New Weaponry, Tactics and the Decline of the Knight

From mounted charges to more varied warfare

Between c1250 and c1500, new weapons and formations changed the balance of power in medieval warfare. Mounted knights—armoured soldiers fighting on horseback—had been a powerful attacking force. Their charges could break enemy lines, after which they could chase scattered troops. Increasingly, however, archers and organised infantry could resist or defeat them.

These changes affected combat, the actual fighting; tactics, the methods used in battle; and strategy, the overall planning of a campaign. A weapon mattered not simply because it could kill, but because commanders could use its strengths to change how they fought.

The longbow: range, speed and power

Longbows were introduced into English armies in the 1290s. Edward I’s successes helped make them a key part of English warfare for about the next 150 years.

A skilled longbowman could fire about 15 arrows a minute, roughly five times the firing rate of a crossbow. The longbow had an effective range of around 200 metres, about twice that of shorter bows and crossbows. Its powerful arrows could pierce a knight’s chainmail. These capabilities allowed archers to attack troops at a distance and deliver repeated volleys before the enemy reached them.

This threatened both knights and their horses. Even if a rider survived, an injured horse could prevent him from completing a mounted charge. Longbows were also effective against less well-protected infantry, so archers became much more than a minor supporting force.

Their effectiveness depended on skilled users: drawing a longbow required considerable strength, and mastering it took long practice. Commanders therefore needed trained archers, not merely a supply of bows.

Schiltrons: infantry resisting cavalry

The Scots under William Wallace used schiltrons: tightly packed circles or squares of infantry with long pikes pointing outwards. A pike was a long spear. Together, the projecting pikes created a barrier that cavalry found difficult to penetrate.

The formation’s strength came from cooperation. An isolated infantryman was vulnerable to a mounted knight, but a disciplined group could present many pike points to an approaching charge. This increased the battlefield importance of infantry.

Schiltrons were strong defensive formations, but could also move forwards to attack. Scottish infantry used them effectively against English infantry in 1297 and against English cavalry in 1314. They were not unbeatable, however: pikes could obstruct a mounted charge without protecting their users against arrows.

Falkirk, 1298: weapons working together

The Battle of Falkirk on 22 July 1298 shows why the interaction between weapons mattered. Edward I’s English army fought William Wallace’s Scottish forces during the Scottish revolt.

Wallace’s disciplined schiltrons initially made it difficult for English cavalry to break through. Their tightly packed pikes successfully resisted the mounted attackers. However, the Scottish archers were isolated and exposed, and the schiltrons lacked effective protection against English archery.

Edward used his approximately 5,000 longbowmen against the Scottish infantry. Repeated volleys killed many of the poorly protected soldiers and opened gaps in the walls of pikes. English cavalry could then charge into those gaps, and English infantry joined the attack as Wallace’s troops fled.

The lesson was not that cavalry had become useless. Rather, archers could create an opening that cavalry and infantry then exploited. English tactics increasingly depended on different kinds of troops working together, rather than expecting a mounted charge alone to win a battle.

Gunpowder and cannon: changing siege warfare

The formula for gunpowder reached Europe from China in the thirteenth century. Gunpowder was used to fire cannon: its explosion propelled a projectile from the barrel. By about 1450, cannon were becoming a standard siege weapon.

Castles and fortified towns were important military targets. Cannon could batter their walls, making it easier for attackers to capture them and potentially shortening sieges. Older styles of fortification became increasingly vulnerable, creating pressure to change castle design.

Early cannon nevertheless had serious limitations:

• They were heavy and expensive, requiring complicated arrangements for transport.
• Their poor accuracy made large targets, such as walls, more suitable than small or moving targets.
• Their short range meant crews had to get close to the target, exposing them to attack.
• They were unreliable and could fail to fire or explode.
• They were slow to reload and needed trained personnel to operate them.

These weaknesses help explain why cannon were particularly useful against fortifications: a stationary wall was a large target that could be attacked repeatedly. Commanders still had to weigh that advantage against the cost and difficulty of bringing cannon to a siege.

Improvements made cannon more useful

During the period, developments improved cannon’s range, aim and effectiveness. Trunnions, projecting supports on the sides of a barrel, allowed it to pivot so that its elevation could be adjusted. This helped crews aim the weapon.

Specialist cannon were developed to send projectiles high over defensive walls or over longer distances. Metal cannonballs increasingly replaced stone projectiles, contributing to more effective and accurate fire.

Cannon therefore became more important despite their remaining problems. They changed not only the fighting at a siege, but also campaign planning: armies needed to transport the weapons and ammunition, while defenders had to consider whether their walls could withstand bombardment.

The mounted knight declined, but cavalry remained

By c1500, mounted knights had declined in numbers and importance. Longbows threatened riders and horses, while schiltrons showed that disciplined infantry could resist cavalry charges. The armoured nobleman on horseback was no longer the unquestioned dominant fighter.

Cavalry adapted rather than disappeared. Mounted troops became more integrated with other parts of the army and undertook specialist tasks such as scouting and patrolling. Knights also often dismounted to fight defensive battles, showing that a knight’s military role did not always require fighting on horseback.

There were wider consequences for power and command. Under the feudal system, kings had relied heavily on nobles who supplied military service in return for land. Increasing reliance on paid soldiers, including mercenaries, reduced that dependence on the nobility. This weakened the link between social rank and military command, although nobles remained important leaders.

The overall change was therefore towards more varied warfare: archery, disciplined infantry, cavalry and increasingly cannon each had strengths that commanders needed to combine.