![Sample our Museum and Heritage Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5945/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Museum-Heritage-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
References to artillery in sources for English history from 1066 to 1189 are typically vague. Eschewing the technical Latin terms ballista, mangonel or onager, medieval writers in the period tended towards generic words like machina. This habit prohibits the positive identification of specific weapon types present at Anglo-Norman/Angevin sieges and thus full interpretations of the engagements themselves. This essay suggests an alternative, contextual methodology. After first assessing the physicality of a siege zone (landscape, topography and fortification architecture), it applies knowledge about artillery type and operation (range to target, trajectory, shot type and size) in order to see what weapons could and could not have been deployed in the zone. When such contextual information is available, the method can help identify weapon type in the absence of specific terminology. The examples presented here are King Stephen’s sieges of Lincoln in 1141 and Faringdon in 1145.