Tactics - The Advent Of Firearms - Britannica

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience and security. Ask the Chatbot Games & Quizzes History & Society Science & Tech Biographies Animals & Nature Geography & Travel Arts & Culture ProCon Money Videos tactics

• Introduction
• Fundamentals
  • Evolution of the term
  • Victory through force and guile
  • The need for flexibility
  • The importance of terrain
• Historical development
  • Tribal and ancient tactics
    • The ambush and the trial of strength
    • The phalanx
    • The chariot
    • Light and heavy cavalry
    • Combined infantry and cavalry
    • The legion
  • Medieval tactics in the West
    • The barbarians
    • The mounted knight
    • Bowmen and pikemen
    • Inferiority of medieval tactics
  • The advent of firearms
    • Adaptation of pike and cavalry tactics
    • The state-owned army
    • Linear formation
    • The French Revolution
  • Tactics from Waterloo to the Bulge
    • The growing scale of battle
    • The power of the defense
    • The armoured offensive
    • Changes in command
    • Limitations of the tank
  • From conventional war to terrorism
    • Nuclear weapons
    • Continued growth of military technology
    • The end of technological warfare

References & Edit History Related Topics Images & Videos For Students tactics summary Quizzes Pick Your Battles Quiz World Wars A History of War Contents World History Wars, Battles & Armed Conflicts print Print Please select which sections you would like to print:

• Table Of Contents

CITE verifiedCite While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions. Select Citation Style MLA APA Chicago Manual of Style Copy Citation Share Share Share to social media Facebook X URL https://www.britannica.com/topic/tactics Feedback Feedback Corrections? Updates? Omissions? Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). Feedback Type Select a type (Required) Factual Correction Spelling/Grammar Correction Link Correction Additional Information Other Your Feedback Submit Feedback Thank you for your feedback

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

External Websites

The advent of firearms

in tactics in Historical development Ask Anything Written by Martin van Creveld Professor of History, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Author of The Transformation of War and others. Martin van Creveld Fact-checked by Britannica Editors Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree.... Britannica Editors History Britannica AI Ask Anything Table of Contents Table of Contents Ask Anything

Adaptation of pike and cavalry tactics

Gunpowder apparently reached Europe from the East shortly before 1300, and firearms appeared during the 14th century. Throughout the 15th century firearms and crossbows continued to be used side by side. The first battles actually to be decided by firearms were fought between French and Spanish troops on Italian soil early in the 16th century; these included Marignano (1515), Bicocca (1522), and, above all, Pavia (1525).

The first firearms were primitive devices lacking both buttstock and trigger; hence, they had to be held under the arm and could scarcely be aimed. It was only during the second half of the 15th century that the harquebus, which incorporated both of these features, made its appearance. This was a great improvement, but the harquebus still suffered from a low rate of fire as well as inaccuracy and unreliability. In order to compensate for these disadvantages and build staying power, 16th-century units such as the famous Spanish tercio were made up of pikemen surrounded by “sleeves” of harquebusiers on each corner. Much like the light armed troops of antiquity and the crossbowmen who accompanied the Swiss Haufen, harquebusiers would open the action and then retreat behind the pikemen as the latter came to close quarters with the enemy. Hence, 16th- and early 17th-century battles still tended to be decided by “push of pike,” as the saying went.

In the face of such formations, lance-carrying cavalry operating on its own was almost helpless. During the 16th century, an attempt was made to adapt cavalry to the new circumstances by arming it with short firearms such as pistols and carbines. These were difficult to load on horseback and had neither the range nor the accuracy to permit Mongol-style swarming tactics. Instead, the cavalrymen carrying them were trained to attack infantry formations by approaching them in serried ranks, firing at point-blank range, and withdrawing in turn—a maneuver resembling the orderly moves of a ballroom dance and known as the caracole. Insofar as they sacrificed the cavalry’s greatest advantages—namely, its mobility and sheer mass—such methods were never very effective. A much better system was to rely on combined arms, bombarding infantry formations with artillery (another 14th-century invention that began to make its impact felt on the battlefield from about 1500) and then, once the infantry had been shattered, sending in the heavy cavalry to complete the job with cold steel. Such methods were typical of Gustav II Adolf and Oliver Cromwell about the middle of the 17th century.

The state-owned army

As European firearms improved, the old situation in which each people possessed its own weapons and, therefore, its own system of organization and tactics disappeared. From about 1600, so great was the superiority of European arms and military methods that non-European societies could survive, if at all, only by excluding or imitating them. Inside Europe, too, armies and tactics became increasingly alike. Gone were the days when one nation specialized in heavy cavalry, another in light cavalry, still another in pikemen, archers, or crossbowmen. Everywhere armed forces were becoming divorced from society at large and growing into regular, state-owned organizations that tended to resemble one another. These similarities were reinforced by the international character of warfare, which for centuries on end permitted individuals and even entire units to move from one service to another.

During the second half of the 16th century, every army came to consist of three arms: infantry, cavalry, and artillery. The trend was to add more and more of the first and third arms, while the second, though retaining its high social prestige, underwent a relative decline in numbers and importance. By the early 18th century a fourth arm, engineering, had differentiated itself from artillery, an arrangement that became standard in all armies after the Seven Years’ War (1756–63). Particularly after 1683, the year in which the Turks mounted their last major challenge and were repulsed at the gates of Vienna, European armies grew accustomed to seeing one another as their strongest opponents. Since they organized, trained, and equipped themselves to fight one another, there was a tendency to distinguish les grandes opérations de guerre from guerrilla, or small war, which was increasingly left to so-called free corps, or irregulars. As the regulars came to rely on heavier and heavier weapons, the gap between the two kinds of warfare grew. Ultimately, this specialization was to cost armies the ability to fight opponents that did not resemble themselves, but in the 17th century that development still remained far in the future.