Warfare In The Middle Ages

Improved Essays
Warfare during the medieval era was a huge shift from earlier warfare with new technology and tactics. The Middle Ages was a time of constant threat from foreign invaders. Due to all these threats, people took as many defensive precautions as possible as well as utilize new weaponry. Due to all the brand new military innovations, many historians differ on what change was the most important in the advancement of war. Some focus on weaponry and the development of cavalries while others focus on the advancement and development of new defensive structures, causing a more defensive style of warfare. When war is talked about, most people neglect to think of churches, often considered to be sanctuaries. During the Middle Ages however, there were …show more content…
It is debatable whether siege warfare became as important as it was due to the presence of the defensive monstrosities that were castles or if it was siege warfare that led to the advancement of castles, but siege warfare is a key focus regardless. When analyzing medieval warfare, some historians make the mistake of ignoring siege engines or warfare and instead choose to focus their inquiry on knights or horses . Knights on horseback had a minor impact on siege warfare, which was the leading form of combat. The medieval battleground consisted of not only the great walled cities, of which, for example, there were almost one hundred in Gaul alone, but also numerous castra, castella, and even less elaborate fortifications. Siege warfare in Europe focused on these fortified cities and other, less fortified, population centers. Bachrach argues that siege warfare is not focused on enough when examining medieval warfare. The majority of warfare during the Middle Ages was made up of siege warfare, and Bachrach says that historians instead choose to focus on minor components of medieval warfare such as knights on horseback and that in depth examination of siege warfare is necessary when historians are examining warfare during the Middle …show more content…
One such historian,Sven Ekdahl, views horses, castles and the crossbow as being the most important advancements in medieval warfare. Sven Ekdahl focuses on how horses and crossbows allowed european forces to easily conquer the heathen peoples but also mentions how the europeans had the advantage by having the ability to create “permanent fortresses in stone or brick: the manufacture of bricks and mortar was unknown in the eastern Baltic until then.”. Ekdahl provides a middle ground between the two dominant paradigms of medieval warfare, talking about infantry advancements as well as structural enhancements that played such a key role in medieval warfare, especially in siege

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Alliances were efficient in allowing the first World War to happen, but Alliances didn’t last long. Alliances only came into effect until after the war started.se nations to fight over land and resources, leading to nations to resort to expand their arms. The first world war has multiple causes, imperialism and nationalism had the most significant impact in the beginning of World War 1, and others like alliances had a lesser impact on World War 1. Nationalism had influenced politics greatly with ethnic groups resenting the control of other nations. Imperialism had caused nations to fight over land and resources, leading to nations then resorted to expand their military strength.…

    • 579 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Globalization In Warfare

    • 1446 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Before World War I militaries thought that tactics and strategy win wars, but when WWI started that was no longer true. New technology was needed to top the enemy like machine guns, tanks, and poisonous gas. Before WWI there were guns that men had to load the…

    • 1446 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    By practicing militarism, Germany fostered an environment of mutual distrust and intense rivalry in Europe. Countries like Great Britain and Russia felt compelled to increase the size and training of their armies and navies so that Germany, or any other militaristic country, could not easily overpower them. In addition, German militarism led to a focus on conflict that made many Europeans anticipate war. By holding armies of a million or more men and strategizing heavily for combat, countries, such as Germany, Great…

    • 1465 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Summary: Bloodier Warfare

    • 1150 Words
    • 5 Pages

    As the Military Revolution revolutionized the way that people fought, it wasn’t only part of the western rise to power but it was also the creation of much bloodier warfare. “The Infantry Revolution marked a sharp increase in causalities on the battlefield. Whereas formerly it had been important to capture the knights for the purpose of realizing a ransom, common infantrymen neither held that value, nor did they share knightly notions of chivalry. Battle thus became more sanguine affairs.” (Krepinevich, 2). Even though some argue that there where far bloodier conflicts outside of the European sphere.…

    • 1150 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    World War 1 Tension Essay

    • 1538 Words
    • 7 Pages

    There were many causes to it, but the three most important causes of the war were the rising tensions, assassination of Ferdinand, and the pre-war alliances. The rising tensions were happening for many reasons and only got worse as people fought to compete. One of the causes of rising tensions came from the advances and building up of the military and weapons. By 1914 there was long-range artillery that could hit targets as far as six miles away. Long-range weaponry was a threat and so others responded by building up their available weaponry or the navy that they had to make them seem bigger and stronger than they were.…

    • 1538 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Military Tactics

    • 2125 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Strategy and Tactics are a pivotal part of both old and modern warfare, remaining fairly consistent due to the influence of Napoleonic Warfare that dominated Europe. Carl von Clausewitz defined military strategy as "the employment of battles to gain the end of war"1. Strategy and tactics have contributed greatly to changing the nature of warfare having varying levels of effect during the wars between 1845 and 1991. This can in part be attributed to significant advances in technology as well as developments in communication and transport which have also had varying degrees of importance between these periods. The Crimean War was an example of limited warfare, highlighting the need for a strategy of defence in a war where attack was at the forefront.…

    • 2125 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Before 1794, army formations lacked flexibility, but the Revolution gave rise to the widespread use of the column formation that allowed for greater maneuverability in the battlefield. Additionally, warfare became a national effort…

    • 1818 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    The United States was bound to run into the conflicts that it did being a newer Country. Physical change and conflicts of interest were bound to happen, especially when there is next to no middle ground for major issues. Although the war was not necessarily fought over slavery, it was a foundation for issues that did help cause the war. Overall, there was no better way to try and…

    • 1892 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Also, the war had a big influence in the late medieval Europe, causing the decline of feudalism and the increase of new weapons like the use of longbows in battles. It all…

    • 657 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Generals expected the advancement of technology to accelerate the customary short, aggressive, and decisive wars yet instead found that they functioned best towards the opposite – defensive, prolongation of wars. This contrast in expectations and reality meant an exceptional amount of time would need to be spent to rectify strategies and organizational structures in order to accommodate the extended war. The combination of time needing to be invested into figuring out how to adjust for the realities of war and counter the defense-oriented technologies that were seen to dominate the battlefield were the ultimate causes of the stalemate that took generals by surprise. From this, we can derive a lesson that can be applied even a hundred years later as our technology advances and molds warfare just as the powers fighting in the First World War experienced: with novelty comes uncertainty, as brand new technologies were expected to increase the pace of war make it even deadlier and decisive, generals soon learned they did quite the opposite. Today we may think that with bombs capable of destroying entire cities or populations, or vehicles capable of going around the globe in mere hours that war would also be even deadlier and quicker, however, we may just as easily see the opposite – prolonged wars of seemingly impenetrable defenses that make our impede the expected capabilities of modern technology just like the generals saw in World War One.…

    • 1746 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays