Mastering Mountain Warfare: From Ancient Battles to Modern Combat

Watch the Episode

Video originally published on September 23, 2023.

Imagine an army traversing the treacherous Alps, facing subzero temperatures and treacherous paths. This was Hannibal's audacious march in 218 BC, a pivotal moment that would reshape the balance of power in the Italian peninsula. Mountain warfare, from ancient battles to modern conflicts, has consistently proven to be a decisive factor in geopolitics. For Rome, the Alps were an insurmountable barrier until Hannibal's daring maneuver turned them into a strategic advantage. Similarly, in ancient China, the rugged terrains between Cao Wei and Shu Han dictated the ebb and flow of power. Today, the US Army's mastery of mountain warfare, honed through centuries of lessons, is crucial in regions from North Africa to the Pacific. As we explore the evolution of mountain warfare, we uncover the tactics, technologies, and terrains that have shaped history and continue to influence modern combat.

Key Takeaways

In 218 BC, Hannibal's army traversed the Alps, turning a natural barrier into a strategic advantage for the Carthaginians against Rome.
The rugged terrain between Cao Wei and Shu Han in ancient China dictated the balance of power, showcasing the strategic importance of mountains.
The US Army's expertise in mountain warfare is crucial in regions from North Africa to the Pacific, shaped by historical lessons and practical innovations.
Hannibal's forces faced significant losses and logistical challenges during their descent from the Alps, highlighting the difficulties of sustaining an army in mountainous regions.
The Kurds used their mountain territory to defend against the Islamic State, staging counteroffensive operations and securing key mountainous areas like Sinjar Mountain.
Mountain warfare demands specialized tactics, training, and equipment due to steep slopes, rugged paths, and extreme weather conditions.

Mountainous Terrain and Warfare: An Ancient Challenge

Mountainous terrain has presented unique challenges and opportunities for militaries throughout history. The steep slopes, rugged paths, and extreme weather conditions of mountains demand specialized tactics, training, and equipment. Armies that master these elements can turn the high ground into an impregnable fortress, while those unprepared often find themselves overwhelmed by the terrain itself. The strategic significance of mountains is evident in their role as natural borders, water sources, and refuges for autonomous communities. These factors make mountains critical in both peacetime and war. The ancient and medieval world provides ample examples of how mountainous terrain shaped the outcomes of battles and wars. One of the most famous examples is Hannibal's crossing of the Alps in 218 BC. Leading an army of Carthaginians and allied troops, Hannibal marched from the Italian peninsula through the treacherous Alpine passes to invade Rome. The journey was fraught with peril, including harsh weather, difficult terrain, and the loss of many men and elephants. Despite these hardships, Hannibal's army emerged from the Alps and caught the Romans by surprise, ultimately leading to significant victories, including the Battle of the Trebbia and the Battle of Lake Trasimene. Hannibal's success underscored the importance of adapting to mountainous terrain and the strategic advantage of catching an enemy off guard. The Roman legions, though formidable in open battle, struggled to counter Hannibal's tactics in the rugged terrain of Southern France and North Africa. Another notable example from ancient history is the Battle of Jieting during the Three Kingdoms period in China. In 228 AD, the state of Shu Han, led by Zhuge Liang, attempted to invade the state of Cao Wei. The battle took place in the mountainous terrain of Jieting, where Shu Han forces were ambushed and defeated by the Cao Wei army, led by Sima Yi. The mountainous terrain played a crucial role in the ambush, as the narrow paths and steep cliffs allowed the Cao Wei forces to surprise and overwhelm their enemies. This battle highlights how a deep understanding of the terrain can be used to gain a tactical advantage. In modern times, the US Army has recognized the importance of specialized training for mountain warfare. The US Army's 10th Mountain Division, originally activated in 1943, was specifically trained for fighting in harsh, mountainous conditions. The division saw action in the Italian Campaign during World War II, where they faced the formidable defenses of the Gustav Line in the Apennine Mountains. The soldiers of the 10th Mountain Division were equipped with specialized gear, including crampons, ice axes, and insulated clothing, which allowed them to operate effectively in the rugged terrain. Their training and equipment gave them a significant advantage over the German forces, who were less prepared for the harsh conditions. The extreme weather conditions of mountainous terrain also pose unique challenges. Mount Washington in New Hampshire, for instance, is known for its unpredictable and severe weather, earning it the nickname "Home of the World's Worst Weather." Temperatures can drop rapidly, and winds can reach hurricane speeds, making it difficult for soldiers to operate effectively. Specialized training and equipment are essential for soldiers to survive and fight in such conditions. The US Army's Cold Regions Training Center at Fort Greely, Alaska, provides training for soldiers to operate in extreme cold weather environments, including mountainous terrain. This training includes techniques for navigating icy terrain, constructing snow shelters, and treating cold-weather injuries. The lessons learned from historical battles and modern training programs underscore the importance of specialized preparation for mountain warfare. Armies that fail to adapt to the unique challenges of mountainous terrain risk being overwhelmed by the environment itself. Conversely, those that master the art of mountain warfare can turn the high ground into a formidable advantage, catching their enemies off guard and securing strategic victories.

Hannibal's Alpine Conquest: A Masterclass in Mountain Warfare

They have a far wider field of view, they’re slower to tire while fighting downhill than an enemy fighting uphill, they can throw or fire projectiles for longer distances, and in the world of modern, mechanized warfare, they force an enemy to abandon any heavy equipment that can’t handle steep or uneven slopes. Both historical cannons and modern-day tanks often struggle to fire upward, and even in historical melee combat, it’s a hell of a lot easier to wave a spear around at your own hip-height than it is to hold it above your head for hours. Then, there’s the physical risks posed by high altitude. Although humans can usually maintain good health at altitudes up to eight thousand feet above sea level, above that zone, decreased oxygen in the air can lead to a whole range of problems. Even at just four thousand feet above sea level, people can start to begin to experience so-called mountain sickness, a mild form of altitude sickness that involves head and muscle aches, shortness of breath, dizziness, and nausea, which can often take multiple days to recuperate from upon returning to lower altitudes. More severe altitude sickness includes conditions like hypoxia—low oxygen in the body tissues, causing confusion, difficulty breathing, and rapid heart rate—and decompression sickness—nitrogen dissolving in a person’s blood and forming bubbles, which can be an incredibly painful condition. People who live in the mountains, or train to acclimate to high altitude, can overcome these conditions, but if an attacking force fails to engage in that sort of preparation, they’ll find their own bodies turning against them even before they enter combat. And acclimating is a process that involves zero shortcuts; there is no way for a person to make the process go faster. In context to warfare, this means that a lowland army pushed into the mountains too fast will experience the effects of altitude sickness, and if they do take the time to acclimate, they’ll have to spend days in camps surrounded by higher mountains on all sides, as sitting ducks for as long as it takes to be ready to keep moving. Just as important as the altitude, is the bitter cold one may often find while trying to traverse the mountains. On the human body, cold can have a range of nasty effects: frostbite, hypothermia, even trenchfoot, all of which can impact underequipped or poorly dressed soldiers nearly immediately. Even soldiers who are ready for the cold, can be worn down physically and psychologically by it—and that situation only gets worse when we factor in the altitude sickness we already discussed. In cold weather, weapons are more prone to jamming, vehicles and generators require more fuel to operate, and even water and basic supplies will be frozen unless precautions are taken. And each of these problems only get worse, when we factor in wind chill; for reference, the Mount Washington Observatory, which long held the record for the most extreme surface wind speed on Earth, sees a year-round average wind speed of almost 57 kilometers per hour. Again, these are all problems that a well-trained and well-prepared alpine fighting force can take care of, but they tend to be intensely challenging for a force that isn’t 110% ready. And expanding on the idea of readiness, it’s important to point out just how difficult it is to get a soldier ready to endure mountain environments for long periods of time. War in the mountains requires extreme physical fitness, as well as mental readiness and an ability to endure the elements. They also need to be trained in fighting in small units, often at the platoon or even the squad level—for reference, a US Army rifle platoon is 42 soldiers, whereas a rifle squad is made up of just nine soldiers. These soldiers need to be ready to fight and live in a decentralized way, and equipped with skills in climbing, rappelling, and wilderness survival.

The Evolution of Mountain Warfare: From Ancient Battles to Modern Conflicts

They’ve also got to contend with the reality that medical support, evacuation, and logistical resupply are unlikely, meaning that they must learn to operate basically on their own. Mountain warfare also has a profound effect on the way that intelligence and reconnaissance works. Maps are often severely lacking in detail, or flat-out wrong, and since every little valley is obstructed by hills, they will typically need to be scouted one-by-one if they are to be understood. What looks like a dry, easy route at one time of year, might be blanketed in feet of snow a few months later, and a few months after that, it might be a raging river that there is simply no way to traverse. In an era of aerial warfare, difficult weather often makes it hard to get real-time information on what’s happening in this sort of terrain, and before planes became available for aerial reconnaissance, militaries were constrained fully by what they could do with small teams of scouts who could be gone for weeks or even months at a time before returning. And that’s if those scouts were able to avoid any enemy forces, also operating in the same mountain ranges. And lastly, we’ve got to give a bit closer attention to the mountains as a center for insurgent and resistance movements. As we’ll explore in a moment, there are no shortage of historical examples here, but even just in theory, mountain terrain is a vital asset for rebel forces and militias looking to establish a stronghold. In his book Guerrilla Warfare, the Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara explained, “Fighting on favorable ground and particularly in the mountains presents many advantages […]”, pointing out that mountains force an enemy to operate cautiously, while allowing revolutionaries to dig into defensive positions, shelter non-combatants, and even run training camps. Because mountains force militaries to leave a lot of their heavy equipment behind, or risk bringing it through narrow passes and notches, they expose those militaries to ambush, and level the playing field with insurgencies often equipped only with small arms. Mountains are very difficult to surveil with small reconnaissance teams, especially when the militias that control the mountains, are more than able to patrol and sniff them out. And it’s important not to miss the simple realities of fatigue; a conventional military, forced to scale mountains without their transport vehicles, are likely to be exhausted and disorganized by the time they enter battle—where, again, a mountain insurgency has already built traps and ambushes waiting for them. The History. It wouldn’t be fair to call the Second Punic War, fought between Rome and Carthage from 208 to 201 BCE, the first use of mountain warfare tactics in major war; after all, war in the mountains has probably been around for as long as there’s been people living on or near mountains. But the Second Punic War does still provide a great first case study, because of how the armies of Carthage, led by their commander Hannibal, was able to turn Rome’s natural mountain defenses into a liability. See, Rome at this time was still mostly constrained to the Italian peninsula, protected in the north by a mountain range, the Alps. They considered the Alps to provide a naturally impassable border against attack, and historically, that assumption had been correct. But when Hannibal was able to bring his armies across the Alps and, all of a sudden, show up in northern Italy, it set the stage for a fifteen-year rampage that would inflict over a million Roman casualties. As the historians of the day told the story, Hannibal was unopposed by the Romans while attempting to scale the Alps, but they got their fair share of fighting anyway, harassed by mountain tribes in the Rhone Valley in what is known today as southern France.

Mountain Warfare in Ancient China: The Strategies of Cao Wei and Shu Han

The rugged terrain of the Italian peninsula and the Alps posed formidable challenges to Hannibal's forces, demonstrating the complexities of mountain warfare. The steep gradients and harsh conditions of the Alps tested the limits of Hannibal's army, leading to significant losses and hardships. The descent was particularly treacherous, as the soldiers had to navigate with their supply trains, pack animals, cavalry horses, and even war elephants. This logistical nightmare underscored the difficulties of sustaining an army in mountainous regions, a lesson that would be echoed centuries later in the battlegrounds of China. During the Three Kingdoms period in China, the Battle of Jieting in 228 CE highlighted the strategic intricacies of mountain warfare. The conflict between Cao Wei and Shu Han unfolded in the mountainous region of Jieting, a strategically vital area. General Ma Su of Shu Han sought to gain an advantage by securing the high ground, a tactic often advocated in military strategy texts. However, Ma Su's decision to prioritize the high ground over the advice of his superiors proved disastrous. The Cao Wei forces, instead of engaging directly on the hillsides, encircled and besieged the mountain. This tactic exploited the limited water and supply resources available to Ma Su's troops, leading to a dire situation. Ma Su's subsequent desertion of his forces and his eventual execution underscored the critical importance of adaptability and situational awareness in mountain warfare. His lieutenant's desperate breakout and retreat further emphasized the need for flexible strategies in such challenging terrains. The Battle of Jieting serves as a stark reminder that holding high ground in mountainous regions does not guarantee victory. The terrain's unique challenges, such as limited resources and difficult supply lines, can turn a seemingly advantageous position into a trap. This lesson is crucial for modern military strategists, who must consider not only the tactical benefits of high ground but also the logistical and operational challenges it presents. The US Army's Mountain Warfare School, located in the rugged terrain of the Sierra Nevada, trains soldiers to navigate and fight in high-altitude environments, emphasizing the importance of adaptation and resilience. The school's curriculum includes lessons on altitude sickness, cold-weather survival, and the use of specialized equipment, all of which are essential for effective mountain warfare. The legacy of mountain warfare strategies extends beyond ancient battles and into modern combat. The experiences of Hannibal and Ma Su provide valuable insights into the complexities of fighting in mountainous terrain. From the Alps to the Himalayas, the principles of adaptability, resource management, and tactical flexibility remain paramount. As modern armies continue to train and operate in high-altitude environments, the lessons of the past serve as a guiding light, helping soldiers to master the art of mountain warfare and secure victory in some of the world's most challenging landscapes.

The US Army's Approach to Mountain Warfare: Lessons from History

The US Army's engagement in mountain warfare has been shaped by a blend of historical lessons and practical innovations, honed through decades of operations in diverse terrains. One of the most influential historical examples is the crossing of the Alps by Hannibal in 218 BC. Hannibal's audacious march with his army and elephants from the Italian peninsula into the Rhone Valley and over the Alps demonstrated the potential for surprise and strategic advantage in mountainous regions. This feat, though costly, showcased the importance of adaptability and resilience in harsh environments, lessons that the US Army has integrated into its mountain warfare doctrine. For instance, during World War II, the US Army faced similar challenges in the rugged terrain of Southern France and North Africa. The experiences of units like the 10th Mountain Division, which was activated in 1943, highlight the necessity of specialized training and equipment for effective mountain operations. The 10th Mountain Division, initially trained at Camp Hale in Colorado, underwent rigorous preparation to adapt to high-altitude conditions, steep terrain, and extreme weather. This division's success in the Apennine Mountains during the Italian Campaign underscored the value of mountain-specific training and the development of specialized tactics. The division's soldiers learned to navigate treacherous paths, establish supply lines in inhospitable conditions, and engage in close-quarters combat in alpine environments. These lessons were further refined during the Korean War, where US forces encountered harsh mountainous terrain and bitter cold. The Battle of Pork Chop Hill in 1953, for example, demonstrated the importance of sustained logistics and the ability to maintain morale and cohesion in isolated, high-altitude positions. The US Army's experiences in Korea emphasized the need for robust supply chains and the development of lightweight, versatile equipment suitable for mountain warfare. In more recent conflicts, such as the wars in Afghanistan, the US Army has faced the complexities of mountain warfare in one of the world's most challenging terrains. The Afghan mountains, with their rugged peaks, narrow valleys, and harsh climate, have tested the limits of military strategy and technology. The Soviet Union's struggles in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989 served as a stark reminder of the dangers posed by extreme weather and difficult terrain. The US and its allies, learning from these historical examples, have focused on enhancing mobility, communication, and situational awareness in mountainous regions. The use of advanced technologies, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and satellite imagery, has become crucial for monitoring enemy movements and coordinating operations in remote, high-altitude areas. Additionally, the US Army has invested in developing lightweight, high-performance equipment designed to withstand the rigors of mountain warfare. Innovations in cold-weather gear, mountain-specific vehicles, and advanced navigation systems have significantly improved the Army's capability to operate effectively in alpine environments. The lessons from historical examples, such as the Battle of Jieting during the Three Kingdoms period in China, where Cao Wei forces under Sima Yi outmaneuvered the Shu Han army in a mountainous ambush, have also influenced US Army tactics. The emphasis on terrain exploitation, surprise attacks, and the use of guerrilla tactics in mountainous regions has been integrated into modern training programs. Soldiers are taught to leverage natural features for cover and concealment, to move silently and efficiently through rugged terrain, and to adapt to the unique challenges posed by high-altitude environments. The US Army's approach to mountain warfare is a testament to its ability to learn from history and adapt to the evolving demands of modern combat. From the ancient battles of Hannibal to the contemporary conflicts in Afghanistan, the Army has continually refined its strategies, equipment, and training to master the art of mountain warfare. This ongoing process of learning and adaptation ensures that the US Army remains prepared to face the challenges of future conflicts in some of the world's most demanding terrains.

The Lasting Impact of Mountain Warfare: Tactics, Technology, and Terrain

Mountain warfare's enduring lessons have profoundly shaped military strategy and tactics, emphasizing the critical roles of terrain, technology, and specialized training. The challenges posed by mountainous terrains have been evident since ancient times. Hannibal's audacious march across the Alps in 218 BC with his Carthaginian army, including elephants, demonstrated the logistical and tactical hurdles of mountain warfare. The Roman forces, despite their eventual victory, faced immense difficulties in navigating the treacherous terrain, highlighting the importance of acclimatization and specialized training. Modern armies, too, have grappled with these issues. During the Soviet-Afghan War and subsequent conflicts, American forces learned the hard way that mountainous terrains favor local militias. The mujahideen's guerrilla tactics, which included planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and launching surprise attacks, exploited the Americans' unfamiliarity with the terrain. The Afghan militias' ability to navigate the high mountains without suffering physical effects gave them a significant advantage. In contrast, foreign armies often required weeks or months to acclimatize, leaving them vulnerable to attacks from seemingly every surrounding hill or mountain. The Afghan militias' organizational structure, allowing them to travel light and use fallback points and resource depots, further underscored the importance of adaptability in mountain warfare. The Soviets and Americans, reliant on heavy machinery and technology, found themselves at a disadvantage. They had to resort to century-old methods of training pack animals, while their advanced technology often proved ineffective in the harsh mountain environment. This reliance on technology can be a double-edged sword, as seen in the Nafusa Mountains of Libya during the country's civil wars. Local militias, operating out of the city of Zintan, used heavy pickup trucks and monster trucks to navigate the desert peaks. Despite being surrounded by government forces, the militias turned the mountains into an impenetrable stronghold, conducting counter-raids and eventually launching a decisive advance westward. The Kurds, an ethnic group spread across Turkey, Iran, Iraq, and Syria, have similarly leveraged mountainous terrains to their advantage. For decades, Kurdish forces have fought against these nations, using the mountains to their strategic benefit. During Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, Kurdish-held mountains were considered off-limits due to the significant military advantage they provided. Even Turkey, despite its efforts to control Kurdish paramilitary forces, has struggled to establish real control over these mountainous regions. The lessons from these conflicts underscore the enduring impact of mountain warfare on military strategy. Terrain dictates tactics, and armies must adapt to the unique challenges posed by high altitudes, rugged landscapes, and harsh weather conditions. Specialized training, such as acclimatization and mountain-specific combat techniques, is crucial. Technology, while essential, must be balanced with traditional methods, as seen in the use of pack animals and guerrilla tactics. The experiences of Hannibal, the Romans, the Soviets, Americans, Libyan militias, and Kurdish forces all point to the same conclusion: mastering mountain warfare requires a deep understanding of the terrain, adaptability, and a blend of modern and traditional military practices.

Mountain Warfare in the Modern Era: New Challenges and Opportunities

In their operations against the Islamic State, the Kurds used their mountain territory to beat back attacks and stage counteroffensive operations into the Syrian and Iraqi lowlands, especially against the city of Mosul, where Kurds performed surveillance from nearby mountains for the years that the city was under Islamic State control. During this time, Kurds were able to secure their own mountains and eradicate the Islamic State from others, including Sinjar Mountain, where in 2014, Iraqi Kurds staged a daring assault to break an Islamic State siege against the minority Yazidi population in the area. After being encircled on Sinjar Mountain and starved out for months, Yazidi civilians were rescued by a large Kurdish militia, who punched a hole through Islamic State forces and eventually cleared them from the mountain entirely. Since the days of their counterinsurgency against the Islamic State, Kurdish forces have been able to reach a mostly peaceful equilibrium with Syria and Iraq, even as they find themselves under escalating threat from Turkey. These days, Kurdish forces in the mountains are increasingly being targeted by Turkish drones, which somewhat reduce the mountains’ relevance in keeping Kurdish militias and even civilians safe from retaliation. But nonetheless, the mountains remain a massive strategic asset for Kurdish forces, without which they would probably face far worse odds in trying to resist Turkey. In the modern world, most militaries that either protect mountains on their sovereign soil, or have a reasonable expectation of fighting in mountains elsewhere, will invest in maintaining robust mountain-warfare capabilities in case they’re needed. The major Andean nations of Argentina and Chile each operate numerous mountain units, as do the Alpine nations of Switzerland and Italy, whose ski troops are the stuff of alpine-warfare legend around the world. China, India, and Pakistan each maintain units to watch over their sections of the Himalayas, and Colombia’s High Mountain Battalions have become some of the most experienced mountain-warfare operators in the world. The United States operates its Army Mountain Warfare School in the mountains of the state of Vermont, and its Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center operates in the mountains near Yosemite National Park. Russia, seizing on its wealth of recruits from the Caucasus region, operates several mountain-warfare units, most prominently the Kuban Cossacks of Russia’s Kuban region. NATO even devotes its own significant resources to alpine warfare, at the NATO Mountain Warfare Center of Excellence in Slovenia. However, the intense training and resources that alpine warfare demands, means that these forces are typically kept somewhat small—not including countries whose mountain-warfare troops might be frequently sent to battle, like India and Pakistan in the disputed Kashmir region. As we conclude today’s video, then, it should be abundantly clear that the mountains are a double-edged sword: a lethal, nearly unstoppable adversary for those who are unprepared to confront them, and a valuable asset to those who can tame them, and use them to their own advantage. With such an unchanging, even technology-resistant sphere of combat, it would be a mistake to predict any grand change anytime soon in the way that mountain warfare is fought. Instead, we’ll predict just the opposite: that no matter how advanced warfare might become, the battles that take place in the high mountains will continue as they always have. They will be protracted, bitter affairs, where many rules of combat must be rewritten or forgotten, and those who can ally themselves with the mountains, are in a far better position to win the battles to come. Guerrilla Warfare. Che Guevara.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who is Hannibal?

See the full article for details on Who is Hannibal?.

What is the role of US Army?

See the full article for details on What is the role of.

What happened during The Art of War?

See the full article for details on What happened during The Art.

What is the significance of The Art of War: Mountain Warfare?

See the full article for details on What is the significance of.

What are the key facts about The Art of War: Mountain Warfare?

See the full article for details on What are the key facts.

Related Coverage

Sources

About the Author

Jackson Reed

Jackson Reed creates and presents analysis focused on military doctrine, strategic competition, and conflict dynamics.

About the Team →