Medieval Military Technology by Kelly DeVries

Abstract

TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 183 in 1543; there are, among others, three 16th-century and two 17th-century editions of Plictho de larte de tentori by Gioanventura Rosetti, the “first printed book exclusively devoted to professional dyeing in Italy.” Less exotic but important to dyeing in the United States is Asa Ellis’s The Country Dyer’s Assistant, the first edition of the first book on dyeing published in America. The weakest part of this otherwise well-documented, potentially useful research tool is the subject index. Its limitations make crossreferencing difficult; its most glaring omission, however, is that of geographic listings of the works in the collection, which are fairly standard features of most bibliographies. It would be interesting to know what criteria were used in selecting books for the library. Surprisingly few—no more than three or fourtrade sample books issued by dye manufacturers are found in the collection. Even this meager selection, however, includes a gem: a German dye manufacturer’s book containing eighty-eight samples of aniline-dyed wool, cotton, and silk yarns, produced in 1864, only eight years after the introduction of Perkin’s mauve, the first coal-tar dye. Rita J. Adrosko Ms. Adrosko is curator of textiles at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History. Medieval Military Technology. By Kelly DeVries. Peterborough, Ont., and Lewiston, N.Y.: Broadview Press, 1992. Pp. xi + 340; illustra­ tions, notes, bibliography, index. C$15.95; U.S.$14.95 (paper). At last someone has dared to write a survey of post-World War II scholarship on medieval European military technology! Kelly DeVries has done a service for those who will never sit down to read methodically the wide-ranging studies that have appeared in English and French (he pays less attention to works in German). A compari­ son with the appropriate sections of Charles Singer’s venerable History of Technology (1956) reveals how significantly the history of medieval military technology has been transformed in the postwar period and shows clearly the need for the type of book DeVries has written. Giving his book a straightforward structure, DeVries devotes sepa­ rate sections to arms and armor, artillery, fortifications, and warships. He consistently provides the reader with background on the technol­ ogy of the late Roman Empire and covers each area of technology up to the end of the 15th century. The inclusion of a section on warships enhances the book, particularly because studies of medieval military technology, and of medieval warfare in general, have tended to offer scant portrayals of naval topics. DeVries is at his best when presenting a debate or dispute. He summarizes superbly the controversy engendered by Lynn White’s 184 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE thesis on the stirrup and feudalism, carefully showing how historians have damaged White’s contentions irreparably. Debates scattered throughout the book include whether Charlemagne built fortifica­ tions, whether Fulk Nerra originated stone castles, and whether William the Conqueror used Viking-style transport ships to take his horses to England or whether Byzantine shipwrights designed special horse transports for him. Any author assembling diverse sources from various specialties such as art history, archaeology, and curatorial studies of arms and armor has to decide what terminology to use. Different authors employ different terms, especially in the field of armor, where terminology has changed noticeably in the 20th century. For example, DeVries draws heavily on the classic study European Armour (London, 1958) by Claude Blair. His terminology is essentially the same as Blair’s, yet, curiously, he parts company with Blair when discussing mail; DeVries uses “chain-mail,” a term that curators and historians of arms and armor in the English-speaking world have abandoned. And despite his emulation of Blair, he includes an illustration of plate armor from the 15th century (p. 80) taken from an English work by Charles Ashdown (1925) with accompanying terms, some of which are no longer used in writings on armor. An explanation that Ashdown’s terminology is no longer current and that DeVries himself does not use it would have prevented the confusion that some readers will experience here. Like many historians, DeVries often remains one step removed from the material artifacts he...