'The quality of soldiers was more important that the size of the army.' How far do you agree
with this view of the period 1792-1945?
● In the period, both the quality of soldiers and the size of armies were important in determining
the tactics used by commanders on the battlefield, the outcome of individual battles, and the
outcome of entire wars.
○ Certainly evidence to suggest that the quality of the soldiers was more important in
determining tactics and outcome of battles
○ However when wars became drawn out the size of the army was more decisive in
determining the overall outcome of wars.
Outcome of battles determined by quality of soldiers rather than size of the army
● Crimean War - Inkerman 1854
○ Highly trained and composed British troops overcame repeated waves of Russian
infantry assaults despite facing odds of 1:9
● WW1 - Battle of Mons 1914
○ High quality British infantry, who were specifically trained for rapid-fire marksmanship
so they could accurately fire 15 round per minute from Lee-Enfield rifles, defeated
German army at Mons 1914 despite being outnumbered 160,000 : 70,000
● Austro-Prussian War - Sadowa 1866
○ The fact that Prussian troops, who were of a high quality due to system of continuous
drilling since 1862 Prussian Military reforms, overwhelmed larger but more
inexperienced Austrian army with rapid fire from Dreyse 'needle ' guns from a hidden
prone position demonstrates importance of q. of s. above size.
When armies were of a similar size, quality of soldiers determined tactics. That said, a large
disparity in the size of opposing armies often determined tactics used by commanders.
● Napoleonic wars
○ The quality of soldiers decisive in determining tactics used by Napoleon
■ By the 1812 Russian Campaign the majority of Napoleon's Grande Armée was
largely made up of poorly trained, inexperienced and less motivated soldiers
● Borodino 1812 - Napoleon limited to sending waves of soldiers in Full
Frontal Assaults
■ While earlier on the bulk of the French army was made up of experienced, high
quality veterans of the FRWs
○ ⇒ Allowed Napoleon to deploy much more complex tactics eg. exemplary manoeuvre
at Ulm and Austerlitz 1805
● Similarly Franco Prussian 1870
○ Increased standard of Prussian training allowed more advanced, flexible tactics
■ Eg. at Froeschwiller in 1870 the Prussian skirmishers (instead of forming
defensive squares) moulded to the hedges and walls, allowing them to shoot
down 9 enemy cavalry units without suffering many casualties
However, evidence suggest that a large disparity in the size of opposing armies often determined
tactics used by commanders, with the larger army undertaking aggressive frontal assault tactics while
smaller army would adopt defensive tactics.
● Russo-Japanese war - Battle of Nan Shan
○ 36,000 : 3,800
○ Japanese hurled waves of infantry against Russian defenders, who held back the japs
for 12 hours from fortified defenses using 10 maxim machine guns.
● French Revolutionary wars - 1792-1802
with this view of the period 1792-1945?
● In the period, both the quality of soldiers and the size of armies were important in determining
the tactics used by commanders on the battlefield, the outcome of individual battles, and the
outcome of entire wars.
○ Certainly evidence to suggest that the quality of the soldiers was more important in
determining tactics and outcome of battles
○ However when wars became drawn out the size of the army was more decisive in
determining the overall outcome of wars.
Outcome of battles determined by quality of soldiers rather than size of the army
● Crimean War - Inkerman 1854
○ Highly trained and composed British troops overcame repeated waves of Russian
infantry assaults despite facing odds of 1:9
● WW1 - Battle of Mons 1914
○ High quality British infantry, who were specifically trained for rapid-fire marksmanship
so they could accurately fire 15 round per minute from Lee-Enfield rifles, defeated
German army at Mons 1914 despite being outnumbered 160,000 : 70,000
● Austro-Prussian War - Sadowa 1866
○ The fact that Prussian troops, who were of a high quality due to system of continuous
drilling since 1862 Prussian Military reforms, overwhelmed larger but more
inexperienced Austrian army with rapid fire from Dreyse 'needle ' guns from a hidden
prone position demonstrates importance of q. of s. above size.
When armies were of a similar size, quality of soldiers determined tactics. That said, a large
disparity in the size of opposing armies often determined tactics used by commanders.
● Napoleonic wars
○ The quality of soldiers decisive in determining tactics used by Napoleon
■ By the 1812 Russian Campaign the majority of Napoleon's Grande Armée was
largely made up of poorly trained, inexperienced and less motivated soldiers
● Borodino 1812 - Napoleon limited to sending waves of soldiers in Full
Frontal Assaults
■ While earlier on the bulk of the French army was made up of experienced, high
quality veterans of the FRWs
○ ⇒ Allowed Napoleon to deploy much more complex tactics eg. exemplary manoeuvre
at Ulm and Austerlitz 1805
● Similarly Franco Prussian 1870
○ Increased standard of Prussian training allowed more advanced, flexible tactics
■ Eg. at Froeschwiller in 1870 the Prussian skirmishers (instead of forming
defensive squares) moulded to the hedges and walls, allowing them to shoot
down 9 enemy cavalry units without suffering many casualties
However, evidence suggest that a large disparity in the size of opposing armies often determined
tactics used by commanders, with the larger army undertaking aggressive frontal assault tactics while
smaller army would adopt defensive tactics.
● Russo-Japanese war - Battle of Nan Shan
○ 36,000 : 3,800
○ Japanese hurled waves of infantry against Russian defenders, who held back the japs
for 12 hours from fortified defenses using 10 maxim machine guns.
● French Revolutionary wars - 1792-1802
