BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Unconquerable Strongholds? An Alternative View on Medieval Siege W
 arfare - Ilya Berkovich (Peterhouse\, University of Cambridge)
DTSTART:20080122T170000Z
DTEND:20080122T183000Z
UID:TALK18445@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Ilya Berkovich
DESCRIPTION:Since the rise of professional military history in the ninetee
 nth century\, it has been the firm belief of almost all scholars that medi
 eval warfare was dominated to a large extent by the siege of fortified pla
 ces\, and that in medieval siege warfare\, the defence had a great superio
 rity over the offence. It has been customarily argued that even small cast
 les could often successfully withstand a siege lasting for weeks and month
 s by a vastly superior field army.\n\nThis view had far reaching influence
 s outside the limited field of medieval military history. Medieval politic
 al and social historians frequently argued that the great superiority of d
 efence over offence in siege warfare was a cornerstone of the feudal syste
 m and a key cause for the political fragmentation that characterised medie
 val polities. Even a minor nobleman could hope to defy the greatest king f
 rom behind the safety of his battlements. This firmly entrenched view was 
 based on what were often impressionistic surveys of medieval siege operati
 ons\, which tended to focus on the most famous and dramatic sieges of the 
 era.\n\nThe paper reports of a study which re-examines this view by relyin
 g on a statistical survey of siege operations conducted in Normandy and No
 rthern France in the twelfth and fifteenth centuries. A statistical databa
 se was created by taking two of the most important chronicles of the era\,
  Orderic Vitalis' _Ecclesiastic History_ and Egguerand de Monstrelet's\n_C
 hronique_\, surveying all the siege operations they mentioned\, a grand to
 tal of about 700 cases.\n\nAn analysis of the resulting database produced 
 a number of surprising conclusions that differed from the accepted underst
 anding of medieval siege warfare. Firstly\, the great majority of strongho
 lds that were attacked\, fell to the attackers. Secondly\, most of the str
 onghold that fell to their attackers\, fell within less than two weeks\, o
 ften within less than 24 hours. Finally\, it was found that the most impor
 tant siege methods involved the use of stratagems\, surprise attacks and t
 reachery rather than the more famous siege engines and complex engineering
  schemes. Obviously\, these results need additional verification by a far 
 more detailed and reliable statistical survey. However\, even now they que
 stion the received wisdom of medieval military history\, and make it clear
  that conducting a more massive statistical study of medieval siege warfar
 e is a worthwhile and needed project that can change our understanding of 
 medieval politics and war.
LOCATION:Walters Room\, Selwyn College
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR