John I, Duke of Brabant, at the Battle of Worringen, Codex Manesse, about 1340.
Positions of forces at the beginning of the battle.
The 5th of June 1288 the duke of Brabant, Jan I, and his allies challenged Siegfried, the Archbishop of Cologne, and his armies near Worringen, Germany, on the west bank of the River Rhine. The battle that followed lasted until darkness fell, and is known in history as one of the fiercest wars of the Middle-Ages.
From Jan Mahler’s The Battle of Worringen, 1288. The History and Mythology of a Notable Event, Edmonton – Alberta 1993. (http://www3.telus.net/~magmeter/worringen.PDF)
The following events can only be reconstructed with some degree of probability from the one surviving eyewitness report, that of Jan van Heelu, whose credibility will have to be examined later, as well as some more remote, far less detailed, and occasionally contradictory chronicles, supplemented by testimony given before a papal inquiry in 1290.
Confidently, Archbishop Siegfried conducted mass on the morning 5 June 1288 in the Abbey of Brauweiler, 10 kilometres south of Worringen, and absolved his troops of all the sins they were about to commit. After a moving address to his men 286, he marched his army onto an open field about 5 kilometres north-west of Cologne and 1 kilometre south east of Worringen, on the left bank of the Rhine, where he intended to meet his enemies while cutting off their escape route to Cologne 287.
Meanwhile the Duke Jan of Brabant and his allies left their camp around Worringen and proceeded south along the course of the Rhine, which in those days sent a huge meander deep into the countryside west of its present course 288. Passing the Bergerhof farm, which the counts of Berg claimed as their ancestral home 289, the army crossed a brook flowing into the river and took up position in the open field just south of the Rhine River, facing the Archbishop’s army positioned between them and Cologne.
Unfortunately, Jan van Heelu is unclear about the arrangement of the battle-lines. Instead we have to rely on conjecture based on who was likely to have fought whom over which issues. The mounted knights, about 3000 on the side of Siegfried of Westerburg and about 2500 on that of his opponents, arranged themselves on a wide front running east to west across the open field 290. The forces from the City of Cologne, Jülich, and Berg would have faced their principal enemy, the Archbishop. Jan of Brabant with Everhard of Mark and William of Jülich, Provost of Aachen, would have faced Heinrich of Luxembourg and Reinald of Guelder, the Duke’s challengers for the Limburg inheritance.
Surveying the field from the higher ground which was formed by a slight incline south of the river bend before Worringen, the Duke of Brabant, the Count of Mark, and the Provost of Aachen chose a stationary defensive position across a dried-up arm of the Rhine running parallel to the battle formations, across which they presumably intended to retreat in case of difficulties. The patricians and guild militia from Cologne, joined by the Count of Berg and his knights, continued the front towards the lower ground next to the river. Though fully prepared for battle, both sides then halted their advance for close to an hour during which two brothers of the Order of Teutonic Knights tried unsuccessfully to arrange a last-minute settlement.
Archbishop Siegfried and his allies finally took action and initiated the first cavalry charge, followed almost immediately by an offensive of their entire front line 291. Having to charge across drainage ditches, the Archbishop’s contingent began to lose some of its coherence 292. Nevertheless this first assault succeeded in collapsing the Cologne-Berg lines on Brabant’s left wing. Seemingly so soon in the welcome position of having eliminated his personal opposition, Siegfried felt free to turn west to take part in the attack which the forces of Guelder and Luxembourg had commenced against his political enemy, Duke Jan I of Brabant, and his remaining allies.
Dispensing with any further tactical manoeuvring at close quarters, the combatants carried on with general hand to hand combat, while the battle began to take on the character of a rather large brawl, interspersed with numerous individual contests between noble opponents 293.
Owing to their superior numbers and the sufficient space for movement likely available to all the combatants, the allies of the Archbishop were beginning to gain the upper hand in the fighting by about midday, and were forcing the Duke’s army back across the dry river bed 294, when suddenly, in a move that seems to have been a well-planned strategic manoeuvre, the Count of Berg with an infantry militia made up of peasants from Berg, accompanied by the remaining Cologne patricians on foot, decided the battle by attacking the Archbishop and his allies from the rear and left flank 295.
However despicable the use of peasants in medieval military terms was, one needs to realize the impact which determinedly-led armed civilians could have against a supposedly superior knightly army, as was demonstrated convincingly at Courtrai in 1302, 296. The fact that military service of peasants in Berg was described by chronicler Jan van Heelu as a matter of custom furthermore suggests that they were not only organized but also possibly trained in some way 297. Their weapons, “clubs spiked with long nails”, clearly identifiable with the “goedendags” of the Flemish craftsmen at Courtrai, had an undeniably destructive impact on the armour of medieval knights. Another equally unchivalrous but effective weapon against medieval armor was the crossbow298, often employed as the favourite weapon of town militias in this period. It seems quite likely that Cologne, as a centre of weapons manufacturing 299, would have been able to supply its citizenry and its allies with this weapon. Although it was not specifically mentioned, the use of crossbows in a battle where winning was clearly more important to some of the combatants than just being chivalrous is quite likely. In addition, quite a number of simple farm implements could be used rather effectively in combat.
Armed in the fashion described, peasants and townsfolk indiscriminately killed anyone in sight, and only after some time could they be directed against their proper target 300. In addition to the anger created by the Archbishop’s raids on Berg territory earlier in the war, they may possibly have been moved by some religious animosity. Certainly the interdict which Siegfried had placed over his enemies shortly before the battle could have aroused the population against him. The Archbishop had sufficient reason to fear for his life from the enraged populations of Berg and Cologne, who were demonstrating little intention of taking anyone prisoner;
therefore, as was the knightly custom of the day, he gave himself up to the nearest noble opponent. Presumably for his own protection he was taken off the field by Adolf of Berg, and imprisoned in the Count’s castle above the river Wupper 301.
Despite this significant capitulation, the fighting among the remaining combatants continued until late into the evening. Again and again the Archbishop’s troops regrouped and fought on, as his standard, held by Count Adolph of Nassau, his brother-in-law, remained on the field some time after Siegfried had been captured. Count Reinald of Guelder, already injured, was also forced to continue the fight for some time against the peasant forces of Cologne and Berg, as he was unable to find a noble opponent who would spare his life 302.
The battle also gave some of its participants the opportunity to settle feuds that had no direct relation to the principal issues at stake. Heelu records the encounter between the feuding Mulrepas clan, loyal to the Duke of Brabant, and the Scaevedrieves, a noble family from the Duchy of Limburg, who continued to fight until one party, in this case the Scaevedrieves, were completely wiped out 303.
Even before the battle was finally concluded by the onset of darkness, however, the plundering of the dead and the taking of the wounded as prisoners for the purpose of ransom had already begun. As they observed victorious knights looking out for their own financial welfare in this manner 304, the townsfolk and peasants also realized that there was some money to be made by not killing every nobleman. Nevertheless, the armed peasants of Berg had turned what had started as a chivalrous battle between equals into a slaughter of the nobility. To the horror of the chronicler, the carnage among the knights of the Lower Rhine was considerable, over a thousand mounted knights had been killed on the Archbishop’s side alone 305. It would almost seem that the population of the surrounding countryside in one single afternoon had taken revenge for generations of oppression as much as for the most recent war and destruction visited upon them by their noblemen.
Count Heinrich of Luxembourg and his two sons, as well as Siegfried’s own brother and numerous other noble knights, did not leave the field alive. Jan van Heelu also lamented the death of more than 4000 horses, representing the waste of a considerable fortune, which like many of their riders fell victim to the crude weaponry of peasants 306.
Notes
285 “Want si van Limborch sijn geboren, Van Lutzenborch die grave….” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 1200-1201.
286 “Ende voer te Bruenwilre ter kerken: Daer sanc hi den heeren messe Ende na predecte hi ene lesse Van goeden troeste ende van rade…. Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 4270-4273. After conducting mass the Archbishop adressed his troops, telling them of how a huge whale was about to be stranded far into enemy territory and that a fortune was about to be made by those joining the Archbishop of Cologne to confront the Duke of Brabant on this day. Finally: “Hier met gaf hi sijn pardoen, Ende dede hen allen aflaet Soe groot, van hare mesdaet, Ochte daer yeman bleve doot Dat hi voere in Abrahams scoot.” Ibid., lines 4314-4318.
287 See Map 5.
288 See Map 4.
289 Andernach, Norbert: “Entwicklung der Grafschaft Berg”, in Land im Mittelpunkt der Mächte (Kleve, Düsseldorf, 1984), p. 64.
290 Knipping, Regesten, vol. 3, no. 3193.
291 There is some evidence to suggest that although sharing one common battleline, each commander (i. e. Duke, Count, or Archbishop) only controlled his individual contingent and at the beginning of the action led it into battle only against an equally individual enemy contingent. This would explain the initial success of Siegfried against Berg and Cologne, seemingly detached from the action between his remaining allies and enemies.
292 “Doen die Brabantre vernamen Datsi hare drie scaren braken, Doen riep lude, met hoge spraken, Die bastaert van Wesemale:
293 Heelu spends much time describing many of them without any further reference to tactical movements.
294 “Drongen si, met sterker vaert, Die Brabantre achterwert: Maer dat en was geen wonder: In hare bataelge waren (sonder Die ghene die te voet streden, Ende die mate waren gereden, Die men daer toe niet en telde nochtan,) Met helmen meer dan MC man. Dat die scaren alle drie Hadden in tsertoghen partye.” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 5225-5234.
295 “Maer ic sal nu voere vertellen Hoe dat, met haren prikellen, Toe Quamen ende voort voeren Van den Berge die coene geboeren, die, na die tale van Brabant, Dorpliede sijn te rechte ghenant. Dese quamen alle wel ten stride bereet, Na die gewoente, die daer steet. Diere hadden een groot deel Beide wambeys ende beckeneel, Ende een deel haddeter platen; Maer diere swert met scarpen waten En wouden si hen niet onderwinden; Maer clupple haddens alle, tinden Met grooten hoefden geprikelt.” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 6241-6255. One can presume that Cologne’s merchants were quite able to provide the necessary transportation across the river, which later must also have been used to remove the Archbishop from the battlefield.
296 A fact that continues to be played down by some who insist on the absolute superiority of the mounted manat- arms. For example, Lehnart, Ulrich: “Kampfweise und Bewaffnung zur Zeit der Schlacht von Worringen” in Der Name der Freiheit, pp. 155-162.
297 See above note: line 6248.
298 Verbrüggen, J. F.: The Art of Warfare in Western Europe during the Middle Ages (from the Eighth Century to 1340) (Amsterdam-New York, 1977).
299 Lehnart, “Kampfweise und Bewaffnung”, p. 160.
300 “Die geburen, die daer bleven, Na, ten stride, die gingen staen Op en Grachte ter neder slaen Vriende ende viande, sonder sparen; Daer haddense geene kinesse af.” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 6302-6306.
301 See Appendix II.
302 “Doen bleef die grave in selker noot doen hi arderwerf sach sinken Die baniere dat hi dinken En wiste siat, noch ane gaen Gherne ware hi in hant gegaen Maer hine dachte om geen vlien Wat daer sijns soude gescien” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 6600-6606.
303 “Die van Witham, ende hare knecht Her Mulrepas, ende sijn geslechte, Daer ic vore af liet die tale Die ic weder nu verhale Si waren die viande Daer die Scavedriesche haer ande Gherne ane hadden gewroken….” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 7185-7191. “… Ende voeren hier en daer, ende sochten Waer si in hant gaen mochten Daer si dat lijf souden ontdragen Doen men die Scavedriesche ginc jagen Ende doot slaen, waer mense kinde Daer met was des strijts een inde.” Ibid., lines 7289-7294.
304 “Doen dit die ghebueren sagen Dat die heeren des plagen Datsi die viande alle vingen Ende om goet lieten verdinghen Doen woudense met ane winnen Ende gingen oec des selves beginnen Daer bi lieten si hare slaen Ende gingen dapperlike vaen, Die ane hen ghenade sochten; Maer diere ieghen vochten Die sloegen si alle thant doot Doen sachmen iammerlike, dor noot, Die vroemste van al kersten lant Armen gebueren gaen in hant.” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 7003-7014.
305 “… Daer bleven doot Elf hondert manne, bi getale Ende meer daer toe, die men wale Ter waerheit weet, nochtan sonder Die ghene die na storven….” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 7314-7318
306 “Dat scade was ende iammer groot Want daer en bleven doot Niet vele gebueren noch knechte Maer si waren van geslechte ende ridderscape die men vant Die beete van al Duytsche lant Dat sceen wel aen hare striden Want daer bleven van beiden siden Doot op tfelt inde porsse Meer dan MLC orsse Die onder hen worden ghevelt Sonder die daer gheqult Ute quamen, ende gewont Die strijt was vander onderstont Lanc al tote der vespertijd Men vernam nye strijt In en geen lant soe lange dueren….” Heelu, Rymkronyk, lines 7325-7341.
