HISTORY OF WARFARE - LAND ROME EMPIRE, PERSIAN EMPIRE, GUN FIRE

reek citizen armies: from the 7th century BC
The citizens of the Greek city states are free men - mainly small farmers, or merchants and artisans in the city. They have a strong collective impulse to protect their shared patch of territory, which is often not much more than a single valley among the hills. Each man, enlisting for military service, provides his own equipment. The rich come on horses; they are few in number because Greece has relatively little grazing. The poorer citizens arrive with minimal equipment; they will be used as light infantry, in skirmishes before and after a battle. But the majority bring sturdy armour, including a heavy shield, the hoplon, from which these soldiers take their name. They are the hoplites.
The armour of the hoplite is a bronze helmet (the famous Greek helmet with a long narrow bridge down the nose), a corselet from shoulders to hips (usually in leather with bronze over the chest), bronze grieves (guarding the shins), a round shield (wood reinforced with iron), a long spear with a sharpened iron tip and a short double-edged iron sword. Variants of this equipment can be found at this time in other armies. The hoplites are revolutionary not for their equipment but for the way they use it - massed together in the famous Greek phalanx (which has Mesopotamian origins).
The phalanx is a slow-moving but almost irresistible force, with a lethally sharp front edge. It consists of a solid block of men, usually eight ranks deep but often more. Each rank marches close behind the one in front. The first three ranks hold their spears horizontally, pointing them forward, so that three staggered spear points precede each man of the front rank. The men in the rear hold their spears upright in readiness. Each hoplite is protected partly by the shield of the man to the right of him. It is in his interest to make sure that he keeps safely behind it, and this gives the phalanx its only vulnerable characteristic. The left of the line tends to fall back and curve away.
Greek tactics: 7th - 4th century BC
Greek battlefields are usually flat and open, chosen for the convenience of the hoplites. The engagement, invariably brief, begins when the phalanx trundles into action. Keeping close formation, the hoplites run slowly forward in their heavy armour, yelling a morale-boosting battle cry. If the enemy's main force is cavalry (as with a Persian invasion), the phalanx is unlikely to be penetrated, since the horses will shy back from the wall of spears. But if the opposing force is another phalanx, running forward at the same speed, the clash is titanic, as the front lines meet and many fall - either wounded or simply overwhelmed by the weight of armour crashing in from both sides.
The first aim of every hoplite, as the opposing ranks meet, is to jab his spear point through the opposing shields to find any gap of flesh unprotected by an enemy's armour - such as neck or armpit. But if the opposing ranks break, the spear is abandoned for the hoplite's other weapon - the short two-sided sword, with which he will attempt to slash the unprotected top or back of an opponent's legs. Once disaster has turned into flight, the weight of the hoplite's armour becomes a major disadvantage. Now the Greek light infantry, poor relations to the hoplite, come into their own, pursuing and spearing the defeated.
The phalanx undergoes a few tactical developments over the centuries. Its tendency to drift backwards on the left is brilliantly exploited in the 4th century by Epaminondas (see the tactics of Epaminondas). Preliminary assaults on the opposing phalanx by slingers and archers become standard practice. And Alexander the Great increases the weight of the phalanx by doubling its depth to 16 ranks and arming the hoplites with spears of 6 or 7 yards (6 metres) in length - enabling the first five ranks to use their spears in the initial charge. But these are only modifications. The next real advance in European infantry tactics must wait for the Roman legions.
Meanwhile in the east...: from the 5th century BC
The might of Rome dominates much of Europe, west Asia and north Africa for four centuries or more. But even before the start of the Roman period China - in its isolation - has developed a military machine which no rival in the west could match. The power of the kingdoms of China derives not only from the sheer size of the armies (it is said that two of the kingdoms in the 5th century BC are capable of mobilizing more than a million men), but also from weapons unknown in the west (the crossbow) and from organization in the field. The Terracotta army of Shi Huangdi gives a vivid image of a Chinese army in battle formation.
The Roman legions: from the 4th century BC
In the early years of Rome's history Roman soldiers form up for battle in a Greek phalanx, but by the 4th century a distinctive tactic is beginning to emerge in the deployment of the Roman legion. The essence of the change is the division of the army into companies of 120 men, known as maniples. Each maniple is formed up on the battle ground as a block 12 abreast and 10 deep. Instead of the serried ranks of the Greek phalanx, the soldiers stand about 5 feet apart within each maniple; and the maniples are deployed on the field like three rows of squares on a chessboard (each black square a block of men, each white square open space).
In the first shock of battle each maniple knows that there is a space behind into which it can fall back. By the same token a maniple of the second or third rank has space in front, where it can move to give support. And enemy forces may be enticed into a space between maniples, where they can be attacked from both sides. This is very different from the rigid once-for-all clash of two solid phalanxes. In keeping with this more open role, the weapons of the Roman foot soldier are gradually modified.
Arms of the Roman legionary: from the 4th century BC
In a Roman army the long heavy spear of the Greek hopliteis replaced by a javelin. The Roman foot soldier flings this as soon as he is in close contact with the enemy. He then gets to work with his short thrusting sword, the most characteristic weapon of the Roman legionary. The Roman helmet is simpler than the Greek version, with more of the face exposed. And the Roman shield is rectangular, with a slight curve so that it hugs the body. Held edge to edge above the head, these shields can form a roof to protect soldiers carrying out a siege - the famous Roman testudo or 'tortoise'.
The foot soldiers in their maniples form the centre of any Roman line of attack. Cavalry and light infantry give support on the wings, particularly in the later centuries. It is a military system which proves well suited to conquer and control most of Europe, north Africa and much of the Middle East. The legions, and the great network of Roman roads which they build and march upon, are the backbone of the empire. But by the 4th century AD there is a military threat of a kind unfamiliar to the legions - heavy cavalry, which Rome's horses and horsemen are at first ill-equipped to confront.
Heavy cavalry: 3rd century BC - 4th century AD
The cavalry, deriving as a military force from the nimble tactics of mounted nomads, have traditionally depended on speed. A quick assault against clumsy infantry can be followed by an equally rapid escape. Armour for the horseman's body is neither necessary nor possible, given the size of early horses. But a heavily armoured cavalry would have clear and different advantages. It would be like a much more powerful version of the infantry, while retaining the mobility of mounted troops. Such a desirable addition to an army requires strong horses. In Persia, a developed region exposed to nomad raiders from the north, such animals are deliberately bred from about 300 BC.
The new breeds of horse spread gradually westwards, north of the Black Sea, into the Ukraine and eastern Europe. They are used by the Goths, and are possibly a factor in the crushing defeat of a Roman army by the Visigoths at Adrianople in AD 378. The Romans subsequently rely heavily on Gothic mercenaries for their own armies, so the heavy cavalry becomes increasingly a central element in any successful force. By now a saddle on a wooden frame, raised in front and behind to form a secure seat for the rider, has replaced the earlier saddle cloth - probably from about the 1st century AD. But one element is still needed to give the heavy cavalryman his full potential. This is the stirrup.

The cavalry of the Medes: 7th century BC
The Assyrian war machine is eventually toppled (in 612) as much by accumulated resentment, particularly from Babylon, as by any military weakness. But among their conquerors are the Medes, nomads from the steppes, who use to devastating advantage their extra agility on horseback. The Assyrians have an effective cavalry, but they cannot match the nimble archery of the Medes. The Persian empire, which derives from the success of the Medes, grows above all through administrative genius. But the cavalry, together with chariots and archers, are now at the heart of its military successes - rather than the foot soldiers who did most of the work for the Assyrians.
The Persian army: c.500 BC
The regular army of the Persian empire contains an elite corps involving a brilliant element of propaganda. These crack troops are known as the Immortals, for the simple and inspired reason that there are always 10,000 of them (in theory as soon as one dies, another soldier is ready to take his place). At the heart of this 10,000 are an even more special thousand - the royal bodyguard. The army is precisely decimal. Divisions of 10,000 are divided into battalions of 1000, companies of 100 and squads of 10. The bow is the chief Persian weapon, and the armies' tactics are based on rapid movement and light armour.
In a crisis the Persian standing army is reinforced by a levy on the subject people of the vast empire. The recruits, of widely different origins, fight according to their own customs and with their own weapons, but under Persian officers. Because the Persian empire is on the whole benevolent, the system works well in most circumstances. But the Persian armies will prove no match for something new in history - the world's first citizen armies, put into the field by the Greek city states.

Artillery: 14th - 16th century
The most significant development in the story of warfare is the use of gunpowder to propel a missile. There has been much debate as to where the first experiments are made. Inconclusive and sometimes mistranslated references from early documents appear to give the priority variously to the Chinese, the Hindus, the Arabs and the Turks. It is likely that the matter can never be resolved. The earliest incontrovertible evidence of artillery is a drawing of a crude form of cannon in a manuscript dated 1327 (now in the library of Christ Church, Oxford). There is a reference to a gun mounted on a ship in 1336, and the possibility of cannon of some kind in use at Crécy and Calais in 1346-7.
The problem confronting early makers of artillery is how to construct a tube strong enough to contain an explosion which will propel a missile out of one end (or, in other words, how to make a gun rather than a bomb). An early solution gives us our word 'barrel'. The tube is built up of metal strips welded to each other along their straight edges - just as a barrel is constructed of similar strips of wood. This rather fragile structure is given greater strength by being encased in a series of tightly fitting metal rings. With luck, a round stone (or later a ball of cast iron) will hurtle from the open end of this tube when gunpowder is ignited behind it.
The laborious loading and firing of such weapons limits their effective use to sieges - either inside a castle defending an entrance, or outside lobbing heavy objects at the walls. The size of the missile rather than its speed is the crucial factor. A breakthrough in this respect, in the late 14th century, is the discovery of how to cast gun barrels from molten iron. Cannon, during the next two centuries, become progressively larger. There are some impressive surviving examples. Mons Meg, dating from the 15th century and now in Edinburgh castle, could hurl an iron ball, 18 inches in diameter, as far as a mile. The even larger Tsar Cannon in Moscow, cast in 1586 with a bore of 3 feet, weighs nearly 40 tons. Mobility is not one of its features.
One of the most remarkable of early cannon is a proud possession of Mehmed, the Turkish conqueror of Constantinople. Before his final attack in 1453 he terrifies the inhabitants by trundling close to their city a massive 19-ton bombard of cast iron. It requires 16 oxen and 200 men to manoeuvre it into its firing position. Once there, it settles down to a slow but devastating bombardment. A stone weighing as much as 600 pounds can be lobbed against the great city walls. The rate of fire is seven stones a day. In this same same year, at Castillon in France, another potential of gun power is demonstrated - in the effect of light artillery on the battlefield.
Hand guns: 14th - 17th century
Portable guns are developed shortly after the first cannons. When first mentioned, in the 1360s, such a gun is like a small version of a cannon. A metal tube, up to a foot long, is attached to the end of a pole about six feet in length - an early and very basic version of the barrel and stock of a rifle. The gunner has to apply a glowing coal or a red-hot wire to a touchhole in the loaded barrel, and then somehow get far enough away from the explosion. There is clearly not much opportunity for rapid aiming. Most such weapons are probably fired by two men, or are carried to a new position and fixed there before being loaded and ignited by one.
Refinements follow surprisingly fast. During the 15th century the barrel of such weapons is lengthened, giving more reliable aim. The wooden stock acquires a curve, so that the recoil raises the barrel rather than driving backwards with full force. A length of rope known as a 'match' replaces the hot coal or wire for igniting the charge in the touchhole; it is soaked in a substance which causes it to burn with a steady glow. And a device called a 'lock' is developed - a curving arm of metal which holds the glowing match and will plunge it into the touchhole, when a pull on a trigger releases a spring. The 'matchlock' becomes the standard form of musket until the arrival of the flintlock in the 17th century.
The guns of Formigny and Castillon: 1450-1453
Inconclusive references in contemporary documents suggest that guns of some kind may have featured on Europe's battlefields as early as Crécy in 1346. But the first engagement in which they play a decisive role is at Formigny in 1450. The English enter the field with a slightly larger force than the French, perhaps 3500 men against 3000. For much of the battle the English bowmen achieve their now customary success. But considerable damage is done to the English force by two small cannons, or culverins, in the French position.
Recognizing the importance of these guns, the English make an effort to capture them. They succeed briefly in doing so. But the French win back their cannons, and with them win the day. The same pattern is repeated three years later at Castillon. On this occasion the French have several cannons in a defensive position. The English make a frontal assault, suffering considerable losses in men and even more in confidence. It is the last battle of the Hundred Years War, which in itself is the last great medieval conflict. The centuries of the archer give way to those of the gunner.
Fortification: 15th - 16th century
The introduction of gunpowder has a profound influence on the science of fortification. Cannon are trundled laboriously up to blast away at castle or town walls from the early 15th century, and by the end of the century sappers are undermining walls to insert explosive charges. The previous convention for a defensive wall (as tall as possible against siege ladders, but not necessarily very sturdy) becomes inappropriate. A squat and massively thick wall now becomes more effective, preferably sloping back from the vertical so that the impact of a cannon ball is lessened. And strong platforms are needed along the length of the wall, to carry the defenders' own cannon.
It is in Renaissance Italy (notable for Europe's most constant warfare and most enquiring minds) that the new science of fortification is developed. Leonardo is only one of many distinguished artists to apply himself to the problem. Of thirty-three serious works published on the topic during the 16th century, all but six are Italian. The chief Italian innovation is the angled bastion. Round towers projecting from the walls have been a part of medieval castle design, but they leave an area at their outer edge where an attacker close to the wall is only vulnerable from directly above - not a good angle for a castle marksman in the days of muzzle loading.
The Italian design solves this problem. Each bastion now projects from the wall to a triangular outer point which is in sight of the gunners on each of the neighbouring bastions. The area which was previously the ideal spot for a sapper to dig undisturbed beneath the wall, to plant an explosive charge, is now as exposed as any other. This arrangement of angled bastions means that a fortress can be fully protected if it has the shape of a five or six-pointed star. A greater number of bastions can be placed at appropriate points in existing city walls. By these means, during the 16th century, the defenders acquire the advantage. The balance is tipped again in the next century by the tactics of Sebastien de Vauban.
The spread of gunfire: 16th century
During the 16th century the armies of Europe continually adjust their tactics to make the most of the developing potential of cannons and muskets. The two leaders in this arms race are the great rivals, France and Spain. The Spanish are more imaginative in their deployment of the most up-to-date musket of the day, a light matchlock known as an arquebus. But the French make better use of cannon, placing them in strategic positions on the battlefield. The fortunes of war swing either way between these armies, as Spanish and French generals find new ways to surprise their counterparts with gunfire.
In 1503 Spanish arquebusiers defeat a French army at Cerignola by the discipline and persistence of their fire. In 1512 the French win a battle at Ravenna thanks to the devastating effect of twenty-four massed cannon. In 1515 a Swiss army, fighting on the Spanish side, suffers heavy damage at Marignano from a combination of seventy-two French cannon followed by a cavalry attack. Ten years later the Spanish turn the tables again at Pavia, where their squads of arquebusiers are deployed rapidly and unpredictably across the battlefield. This 'unusual, astonishing, cruel and unworthy' method of fighting (in the words of a contemporary French author) throws the French cavalry into complete disarray.
Meanwhile, as Europeans become familiar with the new arms, less developed communities further afield are confronted by a terrifying weapon, with no visible missile, which they meet for the first time on the battlefield. Victories won by the mere possession of firearms ripple outwards into Asia, America and Africa during the century. In 1514 Persians experience their first cannon fire from the Turks. In 1519 Indian tribesmen, confronted by intruders from Afghanistan, laugh (at first) at weapons which seem to fire no arrows. In 1532, in Peru, 150 Spaniards overwhelm the Incas with a few cannon and arquebuses. In 1591 the sultan of Morocco with his musketeers routs the cavalry of the kingdom of Songhay.