Medieval Sieges Were a Real Test of Endurance — But Was Conquering the Castle Worth It?

Open-field battles may get all the cinematic glory, but in the Middle Ages, warfare was far more likely to involve a long, uncomfortable siege. Castles didn’t just politely open their gates, so the real challenge was breaking through thick stone walls and actually taking the fortress.

Who Had a Better Chance of Survival: Defenders or Attackers?

In theory, a siege could be carried out without much direct fighting at all. The attackers would simply cut off supplies of food and water and wait for the defenders to surrender. Sounds simple — until you realize this strategy required an almost heroic level of patience. Medieval sieges could drag on for months, sometimes years, and boredom was often as dangerous as the enemy.

Defenders usually had the upper hand. From behind their walls, they could rain arrows and crossbow bolts down on attackers - or, for extra discouragement, pour boiling water from above. Being elevated and well protected gave castle defenders a clear advantage and a great view of exactly who was trying to ruin their day.

Before any fighting began, attackers typically offered the defenders a chance to surrender. If the offer was refused (which it usually was), the siege officially began. The attacking army would set up camp near the castle, dig a ditch, and use the excavated earth to build a protective wall.

Ways into the Castle

There were three main ways to get into a castle: over the walls, under them, or straight through them — none of them particularly pleasant.

Breaking through the walls was the most common approach. Siege engines like catapults were used to batter the walls until they collapsed. This method was relatively safe for attackers, as it allowed them to stay out of range of enemy archers and avoid direct combat. For gates, attackers relied on the classic battering ram, smashing their way in one heavy swing at a time.

Climbing over the walls was even riskier. Defenders could easily pick off attackers with crossbows or greet them with boiling water. To counter this, attackers built large wooden siege towers on wheels, allowing them to climb up and cross the walls while staying (somewhat) protected.

If the walls were especially thick and stubborn, attackers turned to undermining. Tunnels were dug beneath the castle walls, and fires were lit inside them. Once the supports burned away, the walls collapsed under their own weight and gravity ended up doing the dirty work.

The final option, and the least dramatic, was starvation. By cutting off supplies and waiting, attackers hoped hunger would force a surrender. This strategy required immense patience, and since besieging armies preferred quick victories, it was often used as a last resort.

Conclusion

With medieval sieges, we come to the end of medieval warfare. The various tactics show us how complex warfare was in the Middle Ages, and how complex it remains in general. Every battle required preparation and time and was rarely taken lightly. The true meaning of medieval warfare can be seen through the advancement of weaponry and tactics, but also in strategies that have been preserved to this day.

However, it is important to remember how dangerous and immoral wartime can be, and that every conflict should always be considered a last resort. In the end, it is innocent and ordinary people who suffer the most.         

#history #middleages #warfare #wartactics #siege #castles #war #conflict #battle

 What you should read next

Sources:

Palermo, B., Waddell, J., Medieval arms, armor and tactics: Tactics of the Middle Ages, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2002