Crusading Warfare Part 2

As most interested people know archery was a key element of Crusading warfare. Mainly crossbows for the Franks and the composite bow for the Moslems.  The crossbow was a notoriously hard-hitting weapon if a bit slower than other bows.  The composite bow was also powerful, but in order to penetrate Frankish armour it needed a closer range.

This presented a dilemma for Moslem soldiers. To get close enough to do damage they had to risk missiles that could readily defeat their armour.  This reality explains the descriptions of Frankish soldiers literally bristling with Moslem arrows but carrying on with their duties.  Simply put the Moslems had shot accurately but at too great a distance to do serious damage.

The Turcoman seem to have been particularly favoured to begin the storm of arrows.  Their loose, shifting formation mitigated against return shots.  Moreover, betimes they were known to charge home.

What, you may ask, was the point?  Attrition of course, for being shot at is stressful and tiring.  Perhaps more importantly it required a response from the Frankish crossbows.  Moslem cavalry could move very fast.  If they got close enough their shooting would do serious damage.  This happened at Arsuf where King Richard and the Master of the Temple had a furious argument over how many horses the vanguard Templars were losing to arrows.  No horses, no charge.

The crossbows then needed to prevent that and every response diminished a finite missile supply.  It must have required fine judgement.

True, we never read of the Franks running out of missiles.  Yet, had they- defeat would surely have followed.  The missilery of the crossbows was a crucial part of the Frankish tactical repertoire. Without it the whole could not function.

There were indeed Frankish defeats aplenty. In such circumstances the Chroniclers concentrated on the loss of great men or of the vital contingents of the Hospital and Temple. The doings of the Frankish foot were treated with brevity when mentioned. I’m minded to think that running out of quarrels for the crossbows may have played a part when things fell apart.

At Hattin, that great Frankish defeat, Saladin brought up 7 wagons and 70 camel loads of extra arrows that were distributed to his soldiers. King Guy had no such option, his supplies had been jettisoned on the march.

How archery worked then should be a key consideration for us in recreating the battles of the Crusading era.

There are other things to consider too.  The spectacular abilities of the Military Orders and their even more amazing morale.  The relative advantages of the knights of Outremer compared to the Western Crusading knights.  The great diversity of soldiers covered by my use of the term Moslems in this series.  I hope to get to all of these in future posts.

Next though, I want to try a few typical combat match ups.  If they work I’d like you to join me in a table top experiment.  King Guy, Conrad Marquis of Monteferrat and Master of the Temple Gerard de Ridefort will be riding from Tyre to Acre. 

Along the way they will meet with Taqi al Din, Zahir Ghazi and al Afdal three of Saladin’s sons.  Also present will be the Sultan’s formidable ally the Turkish potentate Keukburi.

Let’s see how it works out.

Crusading Warfare Part 1

 

“The charge of the Franks” said Anna Komnene “could go through the walls of Babylon.”  It’s a great image and Anna knew what she was talking about.   

The point being that the Crusaders had brought something new to the manual of tactics in middle eastern warfare.

Charging cavalry were not, of course, a new phenomenon.   

Syrian askaris charged and so did the Bedouin.  Both used lances and the Syrians did wear some armour.   

The difference was that the Westerners were much better protected, carried sturdier lances and charged harder.  The Crusader charge proved too much for the Arab dynasties of the region.

Against the Seljuks and Turcoman the Westerners got into difficulties.  They charged and the foe melted away-shooting.  Crusaders could find themselves strung out on blown horses.  Then, the foe returned and that was that.

In response the Crusaders developed highly disciplined combined arms tactics.  The irresistible knights were now protected behind a wall of spearmen and crossbows.  The crossbows could easily defeat eastern armour.  The shields of the spearmen protected the shooters.  

Behind both, the knights patiently waited.  When the enemy got too close to evade the Knights charged and conquered.

Things could go wrong; the infantry might break or the Knights charge too soon.  Mostly though the tactics worked.

For the armies of Islam, the challenge was always to break the Crusader array.  Mostly this fell to the professional Ghulam cavalry.   

 

Skilled in both archery and close fighting they did not fear to closely engage the Franks. Ideally, their archery would cause casualties and disruption. Then they would attack in waves, striking, retiring and returning. Sometimes it worked.  Like the Frankish charge timing was everything.

Even the best armoured Ghulam were less well protected than the Crusader Knights.  To compensate they were much more mobile.

Beyond the professionals the Turcoman tribes played a notable part in resisting the Franks.  Their strength was as fast- moving horse archers a role in which they excelled.  Sometimes, for reasons which are hard to discern, they fiercely charged home with sword and spear.  Their lack of armour must have made this a costly business.

Already, without looking at the infantry of Islam, we can see there is a lot going on. To the best of my knowledge there are only two published War Game Rules dedicated to this complex set of interactions.  More soon.