Warfare during the Renaissance

1193 Words3 Pages

Warfare During the Renaissance
Warfare did not get invented during the Renaissance, but there were some significant innovations. Feudal cavalry lost its strength of the battlefield, infantry gained in stature, states learned how to field large armies for long periods of time. Most important of all, however, was the use of gunpowder.
The chief result of these innovations was that warfare once and for all was taken out of the hands of private individuals (the nobility) and was taken over by the nation-state. Moreover, war became so expensive and destructive that it became ever more difficult and dangerous for small states to wage war, even at the local level. Warfare became big business and the business of big players.
Decline of feudal Cavalry
Up until the 14th century, the battlefield belonged to the medieval knight. The knight of 1300 was well armored. Plate mail was still in the future, but armor had developed to the point where most of a knight was covered in metal, and even his horse wore padded armor. The knight was adept at the use of the lance, the sword and the shield, and was every bit as effective on foot as he was on horseback.
What happened in the 14th century was that there emerged other forces on the field that could withstand the feudal cavalry charge and could even win battles. The most notable of these were the English Longbowmen and the Swiss Pikemen.
English Longbows
The English longbow was much bigger than other bows. It was as tall as a man or taller and could fire with accuracy well over 200 yards. An English archer could fire accurately three arrows a minute and when pressed could double that rate. A hundred archers could launch a thousand arrows a minute, with withering results, due to the fact that there arrows were much lighter, and wind caused them to change direction after about 50 feet. The longbow is credited with the English victory at Cr&egravecy (1346) and Poitiers (1356). Because an arrow fired from a longbow could pierce chain mail armor, it gave to common foot soldiers a weapon that could withstand the nobility. Not surprisingly, the noble class despised both crossbows and longbows.
A Longbow was reasonably cheap to make and Edward III was able to require all able-bodied Englishmen to become proficient in its use. Archers alone were not enough to win the day, but they modified battlefield tactics, serving as mobi...

... middle of paper ...

...gredient of the modern army had been created. The most significant effect of gunpowder was that it required the resources of the nation-state to exploit. It took money, organization, and sustained effort to put into the field armies with cannons and harquebusiers. To meet these demands, princes learned to tax their people annually and efficiently (or, at least, more efficiently than before). In effect, the nation-state was always at war, or at least taxed its people as if that were so. This was due to the creation of standing armies, which had to be paid for continually. Princes took the control of armies out of the hands of their barons and put it in the hands of professionals paid by the royal fisc. City-states and small principalities lacked the ability to wage war at this level, and they began to surrender to the larger nation-states.

Pg.3

Chris Poetz

Open Document