Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 2.djvu/622

560 hardy and nomadic race, its armies at first consisted mainly of cavalry, and owed much of their success to the conse quent ease and rapidity of their movements. Constantly extending their power by fresh conquests, the warlike Per sians established themselves as garrisons in the subjected provinces, gladly exchanging their own barren mountain lands for these rich and fertile countries, and for some time remained a distinctly conquering and military race. Their empire attained its highest power under Cyrus and Cam- byses; the former, the founder of the great Persian empire, uniting on his head the crowns of Babylon, Media, and Persia, while the latter still further extended the empire by the conquest of Egypt. Cyrus seems to have been the founder of that complete military organisation of which we gather details from Xenophon and other writers. To each pro vince of the empire was allotted a certain number of soldiers as garrison or standing army. These troops, formed originally of native Persians only, were called the king s troops. They comprised two classes : the one devoted exclusively to garrisoning the fortified towns and castles, the other distributed throughout the country. To each province was appointed a military commander, responsible for the number and efficiency of the troops in his district ; while the satrap, a civil governor, was answer able for their subsistence and pay. Annual musters of these troops were held either by the king in person or by generals deputed for the purpose, and invested with full powers. This organisation seems to have fully answered its original purpose, that of holding a vast empire acquired by conquest, and promptly repelling inroads or putting down insurrections. But when a great foreign war was contemplated, the standing army was augmented by a levy throughout the empire, and each province and tributary nation furnished its quota of men, horses, and provisions. The extent of the em pire made such a levy a matter of time. Thus the preparations for the invasion of Greece by Xerxes took three whole years; and the heterogeneous and un organised mass of men of all nations so brought together was a source of weakness rather than strength. That the warlike Persians, whose reputation rose so high under Cyrus, who were distinguished for their powers of endur ance, and a daring courage which despised stratagem and delighted in single combats, should within a century have failed so disgracefully against the Greeks, has often been matter of wonder. Something, doubtless, was due to the fact that their reputation was won over effeminate races,&quot; very different from their later antagonists ; something also to the degeneracy induced among themselves by years of success and luxury. But it must also be borne in mind that the vast hosts over which the Greeks gained such easy victories comprised but a very small proportion of the true Persians of the race which had given Cyrus his con quests. The cavalry alone seems to have retained its national character, and with it something of its high reputation, even to the days of Alexander. Nevertheless, the first contact between the Asiatic and the Greek proved that the crown of military glory had passed to the western nation.

The earliest knowledge we have of the military institutions of the Greeks is derived from the pages of Homer. They are glimpses only that we obtain, but they suffice to distinguish many of their characteristics. Their compact formations and subordination and silence in the ranks are contrasted with the looser formation and noisy attacks of the Trojans. Their armies consisted almost entirely of infantry. The leaders fought either on foot, like the rest, or from chariots ; and single combats between the chiefs on the two sides were common, and often served to open the battle. We have sketched for us the traits of a hardy, independent, enterprising race, sometimes cruel and quarrel some, but gallant, high-spirited, and intelligent, and well fitted to become distinguished as soldiers. How these qualities were developed, till the Greek armies and Greek tactics acquired a renown which has lasted to our day, we learn from the laws of Lycurgus and Solon, and from ths ample details handed down by Xenophon, Thucydides, and other historians.

By the laws of Athens every free man was liable to military service. It was not only his duty but his distinction and privilege. The slave worked, the freeman devoted his time to military exercises and to the gymnasium. At eighteen his name was enrolled on the list of fighting men ; for two years his duties were confined to home service, and especi ally to the guarding of Athens ; from his twentieth to his fortieth year he Avas liable to service wherever the good of the state might require. The collectors of taxes, the singers at some theatres, and a few others, were alone exempted. The only privilege granted to the wealthy was that of serving in the cavalry. The infantry, of which the army was mainly composed, consisted of three classes. First were the heavy troops, &quot; hoplitai,&quot; armed with a spear, a dagger, a corslet, and a large oval shield. These formed the phalanx or main line of battle, and were com posed entirely of free citizens, natives of Attica. Secondly, the light troops, &quot; psiloi,&quot; armed with javelins, but carrying little defensive armour, and no shields. These were des tined for skirmishing and covering the movements of the phalanx, and were mostly slaves, who followed their masters, serving among the &quot; hoplitai,&quot; to war. Thirdly, there were &quot;gumnetai,&quot; or irregular light troops, carrying no defensive armour, but provided with javelins, bows and arrows, and slings, to harass the enemy ; these usually consisted of slaves or foreign troops. Besides these there was another class, &quot;peltastai,&quot; so called from the light shield or target (pdta) which they carried, and inter mediate between the &quot;hoplitai&quot; and &quot;psiloi.&quot; The cavalry consisted entirely of the wealthier Athenians, and was intelligent and enterprising. Each of the tribes of Athens had its own military commander, chosen from itself, and elected for the year only; and an Athenian army thus obeyed ten chiefs (&quot; strategoi &quot;) of equal rank. These commanded by turns for the day, while the ten together formed a council of war to consult and decide in cases of emergency. Practically the inconvenience of such a system was obviated by leaving nine of the ten behind, or by the appointment of a &quot;polemarch,&quot; a sort of per manent chief of the staff, who carried great weight in the councils.

The Spartans owed much of their specially soldierly Sparta, qualities to the institutes of Lycurgus, which had for their aim to form a nation of warriors, and develop to the utmost those physical and moral qualities which render men invincible. Discipline, unquestioning obedience, un complaining endurance, and contempt of danger, were the principles inculcated on the young Spartan from his earliest years, while his body was strengthened by every exercise and trained to every fatigue. As with the Athenians, military service was the first duty of every citizen of Sparta. The age of enrolment was twenty instead of eighteen; but the service lasted till sixty, and was more severe. In peace as in war, the Spartan lived as if in presence of the enemy. War time was, indeed, his relaxation, for he was then accompanied by slaves, carriages, and beasts of burden, and relieved of eve ry labour or fatigue, to keep him fresh for battle. Cavalry was held in disrepute in Sparta; their infantry was formed 