March 23, 1916. 
LAND AND WATER 
expect Austrian losses to be somewliat less than or at 
the most equal to this figure. That is, the total Austrian 
numbers on the strength would not be more than, say, 
two and a quarter million men, or, at the most 2,400,000. 
We shall see in a moment, that this estimate is almost 
certainly insufficient in the case of Austria-Hungary 
In the second category of evidence we have the 
notes of losses taken by those against whom the Austro- 
Hungarian forces have been in conflict. 
The method, which is a commonplace in every 
service, is as follows : — 
You identify from prisoners or from wounded and 
dead the units opposed to you in a particular action. 
You question prisoners with regard to losses in the units 
to which they belong. Their evidence varies, of course, 
very largely, according to their intelligence, their in- . 
formation, their rank, the length of their service, their 
willingness to give evidence. 
Method of Estimate 
But when you have been able to sift a very large 
number of such pieces of evidence and duly to weigh 
tbem, you arrive at a fairly close estimate. You cannot, 
of course, establish results for cverj' unit, you cannot 
ev.en identify e\-ery effort, but after a prolonged period 
of fighting you will have covered so wide a field as to 
furnish you with results which you arc the more inclined 
to accept if they regularly confirm each other, and further 
maintain their average as time goes on. You are fre- 
quently able, though at rarer, intervals than in the case 
of prisoners, to check your results by captured documents. 
You establish as closely as possil^le the total of all 
the units actually engaged against you over the time 
concerned, and you apply your a^'erage to that total. 
The Italian General Staff has made such an estimate 
of the proportionate losses of the Austro-Hungarian 
units opposed to them from their entry into the war. 
The Russian Higher Command has similarly obtained an 
estimate of which the figures I quote run up to the end 
of July, iqi5. Both these estimates roughly tally, allow- 
ing for the difference between trench warfare and the 
warfare upon the Eastern front up to the autumn. The 
average losses of a permanent character which these 
estimates combined give for the whole of the Austro-, 
Hungarian forces is as high as 180,000 a month. 
Now this is an exceedingly high figure for the forces 
involved and an impartial observer, concerned only to 
arrive at the truth and suspecting bias in the opponents 
of Austria-Hungary, might legitimately question it. He 
might demand, what cannot be given here, and indeed 
does not exist in any complete form, documentary proof. 
Such an observer would point out with justice that the 
field of computation was far from imiversal, concerned 
only a certain proportion of the forces engaged, and was 
distributed over incomplete periods of time. 
This is true ; and I do not mean to affirm so high a 
figure. One certainly cannot affirm it with the same 
certitude as. one can the minimum of German losses, for 
the evidence is nothing like so complete. 
But we must recall, on the other hand, certain circum- 
stances peculiar to the case, which render the figure 
mentioned less improbable than it seems at first blush. 
• . In the first place, the number of Austro-Hungarian 
prisoners taken by Serbians, Italians and Russians com- 
liined is at least a million. A few mav have escaped 
during the over-numing of Serbia, but their number 
would be insignificant. . 
This excessive number of prisoners is largely accounted 
for by the nature of the Austro-Hungarian recruitment- 
including as it does men of Polish , Ruthenian, Roumanian 
and Serbian nationality, and by the continuous advance of 
the Russians over Slav territory for the first nine months 
of the war, coupled with the breakdown of the first 
Austrian armies in the field, At any rate, this figure is 
well established. Such a figure for prisoners— the only 
solid bit of statistics we have — is quite abnormal. It is, 
in proportion to the armies in the field, more than three 
times the French and five or six times the German. 
It leaves, at the rate of 180,000 a month only about 
120,000 men a month to be accounted for in other ways, 
say 5 per cent, a month of the forces in the field. 
We must further remember that the Austro-Hun- 
garian army has had the very worst climatic conditions 
and very bad conditions of ground as well. The bulk 
of the German army has always been on the West. The 
Austro-Hungarian army has had the terrible winter fighting 
in Galicia and in the Carpathians against it. Its great 
defeat in Serbia took place in the heart of the winter and 
in the mountains, and even on the Italian front its main 
forces are massed upon a sector of a few miles against 
which the whole weight of the admirable Italian heavv 
artillery is continuously directed. 
If this second form of estimate — the Russian and 
Italian — be admitted, we get for the total Austro-Hun- 
garian losses just over three million men : a much higher 
proportion than the permanent losses of the Germans, 
the French, or English, in proportion to their respective 
armies continuously maintained in the field. 
But there is a type of information which seems more 
conclusive than cither of these two, and which inchnes 
one strongly towards accepting the highest figure. That 
information is the present condition of recruitment in 
Austria-Hungary. The exhaustion of available men in 
that country has quite clearly reached limits not yet 
attained in France or even in Germany. (In the case of 
Russia, England, and Italy there is no comparison, for the 
proportionate reserve of man-power in all these three 
countries is enormously greater than in France, Germany, 
or Austria-Hungary.) 
Note these points : — France, Germany and Austria- 
Hungary have all of them called up the class 1916, but 
France has not yet, I believe, put the men of this class 
imder fire. Germany has already done so in a large 
degree. Austria-Hitiipary hzgan earlier, and by noic lias 
done so in a very large propoiiion indeed. 
Again, France called up (for lengthy training) her 
iqi7 class on the ist of January. Germany (which 
gives a much shorter training), has warned her 1917 
class but not yet, I believe, called them up, save in 
small numbers. Austria-Hungary called up her 1917 
class in its entirety as early as last October. 
Again, neither in France nor in Germany has the 
1918 class been affected at all. In Austria-Hungary the 
1918 class has b:en already gone ihreugh and xvarncd 
for service this year. It is true that the warning is for 
the autumn, but all the organisation of this class has 
been already accomplished, and these lads are ready to 
be called out as early as the Spring. 
Again, Austria-Hungary warned for incorporation 
in January, the month just passed, her Landsturm up 
to 50 years of age. 
In general, Austria-Hungary can be proved to be 
SORTES SHAKESPEARIAN^, 
By SIR SIDNEY LEE. 
VERDUN. 
Victory with little loss doth play 
Upon the dancing banners of the French. 
KING JOHN n.. i., 307-8. 
RANCOURS AT WESTMINSTER, 
Civil dissension is a viperous worm 
That gnaii's the bowels of the common- 
wealth. 
I. HENRY VI.. III., i.i 72J. 
REICHSTAG HEROICS. 
Now could I drink hot blood 
And do sJ4ch bitter business as The Day 
J I 'out d quake to look on. 
HAMLET III., ii., 408-10. 
