War from the 16th and 17th Century to Invention of Gunpowder

WAR FROM THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURY TO INVENTION OF GUNPOWDER

The invention of the powerful artillery guns would change man's role in warring engagements. The artillery guns at first were very limited by their own design. The guns were very heavy and had to be transported by water, which meant that only towns and fortresses that were close to a body of water could be attacked with artillery also known as the cannon. There were also some fortresses that were impervious to the early cannon attacks based on strong designs or natural defenses. The French were able to penetrate the round shaped castles and large walls during the late 1400s by using concentrated fire of several small guns instead of a few large ones.

A new design of smaller walls that were built in uneven lines, like a star shape, was implemented to strengthen the area called crownworks or hornworks. Other modifications of new designs included lower and thicker walls, gun towers that projected at an angle, intervals of guns for fields of fire, wide and deep ditches, and pillboxes.

Of course with the new design of castles came new ways to attack. Some effective ways to attack these castles, but also rare ways to attack, were by surprise, by storm, or by treachery. The most common way to attack the castles were long term engagements that consisted of either surrounding the castle or getting in close enough that the castles guns would be ranged over the position. The long-term methods consisted of starving out the population, forcing surrender, or by mining and bombardment from close range.

The use of firepower also began to put an end to the use of headlong charges and hand-to-hand combat during the Renaissance years. The differences between firearms and the bow were obscene at the beginning of the rifle's evolution. An archer could accurately hit a target at lengths of 200 meters and discharge ten arrows a minute, whereas the arquebus, or rifleman, only had accuracy at 100 meters and took several minutes to reload. Although the new weapons at primacy did not have the accuracy or the range of the bow, the Italians immediately implemented them into their arsenals.

The greatest advantage of the early rifles was that the weapon could be mastered in a matter of months, but it could take up to ten years to master the bow. Eventually the muskets overtook the battlefield, replacing the broadswordsmen, halberd, crossbowmen, long bowmen, and for a time the cavalry. The pikemen maintained a position as protection of the musketeers in between reloads, because improvements needed to be made for the muskets accuracy and rate of fire.

Maurice of Nassau equipped his army with weapons of the same size and caliber in an order to attempt more efficient training methods. His cousin, Count John, began to work on making a training doctrine, which included counted movements for the pikes, arquebus, and muskets. The importance of this training method is that it would enable a commander to ensure that the army trained would be able to improve skills of reloads and master techniques of actual usage of weapons. The doctrine spread to the countries Germany, France, and England and Count John opened a military academy based on Maurice's drill, practice, and training methods of arms, armor, maps, and models.

As time went on the training became more complex and eventually Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden was able through constant drill and practice bring training methods to full potential. Reloading techniques were improved so much that only six ranks of musketeers were needed to maintain a continuous barrage. Firepower from artillery was also perfected as a result of Nassau's work, and every regiment was capable of firing twenty rounds in an hour. Gustavus also trained his cavalry to charge home with sword's drawn, rather than to skirmish with pistols. The military revolution brought the changes of improvement in artillery, increasing reliance on battlefield firepower, and a dramatic increase in the size of the army.

The rapidly increasing size of the armies in Europe brought three problems: Recruitment, Finance, and Supply. The problem with recruitment was solved in many ways. The most common method of enlistment was actually through volunteering, but other men were forced to serve as well. The volunteers were attracted to service because of the money, and recruits joined from the mountains, towns, and even in war-zones and the majority of them consisted of peasants or townsmen that needed work. Many men joined the army to escape the life of their father's work, to avoid criminal prosecution, to see more of the world, or to pursue honor. In addition to the volunteers, the governments also used forceful means of enlistment by "recruiting" an entire population of an area as a unit and forcing them to fight together. Other forms of forced recruiting included soldiers of defeated armies and the use of conscripts. The most sought after combat soldier was the veteran and many times a veteran would move from army to army depending on which one would make him the most money.

Financing the large organizations was no easy task when so many mouths had to be feed, clothed, and armed. Not only were there a lot of soldiers, but the price of weaponry was increasing as well. Combat basically comes down to one thing, money; and the army that could last the longest was eventually able to wear down the enemy instead of having to destroy their armies. Many times the kings of the 1700s would devote anywhere from 75 to 90 percent of their country's gross national product in order to finance the army. Armies of countries like France, Russia, and Britain were able to fund themselves because of sizeable resources already built. Other countries like Spain would have to go bankrupt from time to time in order to fund continuous military operations. Holland was able to fund an army by establishing war-loans based on a promise to repay money with interest.

Most soldiers agreed to serve in the army for wages that were just a little over that of a farmer. The problem in supplying these poorly paid men, laid on the government through the treasury. If armies were on the move, it would usually secure whatever it needed from the local civilian communities. If the locals were uncooperative than an army would threaten to set fire to the town unless it gave up either money or supplies. Villages soon were required to make regular payments for protection, which sometimes led to poorly manufactured goods, but at least the armies were fed, equipped, and clothed.

Another problem with the supply line from the community was that there was no standardization. Basically the armies would take what was given to them and many times would even use what was retrieved from the enemy