re‐thinking the origins of the ‘irish’ hobelar

7/31/2019 Rethinking the origins of the Irish hobelar

1/24


2/24


3/24

CardiffHistoricalPapersPublishedbytheCardiffSchoolofHistoryandArchaeology,CardiffUniversity,HumanitiesBuilding,ColumRoad,CardiffCF103EU,UK

GeneralEditor:DrJessicaHorsley

CardiffEditorialAdvisoryBoardProf.GregorBenton

DrGuyBradley

DrHelenNicholson

Dr

Kevin

Passmore

ExternalEditorialAdvisoryBoardProf.NormanHousley(UniversityofLeicester)

Prof.RogerMiddleton(UniversityofBristol)

Prof.GeoffreySwain(UniversityofGlasgow)

Prof.HansvanWees(UniversityCollegeLondon)

Prof.AndyWood(UniversityofEastAnglia)

ISSN17542472(Print)

ISSN17542480(Online)

Textcopyright:theauthor

Cover:detailfromaplanofCardiffbyJohnSpeed,dated1610,usedbykind

permissionofGlamorganRecordOffice,Ref.2008/1273

Coverdesignandproduction:MrJohnMorgan

AlltitlesintheseriesareobtainablefromMrJohnMorganattheaboveaddressor

viaemail:[email protected]

Thesepublications

are

issued

simultaneously

in

an

electronic

version

at

http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/hisar/research/projectreports/historicalpapers/index.html
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


4/24

RethinkingtheoriginsoftheIrishhobelar

The hobelar is something of a sideshow inmedievalmilitary history. In the past

centurythere

have

been

only

two

major

studies

of

this

troop

type:

J.E.

Morris

MountedInfantryWarfarein1914andJ.LydonsTheHobelar:AnIrishContribu

tiontoMedievalWarfarein1954.1ThisisperhapssurprisinggiventhatMorrissaw

thehobelaras theprecursor to themounted longbowman,whileLydoncalledhim

themosteffective fightingmanof theage, referring to thehobelaras anentirely

differenttypeofmountedsoldier.2Otherhistorianshaveonlyconsideredthehobe

larinpassing,andhavebeenhappytoaccepttheconclusionsofMorrisandLydon.3

Ifhe

is

so

important

to

the

development

of

warfare

in

the

High

Middle

Ages,

why

hasnotmoreworkbeendoneonhim?Thispaperlooksagainattheconclusionsof

MorrisandLydon,andseekstoreevaluatethehobelarsoriginsandlegacy.

Theoriginsofthehobelar,sayMorrisandLydon,lieinIreland.Theirevidence

seems conclusive. The term is first seen in documents relating to the contingent

broughtbyJohndeWogan,JusticiarofIreland,toserveinEdwardIsScottishcam

paign of 1296, and over the next decade Edwards forces included an increasing

number of hobelars in the Irish contingents. The derivation of the term hobelar

stemsfromthehobbyorhobin,thesmallhorsethatthesetroopshabituallyrode,this

name in turn coming from theGaelicword obannmeaning swift.4According to

Morris andLydon, the hobelarwas unlike any cavalry present inEngland at the

1 J.E.Morris, Mounted Infantry inMedievalWarfare,Transactions of theRoyalHistoricalSociety,3rdseries,no.8(1914),pp.77102;J.Lydon,TheHobelar:AnIrishContributiontoMedievalWarfare,IrishSword,2(1954)pp.1216.

2 Morris,MountedInfantry,p.101;Lydon,TheHobelar,p.13.

3 See for example D. Nicolle, Medieval Warfare Sourcebook, vol. I (London: Arms andArmour,1996),pp.165,173,180,204,and2656;M.Prestwich,ArmiesandWarfareintheMiddleAges(NewHavenandLondon:YaleUniversityPress,1996),passim;R.Frame,ThedefenceoftheEnglishlordships,12501450,inT.BartlettandK.Jeffrey(eds),AMilitaryHistory of Ireland (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1996),p.80: thehobelarormounted lancer,who rode towarbut foughton foot.P.Contamine,War in theMiddleAges, trans.M.Jones (London: Blackwell, 1985), p. 71, calls the hobelars English andstatesthattheywereused incampaignsagainstWales.Healsodiscussesotherformsof

light cavalry, such as the Turcopoles in the Holy Land,mounted Saracen archers in

southernItalyandtheCatalanalforrats.4 Morris,MountedInfantry,pp.801;Lydon,TheHobelar,p.13.

CardiffHistoricalPapers2008/1


5/24

RobertJones2

time, being mounted on a small pony, without the caparison of the heavy

cavalrymanandequippedwithonlyamailshirt,ahelmet,asword,andaspear.He

was thereforeunsuited for shockaction, the onlydutyofcavalry.5However,he

wasan

excellent

scout

and

raider,

perfect

for

the

style

of

warfare

common

in

Ireland

andmosteffective intheScottishcampaignsofthefourteenthcentury.Thehobelar

wastohaveashortlifespan.Hisnumbersgrewrapidlyafter1296,490servinginthe

contingent from Ireland for the1304campaign,and1,000being requested (butnot

arriving)forthatof1332.Bythe1350shisnumbershaddwindled,ashewassuper

sededbythemountedlongbowmanwho,combiningthehobelarsmobilitywiththe

archersfirepower,becameanessentialpartofEnglisharmiesforthenexttwohun

dredyears.

These

then

are

Morris

and

Lydons

conclusions.

The

hobelar

comes

from

Ireland, isanew typeofwarrior inEnglishwarfare,andhelps spawn,only tobe

replacedby,themountedlongbow.

These assertionsmaybe challenged, however. The etymology of the name

hobelardoes,atfirst,seemtobecorrect.AlthoughbothFrenchandLatinwordlists

includeanumberofvariationshobeleor,hoblerandthelikeinFrenchandhobelarius,

hobelerius, hobiliarius and so forth inLatin the examplesgiven all stem from the

fourteenth century and later. Furthermore, the majority are from documents

connectedwiththedeedsorgovernmentofEdwardtheThird,whichisofcoursejust

whatonemightexpect.6However, therearecognatewords inFrenchwhichmight

besuggestiveofaContinentalderivation.There is thebirdofpreycalledahobby,

smallandswift.InFrenchthisisrenderedashobet,houbet,butalsohobereau,hobeleror

hoberwhichaccordingtoLeGrandRobertderivesfromthemedievalFlemishhobeleu,

tobudge

or

move

oneself

(sebougerinmodernFrench,buthoberoroberinthatofthe

fourteenthcenturyaccording to theDictionnairede lancienne langueFranaise).7One

5 Morris,MountedInfantry,p.78;Lydon,TheHobelar,p.13.

6 For theFrenchoccurrences of theword seeF.Godefroy (ed.),Dictionnaire de lanciennelangueFranaise,vol.V(Paris:F.Vieweg:E.Bouillon,1885),p.480,andfortheLatinseeR.E. Latham,RevisedMedieval LatinWordlist (London:OxfordUniversity Press for theBritishAcademy,1965),p.227.

7 ForthebirdseePaulRobert,LeGrandRobertdelalangueFranaise,ed.A.Rey,vol.V(Paris:DictionnairesLeRobert,1996),p.211;DictionnairedelanciennelangueFranaise,p.481.FortheverbhoberseeDictionnairedelanciennelangueFranaise,p.480.Inthelatterpartofthesixteenthcenturyhobereaualsoreferredtoacountrygentlemandepetitenoblesse,asquire



6/24

RethinkingtheoriginsoftheIrishhobelar 3

mightwellconcludethatthereisanetymologicallinkbetweentheGaelicobannand

theFrancoFlemish (h)ober,butwhere that link lies chronologically isnot clear.8 It

doeshowevermakeMorrisassertionofaGaelicorigin for the termhobelarmuch

lesscertain.

It is also the case that although some scholarshave suggested a tradition of

mounted combat in Ireland, from which Morris and Lydon claim the hobelar

evolved,thereisverylittleevidenceforthis.Suchaviewseemstohaveariseninpart

becauseofGeraldofWalesTopographiaHiberniae. Inonechapterhedescribes, the

nature, customs and character of thepeople of Ireland, including how they treat

theirbabies,theirstyleofclothing,howtheyride,andhowtheyfightinbattle.These

lasttwo

paragraphs

read:

When theyare riding, theydonotuse saddlesor leggingsor spurs.Theydriveon,and

guide theirhorsesbymeansofastickwithacrookat itsupperend,which theyhold in

theirhand.Theyusereinstoservethepurposebothofabridleandbit.Thesedonotkeep

thehorses,accustomedtofeedingongrass,fromtheirfood.

Moreover,theygonakedandunarmedintobattle.Theyregardweaponsasaburden,and

they think itbraveandhonourable to fightunarmed.Theyuse,however, three typesof

weaponshort

spears,

two

darts

(in

this

they

imitate

the

Basclenses),

and

big

axes9

Itseems thatmanyhistorianshave linked these together, tocreateajavelinarmed

horsemanridingbareback.10

inthemodernEnglishsenseoftheword,whichmightbeofinterestgiventheconclusions

below.

8 Lydonnotes theFrench term for thehobbyashobin,and thatothershavemadea linkbetweenthisandthegaelicobann,buthedoesnotcitehissources.Neitherdoesheprovethattheformerstemsdirectlyfromthelatter.Lydon,TheHobelar,p.13.

9 Itemsellisequitandononutuntur,nonocreis,noncalcaribus.Virgatantum,quammanu

gestant, insuperioripartecamerata, tamequosexcitantquamadcursus invitant.Frenis

quidemutuntur, tamchamiquamfrenivice fungentibus.Quibusetequi,semperherbis

assueti, ad pabula nequaquam impediuntur. Praeterea, nudi et inermes ad bella

procedunt.Habentenimarmaproonere; inermesverodimicareproaudaciareputantet

honere.Tribustantumutunturarmorumgeneribus;lanceisnonlongis,etjaculisbinis,in

quibus et Basclensiummorem sunt imitati; securibus quoque amplis... Giraldi Cam

brensis,TopographiaHibernica,Opera,ed.J.Dimock,vol.V(London,1867),pp.1501;GeraldofWales,TheHistoryandTopographyofIreland,trans.J.OMeara(London:Penguin,1982),p.101.

10 Seeforexample,Nicolle,MedievalWarfareSourcebook,vol.I,pp.77and128;A.Hyland,TheMedievalWarhorse(Stroud:AlanSutton,1994),p.103.



7/24

RobertJones4

Intruth,thegreaterpartoftheevidencefortheuseofhorses inbattlebythe

native Irish comes from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.Katharine Simms,

writingonGaelicwarfare,describescavalryasanimportantpartofcattleraids,but

theearliest

of

her

examples

is

from

shortly

after

1240,

nearly

acentury

beyond

the

first CambroNorman incursions; one must consider how far we are seeing the

impactof theAngloNormanmilitarycultureupon theIrish,afactorrecognised in

otherareasofWestEuropeanexpansionduringtheperiod.11Evidencepriortoandat

the time of the Conquest of 1170 does not appear to support the argument for

widespread use of light cavalry by the Gaelic Irish. Neither Gerald of Wales

ExpugnatioHibernicanortheNormanFrenchchansonTheSongofDermotandtheEarl

makeany

mention

of

mounted

Irish

troops

during

the

early

phase

of

the

Conquest

thattheybothcover.12Inpart,thismaybeascribedtothefactthatthefightingatthis

point took the form of assaults upon coastal towns or ambushes launched from

heavilywoodedcountry,neitheractionsconducivetotheuseofcavalry.Itisalsothe

casethatthesewerenotsolely,orevenprimarily,Gaelicsettlements,butconsistedof

the Ostmen, Scandinavian settlerswhose ownmilitary traditionwas verymuch

infantrybased.However,IrishsourcesarenomoreforthcomingthantheExpugnatio

or The Song. The Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh, an eleventhcentury poem recording

BrianBorumaswaragainsttheNorse,makesnomentionofcavalryincombat,even

thoughitconcludeswiththepitchedbattleofClontarf,andwhilsttheannalsdorefer

tocavalryengagementsaroundthetimeoftheAngloNormanconquest,suchentries

arerareandlackdetail,atypicalonereading:

AhostingbyConchobarUaBriain,andbythemenofMumhaintoLaighlen,andtheytook

their

hostages,

and

they

proceeded

from

thence

into

Midhe,

and

plundered

the

island

of

11 KatharineSimms, Warfare intheMedievalGaelicLordships, IrishSword,12(1975),pp.98108.ForthecrossfertilisationofmilitaryculturesseeR.Bartlett, TechniqueMilitaire

etPouvoirPolitique,9001300,Annales:conomies,Socits,Civilisations,vol.41(1980),pp.113559andTheMakingofEurope(London:AllanLane,1993),pp.6084.

12 Gerald ofWales,ExpugnatioHibernica, trans.A.B. Scott andF.X.Martin (Dublin:RoyalIrishAcademy,1978);TheSongofDermotandtheEarl,ed.andtrans.G.H.Orpen(Oxford:ClarendonPress,1892).



8/24


LochSemdidhe.Theircavalryand thecavalryofConnachtmet there,and thecavalryof

Connachtweredefeated.13

ThesparcityofevidenceintheannalsisreinforcedinJohnV.Kellehersarticleonthe

battle

of

Min

Mhr

in

1151.

In

spite

of

this

being

a

major

engagement

between

two

powerful kings, there is no evidence that either force fought predominantly from

horseback.14

Whilst there is only a little evidence for the use of horses as battlefield

weapons,this isnottosaythattheIrishmadenouseofthemwhatsoever.Thereis

evidence that the Irishnobilitywerevery interested inequestrianismand that, far

frombeing limitedto hobbies,asLydon indicates,atwelfthcenturyBookofRights

listingitems

given

by

an

over

king

to

his

vassals

includes

awide

variety

of

horses,

suchas horses for racing, steedsof the road,and horsesused tohosting.15The

bookalsomentionshorsesimportedfromScotlandandFrance,anditisknownthat

Welshhorseswereimportedforbreeding.16InChrtiendeTroyesromanceErecand

Enide,TheHaughtyKnightoftheHeathridesintothemeleonanIrishhorse,which

bearshimviolentlyforward,andChrtienreferstoitasacharger.17Thissuggests

that,tothelatetwelfthcenturymind(ErecandEnidewaswrittenaround1169),Irish

13 Cogadh Gaedhel re Gallaibh: The war of the Gaedhil with the Gaill, ed. and trans. JamesHenthornTodd (London:Longmans,Green,Reader,andDyer,1867);AnnalsofLochC,ed.and trans.WilliamM.Hennessy,vol. I (London, 1871) for theyear1130.Thereare

similarentries inthisannalfortheyears1128,1130,1236,and1256,andintheAnnalsofUlster,vol.II,ed.andtrans.B.McCarthy(Dublin,1893)fortheyears1099,1128,1131,and1247.

14 J.V.Kelleher,TheBattleofMinMhr1151,Celtica(1988),pp.1127.15 SeeM.T.Flanagan, IrishandAngloNormanWarfare inTwelfthCentury Ireland, inT.

Bartlett and K. Jeffrey (eds), A Military History of Ireland (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress,1996),p.64.Theitemslistedinthisdocumentmakethebookseemvery

likeanAngloSaxonherriot(seeN.P.Brooks,ArmsandStatusinLateSaxonEngland,in

DavidHill (ed.),Ethelred theUnready (Oxford:BritishArchaeologicalReports,1978),pp.81104).

16 N.A. James, Horses inMedievalWelsh Court Poetry and S. Davies, Horses in the

Mabinogion, in SionedDavies andNerysAnnJones (eds), TheHorse inCelticCulture(Cardiff:UniversityofWalesPress,1997),pp.90and136.

17 De lautre part, encontre lui/ point li Orguelleus de la Lande,/ et sist sor un cheval

dIrlande/quileportedegrantravine./sorlescu,devantlapointrine,/lefiertErecdetel

vertue/quedeldestrier laabatu.ChrtiendeTroyes, Erec etEnide, inLes romansdeChrtiendeTroyes,ed.MarioRoques,vol.I(Paris,1953),p.65;ChrtiendeTroyes, Erecand Enide in C.W. Carroll and W.W. Kibler (trans.), Arthurian Romances (London:Penguin,1991),p.64.



9/24

RobertJones6

horses neednotbe small andunsuitable for heavy cavalry. Indeed the evidence

wouldappear to indicate that the Irishwereusinghorsesofanumberofdifferent

conformations for a number of different purposes.Horseswere expensive, high

statusitems,

and

an

interest

in

horseflesh

is

typical

of

medieval

aristocracies.

The

Carolingians,AngloSaxons andNormans all had highly sophisticated royal stud

farms,anditwouldbesurprisingiftheIrishnobilitydidnottakeasimilarinterest

andprideinthesestatussymbols,ifperhapsonasmallerscale.18Whatweappearto

have in Ireland isnot aGaelic light cavalry culture,with themajorityofwarriors

riding intobattle, as suggestedbyNicolle,butanobility similar to that inAnglo

SaxonEnglandorWales,whereasGeraldofWalestellsus, Their leadersrideinto

battleon

swift

mettlesome

horses

which

are

bred

locally.

Most

of

the

common

people

prefertofightonfoot,inviewofthemarshyuneventerrain.Thehorsemenwilloften

dismountascircumstanceandoccasiondemand,readytofleeorattack.19Thisisnot

wherewefindthelighthorseofeitherMorrisorNicolle.20

So, ifwearenolongercertainoftheGaelicderivationofhisname,norofthe

Gaelicoriginofhisstyleofcombat,isitpossibletosuggestthatthehobelarisinfact

animportandthathecameacrosstheIrishSea,perhapswiththeCambroNorman

settlersinthetwelfthcentury?IntheExpugnatioHibernicaGeraldofWalesgiveshis

formulafortheconquestoftheIrish.21Inthischapterheoutlinestheshortcomingsof

theFrenchknightinthetypeofwarfarepresentinIreland:

thereisagreatdifferencebetweenwarfareinFranceontheonehandandinIrelandand

Walesontheother.InFrancemenchoosetheopenplainsfortheirbattles,butinIreland

andWalesrough,woodedcountry;thereheavyarmourisamarkofdistinction,hereitis

onlyaburden;therevictoryiswonbystandingfirm,herebymobility;thereknightsare

18 ForroyalstudsseeR.H.C.Davis,TheWarhorsesoftheNormans,AngloNormanStudies,10(1987),pp.6781andTheMedievalWarhorse(London:ThamesandHudson,1989),pp.3842,74,81,and137;Hyland,MedievalWarhorse,pp.623and835.

19 Equisautemcursoribusetgenerosis,quospatriagignit,nobilioresadbellaferuntur.Pars

autempopulimajor,propter terraspalustrespariter et inaequales,adpraeliapedestres

incedunt. Equites autem, pro locorum et temporum opportunitate, seu fugiendo seu

fugando facilepedites fiunt.GiraldiCambrensis, DescriptioKambriae,Opera, vol.VI(London,1868),p.181;GeraldofWales,TheJourneythroughWales/thedescriptionofWales,trans.LewisThorpe(London:Penguin,1978),p.234.

20 Nicolle,MedievalWarfareSourcebook,vol.I,pp.77and128.21 GeraldofWales,Expugnatio,pp.2449.



10/24


takenprisoner,heretheyarebeheaded;theretheyareransomed,heretheyarebutchered.

Whentwoarmiesmeetinbattleoutontheplains,thatheavyarmour,consistingofseveral

layers of linen or steel, gives soldiers excellent protection and ismostbecoming. But

equally,whenthefightingtakesplaceonlywithinarestrictedspace,oroverwoodedor

boggyground,wherethereisscopeforfootsoldiersratherthanhorsemen,lightarmouris

far superior. For light arms are quite sufficient for use against enemieswho are not

armoured.Anybattleagainsttheseiseitherwonorlostimmediately,generallyinthevery

firstencounter.Inthatsituationitisinevitablethatanenemywhoismobileandinretreat

overconfinedordifficultterraincanonlyberoutedbyanequallymobileforcepressing

hardon them,andonly lightlyarmed.Forowing to theweightof thatarmourwith its

many layers, and saddles which are high and curved back, men have difficulty in

dismounting,even

more

difficulty

in

mounting,

and

find

advancing

on

foot,

when

the

needarises,mostdifficultofall.22

This is almost exactly the same problem thatMorris and Lydon argue the

Englisharmieswere facingoncampaign inScotlandduring the latethirteenthand

earlyfourteenthcenturies.Geraldalsooffersasolutiontotheproblem.Headvocates

theuseof thatbreedofmenwhichhasbeenbroughtup intheWelshbordersand

trainedinthewarfarethatgoesoninthoseparts,becausewhenthechangingcon

ditionsofwardemandit,theyareskilledhorsemenatonemoment,atanotherquick

moving infantry.23Thesemen,ofcourse,were theGeraldineclanand theiradher

ents,menofsouthWaleswhohadbeenmajorplayers inthe initial invasionofIre

landandwereGeraldskinsmen. It ispossible toargue thatGerald is in factover

emphasisingtheroleofhisrelatives;itiscertainthatinothersectionsofhisnarrative

22 Gallica tamenmiliciamultum abHibernica, sicut et aKambricadistaredinoscitur. Ibi

namque plana petuntur, hic aspera; ibi campestria, hic silvestria; ibi arma honori, hic

oneri; ibistabilitate vincitur, hic agilitate; ibi capiunutur milites, hic decapitantur; ibi

redimuntur,hicperimuntur.Sicut igiturubimilitaresaciesdeplanoconveniunt,gravis

illaetmultiplexarmatura,atmlineascilicetquamferrea,militesegregiemunitetornat,sic

ubi solum in arto confligitur, seu loco silvestri seu palustri, ubi pedites potius quam

equites locum habent, longe levis armatura prestancior.Contra inermes namque viros,

quibussemperinprimofereimpetuvelpartaeststatimvelperditavictoria,expediciora

satisarmasufficiunt,ubifugitivametagilemperartavelasperagentemsolanecesseest

gravi quadam et armata mediocriter agilitate confundi. Cum illa nimirum armatura

multiplici,sellisquerecurvisetaltisdifficiledescenditur,difficiliusascenditur,difficillime,

cumopusest,pedibusitur.Ibid.,pp.2467.

23 In omni igitur expedicione sive Hibernica sive Kambrica, gens in Kambrie marchia

nutrita,genshostilibusparciumillarumconflictibusexercitata,competentissima[]cum

aleamartisexegerit,nuncquishabilis,nuuncpedibusagilisinventa[].Ibid.,pp.2467.



11/24

RobertJones8

theygetmorethantheirfairshareofthelimelight.However,itisalsotruethatatthe

time hewaswriting, therewere lightarmed,mobile troops serving in theWelsh

March.

Inhis

book

MilitaryInstitutionsontheWelshMarches,Suppedescribesatypeofsoldiercalledamuntator,whoisfoundintherecordsofthecountiesofShropshire

andStaffordshire in the lateeleventhand twelfthcenturies.24Thereareremarkable

similaritiesbetween this horseman armedwith a hauberk, an iron helmet, and a

lanceandthefourteenthcenturyhobelar.Suppesuggestedthatthemuntator, con

stitutedamobileforceoflightlyarmedcavalryidealforpursuitofsmallbandsof

WelshraidersonfootPatrolsofmuntatorswouldbeeminentlysuitedforlocating

partiesof

Welsh

on

foot

and

forcing

them

into

battle.25

This ismuch the same role as that performedby Robert le Brut, an Irish

hobelur[sic.],retainedtospythepassingsandhauntsoftheenemybynightandday

in July 1299, and of Geralds ideal soldier for Ireland.26 In fact their regular

employmentinthegarrisonsoftheScottishbordertownssuggestverysimilaruseto

thatrecognisedforthemuntatorbySuppe,takingintoaccountthemoreintenselevel

ofconflictontheScotsborderatthetime.MorrisrecordsthatinAugust1311inthe

castles ofBerwick,Roxburgh, Edinburgh, Linlithgow, Stirling,Perth,Dundee and

Bothwellthereweresome73hobelars,approximatelyhalfthenumberofarchersand

onesevenththenumberofheavycavalry,whichwerepresumablymenatarmsand

sergeantsinMorrisunderstandingoftheterms.27

Here, then,we have perhaps the strongest evidence for theAngloNorman

originofthehobelar.ShropshireandStaffordshirearetwocountiesfromwhichlarge

numbersof

the

first

Cambro

Norman

settlers

in

Ireland

originated.

28

It

is

not

inconceivable that thesemarcher nobles, recognising the success of the muntator

againsttheWelsh,introducedthemtoIrelandtodealwiththesimilarsituationthere.

24 F. Suppe,Military Institutions on theWelshMarches (Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer,1994),pp.6385.

25 Ibid.,p.85.

26 CalendarofDocumentsRelatingtoScotland,12721307,ed.J.Bayne(London,1881),no.1084,quotedinLydon,TheHobelar,p.14.

27 Morris,MountedInfantry,p.82.

28 Brendan Smith, Conquest and Colonisation inMedieval Ireland (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress,1999),p.38.



12/24


Then,aroundahundredyearslater,beingaskedtoserveinwarsagainstanelusive

Scottishfoe,thelords inIrelandbroughtthemuntatorbackacrosstheIrishSea,but

underanamewithaGaelicorigin:hobelar.Evenifadirectlinkwiththemuntator

cannotbe

proven,

aWelsh

link

is

suggested

by

the

etymology

of

the

old

French

verb

hober,asdiscussedabove.ItsFlemishoriginsmightsuggestalinkwiththeFlemish

settlers in theGeraldine strongholdofPembrokeshire. Ifnotactually aShropshire

muntator,hemightwellhavebeenasimilarPembrokehobeliernotamanwhowas

mounted,butonewhoshiftedhimself.

So, if thehobelarcanbe linked to themuntator,whatwere theoriginsof the

latter?UnlikeinGaelicIreland,historianshavenotsuggestedthatthenativeWelsh

foughtfrom

horseback,

and

there

is

therefore

no

suggestion

that

the

muntator is

Celticinorigin.AlthoughNicollesuggestsapossiblelinkwithpreConquestriding

men, therewould seem tobe littleevidence foraSaxonorigineither.29Geraldof

Wales horsemen are notWelsh,but rather CambroNormans,who havebecome

accustomedtoadifferentkindofterrain.

Suppe has recognised similarities between the muntator and the socalled

secondclass cavalry, or equites classis secundae,which existed under a number of

termssuchas,inLatin,loricatus,scutiferus,servientsequitans,equeslevisarmaturae,and

inFrench,serjans,damoiseau,andecuyer.30However,bothContamineandSmailagree

thatthissecondclasscavalrydifferedfromtheknightsonly intermsoftheirsocial

rankandtheexpenseandqualityoftheirequipment.31Similarly,Morrissaysthatthe

Englishheavycavalry,whetherthesuperiorknightsortheinferiorscutiferi,fought

inthesameway,thatiswiththecouchedlanceandatthecharge.32Thisisnotwhat

wehave

seen

to

be

the

primary

role

of

either

the

muntator or the hobelar, and itwould seem to suggest that they cannotbe tactically related to the nonknightly

cavalryofWesternEurope.

29 Nicolle,MedievalWarfareSourcebook.vol.I,p.114.30 Contamine,WarintheMiddleAges,pp.6970;R.C.Smail,CrusadingWarfare(Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 111. Suppe makes the same link (MilitaryInstitutions,pp.758).

31 Contamine,WarintheMiddleAges,p.70;Smail,CrusadingWarfare,p.111.32 Morris,MountedInfantry,p.78.



13/24

RobertJones10

Yet in all other respects they do appear tobe very similar. There is even a

technical,tenuriallink,fortheserviceoftwomuntatorswastheequivalenttothatof

oneknight,aswasthatoftwosergeants.33Theequipmentofthemuntatorisnotall

thatdifferent

from

the

equipment

of

the

knightly

cavalry

of

the

late

eleventh

and

twelfthcenturiesamailshirt,ahelmet,ashield,andalanceandtheseknightly

cavalrywere capable ofperforming a charge at lancepoint.Thedifferent sizes of

horsemightbe a factor indistinguishingbetween the two,but I suspect that the

smallsizeofthemuntatorandhobelarsmountshasbeenoverplayed.Warhorsesof

thetwelfthcenturywerearoundfourteenorfifteenhandshigh,andponiesneednot

necessarilybesmallerthanthis;thedistinctionisoneofconformation(thatistosay,

bonestructure,

musculature,

gait

and

the

like)

rather

than

height.34

Bythethirteenthcenturythedisparityinequipmentbetweenthemuntatorand

militeshadgrownsignificantly,thelatternowarmouredcappiedinmail,sporting

armand legprotectionsof cuir bouillior ironplates,andwearing fullheadhelms

rather than iron caps.35 However the equipment of the classis secundae cavalry

remainsverysimilartothatofthemuntator.

Thesamecannotbesaidofthehobelar.Inthefourteenthcenturythedifference

between the hobelar and the manatarms is significant. The latter wore large

amountsofplatearmour.Asergeantmightnotbesowellequipped,butbythetime

the hobelar arrived on the scene, even hewouldbewearing some form of plate

defence. The difference between the hobelar and the fourteenthcentury second

classcavalryisalsoindicatedbythefactthat,underEdwardI,thehobelarwaspaid

6dperday,halfthatofasergeant(1shilling),andaquarterofthatoftheknight(2

shillings).36

This

may

suggest

adisparity

in

the

equipment

of

the

hobelar

and

the

sergeant,butoneshouldnotignorethefactthatpayscaleswerealsosetaccordingto

socialrank,so inpart thedifferencewillhavebeenoneof breeding thehobelar

comingfromalowersocialclasstheneitherthesergeantortheknight.

33 Prestwich,ArmiesandWarfare,p.65.34 SeeHyland,MedievalWarhorse,pp.12.35 Foravisualdepictionofthethirteenthcenturyknightseethevividdepictionsofbattlein

theMorganCrusaderBible(formerlyknownastheMaciejowskiBible),publishedasOldTestamentMiniatures:AMedievalPicturebook(NewYork:G.Braziller,1969).

36 Prestwich,ArmiesandWarfare,p.84.



14/24


Having argued that thehobelar isvery similar to themuntator, and that the

muntatoriseffectivelyasergeant,itnowseemsthatthehobelarisnottheequivalent

ofasergeant.Howcanoneexplainthisapparentdiscrepancy?Iwouldsuggestthat

themuntatorgoestoIrelandastheequivalentofthesergeant,butthehobelarcomes

back as the sergeants inferiorbecause of differences in the development of the

military cultures of Ireland and the British mainland between the twelfth and

fourteenthcenturies.OnceinIreland,theEnglishtroopswereinvolvedinadifferent

formofwarfare,asdescribedinthewritingsofGeraldofWalesquotedabove.There

isaonehundredandtwentysevenyeargapbetweenStrongbowsarrivalIrelandin

1171 and the first mention of the hobelar in 1298. During that time military

technologydid

not

stand

still.

In

England

and

continental

Europe

the

cavalry

became

moreheavily armoured as it faced increasednumbers ofbows and crossbows. In

Ireland the intensity of warfare was lower, thebow and crossbowwere not so

prevalent, and the nature of the terrainmeant that heavy armour could actually

prove an encumbrance. Therewas therefore no tactical or technological impetus

amongstthecavalryoftheAngloIrishlordstoutilisetheheavyarmourfashionable

on thecontinent.Therewas,however,a tacticalbenefit tohaving lightlyequipped

horsemenabletopursuetheraidingpartiesthatwereendemic.Thisgoessomeway

toexplainingthestatutepassedinIrelandin1296,whichorderedthatallthosewith

landworth twenty pounds a yearwere to have abarded horse, and those less

wealthyweretoownahobbyorotherunarmouredmount.Ataboutthesametime

a scheduledrawnup for the lordofTrim shows thatmenworthas littleas three

pounds,sixshillingsandeightpencewereexpectedtohaveahorse,whilstinEng

landit

was

only

arequirement

for

those

valued

at

fifteen

pounds

or

more.

37

This

mightindicatethatthefinancialstatusoftheIrishgentrywasinsufficienttoprovide

the requisitenumberofmenatarms,and thatanextraqualificationhad tobecre

atedtomakeuptheshortfall.

WhenthehobelarcrossedfromtheIrishmilitarycultureintothatofcontinental

EuropetojoinEdwardIsScottishcampaigns,hewasfarmorelightlyequippedthan

anyotherhorseman,andpossibly ina lowersocialbracket,and thereforedue less

37 Frame,DefenceoftheEnglishlordships,p.80.



15/24

RobertJones12

pay.Thehobelar is, touse an evolutionary analogy, adivergentbranch,deriving

fromthesamesecondclasscavalryrootasthesergeant,butthenadaptingforadif

ferentmilitaryenvironment.

Whydid

Morris

fail

to

see

the

link

between

the

hobelar

and

the

second

class

cavalry?Inparthemayhavebeenblindedbytheterminology,seeingdifferentterms

asdenotinganew typeofsoldier.This impressionwouldhavebeenreinforcedby

the fact thatthehobelarcameoutof Ireland traditionallyseenashavinganalien

military culture and bore a name of apparently Gaelic origin. Lydons work,

publishedinajournalonIrishmilitaryhistoryandentitledanIrishcontributionto

medievalwarfare,wasalmostboundtofollowthisideaofthehobelarasnewand

indigenousto

Ireland.

Subsequent

historians

also

failed

to

question

Morris

conclusions, in part because of the problems of translating medieval military

terminology, as StephenMorillo has discussed in his article Milites,Knights and

Samurai: Military terminology, comparative history, and the problem of

translation.38Militaryterms,orsoldierwordsasMorillocallsthem,havedifferent

emphasesand connotationsdependingon thevectorofmeaningbeingused,be it

functional,organisationalorsocial.Thus,thesamewordcanmeandiversethingsin

documents of different purposes or periods.39 Themisinterpretation ofmedieval

terms that are still in use today, or the use of modern soldierwords and

categorisations in theprocess of translation can cause evengreaterproblems.The

latterisinevitable,sincemedievalmilitaryhistoryisaproductofthemilitaryculture

of nineteenthcenturyWesternEurope.Themodern study ofmilitary historywas

borninthestaffcollegesoftheEuropeanpowersinthemidnineteenthcentury,with

theaim

of

teaching

cadet

officers

the

fundamental

and

eternal

laws

of

war.

In

order

todo this,battlesandcampaigns throughouthistorywereselectedtobecompared

38 S.Morillo,Milites,KnightsandSamurai:Militaryterminology,comparativehistory,andthe problem of translation, in R.Abels and B. Bachrach (eds), TheNormans and theirAdversariesatWar(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,2001),pp.16784.

39 The terminology used for those heavy cavalrywhowere not knights changed in the

courseoftime;underEdwardI,therewerestillsergeantsintheroyalhousehold,butmost

nonknightly cavalrymenwere termed squires (scutiferi) or valets (valetti), termswhichmight be synonymous. Later all might simply be called menatarms (armigeri). M.Prestwich,MilesinArmisStrenuus:TheKnightatWar,TransactionsoftheRoyalHistoricalSociety,6thseries,no.5(1995),p.202.



16/24


andcontrastedwitheachother.Theonlywayinwhichconclusionscouldbedrawn

fromtheseexampleswasifacommonframeofreferencewasimposed.Becausethe

lessonslearnedhadtobeappliedonthecontemporarybattlefield,themostsensible

frameworkto

use

was

that

of

the

modern

way

of

warfare;

it

was

familiar

and

there

foreeasilycomprehended.ButthemilitarycultureofnineteenthcenturyEuropewas

not the same as that ofmedieval Europe.Morris recognised this,warning of the

dangersofusingmoderndefinitionsofheavyandlightcavalrywhendealingwith

medievalhorsemen.Onecannotavoidusingmodernphrases,butoneneednotthink

oflifeguardswhentalkingofheavy,orofhussarswhentalkingoflightcavalryof

themiddle ages;medieval mounted infantrywere not like seventeenthcentury

dragoons,nor

were

they

companies

of

line

battalions

put

on

horseback

for

special

purposes.40Yetthemilitarycultureofthenineteenthcenturyisstillsuperimposedon

thatoftheMiddleAges.

Innineteenthcenturymilitaryculture,troopsareorganisedbytypes,witheach

heavycavalry,lightcavalry,dragoons,lineinfantry,lightinfantry,grenadiers,foot

artillery,horseartilleryetceteraadnauseumhavingastrictlydefinedrolewithinthe

prosecutionofwar,andeachsoldier receivingspecificequipmentand trainingde

signed solely to fulfil that role. Itwouldbevery rare forone typeof soldier tobe

foundperforming the tasksofanother (say, forexampleheavycavalry fightingon

footas infantry),anduncommon for troops tomove fromonebranchofservice to

another,evenasofficers.Themedievalmilitaryculturedidnothavethesestrictdefi

nitions.AlthoughvariousAssizes ofArms and similardocuments outlinewhat a

particular individual shouldhave in terms ofmilitary equipment, there isno evi

denceto

suggest

that

this

placed

any

limit

upon

the

functions

he

could

be

asked

to

performor theweaponsandarmourhemightown.TheAssizeofArmswasnota

sumptuarylawseekingtorestricttheequipmentthatanindividualshouldhave,but

ameansofensuringaminimumlevelofreadiness.Thus,whenMorrisunderstands

the hobelar as a new troop type, and sees that the only duty of cavalrywas to

charge, not to scout, he is interpreting the evidence according to the nineteenth

40 Morris,MountedInfantry,p.78.



17/24

RobertJones14

centurymilitary culture still so familiar in the armed forces of the twentieth cen

tury.41

Morerecentwritershavefallenintothesametrap.InherarticleArmourand

MilitaryDress

in

Thirteenth

and

Early

Fourteenth

Century

England,

which

describesanentry in theaccountsof the royalwardrobe forJuly1297,Frdrique

Lachaudcites thecaseofone GeoffreydeCreal,amounted sergeantof theking,

who received anaketon,agambeson,apairofhorse trappers,apairofcuisses,a

haubergeon,abascinet,achapeldefer,agorger,apairofglovesofplate,acrossbow,a

saddle and a targe forhis services in France.42 She goes on to say thatdeCreal,

clearly foughtasheavycavalry,presumablybecauseof theevidenceof theheavy

armourcuisses,bascinet,gorger,etceteraandhorse trappers.43 If this is thecase,

whatarewetomakeoftheinclusionofthecrossbowandtarge?Thisisnot,afterall,

theequipmentoneexpectstobecarriedbyaheavycavalryman,unlessoneaccepts

that roleswerenotas rigidlydefinedashasbeenassumed.PerhapsdeCrealwas

beingequippedforarangeofchallengeshemightfaceinthecourseofhismilitary

duties,whichcouldincludenotonlyserviceonhorsebackasheavycavalrybutalso

onfootasacrossbowman.Thewriterofwhatisstillconsideredtobetheforemost

workonthewarfareoftheCrusades,R.C.Smail,wrote:

the term levisarmaturameantonlythat theywerenotsowellequippedas thewealthier

milites; itdidnotmeanthattheywerenormallyusedas light,andtheknightsasheavy,

cavalry,withallthetacticalimplicationswhichsuchacontrastwouldimplytoamodern

reader.Occasionally the fact that theywere lightly equippedwas put to some special

military purpose; they were sent as speculatores on reconnaissance, or they were

employed as skirmishers.Usually, however, they are not associated in the textswith

specializedfunctions,andtheyappeartohavegoneintoactionwiththeknights.44

Here again the link ismadebetween the eques classis secundae and themilites and

Smail, like Morris, warns against using modern definitions of heavy and light

cavalry.However,he thengoeson toassign specialmilitarypurposes to the levis

41 Ibid.

42 F. Lachaud, Armour and military dress in thirteenth and early fourteenthcentury

England,inM.Strickland(ed.),Armies,ChivalryandWarfareinMedievalBritainandFrance(Stamford:PaulWatkins,1998),p.352.

43 Ibid.,p.353.

44 Smail,CrusadingWarfare,p.111.



18/24


armaturathatarewhollycongruentwiththe modernrolesof lightcavalry.Infact,

actingasscoutsorskirmishersmaynothavebeenconsideredaspecialised taskby

medieval warriors. Those of the knightly class, and even some of the highest

aristocracywere

quite

prepared

to

perform

just

such

functions.

After

landing

at

PevenseyatthestartoftheHastingscampaign,Williamwasquicktoinvestigatethe

regionand its inhabitantswithacompanyofnomore than twentyfiveknights.45

DuringthesiegeofAlenon,inthewaragainstGeoffreyMartel,nolessamanthan

William FitzOsbern, the steward of Normandy,was sent ahead of the army on

reconnaissance.46TheevidenceisabundantlyclearthatamongstEnglishknighthood

inthetwelfthcenturyitwasnotonlyacceptable,butalsotosomeextentdesirableto

fightdismounted.

During

each

of

the

six

main

battles

that

took

place

during

the

AngloNorman period, that is to say those of Tinchebrai, Alenon, Brmule,

Bourgthroulde, Northallerton and Lincoln, some or all of the AngloNorman

knightsdismountedandfoughtonfoot.47Occasionallytheknightlyclassesofother

cultureswerealsowillingtodismount.AtthebattleofCourtraibetweentheFrench

and Flemish,Guy ofNamur andWilliam ofJlich sent their horses away, and

armedliketherebels,withthevisorlesshelmetofthecommunalsoldiers,theytook

theirplaceinthefrontrank,graspingapikeorgoedendag.48

That theknightwasprepared toactas speculator reinforces thepoint that the

nineteenthcentury concept of troopsbeing particularly equipped for one role is

anachronisticwhen applied to theMiddle Ages.Justbecause awarrior had the

45 Guillelmusuerocumuigintiquinque,nonamplismilitumcomitatupromptusipselocaet

incolasexplorauit.WilliamofPoitiers,GestaGuillelmiDucis,ed.andtrans.R.H.C.Davisand M. Chibnall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), pp. 11415. Ever the sycophantic

biographer,WilliamofPoitiersnotes that theDukes actionswereunusualboth inhis

own time and classically,when even PompeyMagnus andJuliusCaesarwould send

exploratores to scout rather than exposing themselves to personal danger, separated

fromthewholearmy.

46 Ibid.,pp.267.

47 J.Bradbury,TheMedievalArcher (Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,1985),pp.3957;S.Morillo,WarfareUndertheAngloNormanKings(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,1994),pp.28and53.

48 J.F.Verbruggen,TheArtofWarfareinWesternEurope,trans.S.WillardandR.W.Southern(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,1997),p.192;J.F.Verbruggen,TheBattleoftheGoldenSpurs:Courtrai,11thJuly1302,ed.K.DeVries,trans.D.R.Ferguson(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,2002),p.199.Theremaybe some specialpleadinghereon thepartof the

DutchVerbruggentoseethetwoFlemishleadersasbeingparticularlyegalitarian.



19/24

RobertJones16

equipmentexpectedofaknight,itdoesnotmeanthatheworeoruseditall.InJune

of1189,WilliamMarshalandfourcompanionsweresentbyKingHenryIItorecon

noitretheadvanceofKingPhilipofFranceandCountRichardonLeMans.Theydid

so,avoiding

skirmishes

with

the

enemy

forces

because

of

their

greater

mobility

re

sulting from not wearing their hauberks. The following morning, when Henry

himselfwentout toscout theenemypositions,herefused to takeWilliambecause

thelatterwasalreadyfullyarmoured.49

MorrisandLydonsassertionsabout thehobelarcanbechallenged therefore

onanumberofgrounds:heneednothavebeenpartofanativeIrishmilitaryculture;

hisnameneednot stem from aGaelicword;his role isnotuniqueornew in the

fourteenthcentury,

having

been

performed

not

only

by

the

muntatoron theWelsh

March in the eleventh and twelfthbut also,when circumstancesdemanded it,by

those heavy cavalrymen theknightandmenatarms.Their final claim that the

hobelarhadalastingeffectontheEnglishconductofwarinthelatefourteenthand

fifteenthcenturiesmustalsobeexaminedmoreclosely.

MorrisandLydonboth see thehobelarasbeinganancestorof themounted

longbowman,born out of the epiphany thatputting a lightly equippedman on a

horsemadehimmoremanoeuvrableandeffective.Farfrombeinganinnovationin

thefourteenthcentury,mountedarchers(thatistosaymenarmedwithabowwho

rodetobattle,asopposedtohorsearchers,menwhoshotbowsfromhorseback)are

advocated as a vital part ofMarcherwarfareby Gerald ofWales in the twelfth

century,andrecordedinsomenumbersinhischronicleoftheconquestofIreland.50

Theyalsoappearregularly, ifnotingreatnumbers,throughouttheforcesraisedin

thethirteenth

century.

51

The

novelty

of

the

mounted

longbowman,

as

with

that

of

the

hobelar,liesnotinthecombinationofarchersorlightlyarmedmenwithhorses,but

in the increasingnumbersof the same in the field forces of royal campaigns.The

innovationisnottechnological,buttactical,andtheresultofsocialandbureaucratic

changesduringthelatterpartofthefourteenthcenturyapointwidelyrecognised

49 TheHistoryofWilliamMarshal,ed.A.J.Holden,trans.S.Gregory,vol.I(London,2002),pp.4267and4325.

50 GeraldofWales,Expugnatio,passim.ThemountedarchersaregiventhedistinctiveLatintermofarcarii,whilstthoseonfootaresagitariipedestris.

51 Prestwich,ArmiesandWarfare,pp.1345.



20/24


forthelongbowmanperse,butnot,itappearswhenhewasmounted,andcertainly

notforthehobelar.

ThisarticlehassoughttoreevaluateMorrisconclusionsaboutthehobelar.It

hasargued

that

far

from

being

aGaelic

Irish

warrior

arriving

in

mainland

Britain

and

fighting inanewway,hisoriginsmay lie in theWelshMarchesorPembrokeshire

where,under theguiseof themuntatoror similar,hewasjustanother formof the

equites classis secundae, that group of nonknightly cavalry that included the ser

geants.Thiswarriorwasthenreimported intotheBritishmainlandunderthenew

nameof hobelar.Havingadapted to thedifferentcircumstancesofwarfare in Ire

land, however,his equipmentwas lighter than that of the fourteenthcentury ser

geantsand

therefore

considered

differently

with

regard

to

matters

such

as

pay.

It

suggests that thereasonMorrisbelievedhim tobesomethingnewwasbecausehe

wasworkingwithinaframeworkofnineteenthcenturymilitarycultureandvalues

thatservedtodistorthisviewofthemedievalsituation.Thisframeworkenduresto

day,primarilybecausethesoldierwordsofthenineteenthandtwentiethcenturies

form a convenient shorthand for describing troop types. Unfortunately the rigid

definitionoftrooptypesthatformspartofnineteenthcenturymilitaryculturedoes

notallow for the flexibilityof roleandequipment thatwere found inmedievalar

miesandthuscanleadtoamisrepresentationofmedievalwarfare.Farfrombeinga

sideshowofmedievalmilitaryhistory,thehobelarshouldnowperhapstakecentre

stage,asamicrocosmofthemajorpitfallsinthisfieldofstudy.



21/24

RobertJones18

Bibliography

PrimarysourcesAnnalsofLochC,ed.andtrans.W.M.Hennessy,vol.I(London,1871)

AnnalsofUlster,ed.andtrans.B.McCarthy,vol.II(Dublin,1893)ChrtiendeTroyes, ErecetEnide,LesromansdeChrtiendeTroyes,ed.M.Roques,

vol.I(Paris,1953)

ChrtiendeTroyes, ErecandEnide,inC.W.CarrollandW.Kibler(trans.),Arthu

rianRomances(London:Penguin,1991),pp.37122

CogadhGaedhelreGallaibh:ThewaroftheGaedhilwiththeGaill,ed.andtrans.J.Hen

thornTodd(London:Longmans,Green,Reader,andDyer,1867)

Geraldof

Wales,

Expugnatio Hibernica, trans.A.B. Scott and F.X.Martin (Dublin:

RoyalIrishAcademy,1978)

Gerald of Wales, TheJourney through Wales/the description of Wales, trans. Lewis

Thorpe(London:Penguin,1978)

Gerald ofWales,TheHistory andTopography of Ireland, trans.J.OMeara (London:

Penguin,1982)

Gerald ofWales, TopographiaHibernica,Opera, ed.J.Dimock, vol.V (London,

1867)

TheHistory ofWilliamMarshal, ed.A.J.Holden, trans. S.Gregory, 3 vols (London:

AngloNormanTextSociety,20026)

OldTestamentMiniatures:aMedievalPicturebook(NewYork:G.Braziller,1969)

TheSongofDermotandtheEarl,ed.andtrans.G.H.Orpen(Oxford:ClarendonPress,

1892)

Williamof

Poitiers,

GestaGuillelmiDucis,ed.andtrans.R.H.C.DavisandM.Chibnall(Oxford:ClarendonPress,1998)

SecondarysourcesBartlett,R., TechniqueMilitaireetPouvoirPolitique,9001300,Annales:conomies,

Socits,Civilisations,vol.41(1980),pp.113559

Bartlett,R.,TheMakingofEurope(London:AllenLane,1993)

Bradbury,J.,

TheMedievalArcher(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,1985)



22/24


Brooks,N.P., ArmsandStatus inLateSaxonEngland, inD.Hill (ed.),Ethelred the

Unready(Oxford:BritishArchaeologicalReports,1978),pp.81103

Contamine,P.,WarintheMiddleAges,trans.M.Jones(London:Blackwell,1985)

Davies,S.,

Horses

in

the

Mabinogion,

in

S.

Davies

and

N.A.

Jones

(eds),

TheHorseinCelticCulture(Cardiff:UniversityofWalesPress,1997),pp.12140

Davis,R.H.C.,TheWarhorsesoftheNormans,AngloNormanStudies,10(1987),pp.

6781

Davis,R.H.C.,TheMedievalWarhorse(London:ThamesandHudson,1989)

Flanagan,M.T.,IrishandAngloNormanWarfareinTwelfthCenturyIreland,inT.

Bartlett and K. Jeffrey (eds), A Military History of Ireland (Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversity

Press,

1996),

pp.

5275

Frame,R., Thedefence of theEnglish lordships, 12501450, inT.Bartlett andK.

Jeffrey (eds),AMilitaryHistory of Ireland (Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity

Press,1996),pp.7698

Godefroy,F.(ed.),DictionnairedelanciennelangueFranaise,vol.V(Paris:F.Vieweg:

E.Bouillon,1885)

Hyland,A.,TheMedievalWarhorse(Stroud:AlanSutton,1994)

James,N.A., HorsesinMedievalWelshCourtPoetry,inTheHorse inCelticCulture

(Cardiff:UniversityofWalesPress,1997),pp.82101

Kelleher,JohnV.,TheBattleofMinMhr1151,Celtica(1988),pp.1127

Lachaud,F., Armourandmilitarydressinthirteenth andearlyfourteenthcentury

England,inM.Strickland(ed.),Armies,ChivalryandWarfareinMedievalBritain

andFrance(Stamford:PaulWatkins,1998),pp.34469

Latham,R.E.,

RevisedMedievalLatinWordlist (London:OxfordUniversityPress fortheBritishAcademy,1965)

Lydon,J., TheHobelar:An IrishContribution toMedievalWarfare, IrishSword,2

(1954),pp.1216

Morillo,S.,WarfareUndertheAngloNormanKings(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,

1994)

Morillo,S.,Milites,KnightsandSamurai:Militaryterminology,comparativehistory,

andthe

problem

of

translation,

in

R.

Abels

and

B.

Bachrach

(eds),

TheNormans



23/24

RobertJones20

andTheirAdversariesatWar(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,2001),pp.167

84

Morris,J.E.,MountedInfantryinMedievalWarfare,TransactionsoftheRoyalHistori

calSociety,3rdseries,no.8(1914),pp.77102Nicolle,David,MedievalWarfareSourcebook,vol.I(London:ArmsandArmour,1996)

Nicolle,David,Arms andArmour of the Crusading Era 10501350, vol. I (London:

Greenhill,1999)

Prestwich,M., MilesinArmisStrenuus:TheKnightatWar,TransactionsoftheRoyal

HistoricalSociety,6thseries,no.5(1995),pp.20120

Prestwich,M.,ArmiesandWarfareintheMiddleAges(NewHavenandLondon:Yale

UniversityPress,

1996)

Robert,Paul,LeGrandRobertdelalangueFranaise,ed.A.Rey,vol.V(Paris:Diction

nairesleRobert,1996)

Simms,Katharine,WarfareintheMedievalGaelicLordships,IrishSword,12(1975),

pp.98108

Shurlock,M.,Arthurian andKnightlyArtfrom theMiddleAges (Lampeter:Llanerch

Enterprises,1989)

Smail,R.C.,CrusadingWarfare(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1989)

Smith,Brendan,ConquestandColonisationinMedievalIreland(Cambridge:Cambridge

UniverstyPress,1999)

Strickland,M.,WarandChivalry(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1996)

Suppe, F., Military Institutions on the Welsh Marches (Woodbridge: Boydell and

Brewer,1994)

Verbruggen,J.F.,

TheArt ofWarfare inWestern Europe, trans. S.Willard andR.W.Southern(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,1997)

Verbruggen,J.F.,TheBattleoftheGoldenSpurs:Courtrai,11thJuly1302,ed.K.DeVries,

trans.D.R.Ferguson(Woodbridge:BoydellandBrewer,2002)



24/24

CardiffHistoricalPaperspublishedin2007

1. ScottNewton,Thetwosterlingcrisesof1964andthedecisionnottodevalue,45pp.

2. VictorGavn,FranceandtheKafkaesquepoliticsoftheEuropeanDefenceCommunity,16pp.

3. PeterEdbury,BritishHistoriographyontheCrusadesandMilitaryOrders:fromBarkerandSmailtocontemporaryhistorians,22pp.

4. N.C.Fleming,Aristocraticappeasement:LordLondonderry,NaziGermanyandthepromotionofAngloGermanmisunderstanding,36pp.

5. ShaneORourke,Trialrun:thedeportationoftheTerekCossacks,1920,30pp.

6. BillAird,Deathandremembrance:theDurhamLiberVitae,34pp.7. PatHudson,Thelimitsofwool,40pp.8. JohnMullan,Mortality,gender,andtheplagueof13612ontheestateofthe

bishopofWinchester,41pp.

9. LouisRawlings,HannibaltheCannibal?PolybiusonBarcidatrocities,30pp.