War: Methods of Offence and Defence (1940)

From the October 1940 issue of the Socialist Standard

A few years ago an English Prime Minister, when discussing the question of defence against enemy aircraft, made the statement, “the bomber will always get through.” Recent experience, both here and in Germany, would seem to give support to this view. Yet in spite of the way we have suffered from the night bomber in the past few weeks, the time will surely come when this menace, in its present form, will be met and will have become out of date. This is the lesson of history.

The history of the art of warfare is the history of advances in the technique of attack, followed by the discovery of defensive measures that caught up with it, or a new form of attack that nullified the old. Mankind does not set itself insoluble problems. Each new instrument of warfare has simply been a fresh problem for the opposition to solve, and they have always solved it, from the time of the flint-headed spear of cave man to the appearance of the explosive bomb of the airman.

We proposed examining some of the principal means adopted for offence and defence from antiquity to the present day with some remarks on their origin and social effects.

It may be as well at the beginning to explain in what way we distinguish the offensive from the defensive methods of warfare. The distinction can only be broad and arbitrary because from one point of view a spear, for instance, is both a weapon of offence and defence. However, for the purpose we have in view, we will define defence as weapons, armour or other means adopted to resist or outwit the attack of the supreme offensive weapon of the moment. For example, shields, armour, walls, catapults, cannons, etc., are such types of defensive means. In time, of course, the defensive means itself becomes a method of offence, for instance, catapults and cannon.

We will begin our study by very briefly examining the method of warfare followed before the advent of civilisation. It is not necessary to go deeply into this early period because organised warfare only really came in with the beginning of civilisation, and has remained with us ever since.

The earliest means of attack, after man had really become man, was the flint-headed spear, wooden club and, perhaps, the boomerang of old stone age man who lived in the early period of savagery. These implements were less used against man himself than against the wild beasts he hunted and who hunted him. The only thing that could be described as defensive armour in those days was the roughly prepared skins of wild beasts that man wore as clothing. Sleeping in caves, under pieces of bark propped against trees, or in rude bough huts early man, like the animals, depended principally on his alert senses and his agility for his safety.

Towards the end of the period of savagery man made a great step forward in offensive methods; he discovered how to make and use the bow and arrow. This made him a regular hunter as opposed to his previous existence, which was mainly that of a food gatherer.

The bow and arrow was the weapon of supremacy for the ethnic period of savagery. Its superiority over the club and spear is obvious. The quarry could be stalked and killed from a distance. The group first possessing it was for a time placed in a supreme position, as against the users of club and spear.

In the next ethnological period, the period of barbarism, a tremendous discovery was made, one that influenced the course of social development for centuries, and fundamentally affected the prosecution of war as well as everything else. This discovery was the smelting of iron ore. Soon the iron sword replaced the bow and flint-headed arrow as the weapon of supremacy.

The new ploughshare of iron not only developed the art of corn growing, it also tied man down firmly to settled habitations, and the flimsy stockaded village of moving people—the defence against the bow and arrow—gave place to the walled town, with turrets and battlements.

At first the walled town gave complete security. On the alarm being sounded of the approach of hostile forces, the inhabitants left their fields, carrying with them portable goods and driving their livestock into the shelter of the walls, where there was adequate accommodation for a long siege. These walls surrounded a large area, including space for animals. We will explain the arrangements in more detail later. Warriors of the opposing sides then went forward to engage each other in single combat.

This way of carrying on war was in operation during the Homeric age of the Greeks before they had stepped upon the stage of written history. The legend of the siege of Troy is an illustration of the powerful defence put up by city walls in those days. Although the attacking force was encamped outside of Troy in vastly superior numbers and besieged it for over twenty years, the city was never taken by assault. It eventually fell through the introduction of a small body of the enemy by means of a stratagem. This force then opened the city gates—the one vulnerable point— to the invaders.

The Viking of historic times is also a direct representative of this period. Iron increased the offensive and defensive armour. Bronze helmets, shields, body, arm and leg armour were added to the defensive in place of the leathern protection of former times. The spear was also added which revolutionised the method of fighting, and was constantly lengthened until it reached the enormous length used in the impenetrable Roman phalanx.

Gilmac. 

(To be continued.)