Medieval Prints by Graham Turner
Although firmly rooted and fairly well developed in the
Rhineland, Franconia, Lorraine (the old Lotharingia) and Burgundy, feudalism in
its widest sense was never as strong in Germany as in, say, France or England,
and true knighthood and the customary granting of fiefs was unknown in Germany
until the 12th century; the earliest recorded instance of knighting actually
dates to 1146.
During the period under review Germany was basically a
confederation of petty states led by princely families of tribal origin, of
whom very few held their Lands as vassals of the crown. In the first half of
this era, therefore, the king (or Emperor) had to depend almost entirely on the
goodwill of these autonomous princes and dukes for military support, who
recognised Imperial authority only when they deemed it expedient to do so.
Their principalities had largely evolved from once-independent territories and
sub-kingdoms (principally Saxony, Thuringia, Burgundy, Franconia, Bavaria,
Swabia, Austria, Bohemia and Moravia) and the princes continued to associate
themselves with the ethnic origins of their lands. Without their support the
Emperor had practically no army, and therefore no power, at all, and it was as
a result of this dependence that the Imperial throne became elective in the
second half of the 13th century, the most powerful princes becoming Kürfursten
or ‘Electors’ whose one concern was effectively to ensure their own autonomy by
the maintenance of a weak monarchy. Some idea of the princes’ military
potential can be got from the fact that at a Diet (parliament) in Mainz in
1235, where they were nearly all present, their personal retinues are recorded
to have totalled 12,000 knights. An individual prince might easily raise
several hundred knights (mostly ministeriales, for which see below), the Archbishop
of Cologne reputedly fielding 500 in 1161.
Other than for the king’s expedition to Rome to be crowned
(the expeditio italica, after 1135 called the expeditio roma or Romfahrt, later
Romzug) only the princes of the church -the abbots, bishops and archbishops-
were actually obliged to render him military service, since they alone owed
their positions to the crown, having been invested with their various estates
and offices by the king; therefore it was on them that he relied predominantly
for troops. In 1167, 1174 and 1176, for example, German armies operating in
Italy under Frederick I Barbarossa consisted almost entirely of church
contingents. However, the obligations of ecclesiastical princes differed from
those of feudal vassals; with them it was more a case of administering an
Imperial estate and, when necessary, financing contingents of troops from the
proceeds. Sometimes such proceeds were inadequate to pay for the requisite
troops and it was not uncommon for the church to have to mortgage or pawn
property and estates in order to raise men. Most German bishops were therefore
soldiers first and churchmen second and many even commanded Imperial armies in
the field, despite the fact that for most of this era there was bitter enmity
between Empire and papacy. In 1257 Richard of Cornwall wrote to his brother,
King Henry III of England, about the ‘mettlesome and warlike archbishops there
are in Germany. It would be a fine thing for you if you could create such
archbishops in England.’
It was Frederick I (who added the ‘Holy’ to ‘Roman Empire’)
who first sought to fully reorganise German feudalism on the model of France.
Realising the necessity of pulling together the heterogenous elements that made
up the Empire, Frederick made a concerted effort to ensure that all princes,
both ecclesiastical and lay, were tied to the throne by bonds of vassalage, and
by 1180 the structure of the feudal hierarchy had been firmly established; the
princes and dukes were now tenants-in-chief (the princes of the church inevitably
taking precedence over lay princes), with their vassals obliged to perform
military service as knights. Where previously the king bad been able to solicit
military aid from his nobility chiefly only by cash payments, the late-12th
century saw them serving for a standard period of6 weeks per year, in addition
to which, after an interval, their vassals could be called upon for further
service of another 6 weeks at the expense of the tenant-in-chief or crown.
Unfortunately after Frederick’s death in 1190 his successors were unable to
maintain their hold on the nobility, his grandson Frederick II (1214-50, best
known for his Sicilian and Italian exploits) issuing in 1231 the ‘Statute of
Favour of the Princes’ which granted lay and ecclesiastical princes alike
absolute autonomy within their lands and total freedom from royal interference;
assorted exemptions from and limitations on obligatory military service
followed (Bohemians and Saxons, for instance, could commute their obligation to
participate in the Romfahrt by means of a token cash payment). Thereafter the
German monarchy was purely elective and royal authority Little more than
nominal. Rudolf of Habsburg (1273-91) appears to have been at least partially
successful in forcing the nobility back into submission, though be bad to put
dissidents down by force on a number of occasions and destroyed some 70 or more
castles in the process. Nor were his achievements particularly lasting.
Since the princes were of dubious loyalty, and because the
German peasantry were basically forbidden to bear arms by the late-12th
century, it was inevitable that some reliance should be placed on mercenary
troops (principally Germans), though they were apparently never employed in
particularly large numbers. As early as the late-11th century it had been
suggested to Henry IV (by Benzo of Alba) that mercenaries, paid for by a form
of scutage, should replace the feudal or semi-feudal muster, and the suggestion
was revived following the failure of Henry V’s French campaign of 1124and again
after the decisive defeat of the Imperialists under Otto IV at Bouvines in
1214. Certainly Frederick I had depended on Brabanson mercenaries in Italy in
1166-67 (5-800 men, or perhaps 1,500 including Flemish mercenaries too) and
1174-75 (commanded by the Archbishop of Mainz), where they gained a morale
ascendancy over the Italians, who were scared to death of them (or, rather, of
their reputation); such Brabanzonen were only actively employed within Germany
itself once, in Saxony in 1179 by Archbishop Philip von Heinsberg of Cologne,
who fielded as many as 4,000 mercenaries, cavalry and infantry together, of
whom the Brabansons constituted the latter. The Emperors themselves tended to
rely heavily on mercenaries in their personal retinues to compensate for the
indifference of their vassals; for a crusading enterprise of 1196-98 Henry VI
personally raised a contingent of as many as 6,000 mercenary troops, 1,500 of
them knights and a further 1,500 being esquires. Many such troops were paid
with money-fiefs. Hungarians too were sometimes employed, about 600
horse-archers being recorded in an army raised in 1158, while as many as 14,000
are supposed to have been present under their king in Rudolf’s army at
Marchfeld 120 years later.
Another considerable – and unique – element of the Imperial
army (and of the ecclesiastical contingents in particular) was supplied by
ministeriales (German Dienscleuten), a class of ‘unfree’ knights. These
appeared in the first half of the 10th century, were only first introduced on a
large scale by Conrad II (1024-39), when they were much used for royal
garrisons. They were initially nonnoble freemen administering fiefs without
actually holding them as vassals, and they could be granted by one lord to
another, leased out as mercenaries, or even sold.
The building of fortresses was one of the duties of the
levy, particularly in the Marches. Henry the Fowler (919-936, founder of the
dynasty), introduced a system where every ninth man lived in a fortified town,
helping to build and maintain it, while the other 8 continued their
agricultural chores and stored one third of their produce within the town,
taking refuge there themselves during Slav or Magyar raids. These men were
lower-class vassals, sometimes referred to as agrarii milites, who were in many
ways the forerunners of the mediaeval German ministeriales, unfree knights.
It was Conrad II (1024-1039) who actually introduced
ministeriales on a large scale. A ministerialis is best described as an unfree
man in possession of a benefice and performing the same military service as a
free, feudal tenant would. They appear to have originally evolved as a result
of church lands being obliged to supply feudal troops in the same way as the
nobility had to; so as not to incur a loss of income by granting the land to
free vassals to fulfil these obligations, unfree men were granted such lands
instead and were obliged to supply the requisite military duties while at the
same time, being unfree, not being permitted any of the benefits or income of a
free vassal. This practice became widespread in Germany.
Many vassals therefore bad no need to involve themselves in
subinfeudation, since they could utilise ministeriales to satisfy their
military obligations without loss of land or revenue, and it was this aspect
that made them particularly popular with the church. However, ministeriales
often became important Imperial officials so that their status steadily
improved. As early as 1126 we find ministeriales being made knights and by the
mid-century they had to be paid for service beyond their master’s own domains.
Many were by this time becoming powerful and wealthy enough to be considered
capable of holding lands on their own account, so that their offices were
subsequently convened into feudal possessions. Their ability to hold property
and thereby have vassals of their own inevitably broke down and blurred the
original distinction between the ‘unfree’ ministerialis and the free knight (to
the disgust of the latter), one powerful ministerialis of Frederick I’s reign,
Werner von Bolanden, even being reported as holding 17 castles and allegedly
being owed the service of as many as 1,100 men-at-arms. By the mid-13th century
when, in South German contingents at least, as much as 95 per cent or more of an
army could be composed of ministeriales – they were indistinguishable from the
nobility, a considerable proportion of the latter by then being of
ministerialis origin, including even dukes, counts and bishops.
Some ministeriales appear to have served as infantry but
most evidence indicates that they were cavalrymen. The same applies to the
Sariants, or sergeants, who first appear in the 12th century. Nethertheless
infantry were an important element of German armies. Many were still supplied
by the Heerbann or its equivalent, the traditional Germanic levy of all
able-bodied freemen which lasted up until the 13th century, though from the
late-12th century the lower classes were being steadily excluded from military
service. It lasted longest in the north and east, in Saxony, Thuringia and
Bavaria; Saxon and Thuringian infantry were present in strength at Bouvines in
1214 and fought in nearly every important campaign of the 11th and
12thcenturies.
The standard role of infantry in this period was of an
almost entirely defensive nature, an attitude which remained prevalent until
the beginning of the 14th century. They were either assigned to the cavalry
units or organised separately, usually as close-order phalanxes. They could be
drawn up before, behind, between or on the flanks of the cavalry depending on
circumstances.
To strengthen the infantry and boost their morale many
commanders chose to dismount at least a percentage of their knights, particularly
in the late-11th and 12th centuries; this is especially true of English, Norman
and German armies. Prior to the 13th century, in fact, German knights are
recorded in a number of contemporary sources as better at fighting on foot than
on horse. The 12thcentury Byzantine chronicler Cinnamus records them as being
at their best fighting on foot with the sword, comparing them to the French who
were better on horseback with the lance. William of Apulia, describing Swabian
knights fighting on foot at Civitate in 1053, says they were ‘better with the
sword than the lance since they are incapable of handling their horses or
thrusting vigorously [with the lance]. But they excel with the sword.’ At
Damascus in the Second Crusade we even find German knights dismounting to
charge, William of Tyre telling us that this ‘was the custom of the Germans
when circumstances obliged them to use it.’ Conversely, we are told that French
knights were of little value on foot, while a source ofc. 1120 describes Breton
knights as 7 times more effective mounted than they were when dismounted.
Other infantry were provided by town militias from the 11th
century onwards, these participating in most of the civil wars which racked the
reigns of every German king of this era.
They were obliged to go to war when ever called upon to do
so by their sovereign (ie, the ruling prince, duke, bishop etc of the state in
which the town stood, which in the case of Reichsunmittelbare towns-those under
direct royal control- was the king or Emperor himself). In most cases, however,
they were not expected to do much more than defend their own town walls, except
in dire circumstances when they might be called upon to serve in the field
locally (this obligation frequently being reduced in the 13th century so that
service could not be called for further than a half-day’s march from the militia’s
home town). Hence the reliance on Italian, Brabancon and other indigenous or
mercenary infantry when campaigning outside Germany.
Auxiliaries were also employed, Magyars, Poles, Wends and
other Slavs all being recorded in the 10th and 1th centuries. Even Danish
auxiliaries are sometimes mentioned, by the mid-11th century apparently
sometimes serving as cavalry As an indication of the numbers of troops
available, 32 legiones were mustered for an attack on the Capetian Hugh the
Great in 946, though these included Carolingian French and Flemish units, while
at Lechfield in 955 there were 8 legiones, probably a more usual size for an
army. Otto II, campaigning in Italy in 982, requested reinforcements of 2,080
feudal cavalry from Lotharingia, Bavaria, Franconia and Swabia, 1,482 of whom
were supplied by ecclesiastical vassals; this may very well have been after his
defeat by the Arabs at Cotrone, where he is recorded to have lost 4,000 men
killed plus many more captured. In the mid-11th century Henry II had adequate
troops to promise a Milanese rebel the loan of 4,000 knights (probably
ministeriales).
