Soldiers of the eighteenth century spent a fair amount of time learning their craft. Accounts from the period abound with soldiers descriptions of the `military discipline,' the common term for drill at the time. Although training in military matters was not yet mandatory for the officer corps, there were many who spent their off hours reading in order to improve their own understanding of warfare. Military historians, however, often leave neglected any serious investigation of the military literature used to teach these soldiers their craft. These works are of interest on several levels. They can be read as literature from the Enlightenment, as early examples of a developing professional literature, and as a means to penetrate the mind of contemporary military institutions.

Before discussing the various types of literature in depth, it is worthwhile to make some general points regarding the subject matter under scrutiny. First and foremost, the literature examined below falls into three basic categories. There are the professional works, usually referred to as drill manuals, these covered most of the basic actions soldiers needed to perform in order to do their jobs, from loading and firing their weapons, to various formations. These works often describe current practices of their country of origin, as well as the practices of other European powers. Many times, they will point out the benefits and shortcomings of several different procedures before suggesting an improved system-undoubtedly that of the particular manual's author.

A second form of military literature in the eighteenth century encompassed what are best termed as memoirs. These were the reflections of soldiers based on their experiences. These combine a lessons-learned approach with recommendations and are usually directed from senior officers to their juniors. Several examples of this form of military literature that appear below are Fredrick the Great's Instructions to his Generals and Maurice de Saxe's My Reveries on the Art of War. Thirdly, there were some fairly technical works, concerned with improving the performance of a particular arm that may not rely purely on the experience of the battlefield. A good example of this type is the Treatise of Artillery by John Muller.

Finally, on a purely technical level, I have made one editorial change for the sake of clarity. Where it was standard practice in eighteenth century English to write `s' as `f' at certain times, for example, `must' would appear as `muff'. I have altered this to follow current rules of English spelling, mainly for the purpose of clarity. While the quotations do loose some of their period flavor, it improves the overall flow of the essay and saves the reader from quaint but sometimes jarring passages such as "A foldier having his firelock thouldered muft ftand with a ftraight body." [1]

Technicalities of spelling aside, the eighteenth century witnessed the production of a very large collection of military literature. Many of the works closely associated with the intellectual movement known as the Enlightenment at least touch on warfare and related subjects. [2]

The Enlightenment held, as one of its core concepts, the desire to reform all areas of society along rational lines. Though the commentary on Enlightenment reforms often examines areas such as farming and punishment, as will be demonstrated the armies of the period were not immune from it either. For example, even that most renowned compilation of knowledge and representative enlightenment work from the period, L'Encyclopedie contains numerous discussions of things military. [2]

As examples of Enlightenment thought, the military literature of the eighteenth century exemplifies some of the key notions of the period. Since France served as the home of the Enlightenment, it seems only fitting that the work of one of her soldiers should lead this inquiry. Marshal Maurice de Saxe stands out as probably the best exemplar of the desire to rationalize and systematize the methods of warfare. Having served under both Marlborough and Prince Eugene prior to entering the French service, where he likewise distinguished himself, Saxe had the opportunity to witness a great deal of combat and his My Reveries on the Art of War certainly typifies the second form of literature described above. Not only did Saxe share his experiences, however, he did so in support for various reforms he hoped to see enacted. One of the reforms he advocated most stringently was the adoption of the cadenced step.

Have them march in cadence. There is the whole secret, and it is the military step of the Romans. That is why these marches were instituted, and that is why one beats the drum; it is this which no one knows and which no one perceived. [4]

For Saxe, this change was key to making the march more endurable: "Every one has seen people dancing all night. But take a man and make him dance for a quarter of an hour without music, and see it he can bear it." [5]

As he argues his point, not only is his assertion reasonable, it also shows a touch of what we today would refer to as social psychology. "This proves that tunes have a secret power over us, that they predispose our muscles to physical exercise and lighten the exercise." [6]

Clearly, Saxe's reveries do show a desire to reform the manner in which contemporary armies functioned. Likewise, another characteristic of Enlightenment thinking was the desire to systematize and rationalize the universe, to develop orderly and logical methods for doing things. These traits as well are present in Saxe's Reveries. For instance, when looking over the current methods of enlisting troops, Saxe criticized all of them, then suggested: "Would it not be better to prescribe by law that every man, whatever his condition in life, should be obliged to serve his prince and his country for five years." [7]

Not only is the method of recruiting Saxe suggested more orderly, it later became the accepted method of raising armies through much of the twentieth century, and is still in use today in some areas. Thus, it stands out as truly innovative. While Maurice de Saxe appears as one of the great examples of Enlightenment thinking in the military arena, he was far from the only example.

With regards to the artillery, John Muller's Treatise of Artillery provides an outstanding example of the qualities of the Enlightenment thought. Muller investigated the current state of the artillery, which he describes in great detail from other works, as well as experience and interviews. [8]

He presented this data in a very logical manner, asserting from the outset that: "When thus experiments agree with a theory founded upon unexceptionable principles, there cannot remain the least doubt of their certainty." [9]

He then goes on to suggest his own reforms. For instance, Muller describes how best to serve the artillery in a land engagement,[10] as well as what he perceived to be the best method for the construction of batteries. [11]

The basis of Muller's reforms was, again, experiment and experience.

As examples of Enlightenment literature, the works described below draw our interest not only as historical artifacts of the period, though they do present some outstanding examples of Enlightenment thought. Moreover, they present explanations of just how eighteenth century armies operated. Thus, this literature can help shed further light on the military mentalite of the eighteenth century.

Often, the authors gave valuable insights into the development of a professional military ethic of the time. For example, in his Treatise of Military Discipline, Humphrey Bland asserts "we should endeavor at the knowledge of our calling, by a thorough application to the service." [12]

This may seem a commonplace to us in the present age, when most military service is voluntary, and promotions are given based on merit, but as those familiar with the British army of the eighteenth century are well aware, the officer corps of the British army was then a preserve of the aristocracy. There was as yet no formal training for officers, though they often served in junior posts before purchasing higher commissions. Still, officers were not required to familiarize themselves with the minutia of training. Bland seems to have held a different view, one which asserted that "The same spirit that brings us into the army should make us apply ourselves to the study of the military art..." [13]

This may signal beginnings of a transformation in how at least some of the officers perceived themselves. They saw their profession as becoming more professional, and its literature depicts this transformation. Bland's ideas are all the more interesting in that he wrote near the beginning of the eighteenth century, although his work was routinely updated and reprinted over the course of the period. Still, it shows that even early in the century this transformation was in a nascent phase of development.

A contemporary of Humphrey Bland took much the same attitude regarding the profession of the officer. Maurice de Saxe perhaps expressed the thought differently, though it should be kept in mind he was referring to the importance of pay for the officer. Still, there seems to be some implicit connection in the ideal portrayed by Saxe and that already set out by Bland. According to Saxe, "The man who devotes himself to war should regard it as a religious order into which he enters. He should have nothing, know no other home than his troop, and should hold himself honored in his profession." [14]

Here again, there appears the spirit that perhaps Bland was alluding to above. This spirit, which seems to hold an inherent connection to what we today would call professionalism, continued to develop over the course of the century. Likewise, it seems to have manifested itself more concretely with each successive generation of authors.

The next generation contained the man often touted as the military leader of the age, Frederick the Great. In his instructions to his officers of the infantry, he states:

I can only give the general rules in this article-you must make your decisions according to events. You must never imagine you have done everything while there is still something to be done; [15]

The same dedication to the service present in Bland and Saxe comes across clearly in the above selection. It can be seen in a paragraph taken from slightly later in the mix that the profession of arms was starting to be viewed, at least by Frederick, as more of a profession.

I will not think my time has been wasted, if this work arouses in my officers the desire to meditate on a profession which will open the most brilliant career to them. They will acquire glory, save their names from obscurity and create by their actions, an immortal reputation. [16]

The above passage rings with the notion of growing concern for professionalism in the army. There is the concern for rules of war, and the implicit notion that good troops may not make up for ignorance on the part of those who lead them. The ignorance the author refers to, however, can be remedied through study and application to the lessons contained in the remainder of the work. Frederick seemed to be hinting at the idea that competent officers were not born into the role, but could be made, again a notion that fit well with some Enlightenment ideas on education. By the same token, there is mention of the importance of reputation. No longer is this something that can be attained solely on the battlefield, but through the efficient performance of more routine duties as well. While the battlefield remained the arena wherein the greatest laurels could be won, good staff work seemed to be achieving a modicum of respect.

Again, as the century progressed, these ideas seemed to grow more ingrained in the thinking of military men. They find an even more complete expression than hitherto appeared in the writings of the British hero of the Seven Years' War, General James Wolfe.

When a young gentleman betakes himself to the profession of arms, he should seriously reflect upon the nature and duties of the way of life he has entered into, and consider that it is not as the generality of the people vainly imagine ... no, he must learn cheerfully [sic] to obey his superiors, and that their orders and his own be punctually executed. [17]

At the same time that these ideas seemed to proliferate and develop across the continent, they seemed also to disseminate through the armed forces in France. The emphasis on knowledge of one's duties that is the core of the professional officer, had, by 1755, been incorporated into the army drill manual.

All captains, lieutenants, second-lieutenants, and ensigns will have to know how to execute the various steps of the exercise of the soldiers. New officers will not assume their duties until they have shown such capacity by a test to be made in the presence of the commander of the regiment. [18]

Thus, on paper at least, officers had to be able to demonstrate proficiency in at least some basic military procedures. Moreover, they would receive a certificate supporting this proficiency from the commander of the garrison, with a copy being sent to the Department of War. [19]

Not only was the idea of professionalism growing more deeply rooted in the militaries of Europe, the French in particular, so was the institution of a bureaucracy with oversight capabilities, though anyone familiar with the governments of eighteenth century Europe would hold the real abilities of such a department as highly skeptical. The fact remains that the notion of a professional officer corps was proliferating across Europe.

Still, not all the military authors of the time felt that the military men were the only ones who should improve, or even that the development of the art of warfare should be left in the hands of the officers. John Muller took quite a different view on this point:

For all the experience of the artillery officers cannot be of any use in the construction of pieces, as their business is to make the best use of them and not how they are made, neither are they ever consulted upon that subject. [20]

On this point, Muller may be one of the first to enunciate the notion of warfare being too important to leave to the generals. Though it is worth noting that he proceeded from a different standpoint. His work was an attempt at a scientific evaluation of much of the technical composition of the artillery, as well as a set of suggestions of how to improve the service materially. Thus much of his work contains some fine illustrations of various artillery implements. It is no surprise then that Muller's work is credited with being used by the Americans as a reference during the War of Independence when they began to cast their own pieces. [21]

At any rate, it should be clear that Muller's work was of a highly technical nature, and would naturally differ from some of the others under scrutiny in this essay.

Part of the professional literature of any discipline is the observation of the methods of other practitioners. The military literature of the eighteenth century is no exception here in that it often utilized examples derived from the armed forces of other countries in making their case for a certain point. Bland is no exception in that he used just such a device when he argued for a more thoroughgoing knowledge on the part of the officer corps.

Our great and warlike neighbors the Germans, are so entirely possessed in the favour of this opinion than [sic] they oblige even their youth of quality to perform the function of a private Soldier, Corporal, and Serjeant [sic], that they may learn the duty of each, before they have a commission: and sure no nation has produced greater generals. [22]

At the same time, this reinforces the notions already presented concerning Bland's desire for the officers to have a more thorough understanding of their craft. Likewise, the nation he utilized for explanation is important here in that the Germans referred to were, in this case, most likely the Prussians. Since this is the 1759 revision of the manual, it is safe to make a few inferences. The British had, by then, witnessed the feats of Prussian arms in the early stages of the war. These were beginning to tell on the British appreciation for their neighbors, at least in the intellectual sphere. This adulation reached its peak in the publication of Harvey's 1764 manual, better known simply as the '64.

With regards to the artillery, John Muller's Treatise likewise uses the same device as Bland in advocating his ideas. In one section, the author attempts "To determine the quantity of guns, ammunition, stores, and every thing else necessary in the field or a siege, so as to have enough and no more, requires more knowledge and experience than can be found in one man. The French have a set of officers, whose business it is to manage these affairs, and who are gradually initiated into it." [23] Thus, he also uses the technique of comparison as a device to goad his readers into adopting the measures he suggested.

Beyond a growing ideal of professionalism in the ranks, the military literature of the eighteenth century also tells, quite obviously, how the militaries of the period functioned. Between these pages are glimpses into the day-to-day techniques of an institution at once foreign and familiar. Among the more interesting pieces of information gleaned in the research for this essay are the following.

Marshal Saxe, when describing how to make the best use of observing the enemy, gave these insights into the warfare of the period: "When you are in the presence of the enemy under arms and see the soldiers changing shirts, it is certain that you are going to be attacked, because they put on their shirts one over the other, in order not to loose any." [24]

He goes on to inform "You can also judge the direction of the enemy's movement by the reflection of the sun on his arms. [25] These are the sorts of details that yield only from a close examination of the sources, what was the common sense of the period, now lost to the passage of time.

In a different context, Frederick the Great, gives some common sense instructions on dealing with civilians near camp, that sound strangely modem. He extols his officers towards "doing everything in his power to conciliate the affections of the inhabitants, as by this means he may often gain information very material to the army." [26]

Essentially, he seems to be calling on his officers to win the `hearts and minds' of the inhabitants, pointing out how the utility of such actions in that they could result in better intelligence. Wolfe issued the same type of directive to his troops, while stationed in Scotland, but for very different reasons and with very different objectives in mind. Writing on February 24, 1749, while his unit was stationed at Stirling, Wolfe ordered his troops that: "The soldiers are to avoid all kinds of disputes with the inhabitants; and if at any time there should happen any tumult or riot, they are by no means to mix with the people of the town..." [27] This directive was immensely practical, considering only three years before Scotland rose up in its last major revolt against British domination, the 1745 rebellion.

It should be clear at this point that a study of the military literature promulgated in the eighteenth century has much to offer in so far as expanding our knowledge of the military institutions of the period. Many of the basic procedures that went along with day-to-day life in these military institutions is set out in these pages. They contain details that are very often absent from even some of the very best of our scholarly studies. While these points may seem fairly minute and unimportant to some, to others, they give wonderful clues into how these organizations actually operated. In this respect, they take us to one of the fundamental principles of history, to gain an understanding of past ages.

There remains a great deal of insight still to be gleaned. Much of how armies truly operated may differ vastly from the methods outlined in these works, and set out above. The ideal, however, of how they were supposed to function is preserved.

In the present context, the ideal may offer more than the reality. It does so by allowing us an insight into the enlightened military mind. Even from this cursory examination, some notes resonate clearly. The writers of the eighteenth century were searching for ways of performing military operations in a logical manner. They hoped to develop methods whereby they could conduct the business of war more smoothly. At the same time, they were developing both a system of professional standards and an ethic to complement it. In this way they are certainly the predecessors of modem military staffs. This essay has merely scratched the surface and offered a taste of the banquet that would come from a more in-depth examination of this subject.

For those interested in masking such a study, I would like to share with you, briefly, some of the places I managed to find the works used in the research for this essay. [28]

The Internet can be a wonderful tool, if used carefully and patiently. A number of the works cited in the preceding essay are available on the website for the 42nd Royal Highland Regiment. Their site, at www.highlandregiment.org/documentation, contains several editions of Bland's Treatise, as well as Cumberland's New Exercise, among others. Most of the works listed on the site are available in PDF files, facilitating the research all the more. For the genre under discussion, the 42nd Highland Regiment site is by far one of the best resources on the Internet. Another very useful site is www.sonshi.com/ frederickthegreat.html, which contains Frederick's instructions both to his infantry and cavalry officers. Those with an interest specifically in the works that were available in the North American Colonies would do well to consult the historical resources branch of the U.S. Army's Center of Military History at www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/revbib /imprints.htm. Those of you who like to hold paper in your hands (something which I must admit I prefer) can obtain some works, such as Muller's Treatise, through the Museum Restoration Service, in reprint form.

There are certainly more writings on the art of war that date from the eighteenth century, they wait to yield up their dusty knowledge of battlefields long silent, and military thinkers long past. Best of luck!

Footnotes