Infantry

( Infanterie, Fr. ) This term being little understood with respect to its derivation, and having by some writers been either vaguely interpreted, or erroneously traced, we think it our duty to give the best, and we presume, the only correct explanation of the word. In so doing we should be unthankful to one of the most acute observers in life, and one of the closest reasoners, were we to omit acknow leg ing that we have been favored by the ingenious and learned author of the Diversions of Purley, with the following account of its derivation. Johnson generally states, that infantry are foot soldiers belonging to the army ; and the compilers of other dictionaries content themselves with a imilating the term infantry to the name of a Spanish prince , who marched at the head of a body of Spaniards on foot, and defeated the Moors. She was called Infanta. Our learned friend, on the contrary, traces it to the source of genuine etymology, and grounds his opinion upon the best authorities. His first root is from the Greek phe-mi , Latin, Fa-ri , participle Fans — In-fans ; Italian, Infante , by abridgment, Fante ; Infante ria , by abridgment, Fanteria ; French, Infanterie ; English, Infantry . It is still in French and in English a common expre ion to soldiers, allons mes enfans , come on my lads , ( or my boys ). So a servant is called a lad or a boy (and formerly a knave or a page ), although a full grown man . The military profe ion is still called service ; and a soldier is said to serve in the army. Skinner says well;—“The infantry , Fr. G. infanterie ; Italian, fanteria , ped it at us: fante , pedes et famulus; qui a scilicet olim pedites equitum famuli, vel pedi equi fuerunt.— fante autem a Lat. Infans , manifeste ortum ducit. Et nos Boy , non tantum pro puero sed et pro famulo, secund a rio sensu usurp am us.” After which he refers us to Lansquenet . A Lansquenet , a Fr. G. Lansquenet , pedes, miles, gregarius, utr. a Teut. Lance , lance a, et Knecht , servus: olim enim pedites equitum lance a rio rum quasi servi erunt; et quilibet eques quatuor vel quinque pedites, tanquam famulos circumduxit. Exercitus autem numero equitum, non peditum censebantur. Vide Comineum et alios illorum seculorum Script ores. It appears, that Machi a vell i, in his Arte dell a Guerra, sufficiently points out what, and how considered, the infantry were in his time, when he says (libro primo) “Venuta la pace, che i gentil huomini all a loro part i col are arte.” It is plain, the fanti were huomini ba i, e soldati gregarii, i. e. hired servants , and therefore called fanti , and the corps fanteria . The term infantry was given to them when they were considered merely as lads attending on the army: and the term has continued, though their condition is altered. From these sensible observations, it is evident that although the primary sources of infantry are in the Greek and Latin languages, its modern derivation is from the Italian word fante , which signifies a follower. In the first stages of modern warfare, battles were chiefly fought by cavalry or horsemen; but in Italy, and afterwards in Spain, the bodies of horse were always attended by a certain number of squires or armed men on foot, who marched in the rear and a isted their leaders. Boccacio mentions the latter under the term fanteria , and other Italian writers, one of whom we have already quoted, call it infante ria , both being derived from fante . Nothing can be more out of date, out of place, and superficial than to imagine that because the Spaniards have recorded a gallant action, which was performed by an infanta of that nation, the rest of Europe should bury the real etymology of infantry beneath the flimsy texture of court adulation. It is, besides, extremely erroneous to state, that until that period men did not fight on foot. It is well known that the Greeks and Romans frequently placed the greatest confidence in men of that description. The former had their Hoplitai, their Psiloi, and their Peltast a i; and the latter their Celeres , Velites , Hastati, Principes, and Triarii, or Pisarii. The French word Fan ta in which signifies a foot soldier, is manifestly derived from fante . Until the reign of Charles the VIIth. the French infantry were extremely defective; so much so, that Bran to me says in one part of his works, the infantry could not be considered as e entially useful to the security of the state. For it consisted in those days, of marauts, be list res mal armés, mal complexionnés; fenéans, pillards et mangeurs du peuple : which may be thus rendered in plain English: lads, rascals, and vagabonds, scoundrels ill equipped and ill looking, filchers, plunderers, and devourers of the people . Europe however is unquestionably indebted to the Swi for a total change in the military system particularly so with regard to foot soldiers. Dr. Robertson in the first volume of his history of Charles V. p. 105, observes that the system of employing the Swi in the Italian wars, was the occasion of introducing a total innovation in the military custom. The arms and discipline of the Swi were different from those of other European nations. During their long and violent struggles in defence of their liberties against the house of Austria, whose armies, like those of other considerable princes, consisted chiefly of heavy-armed cavalry, the Swi found that their poverty, and the small number of gentlemen residing in their country, at that time barren and ill cultivated, put it out of their power to bring into the field any body of horse capable of facing the enemy. Nece ity compelled them to place all their confidence in infantry, and in order to render it capable of withstanding the shock of cavalry, they gave the soldiers breast-plates and helmets, as defensive armor, together with long spears, halberts, and heavy swords, as weapons of offence. They formed them into large battalions, ranged in deep and close array, so that they could present on every side a formidable front to the enemy. (See Machiavel’s Art of War, b. ii. chap. ii. p. 451.) The men at arms could make no impre ion on the solid strength of such a body. It repulsed the Austrians in all their attempts to conquer Swi erland. It broke the Burgundian gendarmerie, which was scarcely inferior to that of France, either in number or reputation; and when first called to act in Italy, it bore down by its irresistable force, every enemy that attempted to oppose it. These repeated proofs of the decisive effect of infantry, exhibited on such conspicuous occasions, restored that service to reputation, and gradually re-established the opinion which had been long exploded, of its superior importance in the operations of war. But the glory the Swi had acquired, having inspired them with such high ideas of their own prowe and consequence, as frequently rendered them mutinous and insolent, the princes who employed them became weary of depending on the caprice of foreign mercenaries, and began to turn their attention towards the improvement of their national infantry. The German powers having the command of men, whom nature has endowed with that steady courage and persevering strength which form them to be soldiers, soon modelled their troops in such a manner, that they vied with the Swi both in discipline and valor. The French monarch, though more slowly, and with greater difficulty, accustomed the impetuous spirit of their people to subordination and discipline; and were at such pains to render their national infantry respectable, that as early as the reign of Louis XII. several gentlemen of high rank had so far abandoned their ancient ideas, as to condescend to enter into their service. The Spaniards, whose situation made it difficult to employ any other than their national troops in the southern parts of Italy, which was the chief scene of their operations in that country, not only adopted the Swi discipline, but improved upon it, by mingling a proper number of soldiers, armed with heavy musquets, in their battalions; and thus formed that famous body of infantry, which, during a century and a half, was the admiration and terror of all Europe. The Italian states gradually diminished the number of their cavalry, and, in imitation of their more powerful neighbors, brought the strength of their armies to consist in foot soldiers. From this period the nations of Europe have carried on war with forces more adapted to every species of service, more capable of acting in every country, and better fitted both for conquests, and for preserving them. See Robertson’s View of the State of Europe, book I., pages 105 and 107.