COMMENDED ESSAY, 1894 . 
373 
Thus all the circumstances of tlie present day favour such an employ¬ 
ment of guns, and the moment for the consideration of how best they 
may be trained to that end is ripe. 
A more imperious necessity, however, than either convenience or 
propriety, forces the question on us. 
There is a distinct tendency amongst all the Continental Powers to 
increase the proportion of artillery which accompanies their armies. 
Guns which might be firing cannot be kept idly in rear, and conse¬ 
quently a vast number of pieces have to be arrayed side by side on a 
modern battle-field; and they occupy so vast a space that concentra¬ 
tion in masses is no longer a matter of choice. 1 
Even in 1870, when the proportion of guns with the German armies 
was smaller than it is at present, 2 the tendency to push all the guns 
into the first line from the outset, rendered it by no means easy for 
their batteries to find positions. 
In the first battles of Spicheren and Woerth the German batteries 
occupied a space equal to one-third of the whole front of attack. At 
Colombey and Rezonville the fraction was slightly larger, while at 
Gravelotte they extended over two-fifths of the German line. 3 Indeed, 
were it not that science has again stepped in to aid us, the problem of 
how to derive full advantage from a numerous artillery, would present 
a most formidable difficulty. 
Smokeless powder, however, will enable guns, not only to be massed, 
but to be posted in tiers, and such an application of them has already 
become a familiar feature of foreign manoeuvres. Thus placed, their 
control by one hand becomes more than ever imperative, and the 
latest developments of tactics, therefore, go to fortify the arguments 
already used in favour of such a method of employing them. 
Before, however, we enter on questions of organisation or train¬ 
ing, it will be well to make what is meant by the term “ masses of 
artillery” quite clear, and indicate the objects for which they are 
usually called together. 
The Austrian Artillery Regulations of 1866 are the first which 4 have 
i ventured on a definition, and given official recognition to the objects 
i with which they might be formed. According to them: “Several divi¬ 
sions of batteries, separated or united, led by one leader, and directed 
against the same target, constitute a mass of artillery.” This definition 
is, however, somewhat unsatisfactory at the present time, because, in 
the first place, it has become generally recognised that unity of direc¬ 
tion and concentration of fire is only to be obtained by concentrating 
1 How much circumstances have altered since the time when some officers, now serving, joined 
i! the service, is exemplified hj a reference to the “ Aide Memoire to the Military Sciences ” of 1846, 
l which puts the proportion of two pieces of ordnance for every thousand infantry as the best for us, 
“ considering how much the perfection of the infantry force diminishes the quantity of artillery 
! necessary to an army.” In our army that proportion is now 3-5, while abroad it is, in the French 
an <l German armies, 5, and there is a tendency for it to grow still larger. 
■ See also “Die FntwicTcelung der Feld Artillerie, etc.” by Lieut.-General Muller. Berlin, 
1893. Vol. II., p. 293. He, however, puts the strength of the infantry, in a German and French 
1 Corps, somewhat higher than other authorities. 
. 2 In 1870 it was 3-7 per 1000 infantry ; it is now 5. 
3 “ Field Artillery,” by Lieut.-Colonel Sisson Pratt. 
4 Langlois. 
50 
