Great Stirrup Controversy

Last updated February 29, 2024

The Great Stirrup Controversy is the academic debate about the Stirrup Thesis, the theory that feudalism in Europe developed largely as a result of the introduction of the stirrup to cavalry ^[1]^[2] in the 8th century AD. It relates to the hypothesis suggested by Lynn Townsend White Jr. in his 1962 book, Medieval Technology and Social Change.^[3] White believed that the stirrup enabled heavy cavalry and shock combat, which in turn prompted the Carolingian dynasty of the 8th and 9th centuries to organize its territory into a vassalage system, rewarding mounted warriors with land grants for their service.

White's book has proved very influential, but others have accused him of speculation, oversimplification, and ignoring contradictory evidence on the subject. Scholars have debated whether the stirrup actually provided the impetus for this social change, or whether the rise of heavy cavalry resulted from political changes in Medieval Europe.

White's hypothesis

The earliest forms of the stirrup are found in China.^[4] White traces the transmission of the stirrup to Europe as an example of the diffusion of technology.^[5]^: 15 The research of the 19th century German historian Heinrich Brunner claimed that the switch to mounted warfare occurred after the Battle of Tours with a Saracen army in 732. Brunner pointed out that Pepin the Short began demanding horses as tribute from the Saxons in 758, citing this as evidence of an increasingly cavalry-dependent army.^[5]^: 3 Brunner also claimed that the Muslim incursion into Europe prompted Charles Martel to confiscate church lands to support cavalry.^[5]^: 5

White used linguistic changes and evidence of a drastic change in weapons to support his claim that this change to mounted shock combat occurred in the early 8th century.^[5]^: 27 He claimed that the francisca (Frankish throwing ax) was replaced by longswords and lances — weapons designed to be used from horseback. The lance, White says, is the strongest evidence that the Franks had adopted the stirrup by this time.^[5]^: 28 He further claimed: "The feudal class of the European Middle Ages existed to be armed horsemen, cavaliers fighting in a particular manner which was made possible by the stirrup."^[5]^: 28 He believed that the stirrup had enabled the knight to exist.

Criticisms of White's ideas

Despite the great influence of White's book, his ideas of technological determinism were met with criticism in the following decades. It is agreed that cavalry replaced infantry in Carolingian France as the preferred mode of combat around the same time that feudalism emerged in that area, but whether this shift to cavalry was caused by the introduction of the stirrup is a contentious issue among historians. It has been asserted that armored cavalry were used successfully without stirrups before their introduction, and that the transition to cavalry was not a result of new technologies. The first fully armoured cataphracts appeared in the third century BC, almost 1000 years before the Carolingian dynasty. White argued that they were "essentially armoured bowmen."^[5]^: 9

Sawyer and Hilton's critique

In an April 1963 review of White's book, the scholars Peter Sawyer, of the University of Birmingham, and R. H. Hilton, were quick to point out that "the most serious weakness in this argument is that the introduction of the stirrup is not in itself an adequate explanation for any changes that may have occurred. The stirrup made new methods possible, not inevitable ... the stirrup cannot alone explain the changes that it made possible."^[6] Sawyer and Hilton further point out that the scant archaeological evidence makes it difficult to determine when the stirrup reached the Franks, as they were already Christian by the 7th century and had largely abandoned elaborate burials and grave goods.^[6]^: 93 They also stated White's footnotes often contradict his thesis and evidence.

Stephen Morillo's argument

Military historian Stephen Morillo, of Wabash College, offered a different explanation for the rise of cavalry in medieval warfare: that of a lack of centralized government. Morillo contends that cavalry-dependent militaries are common in societies that do not have strong central governments, and cites Medieval Japan and China as analogous examples to 8th century Europe. A central government, he explains, is crucial to the development of a highly trained infantry, but cavalry can be maintained, however loosely, by an already horse-owning noble class. He writes: "Rural warrior elites were in fact a common feature of many traditional civilizations. Sons of such classes were raised to the military lifestyle, trained in small groups built from the social connections among the class, and exercised military force in the interest of maintaining their own position in the hierarchy of power."^[7]^: 52 Furthermore, Morillo examines cases of Frankish warriors fighting on foot—and defeating mounted knights in the process. Even White quoted Brunner as admitting that a good infantry could break a cavalry charge if its soldiers held their ranks.^[5]^: 5 Morillo used the example of the familia regis , an elite Anglo-Norman infantry unit,^{[ clarification needed ]} as further evidence that a strong central government was the key to developing a strong infantry. Therefore, Morillo considers feudalism a political construct rather than a military one.

Objections from archaeology and experiment

It has also been asserted by some, including Richard Alvarez,^[8] that modern reenactment and experimental archaeology have shown that the stirrup provides very little benefit for a mounted lancer, and a cantled saddle has a greater effect. His practical research showed that the human body does not meld with the weight of the horse to deliver the impact, as people unfamiliar with mounted combat believe. White noted the importance of the prior emergence of the saddle, but argued, "The stirrup made possible—although it did not demand—a vastly more effective mode of attack" (than a blow "delivered with the strength of shoulder and biceps"): "now the rider could lay his lance at rest, held between the upper arm and the body, and make at his foe, delivering the blow not with his muscles but with the combined weight of himself and his charging stallion."^[5]^{: 1–2, 7}

Notes

↑ Farndon, John (2010). "48 The Stirrup". The World's Greatest Idea: The Fifty Greatest Ideas that have changed Humanity. London: Icon Books Ltd. ISBN 9781848312487 . Retrieved 24 January 2019. The most attention-grabbing bit of White's book [...] was the idea that it was the introduction of the stirrup that led to the development of the feudal system.
↑ Stix, Gary. "The Stirrup". Scientific American 301 (3) p.78
↑ White, Lynn Townsend (1962). "1: Stirrup, Mounted Shock Combat, Feudalism, and Chivalry". Medieval Technology and Social Change. Galaxy book, ISSN 0433-1133. Vol. 163. London: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195002669 . Retrieved 24 January 2019.
↑ Dien (1986).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 White, Jr., Lynn (1964). Medieval technology and social change. London: Oxford University Press.
1 2 Sawyer, P.H.; Hilton, R.H. (April 1963). "Technical Determinism: The Stirrup and the Plough". Past & Present. Oxford University Press. 24 (24): 90–100. doi:10.1093/past/24.1.90. JSTOR 649846.
↑ Morillo, Stephen (1999). "The "Age Of Cavalry" Revisited". In Donald J. Kagay; L. J. Andrew Villalon (eds.). The circle of war in the Middle Ages : essays on medieval military and naval history. Vol. 6. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK [u.a.]: Boydell & Brewer. pp. 45–58. ISBN 9780851156453 . Retrieved May 15, 2014.
↑ Alvarez, Richard (2006). "Saddle, Lance and Stirrup: An Examination of the Mechanics of Shock Combat and the Development of Shock Tactics". SeanPoage.com.

Related Research Articles

Armour or armor is a covering used to protect an object, individual, or vehicle from physical injury or damage, especially direct contact weapons or projectiles during combat, or from a potentially dangerous environment or activity. Personal armour is used to protect soldiers and war animals. Vehicle armour is used on warships, armoured fighting vehicles, and some combat aircraft, mostly ground attack aircraft.

Historically, cavalry are soldiers or warriors who fight mounted on horseback. Cavalry were the most mobile of the combat arms, operating as light cavalry in the roles of reconnaissance, screening, and skirmishing in many armies, or as heavy cavalry for decisive shock attacks in other armies. An individual soldier in the cavalry is known by a number of designations depending on era and tactics, such as a cavalryman, horseman, trooper, cataphract, knight, drabant, hussar, uhlan, mamluk, cuirassier, lancer, dragoon, or horse archer. The designation of cavalry was not usually given to any military forces that used other animals for mounts, such as camels or elephants. Infantry who moved on horseback, but dismounted to fight on foot, were known in the early 17th to the early 18th century as dragoons, a class of mounted infantry which in most armies later evolved into standard cavalry while retaining their historic designation.

A lance is a long thrusting spear designed to be used by a mounted warrior or cavalry soldier (lancer). In ancient and medieval warfare, it evolved into the leading weapon in cavalry charges, and was unsuited for throwing or for repeated thrusting, unlike similar weapons of the javelin and pike family typically used by infantry. Lances were often equipped with a vamplate, a small circular plate to prevent the hand sliding up the shaft upon impact, and beginning in the late 14th century, they were used in conjunction with a lance rest attached to the breastplate. Though best known as a military and sporting weapon carried by European knights and men-at-arms, the use of lances was widespread throughout Eastern Asia, the Middle East, and Northern Africa wherever suitable mounts were available. Lancers of the medieval period also carried secondary weapons such as swords, battle axes, war hammers, maces and daggers for use in hand-to-hand combat, since the lance was often a one-use-per-engagement weapon; assuming the lance survived the initial impact without breaking, it was often too long, heavy, and slow to be effective against opponents in a melee.

Military tactics encompasses the art of organizing and employing fighting forces on or near the battlefield. They involve the application of four battlefield functions which are closely related – kinetic or firepower, mobility, protection or security, and shock action. Tactics are a separate function from command and control and logistics. In contemporary military science, tactics are the lowest of three levels of warfighting, the higher levels being the strategic and operational levels. Throughout history, there has been a shifting balance between the four tactical functions, generally based on the application of military technology, which has led to one or more of the tactical functions being dominant for a period of time, usually accompanied by the dominance of an associated fighting arm deployed on the battlefield, such as infantry, artillery, cavalry or tanks.

A cataphract was a form of armored heavy cavalry that originated in Persia and was fielded in ancient warfare throughout Eurasia and Northern Africa.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stirrup</span> Light frame or ring that holds the foot of a rider

A stirrup is a light frame or ring that holds the foot of a rider, attached to the saddle by a strap, often called a stirrup leather. Stirrups are usually paired and are used to aid in mounting and as a support while using a riding animal. They greatly increase the rider's ability to stay in the saddle and control the mount, increasing the animal's usefulness to humans in areas such as communication, transportation, and warfare.

A charge is an offensive maneuver in battle in which combatants advance towards their enemy at their best speed in an attempt to engage in a decisive close combat. The charge is the dominant shock attack and has been the key tactic and decisive moment of many battles throughout history. Modern charges usually involve small groups of fireteams equipped with weapons with a high rate of fire and striking against individual defensive positions, instead of large groups of combatants charging another group or a fortified line.

Mounted infantry were infantry who rode horses instead of marching. The original dragoons were essentially mounted infantry. According to the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica, "Mounted rifles are half cavalry, mounted infantry merely specially mobile infantry." Today, with motor vehicles having replaced horses for military transport, the motorized infantry are in some respects successors to mounted infantry.

Medieval technology is the technology used in medieval Europe under Christian rule. After the Renaissance of the 12th century, medieval Europe saw a radical change in the rate of new inventions, innovations in the ways of managing traditional means of production, and economic growth. The period saw major technological advances, including the adoption of gunpowder, the invention of vertical windmills, spectacles, mechanical clocks, and greatly improved water mills, building techniques, and agriculture in general.

Light cavalry comprised lightly armed and armored cavalry troops mounted on fast horses, as opposed to heavy cavalry, where the mounted riders were heavily armored. The purpose of light cavalry was primarily raiding, reconnaissance, screening, skirmishing, patrolling, and tactical communications. Prior to the 17th century they were usually armed with swords, spears, javelins, or bows, and later on with sabres, pistols, shotguns, or carbines.

Lynn Townsend White Jr. was an American historian. He was a professor of medieval history at Princeton from 1933 to 1937, and at Stanford from 1937 to 1943. He was president of Mills College, Oakland, from 1943 to 1958 and a professor at University of California, Los Angeles from 1958 until 1987. Lynn White helped to found the Society for the History of Technology (SHOT) and was president from 1960 to 1962. He won the Pfizer Award for "Medieval Technology and Social Change" from the History of Science Society (HSS) and the Leonardo da Vinci medal and Dexter prize from SHOT in 1964 and 1970. He was president of the History of Science Society from 1971 to 1972. He was president of The Medieval Academy of America from 1972–1973, and the American Historical Association in 1973.

Heavy cavalry was a class of cavalry intended to deliver a battlefield charge and also to act as a tactical reserve; they are also often termed shock cavalry. Although their equipment differed greatly depending on the region and historical period, heavy cavalry were generally mounted on large powerful warhorses, wore body armor, and armed with either lances, swords, maces, flails (disputed), battle axes, or war hammers; their mounts may also have been protected by barding. They were distinct from light cavalry, who were intended for raiding, reconnaissance, screening, skirmishing, patrolling, and tactical communications.

For much of history, humans have used some form of cavalry for war and, as a result, cavalry tactics have evolved over time. Tactically, the main advantages of cavalry over infantry were greater mobility, a larger impact, and a higher riding position.

Hippeis is a Greek term for cavalry. In ancient Athenian society, after the political reforms of Solon, the hippeus was the second highest of the four social classes. It was composed of men who had at least 300 medimnoi or their equivalent as yearly income. According to the Timocratic Constitution the average citizen had a yearly income of less than 200 medimnoi. This gave the men who made 300 medimnoi the ability to purchase and maintain a war horse during their service to the state.

The first evidence of horses in warfare dates from Eurasia between 4000 and 3000 BC. A Sumerian illustration of warfare from 2500 BC depicts some type of equine pulling wagons. By 1600 BC, improved harness and chariot designs made chariot warfare common throughout the Ancient Near East, and the earliest written training manual for war horses was a guide for training chariot horses written about 1350 BC. As formal cavalry tactics replaced the chariot, so did new training methods, and by 360 BC, the Greek cavalry officer Xenophon had written an extensive treatise on horsemanship. The effectiveness of horses in battle was also revolutionized by improvements in technology, such as the invention of the saddle, the stirrup, and the horse collar.

Horses in the Middle Ages differed in size, build and breed from the modern horse, and were, on average, smaller. They were also more central to society than their modern counterparts, being essential for war, agriculture, and transport.

Roman cavalry refers to the horse-mounted forces of the Roman army throughout the regal, republican, and imperial eras.

Bajutsu (馬術) is a Japanese form of military equestrianism.

Kura (鞍), is the generic name for the Japanese saddle. The word "kura" is most commonly associated with the saddle used by the samurai class of feudal Japan. Over time the Japanese added elements of their own until the Japanese saddle became an identifiable style, also known as the samurai saddle.

Technological determinism is a reductionist theory that assumes that a society's technology progresses by following its own internal logic of efficiency, while determining the development of the social structure and cultural values. The term is believed to have originated from Thorstein Veblen (1857–1929), an American sociologist and economist. The most radical technological determinist in the United States in the 20th century was most likely Clarence Ayres who was a follower of Thorstein Veblen and John Dewey. William Ogburn was also known for his radical technological determinism and his theory on cultural lag.

References

Dien, Albert E. (1986). "The Stirrup and Its Effect on Chinese Military History". Ars Orientalis. 16: 33–56.