Early modern warfare is the era of warfare during early modern period following medieval warfare. It is associated with the start of the widespread use of gunpowder and the development of suitable weapons to use the explosive, including artillery and firearms; for this reason the era is also referred to as the age of gunpowder warfare (a concept introduced by Michael Roberts in the 1950s).
Fortification techniques evolved rapidly due to the development of artillery. Firearms revolutionized warfare, diminishing the role of aristocracies and heavy cavalry. Early firearms, like arquebuses and muskets, gradually replaced bows and crossbows, leading to the introduction and decline of plate armour as firearms became more effective. Flintlock muskets became dominant by the 1690s, and the invention of the bayonet combined pikes and muskets, transforming infantry into the most crucial military force. Warfare also saw a shift towards larger armies and more devastating conflicts. The rise of centralized states and bureaucracies supported the new, massive armies, while the use of mercenaries declined. Military formations adapted to these changes. Infantry relied on columns, lines, and squares for battle, while cavalry transitioned to lighter roles focused on scouting and flanking. Despite the decline in heavy cavalry's dominance, cavalry charges remained effective under specific conditions, particularly against undisciplined infantry. The Age of Sail (usually dated as 1571–1862) was a period roughly corresponding to the early modern period and gunpowder dominated the era's naval tactics, including the use of gunpowder in naval artillery.
Wars became longer and more destructive, often causing widespread civilian suffering:
In Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Adal's conquest of Ethiopia involving the Ottomans, Mamluks and the Portuguese, the First and Second Boer War, and the Anglo-Zulu War. In Americas, the American Indian Wars, Platine Wars, and Spanish American wars of independence. In Asia, the Persia–Portugal war, the Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–1598), the Anglo-Mughal War, the Anglo-Mysore wars, Anglo-Sikh War, Nader's Campaigns, Taiping Rebellion, and China's Transition from Ming to Qing followed by the Ten Great Campaigns. All of the Great Powers of Europe and the Islamic gunpowder empires were actively fighting numerous wars throughout this period, grouped in rough geographical and chronological terms as: The European wars of religion between the 1520s and the 1640s (including the Thirty Years' War, the Nine Years’ War, the Eighty Years' War, the English Civil War, and the Wars of the Three Kingdoms) and, the Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659), the Northern Wars, Polish–Swedish wars and Russo-Swedish Wars. The Italian Wars, Russo-Turkish wars, Ottoman–Habsburg wars, Ottoman Civil War (1509–1513), and other Ottoman wars in Europe. Throughout the 18th century the "Second Hundred Years' War", an umbrella term which includes the Seven Years' War, War of the Spanish Succession, War of the Austrian Succession, American Revolutionary War, and Coalition Wars (French Revolutionary Wars and Napoleonic Wars) of the late 18th to early 19th centuries which mark the end of this era.
Europe
In Europe, Medieval castles were replaced by the "Italian style" fortresses, known for low, thick, sloping walls and star-shaped designs with bastions. However, by the mid-18th century, polygonal forts emerged to counter the power of explosive shells.
Fortifications
The period from 1501 to 1800 saw a rapid advance in techniques of fortification in Europe. Whereas medieval castles had relied on high walls to keep out attackers, early modern fortifications had to withstand artillery bombardments. To do this, engineers developed a style of fortress known as the "Italian style" or trace Italienne. These had low, thick, sloping walls, that would either absorb or deflect cannon fire.
In addition, they were shaped like stars, with bastions protruding at sharp angles. This was to ensure that every bastion could be supported with fire from an adjacent bastion, leaving no dead ground for an attacker to take cover in. These new fortifications quickly negated the advantages cannon had offered to besiegers.
In response to the vulnerabilities of star forts, military engineers evolved a much simpler but more robust style of fortification. A polygonal fort is a fortification in the style that evolved around the middle of the 18th century, in response to the development of explosive shells. The complex and sophisticated designs of star forts that preceded them were highly effective against cannon assault, but proved much less effective against the more accurate fire of rifled guns and the destructive power of explosive shells. The polygonal style of fortification is also described as a "flankless fort". Many such forts were built in the United Kingdom and British Empire during the government of Lord Palmerston, and so they are also often referred to as Palmerston forts. Fort Tas-Silġ is an example of a British polygonal fort.
Firearms
The power of aristocracies vis à vis states diminished throughout Western Europe during this period. Aristocrats' 200- to 400-year-old ancestral castles no longer provided useful defences against artillery. The nobility's importance in warfare also eroded as medieval heavy cavalry lost its central role in battle. The heavy cavalry—made up of armoured knights—had begun to fade in importance in the Late Middle Ages. The English longbow and the Swiss pike had both proven their ability to devastate larger armed forces of mounted knights. However, the proper use of the longbow required the user to be extremely strong, making it impossible to amass very large forces of archers.
The proper use of the pike required complex operations in formation and a great deal of fortitude and cohesion by the pikemen, again making amassing large forces difficult. Starting in the early 14th century, armourers added plate-armour pieces to the traditional protective linked mail armour of knights and men-at-arms to guard against the arrows of the longbow and crossbow. By 1415, some infantrymen began deploying the first "hand cannons", and the earliest small-bore arquebuses, with burning "match locks", appeared on the battlefield in the later 15th century.
Decline of plate armour
In virtually all major European battles during a period of 200 years (1400 to 1600), many soldiers wore extensive plate armour; this includes infantrymen (usually pikemen) and almost all mounted troops. Plate armour was expected to deflect edged weapons and to stop an arquebus or pistol ball fired from a distance, and it usually did. The use of plate armour as a remedy to firearms tended to work as long as the velocity and weight of the ball remained quite low, but over time the increasing power and effectiveness of firearms overtook the development of defenses to counteract them, such that flintlock muskets (entering use after 1650) could kill an armoured man at a distance of even 100 yards (though with limited accuracy). Thus the amount of armour necessary to protect against this threat would have been heavy and unwieldy.
However, the initial abandonment of plate armor was driven more by financial constraints than by practicality. Prior to the emergence of state-funded armies in the latter half of the 17th century, most early modern forces relied heavily on paid mercenaries. As armies expanded in size and became increasingly centralized, the cost of equipping every soldier with armor, often the most expensive component of their kit, became prohibitive. By the 17th century, most infantry armed with firearms, as well as many pikemen, fought without armor due to these monetary limitations.
Despite the expense of outfitting thousands of soldiers in full plate, cavalry units largely retained their armor during this period. This persistence can be attributed to several factors, including their higher socio-economic status, mobility advantages conferred by horses, and the continued importance of close-quarters fighting. Melee brawls remained a defining feature of cavalry combat well into the mid-19th century, preserving the value of plate armor within cavalry ranks long after it had disappeared from infantry use.
The flintlock musket, carried by most infantrymen other than pikemen after 1650, fired a heavier charge and ball than the matchlock arquebus. A recruit could be trained to use a musket in a matter of weeks. Operating a musket did not require the great physical strength of a pikeman or a longbowman or the fairly rare skills of a horseman. Since a firearm requires little training to operate, a peasant with a gun could now undermine the order and respect maintained by mounted cavalry in Europe and their Eastern equivalents. Although well-smithed armour could still prevent the penetration of gunpowder-weapons, plate armour as a whole was no longer a feasible solution to flintlock firearms. By the end of the 17th century, soldiers in the infantry and most cavalry units alike preferred the higher mobility of being completely unarmoured to the increased protection, but greatly lessened mobility, offered by donning the heavy plate armour of the period.
Transition to flintlock muskets The arquebus, in use from 1410, was one of the first handheld firearms that were relatively light (it still required a stand to balance on) and a single person could operate one. One of these weapons was first recorded as being used in the Battle of Agincourt in 1415, although this was still very much a medieval battle. The term musket originally applied to a heavier form of the arquebus, which fired a shot that could pierce plate armour, though only at close range. In the 16th century it still had to be mounted on a support stick to keep it steady. The caliver was the lighter form of the arquebus. By 1600, armies phased out these firearms in favour of a new lighter matchlock musket. Throughout the 16th century and up until 1690, muskets used the matchlock design.
However, the matchlock design was superseded in the 1690s by the flintlock musket, which was less prone to misfires and had a faster reloading rate. By this time, only light-cavalry scouting units, "the eyes of the army", continued to wear front and back armour plates to protect themselves from distant or undisciplined musket-equipped troops.
While soldiers armed with firearms could inflict great damage on cavalry at a moderate distance, at close quarters the cavalry could slaughter the musket-armed infantry if they could break their formation and close to engage in melee combat. For many years infantry formations included a mix of troops armed with both firearms to provide striking power and pikes to allow for the defence of the arquebusiers or musketeers from a cavalry charge. The invention of the bayonet allowed the combining of these two weapons into one in the 1690s, which transformed the infantry into the most important branch of the early modern military—one that uniformly used flintlock muskets tipped with bayonets.
Nature of war