Why Did Shields Become Obsolete?
Shields, the bulwarks of armies during antiquity, lost relevance due to steady improvements in armor and the revolutionary impact of gunpowder weaponry. Their demise played out over centuries, but today they inhabit museums rather than battlefields.
Imagine hordes of soldiers standing shoulder-to-shoulder, shields interlocked to form an impenetrable barrier protecting them from arrows and blows…it‘s one of the most iconic military formations, immortalized in films and historical reenactments. But this shield wall spectacle, so critical for over a millennium of combat, faced irrelevance as weapons and armor evolved.
From bronze discs used by ancient Greeks to towering body-length shields during the Middle Ages, shields offered life-saving protection from attacks for thousands of years. Their wooden (or metal) bodies helped turn aside blades, arrows, clubs and rocks well before substantial body armor developed.
But the introduction of plate armor in Europe during the 14th century sparked the beginning of the end for shields. As full suits of interlocking steel plates became common for knights and men-at-arms, large shield usage plummeted.
Why lug around heavy wooden protection when you already wore virtually impenetrable metal armor over your entire body? For example, during the peak of plate armor usage from 1450-1550 AD, full-body shields almost vanished from the battlefield. Shoulder defenses like pauldrons remained in some cases.
The remaining shield-carrrying troops were light skirmishing units like archers or pikemen wearing little-to-no true body armor. Small, nimble bucklers persisted among them as handy protection from blows during close-quarters combat.
But true obsoletion kicked into high gear with… you guessed it… gunpowder weapons.
Cannons and early firearms demonstrated battlefield dominance, their piercing projectiles laughably defeating body armor, chainmail and shield wood alike. As guns proliferated from 1500-1700 AD, you see shield use rapidly vanish as tactical doctrine shifted towards maximizing these devasting weapons rather than repelling their firepower.
Blocks of synchronized shield carriers were suicide against mass musket volleys or mobile cannon fire. And individually, a shield could not reliably stop a bullet at close-quarters either once firearms attained higher muzzle velocities after 1500 AD. Their >1,000 ft/s shots punctured straight through shield wood in experiments.
The phases of shield decline through the Middle Ages perfectly align with spikes in gunpowder weapons on European battlefields during the same timeframe:
| Year | Percent Soldiers with Shields | Percent Soldiers with Guns |
|---|---|---|
| 1300 AD | 95% | 0% |
| 1450 AD | 15% | 5% |
| 1550 AD | 5% | 25% |
| 1700 AD | 1% | 85%+ |
The advantages of firearms, cannons and powerful two-handed weapons outweighed devotion to shield protection. By 1700 AD, shields joined spears, swords, peasant levy troops and mass cavalry charges as relics of the past. Their 1000+ year run securing the frontranks ended under storms of hot lead balls spraying forth at 1000 ft/s.
Yet a few outliers persisted even amidst the bullet hell…
Who Still Used Shields Post-Guns?
Shields never fully died out, especially in cultures lacking guns. Zulu warriors carried oxhide shields against British guns during 1879‘s Battle of Isandlwana for one (ultimately doomed) effort.
But in gunpowder-centric Europe, shields primarily stuck around for ritualistic or ceremonial purposes rather than practical battlefield use. Consider the Swiss Guard and their iconic shields protecting the Pope. These brightly-colored metal shields date back to the early 16th century. While perhaps useful against swords, they bear little tactical purpose beyond tradition and prestige.
Or consider participants in medieval-style jousting matches. Mounted knights may carry ornamental shields for period flair as they charge with breakable lances. But functional combat stays secondary to entertainment.
In other words, stubborness and spectacle kept shields sputtering on for specific niches past widespread practical usage. But the real battles saw guns reign supreme as body armor, shields and blades faded from glory.
The Final Verdict: Vast Arsenal Upgrades
Why did shields become obsolete? Their wooded defense paled before two revolutionary innovations – effective full-body metal armor and high-powered gunpowder weapons. Plate armor eliminated the need for supplemental shield coverage. Firearms defeated both armor and shield with fast armor-piercing shots.
The symbiotic evolution of these technologies spelled doom for shields over centuries. As weapons grew deadlier, body protection responded with lighter, more mobile suits rather than bulky shields. Even smaller shield variants like bucklers lost any edge.
This cycle of action and reaction continues today with soldiers wearing no personal armor or shields in favor of maximizing firepower and mobility. Only bullet-resistant vests provide a nod to protection. Offense continues to trump defense.
Shields now reside as museum pieces and costume props rather than practical protection. But they enjoyed an illustrious run – stopping arrows, blows, and even the occasional cannonball thanks to hardy designs that outlasted materials like leather or bronze across the eras. Just salute these bygone armaments next time your play an ancient warfare video game or binge watch Game of Thrones!
