142 
MINUTES OF PEOCEEDINGS OF 
to consider what estimation it was held in at the time I speak of, and how it 
behaved on the field of battle. 
One of the most noticeable features of the military books written between 
the Thirty and Seven Years' Wars, is the almost unbroken silence in regard 
to the artillery observed by the majority, and the unsatisfactory account of 
it given by the rest. Montecuculli seldom mentions the arm, except in the 
two short chapters he has specially devoted to it; and he evidently sets 
little store by what he calls “ la principale machine de l'armee." 1 Feu- 
quieres contents himself with referring to St. Remy on the few occasions he 
has to speak of the artillery. 2 St. Remy's excellent work deals rather with 
the technical than the tactical side of the subject; and while it leaves 
nothing to be desired regarding the weight and dimensions of the materiel , 
it throws but little light on the state of the personnel, or the use of 
the arm in action. 3 The Marquis de Puysegur casually mentions the 
position of a train on the march and in camp; but he says no more of the 
artillery throughout his book, and he does not include it among the troops 
that compose an army. 4 Prom the short chapter devoted to the artillery in 
the “ Reveries ” of Marshal Saxe, absolutely nothing is to be learned; and 
the Chevalier Polard was so engrossed with the wars and military machines 
of the Israelites, the Ammonites, the Greeks, and the Romans, that he had 
no time to devote to modern artillery. 5 The scanty information afforded us 
by Pere Daniel, of the Society of Jesus, is intelligible, because he had little 
faith in modern artillery, and he openly says, “II est certain que le canon, 
soit dans un siege, soit dans une bataille, tue ordinairement tres peu du 
monde . . . Ce n'est pas une chose si certaine qu'il le paroit d'abord, 
que les Francoises combattant avec les armes des Romains dussent etre 
defaits par les Anglois, ou les Allemans, qui se serviraient d'armes a feu." 6 
“Le Jesuite est excusable de l'avoir pense," exclaims the author of the 
admirable “ Essai sur Tusage de TArtillerie," 7 bursting with wrath at the 
flippant contempt with which the father treats the artillery, “il n'avait 
peut-etre jamais vu tirer de fusil qu' a la chasse, et de canons qu' aux 
rejoiiissances publiques." Other military writers treated the subject in the 
same manner as those I have mentioned, and the spirit which pervades the 
military literature of the age shows that field artillery occupied a mean and 
subordinate position in the line of battle. 
The low estimation in which field artillery was held was owing, not to the 
weakness of its fire, but to its want of mobility; for there can be no 
manner of doubt that if, by a happy combination of good fortune and great 
exertion, the field artillery was dragged into the decisive position at the 
decisive moment, its fire was by no means ineffective. “II est arrive 
1 “ Memoires de Montecuculli.” Amsterdam, 1756, p. 53. 
2 “Memoires du Marquis de Feuqui&res.” Londres, 1736. 
3 “Memoires d’Artillerie, tant par mer que par terre.” Paris, 1697. 
4 “L’Art de la Guerre.” Paris, 1749, Tom. I. p. 115. “Les troupes en France se distinguent, 
scavoir l’infanterie, en Francoise et l’etrangere ; la cavalerie, en gendarmerie, cavalerie legere, et 
dragons.” 
5 In the 1st vol. of the “ Abrege des Com. de M. de Folard,” p. 319, may be found a military plan 
of the “bataille sur deux fronts ” delivered by the Israelites to the allied armies of the Syrians and 
Ammonites, accompanied (as usual) by an elaborate commentary, 
6 “Hist, de la Mil. Francaise,” Tom. II. pp. 432, 436. 
7 Preface, p. xviii. 
