Book Review: Castles and Fortified Cities of Medieval Europe: An Illustrated History by Jean-Denis G. G. Lepage

Castles and Fortified Cities of Medieval Europe: An Illustrated History is a very interesting book.  I picked it up because we had a three hour bus ride to get to my son’s football game and my wife was using my Kindle.  I am certainly glad I did.

This is a well written 330 page book.  It includes an index and bibliography, both unfortunately short.  The book is organized chronologically in five chapters covering fortification and castles from the 5th to the 16th century A.D.  Each chapter is further subdivided geographically and covers both eastern and Western Europe and the Middle East. There are many illustrations, both ground plans and sketches that help to illuminate the text. This is a very good introductory volume to medieval fortification.

I found the book to be both entertaining and informative.  The author has a very readable writing style and except for using the unavoidable specialist vocabulary of fortification is easy to understand.  For someone like me who finds the military aspects of castles fascinating it was quite illuminating to read.  I already knew quite a bit about castles but I learned a few things myself.  Of particular interest to me was the discussion of the development of the Trace Italienne fortifications of the 15th and 16th centuries.  I was not aware that many of the elements of that style were not really developed in Italy, but instead were only perfected there. One of the most interesting things about this book is that the author deliberately chose to focus most of this work on less famous castles and forts.  Everyone has heard of Carcassonne, Beaumaris, and Krak des Chavaliers.  Most people have not heard or seen descriptions of such equally important castles as Helmond Castle in the Netherlands or Bellver in Spain.  Many of these lesser known castles are fascinating in their own right and the descriptions cause me to add some of them to my bucket list of places to visit.

The only complaint I have about this book is that it does not include a glossary of terms which I feel would be extremely useful, especially for people unfamiliar with the technical terms for the parts of fortification   It can become pretty confusing to keep the different elements in mind when the author continually throws around such terms as enciente, ravelin, keep, donjon, burgfried, bastille, bastion, etc. Overall this well-written and illustrated work about medieval European and Middle Eastern castles and frost is well worth reading.  I highly recommend this work to anybody interested in European castles and how they developed over time.

Book Review: Anatomy of the Castle by John Gibson

Anatomy of the Castle by John Gibson is perhaps the best book describing Castles aimed at the general reader that I have ever read.  The author manages to make the somewhat technical and dry language of describing castles and their construction lovely and entertaining.

It is a coffee table sized book that is jam packed with beautiful color photos of castles from all over Europe and the Middle East.  There are 200 pages with a glossary, index, and bibliography.  It is divided into 6 chronological chapters with a lengthy introduction that describes the development of the art of fortification up to the development of the first castles.  He also includes a chapter describing what living in a castle must have truly been like.  The glossary is short but helpful as it includes all the technical terms that are easily misused.

John Gibson has produced work about castles and their construction that is both informative and entertaining.  He deftly covers the castles invention and development over a period of about 1,000 years and ties the castle into both hat came before and what came after in the art of fortification.   Along the way he dispels some myths about castles, such as that they were dark dank places or the opposite that they were full of light and warmth.  He gives the lie to both notions and establishes that the truth lay somewhere in between.  He also points out that dungeons as described in popular literature did not really exist although there were some places in castles that were used as prisons including entire castle at times.  What was good for keeping people out was also pretty good at keeping them in when used for that purpose.

Aside from the quality of the photos the thing about this book that I enjoyed the most was the quality of the writing.  I never got bored while reading this book and the illustrations are well placed to illuminate the text.  There are several fold-outs of significant castles that illustrate stages in castle development.  This is a highly enjoyable read and I highly recommend it.

 

Book Review: Holy Wars: 3000 Years of Battles in the Holy Land by Gary Rashba

HOLY WARS: 3000 Years of Battles in the Holy Land is one of the better primers about conflict in the Holy Land to appear within the last few years.  It consists of 17 chapters covering the initial Israelite conquest of Canaan in 1400 B.C. to the Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon in 1982.  The more recent Israeli-Palestinian conflict is covered in the epilogue.  The work is 288 pages and includes extensive notes at the end of each chapter as well as a well sourced bibliography and index.  The Kindle edition, which is what I have, was mostly free of editing errors and the only complaint I have is the maps did not render well.  That is a common problem with the B&W Kindle though and does not reflect on the book, the maps showed up excellently when viewed on my PC.

This book is not aimed at the academic historian but is rather intended for the more general audience who just wants to know more about the military history of this violent part of the world.  In that, Mr. Rashba does an outstanding job of clearly narrating significant events from throughout the history of the Holy Land while fitting those events into the flow of time.  He does so in a surprisingly balanced and objective manner despite the author himself claiming he was not sure if he maintained that balance due to personal connections to the events he describes.  I can happily claim he succeeded admirably in suppressing any personal bias.

His selection of battles and campaigns is good and comprehensive.  Mr. Rashba acknowledges where his sources are scarce and makes use of modern research, particularly archaeological research where it is germane to his account.  He covers some events, such as Napoleon’s Palestine campaign, that are mere footnotes in western historiography.  I was impressed with his treatment of the Mamluks and their battle against the Mongols in 1260 which is practically ignored in most English language histories, even histories of the Holy Land.  He covers the Roman response to the first century Jewish revolt  but only mentions Masada in passing.  In a way that is fitting as the capture of Masada was actually a side note to the campaign but as he mentions, the battle and Jewish Response to the siege has become iconic to the modern Israeli Defense Forces.

In all Holy Wars is one of the best surveys of the Holy Land I have ever run across and I am certainly glad I did.  This book should be on the shelf of anyone who seeks to understand the history behind the hatreds evidenced in modern Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank.

Book Review: The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle by Michael Stephenson

[FULL DISCLOSURE: I received my copy of this book free from the publisher for purposes of reviewing it. I was not paid for this review and the opinion expressed is purely my own]

Michael Stephenson’s work The Last Full Measure: How Soldiers Die in Battle follows somewhat in the tradition of classics such a Keegan’s The Face of Battle and Victor David Hanson’s The Western Way of War. Where it differs from these two works as that while Keegan and Hanson focus on specific battles or time periods this book aims to be a more general description of the experience of combat throughout recorded history.  In that, the book is amazingly successful.  The author has produced a volume that does the job of bringing home te reality of warfare to those who have never experienced it.  What I finds even more refreshing is that he does without weighing the book down with moral judgements on the rightness or wrongness of war itself, instead he accepts the objective reality that war happens and goes about the business of explaining what it is like.

It is written in an easy free-flowing style that is almost a pleasure to read and the text is organized in such a way that it is also compelling to read.  I found myself making excuses to my wife to keep reading to the end of the chapter before I did something else.  The descriptions of combat and death, ultimately this book is about violent death, ring true.  I was struck in particular by the realism of the combat descriptions in the section on the Iraq war.  On page 361 he talks about the US Marines “Pine Box Rule” in which if someone has to go home in a pine box, it is not going to be Marines. In my own experience in Iraq in 2004 my unit had a similar rule except we called it doing the “Death Blossom” when we came under enemy fire.  If his descriptions of combat and death hold as true to reality throughout the rest of the book as they do for modern war, and I have no reason, to think they don’t, then Mr. Stephenson has produced what should be an instant classic.  It should also make its way to the official reading lists of all the services, especially the US Army and Marines.

At 406 pages of text the book is not too long for the interested layman and includes an index, extensive notes, and a truly impressive bibliography that together amount to 54 pages alone.  The book is organized into eight thematic, chronological chapters that cover warfare from the Ancient World to the modern wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with an appendix discussing the state of military medicine through time.  The only very minor criticism I could have for this book is that it is Western Centric in focus, that is true of much western scholarship though  and this book makes no claim to universal history.

As a combat veteran myself, I have said for years in private conversation and on some public forums that no one who has not been in combat can possibly grasp what it is like, this work goes a long way to roving me wrong.  Michael Stephenson comes as close to describing the reality of combat as I have ever read from a non-combat vet.  This objective and fair description of death in battle should be on the shelf of every military historian, whether they are a veteran or not.  Anyone who wants to know what combat is like without putting their own skin on the line should read this book.  If nothing else, they will gain a better understanding of the sacrifices made by those who don the uniform of their country and go forth to do battle.  This is a good description of what George Orwell’s “rough men” go through to allow their countrymen to sleep safe at home.An outstanding book that is sure to remain the standard in its niche for years to come.

 

The Marian Legion

I haven’t touched on anything about antiquity for a while so I thought I would put this up as I have been thinking about this for the last week or two. This is the Marian Legion or the Reforms of Marius, whichever you choose to call it.

These reforms are important because they set the stage for the Legion of the period of the Civil War and early Imperium, especially the time of the Pax Romana.  These reforms are probably not a direct result of the genius of Gaius Marius, he just gets credit for implementing them.  That being said, he is the one who implemented them and turned the Roman Army into a professional force that essentially defeated all comers for the next 300-400 years.  They are therefore worth discussing.

The Marian Reforms can essentially be broken down into two types: 1. Administrative and 2. Operational.  They are synergistic reforms in that administrative changes affected operations and in fact at some level were driven by them. The most important administrative changes were the elimination of the land requirement and substitution of a citizenship requirement for service and most importantly in my opinion, the state was now responsible for providing uniform equipment.  The operational changes were the introduction of the Legionary Eagle, the redesigned pilum, and the elimination of the baggage train.

First let’s discuss administrative changes.  The elimination of a land requirement and substitution of a citizenship requirement meant that the army could be substantially enlarged because there was a large number citizens who lived in the city of Rome but owned no land.  This was a huge departure from former practice.  This actually achieved two things; one, as previously stated it allowed for a huge expansion in the size of the army, secondly it gave the poor in Rome a stake in the success of the Republic.  This last part was no small accomplishment The second administrative change was that the state took on the responsibility for providing the Legionnaire’s equipment.  his also accomplished two things.  The first thing this accomplished was that along with the citizenship requirement for service meant that the huge number of potential recruit could be equipped.  Before this change the individual was responsible for providing their own equipment and this was not a minor expense.  I heave read some estimates that a Legionnaires equipment could cost the equivalent of a year’s wages.  This seems fairly reasonable to me if you consider that a modern American soldier’s equipment runs in the neighborhood of $40-50,000.  Eliminating this burden allowed more soldiers to be recruited.  The second and more important change was that it allowed for the standardization of equipment.  This not only brought down costs it also meant that units were more uniform and thus their capabilities became more of a known factor.

Operational changes were at least as important as the administrative changes the Legions underwent.  The introduction of the Eagle, the pilum, and elimination of the legionary baggage train made huge changes.

Examples of Legionary Eagles

First, the introduction of the Legionary Eagle.  The Eagle was the standard of the Legion and with its introduction the Legions became permananetn formations and not transitory ones that were raised and disbanded with every campaigning season as had previously been the practice. This gave individual legions a history and traditions.  The Eagle was the personification of this history and tradition.  It helped improve that tenuous concept known as Esprit d’Corps.  It helped soldiers identify with their unit and made them want to fight hard to uphold the units traditions.  It also served as a rallying point for the Legion in Battle.  The loss of an eagle was considered one of the most shameful things that could happen to a unit.  Great deeds of heroism were done to protect the Eagle.  In many ways the Eagle became the unit, it was the manifestation that the unit itself had a life and would continue.  The greatest disgrace that could occur was for a Legion to lose it’s Eagle, this was even worse than defeat.  A unit could be defeated in honorable battle but it was the height of shame when a unit lost it’s Eagle.

Roman Pilums

The introduction of the Pilum was another of the Marian reforms.  It is difficult for a modern reader to understand the significance of this change.  The Pilum was a spear with some special design elements.  Most importantly, it incorporated a semi-mobile shaft.  It had an articulated head constructed such that when it impacted an enemy shield part sheared off precluding the enemy from throwing it back at the Romans.  There were two pegs connecting the head of the spear to the shaft.  One was iron while the other was wooden.  When the Pilum impacted an enemy shield the wooden peg would break allowing the spear to pivot on the fulcrum of the iron peg.  this meant the the shield was not only useless to be thrown back at the Romans but further it meant that the enemy shield itself became too heavy and unwieldy for use thus forcing them to discard their shield because of the added unbalanced weight added to it. The loss of their shield meant that enemy troops were that much less protected once the Legionnaire got into melee range.  Additionally, the fact that the Pilum beacme the standard Legion stand-off weapon meant that drill in its use could be added to the standard training regimen of the legion.  This not only simplified legion training it meant that if a legionnaire was transferred from one Legion to another he did not have to relearn how to employ  a new weapon that was not used in the Legion from which he came.

The last, and one of the most important changes was the elimination of the Legions baggage train.  To really understand the significance of this change it is necessary to understand the effect of a baggage train on ancient armies.  Typically, armies of the ancient world had a baggage train.  This was not just baggage and equipment for the troops, often, even most of the time, the baggage train was full of what are known as camp followers.  This was a large group of people from families of the soldiers to suttlers, merchants, widows and orphans, and prostitutes.  This group could not move as fast as an army unencumbered because it included wagons as well.  Ancient wagons were generally drawn by Oxen and not horses, and oxen are slow.  The Roman elimination of the baggage train increased he strategic and operational speed of the Roman Legions.

Legionary Backpack of the time of Marius

To put it bluntly, with a baggage train an army could march on the order of 5-8 miles per day; without a baggage train they could make 20-25 miles per day or almost 4 times as fast.  To accomplish this Marius made each Legionnaire carry a backpack with the essentials he would need while on the march.  This backpack weighed up to 90 pounds and the legionary was expected to march 20 miles per day carrying it.  This pack led to the nickname for the troops of Marius’ Mules.

The Legionaries carried not just food but also equipment to fortify their camp at the end of each day’s march.  The fact that they could make 20 miles per day meant that the Roman army had an operational mobility that few of their enemies could match.  This let them surprise their enemies by getting to places much faster than any of them thought possible and surprise is one of the most decisive things in warfare.

The various reforms of the Roman army implemented by Marius turned the Roman army from a formidable, seasonal force to a year round, professional force that proved to be virtually unbeatable by it’s enemies.  These reforms wrought changes in the Roman ay f war comparable to those brought about by the introduction of the internal combustion engine in the early 20th cnetury.  The reforms were standardized and modified very little until relatively late in the Imperial period.  They let the Romans outfight and outmarch their opponents an just about every battlefield for almost 500 years.  It is virtually impossible to understand Roman military success without understanding the definitive changes in military practice brought about by the Marian Reforms of the Roman Army.

Further Reading: Marian ReformsClio Article, From Republic to Empire: How Revolutionary were the Reforms of Gaius Marius.

Battles and Book Reviews.