During experiments in field firing, held in Austria by a force advancing from 1,400 to 600 paces, with an expenditure of an equal number of rounds of ammunition in each experiment, the following results were obtained:

                       
  Regulation attack: Fire while in motion:
Time 26 min. 28 seconds 18 min. 40 seconds
Fire pauses 12 18 7 40
Attacker against the defender:
  Percentage of hits 7   16 .7  
Defender against the attacker:
  Percentage of hits 9 .2   33 .  
Percentage of hits obtained during the execution of the attack from 1,400
to 100 paces:
  Attacker 22 .7   20 .  
  Defender 32 .2   51 .2  

There is no model advance within the zone of effective infantry fire. All expedients, whether they be sneaking or crawling, long or short rushes, or fire while in motion, are of equal value, if the force, kept well in hand by the leader, is thereby brought closer to the enemy. Every opportunity to gain a foot of ground to the front, offered by flanking fire or fire directed at the enemy over the heads of the advancing force, must be utilized. The effect of our own artillery fire should also be attentively followed with a view to advancing when the hostile skirmishers have sought refuge under cover to escape our shrapnel.

Examples of the Employment of Fire While in Motion.

The successful attack made by the 1st Turco Regiment at Wörth.[93]

 [93] v. Boguslawski, Geschichte des Regiments Nr. 50, p. 212.

This attack was made against disordered and exhausted troops which lacked officers and reserves. The attack was finally repulsed by Prussian artillery and the IInd Battalion of the 58th Infantry.

The attempted sortie of the Turks on December 10th, 1877.[94]

 [94] Springer, VI, p. 204.

The attack, made in superior force and supported by artillery, was successful in that the Russian intrenchments and rifle pits were taken. With the arrival of Russian reinforcements, which advanced against front and flank of the Turks, the situation was reversed.

The attack made by Vinoy’s Corps on September 30th, 1870, against the VIth Army Corps in l’Hay and Chevilly: “The defender’s coolness and confidence in victory grew with this ineffective fire of the attack, and finally the dead were piled up in heaps by the steady volleys delivered by him at short ranges (300-400 paces).”[95]

 [95] v. Schlichting, Taktische und strategische Grundsätze, 1, p. 71.

Examples of the Employment of Rushes.

1. Attack on Le Bourget, on October 30th, 1870.[96]

 [96] Hohenlohe, Briefe über Infanterie, p. 80.

Kunz, Kriegsgeschichtliche Beispiele, 10, p. 43.

Two battalions of the Kaiser Franz Guard Grenadier Regiment had to advance from Dugny against the enemy in the northwest edge of Le Bourget over 1,500 m. of very open terrain, covered only with high potato crops. The battalions were formed in two lines with two companies entirely deployed in the first line, and the battalion reserves in rear of the center of the line with files at extended intervals. The second line was formed similarly. The two companies in the firing line advanced at first without firing, by rushes of about 300 m. each, made by alternate companies, each moving forward beyond the point where the other had halted. When effective range was reached one company opened rapid fire while the other moved forward by long rushes. The companies in rear followed in a similar manner. The tall potato bushes partly concealed the lines while lying down. In this manner the two battalions reached the outskirts of the village almost without being checked, the defender having withdrawn to the interior of the village.

The losses of the two battalions, while advancing by rushes, were insignificant.

The regimental commander, bearing in mind the lessons gained at St. Privat, had drilled the regiment beforehand in this mode of attack.

2. Attack on Redout No. 2, at Scheinovo, on January 9th, 1878.

The attack by Skobeleff’s Division, consisting of four battalions (Drushines) of Bulgarians, and the Ugla, Vladimir, and Kasan Regiments, was to be made under cover of the fire of two rifle battalions armed with Berdan rifles, and of a provisional battalion of the Ugla Regiment armed with captured Turkish rifles. The only artillery available consisted of a mountain battery, while the Turks were able to bring twenty guns into action.

The Turkish rifle fire began at about 1,000-1,200 m., but the Russian firing lines continued the advance with shouldered arms. Only when the losses increased noticeably did they advance by rushes, without firing, from 750 to about 500 m. where they opened fire. The rushes were made by the entire firing line; the supports, with files at extended intervals, did not follow until the firing line had thrown itself down.

After the firing had lasted for some time, the Ugla Regiment, from the reserve, was formed in three lines, each consisting of one battalion, each battalion again into two lines with 350 m. distance between lines (total depth of the column about 1,800 m.). From 900 m. on, the advance was made by rushes, the entire force inclining to the right front. While covered by the fire of the skirmishers of the firing line in front, the length of the rushes was 100-150 m. At 250 m. from the enemy, the leading line, extending the line of the Bulgarian and Rifle Battalions, was able to open fire and, after about thirty minutes, when it was clearly apparent that the Turks were evacuating the work, the regiment began the assault, which was successful.

Of the troops in the first line, the 11th Rifle Battalion lost 11 officers and 422 men; the 9th Rifle Battalion, 5 officers and 269 men; the original strength of each being about 800 men. Expenditure of ammunition: 11th Rifle Battalion, 120 rounds per rifle.

The Ugla Regiment, which advanced in close order after the defender’s fire had been silenced, lost only nine officers and 391 men. The Kasan Regiment, which followed the Ugla Regiment, participated in the assault on the second Turkish position. The Turkish fire had abated to such an extent that the battalions were able to advance in rear of one another, each in two lines with distances of only 35 m. between lines; the intervals between companies were 15 m., and those between files were extended. Losses: four officers and 76 men. Expenditure of ammunition: 12 rounds per rifle.[97]

 [97] Kuropatkin-Krahmer, Kritische Rückblicke auf den Russich-Türkischen Krieg, III, pp. 168-186.

In contrast with these examples of long rushes, almost every obstinate engagement with an unshaken enemy showed that “every step forward” had to be literally gained by the impulse imparted by the arrival of small, fresh detachments, that the rushes often faltered after only 20-30 paces, and that frequently nothing remained but to work forward individually. (See pp. 76 and 87 supra.)

The frontal attacks made at Wörth, at the Roten Berg at Spicheren, opposite Flavigny, on August 16th, 1870, and opposite the gravel pits of Point du Jour, on August 18th, 1870, etc.

In the Russo-Turkish war, the engagement at the mills north of Lovtcha, the fight for the possession of the Green Hill ridges south of Plevna, and the fight during the advance from the west and southwest against the large work of Gorni Dubniac, show how rushes, repeatedly attempted at short ranges, faltered after only a few paces. “On a signal given by Ljapunov, which was to be repeated by all the officers, the men were to rush forward immediately. Just before the movement began, the Turks opened the usual incessant fire, and the simultaneous advance of so many squads was of course absolutely impossible. The rushes were, therefore, always made by groups of 2-3 men. These groups would rise, one in this company, one in that, run forward a few steps, and then throw themselves down again.”[98]

 [98] Pusyrewski, Die russische Garde im Kriege, 1877-78, p. 127.

The attacks on Railway Hill and on Hart’s Hill (February 1900), on the Tugela, show an endeavor to advance at first by long rushes, then by rushes gradually diminishing in length, the infantry finally working itself forward by twos and threes for the purpose of reaching the last firing position from which the final assault could be made.[99]

 [99] Kriegsgeschichtliche Einzelschriften, 34/35, pp. 129, 139. The Times History of the War in South Africa, III, p. 539.

(c) Reinforcing the Firing Line.

If the fire power of the firing line is to be maintained after heavy losses, or the intensity of its fire is to be augmented, or when it finally is to receive the impulse for making a further advance, it must be reinforced. (Pars. 226, 227 and 341 German I. D. R.). This may be done by prolonging the line (platoons abreast at well defined intervals), or, when space is lacking and after losses have occurred, by putting men in the intervals (i.e., increasing the density of the line and filling it up). When the firing line is prolonged, tactical units are not broken up, and this facilitates fire control. Whenever practicable, the firing line should be reinforced by prolonging it, although the other method, that of placing men in the intervals and gaps of the firing line, is more frequently used and more practical because the arrival of fresh men and the replacement of incapacitated officers occasioned thereby renews the strength of the firing line (replenishment of ammunition). The breaking up of platoons is unavoidable, and on that account platoon and squad leaders should be trained in time of peace to form new units at once so that control is not lost. In order to prevent the mixing of units, so far as this is possible, and to keep the firing line filled up with skirmishers, even during an engagement entailing heavy losses, it is indispensable that the fighting front should be limited, that of a company in attack to 150, in defense to about 200 m. The unit designated to reinforce the firing line endeavors to approach that line under cover, forms skirmish line at any rate before leaving the last cover and advances by rushes, or, if directly in rear of the firing line and under a heavy fire, even by crawling.

Austria. Both modes of reinforcing the firing line, that of prolonging it, and that of filling the intervals and gaps, are used. When prolonging the line the reinforcement may remain abreast of the firing line. During an attack efforts should, however, be made to advance beyond the firing line—“to overreach it.” The other method, that of filling up the line, is in attack, as a rule, to be used for the purpose of carrying the line forward, the rush to be made as soon as the reinforcement reaches the firing line. Signals are prescribed for prolonging the line without advancing beyond it, for reinforcing that line and advancing beyond it, and for filling it up and carrying it forward in a rush.

(d) Closing Up. Assembling. Re-Forming.
(Pars. 211-214 and 230-232 German I. D. R.).

The most effective method of preventing a mixing of organizations in action is for all units constantly to endeavor to close in toward their leaders, filling gaps as soon as casualties have occurred. Squads which have sustained heavy losses unite with adjoining ones under a common leader. This closing in can, as a rule, be executed only while in motion. It must be effected gradually and the intervals ordered should be maintained. Crowding of every description increases losses and causes dangerous gaps along the entire front.

If in the course of an engagement, the purpose of the action and the situation make it no longer desirable to retain an extended order formation, each leader, from the squad leader upward, must assemble his unit at once and place himself and it at the disposal of the commander of the next higher unit. Formed bodies must be created quickly and held well in hand by their leaders, without awaiting specific orders to that effect.

The troops must be assembled very quietly and always facing the enemy.

The original organizations are not re-formed until the command “Fall in” is given. (Pars. 214 and 232 German I. D. R.).

10. SUPPORTS.
(Pars. 222-228 and 341 German I. D. R.).

The limited front assigned to an organization necessitates, in the first place, a division into firing line and retained fractions. At the decisive stage of a fight every available man must, without question, be in the first line.

Italy. Supports are not to be used when they cannot be maintained at a less distance from the firing line than that separating the latter from the enemy.

It is the duty of supports to reinforce and extend the firing line, to cover the flanks (par. 222 German I. D. R.), to act as a reserve, and, in case of necessity, as a rallying force upon which the firing line can fall back. The presence of supports increases confidence in attack, and the power of resistance in defense. Supports enable a leader to influence the action, to give a firing line that has been checked the impetus necessary to carry it forward, and to affect the action by sending reinforcements to points where he wishes to gain an advantage. The support follows that part of the firing line which, in all probability, will need its assistance; if part of the same organization as the firing line, it follows in rear of the center, otherwise in rear of a wing. In a company advancing alone over covered terrain, it will sometimes be necessary to place small supports in rear of both flanks. Firing lines can perhaps advance for some time under hostile fire, whether they move by twos, by squads, or by platoons, but the power necessary for pushing home the attack must be imparted to them from the rear; otherwise the energy of the attack will spend itself. The necessity of having supports in rear of the firing line is clearly illustrated in the very instructive engagement at Wagon Hill in front of Ladysmith (6th January 1900). In this fight all attempts to push the firing line forward failed, and the necessary impetus for the decisive advance was not given until fresh supports were fed into the firing line.[100]

[100] The Times History of the War in South Africa, III, p. 200.

In hilly country the supports can fire over the heads of the skirmishers in front of them without neglecting their proper functions. (Switzerland and England). Such opportunities should not be overlooked, as they increase the volume of fire.

Distances depend upon the object to be attained by the action and upon the terrain.

When a decision is sought, distances should be decreased in the course of the action. When this is the case, the leaders of all grades should be animated by but one desire, that of being in front in order to participate in gaining the victory. The duration of the crisis of an action is usually brief, and in a very few rapidly passing moments the leader must decide what to do with the troops remaining available.

When an immediate decision is not sought, it is advisable to increase distances in order to keep the echelons held back in rear from coming under fire. In any case, the distance between supports and firing line should be less than the distance between firing line and enemy. In an attack, supports should be close enough to the firing line to prevent, by timely interference, a retrograde movement of the latter. On the defensive, on account of the difficulty of bringing up supports for the purpose of repulsing an assault, they will usually be placed a short distance immediately in rear of or within the firing line (intrenched) at the points where they are to be employed.

During an attack, whenever the lines in rear cannot be kept out of hostile fire, care must nevertheless be taken that two echelons be not simultaneously struck by a cone of infantry fire or by one and the same shrapnel. The distance between echelons is therefore increased to more than 300 m., and should not be reduced until the decisive stage of the combat approaches.

In open country, supports held too close to the firing line will soon cease to exist as such. When kept in close order, their losses would be so great that the boldest men would join the firing line and the less courageous would hunt cover. Everything depends upon the manner in which supports are led forward, especially during that part of the advance immediately preceding their junction with the firing line. In this lies the whole art of fighting in deep formations. Covered terrain permits distances to be reduced. The commander should be particularly careful not to let this advantage escape him, since on such terrain it is more frequently necessary promptly to reinforce the firing line.

The commander of the support must constantly observe the movements and successes of the firing line in order that he may be able to reinforce it in the most advantageous manner. Whenever he is obliged to split up his command during a movement to the front, he should endeavor to reunite it at the first opportunity.

The support should closely adapt its movements to those of the firing line. When a part of the firing line makes a rush, the support halts for the moment, and then runs forward to the next cover, simultaneously with the next advancing unit of the firing line, and covered by the fire of the skirmishers in front. “To make a rush at the same time as the firing line was impossible, because, as soon as the latter rose, the Turks opened a murderous fire. Whenever the firing line threw itself down and returned the fire, that of the enemy became noticeably weaker.”[101]

[101] Report of Lieutenant Borsov, in Kuropatkin-Krahmer, Kritische Rückblicke auf den Russisch-Türkischen Krieg, III, p. 183.

The supports follow the firing line in single or double rank, in column of twos or squads, in skirmish line or in line of squads, in quick time or by rushes; it may also be advisable to deviate temporarily from the direction of advance. Columns having a narrow front, so long as they are not open to attack from a flank, are able to withstand long range infantry fire. (Par. 224 German I. D. R.). On coming to a halt, it is advisable to return to close order formation; at any rate, the leader must get his command again entirely under control.

Supports in Rear of the Firing Line or Not?

Up to a few years ago (1894), the French battalion was divided into firing line and companies of the second line. The Japanese, also, often placed entire companies in the firing line, which could not be quickly enough reinforced by the companies of the second line, because these were held too far in rear. At any rate, supports are of advantage during the first deployment before the situation is clear.

The following arguments are advanced against the employment of supports:

1. The supports following the firing line suffer losses, without, as a rule, being able to participate in the action. This argument is not well founded, since the criticism made with reference to supports is equally applicable to companies in the second line. That supports threw themselves into the firing line in the Franco-German war, in the belief that they were needlessly suffering losses, was due to the fact that they followed the firing line too closely.

Supports following the firing line closely (250-300 m.) can reach the firing line quickly and can easily find cover on account of the small angle of fall of modern bullets. Besides, the knowledge that supports are immediately in rear, the moral factor, should not be underestimated.

2. The supports may be commanded by inexperienced leaders, who will not always act with the good judgment the situation demands and will fail to seize the right moment for advancing. (This can perhaps never be avoided).

3. Pushing the supports into the firing line tends to mix units, makes control more difficult, and impairs the efficacy of fire. These criticisms are not applicable to a company, for it is in any case impossible for the company commander to control the fire; this is the business of platoon commanders.

The advantages of supports are, that they increase the number of targets offered the hostile artillery; that, by reason of their small size, they can utilize every accident of the ground; that they can be kept close enough to the firing line to reinforce it in case of sudden emergency; and that they allow companies in the second line to be kept farther to the rear. A battalion, when part of a larger force, need not keep formed bodies as supports; but a few platoons, following the firing line in close order on the flanks, are an advantage. The drawbacks of the petits paquets would appear only if every company were to preserve a support up to the decisive stage of the action.

11. COMPARISON BETWEEN CLOSE AND EXTENDED ORDER.

In close order the men are placed so close together that they can be led by word of command and directly influenced by their officers. The position of the individual soldier is fixed; the men on either side of him interfere with his utilizing cover or his weapon. On terrain devoid of cover, close order formations present such large targets to infantry fire, that their employment, when exposed to the unsubdued fire of the enemy, is impossible and must lead to annihilation. Thus the hostile fire compels the most extended deployment.[102]

[102] Even during the Franco-German war it was impossible to employ close order formations in the first line, when opposed by an unshaken enemy, although this was still prescribed by the regulations. Whenever this was attempted tremendous losses resulted. In the battle of Vionville the 5th and 8th Companies of the 35th Füsilier-Regiment, formed into a half-battalion, and following the other companies of the battalion, which were pushed forward as the first line, suffered in five minutes a loss of 9 officers and 150 men (out of a total of about 400 men) from infantry fire at 1000 to 1200 m. “The impression produced was so overpowering that the commands for extending and deploying could not be executed at all and that the half-battalion had to be withdrawn in rear of the cemetery where it was assembled by the three officers still remaining.” Geschichte des Regiments Nr. 35, p. 23.

In cases where troops appeared in close order each losses were not at all exceptional.

On August 18th, 1870, the Füsilier-Battalion of the 85th Infantry, advancing from Vernéville, at first in double column, then in half-battalion column, to within 400 paces of the enemy, lost 12 officers, 32 non-commissioned officers, and 437 men killed and wounded (52%) in 20 minutes by the cross-fire of hostile artillery and mitrailleuse batteries. At 800 paces from the enemy the fragments of the battalion were assembled in three platoons. Gen. St. W., II, p. 724. Der 18. August, p. 152.

The success of the bayonet attack made by the 9th Company of the 29th Infantry at St. Quentin may be explained by the inferiority of the opponent. Geschichte des Regiments Nr. 29, p. 499.

In extended order the soldier’s position is not definitely fixed; he is not required to keep his body in a prescribed position, nor is he expected to handle his rifle by the numbers as in the manual. Instead, judgment, agility, courage, confidence in himself, skill in handling his weapon and in taking full advantage of the accidents of the ground, as well as unremitting attention to his leader, are demanded of the skirmisher.

The difficulties of troop leading are, moreover, increased by the noise and other disorganizing influences of the fight, especially in broken or wooded country. Whether an organization is thoroughly trained and disciplined is best shown in extended order fighting, for, as the direct control of the leader on his command decreases, the demands made on the initiative of the individual soldier increase out of all proportion. It is at any rate more practical to develop this initiative than to try to prevent the disorganizing effect of combat by restricting the personal freedom of the individual soldier.

In order to keep troops well in hand and to deploy them quickly in any direction, it is requisite that close order formations be retained as long as the terrain and the hostile fire permit. After an action, in order to make a renewed employment of the troops possible, they must be assembled in close order without regard to the previously existing organization.

In night combats, in actions against cavalry not supported by other arms, in putting down rebellions, and frequently in colonial wars[103] as well, the importance of close order formations increases when the troops show a disposition to get out of hand.

[103] The British Infantry Training contains special regulations governing “savage warfare,” in which close order battalion formations are explicitly given the preference (order in echelon, square).

In extended order, infantry can most easily surmount obstacles, cross difficult terrain, and take the fullest advantage of the accidents of the ground, as cover against hostile fire and as rifle rests. In extended order, infantry is, moreover, able to develop its fire power most effectively, while at the same time offering the smallest possible targets to the hostile projectiles. Thus the skirmish line is the principal combat formation of infantry; by means of it a combat is initiated and carried through to the end.

Close order is best adapted for establishing discipline in the simplest and most rapid manner by means of drill. At Jena the Prussian battalions were not defeated because of their drill, but because they were poorly led. What function drill had fulfilled at that time is pretty well illustrated by the heavy losses sustained by the Prussian infantry and by the fact that, although placed in a situation to which they were entirely unaccustomed, the troops retained their steadiness. No properly led army has been able to dispense with drill in developing its discipline. In the days of linear and column tactics the ultimate object of training was the leading of battalions in close order, in magnificent array, against the enemy. By means of drill a passive discipline was to be created in which intelligence played no part whatever. We know with what energy the army of the First Napoleon was drilled according to the wholly superannuated regulations of linear tactics in the camp at Boulogne and during the brief pauses between campaigns. A well drilled organization has ever, when well led, proved equal to the occasion.[104] The electrifying word of command is an important factor in assisting an organization accustomed to it to overcome difficult situations. No leader will voluntarily dispense with this aid. When Austrian shells struck the company of Count Finkenstein during the advance against the Shipwald, that officer halted his command, brought it to shoulder arms and did not continue the movement until order had been completely restored.

[104] Compare herewith Der 18. August, p. 463, in regard to the importance of discipline in the execution of the attack on St. Privat.

General v. Blume considers drill and skirmish training two distinct methods by means of which efficient soldiers may be created. To quote: “In this connection the most perfect results would undoubtedly be attained by efficient drill and thorough skirmish training.” Where both these methods cannot be coördinated, training in extended order fighting should take precedence. General v. d. Goltz raises the objection that this might perhaps produce skirmishers, but not soldiers, i.e., men whose devotion to duty surpasses their fear of death. General v. d. Goltz is right in demanding combat drill. In this term he includes the painstaking execution of all those accomplishments which the skirmisher needs in action and which he should be able to use correctly and quickly without lengthy deliberation. To this category belong rapid loading and setting of the sight, good pointing in any position, accurate aiming, cool firing, quick locking of the piece, prompt jumping up for the advance, taking advantage of accidents of the ground in lying down for the purpose of heightening the fire effect, crawling forward with or without firing, etc., etc. Since all these things must be practiced individually, and since many of them do not permit of simultaneous execution by an entire unit, we usually speak of combat training instead of combat drill, without, however, intending any other meaning.

“Drill is always mechanical. The instructor can make the skirmisher load quickly and carefully, can cause him to take the position of aim, just as he drills the correct execution of present arms and the rise preparatory to advancing by rushes. Training is directed at the mentality of the man, it makes him independent and allows him to exercise initiative, even when he is no longer directly under his superior officers’ influence, and when, in a critical hour, he is no longer able to follow their example.

“Drill and training are both justified, each in its appropriate sphere; the scope of both is closely defined and neither one could be dispensed with. ‘Drill’ assists in creating the ‘soldier,’ because it develops the characteristics which must be required of a ‘soldier’: Endurance in surmounting hardships and dangers, unquestioning subordination of his will to that of the leader, tenacity and trustworthiness, skill in handling his weapon and in utilizing the ground. The addition of training will, of course, increase the value of this ‘soldier’ very considerably.

“Training alone will never attain this object. To arouse and develop the man’s intellect may make him a good skirmisher, a skillful member of a patrol, but for battle he remains incomplete, since his awakened mental powers have not been made available by the disciplining drill. His energies are not governed by a higher will. Nothing can give us the assurance that he may not fail at the most decisive moment. He is no soldier.”[105]

[105] V. D. Goltz, Zur Gefechtsausbildung, p. 26.

The French, for reasons inherent in their character, discard this drill and seek to replace it by developing the moral factors: “Moral powers are the mightiest pillars of success. Honor and patriotism fill troops with the noblest devotion. The spirit of self-sacrifice and the determination to win ensure success; discipline and steadiness guarantee the influence of the leaders and the coöperation of all the elements.”[106]

[106] Introduction to the French Infantry Drill Regulations.

“However, when necessity demands the creation of new organizations—whether militia, volunteers, or gardes mobiles,—it is a great mistake to expect everything from moral factors; even though hatred of the enemy, enthusiasm for the fatherland, the republic or for glory, rise to the highest pitch. ‘Victory or death’ is the watchword when marching out—but neither is quickly attainable; weeks and months of the severest hardships, exhausting marches, wet and hungry bivouacs must first be endured. Very soon the intoxication of enthusiasm is gone and reality weighs heavily on the sobered men. Finally the enemy is confronted. But he is not to be annihilated at once by a rapid assault—not at all; the advance is made very slowly and the highest enthusiasm is given ample time to evaporate during the many hours in which death is constantly faced.” Layman.

For enthusiasm, we would substitute faithful, unselfish performance of duty, and unquestioning subordination of the will of the individual to that of the leader. To be sure, on days of success enthusiasm will suffice, but not when everything around us begins to waver and to yield. The importance of drill, which cannot be replaced by anything else, does not become apparent until all enthusiasm disappears, until the leader becomes conscious of the specter of panic which stalks by the side of enthusiasm.

“Discipline,” says Archduke John in his well-known work Drill or Training, “must not be confounded with the snappy drill of troops, and can, moreover, not be attained by means of it. The straightjacket has never yet cured one insane person; the soul cannot be disciplined through the body. One must work from the inside and not from the outside. It is of little value if the outer annular rings of a tree are beautiful and regular; it will rot and die in spite of its deceptive appearance; if its heart is not healthy, the first storm may bring it down. The inner man must look beautiful; firmness and steadiness are needed within; the marching tread of feet on the drill ground plain are of no moment; the beat of the heart filled with the spirit of self-sacrifice is the important factor.”

It is well known that Emperor William I. changed the title of the brochure Drill or Training, written by Archduke John, to Drill and Training. Training necessitates a good corps of instructors and a great deal of time, whereas drill will accomplish in a shorter time results which are not so enduring. It is again presupposed that the recruits are willing to be trained, otherwise all efforts are unavailing. The question whether the individual man can be influenced sufficiently in a two years’ service period to overcome even sentiments inimical to the state, instilled in him by friends or relatives, can only be answered by the next war. To answer this question at the present time would be premature; but one thing is certain: the sharp word of command, the whole influence of a well-organized body of troops, will sweep along even the reluctant in the hour of danger.

The importance of the tactical formations which at one time constituted minor tactics has doubtlessly decreased; unfavorable formations, in so far as they increase or reduce losses, increase or restrict one’s fire effect, can be offset by the fighting efficiency of the soldier and by proper leading. The unfortunate termination of the battle of Jena for the Prussian arms, as already mentioned, bears no relation to drill as such. The formations in themselves were not at fault, for linear tactics scored the greatest successes in the Peninsular war and at Waterloo; and at the Katzbach, Prussian battalions of Borke’s Brigade in line overran the French columns. Within certain limits, numerical inferiority and lack of fighting efficiency can be offset by leadership. But numbers and fighting efficiency will always remain the decisive factors for success.

The victory of Spicheren was due primarily to the troops and not to leadership. This is likewise true of Wörth. The lion’s share in the victory of Vionville is certainly due to the fighting efficiency of the gallant Brandenburgers. Finally, at St. Privat, the crisis produced by the commanders was successfully overcome only by the tenacity of the troops, who maintained their positions for hours under the most destructive hostile fire.

Increased demands must at present be made upon the combat training of the soldier. The combat requires enterprising, self-sacrificing, cold-blooded men who are imbued with the spirit of the reckless offensive. “The combat requires thinking leaders, trained to rely upon themselves, and skirmishers having initiative.” (Par. 2 German I. D. R.). “Judgment, self-confidence and boldness must be aroused and continually developed in the young soldier.” (Par. 144 German I. D. R.). “The aim of all exercises should be to develop the soldier into a self-thinking and conscientiously working skirmisher.” (Par. 158 German I. D. R.). “All training should be directed toward producing self-reliance in leaders and in the individual skirmisher.” (Par. 251 German I. D. R.). “The infantry must nourish the desire for taking the offensive; its actions must be guided by the one thought, forward, at the enemy, no matter what the cost.” (Par. 265 German I. D. R.). “The continuous desire to press forward and the endeavor to surpass all other units must animate all parts of the attacking force.” (Par. 327 German I. D. R.). “It should be a point of honor with skirmishers not to allow the supports to overtake them earlier than the moment of penetrating the enemy’s position.” (Par. 348 German I. D. R.). “Those who fall must be left behind. These sacrifices should not lead to an abatement of the pursuit any more than the losses sustained in the previous fight caused the renunciation of the purpose of the combat.” (Par. 424 German I. D. R.). “A commander who is ever willing to shoulder responsibility will not shrink from throwing troops into the fight regardless of consequences even when the outcome of the battle is doubtful.” (Par. 304 German I. D. R.).

If love of life and fear of death are overcome in a soldier by discipline, in an officer this must be brought about by a higher sense of duty and honor. On the battlefield the desire to live does not appear in a cultured person, as a rule, in its ordinary, undisguised form; it makes itself felt rather in the shape of tactical scruples, whether the leader would be justified in leading his subordinates to certain death, whether it would not be his duty to preserve the force entrusted to him for more important duty in the service of the fatherland, instead of sacrificing it uselessly. If, in addition, an officer has been allowed, in time of peace, to criticise, from the start, an order of his superior with reference to its feasibility, it may easily happen in the stern reality of actual war that a subordinate leader, neither especially courageous nor ambitious, succumbs to the seductive whisperings of his senses on the approach of danger and sees in caution the better part of valor. It is always suspicious if troops have become accustomed to consider insignificant losses, common to colonial wars, accompanied by great physical exertions, as indications of good leadership.[107] Great victories are, as a rule, invariably accompanied by great losses.

[107] In this connection and in regard to the British losses in South Africa, see my lecture: Die Lehren des Burenkrieges (1904), p. 8, et seq. The behavior of Sir Redvers Buller at Colenso and Spionskop is interesting. See The Times History of the War in South Africa, III, pp. 234, 236, 297, 318.