Changes in tactics and strategy: medieval to early modern
How Battles Were Fought in the Early Medieval Period
Before the Norman Conquest of 1066, the armies of Britain were dominated by the infantry tactics of the Anglo-Saxons and the mobile raiding style of the Vikings. Understanding how these methods worked — and why they changed — is essential for tracing how British tactics evolved over more than a thousand years.
Saxon and Viking Battle Methods
The Anglo-Saxon army was built around the shield wall. Warriors — called huscarls (professional household troops) and fyrd (part-time levies) — locked their shields together to create a solid defensive line. This formation required strong discipline and worked best on firm ground where the line could hold. The shield wall was effective against cavalry charges but vulnerable if broken from the flanks or if discipline collapsed.
Viking armies used a similar shield wall when fighting pitched battles, but their strategic approach was fundamentally different. The Vikings were primarily raiders. Their use of longships allowed them to strike coastal and river targets rapidly, plunder and withdraw before a defensive force could be mustered. This hit-and-run raiding made conventional defensive responses difficult and forced Saxon England into a series of fortification programmes, including the system of burhs (fortified towns) developed under King Alfred of Wessex in the 880s.
The shield wall was the core infantry formation of both Anglo-Saxon and Viking warriors. Saxon armies used it defensively in pitched battle; Vikings used a similar formation when they chose to fight but preferred raiding over set-piece combat. The shield wall remained effective until cavalry tactics or missile weapons could break the line.
The Battle of Hastings, 1066
The Battle of Hastings on 14 October 1066 is one of the most important tactical engagements in British military history. Harold II’s Saxon army took up a strong defensive position on Senlac Hill and formed a shield wall. For much of the day, the Norman infantry and cavalry failed to break through. The Normans then used a tactical innovation: a feigned retreat that drew part of the Saxon line off the hill in pursuit. When the Normans turned to fight again, the broken Saxon formation was destroyed. William’s mounted knights delivered the decisive blow.
Hastings demonstrated the power of combined arms — coordinating archers, infantry and cavalry — against a force relying on a single tactic. It marked the beginning of the end for the old Saxon infantry-based method and introduced Norman cavalry dominance to Britain.
From the Conquest onwards, the mounted armoured knight became the dominant military figure in England. Knights were expensive to equip and maintain, and their social status — the feudal ideal of chivalry — was intertwined with their military role. In open-field battles, a cavalry charge by armoured knights could shatter an infantry line that lacked defensive preparation. However, this superiority was not absolute: cavalry charges struggled against disciplined pikemen, prepared defensive terrain and, most significantly, the English longbow.
The Longbow and the Battle of Crécy, 1346
The Battle of Crécy in August 1346 transformed medieval warfare. An English army under Edward III, with around 10,000 men, faced a larger French force that included armoured cavalry. The English deployed their longbowmen in massed formations on the flanks. As the French cavalry charged repeatedly, English volleys of arrows brought horses and riders down in large numbers. The disciplined firepower of the longbow shattered the tactical assumption that armoured cavalry was invincible.
Crécy was followed by similar English victories at Poitiers (1356) and Agincourt (1415). These battles demonstrated a key tactical principle: missile weapons, properly deployed with disciplined infantry support, could defeat the most prestigious heavy cavalry. The longbow required years of training to use effectively, which is why English and Welsh archers were genuinely feared across Europe.
The Battle of Crécy (1346) showed that disciplined longbow fire could defeat French armoured cavalry. English victories at Crécy, Poitiers (1356) and Agincourt (1415) all relied on this combination of missile weapons and defensive positioning, cementing the longbow as England’s signature weapon of the Hundred Years’ War.
Linear Tactics and the New Model Army
From the sixteenth century, the introduction of firearms gradually displaced the longbow and changed tactical formations. Linear tactics involved deploying musketeers in lines so that they could fire in sequence — one rank shooting while others reloaded — maintaining a near-continuous rate of fire. This required intensive drill and strict discipline.
The New Model Army, created by Parliament in 1645 during the English Civil War, represented a significant professionalisation of English military organisation. Unlike the feudal levies or ad hoc forces of earlier eras, it was a standing paid army with a clear command structure, uniform training and a regimental system. Its victories at Naseby (June 1645) and Langport (July 1645) effectively ended the first phase of the Civil War. The New Model Army’s model — professional, trained, disciplined — pointed towards the kind of armies that would dominate British warfare into the nineteenth century.
Across the medieval and early modern periods, several elements changed significantly: the dominant arm shifted from infantry (shield wall) to cavalry (Norman knight) to missile (longbow) to firearm (musket and then rifle). However, one continuous factor was the importance of discipline. Whether holding a shield wall, maintaining arrow volleys at Crécy, or firing in linear sequence, disciplined soldiers consistently outperformed undisciplined ones. This continuity — the premium placed on training and formation — runs through the entire history of British land warfare up to the mid nineteenth century.