Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

ARMY

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V02, Page 610 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

ARMY ORGANIZATION 44• Arms of the Service.—Organization into " arms " is produced by the multiplicity of the weapons used, their functions and their limitations. The " three arms "—a See also:

term universally applied to See also:infantry (q.v.), See also:cavalry (q.v.) and See also:artillery (q.v.)—coexist owing to the fact that each can undertake functions which the others cannot properly fulfil. Thus cavalry can See also:close with an enemy at the quickest See also:pace, infantry can See also:work in difficult ground, and artillery is effective at See also:great ranges. Infantry indeed, having the See also:power of engaging both at close quarters and at a distance, constitutes the See also:chief See also:part of a fighting force. Other " arms," such as mounted infantry, cyclists, See also:engineers, &c., are again differentiated from the three chief arms by their proper functions. In deciding upon the See also:establishment in See also:peace, or the See also:composition of a force for See also:war, it is therefore necessary to See also:settle beforehand the relative importance of these functions in carrying out the work in See also:hand. Thus an army operating in See also:Essex would be unusually strong in infantry, one on See also:Salisbury See also:Plain would possess a great number of guns, and an army operating on the See also:South See also:African veldt would consist very largely of mounted men. The normal See also:European war has, however, naturally been taken as the basis upon which the relative proportions of the three arms are calculated. At the See also:battle of See also:Kolin (1757) the cavalry was more than See also:half as strong as the infantry engaged. At See also:Borodino (1812) there were 39 cavalry to too of other arms, and 5 guns per 'coo men. In 187o the Germans had at the outset 7 cavalrymen to every See also:loo men of other arms, the See also:French to. As for guns, the See also:German artillery had 3, the French 3+ per loco men.

In more See also:

modern times the proportions have undergone some alteration, the artillery having been increased, and the cavalry brought nearer to the See also:Napoleonic See also:standard. Thus the relative proportions, in peace See also:time, now stand at 5 or 6 guns per l000 men, and 16 cavalry soldiers to too men of other arms. It must be See also:borne in mind that cavalry and artillery are maintained in peace at a higher effective than infantry, the strength of the latter being much inflated in war, while cavalry and artillery are not easily extemporized. Thus in the Manchurian See also:campaign these proportions were very different. The See also:Russian army on the See also:eve of the battle of See also:Mukden (loth of See also:February 1905) consisted of 370 battalions, 142 squadrons and 153 See also:field batteries (1200 guns), with, in addition, over 200 heavy guns. The strength of this force, which was organized in three armies, was about 300,000 infantry and 18,000 cavalry and See also:Cossacks, with 3 i guns per moo men of other arms. The See also:Japanese armies consisted of 300,000 infantry, 11,000 cavalry, 900 field and 170 heavy guns, the proportion of field artillery being 22 guns per Imo men. It is perhaps not superfluous to mention that all the smaller See also:units in a modern army consist of one See also:arm only. Formerly several dissimilar weapons were combined in the same unit. The See also:knight with his four or five variously armed retainers constituted an example of this method of organization, which slowly died out as weapons became more See also:uniform and their functions better defined. 45. Command.—The first essential of a See also:good organization is to ensure that each member of the organized See also:body, in his own See also:sphere of See also:action, should contribute his See also:share to the achievement of the See also:common See also:object.

Further, it is entirely beyond the power of one See also:

man, or of a few, to See also:control every action and provide for every want of a great number of individuals. The modern See also:system of command, therefore, provides for a system of grades, in which, theoretically, See also:officers of each grade control a See also:group of the next See also:lower units. A See also:lieutenant-See also:colonel, for instance, may be in See also:charge of a group of eight companies, each of which is under a See also:captain. In practice, all armies are permanently organized on these lines, up to the colonel's or lieutenant-colonel's command, and most of them are permanently divided into various higher units under See also:general officers, the See also:brigade, See also:division and army See also:corps. The almost invariable practice is to organize infantry into companies, battalions and regiments. Cavalry is divided into troops, squadrons and regiments. Artillery is organized in batteries, these being usually grouped in various ways. The other arms and departments are subdivided in the same general way. The commands of general officers are the brigade of infantry, cavalry, and in some cases artillery, the division of two or more infantry brigades and a force of artillery and mounted troops, or of cavalry and See also:horse artillery, and the army corps of two or more divisions and " corps troops.", Armies of several corps, and See also:groups of armies are also formed. 46. A brigade is the command of a brigadier or See also:major-general, or of a colonel. It consists almost invariably of one arm only.

In armies of the old regime it was not usual to assign troops of all arms to the subordinate See also:

genet-Ills. Hence the brigade is a much older See also:form of organization than the division of all arms, and in fact See also:dates from the 16th See also:century. The.infantry brigade consists, in the See also:British service, of the brigadier and his See also:staff, four battalions of infantry, and adminstrative and medical units, the combatant strength being about 4000 men. In See also:Germany and See also:France the brigade is composed of the staff, and two regiments (6 battalions) with a See also:total of over 6000 combatants at war strength. The cavalry brigade is sometimes formed of three, sometimes of two regiments; the number of squadrons to a See also:regiment on service is usually four, exceptionally three, and rarely five and six. The " brigade " of artillery in Great See also:Britain is a lieutenant-colonel's command, and the term here corresponds to the Abtheilung of the German, and the groupe of the French armies (see ARTILLERY). In Germany and France, however, an artillery brigade consists of two or more regiments, or twelve batteries at least, under the command of an artillery general officer. 47. A division is an organization containing troops of all arms. Since the virtual abolition of the " corps artillery " (see ARTILLERY), the force of field artillery forming part of an infantry division is sometimes as high as 72 guns (Germany); in Great Britain the augmented division of 1906 has 54 field guns, 12 field howitzers, and 4 heavy guns, a Total of 70. The term " infantry " division is, in strictness, no longer applicable, since such a unit is a See also:miniature army corps of infantry, artillery and cavalry, with the necessary services for the See also:supply of See also:ammunition, See also:food and See also:forage, and for the care of the sick and wounded. A more exact See also:title would be " army " division.

In general it is composed, so far as combatants 'are concerned, of the divisional See also:

commander and his staff, two or more infantry brigades, a number of batteries of field artillery forming a regiment, brigade or group, a small force, varying from a See also:squadron to a regiment, of cavalry (divisional cavalry), with some engineers. The force of the old British division (1905) may be taken, on an See also:average, as 10,000 men, increased in the 1906 reorganization to about 15,000 combatants. In other armies the fighting force of the division amounts to rather more than 14,000. The cavalry division (see CAVALRY) is composed of the staff, two or three cavalry brigades, horse artillery, with perhaps mounted infantry, cyclists, or even See also:light infantry in addition. In many, if not most, armies cavalry divisions are formed only in war. In the field the cavalry division is usually an See also:independent unit with its own commander and staff. " Cavalry corps " of several divisions have very rarely been formed in the past, a division having been regarded as the largest unit capable of being led by one man. There is, however, a growing tendency in favour of the corps organization, at any See also:rate in war. _ 48. Army Corps.—The" corps " of the 18th century was simply a large detachment, more or less See also:complete in itself, organized for some particular purpose (e.g. to See also:cover a See also:siege), and placed for the time being under some general officer other than the chief commander. The modern army corps is a development from ' the division of all arms, which originated in the French Revolutionary See also:wars. It is a unit of considerable strength, furnished with the due proportion of troops of all arms and of the See also:auxiliary and medical services, and permanently placed under the command of one general.

The corps organization (though a corps d'armee was often spoken of as an armee) was used in See also:

Napoleon's army in all the See also:campaigns of the See also:Empire. It may be mentioned, as a curious feature of Napoleon's methods, that he invariably constituted each corps d'armee of a different strength, so that the enemy would not be able to estimate his force by the See also:simple See also:process of counting the corps flags which marked the marghals' headquarters. Thus in 1812 he constituted one corps of 72,000 men, while another had but 18,000. After the fall of Napoleon a further advance was made. The See also:adoption of universal service amongst the great military nations brought in its See also:train the territorial organization, and the corps, representing a large See also:district, soon became a unit of peace formation. For the smooth working of the new military system it was essential that the framework of the war army should exist in pave. The Prussians were the first to bring the system to perfection; See also:long before 1866 See also:Prussia was permanently divided into army corps districts, all the troops of the III. army corps being Brandenburgers; all those of the VI. Silesians, and so on, though See also:political reasons required, and to some extent still require, modifications of this principle in dealing with annexed territory (e.g. See also:Hanover and See also:Alsace-See also:Lorraine). The events of 1866 and of 1870–71 caused the almost universal adoption of the army corps regional system. In the See also:case of the British army, operating as it usually did in See also:minor wars, and rarely having more than sixty or seventy thousand men on one See also:theatre even in See also:continental wars, there was less need of so large a unit as the corps. Not only was a British army small in See also:numbers, but it preserved high traditions of discipline, and was sufficiently well trained to be susceptible as a unit to the impulse given by one man.

Even where the term " corps " does appear in See also:

Peninsular See also:annals, the implication is of a corps in the old sense of a See also:grand detachment. Neither cavalry nor artillery was assigned to any of the British " corps " at See also:Waterloo. 49. Constitution of the Army Corps.—In 1870–71 the III. German army corps (with which compare See also:Marshal See also:Davout's ordre de bacaille above) consisted of the following combatant units: (a) staff; (b) two infantry divisions (4 brigades, 8 regiments or 24 battalions), with, in each division, a cavalry regiment, 4 batteries of artillery or 24 guns, and engineers; (c) corps troops, artillery (6 field batteries), See also:pioneer See also:battalion (engineers), train battalion (supply and transport). A See also:rifle battalion was attached to one of the divisions. This ordre de bataille was followed more or less generally by all countries up to the most modern times, but between 1890 and 1902 came a very considerable See also:change in the point of view from which the corps was regarded as a fighting unit. This change was expressed in the abolition of the corps artillery. Formerly the corps commander controlled the greater part of the field artillery, as well as troops of other arms; at the See also:present time he has a See also:mere handful of troops. Unless battalions are taken from the divisions to form a corps reserve, the See also:direct See also:influence of the corps organization on the battle is due almost solely to the fact that the commander has at his disposal the See also:special natures of artillery and also some horse artillery. Thus the (augmented) division is regarded by many as the fighting unit of the loth, as the corps was that of the 19th century. In See also:Europe there is even a tendency to substitute the See also:ancient phrase " reserve artillery " for " corps artillery," showing that the role to be played by the corps batteries is subordinated to the operations of the masses of divisional artillery, the whole being subject, of course, to the technical supervision of the artillery general officer who accompanies the corps headquarters.

Thus limited, the army corps has now come to consist of the staff, two or more divisions, the corps or reserve artillery (of special batteries), a small force of " corps " cavalry, and various technical and departmental troops. The cavalry is never very numerous, owing to the demands of the independent cavalry divisions on the one hand and those of the divisional cavalry on the other. The engineers of an army corps include See also:

telegraph, See also:balloon and See also:pontoon units. Attached to the corps are reserves of munitions and supplies in ammunition columns, field parks, supply parks, &c. The term and the organization were discontinued in See also:England in 1906, on the See also:augmentation of the divisions and the See also:assignment of certain former "corps troops" to the direct control of the army commanders. It should be noticed that the Japanese, who had no corps organization during the war of 1904-5, afterwards increased the strength of their divisions from 15,000 to 20,000; the augmented " division," with the above peace strength, becomes to all intents and purposes a corps, and the generals commanding divisions were in 1906 given the title of generals-in-chief. 50. Army.—The term " army " is applied, in war time, to any command of several army corps, or even of several divisions, operating under the orders of one commander-in-chief. The army in this sense (distinguished by a number or by a special title) varies, therefore, with circumstances. In the See also:American See also:Civil War, the Army of the See also:Ohio consisted in 1864 only of the army staff and the See also:XXIII. corps. At the other extreme we find that the German II. Army in 187o consisted of seven army corps and two cavalry divisions, and the III.

Army of six army corps and two cavalry divisions. The term " army " in this sense is therefore very elastic in its application, but it is generally held that large groups of corps operating in one theatre of war should be subdivided into armies, and that the strength of an army should not exceed about 15o,000 men, if indeed this figure is reached at all. This again depends upon circumstances. It might be advisable to See also:

divide a force of five corps into two armies, or on the other hand it might be impossible to find suitable leaders for more than two armies when half a million men were present for See also:duty. In France, organization has been carried a step further. The bulk of the See also:national forces is, in case of war,' organized into a " group of armies " under a commander, usually, though incorrectly, called the generalissimo. This See also:office, of f course, does not exist in peace, but the insignia, the distinctive marks of the headquarters See also:flag, &c., are stated in See also:official publications, and the names of the generalissimo and of his chief of staff are known. Under the generalissimo would be four or five army commanders, each with three or four army corps under him. Independent of this " group of armies " there would be other and minor " armies " where required. 51. Chief Command.—The leading of the " group of armies " referred to above does not, in France, imply the supreme command, which would be exercised by the See also:minister of war in See also:Paris. The German system, on the other hand, is based upon the See also:leader-See also:ship of the national forces by the See also:sovereign in See also:person, and even though the headquarters of the "supreme war See also:lord" (Oberste Kriegsherr) are actually in the field in one theatre of operations, he directs the movements of the German armies in all quarters.

Similarly, in 1864, General See also:

Grant accompanied and controlled as a " group " the Armies of the See also:Potomac and the See also:James, supervising at the same time the operations of other groups and armies. In the same campaign a subordinate general, See also:Sherman, commanded a " group " consisting of the Armies of the See also:Tennessee, the See also:Cumberland and the Ohio. The question as to whether the supreme command and the command of the See also:principal group of armies should be in the same hands is very difficult of See also:solution. In practice, the method adopted in each case usually grows out of the military and political conditions. The See also:advantage of the German method is that the supreme commander is in actual contact with the troops, and can therefore form an accurate See also:judgment of their See also:powers. Under these conditions the See also:risk of having See also:cabinet See also:strategy forced upon the generals is at its minimum, and more especially so if the supreme commander is the See also:head of the See also:state. On the other hand, his judgment is very liable to be influenced unduly by facts, coming under his ownnotice, which may in reality have no more than a See also:local significance. Further, the supreme commander is at the See also:mercy of distant subordinates to a far greater degree than he would be if See also:free to go from one army to another. Thus, in 187o the See also:king of Prussia's headquarters before Paris were subjected to such pressure from subordinate army commanders that on several occasions selected staff-officers had to be sent to examine, for the king's private See also:information, the real state of things at the front. The conduct of operations by one group commander in the campaign of 1864 seemed, at a distance, so See also:eccentric and dangerous that General Grant actually See also:left his own group of armies and went in person to take over command at the threatened point. Balanced- judgment is thus often impossible unless the supreme command is independent of, and in a position to exercise general supervision over, each and every group or army. At the other end of the See also:scale is the system of command employed by the See also:Turks in 1877, in which four armies, three of them being actually on the same theatre of war, were directed from See also:Constantinople.

This system may be condemned unreservedly. It is recognized that, once the armies on either See also:

side have become seriously engaged, a commander-in-chief on the spot must direct them. Thus in 1904, while the Japanese and Russian armies were under the supreme command of their respective sovereigns, General See also:Kuropatkin and Marshal Oya.ma personally commanded the chief groups of armies in the field. This is substantially the same as the system of the French army. It is therefore permissible to regard the system pursued by the Germans in 187o, and by the See also:Union See also:government in 1864, more as suited to special circumstances than as a general See also:rule. As has been said above, the special feature of the German system of command is the See also:personal leadership of the German See also:emperor, and this brings the student at once to the See also:consideration of another important part of the " See also:superior leading." 52. The Chief of the General Staff is, as his title implies, the chief staff officer of the service, and as such, he has duties of the highest possible importance, both in peace and war, For the general subject of staff duties see STAFF. Here we are concerned only with the See also:peculiar position of the chief of staff under a system in which the sovereign is the actual commander-in-chief. It is obvious in the first See also:place that the sovereign may not be a great soldier, fitted by See also:mental gifts, training and See also:character to be placed at the head of an army of, perhaps, a million men. Allowing that it is imperative that, whatever he may be in himself, the sovereign should ex officio command the armies, it is easy to see that the ablest general in these armies must be selected to See also:act as his adviser, irrespective of See also:rank and seniority. This officer must therefore be assigned to a station beyond that of his army rank, and his orders are in fact those of the sovereign himself. Nor is it sufficient that he should occupy an unofficial position as adviser, or ad latus.

If he were no more than this, the sovereign could-act without his adviser being even aware of the action taken. As the staff is the machinery for the transmission of orders and See also:

des-patches, all orders of the commander-in-chief are signed- by the chief of staff as a See also:matter of course, and this position is therefore that in which the adviser has the necessary influence. The relations between the sovereign and his chief military adviser are thus of the first importance to the smooth working of the great military See also:machine, and never have the possibilities of this apparently See also:strange system been more fully exploited than by King See also:William and his chief of staff von See also:Moltke in 1866 and in 187o-71. It is not true to say that the king was the mere figurehead of the German armies, or that Moltke was the real commander-in-chief. Those who have said this forget that the See also:sole responsibility for the consequences of every See also:order See also:lay with the king, and that it is precisely the fear of this responsibilty that ha' made so many brilliant subordinates fail when in chief command. The characters of the two men supplemented each other, as also in the case of See also:Blucher and See also:Gneisenau and that of See also:Radetzky and See also:Hess. Under these. circumstances, the German system of command See also:works, on the whole, smoothly. Matters would, however, be different if either of the two officers failed to realize their mutual interdependence, and the system is in any case only required when the self-sufficing great soldier is not available for the chief executive command. 53. First and Second Lines.—The organization into arms and units is of course maintained in, peace as well as for war. Military forces are further organized, in peace, into active and reserve troops, first and second lines, &c., according to the power possessed by the executive over the men. Broadly speaking, the latter fall into three classes, regulars, auxiliary forces and irregular troops.

The regulars or active troops are usually liable to serve at all times and in any See also:

country to which they may be sent. Auxiliary forces may be defined as all troops which undergo actual military training without being constantly under arms, and in Great Britain these were until 1908. represented by the See also:Militia, the See also:Yeomanry and the See also:Volunteers, and now by the Territorial Force and the Special Reserve. In a country in which recruiting is by voluntary enlistment the See also:classification is, of course, very different See also:Loin that prevailing in a conscript army. The various "lines" are usually composed of See also:separate organizations; the men are recruited upon different engagements, and receive a varying amount of training. Of the men not permanently embodied, only the reserve of the active army has actually served a continuous term with the See also:colours. Other troops, called by various appellations, of which " militia " may be taken as generic, go through their military training at intervals. The general lines of army organization in the case of a country recruiting by universal service are as follows:—The male See also:population is divided into classes, by ages, and the total See also:period of liability to service is usually about 25 years. Thus at any given time, assuming two years' See also:colour-service, the men of 20 and 21 years of See also:age would constitute the active army serving with the colours, those of, say, 22 and 23, the reserve. The See also:Landwehr or second See also:line army would consist of all men who had been through the active army and were now aged 24 to 36. The third line would similarly consist of men whose ages were between 36 and 44. Assuming the same See also:annual See also:levy, the active army would consist of 200,000 men, its reserve 200,000, the second line of 1,300,000, and the third of 800,000. Thus of 2,500,000 men liable to, and trained for, military service, 200,000 only would be under arms at any given time.

The simple system here outlined is of course modified and complicated in practice owing to re-engagements by non-commissioned officers, the speedy dismissal to the reserve of intelligent and educated men, &c. 54. War Reserves.—In war, the reserves increase the field armies to 400,000 men, the whole or part of the second line is called up and formed into auxiliary regiments, brigades and divisions, and in case of See also:

necessity the third line is also called upon, though usually this is only in the last resort and for See also:home See also:defence only. The proportion of reservists to men with the colours varies of course with the length of service. Thus in France or Germany, with two years' service in force, half of the rank and See also:file of a unit in war would be men recalled from civil See also:life. The true military value of reservists is often questioned, and under certain circumstances it is probable that units would take the field at peace strength without waiting for their reservists. The frontier See also:guards of the continental military powers, which are expected to move at the earliest possible moment after hostilities have begun, are maintained at a higher effective than other units, and do not depend to any great extent on receiving reservists. The peace footing of cavalry and artillery units is similarly maintained at an artificial level. An operation of the nature of a coup de See also:main would in any case be carried out by the troops available at the moment, however large might be the force required—twenty weak battalions would, in fact, be employed instead of ten strong ones. There is another class of troops, which may be called See also:depot troops. These consist of officers and men left behind when the active corps completed with reserves takes the field, and they have (a) to furnish drafts for the front—and (b) to form a See also:nucleus upon which all later formations are built up. The troops of the second line undertake minor work, such as guarding See also:railways, and also furnish drafts for the field army.

Later, when they have been for some timeunder arms, the second line troops are often employed by them-selves in first line. A See also:

year's training under war conditions should bring such troops to the highest efficiency. As for irregulars, they have real military value only when the various permanent establishments do not take up the whole fighting strength of the nation, and thus states having universal service armies do not, as a rule, contemplate the employment of combatants other than those shown on the peace rolls. The status of irregulars is See also:ill defined, but it is practically agreed that combatants, over whose conduct the military authorities have no disciplinary power, should be denied the privileges of recognized soldiers, and put to See also:death if captured. So drastic a See also:procedure is naturally open to abuse and is not always expedient. Still, it is perfectly right that the same man shall not be allowed, for example, to shoot a sentry at one moment, and to claim the privileges of a harmless civilian at the next. The division into first, second and third lines follows generally from the above. The first line troops, in a conscript army, are the " active army" or regulars, permanently under arms in peace time, and its reserves, which are used on the outbreak of war to complete the existing units to full strength. The German terms Landwehr and See also:Landsturm are often applied to armies of the second and the third lines. 55. The military characteristics of the various types of See also:regular troops have been dealt with in considering the advantages and disadvantages of the several forms of recruiting. It only re-mains to give some indication of the advantages which such forces (irrespective of their time of service) possess over troops which only come up for training at intervals.

Physically, the men with the colours are always superior to the See also:

rest, owing to their See also:constant exercise and the regularity and order under which they live; as soldiers, they are more under the control of their officers, who are their leaders in daily life, in closer See also:touch with army methods and discipline, and, as regards their formal training, they possess infinitely greater power of strategic and See also:tactical manoeuvre. Their steadiness under See also:fire is of course more to be relied upon than that of other troops. See also:Wellington, speaking of the contrast between old and See also:young soldiers (regulars), was of See also:opinion that the chief difference lay in the greater hardiness, power of endurance, and general campaigning qualities given by experience. This is of course more than ever true in respect of regular and auxiliary troops, as was strikingly demonstrated in the See also:Spanish-American War. On the whole, it is true to say that only a regular army can endure defeat without See also:dissolution, and that volunteers, reservists or militiamen fresh from civil life may win a victory but cannot make the fullest use of it when won. At the same time, when they have been through one or two arduous campaigns, raw troops become to all intents and purposes equal to any regulars. On the other hand, the greatest military virtue of auxiliary forces is their See also:enthusiasm. With this quality were won the great victories of 1792-94 in France, those of 1813 in Germany, and the beginnings of See also:Italian unity at See also:Calatafimi and See also:Palermo. The earlier days of the American Civil War witnessed desperate fighting, of which See also:Shiloh is the best example, between armies which had had but the slightest military training. In the same war the first battle of See also:Bull Run illustrated what has been said above as to the weaknesses of unprofessional armies. Both sides, raw and untrained, fought for a long time with the greatest determination, after which the defeated army was completely dissolved in rout and the victors quite unable to pursue. So far it is the relative military value of the professional soldier and the See also:citizen-soldier that has been- reviewed.

A continental army of the French or German See also:

stamp is differently constituted. It is, first of all, clear that the drilled citizen-soldier combines the qualities of training and enthusiasm. From this it follows that a hostile " feeling " as well as a hostile " view " must animate such an army if it is to do good service. If a modern " nation in arms " is engaged in a- purely dynastic See also:quarrel against a professional army of inferior strength, the result will probably be victory for the latter. But the active army of France or Germany constitutes but a small part of the " nation in arms," and the army for war is composed in addition of men who have at some period in the past gone through a regular training. Herein lies the difference between continental and British auxiliary forces. In the French army, an ex-soldier during his ten years of reserve service was by the See also:law of 1905 only liable for two months' training, and for the rest of his military career for two See also:weeks' service only. The further reduction of this liability was proposed in 1907 and led to much controversy. The question of the value of auxiliary forces, then, as between the continous work of, say, See also:English territorials, and the permanent though dwindling influence of an See also:original period of active soldiering, is one of considerable importance. It is largely decided in any given case by the average age of the men in the ranks. 56. The See also:transfer of troops from the state of peace to that of war is called mobilization.

This is, of course, a matter which primarily depends on good See also:

administration, and its minutest details are in all states laid down beforehand. Reservists have to be summoned, and, on arrival, to be clothed and equipped out of stores maintained in peace. Officers and men of the regular army on leave have to be recalled, the whole medically examined for See also:physical fitness to serve, and a thousand details have to be worked out before the unit is ready to move to its concentration station. The concentration and the strategic deployment are, of course, dependent upon the circumstances of each war, and the peace organization ceases to be applicable. But throughout a war the depots at home, the recruiting districts of second-line troops, and above all the various arsenals, manufactories and offices controlled by the war See also:department are continually at work in maintaining the troops in the field at proper strength and effectiveness. 57. Territorial System.—The feudal system was of course a territorial system in principle. Indeed, as has been shown above, a feudal army was chiefly at See also:fault owing to the dislocation of the various levies. Concentration was equally the characteristic of the professional armies which succeeded those of See also:feudalism, and only such militia forces as remained in existence preserved a local character. The origin of territorial recruiting for first-line troops is to be found in the " cantonal " system, said to have been introduced by See also:Louis XIV., but brought to the greatest perfection in Prussia under See also:Frederick William I. But long service and the See also:absence of a reserve vitiated the system in practice, since losses had to be made good by general recruiting, and even the French Revolution may hardly be said to have produced the territorial system as we understand it to-See also:day. It was only in the deliberate preparation of the Prussian army on See also:short-service lines that we find the beginning of the " territorial system of dislocation and command." This is so intimately connected with the general system of organization that it cannot be considered merely as a method of recruiting by districts.

It may be defined as a system whereby, for purposes of command in peace, recruiting, and of organization generally, the country is divided into districts, which are again divided and subdivided as may be required. In a country in which universal service prevails, an army corps district is divided into divisional districts, these being made up of brigade and of regimental districts. Each of these units recruits, and is in peace usually stationed, in its own See also:

area; the artillery, cavalry and special arms are recruited for the corps throughout the whole allotted area, and stationed at various points within the same. Thus in the German army the III. army corps is composed entirely of Brandenburgers. The infantry of the corps is stationed in ten towns, the cavalry in four and the artillery in five. In countries which adhere to voluntary recruiting, the system, depending as it does on the calculable certainty of recruiting, is not so fully See also:developed, but in Great Britain the auxiliary forces have been reorganized in divisions of all arms on a strictly territorial basis. The advantage of the system as carried into effect in Germany is obvious. Training is carried out with a minimum of See also:friction and expense, as each unit has an ample area for training. Whilst the brigadiers can exercise general control over the colonels, and the divisional generals over the brigadiers, there is little undue interference of superior authority in the work of each grade, and the men, II. 20if soldiers by compulsion, at any rate are serving close to their own homes. Most of the reservists required on mobilization reside within a few See also:miles of their See also:barracks. Living in the midst of the civil population, the troops do not tend to become a class apart.

Small garrisons are not, as fullnerly, allowed to stagnate, since modern communications make supervision easy. Further, it must be borne in mind that the essence of the system is the organization and training for war of the whole military population. Now so great a See also:

mass of men could not be administered except through this decentralization. of authority, and the corollary of short service universally applied is the full territorial system, in which the whole enrolled strength of the district is subjected to the authority of the district commander. Practice, however, falls short of theory, and the dangers of See also:drawing whole units from disaffected or unmilitary districts are often foreseen and discounted by distributing the recruits, non-regionally, amongst more or less distant regiments. 58. Army Administration.—The existing systems of command and organization, being usually based upon purely military considerations, have thus much; indeed almost all, in common. Administration differs from them in one important respect. While the methods of command and organization are the result of the accumulated experience of many armies through many See also:hundred years, the central administration in each case is the product of the See also:historical See also:evolution of the particular country, and is dependent upon forms of government, constitutions and political parties. Thus France, after 1870, remodelled the organization of her forces in accordance with the methods which were presumed to have given Germany the victory, but the head-quarters staff at Paris is very different in all branches from that of See also:Berlin. Great Britain adopted German See also:tactics, and to some extent even uniform, but the Army See also:Council has no counterpart in the administration of the German emperor's forces. The first point for consideration, therefore, is, what is the ultimate, and what is the proximate, authority supervising the administration? The former is, in most countries, the See also:people or its representatives in See also:parliament, for it is in their power to stop supplies, and without See also:money the whole military fabric must crumble.

The constitutional chief of the army is the sovereign, or, in republics, the See also:

president, but in most countries the direct control of army matters by the representatives of the people extends over all affairs into which the well-being of the civil population, the See also:expenditure of money, alleged miscarriages of military See also:justice, &c., enter, and it is not unusual to find grand strategy, and even the technical deficiencies of a field-See also:gun or rifle, the subject of See also:interpellation and debate. The peculiar influence of the sovereign is in what may be termed patronage (that is, the selection of officers to fill important positions and the general supervision of the officer-corps), and in the fact that See also:loyalty is the See also:foundation of the discipline and soldierly See also:honour which it is the task of the officers to inculate into their men. In all cases the head of the state is ipso facto the head of the army. The difference between various systems may then be held to depend on the degree of power allowed to or held by him. This reacts upon the central administration of the army, and is the cause of the See also:differences of system alluded to. For the civil chief of the executive is not necessarily a soldier, much less an See also:expert and capable soldier; he must, therefore, be provided with technical advisers. The chief of the general staff is often the principal of these, though in some cases a special commander-in-chief, or the minister for war, or, as in France and England, a See also:committee or council, has the duty of advising the executive on technical matters. 59. Branches of Administration.—In these circumstances the only general principle of army administration common to all systems is the division of the labour between two great branches. Military administration, in respect of the troops and material which it has to control, is divided between the departments of the War Office and the General Staff. In the staff work of subordinate units, e.g. army corps and divisions, the same classification of duties is adopted, " general staff " duties being per-formed by one set of officers, " routine staff " duties by another. Ir and the quartermaster-general's See also:branch, which supervises the See also:provision and issue of supplies, stores and materiel of all kinds.

Over and above these, provision has to be made for control of all the technical parts of administration, such as artillery and engineer services (in Great Britain, this, with a portion of the quartermaster-general's department, is under the. See also:

master- general of the See also:ordnance), and for military legislation, preparation of estimates, &c. These are, of course, special subjects, not directly belonging to the general administrative system. It is only requisite that the latter should be sufficiently elastic to admit of these departments being formed as required. How-ever these subordinate offices may be multiplied, the main work of the war office is in the two departments of the See also:adjutant-general (personnel) and the quartermaster-general (materiel). gory fall such matters as " routine " administration, See also:finance, Beyond and wholly distinct from these is the general staff, justice, recruiting, promotion of officers (though not always), the creation of which is perhaps the most important. See also:con-barracks and buildings generally, armament, equipment and tribution of the past century to the pure See also:science of military clothing, &c., in fact all matters not directly relevant to the training of the troops for and the employment of the troops in war. In war, some of the functions of a war office are suspended, but on the other hand the work necessary for the provision of 6o. See also:Prior to the See also:Norman See also:Conquest the armed force of England men and material to See also:augment the army and to make good its was essentially a national militia. Every See also:freeman was See also:bound to losses is vastly increased.

End of Article: ARMY

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM GEORGE ARMSTRONG, BARON (1810—...
[next]
ARMY (from Fr. armee, Lat. armata)