Just as in nature no mere assemblage of cells, or even of functional parts, can form a living organism, so no collection of individuals, however efficient—or of small units, however perfect—can in any true sense be called an Army. It might have the appearance of a real military force, but it would only be suited to peace. The means by which it can be made fit for war is Organization, without which it would be little better than an armed mob—inert, or at best irregular and spasmodic in its movements. An ill-organized army is not capable of co-ordinated or of sustained action, owing to the difficulty of either directing its movements or supplying its wants.
The Chain of Command
It is obvious that a Commander of a Military Force cannot deal personally and directly with all those under his command, but only with a limited number of subordinate commanders. Each of the latter in his turn conveys his will to his own subordinates, and this gradually broadening system, called the Chain of Command, is carried on, till every individual of the Force receives his Orders. These Orders are founded on the original directions of the Commander-in-Chief, with modifications and details added by each lower authority in the chain, so as to suit the special circumstances of his own Command.
This principle combines unity of control with decentralization of command and devolution of responsibility. In no other way can ready and effective co-operation of all fractions of the force to a common end be ensured.
Units or Formations of Troops
The method, generally speaking, of War Organization is to provide the links in the chain of Command by a systematic arrangement, in suitable groups, of the various troops composing the Army. The smallest groups, or Units, are combined in larger ones, and these again are built up into more complex bodies, and so on, until the whole Army is formed in a small number of large bodies, whose Commanders receive direct orders from the Supreme Commander.
For want of a general name for these bodies it is usual to speak of them all as Formations. The term Units, which is often used, properly applies only to the elementary groups. The largest Formations are conveniently styled the Subordinate Commands of the Army.
Each category of Formations forms a step in the pyramid of organization, in which the lowest layer is formed by the Units, the top layer by the Subordinate Commands, and the apex by the Supreme Commander. The Commanders of each Formation, from the largest to the smallest, form the successive links in the chain of Command.
All Formations should have such a strength and composition as to be in the best relation and proportion to each other, and to the larger groups which they help to build up. Every Formation should be formed of at least three subordinate Units. This gives the Commander of the whole due importance over his Subordinate Commanders, and ensures his retaining an adequate Command whenever he wishes to detach one of his Units. This would not be the case were there only two Units in the whole, for, if one were detached, the Commander of the whole would be left exercising Command only over the other Unit, already adequately commanded. The Superior Commander would then be superfluous, and harmfully interfering with his subordinate. A Formation with three or more Units can be readily broken up when desired, without affecting the principles of Command, and is therefore more flexible and efficient than one with only two Units. Emphasis is laid on this point by Clausewitz in his classic work “On War.”
It is the purpose of the next few chapters to describe the Units and Formations constituted in modern armies. But, in order to explain the reasons which have dictated their strength and composition, it is necessary first to describe the various kinds of Troops which go to make up an Army, and their respective methods of fighting, and functions in war. Organization exists to facilitate fighting, and cannot be explained without some discussion of Tactics.