# Ladder safety during castle storming **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 4, 2010, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583 "2010-09-04T09:47:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/21 "2010-09-05T00:22:38Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > Was it ever the case that medieval foot soldiers were extensively armored? Some of the guys in my SCA barony fight in almost nothing but leather with a few strategically placed plates. Some of the leather stuff they wear is very thick and rigid. I could easily see how it would take a good solid hit with a good weapon to hurt it, let alone them underneath. Leather was very common back then, so making a good tough leather breastplate, shoulders, and arm/leg guards would probably not be too cost prohibitive. little aside Armor is a vary labor intensive process, I should start a “Ask the guy who is building a suit of armor” thread. I am working on my first set of armor for SCA combat. By the time I am done it will probably be 50-60 hours of work and about $300-400 in materials. Just hammering out bowl shaped pieces for elbows and knees is a bit of a chore. This is not even full plate, there will be some leather components to it as well. Granted I am using aluminum which is more expensive than steel but much lighter and I am doing things like hand staining my leather, mirror polishing aluminum, etc. I am gonna look like one sexy beast. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/22 "2010-09-05T00:25:57Z")
> [@spingears](#): > > Castle storming is a rather hazardous occupation at best. Yup. Which is why they didn’t do it unless they \*absolutely \*had to. Much easier and safer to just wait it out. Note however that the ladder thing is a bit overdone by Hollywood : it wasn’t _that_ easy to push the ladder away because there would also be attackers at the bottom of the wall pulling the ladder down to secure it in place, if I’m being clear. Ladders were also almost the bare minimum of siege work, just above ropes and grapnels. An assault involving only ladders would be very difficult against even a token defensive effort for obvious reasons, unless the attackers outnumber the defenders by a huge margin. And even then the casualty rates would be appalling. Historical assaults would involve breaching the walls in multiple places with catapults or sapping, massive armoured siege towers instead of puny ladders, battering rams… Failing that, sneaking dudes in by night to open the gates or even bribing the defenders’ soldiers away was also common. Destroying the fortifications with catapults/trebuchets/explosives, as often seen in the movies, was also something of a last resort BTW, at least in wars of conquest (as opposed to looting raids, but then again escapades of the sort rarely involved sieges in the first place). The big prize then was to take the castle or fortified city as intact as possible so you could immediately use it for yourself. Fat lot of good a captured castle is if it’s got big gaping holes in it… which was yet another reason to simply wait it out. [QUOTE=Xema] Okay, you addressed the weight issue rather well. How about the cost issue? Was it ever the case that medieval foot soldiers were extensively armored? I have a general notion that armor was mostly used on horseback - is that wrong? [/QUOTE] Yup. Just take a look at the [Bayeux tapestry](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayeux_tapestry), which depicts William the Conqueror’s invasion of England (so, early Middle Ages). Every guy is in maille from head to toe. And those were Norman huscarls, the direct continuation of Scandinavian Vikings - these guys weren’t big on horses to begin with. As for the cost issue, for professional soldiers, man-at-arms, mercenaries or noblemen armour was just as much a tool of their trade as their swords, horses, crossbows etc… An investment, if you will. Quite a sensible one if they were fond of that whole breathing thing, too. ---
**Author:** ![Otara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a88e4f/32.png) [@Otara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otara)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/23 "2010-09-05T00:32:02Z")
Ive worn chainmail for reasonable periods. Doing single actions isnt hard, but intense activity will wear you down very quickly. I wouldnt want to be running across a gap, climbing a ladder, then trying to fight at the top in it. Not saying it couldnt be done but it wouldnt be a cakewalk. Otara ---
**Author:** ![Kilmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a6a055/32.png) [@Kilmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kilmore)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/24 "2010-09-05T00:51:18Z")
Am I correct in assuming that the first guys up the ladders would be the strongest, most skilled, and most heavily armored that the attacking lord would have at his disposal? I’m pretty sure whoever it was would get a nice bonus in their little sack of silver as well. ---
**Author:** ![Asympotically\_fat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47c2d/32.png) [@Asympotically\_fat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asympotically_fat)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/25 "2010-09-05T00:57:58Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > > [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > > > Based on that. it seems pretty clear that a heavily armored knight could have gone up the ladder almost as easily as an unarmored man. > > Okay, you addressed the weight issue rather well. How about the cost issue? > > Was it ever the case that medieval foot soldiers were extensively armored? I have a general notion that armor was mostly used on horseback - is that wrong? The late 13th/ early 14th century was a very stereotypically medieval time in Great Britain. At this time most of the soliders would be commoners for whom a suit of full-plate armour would be way beyond their means, but an arm would also have of a large contingent of knights who would pretty much universally be heavily armoured. Often these knights would act as cavalry, but also they would fight on foot too. It’s also worth noting that not all ladders were wooden affairs, rope ladders were used also used. Robert the Bruce used them particualrly effectively in capturing English castles in Scotland. ---
**Author:** ![AmunRa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@AmunRa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AmunRa)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/26 "2010-09-05T01:18:00Z")
> [@Kilmore](#): > > Am I correct in assuming that the first guys up the ladders would be the strongest, most skilled, and most heavily armored that the attacking lord would have at his disposal? I’m pretty sure whoever it was would get a nice bonus in their little sack of silver as well. I’m by no means an expert, but I would want my least skilled troops going up first, as someone else mentioned earlier it seems likely that the casualty rate for the first men up the ladder would be damn close to 100%. Better to let some peasants soften up the defenders a bit, with your best men behind them to encourage them to keep moving up the ladders. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/27 "2010-09-05T02:11:01Z")
> [@Kilmore](#): > > Am I correct in assuming that the first guys up the ladders would be the strongest, most skilled, and most heavily armored that the attacking lord would have at his disposal? I’m pretty sure whoever it was would get a nice bonus in their little sack of silver as well. Not only that, but there were also massive bragging rights involved, which counts for quite a bit in a macho warrior culture. Seriously, in some cases people quibbled over who would get the \*privilege \*of going in first. Just to be able to go : “Yesterday, boy, I climbed a 40 foot wall on a rickety-ass ladder, getting shot at right in the face all the way up and being the biggest target in the whole damn army. Then I reached the top, alone, right in the middle of them, completely surrounded, assholes from \*our \*side pushing me forward, 40 foot drop right behind me, 40 foot drop in front of me too, sharp-edged death everywhere else. And I proved to be such a murder goddamn machine I survived and we won the fucking thing. I basically have to use a wheelbarrow to carry my own balls around at this point. So what did you do with \*your \*day, pussy ?” [QUOTE=AmunRa] I’m by no means an expert, but I would want my least skilled troops going up first, as someone else mentioned earlier it seems likely that the casualty rate for the first men up the ladder would be damn close to 100%. Better to let some peasants soften up the defenders a bit, with your best men behind them to encourage them to keep moving up the ladders. [/QUOTE] That’s because you think like a tactician, not a feudal warrior. If you were already noble, acts of near-suicidal bravery like that went on your personal record, with minstrels singing about you and everything. A petty knight could hope moving up the food chain, a king could prove he was the most badass motherfucker of them all. If you were a commoner that could mean a knighthood then and there that would set you up for life. That stuff could be a pretty big deal, really. To give you a concrete example : Godfrey of Bouillon, who led the First Crusade, was among the first Christians on the walls of Jerusalem (albeit not the first - but history still remembers the names of \*those \*dudes, too). The guy had over 1.500 knights serving under him at the time, plus ~15.000 regular infantrymen and god knows how many fanatic pilgrims who’d come along for the ride, and he went on point. Different times. Of course, that kind of scrotum-centric strategy cost a \*lot \*of victories too. Azincourt, anyone ? ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Panda](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ee7513/32.png) [@Darth\_Panda](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Panda)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/28 "2010-09-05T02:26:49Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Every guy is in maille from head to toe. And those were Norman huscarls, the direct continuation of Scandinavian Vikings - these guys weren’t big on horses to begin with. No one was ‘bigger’ on horses than the Normans. > [@](#): > > The Norman army’s power derived from its cavalry which were reckoned amongst the best in Europe. > **[Battle of Hastings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings)** > > The Battle of Hastings\[a\] was fought on 14 October 1066 between the Norman-French army of William, Duke of Normandy, and an English army under the Anglo-Saxon King Harold Godwinson, beginning the Norman Conquest of England. It took place approximately 7 mi (11 km) northwest of Hastings, close to the present-day town of Battle, East Sussex, and was a decisive Norman victory. > The background to the battle was the death of the childless King Edward the Confessor in January 1066, which set up a ... > **[Battle of Hastings 1066. The Overview](https://essayservice.com/blog/battle-of-hastings-1066)** > > This article will help you better understand the historical context and the events that surrounded the famous battle of Hastings. > **[History | The Normans](http://normans.etrusia.co.uk/)** > > The Normans website looks at the period of British History from the downfall of the Saxons at the Battle of Hastings in 1066 to the end of the Angevin line of Kings with the Murder of Richard II in 1204. The whole modern concept of feudalism and knights and what not basically stems from the Normans and William’s conquest. You are correct about the footmen being armored, however, as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry. ---
**Author:** ![Wile\_E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c37758/32.png) [@Wile\_E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wile_E)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/29 "2010-09-05T02:41:35Z")
You guys are making it sound like it wouldn’t be fun to storm the castle. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/30 "2010-09-05T02:51:27Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > > [@Kobal2](#): > > > > Every guy is in maille from head to toe. And those were Norman huscarls, the direct continuation of Scandinavian Vikings - these guys weren’t big on horses to begin with. > > No one was ‘bigger’ on horses than the Normans. > > > [@](#): > > > > The Norman army’s power derived from its cavalry which were reckoned amongst the best in Europe. > > [Battle of Hastings - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hastings) > [Battle of Hastings 1066. The Overview](http://www.battle1066.com/cavalry.shtml) > [http://normans.etrusia.co.uk/](http://normans.etrusia.co.uk/) > > The whole modern concept of feudalism and knights and what not basically stems from the Normans and William’s conquest. > > You are correct about the footmen being armored, however, as depicted in the Bayeux Tapestry. There was also a horse-related technological advance that the Normans had, while the English didn’t. This is shown in the Bayeux Tapestry. It clearly shows that the Norman horsemen used _stirrups_. These are a significant advantage – they allow a mounted cavalry to make sharper maneuvers without having people dismounted, and also allows horsemen better stability, thus more leverage (yielding harder blows on opponents) when using weapons while mounted. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/31 "2010-09-05T03:36:50Z")
> [@Darth\_Panda](#): > > No one was ‘bigger’ on horses than the Normans. […] Huh. Interesting. For some reason, I was convinced the Normans had mostly stuck with the Danish way of war (a big shield wall of heavy infantry, with maybe some light cavalry as scouts/screeners/flankers), while the Franks were the ones who’d embraced the heavy cav. devastating charge strategy. I stand corrected, thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/32 "2010-09-05T03:58:13Z")
> [@qpw3141](#): > > Unless you used long poles. 😉 If it is Poland’s Malbork Castle, the answer is a [very bent Pole](http://malbork.20m.com/): > [@](#): > > The main goal of this web page is to indicate least-known mysteries and curiosities of the Castle of Teutonic Knights from Malbork. In addition, this web pages inspires to explain each of these mysteries and curiosities of the Malbork Castle on the basis of scientific theory of everything called the [Concept of Dipolar Gravity](http://www.totalizm.pl/dipolar_gravity.htm). > . . . > But if we have any scientific theory which explain to us the mechanism of a number of empirical findings, then this illustratively can be compared to climbing through a wall by attaching a ladder or a scaffold to it. This is because such a theory allows that independently from empirics we can also rely on the statements of that theory - this having the same significance as the capability to climb when we simultaneously are able to support ourselves on the wall and on the ladder. ---
**Author:** ![Otara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/a88e4f/32.png) [@Otara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otara)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/33 "2010-09-05T05:51:15Z")
I wondered a bit about leaders going up ladders first, so did a bit of googling: [http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/be-wlxbo.html](http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/be-wlxbo.html) “Timberwood and carpenters were brought from Jaffa in order to build the required machines of war, that is three rolling towers and catapults. The attack started during the night of 9 to 10 July; with the main attack launched on the evening of 13 July. On 15 July, Godfrey of Bouillon put his tower against the wall and entered the town with his brother Eustace of Boulogne.” Not to say I wouldnt be wetting myself personally with either, but a tower and a ladder are pretty different things. Is this accurate? Otara ---
**Author:** ![AmunRa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@AmunRa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AmunRa)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/34 "2010-09-05T06:21:24Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > [QUOTE=AmunRa] > I’m by no means an expert, but I would want my least skilled troops going up first, as someone else mentioned earlier it seems likely that the casualty rate for the first men up the ladder would be damn close to 100%. Better to let some peasants soften up the defenders a bit, with your best men behind them to encourage them to keep moving up the ladders. That’s because you think like a tactician, not a feudal warrior. If you were already noble, acts of near-suicidal bravery like that went on your personal record, with minstrels singing about you and everything. A petty knight could hope moving up the food chain, a king could prove he was the most badass motherfucker of them all. If you were a commoner that could mean a knighthood then and there that would set you up for life. That stuff could be a pretty big deal, really. To give you a concrete example : Godfrey of Bouillon, who led the First Crusade, was among the first Christians on the walls of Jerusalem (albeit not the first - but history still remembers the names of \*those \*dudes, too). The guy had over 1.500 knights serving under him at the time, plus ~15.000 regular infantrymen and god knows how many fanatic pilgrims who’d come along for the ride, and he went on point. Different times. Of course, that kind of scrotum-centric strategy cost a \*lot \*of victories too. Azincourt, anyone ? [/QUOTE] /me crosses medieval soldier of the list of things to try when I invent my time machine.:eek: ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/35 "2010-09-05T07:17:48Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > [QUOTE=AmunRa] > I’m by no means an expert, but I would want my least skilled troops going up first, as someone else mentioned earlier it seems likely that the casualty rate for the first men up the ladder would be damn close to 100%. Better to let some peasants soften up the defenders a bit, with your best men behind them to encourage them to keep moving up the ladders. That’s because you think like a tactician, not a feudal warrior. If you were already noble, acts of near-suicidal bravery like that went on your personal record, with minstrels singing about you and everything. A petty knight could hope moving up the food chain, a king could prove he was the most badass motherfucker of them all. If you were a commoner that could mean a knighthood then and there that would set you up for life. That stuff could be a pretty big deal, really. [/QUOTE] That’s not really thinking like a tactician, though. Who were the first troops to hit the shore in Normandy? Rangers and commandos, not guys fresh out of boot camp. All armies send their best troops first into the breach, because they don’t want the enemy to gain the time they need to react and reinforce, and because if your first line of troops breaks and runs, there’s a good chance your second line will, too. The toughest jobs are always given to the toughest soldiers. This was true during the middle ages, and it’s true today. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2010, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/36 "2010-09-05T13:29:53Z")
> [@Otara](#): > > I wondered a bit about leaders going up ladders first, so did a bit of googling: > > [Bouillon (Municipality, Province of Luxembourg, Belgium)](http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/be-wlxbo.html) > > “Timberwood and carpenters were brought from Jaffa in order to build the required machines of war, that is three rolling towers and catapults. The attack started during the night of 9 to 10 July; with the main attack launched on the evening of 13 July. On 15 July, Godfrey of Bouillon put his tower against the wall and entered the town with his brother Eustace of Boulogne.” > > Not to say I wouldnt be wetting myself personally with either, but a tower and a ladder are pretty different things. Is this accurate? > > Otara Yes it is. As I mentioned, ladders were never really the first choice, even before the Middles Ages and the considerable progress made in fortifications over the period. Siege towers date back to Antiquity, with examples cropping up as early as 800 BC. When ladders were used alone, it was either because the attackers were really desperate and throwing a Hail Mary pass, the defenders were hopelessly outnumbered, or as a sneak attack : race as many ladders to the wall as possible, as fast as possible, and hope to catch the defenders with their pants down and to have established a secure foothold before reinforcements can react or wake up. Which is not to say siege towers were safe places to be either. They would of course be arrow and boulder magnets, moved slowly and would often get bogged or stuck in the open and burned rather easily. Organized defenders could even hope to topple them from a nearby tower once they’d reached the walls. [QUOTE=Alessan] That’s not really thinking like a tactician, though. Who were the first troops to hit the shore in Normandy? Rangers and commandos, not guys fresh out of boot camp. All armies send their best troops first into the breach, because they don’t want the enemy to gain the time they need to react and reinforce, and because if your first line of troops breaks and runs, there’s a good chance your second line will, too. The toughest jobs are always given to the toughest soldiers. This was true during the middle ages, and it’s true today. [/QUOTE] Not all armies. The stereotypical Polybian battle line for example involved three lines, with the fresh blood in front (the light _hastati_), then the regulars (the _principes_) and finally the old, superiorly equipped veterans back, ready to plug the gaps, exploit breaches or simply hold the line to give the first two time to regroup and come back. In many cases, the battle was won before the \*triarii \*even had to fight. In a more general sense, it makes some sense to keep the crack troops in reserve and only use them to decisively tip the scales where they are really needed or once the defenders are exhausted. Least, that’s how my sieges tend to go in _Medieval 2. Defenders get ridiculous bonuses from fighting on the walls anyway 😛_ ---
**Author:** ![carlb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carlb/32/5930_2.png) [@carlb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carlb)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/37 "2010-09-06T14:45:29Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > To give you a concrete example : Godfrey of Bouillon, who led the First Crusade, was among the first Christians on the walls of Jerusalem (albeit not the first - but history still remembers the names of \*those \*dudes, too). The guy had over 1.500 knights serving under him at the time, plus ~15.000 regular infantrymen and god knows how many fanatic pilgrims who’d come along for the ride, and he went on point. Different times. I’m curious; how well documented were these acts of bravery? In other words, do we know to a fair degree of certainty that Godfrey really was among the first on the wall, or was he just the first man of any renown up there? Given that he was nobility he would have much greater control over the record, and would also make for a better story in general. “Sir Godfrey stormed the castle walls” does read a little better than, “A whole bunch of guys stormed the castle walls.” Could it have been a bit like the opening of “Star Wars”, where a bunch of nameless, not-important-to-the-historical-record grunts do the heavy lifting, allowing the nobleman to stride into the aftermath and “conquer?” ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/38 "2010-09-06T16:04:50Z")
> [@carlb](#): > > I’m curious; how well documented were these acts of bravery? In other words, do we know to a fair degree of certainty that Godfrey really was among the first on the wall, or was he just the first man of any renown up there? Given that he was nobility he would have much greater control over the record, and would also make for a better story in general. “Sir Godfrey stormed the castle walls” does read a little better than, “A whole bunch of guys stormed the castle walls.” Could it have been a bit like the opening of “Star Wars”, where a bunch of nameless, not-important-to-the-historical-record grunts do the heavy lifting, allowing the nobleman to stride into the aftermath and “conquer?” The whole Crusade was documented by an unknown scholar in the retinue of Bohemund I in the _Gesta Francorum_. It’s perhaps not as accurate as a CNN video, but it was in his direct interest not to make too much stuff up or to minimize the achievements of irascible, armed people. As it is, this unnamed scholar did mention the very first people on the wall : Lethalde and Engelbert, a pair of otherwise unremarkable Flemish knights. Now, the counterpoint to that is that he mentions the assault started two days before that happened - that’s the time it took for Godfrey’s tower to reach the wall (while Raymond of Toulouse stuck his in a ditch). What else went on during these two days ? I don’t rightly know. I do know the Crusaders had managed to destroy at least one section of the wall with a battering ram but failed to make it through the defense, but that’s about it. So it’s a bit of both, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/39 "2010-09-06T19:06:10Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > > [@Kilmore](#): > > > > Am I correct in assuming that the first guys up the ladders would be the strongest, most skilled, and most heavily armored that the attacking lord would have at his disposal? I’m pretty sure whoever it was would get a nice bonus in their little sack of silver as well. > > Not only that, but there were also massive bragging rights involved, which counts for quite a bit in a macho warrior culture. Seriously, in some cases people quibbled over who would get the \*privilege \*of going in first. Going back - admittedly - at least a millennium, Roman legionnaires would be awarded the _corona muralis_, mural crown, for being the first to climb the wall of a besieged city. This was a highly sought-after decoration and a great way to get glory (and spoils). ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2010, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583/40 "2010-09-06T19:17:02Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Yesterday, boy, I climbed a 40 foot wall on a rickety-ass ladder, getting shot at right in the face all the way up and being the biggest target in the whole damn army. Then I reached the top, alone, right in the middle of them, completely surrounded, assholes from \*our \*side pushing me forward, 40 foot drop right behind me, 40 foot drop in front of me too, sharp-edged death everywhere else. And I proved to be such a murder goddamn machine I survived and we won the fucking thing. I basically have to use a wheelbarrow to carry my own balls around at this point. …but do they call me **Kobal2** the Castle Stormer? No…! But you fuck _one_ goat! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ladder-safety-during-castle-storming/552583.md?page=3)