The peacetime exercise of soldiers, normally by constant repetition, designed to provoke a uniform and near automatic response to command. Although it is often forgotten today, the close-order drill which can be observed during recruit training in most modern armies has its roots in combat training. Until the late 19th century, the inaccuracy and short range of firearms meant that the majority of soldiers fought shoulder to shoulder in close-order formations, serving merely as a part of the basic tactical unit (since the time of Maurice of Nassau, usually a battalion). Through the manoeuvring of these large formations on the battlefield, the commander was able to concentrate his troops at the desired point. Units required extensive training to enable their troops to move as one, and in order to perform these complex tasks of firing and moving in battle, under fire, the greatest discipline was required. This was instilled by constant drilling during peacetime.
Drill also taught the soldier the prescribed method of loading and firing his weapon so as to increase the rapidity of fire and reduce the risk of accident. From there the training went further, teaching him how to march in step with his fellow soldiers. Once soldiers could march together, then they would be taught how to manoeuvre as a unit. Moreover, drill taught the soldiers to respond immediately to the commands of their officer, allowing a commander to move his tactical formations with ease. The advent of accurate, rapid-fire small arms in the late 19th century put paid to the tactical usefulness of close-order formations in battle, and armies shifted to open-order tactics. These could not be taught by rote and close-order drill ceased to play a role in combat training.
However, most armed forces have retained close-order drill as part of their recruit training. Semi-affectionately called ‘square-bashing’ by today's British army, the drill so familiar to anyone who has served in the military still serves several important functions. First, the recruit learns to respond immediately to a superior's commands. Further, by drilling together with his fellow soldiers, the recruit learns that he is no longer an individual but part of a unit in which he is dependent upon his comrades and they upon him. It also instils alertness and helps maintain physical fitness, precision, a smart bearing, and a sense of pride. The value of drill in this context remains disputed, and certainly the highly effective IDF is not known for its prowess on the drill square. However, Capt Robert Graves, discussing drill with fellow instructors at Etaples in 1916, concluded that ‘we all agreed on the value of arms-drill as a factor in morale’.
If close-order drill has lost its battlefield function, battle drills have not. Today's armed forces employ drills known as ‘standard operating procedures’ to teach tasks which involve proscribed procedures, particularly those required for survival on the battlefield. For instance, ‘battle drills’ are designed to provoke an automatic, uniform response in the face of a particular combat situation. There is a strong case for suggesting that effective and well-understood drills are the syllables with which a successful commander constitutes the vocabulary of battle.
Bibliography
- Chandler, David, The Art of Warfare in the Age of Marlborough (New York, 1976).
- Duffy, Christopher, The Army of Frederick the Great (New York, 1974).
- Dyer, Gwynne, War (London, 1985)
— Robert Foley/Richard Holmes
