posted 05-17-2000 10:45 AM               

This is one of those topics that is so obvious that I've been tripping over it for a year without ever actually introducing it on the forum. However, a few nights ago, while relaxing in Oakeshott Hall (our great room, named in honor of our friend Picquet and his lovely wife, Tiger), I picked up my copy of the Maciejowski Bible and started leafing through it... and, Ecco! the obvious smote me like a pie in the face, from a Three Stooges comedy.

Most students of arms & armour have come across references to the Maciejowski Bible in books on medieval weapons and accoutrements. Such books usually offer at least one reproduced plate showing one of the many magnificent illuminations, typically of some Old Testament battle between the Israelites and the Amalakites. But *surprise!* King Saul and his warriors are wearing 13th century harness, as are their enemies -- though typically the Jewish patriarchs wear great helms, while their enemies wear Norman-style helmets with nasal bars.

The manuscript is generally known as the Maciejowski Bible, but also as the Shah Abbas Bible. Its centuries-long career began when the series of illuminations was created (probably) in France ca. 1250. Though we can't know with any certainty, the artists (of whom there appear to have been 3 or 4, with sufficiently distinctive styles to recognize) might have been among those employed decorating cathedrals at that time. Personally, I've always thought of the true maestro of the group as a monk who, rather like Brother Cadfael, had turned to the scholarly life after a long career as a man-at-arms, but doubtless all of the artists were laymen. Nevertheless, their eyes for detail were superb: their portrayals of mid-13th-century costume, armour, and weaponry (from daggers to seige engines) are virtually photographic.

By ca. 1300, the illuminations had found their way in to Italy, where they acquired a set of brief Latin explications. After another 300 years, the manuscript came into the possession of Polish Cardinal Maciejowski, who, in 1608 bestowed it upon Shah Abbas; the added Arabic glosses date from this time.

Okay, this will get us kicked off. The first illumination (O.T. chronologically) of a weapon is of the sword held by the Cherub who drives the fallen Adam and Eve from the Garden. We'll look at it and others in detail, in my next posting. Meanwhile, everyone else is invited to join the discussion and introduce his/her favorite weapon (or scene) from the magnificent Maciejowski Bible.

Kartaphilos
"Ergo Pericvlvm non Vitabo" -- Mencivs

posted 05-17-2000 03:02 PM               

My name is Charles Eckert. I'm sorry for e-mailing you, but I didn't want to clutter up the thread with this question.

I would really like to follow along on this thread, but it would help very much if I had my own copy to study and follow along with. Do you have any suggestions for us newbies on where we could obtain a copy of the manuscript? I tried searching ebay and amazon with no luck.

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide.

posted 05-17-2000 03:10 PM               

Your question is very much to the point, not a thread-clutterer at all. The Maciejowski Bible is, unfortunately, not currently in print, and AFAIK the facsimile edition is also out of print. The facsimile, which is called OLD TESTAMENT MINIATURES, was published some years ago by special arrangement with the Pierpont Morgan Library, which owns the original; it's a folio-sized book, which means it's *huge* -- all the better to see the details in those wonderful illuminations. The excellent introduction was written by (I believe) Charles Cockerel.

I was fortunate enough that several of my more appreciative graduate students got together and located a used copy on the Advanced Book Exchange and presented it to me for Christmas one year. (Bless them!) So ABE is my best recommendation for finding a copy if you're really interested and can afford the $150 and up that it would cost. Here's the website address:
http://www.abebooks.com/

Frankly, unless you honestly have the extra cash to spare, I'd recommend putting that much money toward buying a decent replica sword -- preferably a Del Tin or a piece of comparable quality.

However, as far as a relatively inxpensive book that offers several good reproduction plates from the Maciejowski, I recommend A HISTORICAL GUIDE TO ARMS AND ARMOUR, edited by Stephen Bull & Tony North. (See pages 55 & 55 in particular.) It's a good general reference work on our favorite topic and worth the price. Hope this information helps.

Regards,

posted 05-17-2000 05:46 PM               

I knew it was OOP and the approximate price, just not where to find it. Abebooks has quite a few copies, thanks.

I do have an Atrim sword I've got my eye on, but books and study materials are just as important for someone looking to study swordsmanship.

posted 05-18-2000 10:04 AM               

By Jove, sir, I *like* your attitude about books! Well said, sir! All during my college and graduate-school years, when original weapons were relatively plentiful and inexpensive, but money was scarce, I acquired books to build my reference library. My major discoveries were Stone's GLOSSARY, while I was still an undergrad, and then -- O Frabjous Day! -- Sire Picquet's THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF WEAPONS and THE SWORD IN THE AGE OF CHIVALRY, which I discovered in the stupendous stacks (graduate side) of the Indiana University Library.

So without a doubt, books are of extreme importance! But good on you for keeping your eye on an Atrim sword: from all I know of this craftsman, his work ranks among the best. (I'm currently waiting for a one-off copy of Picquet's Moonbrand, from Michael "Tinker" Pearce. Just 2 more months, if all goes according to schedule!) As I've said often before on the forum, in order to grok the Riddle of Steel, you must own, handle, and practice with real weapons -- there's no substitute!

Okay, back to the Maciejowski Bible next.

posted 05-18-2000 07:43 PM               

As for the blue, it really is quite remarkable, especially after so long. Completely out of my depth here, but perhaps they used the same thing the Celts used to color themselves, woad?

Kartaphilos, I got Stone's GLOSSARY when I was just a kid. Sadly, I'm lacking in reading Mr. Oakshott's work and more general works on the period. Something I plan to soon rectify.

I believe it is important to learn what I can about the times and people, why and how they used such beautiful instruments of death and horror.

I also believe, in a topic such as this, that modern experimentation with replica's is just as important to the understanding. To me, having one aspect without the other leads to a hollow or empty understanding. If that makes any sense. But I'm way ahead of myself. I'm just beginning my study in this area.

posted 05-18-2000 10:55 PM               

a) There are lots of very facinating pole arms represented - for example something that we over here in germany would call an 'Aalspiess'. This is sort of a spear/ lance with a long vera narrow pointed blade attached, which I always have believed to have develpoped in th 14th. or 15th c.AD.

b) Round shields in european art. Although it should be noted that most round shields are being carried by 'enemies' - could therefore be a reference to muslim armies.

c) The spears all have very pointed tips, while swords mostly are round at the tip.

d) 'recurve bows' - although not in the asian style, but rather in a straight form with angled ends. Some archers carry their arrows stuck in their belt.

e) Strange 'slahing sword' (that what I would call them. Their have quite an odd shaped blade, and in one example a strong bent grip, like on an umbrella.

f) Of course the famous picture showing a rider wielding a two-handed blade without any crossguard. Very unusal in the mid-13th c.AD.

g) Rigid metal leg protectors

h) head protection- 6 main types:
- scull caps
- maille coifs
- great helms
- Spangenhelms
- one piece nasal helms (the famous 'norman')
- chapel-de-fer; mostly infantry helms with a wide rim

i) very nice examples of siege engines (trebuchet or mangonel)

posted 05-19-2000 11:00 AM               

Wow, what a great round of responses while I was off elsewhere! Debbie, many thanks for the link to the graphic: in one illumination, it shows most (if not all) of the typical arms and armour depicted in the Maciejowski. We'll be discussing each of these in detail throughout this thread.

Charles, as one of Sire Picquet's most ardent disciples, I recommend that you acquire at least ARCHAEOLOGY OF WEAPONS soonest. Happily, it's available from Barnes & Noble @ $9.95 in hardback, so even a wayu on a limited budget can easily afford it. SWORD IN THE AGE OF CHIVALRY is somewhat steeper but still quite reasonably priced @ $24.95 (last I looked).

Andrew, I compliment you on your excellent summary of the weapons & armour in the Maciejowski! Again, we'll be taking each of these in detail throughout this thread -- but before I sign off, I want to make a couple of general observations, which we can discuss at leisure.

The swords in the Maciejowski Bible seem to be, for the major part, Type X or Xa weapons, with Type-G plain disk pommels and Style 3 crosses. The blades show the typical full-length (or nearly so) fuller and somewhat rounded point. Occasionally, a sword will look rather more like a Type XIII because of the size of the blade; otherwise, the hilt fittings appear virtually identical.

Second general observation -- as prevalent as swords are in the Maciejowski, the amazing "chopper" weapon is prominently depicted in the majority of battle scenes. It must have been relatively common, then, at this time. BRAVEHEART, which is always worth rewatching -- never mind its flaws as a portrayal of the life and battles of William Wallace -- features these choppers in some of the battle scenes. My best speculation on this piece is that it probably originated as an agricultural tool, rather like a machete or cane knife, and may well have been the only available weapon for farmers willing to serve in medieval armies. Perhaps a few nobles liked its features well enough to have it copied in better steel, though the hilt is always portrayed as simple and guardless.

More later.

posted 05-20-2000 04:39 PM               

Another quick general observation about the Maciejowski illuminations... Along with the soi-disant "Bayeaux Tapestry" -- a marvelous historical artifact, but too stylized to be accurate on some crucial points of arms & armour, and definitely not a tapestry -- the Maciejowski illuminations show us a starkly realistic practice carried out on any medieval battlefield. I'm referring to stripping the dead.

Though modern folk might be a bit squeamish about even contemplating this practice, there's no question that mere practicality demanded it. Armour and weapons were simply too valuable to allow them to remain unclaimed on a battlefield. If the troops of the winning side didn't strip the slain enemies, then the camp followers and scavengers would certainly have done so; hence, "to the winners belong the spoils."

Although the battle scenes invariably show devastating wounds being inflicted upon combatants on both sides, there's no question but that a competent armourer could repair any disruptions of the mail pattern, caused by lance thrust or axe blow. After removing and discarding the mangled links, the armourer would insert new ones, close them up, and the hauberk would have been as good as new.

"What about all that dried blood?" you ask, as well you might. Simple: the standard method of cleaning mail was to place it into a barrel filled with sand, then roll or turn the barrel until the mail was scoured clean. This technique ought to work as well with dried blood from a former owner as with rust. A quick retrofitting and polish would thus easily return a valuable piece of equipment to active use.

posted 05-21-2000 10:23 AM               

As far as I remember (don't have the bible here, just look at it every now and then at a friends place) the basic form of the 'chopper' weapon's blade is also represented on some eating knives in the Mac.Bible.

posted 05-24-2000 09:51 AM               

Golly, this has been one of our most enjoyable threads; now it's up to me to keep it going -- though I hope everyone will jump right in and contribute comments. I love working with such a knowledgeable group!

I'll have to keep my eyes open for confirmation of Andrew's suggestion that the "chopper" blade type appears also as a "hauswehr"-type general-purpose knife also. I shouldn't be at all surprised if this proved to be the case. Hmm... while we're talking about the chopper, I can verify Alasdayr's observation about the blade being used on pole weapons as well as sword-type arms: in a number of the Maciejowski illuminations, a chopper blade appears at the same level as the points of spears and other polearms, so there's no question that it occurred in this form. Quite an amazing piece!

Another unusual weapon, which I continue to think of as a "glaive," is one that has already been mentioned as being displayed prominently in one of the most famous battle/seige scenes in the manuscript. This piece has what might be described as an elongated, single-edged falchion-type blade on a plain haft which is 3 to 4 handsbreadths long. Believe it or don't, on the wall at a local Cracker Barrel Restaurant, there hangs a farm implement that could well be the direct descendant of this weapon! (Except for the black-rubber grip at the very end of the handle; the medieval piece would very likely have had leather over wood.)

More on the marvelous Maciejowski Bible anon. Meanwhile, any more comments from our members?

posted 05-26-2000 07:14 AM               

Here are a few of the things I've always found most interesting:

A) The use of large two-handed battle axes, both on foot and from horseback. I've seen numerous 13th century representations of foot soldiers wielding two-handed battle axes, but the Maciejowski Bible is the only source I've encountered where they are shown being wielded from horseback.

B) That bloody great two-handed spiked mace, also being wielded from horseback. This may betray an Eastern influence, either on the artists or the soldiers they portrayed. European Crusaders adopted the large two-handed mace from Muslim foot-soldiers, who used them with great effect against Crusader horses.

C) The two horse archers, and the archer in the castle, all seem to be armed with Eastern composite bows. All three bows feature the telltale inflexible "ears" of the Eastern composite bow, and one of the horsemen, possibly both, seem to be utilizing the "Mongolian" thumb draw. All the other representations of European archers I've seen from this period are firing "self" bows, including a representation from a manuscript dated 1290 that shows a European knight firing a bow from horseback. So again, this may be another possible hint that either the artists had firsthand experience with Eastern styles of warfare, or the men they portrayed had adopted Eastern styles and brought them home to Europe with them.

D) The horsemen all appear to have high-backed saddles, as one would expect, and those charging with spears have them couched, also as one would expect. But there's one fascinating exception, a knight on horseback who is wielding his spear two-handed in a sophisticated style. The spear is being thrust with the right hand and thrust/guided with the left. The spear is being thrust overhanded and downward into the body of a retreating foe. What's interesting is that this is one of four styles of tilting described in the furusiya combat training manuals of the Mamluks, another possible indication of Eastern influence.

E) The remarkably ineffectual armor and helmets. Single-handed sword strokes cleave easily through both helmet and mail coif, mailed limbs are severed cleanly, swords and spears are shown thrust right through mailed bodies, arrows pierce mailed torsos, etc.

F) The manpowered mangonel. The more sophisticated trebuchet was known to Europeans at that time, but apparently the mangonel was still more common.

posted 05-29-2000 01:29 PM               

Just a couple of quick responses to some of Gregg's perceptive observations --

First, about the prevalence of couched lances in the Maciejowski illuminations and a two-handed thrusting technique displayed by one figure... Though we tend to think of the "couched" position of the lance as being standard throughout the Middle Ages, it was actually a relatively late development and by no means universal until the highly specialized form of the lance -- i.e., with vamplate and counterpoise -- made it obligatory. For centuries, the spear and lance were virtually indistinguishable, and methods of combat using them varied from high overhand to low underhand thrusts, slashing attacks, and even occasionally throwing. Even after the couched position became more or less standardized, the lance did not assume its specialized form until perhaps the early 15th century (Stone).

Secondly, "The remarkably ineffectual armor and helmets." I believe the artists' intention in showing the great, gaping gashes in mail hauberks and coifs and the rents in helmets was symbolic rather than realistic. (Though this continues to be a topic of lively discussion amongst arms & armour enthusiasts, I personally believe that the ability of swords to cut through mail is exaggerated; an axe would certainly do better -- until its edge became so dull that it became a sheer blunt-trauma weapon like a mace.) In illuminations portraying a victory of the Israelites, their enemies' ineffective armour underscores the fact that YHWH fights on the side of Their chosen people, thus making them an irresistible force; similarly, the carnage highlights the prowess of a warrior such as Joshua. Conversely, in a scene depicting an Israelite defeat -- Saul's last stand at Gilboa, for example -- the weakness of the armour shows that YHWH has withdrawn Their favor from the Hebraeim, leaving them vulnerable.

Finally, the portrayal of the bows does indeed seem to indicate an ultimate Eastern influence, probably through Byzantium. However in THE MEDIEVAL ARCHER, James Bradley suggests that this method of depicting a longbow quickly became conventionalized and continued in use even though it was not a particularly accurate portrayal of European longbows. The details of the crossbows, however, are spot on!