Today I was daydreaming about an ancient army training chimpanzees or similar ape to fight as a kind of ‘secret weapon’ against more conventional armies at the time. This was, in part, due to the startlingly violent nature of chimps, and how much stronger they and other apes are compared to humans. An animal that will go around ripping of the faces and genitalia of their victim sounds like a pretty terrifying weapon, at least on paper, but I’m wondering about the reality of this.
I’m sure ancient generals and kings daydreamed the same thing…“I’ll get a legion of lions…yeah lions, we’ll strap honeybadgers on their backs and sic them on the barbarians!” But it runs into a couple of obvious problems. Now I know the Romans used animals in gladitorial combat (either against each other, or hapless human opponents).
First off is numbers. You’d have to be able to gather, and train enough of them for them to be an effective weapon in an army. They’re not immune to arrows or spears, so they’ll be affected by attrition just like any other military unit, needing replacements, and needing to be deployed with enough force not to be completely annihilated.
Then there is the training part. On paper, the most viscious animal seems like the best weapon, but then, how do you keep it under control? How do you convince an animal, “Maul those humans, not these humans that have been tormenting you with spears and starving you for the last three days. Those humans are on your side and not for eating”. If the animal was tame enough to not attack its trainers/allies, it might be a little too friendly toward its enemies.
So what would be the most viable combat animal? Zebras? Kangaroos? Chimpanzees? Honey Badgers?
IOW, what you’re looking for is germ warfare - impressive numbers and no training required. In the ancient world, as now, there are logistical challenges, but these are not insurmountable.
Trying to do this with semi-intelligent animals is fraught with problems. You’re better off using humans - they can understand the concepts, are subject to discipline, and can use weapons of which even primitive versions typically make them more formidable than even the best animals.
*10.4 - 10.5
They were to engage by sea in a few days; Hannibal was inferior in number of vessels, and had to use art in the contest, as he was no match for his enemy in force. He accordingly ordered as many poisonous serpents as possible to be brought together alive, and to be put into earthen vessels, of which when he bad collected a large number, he called the officers of his ships together, on the day on which he was going to fight at sea, and directed them all to make an attack upon the single ship of King Eumenes, and to be content with simply defending themselves against others, as they might easily do with the aid of the vast number of serpents;
11.5-11.6
As the rest of the Pergamenian ships bore hard upon the enemy, the earthen pots, of which we have previously spoken, began suddenly to be hurled into them. These, when thrown, at first excited laughter among the combatants, nor could it be conceived why such a thing was done; but when they saw their ships filled with serpents, and, startled at the strangeness of the occurrence, knew not what to avoid first, they put about their ships, and retreated to their camp upon the coast.*
From Cornelius Nepos’ Liber De Excellentibus Ducibus Gentium ( Lives of Eminent Commanders ). Possibly apocryphal, though Peter Green for one seems to accept it. Seems like the sort of thing that might have worked exactly once :). This by the way was long after Zama when Hannibal was in exile serving as the de facto mercenary military adviser to King Prusias I of Bithnyia in Prusias’ conflict with Roman-backed Eumenes II of Pergamon.
I think everybody is missing the point, although Xema comes tangentially close with:
Humans are the best war-animals for the simple reason: Humans are cheap!
I got the best lecture on this point some 25 years ago, directly from the mouth of a Navy dolphin trainer. It’s damn expensive to capture (or breed), raise, maintain, and train any other animal that might be useful in war. Certainly so with dolphins, at least.
So we’re NOT going to be investing all that expense in training dolphins just to go plant an explosive charge on the side of an enemy ship, only to risk getting the dolphin blown up too. Recruiting, maintaining, and training a human to do that is much cheaper. Are there will always be plenty more humans where that one came from.
I’m going to guess here that something at least roughly the same might be true of any other species that could be useful in war. They are simply less cost effective than humans. (Horses would have been worthwhile because they can provide a service that humans simply cannot do cost-effectively, namely, carrying other soldiers around on their backs.)
Great cite/quote, thank you. I knew, sort of, about the elephants. This is extraordinary.
Can you recommend or cite something on the elephant battle? It occurs to me that this weapon rivals, and by chronology easily beats, the most famous in the world…whoops, I feel a thread being borne/born from my foam-flecked sea…
Training soldiers in the US is far more expensive per capita. Let alone weapons specialists.
If we’re talking actual, battlefield combat it would be gorillas hands down. They’re at least ten times stronger than men and their low center of gravity would make it virtually impossible for a single man, or even three or four, to take one down. They’ll fight at 100% ferocity at all times and no man, especially one in ancient armor, could outrun them. Since they’re designed to fight other gorillas, they can take one helluva beating before succumbing. Oh, and their mouths are full of large knives. A soldier would have to be very fast and adept with a sword to keep a pissed-off gorilla from dismembering him in under ten seconds.
And if you could teach your gorilla army to use throwing stars Rome would burn.
Lucretius (5.1308ff) has a big passage on animals in warfare. It seems to have no relation to reality, however.
After describing horses and elephants in battle, he writes:
Thus Discord sad
Begat the one Thing after other, to be
The terror of the nations under arms,
And day by day to horrors of old war
She added an increase.
Bulls, too, they tried
In war’s grim business; and essayed to send
Outrageous boars against the foes. And some
Sent on before their ranks puissant lions
With armed trainers and with masters fierce
To guide and hold in chains- and yet in vain,
Since fleshed with pell-mell slaughter, fierce they flew,
And blindly through the squadrons havoc wrought,
Shaking the frightful crests upon their heads,
Now here, now there. Nor could the horsemen calm
Their horses, panic-breasted at the roar,
And rein them round to front the foe. With spring
The infuriate she-lions would up-leap
Now here, now there; and whoso came apace
Against them, these they’d rend across the face;
And others unwitting from behind they’d tear
Down from their mounts, and twining round them, bring
Tumbling to earth, o’ermastered by the wound,
And with those powerful fangs and hooked claws
Fasten upon them. Bulls would toss their friends,
And trample under foot, and from beneath
Rip flanks and bellies of horses with their horns,
And with a threat’ning forehead jam the sod;
And boars would gore with stout tusks their allies,
Splashing in fury their own blood on spears
Splintered in their own bodies, and would fell
In rout and ruin infantry and horse.
For there the beasts-of-saddle tried to scape
The savage thrusts of tusk by shying off,
Or rearing up with hoofs a-paw in air.
In vain- since there thou mightest see them sink,
Their sinews severed, and with heavy fall
Bestrew the ground.
Here in the SE US, we’ve dug up yellowjacket nests that were the size of cars. I think a defensive perimeter with mutiple colonies would discourage enemy sappers.
