Transcript Lecture 2: Warfare in Antiquity and Middle Ages

Lecture 2: Warfare in Ancient
China and Greece
James Corum, PhD
Lecture outline
1. What are we looking for, while discussing
warfare?
2. Ancient China
3. Ancient Greece
4. Summary
Evolution of warfare: questions
•
•
•
•
Strategic level of war
Forces and armaments
Tactical level of war
Theoretical views on war
Ancient China
Historical context
Ancient China evolved through several
distinct periods of statehood:
1. Western Zhou: 1027-771 BC
2. Eastern Zhou: 770-256 BC
3. Warring states: 475-221 BC
4. Qin empire (unified China): 221 BC
Western Zhou
Eastern Zhou
Warring states
Warfare in ancient China
1. Western Zhou: 1027-771 BC (feudal empire)
Strategic level or war: Wars were fought for punishment,
deterrence, warning, demonstration of king’s force and
power (avoidance of extensive destruction)
Forces and armaments: Forces were small (a few
thousand men), war fighting was a prerogative of feudal
lords, the majority of combatants were professional
soldiers, main weapons were long (spears, halberds)
main striking power – chariots. States had limited means
to support wars
Tactical level of war: Conduct of battles was ritualistic,
usually one demonstrative assault by chariots sufficed
for enemy to be intimidated and to surrender
Theoretical thinking on war: No written theoretical works
have survived
Warfare in ancient China
2. Eastern Zhou and the period of Warrior States: 770-221
BC (transition from a feudal empire to a society of states
to a unified state)
Strategic level or war: Wars were eventually aimed at subduing and
conquering the enemy state at any cost (leading to a formation of
unified and centrally governed empire). States transformed into
“machines” for supporting wars of attrition (Qin that conquered other
states by 221 BC had the most advanced administration system) –
from 10-20% of population were mobilised for war.
Forces and armaments:
• Forces grew dramatically (20,000-30,000 men + 1,000 chariots in
average)
• Elite troops remained professional, majority of forces consisted of
recruited peasants, armies transformed gradually into permanent
forces, main strike power – numerous infantry
• Main weapons became swords, battle axes – weapons of close
combat
Warfare in ancient China
2. Eastern
Zhou and the period of Warrior States: 770-221
BC (transition from a feudal empire to a society of states
to a unified and centrally governed empire)
Tactical level of war :
• In order to first weaken and then subdue the enemy state, killing of
enemy civilians and soldiers in large numbers became a common
practice (in 260 BC 400,000 soldiers lost their lives in one battle)
• Forces were able to accomplish complicated manoeuvres on the
battlefield and the role of fire (bows, crossbows) grew
• Wars could last for several years and forces could move over long
distances
• The role of siege warfare grew dramatically (technology evolved)
Theoretical thinking on war:
• Thinking about war became very advanced and sophisticated from
IV-III Century BC (“Seven Military Classics”)
• Sun Zi’s “The Art of War” was the foundation of Chinese military
thinking
Battle of Changping
1. Zhao’s forces were in defensive
positions against superior Qin forces
in Han kingdom in 260 BC
2. Qin’s forces could not attack the city
of Shendang and Zhao forces at the
same time. Zhao commander Lian Po
knew that Qin had to retreat soon.
3. Qin (using espionage) discredited
Zhao commander Lian Po who was
changed for a young general Zhao
Kuo
4. Zhao Kuo attacked Qin forces who
retreated and the surrounded Zhao
forces.
5. After some fighting 400,000 Zhao
soldiers surrendered and were killed.
Sun Zi views on war
War: is an utterly fluid, cruel and violent process, a matter
of life and death for a country
The fabric of war:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Path (unity of nation and its leaders)
Sky (weather, yin-yang, day and night (but prohibit omens!!!)
Earth (geography, geology, selecting one’s tactical position)
Commander (wisdom, trust, humanity and courage, sternness)
Law (formation of an army, leadership and logistics)
Fighting a war: is for a commander like weaving a fabric –
all aspects must be constantly considered, favourable
moments must be identified and chances seized.
Nothing remains constant. Strength of today could
transform into a weakness tomorrow.
Sun Zi’s views on war
Winning the war (strategic level of war):
•
Bloodless victory and forcing the enemy to surrender
without a battle is the ultimate objective and achievement in
war (protracted siege of enemy cities is the worst option for
a commander):
1. Destroy enemy plans
2. Destroy enemy alliances
3. Destroy enemy forces
4. Siege enemy cities
•
Careful planning is the key for victory. “Knowing the enemy
and yourself will give you 100 victories in 100 battles.
Knowing yourself will give you a chance of victory. Not
knowing enemy and yourself will put you in constant
danger”
•
Aim your military effort at what is precious/important to the
enemy to force your will upon him (Center of Gravity!)
•
No war is won without espionage and deception
Sun Zi’s views on war
Winning the war (tactical level of war):
• Battle is the final clash, but manoeuvre leads to a victory
• Battles must be fought only on the basis of rational
considerations and under advantageous conditions
(geography, weather, time of the day, own and enemy
combat capability)
• Always use numerical ratios of forces to a maximum
effect – (1) surround, (2) attack, (3) split the enemy, (4)
give battle, (5) retreat, (6) hide in fortresses
• Constant deceiving and surprising an enemy is an
absolute requirement for possessing the initiative
• Use all forces of nature (e.g. fire) to your advantage
Sun Zi’s views on war
Commander:
• Must know the war
• Must be independent and have sufficient freedom of
action to pursue the best interest of state (and must not
only follow emperor’s commands)
• Must be calm and balanced
• Must be clear and understandable when giving
commands
• Must be ruthless when needed and delicate when
needed (stick and carrot)
• Must be feared more than enemy by his
soldiers...(discipline!)
• “Can you imagine what I would do if I were allowed
to do what I CAN?!”, Sun Zi
Warfare in ancient Greece
Historical context
1. Archaic period 800-510 BC
2. Classical period 510-323 BC (Persian wars,
Peloponnesian war, wars of Alexander the
Great)
3. Hellenistic period 323-146 BC
Athens’ dominance: 480-404 BC
Sparta’s dominance: 404-371 BC
Thebes’ dominance: 371-360 BC
Macedon dominance: 338-323 BC
Greece in classical period
Greek warfare: from sticks to phalanxes
Greece is the place where the Western way of
fighting wars was born...“war is a horror for what
it is impossible to prepare a man”
IX-VII Centuries BC: battles were fought in less
organised manner using primarily slings, heavier
throwing weapons (spears) and light infantry
VII Century BC – 146 BC: heavy infantry (hoplites)
armed with long spears becomes a dominant
force on the battlefield (partially due to some
physical reasons, partially due to cultural
considerations)
Phalanx
Phalanx in battle
• Very stable and strong (but immobile) formation.
Its main vulnerabilities were its rear, flanks and
breaking up in battle
• Depth: 6-16 rows
• Training: extensive training of an infantryman
was not required
• Battle: Between phalanxes it reminded a
pushing contest and could end in a circular
movement as the right flanks of both phalanxes
tended to be manned with strongest soldiers
Battle of Marathon 490 BC
Battle of Salamis 480 BC
Peloponnesian War: 431-404 BC
Thucydides “Peloponnesian War”
http://records.viu.ca/~Johnstoi/thucydides/tofc.htm
• The first thoroughly recorded war in Europe
• Struggle for power and dominance (preventive war)
between increasingly dominant power Athens and Sparta
that tried to check Athenian power
• Athens: sea power; Sparta: continental power
• Athens: democracy; Sparta oligarchy where minority (Spartans - ruled majority – helots)
• Dialogue of Melians: ”...you know as well as we do that
right, as the world goes, is only in question between
equals in power, while the strong do what they can and
the weak suffer what they must.” (Ch. XVII)
Peloponnesian War
I period: 431-421 BC
•Athens raids the coasts of
Sparta and its allies,
defends itself on land.
• Sparta attacks on land
II period: 421-413 BC
• Athens becomes more
aggressive, but expedition
to Sicily ends in disaster in
413 BC
• Sparta advances on land,
cuts Athens’s supply routes
and forces all supplies
being transported by sea
Peloponnesian War
III period: 413-404 BC
• Athens becomes
internally unstable, but
its fleet keeps fighting
• Sparta induces revolts
in Athens’ colonies and
defeats Athens’ fleet
(cutting all supplies) at
Aegospotami in 405 BC
forcing Athens to
surrender
End of Sparta’s rule
To break up Spartan
phalanx, Theban
commander Epaminondas
increased the depth of his
left flank to 50 rows by
weakening his centre and
right (despite being
outnumbered). It allowed to
break up Spartan phalanx
and inflict massive losses:
400 out of 700 Spartan
hoplites and over 1,000 of
other troops were killed
Spartans protested:
Thebans violated traditions
of warfare (!!!)
Macedonian additions to Greek warfare
• Alexander the Great also used the phalanx as
the backbone of his army in battle, but he
increased the numbers of light infantry, light and
heavy cavalry
• Alexander aggressively sought decisive victory
in battle – his phalanx took the main thrust of the
enemy, while he sought the way to use his
heavy cavalry to break up enemy formation or
kill enemy commander
Macedonian additions to Greek warfare
Alexander the Great
• Wars in his lifetime
• 356-323
• Greece under Macedon
• Persian Empire broken
• Result of a Hellenized region
• Several smaller Empires that will fall to Rome
Macedonian additions to Greek warfare
Battle of Granicus
Battle of Issus- Alexander meets
Darius III
Battle of Gaugamela
Warfare in ancient Greece
Strategic level of war: Wars were fought with the aim of
weakening the enemy and subduing him. Struggle for power
and dominance, but (if fought between Greek city states)
avoiding the total destruction of enemy. Macedon: dominance
and conquest
Forces and armaments: Forces were numerically considerably
smaller than in ancient China and their composition depended
on a particular state (citizens, professionals). Greece gave the
world mercenaries as we know them. Greeks usually fought
with long weapons – spears, sarissas
Tactical level of war: Ruthless and bloody fighting based on
using phalanxes and aimed at destroying the enemy in battle
(but violence usually stopped upon surrender – between
Greeks)
Theoretical thinking on war: Surviving works are not as
comprehensive as Sun Zi’s. Greeks introduced to the
European strategic and military thinking concepts of power of
balance, preventive war, main thrust/effort in battle. One of
the first theoreticians was Aeneas Tacticus (IV Century BC)
Aeneas Tacticus’ views on defensive war
and siege warfare
It is known that Aeneas Tacticus wrote many works on war,
but little has survived. One of the surviving works that is
frequently cited, is his work on withstanding a siege
Strategic level of war:
• There are offensive and defensive wars
• Nations defending themselves could achieve a lot by
withstanding a siege – they would deter future enemies
and achieve better security in the future
• However, if they show weakness, lack of will and unity of
effort in defending themselves, nothing will save them
(use all means and opportunities for successful
defence!)
Aeneas Tacticus’ views on defensive war
and siege warfare
Tactical level of war:
• Make enemy intrusion and advance to the city
walls as complicated as possible
• Risk the battle on open ground only under
favourable conditions (deceive, surprise, create
a local numerical superiority), use tactical retreat
to ambush the enemy
• Constantly collect information on enemy
advance and inform your heavy forces (hoplites)
in time
• Fortify the weak spots of city walls
Aeneas Tacticus’ views on defensive war
and siege warfare
Tactical level of war:
•
Secure the unity of people inside the walls:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
•
•
•
Conspiracies
Rebel factions
Moral
Expel before siege sick, beggars, etc.
Watch closely mercenaries and allies
Defend actively – counterattack when possible, try to
seize the initiative, use the initiative of your own
soldiers
Organise the best soldiers into special attack and
mobile units
Divide your good soldiers evenly between units to
achieve the maximum combat capability
Summary: ancient China and Greece
Strategic level: wars for dominance and
conquest. In China, war became total in terms of
mobilising states and destroying them as well.
Strategy very sophisticated in China
Armies and weapons: were commanded by
professionals, but consisted of large numbers of
citizens
Tactical level of war: Various manoeuvres used in
China. Greeks developed main thrust.
Theoretical views: Advanced theoretical views
evolved in China, and they are still relevant
today.