Chinese One of the earliest written claims of using conjoined mobile shields as fortification is described in the Chinese historical record
Book of Han. During the 119 BC
Battle of Mobei of the
Han–Xiongnu War, the famous
Han general
Wei Qing led his army through a fatiguing expeditionary march across the
Gobi Desert only to find
Yizhixie chanyu's main force waiting to encircle them on the other side. Using armored heavy wagons known as "Wu Gang Wagon" () in ring formations, which provided Chinese
archers,
crossbowmen, and
infantry protection from the Xiongnu's powerful
cavalry charges, and allowed Han troops to utilize their ranged weapons' advantages of
precision. Wei Qing neutralised the
Xiongnu's initial cavalry charges, forcing a
stalemate and buying time for his troops to recover strength, before using the cover of a
sandstorm to launch a counteroffensive which overran the
nomads.
Czechs and Hussites In the 15th century, during the
Hussite Wars, the
Hussites developed tactics of using the tabors, called
vozová hradba in Czech or
Wagenburg by the
Germans, as mobile
fortifications. It was first used in the
Battle of Nekmíř. When the Hussite army faced a numerically superior opponent, the
Bohemians usually formed a square of the armed wagons, joined them with iron chains, and defended the resulting fortification against charges of the enemy. Such a camp was easy to establish and practically invulnerable to enemy
cavalry. The etymology of the word
tabor may come from the Hussite fortress and modern day Czech town of
Tábor, which itself is a name derived from biblical
Jezreel mountain
Tabor (in Hebrew תבור). The crew of each wagon consisted of 18 to 21 soldiers: 4 to 8 crossbowmen, 2 handgunners, 6 to 8 soldiers equipped with pikes or flails, 2 shield carriers, and 2 drivers. The wagons would normally form a square, and inside the square would usually be the cavalry. There were two principal stages of the battle using the wagon fort: defensive and counterattack. The defensive part would be a pounding of the enemy with artillery. The Hussite artillery was a primitive form of a
howitzer, called in
Czech a
houfnice, from which the
English word howitzer comes. Furthermore, they called their guns the Czech word
píšťala (
hand cannon), in that they were shaped like a pipe or a
fife, from which the word
pistol is possibly derived. When the enemy approached near enough, crossbowmen and hand-gunners emerge from the wagons and inflict more casualties at close range. There would even be stones stored in a pouch inside the wagons for throwing should the soldiers run out of ammunition. After this huge barrage, the enemy would be demoralized. The armies of the anti-Hussite crusaders were usually heavily armored
knights. Hussite tactics were to disable the knights' horses so that the dismounted (and ponderous) knights would be easier targets. Once the commander saw fit, the second stage of battle would begin. Men with
swords,
flails, and
polearms would spring out and attack the weary enemy. Alongside this infantry, cavalry would leave the square and strike. The enemy would be eliminated, or very nearly so. The wagon fort was later used by the crusading anti-Hussite armies at the
Battle of Tachov (1427). Anti-Hussite
German forces, unfamiliar with this type of strategy, were defeated. The Hussite wagon fort strategy failed at the
Battle of Lipany (1434), where the
Utraquist faction of Hussites defeated the
Taborite faction. On a hill within a wagon fort, they were drawn into charging out prematurely, when their enemy pretended to retreat. The Utraquists would be reconciled with the Catholic Church afterward. Thus, the wagon fort's impact on Czech history ended. The first victory against the wagon fort at the Battle of Tachov showed that the best ways to defeat it were to prevent it from being erected in the first place or to get the men inside to charge out prematurely after a feint. Such solutions meant the fortification lost its prime advantage. The importance of the wagon fort in Czech history diminished, but the Czechs would continue to use the wagon forts in later conflicts. After the
Hussite Wars, foreign powers such as the
Hungarians and
Poles who had confronted the destructive forces of Hussites, hired thousands of Czech mercenaries (such as into the
Black Army of Hungary). Hungarian general
John Hunyadi studied the Hussites' tactics, he applied its featuring elements in his army during the
Hungarian–Ottoman Wars, including the use of war wagons as a mobile fortress called
szekérvár in Hungarian. At the
Battle of Varna in 1444, it is said that 600 Bohemian handgunners (men armed with early shoulder arms) defended a wagon fortification. The Germans would also use wagons for fortification. They used much cheaper materials than the Hussites, and different wagons for infantry and artillery. The
Russians also used a type of movable fortress, called a
guliai-gorod in the 16th century. A Danish peasant rebellion in 1441, culminating in the battle of St. Jørgensbjerg also used the war fortresses. The leader of the Danish peasants were led by
Henrik Reventlow who had participated in the
Hussite Wars and had learned of the war fortress by participating in
Albert II's war against the Hussite. There he saw what a formidable defence the war fortress was, and then used it in the peasant rebellion. While it is not certain how the fortress was built, it still played a crucial role in defending Husby against a more well equipped army under
Christopher of Bavaria. While the fortress did defend Husby initially, Henrik's army was defeated after much of his army had left. The casualties of the peasant army is speculated to be 6,000-25,000. Henrik was executed shortly after by Christoffer. Another use of this tactic was the very similar
infantry squares deployed by
Wellington at the
Battle of Waterloo. Likewise the
South African laager. The wagon forts would form into squares, supporting each other. Were an assault made between two forts, marksmen from both would easily exploit the advantage and kill many of the enemy. ==Variations==