Military Training and Discipline Research Paper

This sample Military Training and Discipline Research Paper is published for educational and informational purposes only. Free research papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a high quality research paper on history topics at affordable price please use custom research paper writing services.

Masses of men, however well armed, will never be a match for a well-trained and highly disciplined military force. Since the birth of nationstates, an army has been part of the organization of the state, but armies have not always been a permanent feature within states.

In early history trained armies were often brought into being at times of crisis and were disbanded once the moment had passed. At the same time certain states and tribes with superior training and experience in military arts and strong discipline began to hire themselves out as mercenaries. In both scenarios, training and discipline go hand in hand to transform an armed group in a viable army.

Training and Punishment

From ancient times, all military leaders have attempted to instill discipline into their troops, and the best method of doing this is training, backed by military discipline. Initial training puts men into groups in which they will perform foot drill and basic tasks; this teaches the men to work together and to work for the good of the group. As the training progresses the group is expanded and often the discipline becomes harsher. Instructors of trainee soldiers always have to balance rewards and punishments to ensure that morale is maintained, even though punishments may have some short-term negative effects on the men’s sense of well-being. The aim of training and the discipline that goes with it is to produce a soldier who is capable of operating and fighting effectively in concert with the other members of the armed forces. He should be able at the same time to exercise self-discipline, once more for the betterment of all, by being well organized himself.

Discipline in the military has always been a matter of concern for nonmilitary people; it is best expressed as another method of training. Soldiers who have no self-discipline make mistakes and may be prone to carelessness, which can lead to mistakes and death. By contrast, cohesive discipline within a group of soldiers brings with it higher morale and thence higher fighting effectiveness. In training and later, because mistakes can cost lives, punishments are graded according to the seriousness of a transgression, just as in civilian life. The German army for a long time used the phrase Schweiss spart Blut (sweat saves blood), which encapsulates the whole ethos of military training and discipline. The ultimate punishment for soldiers is the death penalty, until recently meted out for acts such as cowardice in the face of the enemy.

Early Armies

The Assyrians were among the first peoples to create an army, which was a natural expression of their way of life; they were bold men full of energy who were adept at big-game hunting, from which military activity was a natural progression. The Assyrian army at the time (c. 700 BCE) was built within the state, and the main business of the state was war. The Assyrian army was trained in infantry and cavalry maneuvers, field engineering, and sieges, and was supported by a logistical system capable of supporting 100,000 men in the field. Their tactics included the use of terror, and whole populations were either killed on the spot or transported to slavery. The discipline within this army was draconian.

In the seventh century BCE the Greek city-states refined the tactical formation known as the phalanx, which had first been developed by the Sumerians. The phalanx was a block of men—in the case of the Greeks, eight men deep—that marched forward in solid ranks, which was a frightening sight for the enemy.

The ancient Greek city-state Sparta, known in history for its military prowess, was founded around 1000 BCE and initially was little different militarily from the rest of Greece. However, under Lycurgus (ninth century BCE) Sparta became the preeminent military state in Greece, and the training and discipline of its troops became legendary.

The Hellenistic World and Rome

As civilization progressed, armies became standard parts of all states, with the parallel mercenary system alongside. Mercenaries were of particular value because they were paid professional soldiers; soldiers who were not mercenaries were often farmers and peasants, called up for service when needed by their superiors within their own state. Mercenaries were well trained and always available. As long as they were paid, they fought well and were often decisive in battles and campaigns because of their professionalism. As warfare developed training had to become more complex; troops trained in a limited number of drill maneuvers would soon be outmaneuvered. Philip II of Macedon (382–336 BCE) established a national army that was transformed into a magnificent fighting machine by means of training and discipline allied with careful organization. The heavy infantry were so well trained that they were more maneuverable than the Greek phalanx, a real mark of professionalism.

Heavy infantry, by virtue of their origin in the more moneyed middle classes, were better educated and equipped (having bought their arms and equipment themselves), and their training used their loyalty and intelligence to produce cohesive, effective and maneuverable fighting units.

In the Roman army training and discipline combined to produce a force that was rarely defeated simply because it was so well trained that it could react to adversity and be effective in very difficult situations, times at which opponents would often cut and run. The Roman army was officered by men who had fought initially in the ranks, and who had proved themselves in battle as both courageous and capable of command. Their men were drilled by their seniors who had battle experience, training which emphasized the importance of maintaining formation, fighting cohesively and always being loyal to their unit and their country. The great incentive for rank and file Roman soldiers was that when discharged after service they would receive citizenship and land.

Early Chinese Military Training and Discipline

The Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE) built up a field army of infantry, cavalry, chariots and crossbowmen. The effective use of such an army required detailed training, but there is little in extant literature to guide the student of the period. It seems that the army promoted at least partly on a merit system (as well as seniority), and that the mass of men were assembled by means of conscription into a semi-regular militia, liable to serve at any time they were needed. Men between the ages of seventeen and sixty had to serve for a long period. One treatise of great importance has survived and is still studied today: The Art of War by Sunzi (Sun-tsu). It is probably the earliest work on the subject and was read by many of the leading soldiers of the period, as well as by later practitioners.

The Mongols and Cavalry

In agrarian states, cavalry were recruited initially from men who could afford to keep a horse. For foot soldiers cavalry presented a greater threat than opposing foot soldiers because cavalry can move more quickly (and turn a flank), and men are naturally alarmed by the sight of horse riders approaching en masse. Among pastoral peoples such as the Xiongnu (flourished third–eighth centuries CE) or the Mongols, cavalry fighting arose naturally, as pastoralists rode horses in the care of their flocks.

The Mongols, who dominated eastern Eurasia in the thirteenth century, are often depicted as a horde, winning their battles by weight of numbers, speed, and surprise. In fact, the Mongols’ numbers were often less than those of their opponents, but their technique of sending units of men in from many directions gave the impression of many more numbers than they actually had. The Mongols were exceptional horsemen and skilled at arms. Accustomed to life on the move, they were untroubled by weather and hardship and were rarely sick.

Every unit was trained in precise maneuver and was capable of extremely rapid reaction. Practice before battle meant that every component of the Mongol army could cooperate effectively with all other parts of the army, and this was the result of interminable training sessions where mistakes were recognized and ironed out to produce a smooth tactical effort. The method of training was above all based on repetition, so that initial mistakes were trained out, and men reacted cohesively in battle, a primary requirement of all good armies.

The Middle Ages: Evolving Weapons Systems

Weapons in use in Europe during the Middle Ages had changed little from those used in ancient times: infantry were equipped with spears, axes, clubs, or swords, cavalry with sabers. One new weapon, however, was the longbow, which was decisive in the battles of Crecy (1346), Poitiers (1356), and Agincourt (1415), three English victories over the French in the Hundred Years’ War. Armored knights on horseback and heavy infantry armed with shorter-range crossbows were mown down by the concentrated fire of the English (or rather Welsh) archers. At Agincourt, although weight of numbers brought the French knights to the English front line, English archers picked up swords, axes, and daggers and attacked the almost exhausted French nobles through gaps in their depleted line of battle, causing terrible casualties.

Firearms also began to be seen, with Europeans beginning to use cannons in the fourteenth century. There were two types: cannons made of copper or bronze alloys, which fired lead shot, and wrought iron cannons, which fired iron balls, stones, or shrapnel. Cannons were employed in sieges, common in the battles of the Middle Ages. The matchlock, a device for igniting gunpowder, was developed in the fifteenth century and made possible the later development (in the sixteenth century) of the musket. Because muskets took a long time to reload, musketeers were protected by pikemen for a long time after they appeared on the battlefield. Training involved loading the musket in a rigid number of steps that had to be performed in sequence, otherwise the weapon would not fire or would be incorrectly loaded and injure or kill the user. Musket training was by its nature devoted to getting men who were being attacked to remain steady and to load and reload their muskets, delivering perhaps two or three shots at the enemy per minute. Musketeers also had to be trained to advance to within fifty paces (the range at which muskets were usually fired) in good order; they were to maintain their position in the line no matter what happened.

Throughout this period of warfare the infantry fought as a large mass. In the early days this was to present a block of swords or pikes to the enemy and deny him the chance to get to the rear, where great slaughter could be perpetrated; later it was to ensure a maximum concentration of arrows onto the target, or to bring the mass of the cavalry to a specific point.

The Turkish Janissaries were first raised at the end of the fourteenth century, and consisted of former Christians captured in childhood and raised as fanatical Muslims. They were to be a force of great renown for some five hundred years thereafter. Their discipline came from the strictures of the Muslim religion, and their ferocity and courage were much respected. The Corps of Janissaries was never large, but they were skilled infantry who would build fortifications as bases around which the less effective Turkish cavalry could maneuver.

Military Training in Japan, 1192–1868

For the better part of a millennium, the islands of Japan were ruled by various military governments, and the warrior elite were training in martial arts and military skills from childhood. House codes prescribed appropriate behavior and supported warrior ideals.

Although there were notable cases of betrayals during the long centuries of military rule, the ethic of absolute loyalty was quite real, as exemplified by the practice of following one’s lord in death by committing suicide. During the Edo period (1600/03–1868), there were specialized schools of military training that the military class (which for most of the period, ironically, did not engage in warfare, as there were no wars) attended.

Training Individuals for Modern Warfare

Rifled firearms, which increase the range and accuracy of a fired bullet, were first developed in the fifteenth century, but they were difficult to manufacture and remained the weapon of sharpshooters until the eighteenth century. The nineteenth century saw a further innovation: the machine gun, which was capable of firing off hundreds of rounds per minute. In response to this new weapon, it became necessary to train men to disperse on the battlefield so that they did not present a massed target. In less than fifty years (from the U.S. Civil War to the Boer War) the soldier appeared as an individual. This individual still had to work as part of his team, his unit, and his formation, but his movements on the battlefield were intended to enable him to fight and stay alive. Training to improve individual skills on the battlefield therefore became more important.

In the days of the line, when men fired on command, training focused on getting the men to stay in line and to fire in concert. Modern warfare, however, requires men often to fire at will and to move on an individual path toward the enemy. This type of training acknowledges that today’s soldier is a far cry from the “cannon fodder” of two centuries ago, and that soldiers are important assets to be trained in avoiding personal injury while closing in on the enemy. However when defeat was facing both the Germans and the Japanese they put fewer well-trained personnel into the field, and all involved recognised that this was a desperate attempt at postponing defeat by means of suicidal operations. The Japanese went one step further with the “kamikaze” system, which involved flying aircraft into enemy warships with the certain prospect of death.

Modern training methods still begin with the need to act concertedly and in step with others. However, battlefield training takes the form of individual education in fieldcraft, map reading, communications, camouflage, survival, weapons training, and many other aspects of modern soldiering.

Bibliography:

Chandler, D. G. (1973). The campaigns of Napoleon. New York: Scribner.
Chandler, D. (1990). The art of warfare in the age of Marlborough. Staplehurst, U.K.: Spellmount Publishers.
Commager, H. S. (1973). The blue and the gray (2nd ed.). New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company.
Duffy, C. (1974). The army of Frederick the Great. London: David & Charles.
Dupuy, R. E., & Dupuy, T. N. (1993). The Collins encyclopedia of military history (4th ed.) New York: Harper Collins.
Engels, D. W. (1980). Alexander the Great and the logistics of the Macedonian army. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Friday, K. (1996). Hired swords: The rise of private warrior power in early Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Friday, K. (2004). Samurai, warfare, and the state in early medieval Japan. New York: Routledge.
Graff, D. (2002). Medieval Chinese warfare, 300–900. New York: Routledge.
Hadas, M. (Trans.) (1957). The Gallic war and other writings by Julius Caesar. New York: The Modern Library.
Lamb, H.(1986). Genghis Khan, or the emperor of all men. Mattituck, NY: Amereon.
Liddell Hart, B. H. (1991). Strategy (2nd rev. ed.). London: Penguin. (Originally titled The decisive wars of history, a study in strategy)
Mallett, M. (1974). Mercenaries and their masters: Warfare in Renaissance Italy. London: Bodley Head.
Nicolle, D. (1995) The Janissary (Elite No. 58). London: Osprey Books.
Oman, C. (1999). A history of the art of war in the Middle Ages: 378–1278 ad. London: Greenhill Books.
Parker, G. (1996). The military revolution: Military innovation and the rise of the West, 1500–1800 (2nd ed). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Sawyer, R. (Trans.). (1994). Sun Tzu: The art of war. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Wedgwood, C. V. (1957). The Thirty Years’ War. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin.
Young, P. (Ed.). (1984). The Marshall Cavendish illustrated encyclopedia of World War I. New York: Marshall Cavendish.

See also:

Free research papers are not written to satisfy your specific instructions. You can use our professional writing services to order a custom research paper on political science and get your high quality paper at affordable price.