A military dictionary

by William Duane

We find among the ancient historians various instances in which the generals of armies have judged fit to harangue their troops. It must, however, be acknowleged, that the greater part of these harangues have been studiously made out by ingenious writers, and put into the lips of the heroes they have thought proper to celebrate. Those which contain most common sense, and are conveyed in short pithy sentences, will always produce the best effects.

Eloquence is certainly a qualification which every general of an army should possess; but, it is not, in our days, the most essential requisite in his character. Cæsar was naturally endowed with a most bewitching talent in the exercise of words; and he used it on many occasions to considerable advantage. The manner in which he was accustomed to address his men became so celebrated, that several persons belonging to the army he commanded carefully selected his military harangues; and, if we may believe the Chevalier Folard, the emperor Augustus was particularly pleased and entertained in having them read to him.

In Chevalier Folard’s opinion, those speeches which are enlivened by expressions of humor and by occasional raillery, will always have the most influence over the minds of common soldiers. War although apparently dictated by the laws of nature (for war and bloodshed seem to have been the concomitants of man from his first creation) cannot be so far congenial to the feelings of civilized mortality, as to mingle with sober sense and rational reflection. Consequently, those discourses which lead the common mind to think, and which induce the common heart to feel, are ill adapted to acts of violence and mutual rancour. A witticism or humorous expression has sometimes the most happy effect. The answer which Hannibal the Carthaginian made to one of his generals, whose name was Gisco, produced a fortunate emotion among the soldiers. The latter observed, that the enemy’s great numbers somewhat surprized him; Hannibal, as Plutarch relates the story, immediately said, with a sort of indignant look—But there is another circumstance, Gisco, which ought to surprize you much more, and which you do not seem to know. Gisco requested to know what it might be. It is, replied Hannibal, that in so large a multitude there should not be one man whose name is Gisco. This sarcastic observation created a loud laugh among all who surrounded the general, and the humor of the saying was instantly conveyed through the ranks.

Antigonus, according to the same authority, never adopted any other mode of conveying his sentiments to the troops. The Lacedemonians were even more laconic; but every thing they uttered was full of sound sense and energy of thought. Thucydides, who was not only a good historian, but likewise an able general, makes his heroes speak in a very emphatic and eloquent manner. Tacitus does not appear to possess much excellence that way; and the speeches which we find in Polybius, are copied after what was spoken by the several generals, whom he celebrates. Titus Livius is too ornamental and too flowery. An active and intelligent general must be a perfect stranger to that species of oratory.

We read in Varillas, a French historian, who was born in 1624, and wrote a history of France beginning with Louis XI. and ending with Henry III. &c. that Zisca (or Ziska) a gentleman and soldier of Bohemia (who was so called because he happened to lose an eye,) made a remarkable speech to his followers. We refer our inquisitive readers to that writer’s works for one of the most energetic, most soldier-like, and persuasive pieces of military eloquence that perhaps is extant. Zisca succeeded Huss, who had armed the peasantry of Bohemia to resist the oppressions of the emperor and the Roman pontiff; and although he lost his other eye at the siege of Rabi, his influence and courage were so great, that he obliged the emperor Sigismund to send an embassy to him, and to offer him the government of Bohemia. Such was his power of persuasion, that he could not only animate his men to the most desperate feats of valor, but likewise check them in the full career of victory, to prevent plunder and unnecessary bloodshed. A remarkable instance of this sort may be found in Varillas, where he relates, that nothing but the influence which Zisca possessed over the minds of his followers could have saved the city of Prague from utter destruction.

Several specimens of military eloquence may be found in Procopius. They possess the happy quality of being very short, full of good sense and strength of expression. Since the time of Henry the IVth, of France, we find few instances in which the generals of armies have thought it expedient to harangue their troops, unless we except the battle of Nerva, previous to which Charles the XIIth, king of Sweden, addressed his little army.

It frequently happens, however, that the commanding officers of corps and of detached parties, feel it necessary to encourage their men by short and appropriate speeches after the manner of the Lacedemonians. At the famous battle of Tory, Henry the IVth, of France, rode down the front of the line, and pointing to the white feather which he wore in his hat, spoke in the following emphatic manner to his soldiers: My children, (mes enfans) cried he, should any mistake or irregularity occur among the standard bearers, and your colors by any accident be misled, recollect, that this feather will shew you where you are to rally; you will always find it on the road to honor and victory!

At Fleurus, general Jourdan rode along the line with this short speech, “no retreat to-day.” At Marengo Bonaparte addressed the soldiers, “remember we always sleep the night after victory on the field of battle.” At Jena he told them—“There is Rosbach and a column commemorating French defeat, we must retrieve the honor of France, and plant a column dedicated to French glory.” Admiral Nelson’s address before the battle of Trafalgar, merits perpetual record,—“England expects every man to do his duty.” The English ladies very significantly embroidered it on their garters.

HARASS, (harceler, Fr.) In a military sense, signifies to annoy, to perplex, and incessantly turmoil any body of men, to hang upon the rear and flanks of a retreating army, or to interrupt its operations at a siege by repeated attacks. The troops best calculated for this duty are hussars, mounted riflemen, and light dragoons. The general most celebrated among the ancients for this kind of warfare was Sertorius. By means of the most subtile and ingenious manœuvres, aided by a thorough knowlege of military tactics, he disconcerted all the plans, and finally defeated all the attempts which were made by Pompey and Metellus to subdue him. It has been shrewdly remarked by the commentator on Polybius, that had there been one Sertorius within the walls of Lisle, when that city was besieged in 1708, the whole combined force of the allies that was brought before it would have been rendered ineffectual. This wise and sagacious officer was constantly upon the watch; no movement of the enemy escaped his notice; and by being master of his designs, every measure which was attempted to be put in execution, was thwarted in its infancy.

When he received intelligence that a convoy was on its way to the enemy, such was his activity, that no precautions could save it from his attack; and however seemingly advantageous a temporary position might appear, every possible peril or surprize crouded upon his mind, and the instant he judged it necessary to decamp, such was his sagacity and shrewdness, that no foresight or information of the enemy could circumvent him on his march. He was full of expedients, master of military feints, and indefatigably active. When pursued in his retreats, he had always the ingenuity to avoid his enemy by getting into inaccessible places, or by disposing of his troops in such a manner, as to render it extremely hazardous to those who might attempt to harrass or perplex him.