for sick and supernumerary horses, and other services. Such an army corps has a fighting strength of 25 bat talions, or about 25,000 infantry, 5 regiments (about 3000) cavalry, and 96 guns, and a total strength of about 40,000 men, 12,000 horses, and 1400 waggons and wheeled vehicles.
The following table shows approximately the military resources of the great powers of Europe:—
A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions. |
Country. Population. Military Expenditure. Arniy Peace Footing. Anny War Footing. Active Army. Depfit Troops. Garrisons and Reserves. Total. Great Britain, . . .. 32,000,000 36,000,000 41,000,000 82,000,000 36,000,000 27,000,000 23,000,000 18,000,000 15,500,000 21,500,000 10,500,000 7,500,000 100,000 450,000 400,000 750,000 275,000 200,000 225,000 780,000 680,000 850,000 600,000 375,000 95,000 270,000 240,000 150,000 150,000 125,000 350,000 500,000 330,000 300,000 220,000 250,000 670,000 1,550,000 1,250,000 1,300,000 950,000 750,000 France, German Empire, liussia, Austria and Hungaiy, . . . Italy, several cases a large proportion of these are available as reinforcements to the active army if required. Only those forces that have received some training and have a permanent organisation are counted; thus the English volunteers are included, but not the Germnii landsturm, or French reserves of the territorial army. The British troops serving in India have been included in the military forces of Great Britain, and the expenses borne oil their account by the Indian revenue in the military expenditure ; but not tho native forces in India.
HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE BRITISH ARMY.
The history of the military institutions of England may be divided into three principal periods, each marked by a system peculiar to itself : the Anglo-Saxon, or militia period, preceding the Norman Conquest; the feudal period, extend ing from that to the great Rebellion ; and the period of stand ing armies, lasting from the Restoration to the present day.
Prior to the Norman Conquest the armed force of Eng land was essentially a national militia. Every freeman was bound to bear arms for the defence of the country, or for the maintenance of peace. Military service was not a debt due to the king or earl, the obligation of a dependent to his lord, but the service owed by a free citizen to his country. To give some organisation and training to this levy, the sheriffs had authority to call out the contingents of their several shires for exercise. The thanes appeared on horseback, and the bulk of the people, armed with swords, spears, and heavy shields, or with bows and spears, formed the infantry; This force, termed the " Fyrd," was available for home service only, and could not be moved even from its county except in the case of invasion or great emergency; and it was principally to repel the invasions of Danes and others that its services were required. Yet even in those days the necessity of some more permanent force was felt, and bodies of paid troops were maintained by the king and some of the great earls at their own -cost. Thus Canute kept up a household force (huscarle) of 6000 men, and paid troops also formed part of Harold s army at the battle of Hastings.
Although William professed to reign by right of inheritance, not of conquest, and to maintain the existing laws of the country, its military institutions underwent a rapid and complete change under him. The great slaughter of the Anglo-Saxon nobility at Hastings, and the frequent and un successful revolts of the survivors, and consequent forfeiture of their estates, enabled William to make large grants to his followers; and with these he introduced the feudal system of military tenure. Henceforth military service was a debt due by the dependent or vassal to the lord of whom he held his land, not the free service rendered by a citizen to his country. And William took advantage of his exceptional position as a conqueror, and as the original granter of nearly half the lands of England, to carry the feudal system to a perfection which it had never attained on the Continent. Assuming that " the king is the uni versal lord and original proprietor of all the lands of the kingdom," he proceeded to divide the country into more than 00,000 military allotments or fees, to be held under j tenure of "knight s service." By the conditions of knight s service the tenant of a fee was bound to attend his lord in war, with horse and arms, at his own cost, for forty days iu each year, the tenant of half a fee doing like service for twenty days. Where one man held many fees and some of the great barons held several hundreds ho became responsible to the king as tenant-in-chief for military service in proportion to his grant, and required the same from his tenants.
system of the country was not effected easily or at once. To the original Saxon proprietors, who still held much of the land, the feudal- system was a strange and intolerable burden. But the ever-growing preponderance of the Norman element, the dissensions among the Saxons them selves, which William skilfully made use of, the constant wars and revolts, and consequent necessity for improved military organisation, gradually overcame their resistance, and shortly before the Conqueror s death the new system was finally accepted throughout the country. Thus the king could command the services of 60,000 knights[1] and men-at-arms for forty days free of cost; and these feudal troops, unlike the Saxon levies, were bound to follow him anywhere. Such at least was the theory; but in practice modifications were soon introduced. Forty days might suffice to repel an invasion or crush a revolt, but not to prosecute a foreign war; moreover, many of the tenants fees were subdivided, and the holders only liable to twenty or ten days service. On the other hand, many holders of fees could not render personal service, or preferred sub mitting to a money penalty instead. Thus by mutual consent grew up a system" of fines or "escuage," and with the money levied from those who failed to do service the king was able to hire mercenaries, or pay such of the feudal troops as were willing to prolong their service. From time to time proclamations and statutes were issued reminding the holders of knights fees of their duties; but the immediate object was generally to raise money rather
than to enforce personal service, which became more and- ↑ The " knight of honour," the true knight, must not be confounded with the tenant of a knight-fee. Practically the latter were usually the " men-at-arms," on y men of good family being admitted to the honour of knighthood.
