What do you think?
Rate this book
Warfare in the Medieval World
Warfare in the Medieval World explores how civilizations and cultures made war on the battlefields of the Near East and Europe in the period between the fall of Rome and the introduction of reliable gunpowder weapons during the Thirty Years War. Through an exploration of thirty-three selected battles, military historian Brian Todd Carey surveys the changing tactical relationships between the four weapon systems-heavy and light infantry and heavy and light cavalry - focusing on the evolution of shock and missile combat.
This is the second part of an ambitious two-volume study of the subject. The first volume, Warfare in the Ancient World, examined the evolution of warfare from the Bronze Age to the highly organized armies of the Greeks and the Romans.
This is the second part of an ambitious two-volume study of the subject. The first volume, Warfare in the Ancient World, examined the evolution of warfare from the Bronze Age to the highly organized armies of the Greeks and the Romans.
344 pages, Hardcover
First published January 19, 2006
41 people are currently reading
131 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
June 14, 2020
"Tactically, utilizing a combined-arms system meant bringing to the battlefield the capabilities of both shock and missile combat. In the periods under study, this meant the ability to kill in close proximity in hand-to-hand engagements using hand-held weapons (shock) or at a distance using slings, javelins, spears, bows, and, later, handguns (missile). Modern military historians describe tactical systems with shock capabilities as heavy, while tactical systems that utilize missiles are described as light."
This book covers warfare from the fall of Rome’s Western Empire to the Battle of Lützen in 1632, concentrating on weapons and tactics as they evolved to meet new challenges. Anyone who thinks that medieval warfare was simply mounted knights charging one another understands only one small piece of the tactical picture; heavily armored knights on horseback rose to dominance for a time, but found themselves outmatched when pitted against light infantry and cavalry using bows and javelins or heavy infantry squares bristling with pikes, and were eventually subordinated into being just one branch of a combined-arms force before fading away entirely.
With the fall of Rome Europe devolved into many small and transient kingdoms, without the money, manpower, or logistical capabilities that the Romans had commanded. Even Charlemagne’s great achievement at empire building did not survive his death in 814, as Europe came under pressure from invasions on multiple fronts: the Vikings from the north, the Magyars from the east, and the armies of Islam from the south.
The mounted knights were successful for a time, partly because of their training and discipline, and partly because of the adoption of the stirrup, which changed mounted warfare.
Mounted knights were successful for several centuries, and helped turn back the invasions. The Vikings were raiders rather than soldiers, and fared poorly against trained, disciplined troops; the Islamic push north into France was smashed at Tours in 732, and in 855 Otto I crushed the Magyars at Lechfield so thoroughly that they were never again a threat to western Europe. “Instead of ransoming the Magyar princes and nobles back to their vassals as was customary for the time, Otto ordered them hanged, then sent the rest of the barbarians back to their homeland minus ears or noses.”
Although successful for a time in Europe, the limitations of heavy cavalry became apparent when the Byzantines found themselves outmatched against the more mobile light cavalry of the Islamic armies and the Seljuk Turks, who could shower the knights with arrows while easily avoiding their ponderous lance charges. Western armies began to reconsider relying primarily on their heavy cavalry, and started incorporating light infantry and cavalry into their armies.
Nevertheless, the mounted knights tried to maintain their primacy, partly because their position was not just military, but social as well. “the medieval period’s most powerful institution, the Catholic Church, passed legislation at the Second Ecumenical Lateran Council in 1139 anathematizing all who used the crossbow and bow in wars between Christians (later, the killing of infidels with missile weapons was acceptable). In many ways the Catholic Church was bowing to the demands of a noble class who feared death by arrows and bolts from a distant, anonymous killer.”
And then, both the armies of the West and those of Islam came face to face with the Mongol invasions, and had no answer for the swiftness, ferocity, and strategic brilliance of their foes. From China to Hungary, and from northern Russia to Iraq the Mongols built the largest empire in history and swept all before them. Although they made effective use of siege weapons as required, the Mongol fighting forces were entirely mounted. “The typical Mongol army was a pure cavalry force consisting of about 60 per cent light cavalry and 40 per cent heavy cavalry.” Trained since childhood to ride and shoot, they could avoid the charges of their opponents’ heavy cavalry, and rain down destruction on immobile infantry forces. They were also equipped with the fearsome compound bow, better than anything in use in the West.
So what saved Europe and Islam? It was luck. Both the Mongols’ European and Middle Eastern campaigns were stopped because of the deaths of the Great Khans, which required their armies to return home. Had that not happened, nothing would have stopped them until they reached the Atlantic Ocean in Europe or however far they wished to conquer in the Levant and Africa.
As Europe recovered from the Mongols its armies were experimenting with new weapons and tactics. The English adopted the Welsh longbow, which could penetrate heavy armor at a distance of several hundred yards. “On the continent, two English kings, Edward III and Henry V, were victorious against the French during [the Hundred Years War], utilizing light infantry archers and dismounted heavy cavalry in a defensive posture against the repeated charges of French lances, with great success at Crecy in 1346 and Agincourt in 1415.”
It was the Swiss pikemen who changed the rules of the game in the last centuries of the Medieval era, finally ending the dominance of the mounted knights. They created flexible battle squares bristling with pikes and halberds which could move in any direction. Supported on their flanks by light infantry with bows and crossbows, they repeatedly inflicted heavy defeats on their French, Burgundian, and Hapsburg opponents. Since they were also fighting to keep their freedom and avoid being absorbed into one of the large empires surrounding them, they also developed a fearsome reputation for butchery; instead of ransoming captives back they were killed, giving the soldiers of opposing armies something to think about. Even Charles the Bold of Burgundy met his end at the point of a Swiss halberd while losing his third battle against them.
The Swiss battle square was quickly adopted throughout Europe, resulting in a number of tactical innovations to try to deal with it. The sword and shield even made a comeback for a time, the idea being that soldiers so equipped could slip under the pike to close with its wielder.
It was gunpowder that eventually changed the Medieval armies into ones we would recognize today. Early gunnery was slow and clumsy, but even then it was clear that it was going to become a major factor in training and tactics.
A number of different ways were tried to incorporate firearms into battle formations. Due to the time it took to reload, one popular tactic was to use a carousel formation, where the first rank would fire, then pivot to the rear to reload while the next rank fired, and so on through ten ranks. The musketeers were also tried on the ends of pike formations, as well as interspersed between the rows of pikemen.
The book ends with Gustavus Adolphus and the Battle of Lützen in 1632, because it is there that modern infantry tactics came into being. For the first time the gunners were arrayed in long lines of only a few ranks each, instead of massed together. When protected by light cavalry on their flanks, and with pikemen available to come to their aid if enemy cavalry got too close, a new formation emerged which would become the basis of army tactical deployments for 250 years.
This book is not for experts in the history of warfare, and has received a couple of negative reviews for its perceived shortcomings. Nevertheless, those looking for a general introduction to Medieval armies and tactics, with good descriptions of how and why they evolved over time, will find this book worth reading.
This book covers warfare from the fall of Rome’s Western Empire to the Battle of Lützen in 1632, concentrating on weapons and tactics as they evolved to meet new challenges. Anyone who thinks that medieval warfare was simply mounted knights charging one another understands only one small piece of the tactical picture; heavily armored knights on horseback rose to dominance for a time, but found themselves outmatched when pitted against light infantry and cavalry using bows and javelins or heavy infantry squares bristling with pikes, and were eventually subordinated into being just one branch of a combined-arms force before fading away entirely.
With the fall of Rome Europe devolved into many small and transient kingdoms, without the money, manpower, or logistical capabilities that the Romans had commanded. Even Charlemagne’s great achievement at empire building did not survive his death in 814, as Europe came under pressure from invasions on multiple fronts: the Vikings from the north, the Magyars from the east, and the armies of Islam from the south.
In response to this ‘Second Age of Invasions’, western European monarchies developed an art of war unique in world history in its reliance on heavy cavalry as the dominant weapon system. Needing the kind of strategic mobility only cavalry could provide, western European commanders initiated a gradual transformation in the composition of medieval armies. Consequently, heavy cavalry replaced infantry as the decisive arm. The mounted knight and lancer, with his stabilizing stirrup, expensive panoply and well-trained horse, gradually became the centrepiece of a combined-arms army where all other weapon systems were subordinated to the heavy cavalry.
The mounted knights were successful for a time, partly because of their training and discipline, and partly because of the adoption of the stirrup, which changed mounted warfare.
When combined with a saddle built up at the pommel and cantle for longitudinal support, the stirrup welded rider and horse together. Rather than thrusting out himself, the lancer now held his weapon at rest in the crook of his arm, using the combined weight of his body and his charging mount to deliver a blow of unprecedented violence. Utilizing the energy of the horse and the new-found stability provided by the stirrup, this new heavy cavalry used its spears as lances to defeat its enemies and secure a position at the top of the social hierarchy.
Mounted knights were successful for several centuries, and helped turn back the invasions. The Vikings were raiders rather than soldiers, and fared poorly against trained, disciplined troops; the Islamic push north into France was smashed at Tours in 732, and in 855 Otto I crushed the Magyars at Lechfield so thoroughly that they were never again a threat to western Europe. “Instead of ransoming the Magyar princes and nobles back to their vassals as was customary for the time, Otto ordered them hanged, then sent the rest of the barbarians back to their homeland minus ears or noses.”
Although successful for a time in Europe, the limitations of heavy cavalry became apparent when the Byzantines found themselves outmatched against the more mobile light cavalry of the Islamic armies and the Seljuk Turks, who could shower the knights with arrows while easily avoiding their ponderous lance charges. Western armies began to reconsider relying primarily on their heavy cavalry, and started incorporating light infantry and cavalry into their armies.
Nevertheless, the mounted knights tried to maintain their primacy, partly because their position was not just military, but social as well. “the medieval period’s most powerful institution, the Catholic Church, passed legislation at the Second Ecumenical Lateran Council in 1139 anathematizing all who used the crossbow and bow in wars between Christians (later, the killing of infidels with missile weapons was acceptable). In many ways the Catholic Church was bowing to the demands of a noble class who feared death by arrows and bolts from a distant, anonymous killer.”
And then, both the armies of the West and those of Islam came face to face with the Mongol invasions, and had no answer for the swiftness, ferocity, and strategic brilliance of their foes. From China to Hungary, and from northern Russia to Iraq the Mongols built the largest empire in history and swept all before them. Although they made effective use of siege weapons as required, the Mongol fighting forces were entirely mounted. “The typical Mongol army was a pure cavalry force consisting of about 60 per cent light cavalry and 40 per cent heavy cavalry.” Trained since childhood to ride and shoot, they could avoid the charges of their opponents’ heavy cavalry, and rain down destruction on immobile infantry forces. They were also equipped with the fearsome compound bow, better than anything in use in the West.
The Mongol composite bow was larger than most of its central Asian cousins, with a hefty pull of up to 165 pounds and an effective range of 350 yards. Quivers carried arrows for many purposes: light arrows with small, sharp points for use at long ranges, heavier shafts with large, broad heads for use at close quarters, armour-piercing arrows, arrows equipped with whistling heads for signaling and incendiary arrows for setting things on fire. The Mongol warriors were so adept at mounted archery that they could bend and string the bow in the saddle and then loose the arrow in any direction at full gallop.
So what saved Europe and Islam? It was luck. Both the Mongols’ European and Middle Eastern campaigns were stopped because of the deaths of the Great Khans, which required their armies to return home. Had that not happened, nothing would have stopped them until they reached the Atlantic Ocean in Europe or however far they wished to conquer in the Levant and Africa.
As Europe recovered from the Mongols its armies were experimenting with new weapons and tactics. The English adopted the Welsh longbow, which could penetrate heavy armor at a distance of several hundred yards. “On the continent, two English kings, Edward III and Henry V, were victorious against the French during [the Hundred Years War], utilizing light infantry archers and dismounted heavy cavalry in a defensive posture against the repeated charges of French lances, with great success at Crecy in 1346 and Agincourt in 1415.”
It was the Swiss pikemen who changed the rules of the game in the last centuries of the Medieval era, finally ending the dominance of the mounted knights. They created flexible battle squares bristling with pikes and halberds which could move in any direction. Supported on their flanks by light infantry with bows and crossbows, they repeatedly inflicted heavy defeats on their French, Burgundian, and Hapsburg opponents. Since they were also fighting to keep their freedom and avoid being absorbed into one of the large empires surrounding them, they also developed a fearsome reputation for butchery; instead of ransoming captives back they were killed, giving the soldiers of opposing armies something to think about. Even Charles the Bold of Burgundy met his end at the point of a Swiss halberd while losing his third battle against them.
The Swiss battle square was quickly adopted throughout Europe, resulting in a number of tactical innovations to try to deal with it. The sword and shield even made a comeback for a time, the idea being that soldiers so equipped could slip under the pike to close with its wielder.
It was gunpowder that eventually changed the Medieval armies into ones we would recognize today. Early gunnery was slow and clumsy, but even then it was clear that it was going to become a major factor in training and tactics.
Though the musket’s increased powder improved the lead ball’s velocity, its effective range still remained well under 200 yards. Both the arquebus and the musket required a few minutes to reload (two shots in three minutes was considered exceptionally good by the 1570s), and accuracy was so poor that the typical marksman could not reliably hit a man-sized target at ranges above 75 yards. Still, the arquebus and musket could penetrate any practical thickness of armour on the battlefield, making light infantry firepower an increasingly important factor in early modern warfare.
A number of different ways were tried to incorporate firearms into battle formations. Due to the time it took to reload, one popular tactic was to use a carousel formation, where the first rank would fire, then pivot to the rear to reload while the next rank fired, and so on through ten ranks. The musketeers were also tried on the ends of pike formations, as well as interspersed between the rows of pikemen.
The book ends with Gustavus Adolphus and the Battle of Lützen in 1632, because it is there that modern infantry tactics came into being. For the first time the gunners were arrayed in long lines of only a few ranks each, instead of massed together. When protected by light cavalry on their flanks, and with pikemen available to come to their aid if enemy cavalry got too close, a new formation emerged which would become the basis of army tactical deployments for 250 years.
This book is not for experts in the history of warfare, and has received a couple of negative reviews for its perceived shortcomings. Nevertheless, those looking for a general introduction to Medieval armies and tactics, with good descriptions of how and why they evolved over time, will find this book worth reading.
January 19, 2022
Thoroughly enjoyed this book. I picked it up to learn more about medieval warfare tactics, particularly the interactions between the Muslim world and the western powers. It was detailed in the way that I wanted and also had very helpful diagrams to help understand the interactions between different forms of military. Given my previous love of fictional warfare, I'm now much more confident on what can be called cinematic drama and what can be called accurate depictions in film and TV.
August 29, 2011
This book is intended as a short overview of evolution of warfare in middle ages and manages to achieve that goal, but only just. The main problem here is author's choice of sources - to a large degree he depends on works by Delbruck, Oman and Fuller, which by now are ancient. Content of the book is centered on developments in Western Europe, in fact focus on that geographic area borders on rudiculous. This is especially visible in sections that deal with Crusades and Mongol invasions, where events are based on English-speaking sources. It is safe to say that in regard of events in Eastern Europe during that historical period, resources in English are pathetically inadequate (for example, presence of military religious orders at Leignitz was miniscule, but if one is to believe the author, they were the main force of the Christian army). Another thing that annoyed me was author's insistance on importance of stirrups in connection with development of European heavy cavalry of the period - this 'old wives tale' simply refuses to die. I guess that this volume is a suitable starting point for studies of the period, however a warning must be issued regarding the pre-packaged conclusions presented by the author.
April 3, 2022
This is a good niche run-through of the history of medieval warfare including Vikings/Mongols/Franks etc and covers a lot of the well known battles in really good detail.
Would recommend. There is a book before it also regarding ancient warfare that I’ll be looking to read soon.
Would recommend. There is a book before it also regarding ancient warfare that I’ll be looking to read soon.
May 27, 2012
This work is a continuation of his excellent WARFARE IN THE ANCIENT WORLD, picking up where his first volume left off. MEDIEVAL WORLD begins with an exploration of Byzantine warfare, then moves on to discuss the rise of heavy cavalry in western Europe during the early and high medieval periods. He then moves on to discuss the crusades in Spain and the Holy Land, as well as the Mongol penetrations in eastern Europe and in the Near East. His book winds down with a discussion of the return of light infantry to European warfare, as well as the rise of heavy infantry like the Swiss. The book ends with a fine chapter discussing the ipact of classical authors on early modern war. Like his volume 1, this work is profusely illustrated with tactical maps and regional maps and brings the combat of the era to life. I highly recommend both of these books for any military historians library.
September 26, 2011
After decades of reading the academic specialized work, I want to see what the popular version of medieval warfare history books look like!
...[edit]and so far it looks...simplistic. And with an odd focus on battles that remind me of Oman and Delbruck, but not in a good way.
...I finally decided not to finish this book beyond the 60%. Carey seems to have access to (from the Kindle edition bibliography) most of the modern scholarship on the subject, but must have decided not to use it. There are also simply too many direct and glaring errors - simple, factual ones, rather than interpretations that are simply dodgy for me to bother finishing this book.
Don't waste your time. Carey is in over his head here.
...[edit]and so far it looks...simplistic. And with an odd focus on battles that remind me of Oman and Delbruck, but not in a good way.
...I finally decided not to finish this book beyond the 60%. Carey seems to have access to (from the Kindle edition bibliography) most of the modern scholarship on the subject, but must have decided not to use it. There are also simply too many direct and glaring errors - simple, factual ones, rather than interpretations that are simply dodgy for me to bother finishing this book.
Don't waste your time. Carey is in over his head here.
July 11, 2014
The follow-up to Warfare in the Ancient World, this book turns its attention to the Middle Ages (although it continues through the mid-1600s, which is not usually considered medieval). It's not all about the knights, although they get their share of the attention--archers, longbowmen, gunners, horse-archers, and pikemen, to name a few, each played pivotal roles. Like its predecessor, this book ignores the Americas, east Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa, although at least we get some Mongols and Turks, which helps to broaden the perspective. Highly recommended to those with an interest in medieval times or military history.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews