122 
ACHIEVEMENTS OF FIELD ARTILLERY. 
to forestall the power and focus of shells, and is intensity of fire to 
supplant its concentration ? Are guns to be dismissed to the dim 
horizon of the battle-field, or are they still to be played down as the 
trump cards in his hands by the General who can recognise the 
moment and its possibilities ? 
Let us take the main question first, for tactical considerations must 
ever take precedence of those which are merely technical. And it 
would seem, moreover, that the value of what artillery can be made to 
accomplish depends in the first place on the higher tactics of the 
battle-field, on the manner in which it is made to supplement and co¬ 
operate with the efforts of the other arms, and on its direction by a 
supreme leader handling it with perfect knowledge and confidence. 
Handling it, that is to say, with a full appreciation of its powers, with a 
bold liberal grasp, that adapts and bends materials to his purpose with 
the full decision that bespeaks the practised workman. The General 
must cease to regard artillery with that respect, akin almost to dislike, 
that distinguishes the superstitious awe with which the unknown or only 
partially understood is regarded by the unilluminated multitude. The 
tactics of artillery are invested with no scientific mysteries, and tech¬ 
nical knowledge can be supplied by the experts who are to be found 
amongst its ranks. It is the Generals rather than the regimental 
officers, therefore, who require education if the most is to be got out of 
guns in the future. Frederick’s blow at Rossbach, Senarmont’s at 
Friedland, Napoleon’s at Wagram, Liitzen and Hanau ; Blucher’s at 
Bautzen, lead up to Longstreet’s at Manassas, and Yon Alvensleben’s 
at Mars-la-Tour. The same spirit animates all these efforts, and the 
same impulse is given to the arm even though the age and the weapons 
stand separated by many decades and many scientific discoveries. 
To descend to matters technical, it is to the shrapnel shell that 
modern gunners look to hold their place relatively to the other arms, 
and it is with no inflated rhetoric that they claim that the effect of modern 
artillery has been so greatly enhanced by its introduction that five times 
as great results may be hoped for from it than were attained by the 
German artillery in 1870. 1 2 The increased depth of the deadly zone, and 
the rapidity of fire which are rendered possible by modern improve¬ 
ments, have placed, according to a high modern authority, 3 a projectile 
in the hands of the gunner of to-day as effective at 3000 yards as was 
the old cannister at 500. 
The same authority considers that modern artillery will, therefore, 
only thoroughly turn its powers to account if it accustoms itself to pick 
up the range quickly and accurately—even if it be obliged to keep at 
long ranges—and then pours in such a rapid fire as will annihilate its 
opponent. Artillery must act, as he, with a fine burst of enthusiasm, 
expresses it, “par rafales ” that is to say, with the rapid and decisive 
1 According to Lieut.-Colonel Walford, R.A., the shells used by the Germans in 1870 gave about 
30 or 40 splinters at the burst, while their present ring-shell gives 150 to 180 splinters, and their 
shrapnel discharges 262 bullets. The shrapnel, it is to be noted, has an excellent time fuze, which 
acts with regularity up to 3500 yards. 
2 See the opinion of Colonel Langlois, professeur k 1’^cole Superieure de Guerre, in his recent 
work “ L’Artillerie de campagne en liaison avec les autres armes,” 
