Bastions, Blades, and Boomsticks: Technology and tactics as force multipliers in the Great Siege of Malta

Ocdt Hargreaves 25980 HIE 271: Introduction to Military History and Strategic Thought March 20 2013

During the sixteen century the Ottoman Empire was at the height of their power, the last remnants of the Byzantine Empire have been conquered and the Ottomans controlled the Balkans, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Crimea, North Africa, Hungary, and Transylvania. The Turks also were a dominate power in the Mediterranean Sea. The Ottomans were intent on pushing into Europe and wanted to assault Italy by sea. However in order to assault the peninsula, they would have to gain control of the Island of Malta. The Turks needed Malta to serve as a base for their assault. The Island however, was the headquarters of the Knights of Saint John. A religious order of knights founded back in the days of the crusader states in the 12th century. The knights had only recently taken control of the islands in 1530, having previously lost their headquarters on the Island of Rhodes to the Ottomans in 1522. The knights were determined not to lose another headquarters and called for the help of other European nations. Unfortunately for the knights they were only able to get 900 Spanish, 800 Italians, and 200 Greeks and Sicilians. Along with the 700 knights and 3000 Maltese men at arms, the defenders had strength of around 6000 men. Meanwhile the Ottomans assembled a force of 29,000 men from their empire with 19,000 men from allied states in North Africa with a total of around 48,000 men. The Ottomans arrived on May 18th 1656 and would have to take Malta before the winds shifted at the end of the summer or be forced to winter on the island and be left vulnerable to a Spanish counterattack. More reinforcements were promised for the knights but it would take too long for them to be mustered. The Turks would focus on the forts of St. Elmo, St. Michael and Angelo which if lost, would mean the defeat of the knights and the other defenders1. The situation was not hopeless for the defenders however. The defenses at Malta were some of the best fortifications in Europe and new technological advances in weaponry would help the
1

Spiteri, Knights Vs. Turks, MDLXV : Anatomy of a Hospitaller Victory, 52

defenders prevail against the Turks. The defenders also used some very unorthodox tactics to break the Turkish moral and delay them long enough for reinforcements to arrive. The modern military doctrine used by the Knights of Saint John and their allies was the key to the decisive victory enjoyed by the Knights. The use of new military ideas such as bastioned fortifications gave the defenders a greater advantage as well as reducing the effectiveness of the Ottoman artillery. The pike and shot formations proved very effective at holding off the waves of Ottoman infantry at the breaches in the wall, as well as some very unconventional strategies used by the knights allowed them to hold off the Ottomans long enough for the winds to shift at the end of summer, forcing the attackers to retreat back to the Ottoman Empire. With the rise of gunpowder weapons the use of traditional castle and wall defences were obsolete. Most of these older style walls could not stand up to a cannon bombardment for very long and would collapse after only a few hits. The Ottomans had a lot of success in attacking cities in this way and their engineers created the largest cannon in use at this time. The Dardanelles gun, also known as the grand bombard was18.6 tons and was a length of 518 centimetres capable of firing 63 centimetre cannon balls. Few fortifications would be able to sustain a bombardment from these guns2. Luckily, when the knights took possession of the Island of Malta there were very few fortifications. The knights spared no expense at building new fortifications on the island in accordance to new fort designs. The forts of St. Elmo, St. Michael and Angelo where all built with bastioned fortifications which were thick, sloped, low walls which were able to survive the pounding given to them by the grand bombard. Another new feature was the concept of overarching fields of fire. This would force anyone assaulting the walls into kill zones and made it hard for the Turks to find cover to protect themselves from the
2

Antonios, T h e S i e g e o f M a l t a 1 5 6 5 , 53

defenders firing at them from atop the wall. In the age of gunpowder fort had to be able to withstand cannon fire, made form stone and reinforced with massive earthen ramparts, the walls were sometimes as much as fifty feet thick3. When the Turks tried to climb the walls with ladders, they would find themselves being fired upon from the side and the back. This was one of the first times that their grand bombards could not bring down a wall; this hurt the Turks moral because one of their greatest weapons failed to do its job. Their moral was brought down further because when they attacked the walls they were being fired on by multiple directions and even when they reach the wall they can still be fired upon. Forts were created in a star shape, bastions on the points allowed crossfire creating kill zones and permitting supporting fire from the other bastions. In a fort like this the effective strength of the defenders is multiplied by a factor of ten.4 The knights also made great use of grenades. These were very primitive grenades that were little more than a clay pot filled with gunpowder. They used these to injure or kill dense groups of Turks approaching the walls. By the time the Turks were able to take Fort Saint Elmo and secure a landing point for the rest of the army, they had lost over 6000 soldiers, including half of their Janissaries as well as one of their top commanders Turgut Reis while the defenders lost only 1,500 men.5 The soldiers under the command of the knight were also very well trained. Unlike other European groups they did not try to hold on to dying traditions and instead adopted the newest tactics and weapons. Rather than use the traditional long sword, which was effective at piercing
3

Hughes, F o r t r e s s : A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y i n M a l t a , 116 Hughes, F o r t r e s s : A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y i n M a l t a , 138 (Brennan, "Key to Christendom: The 1565 Siege of Malta, 423

armour. They opted to use the rapier instead. The rapier was great for stabbing with accuracy and quickly, which was made even more effective due to the Turks wearing little armour and their use of the scimitar. The scimitar was a slashing weapon that required the user to get close to the enemy. The defenders were able to easily keep their distance from the Turks and outreach them and even though armour was disappearing due to firearms, they still used breastplates for protection giving the soldiers even more of an advantage. After a while the Turks started to dig mines underneath the fort walls and set up explosives in order to bring down the walls, however this took time to do and once the walls did come down they would only be able to assault a small breach. When breaches did occur the defenders would create a pike and shot formation. This involved using units of pike men as well as gunners to form a wall of pikes to keep the enemy away while the gunners would fire their muskets into the enemy. This formation proved every effective at holding back the Turks ad preventing them from taking the breach and storming the rest of the fort. While the Turks were engaged with the pike men below, they were also very vulnerable to gunners on top of the walls, pike men on the walls who could stab at them from above, as well as grenadiers who would throw their grenades into the tightly packed groups injuring dozens with each throw. This would also cause the Turks formation to loosen which would make it easier for the breach defenders to hold them off6. These tactics allowed the defenders to hold of the Turks for long periods of time. They were determined to make the Turks fight for every bit of ground lost and to make them pay a price for it. Another advantage the knights had was that they were experts in field medicine and excellent surgeons. The Knight of Saint John originated in the Kingdom of Jerusalem as hospital to treat pilgrims in the 12th century. With over 400 years of experience the knights were great at treating injured troops and
6

Spiteri, Knights Vs. Turks, MDLXV : Anatomy of a Hospitaller Victory, 307

being able to return them to the battlefield. 7 The Turks had difficulty trying to find ways to counter the knights tactics and to exploit the breaches in the walls, their own gunners, who were some of the best in Eurasia, were of little use because they could not get a good line of sight on the formations defending the breached or on the defenders on top of the wall due to the ramparts. The amount of casualties the Turks sustained compared to the little success they have had assaulting the walls and breaches would continue to wear down their moral. This would also push their commanders into undergoing riskier tactics in order to bring a quick end to the siege before they were forced to leave for the winter. Due to their desperate situation, the knights also had to come up with some very unorthodox strategies in order to last until reinforcements showed up. One of the things they noticed was that the Turks wore very free flowing robes, robes that could ignite easily. The defenders decided to use this to their advantage using two different methods. The first method employed by the knights was the trump, also known as a fire lance, which was a six foot long pole with a barrel at the end packed with gunpowder, sulphur, varnish, and pitch. The fire lance shot flaming tar out the front and burns at 1200 degree Fahrenheit. The defenders would position these in places where they knew the Turks would try and breach the walls. The fire lance was extremely effective at igniting the tight formations of the attackers as they passed through the bottleneck at the wall breach. This weapon had a very large intimidation factor because the Turks were basically walking into fire. The delaying action this weapon caused would allow the defenders to get in a good position in order to hold off the Turkish assault.8 Another method used

Antonios, T h e S i e g e o f M a l t a 1 5 6 5 , 7 6 Antonios, T h e S i e g e o f M a l t a 1 5 6 5 , 8 3

by the knights was fire hoops. The design was really simple and easy to make. It starts with a metal or wooden frame about a metre in diameter wrapped in rags, burlap, hemp, and rope then soaked in flammable liquids. The defenders would then ignite the hoops and send them rolling down the walls in the hundreds. They would send these rolling down into groups of soldiers who could not move that much in formation. A rolling, flaming hoop would come towards them spreading fire everywhere causing chaos, confusion, and panic.9 There was no record of weapons like these being used in combat before this siege which makes this a good example of how the defenders had to improvise new weapons to help them.10 Towards the end of the summer on August 19th the Ottomans were becoming desperate. They attempted a last ditch attempt to take Fort Saint Michael by use of a siege tower, a tactic that has not been used in a while. If the tower made it to the walls the Turks would have been able to overrun the defenders at Saint Michael. The leader of the knights, Jean de la Valette, ordered the engineers to dig through the wall at the location where the siege tower was expected to land. Once the siege tower reached the wall the defenders removed the last few bricks, rolled a cannon up to the hole in the wall, and fired a chain shot directly into the base of the tower. When the siege tower was in place, la Valette executed his brilliant plan, he had the final stones in the wall removed, wheeled up the cannon, and fired it right into the base of the siege tower. Within seconds the Turks greatest weapon was in rubble. When that tower went down Ottoman Turks were dealt a blow from which they never recovered.11 This was what broke the Turkish moral, they had little ammunition left, lost an estimated third of their men, and the winds would shift soon forcing
9

Rothman, "The Great Siege of Malta," H i s t o r y T o d a y , 9 Spiteri, Knights Vs. Turks, MDLXV : Anatomy of a Hospitaller Victory, 503
Antonios, T h e

10

11

Siege of Malta 1565,108

them to either winter on the island, leaving them vulnerable to a Spanish counter attack, or retreat back to the Ottoman Empire and possibly regroup in order to try again at a later time.12 The Great Siege of Malta was a decisive victory for the Knights of Saint John. If the knights had lost the Ottomans would have been able to invade Italy and perhaps even conquer Rome. Queen Elizabeth of England was even said to have remarked, If the Turks should prevail against the Isle of Malta, it is uncertain what further peril might follow to the rest of Christendom.13 With the knights victory the western expansion of the Ottomans was held in check. Although this was not without loss of life; 2500 defenders as well as 7000 civilians were killed while the Ottomans lost over 10,000 men, although this could be more. The knights were able to hold off the Ottomans because of an effective use of technology and tactics as well as original thinking. The fortifications were able to withstand even the most powerful Ottoman weapons. the knights were able to shatter Turkish moral and on September 11th 1565, the Ottomans left Malta and returned to Turkey. The use of new military ideas such as bastioned fortifications gave the defenders a greater advantage as well as reducing the effectiveness of the Ottoman artillery. The pike and shot formations proved very effective at holding off the waves of Ottoman infantry at the breaches in the wall, as well as some very unconventional strategies used by the knights allowed them to hold off the Ottomans long enough for the winds to shift at the end of summer, forcing the attackers to retreat back to the Ottoman Empire.

12

Spiteri, Knights Vs. Turks, MDLXV : Anatomy of a Hospitaller Victory, 623 Antonios, T h e S i e g e o f M a l t a 1 5 6 5 , 2 3

13

Bibliography

Antonios, Achelis. T h e S i e g e o f M a l t a 1 5 6 5 , (1570).

Brennan, Michael. "Key to Christendom: The 1565 Siege of Malta, its histories, and their use in Reformation polemic," T h e S i x t e e n t h C e n t u r y J o u r n a l , 33, no. 4 (2003): 1021,

Hughes, Quentin. F o r t r e s s : A r c h i t e c t u r e a n d M i l i t a r y H i s t o r y i n M a l t a , (Farnham, England: Lund Humphries, 1969), 284.

Rothman, Tony. "The Great Siege of Malta," H i s t o r y T o d a y , 57, n1 (2007): 12,

Spiteri, Stephen. Knights Vs. Turks, MDLXV : Anatomy of a Hospitaller Victory. Gutenberg: Gutenberg Press, 2005.