Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 02.djvu/45

ARMIES. field of battle, the burden falls still heavier on the industrial laborer, with whom the conditions of production are such as to require constant application. The process thus begun continues until in countries like Great Britain or the United States, where military service is on a contractual basis, the total separation of warrior and citizen is attained. These considerations must be borne in mind in discussing the history of the evolution of the army. Beginning with the earliest organized armies of which there is record, below will be found an historical outline of this development.

Under the Old and Middle empires (down to about 1000 ), the wars of Egypt were comparatively unimportant. During this period a sort of feudal system prevailed, and the main strength of the army was furnished by the militia of the nomes, commanded by the monarchs or their deputies, together with the contingents of the great temple estates and of the royal domains. In addition, a certain number of mercenary troops were drawn from the tribes of northern Nubia. Under the twelfth dynasty, and perhaps earlier, there was also a permanent corps, the “Retainers of the King,” which seems to have filled the place of a standing army. No cavalry or chariot force existed, as the horse does not appear to have been introduced into Egypt until about 1000.

The Hyksos wars, which swept away the old feudal system, aroused the military spirit of Egypt, and under the New Empire (from about 1580 ) a standing army was a necessity. It was composed chiefly of barbarian mercenaries, the native troops playing a rather imimportant part. Under the Saïtic dynasty ( 645-525), Greek mercenaries were largely employed. The bulk of the army under the New Empire was formed by the infantry, armed with spear and heavy shield, or with light buckler and bow. The chariot force constituted the flower of the army. Each chariot contained two soldiers, of whom one fought with his bow and other weapons, while his comrade drove the horses. Great attention was paid to organization and discipline. The troops were divided into regiments and companies, and, in time of war at least, the regiments were formed into brigades or divisions. A special force, called the Mazay, was organized as a gendarmerie, or armed constabulary, but was sometimes employed in war. See Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt (London and New York, 1894), chapter.

Quite extensive descriptions of armies, battle arrays, and of warfare among the ancient Hindus are preserved in the  (q.v.) or Iliad of India, and in the seventh book of the great legal code of (q.v.). The information which these sources furnish with reference to the constitution of the military force of early India serves to supplement such allusions to armed equipments and fighting as may be gathered from the earlier times represented by the (q.v.). Among the organizations of an army early recognized in India was a distribution of the forces into nine subdivisions, on the ascending scale, ranging from a squad (Sanskrit patti), composed of 1 chariot, 1 elephant, 5 foot-soldiers, and 3 horsemen, up to an army

corps (Skt. akšāuhiṇī), comprising 21,870 chariots, 21,870 elephants, 109,350 foot-soldiers, and 65,610 cavalry. The code of Manu likewise provides for various arrangements for drawing up of the forces in manœuvring, fighting, and encamping. These are interesting for students of military tactics to look up. On the march and in action the King was naturally stationed in the centre for safety; the commander was in the vanguard, unless, through the exigency of the situation, his presence was demanded elsewhere. Details may also be gathered from the sources mentioned with reference to the armor and accoutrement of the soldiers and all matters appertaining to military forces and warfare. The best work on the subject is Hopkins, Ruling Caste in Ancient India, published in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. XIII. (New Haven, 1889).

The organization of the Persian army in ancient days appears to have corresponded largely with the divisions introduced into the forces of Media at an earlier date by (q.v.), as mentioned by Herodotus (c.103). This general distribution into infantry, composed of spearmen, bowmen, and others, and into cavalry, supplemented by warriors mounted on chariots, prevailed throughout the history of the Persian Empire. The cavalry was the flower of the army, as Persia was ever famous for her horses and her excellence in horsemanship. These mounted forces occupied the wings of the main body. This latter mass was composed of the people, and was often little better than an armed mob. The scythe-bearing chariots were drawn up as a division in front of the army, and they seem to have inspired terror into the foe, but were often less effective than the other forces. The use of elephants is found as early as in the campaigns to oppose the invading Alexander. From Herodotus (vii. 61, 84) and other sources we learn that the characteristic equipments of the Persian soldiers were a short straight sword, a long spear, a bow, quiver, battle-axe, mace, or club, and a sling, according to the special district or province from which the levies came. A large wicker shield and a close-fitting leather tunic and trousers, a coat of mail, or a quilted corselet, completed the outfit. The horses as well as the riders were protected by mailed trappings—at least if we can judge from the caparison of the war-horses on the sculptures in Sassanian times. A division of the army on the decimal scale of tens, hundreds, thousands, and tens of thousands may be gathered from Herodotus (xii. 81), and seems to be as old as the (q.v.). The Persian hosts have ever been proverbial for numbers, and even allowing for exaggeration, the figures must have been enormous. The army which Xerxes led against Greece has been estimated at hardly less than 2,000,000, and Darius is reputed to have opposed the world-conquering Alexander with a force of between 750,000 and 1,000,000 men. The development and history of the Persian army during the Parthian and Sassanian periods, down to the overthrow of the Persian dominion by the Arab conquest and its subsequent results, may be obtained from a study of those times. On Persian armies and armor consult Jackson, Classical Studies in Honour of