why did people stop using medieval castles for fighting and defence?

Question

why did they stop using a castle as a defence? why didn't they use a castle to fight the other opponent?

Answer 1

The invention of the canon and discovery of gun powder.

Answer 2

Gunpowder may not have caused the demise of castles but it did change them and thus stop them being built in a way that we would recognise as being a castle. But this was not a sudden change and happed over a long period.

The change to which i refer is from the classic turreted castle of the middle ages to the Tras Italian fort of the 18th century. the classic style although sturdy was very seseptable to cannon fire due to its high profile. This was proved during the English civil war and 30 years war. And also the classic castle has many blind spots where defending muskets and cannon cannot see the attacking soldiers.

Thus there was a change to large, lower profile forts. These were often partially buried so as to give the maximum defence against cannon (some had walls many meters thick) and most were pentagon shaped with pointed bastions on each corner. As such this allowed for every wall to be covered by racking cannon and musket fire from another. An example of this is Fort Nelson near Portsmouth. And such fortifications were used and modified right up until ww1 (many were used around Verdun) after which there was a change towards Maginot line style underground fortifications as seen on the Maginot line, Sigfried line and Atlantic wall.

Answer 3

That rather depended on where you lived. The one thing that did NOT bring about the demise of the castle as a military defence was gunpowder. Few castles were ever breached by cannon and those that were were of the "lightweight" variety. There were many of these around at the end of the mediaeval period which had been built more as status symbols than as a proper defensive position. Bodiam Castle is a good example of this and it is clear from first sight that it was never intended to put up any kind of prolonged resistance despite its apparent trappings of the "typical" castle.

Corfe Castle proved invulnerable to artillery as late as the English Civil War. The damage evident today is the result of "slighting" after capture and the degree of damage is directly related to the resistance offered. The fact that Corfe has been almost destroyed shows the spirit of its defence. Even then, it proved extremely difficult to demolish using carefully placed explosives.

In England, the end of the Wars of the Roses brought about about a political stability and strong central government which rendered the castle an unnecessary expense and people who had depended on them for their own safety and power base moved out of them as soon as they could. Castles were primarily built for defence and were confined, gloomy, ill-lit places lacking most of the comforts of home and people were glad to see the back of them. It was therefore social change that saw the end of the castle in this country.

The Continent was not so well blessed with with peaceful existence and the need for static fortification continued well beyond that in England. There, the castle evolved into the artillery fort whereby the principles of high, perpendicular defences gave way to low, earth-built fortifications designed for both the deployment and resistance of artillery. Even so, people no longer wanted to make a permanent fortification their place of residence and so forts became purely military in purpose.

Answer 4

Castles were a purely defensive weapon and couldn't really be used against opponents. Their value went down as the availability of gunpowder went up. The methods of warfare also changed so soldiers became more mobile and less defensive. Being bottled up in a castle wasn't a swift move because you could be starved out. Limited exits meant limited moves.

That doesn't mean that castles aren't stil being used. They make good bases for operations. That is, until someone finds out where the base is and brings in heavy weaponry to take it out. Castles can't stand against a modern artillery barage.

Answer 5

Taking to Field is always the preferred option and holding fortifications the last resort! Castles were still in use during World War 1. Understand, any structured Fort is the essential Castle, but obviously such fortifications only serve a defensive function and so easily fall prey to Bombardment and Siege.

Answer 6

Castle's became "outdated" mainly due to the advent of gunpowder. Cannon's made it easy for advancing armies to destroy castle defenses. They were more powerful and had longer range. They were also much more mobile than large catapults.

On top of that, the political structure of Europe (and other parts of the world) started to change over time. Feudalism was a very popular form of government across most of Europe in Medieval times. In the feudal system, a lord would control a small slice of the kingdom, and would need to defend it. Castles were best suited for that. But gradually nation states started to evolve, and as countries started to create national militaries, then the need for each feudal lord to defend his own slice of the kingdom became less, and the castles they used to defend their lands became less important.

Answer 7

Evolution. Economy and Industrial.

Nobles start to loose power to new cast of businessman.

More and more people concentration in cities started to bring down real mean of a castle protecting entire population living around it.

Instead do expend money building Castles, it should be better building better Army and improving another communal institutions. New Casts started to direct their money into new distribution and not givind all to the government.

Advent of the State. Government lose power when considered as a single person. Conquer lost association to Get in, Kill and take power of an entire group of peasants who do not care about their government.

Answer 8

Gun powder and cannons didn't stop nations using castles, future weaponry did as they become more powerful.

But when cannons came onto the field, castle designs went from high, thinish walls, to lower, thicker walls, in order to prevent a cannon ball demolishing the wall in one shot.

Answer 9

Castles and fortifications were still in use in the second world war. I don't believe that people ever did stop using them. Gunpowder changed siege tactics. Missiles and air power now make them obsolete unless dug very deep into the earth.

Answer 10

Weaponry developed to the state that made the castle redundant as they were being taken apart by artillery.

Answer 11

Castle walls weren't very strong back then They used to be made of wood, then stone, but battering rams can knock anything down, so they stopped. Plus Bombs.