The Art of War has been very simply defined as «the art which enables any commander to worst the forces opposed to him.» This book shows the evolution of European warfare throughout the middle ages from Roman legions to the first use of fire arms: The Transition from Roman to Medieval Forms in War – A.D. 378–582. The Early Middle Ages – A.D. 476–1066–81. The Byzantines and their Enemies – A.D. 582–1071. The Supremacy of Feudal Cavalry – A.D. 1066–1346. The Swiss – A.D. 1315–1515. The English and their Enemies – A.D. 1272–1485.
Оглавление
Charles Oman. The Art of War in the Middle Ages
The Art of War in the Middle Ages
Table of Contents
Introduction
The Transition from Roman to Mediæval Forms in War - A.D. 378–582
The Early Middle Ages - A.D. 476–1066–81
The Byzantines and their Enemies28 - A.D. 582–1071
(1) Character of Byzantine Strategy
(2) Arms, Organization and Tactics of the Byzantine Armies
The Supremacy of Feudal Cavalry - A.D. 1066–1346
The Swiss - A.D. 1315–1515
(1) Their Character, Arms, and Organization
(2) Tactics and Strategy
(3) Development of Swiss Military Supremacy
(4) Causes of the Decline of Swiss Ascendency
The English and their Enemies - A.D. 1272–1485
Conclusion
Отрывок из книги
Charles Oman
Published by
.....
A picture of the state of the imperial army in the Western provinces, drawn precisely at this period, has been preserved for us in the work of Vegetius, a writer whose treatise would be of far greater value had he refrained from the attempt to identify the organization of his own day with that of the first century, by the use of the same words for entirely different things. In drawing inferences from his statements, it has also to be remembered that he frequently gives the ideal military forms of his imagination, instead of those which really existed in his day. For example, his legion is made to consist of 6000 men, while we know that in the end of the fourth century its establishment did not exceed 1500. His work is dedicated to one of the emperors who bore the name of Valentinian, probably to the second, as (in spite of Gibbon’s arguments in favour of Valentinian III) the relations of the various arms to each other and the character of their organization point to a date prior to the commencement of the fifth century.
A single fact mentioned by Vegetius gives us the date at which the continuity of the existence of the old Roman heavy infantry may be said to terminate. As might be expected, this epoch exactly corresponds with that of the similar change in the East, which followed the battle of Adrianople. ‘From the foundation of the city to the reign of the sainted Gratian,’ says the tactician, ‘the legionaries wore helmet and cuirass. But when the practice of holding frequent reviews and sham-fights ceased, these arms began to seem heavy, because the soldiers seldom put them on. They therefore begged from the emperor permission to discard first their cuirasses, and then even their helmets, and went to face the barbarians unprotected by defensive arms. In spite of the disasters which have since ensued, the infantry have not yet resumed the use of them.... And now, how can the Roman soldier expect victory, when helmless and unarmoured, and even without a shield (for the shield cannot be used in conjunction with the bow), he goes against the enemy14?’
