For example, Orderic Vitalis’ discussion on the Siege of Rochester, which states William II was urged by his English subjects to kill the defenders of the castle, but other members of his army urged him to be merciful, as he had already beaten them, which was enough. Mercy was a key chivalrous ideal for elite men, so they had to decide whether to be seen as merciful and spare the defeated opponents or risk being deemed unchivalrous, which could result in the loss of honour.

Which was one of the reasons why siege warfare was used more than pitched battles in the high medieval period, as it potentially had fewer casualties, whereas in pitched battles anyone could be killed either intentionally or in cross fire. These new ways of thinking put more emphasis on the value of life and bodies. Its possible ideals and changes in how elite men were expected to behave impacted how battles and warfare were conducted. Which indicated William was well within his right to decimate the North, as the Northerners were rebels, so William was not only punishing them but showing others what happened in cases of rebellion against him by not sparing his opponents.Ĭhivalry is a fluid concept for historians, so it’s difficult to fully determine what was deemed chivalrous and what wasn’t, so in this discussion I am referring to chivalry as a set of rules and ideals which knights and elite men followed. The extent of the carnage inflicted by William’s forces resulted in famine and emigration, Henry of Huntingdon said William ‘sacked the city, and made great slaughter of the rebellious inhabitants’. For example, William the Conqueror and the ‘Harrying of the North’ in 1069-1070, as a result of the rebellion in the Northern part of the country involving the remaining English claimant, the Danes and northern subjects. Furthermore, killing and maiming defeated opponents acted as a deterrent for others. This was particularly important in battles relating to rebellions, as removing figureheads could completely derail a rebellion along with destroying their remaining armies. Generally, the victors would aim to remove those who could cause them the most trouble in battle, such as archers as their effectiveness was a cause for concern, especially as elite men could be killed by low-status men, which could damage their prestige. But also damage the capability of a kingdom or individuals by destroying their armies, removing the leaders and figureheads. The killing and mutilation of defeated opponents were usually conducted to emphasise a victory. Then there would sometimes be a pitched battle where many were maimed and killed, either in the battle itself or after by the victors. In the earlier period, battles constituted of opposing sides decimating land, houses and wreaking havoc and violence again civilians. Medieval warfare has always been known as a violent affair, which in most researched cases is quite accurate.

Chivalry medieval warfare free