbrushed out of history (just Longbowmen and Men-at-Arms and nothing in between). But the point stands that the "French Civil War" canard exists solely to make the English seem less involved in the war they started and lost.
its more along the lines that the King of the English and Welsh and _Filenotfound_Scots also wanted to be King of the French. the Norman Conquest had really blurred the lines between England and France. some have called 1066 to 1500 the "500 years war" France had a weak king England had a Strong King, the English king had enough claim to the Throne to claim the realm for his own. Many of the French who fought for the English had strong economic connections to London rather than Paris. Remember that the Coast of France is just a ships journey from the mouth the the Thames.
Compensation in the Late Antique and Early Medieval Roman army included an equipment allowance, intended to allow soldiers to furnish their own equipment according to a set of requirements (and one of the problems they eventually ran into was people pocketing that money and sending under-equipped soldiers into battle). IIRC there were also specific armories dedicated to producing, storing, and distributing some of the more expensive or specialized items (armor, swords, and so on), which soldiers could make purchases from out of their allowance (presumably the quality would be a bit lower given the mass-produced nature of armory stores as opposed to bespoke kit). The imperial household would also provide things like wagon loads of prepackaged arrows (40 to a quiver IIRC) and other consumables. Of course, with the theme system some of that compensation was shifted away from cash payments toward land holdings (and scaled up considerably as you moved from thematic infantry to tagmatic super-heavy cavalry, with top-end soldiers having expected incomes of several pounds of gold per year), and with the collapse of the same and the shift to a more purely mercenary army (or the later attempt to revive a native army via pronoiar grants) all that went out the window. Those coincided with increased influence from Latin Europe, both as a source of mercenaries and as a model for army structure. I find pay structures and logistics to be a very interesting aspect of medieval warfare. IIRC the classical pay scale was from around 5 gold solidi per year for a recruit to 13 or thereabouts for a veteran, which as the classical period drew to a close and the Late Antique period began was regularized to around 9 nomismata per year, with additional "donatives" for sensitive political moments (new accessions to the throne, for instance) and equipment allowances on top of the regular pay.
It’s interesting that in some of those medieval pictures, a person with a sword is holding it point up, sometimes resting it on the right shoulder, instead of having it in a sheath, hung from a belt or on a table or otherwise stored. I don’t mean battle scenes; I mean where some guy is sitting on a chair (throne?) or riding a horse to the next market town or doing other stuff besides fighting or getting ready to fight.
The answer is rather obvious, first you send your villagers to build two houses and collect food, then you create 22 villagers and send them to gather wood and food, mainly the fomer, then you build a barracks and a mill and advance to feudal age, there you send some more villagers to gather gold and investigate the man-at-arms technology in the barracks and voilá you have your swordsmen
Is there any evidence of, I suppose you'd call it hereditary arms and armour among the common soldiery? Like, a jack, helmet and a sword gets passed down through a few generations, or would the gear get so banged up on campaign that fixing it would be more expensive than just buying a new set?
Absolutely all sorts of equipment were handed down and re-used, sometimes modified as fashions and technology changed. We have a lot of medieval wills remaining which list weapons, armour and other equipment.
Yep, here in Italy pretty much every medieval town is surrounded by walls and there is usully a "castello" or a "fortezza" with an armory, espeially in Tuscany. Now, these were used more often than not by the local "private police" wich could be called in many ways, but a signifiant amount of city taxes could be used for the protection of the city.
I think, like a lot of folks, the question was more about who a soldier would buy a sword from if they needed one. By, say, the Hundred Years War were there arms dealers in places like London where you could just walk in and buy a sword? I’d imagine during wartime there would have to be a thriving trade in new and used arms to keep the armies equipped.
17:18 May have missed? I think i need to clarify something here (at least for my part). Mr. Easton, you are a amazing source of information about history to me. Things, i always wanted to know in depth are amazingly well explained by you, way better than most professional made (but superficial) documentaries you can find anywhere.
My understanding was that a hide was large enough (80-180 acres about 30-70 hectares) to support an infantry man for the fyrd. The hide itself frequently contained 4-6 small farms such as virgates which were enough for a peasant. One peasant from this group would be armed and represent the hide in the shire militia.
War loot! You show up at your first battle with just your spear, pike, longbow or arquebus. By the second battle, you'll have a cool sword at your hip and a probably a couple of significant upgrade pieces to your armor set, too.
I read that at least in some German cities the city wall was divided between the crafters' guilds in case of an attack. As the average craftspeople didn't have weapons, they used their tools and so the part of the wall manned by the butchers was most feared. Then again, I couldn't say when exactly this was but it rather sounds like the middle to late middle ages (talking about cities and guilds and stuff).
So, where does one tend to purchase said swords in the later bits of the middle ages, then? Was an Englishman, kitting himself out for campaign because he wants to get paid, allowed to just go to a shop (weapon shop, general sutlery, etc)? Was there an entity that had a monopoly on the sale of weapons? Could I just get it whenever?
@@gregs4748 Guilds looked after the quality, if you bought a sword that was from a Guild member u could be certain it was topnotch. It later on became more of a company, a bit like a lot of supermarkets nowadays. Franchise i believe it's called. The Guilds where an interesting mix of a Union, Quility Control and Bussiness. Some guilds even had research departments to figure out how to get more bang for their buck, this new findings where then distrubuted among their members to stay ahead of the curve. Especially in food Guilds like the Bakers Guild they came up with healthy recipies for bread and made sure no bad stuff was added, very modern in some ways. Tresspassing Guild laws was a major offense as you damaged the customers trust in the Guild, punishment was quite severe but almost never leathal. It was more of an extreme humiliation, and bans where common.
As far as I know there was a pretty huge second hand sword market in the later middle ages, not only because of better organized production and more affordable materials, but also because of the black death which killed a lot of sword owners.
Excellent video Matt. I've got a further question on this subject - the spoils of war. Who would be allowed to keep weaponry from the battlefield?. Clearly men from further up the social order would be able to keep spoils of war, but what about those from militias, or those expected to provide service? Would the answer depend upon the quality of the spoils? I've got a mental picture of a defeated army being stripped of anything useful - particularly if they were casualties. Anything that you could add would be of great interest. As always thank you Matt.
I love this channel and there is one thing I would like to share. Every time Matt is holding weapons not vertically or not horizontally but somewhere in between, they look like they are rusty :) Something - maybe floor, maybe some furniture - is reflecting from weapons giving this effect. I know it is small detail. But - hey! - let them all look nice and shiny :) Cheers!
Matt have several off topic questions about the 1821 Heavy Cavalry Officer’s sword I’m hoping you can answer... 1. Aside from the honeysuckle looking engraved guard, how different is it from the light cavalry officers Sabre. I.e blade length, curve etc. 2. Is anyone making reproductions for HEMA, reenacting or otherwise? I’ve not seen them but am looking for one as a historical reenactor and all the originals I’ve seen are unsightly expensive. 3. Have you done a video on the use of heavy cavalry and their swords? Or can you? I’m really interested to hear your thoughts on the subject of 18th and 19th century heavy cav weapons, their design, use, and fall from favor on the field etc.... Thanks! Have always enjoyed your videos and learned a lot from them. Would love to contact you privately to further discuss where to find 19th century heavy cav swords for sale.
Hey Matt, love your channel, it actually played a part in inspiring me to get into HEMA myself. I even found a school that uses English treatises, when available that is. Anyways, watching this video has given me three questions that I want to ask you. One, what is that flag in your background? It’s very interesting looking. Two, what part did the peers (barons, counts, and other types of nobility) play in warfare? We’re they just considered men-at-Arms like knights and richer yeomen or did they take more of a leadership role as captains or higher ranking officers? Three, in a typical Medieval town, how was the local government set up. I know this would vary from country to country or even from town to town, but what was the most common way they were set up. Were they ruled by a member of the nobility? If so what rank would they commonly be? Were there elected bodies in town governments? I know that the Venetians were an elected republic, but were there cities in other countries (like London for example) that had more elected offices? Were there some that had elected officials combined with hereditary positions like a lord? Keep up the good work! I really love your show!
Yes during the Hundred Years War a significant proportions of the French armies were militiamen called up via the arriere-ban, but at Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt the number of men-at-arms in their armies probably exceeded the size of the whole English army!
I got myself a degree in history. I read of and studied a little of the Norman/Breton (Cornish Frenchies) alliance- as I’m in the US it didn’t have much relevance other than to me. And since then, about 2000ish, I have not heard that fact, a fact that maybe a quarter of William’s army was Breton (and probably liberated the Southwest rather than invaded it), mentioned or written or documentaried once until you just said it. People tended to dismiss this obscure knowledge- of the alliance not the liberation bit- as maybe another of my crazy theories.
An excellent book covering much of this ground(I'll leave it's historical grounds to more knowledged minds than I), is "The White Company" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. A fictional story, yet a good work touching on many historical facts.
About the early middle ages and the Vikings, the 'where' actually mattered quite a bit as to where you got your sword from. In Norway for example I have been told there were actually laws stipulating that you could only get a sword as a gift from a higher ranking person, a chieftain of some sort. This was, however, not the case everywhere in Scandinavia. In Iceland for example when they wrote their new laws they dispensed a lot of social restrictions of all kinds that they perceived as onerous, they for example significantly reduced the social restrictions on slaves after they had been set free and become freedmen. There were no laws in Iceland mandating sword giving that I'm aware of and if there were they were ignored because the archeological record contains numerous graves of pretty low ranking people with simple undecorated swords in very plain and simple scabbards and the grave goods indicate these were pretty normal and not particularly wealthy farmers. By the late 11th century any restrictions on sword ownership disappeared and you get mentions of kings actually stocking up on swords and other edged weapons so that their men could swap their dulled blades out for fresh sharp ones.. By the 15th and 16th century the most common sword in the archeological record (at least in Iceland) by far was the German one handed langes messer which were probably imported by the barrel full from Bremen, Hamburg and Lübeck in Germany. There are still records of swords and other arms being given away by chieftains but a farmer was perfectly free to head to the market and buy his own langes messer or a sword if he could afford it but the messer was probably somewhat cheaper. So in 15th and 16th century Scandinavia and the Holy Roman Empire your sword might have come from a knife maker because of guild laws.
Thanks for the video! As to what you didn't cover very well (or at all) it's obvious - the time before the viking era! In the high bronze age this stuff (metal weapons, armor too) was often state property. It was issued and accounted for much like rifles are today. The same was probably true in much but not all of iron age antiquity leading up to the migration and 'viking' period, at least in the more organized states. Cheers!
A critical deciding factor would have been availability and hence production methods determining procurement cost. Cheaper and more efficient manufacture lowers the unit cost and thus availability. Example, a single blacksmith forged sword typically takes days to produce whereas crucible molding or power hammered (water/wind) manufacturing methods would result in many swords being mass produced. Also, simplified blade design and composition would signifigantly lower production cost. A classic example of the above is the British stem gun of WW2. Thanks Matt, your videos are always informative and entertaining. And, they usually lead to other areas of inquiry and conversation. 🍁🍺
Actually, in pre Norman times swords were given as gifts to the camitatus or warband of "ring-giver" in the "gift-hall" from the seat of the "giftstol". Therefore, they didn't buy them. Swords were given under "hariot" (in Muslim world "timariot") which meant in turn the receiver had to supply military service.
Wait forces like the Fyrd were also used for patroling (outside a specific war effort), maintaining military structure and such? I always thought the nonhuskarl, Men at Arms, Knightly or similar forces were only raised for a specific conflict and disbanded afterwards, like classical greece hoplites. At least in the early to mid middle ages. Might have had some misconceptions there.
How did weapon variety on the battlefield differ in different time periods? How were weapons used together by separate units for tactical reasons etc? Quite broad questions but I'm sure you have something interesting to say on the matter :) love the videos btw! Cheers
In those era 12-13 century I reckon military service can be an opportunity at some cases. Remember even among the serfs there are some who manage to accumulate wealth and is in dire need to become a freemen (small landowners/merchants) before their due contract ends.
Hey Matt, about your last videos about "blunt" swords: if the swords were stored "dull" for the myriad of reasons and then sharpened for war, would they make them dull again after the war? Surely not. They wouldn't just buy a new armory of blunt swords just because the ones they just used are now sharp and unsafe for times of peace. Idk just seems a little strange. I suppose this just means they only bought swords dull, and would still have leftover sharp ones. Idk I feel like I'm just answering my own question now
They didn't. You'll notice that when reviewing some antiques Matt will note that they're "service sharpened". That also tells us that these swords were either used in combat, or that the owned actually expected to use it in combat at one point of his military life. I'd say that once the sword was sharp, they left it like that and carried it as it was.
What about the financial aspect? If you want to be the indentured soldier you mentioned, can you get a loan of funds to buy your equipment? And what happens if you're on campaign and your kit gets damaged or worn out?
I doubt banking and credit was available to common people. It would have been extremely hard to keep track of them and recover the loan if they defaulted. Bad business for bankers. They probably only loaned to nobles and rich bourgeois who actually had capital and would be the least likely to default and bolt with their assets, since they had more to lose. Common soldiers probably bought their gear out of their savings initially or received it through inheritance and had it maintained, replaced or upgraded by investing part of their pay in the course of their career.
Matt, you are a wealth of information. I have a question. How long were medieval swords used? Were they family heirlooms that were handed down for generations? When they broke, were they repaired or replaced? Swords can only be resharpened so many times before they become not fit for combat. What was the service life of a sword?
A question, can you do a video about the hunting use of spears? I know it is off your beaten path, but your knowledge of the texts intrigues me. I have a reason for asking.
In the "Viking Era" it was common for arms/armor to be gifted to landowners/Thegns and later Huscarls in English kingdoms at least. Its not known if these gifts were commonly returned upon death and then re-gifted to heirs or what.
How does the volunteer-system work? how does the "Armee-raiser" knows how many there are to raise and how they are equipped? Was he forced to take only archers with him to campaign if there are only them? how can he improve his armee?
The chief recruiter probably gets a list of all recruits from various regions and how they're equipped from all of his subordinate recruiters. So let's say you have village X and they send 5 people each armed with sword and shield, the recruiter then notes, village X sends 5 men all with sword and shield. He then adds this to his list of all other villages he might be responsible for and passes it on to his superior. This person then makes a list of his own from all of the people working for him and he would probably send it up the chaing until it eventually reaches the head recruiter who then makes the final tally and presents it to his lord or the king.
@@Riceball01 you mean every volunteer must be listed and is then forced to go on campaign if the lord hires them? but how can the lord influence how many and what kind of soldiers he can recruit? I think the "job" of an volunteer is a bit problematic anyway, because you never know when ther will be work for you, so they would probably not specialize as much into it.
@@hectorvi1633 It's not that hard, the lord simply has to delegate the job to subordinates, much like we do now. Depending on how large his holdings are the lord sends a certain number of people out to the countryside going from village to village, farm to farm and recruiting or volunteering people. The new recruits would probably bew told to show up to a certain place, likely at or near the lord's manor or castle by a certain date and if they don't show troops are sent to bring them there.
@@Riceball01 i never questioned the organization part. The tricky part about volunteers is, that you can not force some on into becoming a volunteer. Therefore you can not controle them. So my question was, how do they dealt with it?
@@hectorvi1633 Oh, you can very well force someone into volunteering, in the military it's called being voluntold. A request for volunteers is put out and if no one volunteers, or not enough people volunteer, then the person in charge will pick people and volunteer them. Alternately, like for this particular situation, you apply incentives or dire consequences for volunteering or not volunteering.
Not so much criticism Matt because it was good, but maybe you could actually name some known historical sword smiths?, specific workshops, shown examples of historical finds that we know are linked to a certain smith or small factory / shop. I kind of expected more of that sort of thing when I saw the video length.
Download Boheim's manual on armor and weapons and go to pg 655. It's german, but there's signs and names. Boheim's manual, graciously digitalised by the university library in Heidelberg: digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/boeheim1890
The best Norse swords were known as 'ULFBERHT' swords. These swords were made of highly flexible crucible steel and were considered the best swords you could get. Predictably, there were knockoffs made of more brittle ordinary non-crucible steel.
@@txgunguy2766 This is actually just conjecture with a bit of fantasy mixed in - what is known is that there are numerous sword finds with the insignia 'ULFBERTH' found in Scandinavia and some in northern/western Europe, which actually just shows, that there was trade and cultural exchange along with all the warring. ULFBERTH likely was a craftsman who was able to sell a great many swords that were also traded far from his home, but everything else is pure and unfoundable fantasy until more information is found. Other sword-insignia that have been found are LEUTFRIT and INGELRII, both like ULFBERTH most likely craftsmen.
Matt, a question! speaking of swords, what do you think about the origins of great swords? someone one day thought about "welp, we got longsword now, why not make a bigger one so it looks cool?" that sorta thing?
"By the 14th century anyone who wanted a sword could afford a sword..." Just to be clear: Would a wealthy townsperson, or perhaps a soldier returning from war purchase a sword from the town or city arsenal? The sword purchased was then a piece of private property kept on their person rather than the armory? Further, you mentioned in the beginning, merchants selling swords to wealthy persons? Were the merchants connected to an arsenal within a town or city, did they purchase the swords themselves, wholesale or merely sell them on behalf of town or city armory? Did it work any differently than selling any other highly valued commodity/luxury like spices from the Holy Land or fabrics from Flanders? Thanks very much!
So who exactly were Men-At-Arms? I know they were professional or at least semi-professional soldiers but where did they come from? They were not a distinct social class as far as I know. I guess what I'm asking is how did you get to be a Man-At-Arms and what would you have been before that?
After what I know they where the sergeants of the army, I am shure some where rankers other where employed directly as they got the gear and the training for it.
Men-at-arms were to knights what rectangles are to squares. All knights were men at arms but not all men at arms were knights. Knighthood came with a bunch of additional expenses and taxes, so a lot of poorer families in that social stratum would forego the title. So the answer is, mostly the landed gentry who in earlier times would've been knights. But since MAA is just a description of how they fought, they could really be from any class. In central Europe a lot of townsmen were equipped heavily and could have been described as such, for example.
A Man at Arms is any soldier who is outfitted to be able to fight as heavy cavalry should the need arise. These were the fully armoured professionals who made up the backbone of most medieval armies, the type of me that most modern people would simply label as Knights. As @migkillerphantom said, all Knights were Men at Arms but not all Men at Arms were Knights. In fact most of them weren't Knights, most of them were Landed Gentry (Gentlemen and Esquires) men who would be Lord of the Manor in peacetime or wealthy Townsmen who would come from the higher echelons of the Mercantile class.
Men-at-arms were generally recruited from the landed gentry, basically nobles without any titles, not even a knighthood. They would be men who owned or were enfeoffed with a large enough tract of land plus enough tenants and serfs in them so they did not have to engage in manual labor at all, which was their distinction from the yeomen. The landed gentry would have practiced skill at arms such as horse riding, fencing and jousting from a young age, expecting to eventually be called for military service by their liege lords. Some yeomen or even peasant boys who were able to obtain the requisite training, armor and horses eventually became a man-at-arm, and some (like John Hawkwood) were even knighted!
Let's not forget that the peasant that was drafted and handed a spear could, if he survived the battle, pick up a sword from the fallen enemy or buy one cheap from a successful gatherer of spoils. Other equipment could be upgraded at the time as well.
@@scholagladiatoria but didn't you say in a different video that common soldiers didn't make much money from wages, but made plenty from looting? I understand that the commanders had first pick, but then how would others profit enough to improve their equipment if they couldn't loot?
@@CoffeeSnep coins and jewelry are much easier to stuff inside your tunic than a sword, and probably worth more. Loot the easy to carry stuff , buy the hard.
What did a sword (and other equipment) cost? Like, a week's wages, or a year's wages? Or in terms of a sword costs three cows or twenty sheep? Is there a way to quantify it?
Like cars, they could cost relatively little, or a lot (no upper limit). A typical archer's sword would have cost him two or three days' pay. But the records also show old rusty swords worth a 1/3rd of an archer's daily pay. A knight clearly would have bought a much more expensive sword, but basic swords were pretty cheap by the 14th century.
@@scholagladiatoria That seems considerably cheaper than what I'd expect; even something like a Hi-Point costs a few days pay on minimum wage these days. Though, I suppose that (at least here in the US) you can get a really crappy AR for around $400; at $10/hr (starting wage for a greeter at Walmart) you could get one for a week's wages
Hi Matt, I have a doubt at the topic of medieval guards: Do you know what were their requirements for been a city guard? Were they different for been a noble's guard? (for example, needing a low noble title such as with knights)
Mate, not a question about weapons as such but was wondering how did knights and normal service people or those drafted in get paid? Was it in coin, or gold and was it regularly (say weekly) or at the end of the campaign? Things are a lot different now even now considering how I first was paid to now having everything online, including our wages. Love to hear about it, cheers for now... ;-}
One thing I've been wondering is what happened to old swords. Are there any historical accounts of beat up swords being sold off very cheaply or recycled?
Speaking of steel, I have wondered how modern steel, say 5160 high carbon steel that is used in many modern swords such as Albion, would compare to the steel used in the swords of say the 14th or 13th century. Not talking about wootz steel but the steel commonly used for swords, daggers, etc. in those periods.
Modern steel is much better in general, as is modern heat treatment. Blade technology in Europe reached modern standards in the 19th century, but medieval steel was not cast and was full of slag inclusions. Medieval swords that have been tested show irregular consistency of the steel and therefore variable hardness along the edge, with an average hardness that is usually lower than in modern blades. Only wootz and Japanese steel really approached modern standards, but even they are inferior.
Hmm, never really thought of the specifics of where, but have simply assumed there were a demand for blacksmithing in those days and therefore items from sword blades & spearheads to farming tools & basic cutlery were traded at markets like any other product that requires specialized training. Therefore, outside of custom jobs for the wealthy, a smith would make a batch of basic blades than a merchant would spread these to surrounding towns and/or trade with other merchants who have more exotic looking items. Then again, I never looked into exactly what era such trade began and just assumed the same logic was there in the middle ages.
@scholagladiatoria, do you have or have any plans on making a video on the life of knights and or the evolution of knighthood? New subscriber enjoy your videos very much!
@@scholagladiatoria Why the Superdry? I have a real English wool sweater and don't want anything else now! U live there, could pick it up from the farm so to speak haha.
My guess is some of the Yeoman & men at arms that saw battle action may have taken or seized such🪓🗡⛏️ these kind of weapons off the dead or fallen on the battle field & accumilted them ready for next scurmish from their feudal Overlord..
Huh I thought they simply found green level boars or red level bears and farmed them. Or they found a ye olde quest giver who was looking for 10 bear skins and 5 slimy boar tusks. Or found a high level monster like how Beowulf tanked Grendel's mother.
^that and so called "islamic" swords (arabian peninsula, north africa and parts of spain) in general would be an interesting field to hear about. I had the chance to get a book on it but blew it. Annoying.
Well, doing some research about them, it seems like their were two main type and one rarer blade type, at least in the 15th century, the time that I researched. One of them was a straight double edge sword, with sometime a more rounder point and a leaf blade (rare). It had a pommel with a protrusions and a guard with quillions that are bend parallel to the blade. The other type frequently depicted in art is the saber, that as a rather smaller guard and a slightly curved slander blade. Finally, the last rare sword is a type of broad blade falchion with a straight blade and a larger round tip. Keep in mind that most of those sword were called Boabdil sword, being attributed to the Sultan, but we don't really know if they belonged ti him or not.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
They found them in random caves, or used their leveled up stealth attribute to pickpocket them from the city guards. Some of them got the dlc so they got theirs right after they left the starting area.
If they went on a campaign their commanders might pay them 20-80 gold to level up so they'd end up with better skills and hundreds or thousands of denaris worth of gear.
I hate that trend in DLC. I like getting better rewards from additional content but starting a game with gear that will make any gear dropped in the first third of the game useless annoys me to no end. I usually just deactivate those *looks at New Vegas*
Could be from random chest too.
*They used console commands*
MenschMan Cheating is ok in single player games, but not in mmo.
I can see the question being interpreted two ways: the first is how you answered Matt - with troops being issued gear or providing their own.
They might have wanted a more focused answer, as in *where specifically* would someone have gotten a sword; trade, go see the local swordsmith, taken off the field of a battle, etc. He may have been asking more about the commercial market in the early days for swords. Would you like to make a quick supplemental video if that’s the case?
It was a bit of both but he covered it well
He kinda did discuss this, but maybe could have added a bit more.
Yeah I was wondering that too. The process of soldier getting a sword, would he visit a "shop" to buy a premade generic sword or would he go custom etc. Of course would vary depending on time, culture, status etc.
What would interest me and of course is, that we would then be looking at was there a hierarchy of manufacturers, would local blacksmiths be making swords. I am assuming that spear points would be being made by local blacksmiths, so is that a possibility?
Rascally Ryan ... a well cared for weapon could last for generations. also, broken weapons could be recycled without the expense of producing high quality steel from scratch. weapons tended to accumulate, just like guns in the usa.
A Zeughaus (armory, literally stuff/hardware house/store) was quite a bit more than a storage facility. They maintained contact to arms and armory producers, procured samples and quality tested them and equally importantly they had to make sure that they had enough armour in the right sizes. However, they couldn't afford custom fitted armour all the time, thus they were actually the first who introduced standard sizes, even if they didn't have labels as such. Such armour tended to be smaller than custom armour of those that could afford it, which indicates that disparity in nutrition resulted in a disparity of size as well!
flugzeug
The black death freed up a lot of swords for new ownership too.
Maybe get them blessed first. Just in case.
"Some rebellious bunch of people in Kent" I laughed pretty hard at that
Not land owning - cattle owning. Irish tribal social hierarchy was based on number of animals owned. Specific numbers of cows, sheep, goats and horses dictated what rank a man could be. "BoAire" the Irish equivalent or a Baron translates as "Cattle Lord". Note if a man's social rank could be adversely effected by a loss of the number of animals owned. In other words upward and downward mobility was possible in tribal Ireland. Steal enough cattle and even a pauper could become a "BoAire". (Cattle raids were a thing among the Irish)
Same with the Scots.
My own ancestors had a particular affinity with this practice - it's for this reason that the moon is known as Macfarlane's Lantern, and a song of particular relevance to the Clan Macfarlane is 'Thomgail nam Bo theid sinn', which translates to 'To lift the cattle we shall go'.
There seems to have been a lot of pride taken in their ability to 'acquire' cattle.
@@ianmacfarlane1241 Scots/Irish were all Gaelic speaking cattle people. The greatest Irish heroic tale from the Ulster Cycle is the Táin bó cúailnge -The Cattle Raid of Cooley.
Who owned the land for grazing? I understand that the wealth itself was measured in heads of cattle but would the lord actually own the land upon which his livestock grazed or did he receive permission to use it from a higher up?
@@oduffy1939 Not all Scots were Gaelic speaking, though I understand your point.
Geographically dependent obviously, but Gaelic was somewhat limited to the Highlands and Western Isles (Innner and Outer Hebrides).
There has been a concerted effort to reintroduce Gaelic to a wider range of the Scottish population over the last 25 years with BBC Alba, a Gaelic 'department' within STV, a number of Gaelic Primary schools in Glasgow (probably elsewhere, but I'm from Glasgow, so it's all I'm certain of) and Gaelic translations all across the Scottish transport system (which is a bizarre state of affairs TBH - it must have cost a significant amount of money & time to do all of this when I think that around 3% of the current Scottish population speak Gaelic, and people who speak solely Gaelic can probably be measured in dozens).
Years ago I attempted to learn Gaelic as part of a video & TV production course I was doing at college (Gaelic speakers apparently find work quite easily due to the aforementioned BBC Alba and STV Gaelic department) although I gave up when it became clear that it was extremely difficult for an adult to learn, and it was an extremely niche market.
Historically I'm guessing that my ancestors quite quickly gave up Gaelic for Scots/ English when they came down to the Lowlands - although Macfarlane 'lands' were never actually in the Highlands, being centered around the Northern part of Loch Lomond, Loch Kathrine etc.
As far as I'm aware, (although I've never put any time into researching it) there were Macfarlanes in the land around Omagh, but why this migration / settling happened I'm not sure.
I've got a fair bit of Irish in me anyway with my Mother's side being Kellys and there's a good bit on my paternal side too.
I'll take a look at the Cattle raid of Cooley.
Thanks for the recommendation.
Take care.
@@powg3476 That's where the conflict occurred. The tribe/clan owned the grazing land and each member had the right to graze. Clans fought over who had the right to "land use". The problem arose with the coming feudalism, which emphasized inherited land and title, and broke the previous tribal law. You can see the conflict in the movie "Rob Roy" with Liam Neeson; where the stealing of cattle for feeding members of the clan conflicts with the feudal law of property rights.
Bloodbath and Beyond
That was Great!
I want to start a daemonhunting boutique called Bell Book and Beyond
The waiting is the hardest part
@@virgosintellect
Tom Petty
@@robertscott2210 Genius
Ouch, ouch, ouch! The 'broad arrow' used by the War Department was Tiws' rune (A.S. equivalent of Mars, the God of War, the one that Tuesday is named after). The 'hide' was enough land to be comfortably taxed at one pound of silver per year, a Thegn (or Thane) was someone who had been awarded five or more hides for 'services rendered' (usually on the battlefield) or was descended from someone who had and inherited the land (and obligations) from his deceased father. As a landholder he would naturally be expected to defend that land in the event of war and uphold the law in peacetime - hunting Welsh cattle rustlers for example. The Burghal Hideage (I think) sets out the obligation that for every five hides of land he holds he must provide a shield, sword, helmet, chainmail hauberk, two horses (one of them saddled), which would presumeably have been given to one of his servants (cnihts) who would be trained from a young age to use them - hunting was a very useful and productive pastime of the day which would enable these men to get used to the idea of working together against a common 'enemy' a.k.a. dinner. The person chosen for this honour would also be trained to run the estate and quite possibly man the ships that Alfred the Great had decreed that each triple hundred (three hundred hides between them) were to build, presumeably 60 men per ship plus officers (thegns or earls). Worth remembering that only about 1% of the population were 'fighters', that'll be the top 1%, the 1% that invaders were seeking to replace.
Ouch, ouch, ouch! The broad arrow used by the War Department is infact a broad arrow: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad_arrow
You could both be right, but it seems like your comment relies on only one or two sources, so it's probably only true for a particular people during a particular time. I also think that you are trying to espouse too rigid a view of history, one in which 1% of people sit at the top of a feudal pyramid with certain social rules and obligations that remained similar for long periods of time. Simple narratives like that are usually wrong most of the time.
@@maxbachvaroff1967 Before England was united there were kings of Mercia, Wessex, Anglia, Northumbria etc. Usually only one king per kingdom at a time - this was customary practice. Because kings of the time would not be able to micro-manage everything that needed doing in those kingdoms they would need eorls or jarls carrying out tasks necessary at the next level down, and even they wouldn't be able to cover everything so below them would come the thegns or thanes to manage the next level down, and even they would need servants to organise things at a local level to ensure that tasks were being carried out. All of these people would require the authority to ensure compliance thus effectively making them the ruling classes, and it's unlikely that they constituted more than 1% of the population. When England did become unified it merely dropped the number of kings by six, but the one remaining may well have had to hire half a dozen extra servants to filter the extra workload.
@@orkstuff5635 Nitpick: eorls only came about under Cnut (so with a unified England), before that there were only ealdormen.
@@hrotha Fair point - the eorls replaced the kings of the individual kingdoms, my bad. Doesn't much alter the 'chain of command' or the number of individuals required to implement it though.
When I saw the title, it made me think the subject might be more about where people, assuming they were providing their own gear, would get a sword. How easy was it to find a place where you might order a sword made, and where would you find that place? Were there stores where you could pick a sword off the shelf?
You'd go to a cutler and buy one, either low end, used, or made to order
Townsman 1: "Oh no, we're under attack!"
Townsman 2: "With the town militia equipped with little more than their bare fists, it is immediately clear to me that only the king's army can rescue us." *dials phone*
King: "Yeah?"
Townsman 2: "Your majesty, it is the townsfolk of townshire in great need of your help. French are besieging us, we're sitting ducks out here... Spare anything, your majesty!"
King: "Okay, I'm driving down, but highway's kinda backed up right now. Could take upwards of an hour to get here, but I'll do my best, since I'm your king."
Townsman 1: "Thanks king!"
*King arrives*
King: "There was a freaking toll bridge this way. Why do you still maintain that?
Townsman 1: "My liege! But you're on your own? Why?"
King: "What do you mean, I'm here to help. Oh... oh? Shit! I forgot my army! Hold on! Hold on, I'll call my secretary." *dials*
King: "Yeah, hi, Clara? Yeah, hey, I just wanted to say about that memo I left on your desk? Yeah, could you forward it to my entire army? Yeah, that'd be great... All you gotta do is hit forward all. Thanks Clara." *hangs up*
King: "Well all is said and done. They'll get here when they get here."
Townsman 1: "So long as it doesn't take 3 months, because that's how much food we have left."
King: "Oh. If they ignore the memo, we're kinda screwed, because then I'd have to go the trouble of calling my secretary again (which would be annoying). Haha! Do you like poker? Since I'm your king, I always bring a deck for times like these."
Townsman 2 and 1: "You are our king."
King: "Mmmmm"
Ye Olde Amazon?
Skallagrim likes to recommend Cult of Athena.
:)
Shalle ye try Pryme for to Receive ye thine Goodes within botte Twain Dayes?
Only if you're campaigning in Scythia or Dahomey.
Ye Bay
This was before the internet, so it'd be Ye Olde Walmart.
Everyone knows you get your swords from the weapon shop which is next to the item and armor shop in every town, next street over from the inn.
Another great video. I live in the US and have always been fascinated with history. Especially the Middle Ages!!! I love swords ever since I was a small child!! I love your videos! Please keep up the good work!!
Also, as far as I'm aware, archers did have to bring their own arrows (a sheaf of them; from "Select Casts in the Exchequer of Pleas.") in the 14th century, but the majority of their arrows would have been provided to them by the "Privy Wardrobe in the Tower".
I like how the British take on the Hundred Years War has shifted from "The Blokes did a great job killing French knights until they got bored and left." to "It really wasn't an English war with the French, but a French civil war with some minor English involvement at Crecy, Poiters and Agincourt and it's a mystery how they got there really. Also England did nothing wrong."
Still a great video from one of my favorite youtubers.
Ton Lito lots of welsh mercenarys and italians and other local french as well
scots
Oh yeah, I know they were there. The Scots kept France in the fight post Agincort and provided one of Joan of Arc's best units. The Weslh Spearmen and Irish light troops provided useful units to the English Army that get airbrushed out of history (just Longbowmen and Men-at-Arms and nothing in between).
But the point stands that the "French Civil War" canard exists solely to make the English seem less involved in the war they started and lost.
Everyone was on vacation
its more along the lines that the King of the English and Welsh and _Filenotfound_Scots also wanted to be King of the French. the Norman Conquest had really blurred the lines between England and France. some have called 1066 to 1500 the "500 years war"
France had a weak king England had a Strong King, the English king had enough claim to the Throne to claim the realm for his own. Many of the French who fought for the English had strong economic connections to London rather than Paris. Remember that the Coast of France is just a ships journey from the mouth the the Thames.
Compensation in the Late Antique and Early Medieval Roman army included an equipment allowance, intended to allow soldiers to furnish their own equipment according to a set of requirements (and one of the problems they eventually ran into was people pocketing that money and sending under-equipped soldiers into battle). IIRC there were also specific armories dedicated to producing, storing, and distributing some of the more expensive or specialized items (armor, swords, and so on), which soldiers could make purchases from out of their allowance (presumably the quality would be a bit lower given the mass-produced nature of armory stores as opposed to bespoke kit). The imperial household would also provide things like wagon loads of prepackaged arrows (40 to a quiver IIRC) and other consumables.
Of course, with the theme system some of that compensation was shifted away from cash payments toward land holdings (and scaled up considerably as you moved from thematic infantry to tagmatic super-heavy cavalry, with top-end soldiers having expected incomes of several pounds of gold per year), and with the collapse of the same and the shift to a more purely mercenary army (or the later attempt to revive a native army via pronoiar grants) all that went out the window. Those coincided with increased influence from Latin Europe, both as a source of mercenaries and as a model for army structure.
I find pay structures and logistics to be a very interesting aspect of medieval warfare. IIRC the classical pay scale was from around 5 gold solidi per year for a recruit to 13 or thereabouts for a veteran, which as the classical period drew to a close and the Late Antique period began was regularized to around 9 nomismata per year, with additional "donatives" for sensitive political moments (new accessions to the throne, for instance) and equipment allowances on top of the regular pay.
It’s interesting that in some of those medieval pictures, a person with a sword is holding it point up, sometimes resting it on the right shoulder, instead of having it in a sheath, hung from a belt or on a table or otherwise stored. I don’t mean battle scenes; I mean where some guy is sitting on a chair (throne?) or riding a horse to the next market town or doing other stuff besides fighting or getting ready to fight.
The answer is rather obvious, first you send your villagers to build two houses and collect food, then you create 22 villagers and send them to gather wood and food, mainly the fomer, then you build a barracks and a mill and advance to feudal age, there you send some more villagers to gather gold and investigate the man-at-arms technology in the barracks and voilá you have your swordsmen
Is there any evidence of, I suppose you'd call it hereditary arms and armour among the common soldiery? Like, a jack, helmet and a sword gets passed down through a few generations, or would the gear get so banged up on campaign that fixing it would be more expensive than just buying a new set?
Absolutely all sorts of equipment were handed down and re-used, sometimes modified as fashions and technology changed. We have a lot of medieval wills remaining which list weapons, armour and other equipment.
@@scholagladiatoria The British Museum has an extensive collection of swords who clearly show signs of that.
Yep, here in Italy pretty much every medieval town is surrounded by walls and there is usully a "castello" or a "fortezza" with an armory, espeially in Tuscany. Now, these were used more often than not by the local "private police" wich could be called in many ways, but a signifiant amount of city taxes could be used for the protection of the city.
I think, like a lot of folks, the question was more about who a soldier would buy a sword from if they needed one. By, say, the Hundred Years War were there arms dealers in places like London where you could just walk in and buy a sword? I’d imagine during wartime there would have to be a thriving trade in new and used arms to keep the armies equipped.
Arthur Williams still like that today
roberts roberts Yup. It doesn’t help that during the Cold War the Soviets handed out AK-47s and RPG-7s the way Oprah hands out makeovers.
17:18
May have missed? I think i need to clarify something here (at least for my part).
Mr. Easton, you are a amazing source of information about history to me. Things, i always wanted to know in depth are amazingly well explained by you, way better than most professional made (but superficial) documentaries you can find anywhere.
I could watch these videos everyday
Kyle William s I could watch u mom every day
Really fantastic topic and explanation! Subjects concerning military and social structure/logistics are incredibly interesting
My understanding was that a hide was large enough (80-180 acres about 30-70 hectares) to support an infantry man for the fyrd. The hide itself frequently contained 4-6 small farms such as virgates which were enough for a peasant. One peasant from this group would be armed and represent the hide in the shire militia.
This was so informative, thanks Matt great video as always.
War loot! You show up at your first battle with just your spear, pike, longbow or arquebus. By the second battle, you'll have a cool sword at your hip and a probably a couple of significant upgrade pieces to your armor set, too.
14:51 The depicted Monteriggioni is not a city-state but on the contrary a fortress of Siena against Florence.
13:33 - the single worst place in the universe to hide from a tornado
Not up for a challenge?
Casual...
Safer than a black hole.
I read that at least in some German cities the city wall was divided between the crafters' guilds in case of an attack. As the average craftspeople didn't have weapons, they used their tools and so the part of the wall manned by the butchers was most feared. Then again, I couldn't say when exactly this was but it rather sounds like the middle to late middle ages (talking about cities and guilds and stuff).
From the item shop with the sword and stuff icon on it, of course. They had to grind the local mobs first, naturally.
So, where does one tend to purchase said swords in the later bits of the middle ages, then? Was an Englishman, kitting himself out for campaign because he wants to get paid, allowed to just go to a shop (weapon shop, general sutlery, etc)? Was there an entity that had a monopoly on the sale of weapons? Could I just get it whenever?
I'd assume production and sales of swords and other weapons were monopolized by guilds, but I'd love to hear an answer from Matt...
@@gregs4748 Guilds looked after the quality, if you bought a sword that was from a Guild member u could be certain it was topnotch. It later on became more of a company, a bit like a lot of supermarkets nowadays. Franchise i believe it's called. The Guilds where an interesting mix of a Union, Quility Control and Bussiness. Some guilds even had research departments to figure out how to get more bang for their buck, this new findings where then distrubuted among their members to stay ahead of the curve. Especially in food Guilds like the Bakers Guild they came up with healthy recipies for bread and made sure no bad stuff was added, very modern in some ways. Tresspassing Guild laws was a major offense as you damaged the customers trust in the Guild, punishment was quite severe but almost never leathal. It was more of an extreme humiliation, and bans where common.
As far as I know there was a pretty huge second hand sword market in the later middle ages, not only because of better organized production and more affordable materials, but also because of the black death which killed a lot of sword owners.
Who is that 15th century sword you are holding made by? I love that wide cross guard and blade profile.
Would be interesting to see a video on the mercenaries Italian cities used and how they functioned.
I'm quite sure Metatron would be more than happy to talk about Italy - and quite rightfully so!
Excellent video Matt.
I've got a further question on this subject - the spoils of war.
Who would be allowed to keep weaponry from the battlefield?.
Clearly men from further up the social order would be able to keep spoils of war, but what about those from militias, or those expected to provide service?
Would the answer depend upon the quality of the spoils?
I've got a mental picture of a defeated army being stripped of anything useful - particularly if they were casualties.
Anything that you could add would be of great interest.
As always thank you Matt.
Matt answered to a simular question that the spoils of war belong to the commanders, thus a peasant taking a sword would be regarded as theft.
@@ArthurHerbst Thanks for the response.
That's interesting, though sadly unsurprising.
@@ianmacfarlane1241 yeah, they where kinda dickheads i figure. Your welcome :)
"So i hope that goes some way towards answering the question"
*Goes on for another 4 minutes*
Same old Matt :)
I love this channel and there is one thing I would like to share.
Every time Matt is holding weapons not vertically or not horizontally but somewhere in between, they look like they are rusty :)
Something - maybe floor, maybe some furniture - is reflecting from weapons giving this effect.
I know it is small detail. But - hey! - let them all look nice and shiny :)
Cheers!
Matt have several off topic questions about the 1821 Heavy Cavalry Officer’s sword I’m hoping you can answer...
1. Aside from the honeysuckle looking engraved guard, how different is it from the light cavalry officers Sabre. I.e blade length, curve etc.
2. Is anyone making reproductions for HEMA, reenacting or otherwise? I’ve not seen them but am looking for one as a historical reenactor and all the originals I’ve seen are unsightly expensive.
3. Have you done a video on the use of heavy cavalry and their swords? Or can you? I’m really interested to hear your thoughts on the subject of 18th and 19th century heavy cav weapons, their design, use, and fall from favor on the field etc....
Thanks! Have always enjoyed your videos and learned a lot from them. Would love to contact you privately to further discuss where to find 19th century heavy cav swords for sale.
Same four ways we got prop swords at the fine arts company I worked for.
1 pull one you have “down there”
2 purchase one
3 borrow one
4 steal one
They got their swords by looting the dead armies who thought Spears were inferior weapons.
Hey Matt, love your channel, it actually played a part in inspiring me to get into HEMA myself. I even found a school that uses English treatises, when available that is. Anyways, watching this video has given me three questions that I want to ask you. One, what is that flag in your background? It’s very interesting looking. Two, what part did the peers (barons, counts, and other types of nobility) play in warfare? We’re they just considered men-at-Arms like knights and richer yeomen or did they take more of a leadership role as captains or higher ranking officers? Three, in a typical Medieval town, how was the local government set up. I know this would vary from country to country or even from town to town, but what was the most common way they were set up. Were they ruled by a member of the nobility? If so what rank would they commonly be? Were there elected bodies in town governments? I know that the Venetians were an elected republic, but were there cities in other countries (like London for example) that had more elected offices? Were there some that had elected officials combined with hereditary positions like a lord? Keep up the good work! I really love your show!
Right, but were there sword shops way back when, or armouries issuing the things, or did people commission bladesmiths for the things?
Great video love your content, keep it up!
Yes during the Hundred Years War a significant proportions of the French armies were militiamen called up via the arriere-ban, but at Crecy, Poitiers and Agincourt the number of men-at-arms in their armies probably exceeded the size of the whole English army!
I got myself a degree in history. I read of and studied a little of the Norman/Breton (Cornish Frenchies) alliance- as I’m in the US it didn’t have much relevance other than to me. And since then, about 2000ish, I have not heard that fact, a fact that maybe a quarter of William’s army was Breton (and probably liberated the Southwest rather than invaded it), mentioned or written or documentaried once until you just said it. People tended to dismiss this obscure knowledge- of the alliance not the liberation bit- as maybe another of my crazy theories.
Love your videos!! Thank you
Excellent video. I loved it.
An excellent book covering much of this ground(I'll leave it's historical grounds to more knowledged minds than I), is "The White Company" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. A fictional story, yet a good work touching on many historical facts.
Really nice talk. Thanks!
About the early middle ages and the Vikings, the 'where' actually mattered quite a bit as to where you got your sword from. In Norway for example I have been told there were actually laws stipulating that you could only get a sword as a gift from a higher ranking person, a chieftain of some sort. This was, however, not the case everywhere in Scandinavia. In Iceland for example when they wrote their new laws they dispensed a lot of social restrictions of all kinds that they perceived as onerous, they for example significantly reduced the social restrictions on slaves after they had been set free and become freedmen. There were no laws in Iceland mandating sword giving that I'm aware of and if there were they were ignored because the archeological record contains numerous graves of pretty low ranking people with simple undecorated swords in very plain and simple scabbards and the grave goods indicate these were pretty normal and not particularly wealthy farmers. By the late 11th century any restrictions on sword ownership disappeared and you get mentions of kings actually stocking up on swords and other edged weapons so that their men could swap their dulled blades out for fresh sharp ones.. By the 15th and 16th century the most common sword in the archeological record (at least in Iceland) by far was the German one handed langes messer which were probably imported by the barrel full from Bremen, Hamburg and Lübeck in Germany. There are still records of swords and other arms being given away by chieftains but a farmer was perfectly free to head to the market and buy his own langes messer or a sword if he could afford it but the messer was probably somewhat cheaper. So in 15th and 16th century Scandinavia and the Holy Roman Empire your sword might have come from a knife maker because of guild laws.
Another question could be about the jack chains many of them wore...
Thanks again!
Pssst. Ask him about dual wielding spadroons. XD
HAHA, the ultimate weapon system.
I was looking to see if you commented on this video.
Django has some competition! Sub, plusi catched the tiny desk engineer. Looking forward for more
I guess great minds don't always think alike, but I love Metatron and Lindybeige. You are both clever and funny dudes.
Thanks for the video! As to what you didn't cover very well (or at all) it's obvious - the time before the viking era! In the high bronze age this stuff (metal weapons, armor too) was often state property. It was issued and accounted for much like rifles are today. The same was probably true in much but not all of iron age antiquity leading up to the migration and 'viking' period, at least in the more organized states. Cheers!
A critical deciding factor would have been availability and hence production methods determining procurement cost. Cheaper and more efficient manufacture lowers the unit cost and thus availability. Example, a single blacksmith forged sword typically takes days to produce whereas crucible molding or power hammered (water/wind) manufacturing methods would result in many swords being mass produced. Also, simplified blade design and composition would signifigantly lower production cost. A classic example of the above is the British stem gun of WW2. Thanks Matt, your videos are always informative and entertaining. And, they usually lead to other areas of inquiry and conversation. 🍁🍺
Actually, in pre Norman times swords were given as gifts to the camitatus or warband of "ring-giver" in the "gift-hall" from the seat of the "giftstol". Therefore, they didn't buy them. Swords were given under "hariot" (in Muslim world "timariot") which meant in turn the receiver had to supply military service.
and the blades were to be returned to the giver on the death of the receiver.
Wait forces like the Fyrd were also used for patroling (outside a specific war effort), maintaining military structure and such? I always thought the nonhuskarl, Men at Arms, Knightly or similar forces were only raised for a specific conflict and disbanded afterwards, like classical greece hoplites. At least in the early to mid middle ages. Might have had some misconceptions there.
How did weapon variety on the battlefield differ in different time periods? How were weapons used together by separate units for tactical reasons etc? Quite broad questions but I'm sure you have something interesting to say on the matter :) love the videos btw! Cheers
5:39 what's that telephone pole looking thing? Is it a gibbet or some type of defensive weapon?
Great video, really enjoyed it
In those era 12-13 century I reckon military service can be an opportunity at some cases. Remember even among the serfs there are some who manage to accumulate wealth and is in dire need to become a freemen (small landowners/merchants) before their due contract ends.
Hey Matt, about your last videos about "blunt" swords: if the swords were stored "dull" for the myriad of reasons and then sharpened for war, would they make them dull again after the war? Surely not. They wouldn't just buy a new armory of blunt swords just because the ones they just used are now sharp and unsafe for times of peace. Idk just seems a little strange. I suppose this just means they only bought swords dull, and would still have leftover sharp ones. Idk I feel like I'm just answering my own question now
They didn't. You'll notice that when reviewing some antiques Matt will note that they're "service sharpened". That also tells us that these swords were either used in combat, or that the owned actually expected to use it in combat at one point of his military life.
I'd say that once the sword was sharp, they left it like that and carried it as it was.
Matt mentioned that the sharpened swords will dull themselves over time, when worn and drawn. If the scabbard is steel the sword will dull quicker.
What about the financial aspect? If you want to be the indentured soldier you mentioned, can you get a loan of funds to buy your equipment?
And what happens if you're on campaign and your kit gets damaged or worn out?
I doubt banking and credit was available to common people. It would have been extremely hard to keep track of them and recover the loan if they defaulted. Bad business for bankers. They probably only loaned to nobles and rich bourgeois who actually had capital and would be the least likely to default and bolt with their assets, since they had more to lose.
Common soldiers probably bought their gear out of their savings initially or received it through inheritance and had it maintained, replaced or upgraded by investing part of their pay in the course of their career.
Matt, you are a wealth of information. I have a question. How long were medieval swords used? Were they family heirlooms that were handed down for generations? When they broke, were they repaired or replaced? Swords can only be resharpened so many times before they become not fit for combat. What was the service life of a sword?
A question, can you do a video about the hunting use of spears?
I know it is off your beaten path, but your knowledge of the texts intrigues me. I have a reason for asking.
In the "Viking Era" it was common for arms/armor to be gifted to landowners/Thegns and later Huscarls in English kingdoms at least. Its not known if these gifts were commonly returned upon death and then re-gifted to heirs or what.
How does the volunteer-system work? how does the "Armee-raiser" knows how many there are to raise and how they are equipped? Was he forced to take only archers with him to campaign if there are only them? how can he improve his armee?
The chief recruiter probably gets a list of all recruits from various regions and how they're equipped from all of his subordinate recruiters. So let's say you have village X and they send 5 people each armed with sword and shield, the recruiter then notes, village X sends 5 men all with sword and shield. He then adds this to his list of all other villages he might be responsible for and passes it on to his superior. This person then makes a list of his own from all of the people working for him and he would probably send it up the chaing until it eventually reaches the head recruiter who then makes the final tally and presents it to his lord or the king.
@@Riceball01 you mean every volunteer must be listed and is then forced to go on campaign if the lord hires them? but how can the lord influence how many and what kind of soldiers he can recruit? I think the "job" of an volunteer is a bit problematic anyway, because you never know when ther will be work for you, so they would probably not specialize as much into it.
@@hectorvi1633 It's not that hard, the lord simply has to delegate the job to subordinates, much like we do now. Depending on how large his holdings are the lord sends a certain number of people out to the countryside going from village to village, farm to farm and recruiting or volunteering people. The new recruits would probably bew told to show up to a certain place, likely at or near the lord's manor or castle by a certain date and if they don't show troops are sent to bring them there.
@@Riceball01 i never questioned the organization part. The tricky part about volunteers is, that you can not force some on into becoming a volunteer. Therefore you can not controle them. So my question was, how do they dealt with it?
@@hectorvi1633 Oh, you can very well force someone into volunteering, in the military it's called being voluntold. A request for volunteers is put out and if no one volunteers, or not enough people volunteer, then the person in charge will pick people and volunteer them. Alternately, like for this particular situation, you apply incentives or dire consequences for volunteering or not volunteering.
Not so much criticism Matt because it was good, but maybe you could actually name some known historical sword smiths?, specific workshops, shown examples of historical finds that we know are linked to a certain smith or small factory / shop. I kind of expected more of that sort of thing when I saw the video length.
Download Boheim's manual on armor and weapons and go to pg 655. It's german, but there's signs and names.
Boheim's manual, graciously digitalised by the university library in Heidelberg:
digi.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/diglit/boeheim1890
The best Norse swords were known as 'ULFBERHT' swords. These swords were made of highly flexible crucible steel and were considered the best swords you could get. Predictably, there were knockoffs made of more brittle ordinary non-crucible steel.
@@txgunguy2766 This is actually just conjecture with a bit of fantasy mixed in - what is known is that there are numerous sword finds with the insignia 'ULFBERTH' found in Scandinavia and some in northern/western Europe, which actually just shows, that there was trade and cultural exchange along with all the warring.
ULFBERTH likely was a craftsman who was able to sell a great many swords that were also traded far from his home, but everything else is pure and unfoundable fantasy until more information is found.
Other sword-insignia that have been found are LEUTFRIT and INGELRII, both like ULFBERTH most likely craftsmen.
The Crimson Fucker, Was "Blackadder" involved in any of this
Matt, a question! speaking of swords, what do you think about the origins of great swords? someone one day thought about "welp, we got longsword now, why not make a bigger one so it looks cool?" that sorta thing?
Yes, they started making bigger longswords and then they diverged into their own forms.
You forget medieval kultofathena. >:D
"By the 14th century anyone who wanted a sword could afford a sword..." Just to be clear: Would a wealthy townsperson, or perhaps a soldier returning from war purchase a sword from the town or city arsenal? The sword purchased was then a piece of private property kept on their person rather than the armory? Further, you mentioned in the beginning, merchants selling swords to wealthy persons? Were the merchants connected to an arsenal within a town or city, did they purchase the swords themselves, wholesale or merely sell them on behalf of town or city armory? Did it work any differently than selling any other highly valued commodity/luxury like spices from the Holy Land or fabrics from Flanders? Thanks very much!
So who exactly were Men-At-Arms? I know they were professional or at least semi-professional soldiers but where did they come from? They were not a distinct social class as far as I know. I guess what I'm asking is how did you get to be a Man-At-Arms and what would you have been before that?
After what I know they where the sergeants of the army, I am shure some where rankers other where employed directly as they got the gear and the training for it.
@@exploatores no they were not, the rank of sergeant didn't exist. The term was used to refer to paid soldiers at some points.
Men-at-arms were to knights what rectangles are to squares. All knights were men at arms but not all men at arms were knights. Knighthood came with a bunch of additional expenses and taxes, so a lot of poorer families in that social stratum would forego the title.
So the answer is, mostly the landed gentry who in earlier times would've been knights. But since MAA is just a description of how they fought, they could really be from any class. In central Europe a lot of townsmen were equipped heavily and could have been described as such, for example.
A Man at Arms is any soldier who is outfitted to be able to fight as heavy cavalry should the need arise. These were the fully armoured professionals who made up the backbone of most medieval armies, the type of me that most modern people would simply label as Knights. As @migkillerphantom said, all Knights were Men at Arms but not all Men at Arms were Knights. In fact most of them weren't Knights, most of them were Landed Gentry (Gentlemen and Esquires) men who would be Lord of the Manor in peacetime or wealthy Townsmen who would come from the higher echelons of the Mercantile class.
Men-at-arms were generally recruited from the landed gentry, basically nobles without any titles, not even a knighthood. They would be men who owned or were enfeoffed with a large enough tract of land plus enough tenants and serfs in them so they did not have to engage in manual labor at all, which was their distinction from the yeomen.
The landed gentry would have practiced skill at arms such as horse riding, fencing and jousting from a young age, expecting to eventually be called for military service by their liege lords. Some yeomen or even peasant boys who were able to obtain the requisite training, armor and horses eventually became a man-at-arm, and some (like John Hawkwood) were even knighted!
Let's not forget that the peasant that was drafted and handed a spear could, if he survived the battle, pick up a sword from the fallen enemy or buy one cheap from a successful gatherer of spoils. Other equipment could be upgraded at the time as well.
No, loot belonged to commanders. Taking swords from the battlefield would be punishable as theft from the victor.
@@scholagladiatoria But I had this when we got here. Honest!
@@scholagladiatoria but didn't you say in a different video that common soldiers didn't make much money from wages, but made plenty from looting? I understand that the commanders had first pick, but then how would others profit enough to improve their equipment if they couldn't loot?
@@CoffeeSnep coins and jewelry are much easier to stuff inside your tunic than a sword, and probably worth more. Loot the easy to carry stuff , buy the hard.
What did a sword (and other equipment) cost? Like, a week's wages, or a year's wages? Or in terms of a sword costs three cows or twenty sheep? Is there a way to quantify it?
Like cars, they could cost relatively little, or a lot (no upper limit). A typical archer's sword would have cost him two or three days' pay. But the records also show old rusty swords worth a 1/3rd of an archer's daily pay. A knight clearly would have bought a much more expensive sword, but basic swords were pretty cheap by the 14th century.
@@scholagladiatoria That seems considerably cheaper than what I'd expect; even something like a Hi-Point costs a few days pay on minimum wage these days. Though, I suppose that (at least here in the US) you can get a really crappy AR for around $400; at $10/hr (starting wage for a greeter at Walmart) you could get one for a week's wages
What kind of weapon is that at 5:44 on the top left hand side of the picture?
“A rebellious bunch of folk in Kent”
Me: Those bastards!! (Grabs sword)
Fascinating story. I wonder if you could use your research to describe the evolution of steel (including its manufacturing ??).
Hi Matt, I have a doubt at the topic of medieval guards: Do you know what were their requirements for been a city guard? Were they different for been a noble's guard? (for example, needing a low noble title such as with knights)
How did the sword get from France to Ireland? A long time ago, some Bethesda hero had a quest marker at the far end of their map and...
That certainly explains why Roman Trooper Helmets were still seen for as long as they were.
Does anyone have a source for the image at 10:05?
Mate, not a question about weapons as such but was wondering how did knights and normal service people or those drafted in get paid? Was it in coin, or gold and was it regularly (say weekly) or at the end of the campaign? Things are a lot different now even now considering how I first was paid to now having everything online, including our wages. Love to hear about it, cheers for now... ;-}
Have you considered that the black death may have freed up a bunch of swords? Haha!
Great video! :D Made it a bit more clear for me :)
What is the deal with the reverse fuller (reinforced spine?) on your 15th century arming sword? More rigidity for thrusts?
This but a scratch
One thing I've been wondering is what happened to old swords. Are there any historical accounts of beat up swords being sold off very cheaply or recycled?
Some of these pics made me curious about what fortifications a medieval town or city have in the Early Middle Ages
Speaking of steel, I have wondered how modern steel, say 5160 high carbon steel that is used in many modern swords such as Albion, would compare to the steel used in the swords of say the 14th or 13th century. Not talking about wootz steel but the steel commonly used for swords, daggers, etc. in those periods.
Modern steel is much better in general, as is modern heat treatment. Blade technology in Europe reached modern standards in the 19th century, but medieval steel was not cast and was full of slag inclusions. Medieval swords that have been tested show irregular consistency of the steel and therefore variable hardness along the edge, with an average hardness that is usually lower than in modern blades. Only wootz and Japanese steel really approached modern standards, but even they are inferior.
@@scholagladiatoria Thank you.
@@scholagladiatoria So I shouldn't feel like a loser owning shitty swords then? 🤔
Albion uses 6150
@@Duzzies-101 Thanks. I numbers the up mixed.
Hmm, never really thought of the specifics of where, but have simply assumed there were a demand for blacksmithing in those days and therefore items from sword blades & spearheads to farming tools & basic cutlery were traded at markets like any other product that requires specialized training. Therefore, outside of custom jobs for the wealthy, a smith would make a batch of basic blades than a merchant would spread these to surrounding towns and/or trade with other merchants who have more exotic looking items. Then again, I never looked into exactly what era such trade began and just assumed the same logic was there in the middle ages.
@scholagladiatoria, do you have or have any plans on making a video on the life of knights and or the evolution of knighthood? New subscriber enjoy your videos very much!
Matt Easton who is the Maker/ company that made the second sword you showed us, The Henry the Vth Sword?
St. George Armoury (Mark Vickers)
No Superdry, but the sweater looks super warm!
The sweater is Superdry ;-)
@@scholagladiatoria Why the Superdry? I have a real English wool sweater and don't want anything else now! U live there, could pick it up from the farm so to speak haha.
What walled town was that in the picture?
Where did trebushets and cannons come from?
Were you expected to buy them as well?
Allright, folks! We are going to war next week. Everybody bring their own trebuchet!
My guess is some of the Yeoman & men at arms that saw battle action may have taken or seized such🪓🗡⛏️ these kind of weapons off the dead or fallen on the battle field & accumilted them ready for next scurmish from their feudal Overlord..
Matt, on the subject of soldiers acquiring equipment, have you read Christian Cameron's stuff at all, particularly the William Gold books?
Huh I thought they simply found green level boars or red level bears and farmed them. Or they found a ye olde quest giver who was looking for 10 bear skins and 5 slimy boar tusks. Or found a high level monster like how Beowulf tanked Grendel's mother.
Matt what's your opinion on medieval Moorish Andalusian swords ?
^that and so called "islamic" swords (arabian peninsula, north africa and parts of spain) in general would be an interesting field to hear about.
I had the chance to get a book on it but blew it. Annoying.
Well, doing some research about them, it seems like their were two main type and one rarer blade type, at least in the 15th century, the time that I researched. One of them was a straight double edge sword, with sometime a more rounder point and a leaf blade (rare). It had a pommel with a protrusions and a guard with quillions that are bend parallel to the blade. The other type frequently depicted in art is the saber, that as a rather smaller guard and a slightly curved slander blade. Finally, the last rare sword is a type of broad blade falchion with a straight blade and a larger round tip. Keep in mind that most of those sword were called Boabdil sword, being attributed to the Sultan, but we don't really know if they belonged ti him or not.
@@theghosthero6173 Were they optimised for cutting or thrusting or both ?
@@ramibairi5562 the staignt one were probably similar to arming sword, the curved one probably more cut oriented and the fakchion one cut only