ing machine that these heavy machines find their best field. For reconnaissance purposes the aeroplane is superior. The bombing raids on London throughout the war show the possibilities of attack of the large dirigible type. With the development of anti-aircraft guns, dirigibles were obliged to keep at a greater height when dropping bombs and thus their accuracy of aim was greatly impaired. The verdict of most experts having in view the performances of dirigibles during the late war is that they have been a disappointment. They cannot be safely employed in daylight hours because of their vulnerability to hostile aeroplanes; their great cost as compared with aeroplanes-about 50 to 1 is disproportionate when it is remembered that the aeroplanes can, with a greater margin of safety, perform similar functions. The problem for sheltering dirigibles is also a serious one.

Aeroplanes.- The Wright, Farman and Blériot machines (see AERONAUTICS) may be considered as the parent types from which has

Fokker (German).

been evolved the large variety which at the present time are at the disposal of the military aviator. Among the various types which have sprung from the parent forms we search in vain for any underlying new principles. There is, however, in the various types plenty of variety of constructional detail. Perhaps the two most important features of modern military aeroplane work are (1) the gradual substitution of steel in place of wood, and the general strengthening of aeroplane construction; (2) the armoring of vital parts of aeroplanes for the exigencies of warfare. Regarding the various types of machines now available, it must suffice here to especially mention the features of special interest for the purpose of warlike operations. As the military operations in Europe developed it became apparent that the aeroplane was suitable for very many military purposes. It is from the air that artillery fire is regulated, after the airmen have reconnoitred and photographed the enemy's position, taken the plan of their trenches and discovered the importance

of the wall and was embellished with the sacred lion form to protect it from the assault of superstitious assailants.

Civilization gradually traced her way from the flat alluvial areas of Mesopotamia to the valley of the Nile. Reinforced with the elements of progress and power of Egypt, through the medium nations of Asia Minor and the Mediterranean, the laws of order and culture were transmitted to Greece. Greece, in her turn, taught imperial Rome the elements of universal government. As in the other arts, so in the problem of protecting her cities from the carefully planned destructive agency of man, the constructive experience of Egypt and the Orient was transmitted to succeeding civilizations. The first four links of the chain that binds the world together are the civilizations of Minoa, Mesopotamia and Egypt, Greece and Rome. Minoan protective art has been known to us by the remains at Cnossus, Mycena and Tiryns, and the primitive walls and embryonic projects at Orchomenos, Delos and Phigaleia.

Egypt.-In Egypt the early fortifications consisted of a quadrangular double wall of sun-dried brick approximately 15 inches thick and at times 50 feet in height, Square towers of the same height as the walls occurred at intervals. Both walls and towers were crowned with parapets. At times the entrance was additionally protected with outworks consisting of a second lower wall and towers. Frequently there was a keep or citadel used as a last resort for defenders. Lower Egypt was undoubtedly greatly influenced by the advanced systems of fortifications with which the Egyptians became acquainted during their wars against the Hittites in western Asia.

Hittite. The culminating type of the Hittite military system was the double-moated city of Kadesh, of which we have a lively illustration in the battle scene from the great Kadesh reliefs of Rameses II on the walls of the Ramesseum. These carvings show the capital, Kadesh, situated on an island in the Orontes River. The city, protected by two moats, approached by two parallel draw-bridges, is encircled by a huge, high wall. The main gateways are strengthened by increasing, at the place of their occurrence, the thickness of the wall, heightening the towers and providing rooms for the housing of a special gate guard. The relief shows the city to have been built in the form of a circle or ellipse. (Consult plan of Chateau-Gaillard, France). The plan at once obviates the four danger points inherent in the rectangular city enceinte. The walls were surmounted by battlements and strengthened by auxiliary towers or buttresses, the top of which did not extend far above the main wall. At Senjirli extensive ruins of a fortified Hittite palace have been found. The entrance was planned as a fortress-like portico. Massive towers flanked the approaches. The guardroom, the ceiling of which was supported by columns, intervened between the moat and the gate. The city was divided into sections, each separated from the other by protecting walls. (Consult plan of Haidra, Africa). It is a notable fact that the ancient Hittite protective city plan finds its reproduction in more or less complete form in the great fortified cities and towns of mediæval Europe and Africa.

Mesopotamia. The configuration of the land exposed the cities of Chaldæa, Assyria and Babylonia to easy attack, for the flat character of the territory made siege from four sides possible. Hence it is that military architecture, forced to meet the added hazards of the locus, received a mature study and development that had not occurred elsewhere in the pre-classic world. It was in Asia that the early developments of the art of war construction, which subsequently formed the basis of the Roman, Visigothic and Mediæval science, was through necessity established, Numerous ruins serve to show us the character of the Chaldæo-Assyrian protective scheme. Typical of every phase of this art was the city of Dur-Sharrukin, the modern Khorsabad and site of the palace Sargon. The ancient city was surrounded by a wall 150 feet wide and 60 feet high, furnished with battlements, towers and outworks, and entered by means of arched gateways flanked by protecting towers. The palace of the ruler stood upon a stupendous platform constructed straddling the northwest wall. The position of the palace gave to it the maximum amount of protection from within and from without the city.

Greece. Early Greece was settled by wandering tribes. Tribal equality ceased when unusual strength established local domination on the part of a family or a tribe that had waxed powerful. This condition forced, for protection, a union of local interests — through the establishment of these confederations the Greek city came into existence. Religion and daily life were indissolubly connected in Greece, and the acropolis or upper city of the Hellenes was graced with the monuments erected in honor of the beneficent gods who were everywhere the guardians of the city and society. In the Orient the protected heights that the Greeks reserved for their shrines were preempted by the luxury-loving despots as the safest place for their court buildings and palaces. Athens, with its Acropolis crowned by the noble Parthenon, was the sacred centre of the Attic life, and upon its safety was lavished the thought and ingenuity of the military experts of the time. Its capture and sack by the Persians forced a reconstruction of all of its defenses. Under Themistocles, the Athenian leader, the entire city was surrounded by a strong wall and the Piræus, the port of Athens, was fortified and its harbors protected by moles. Subsequently the city and port were joined by long walls; thus making it possible to control the Attic lands as well as her maritime interests. These extensive military constructions embody everything that the Greeks thought would be of value to them, with which they had come in contact through the widespread medium of the Delian League. The knowledge thus gained was later absorbed by Magna Græcia and Sicily.

Rome. The Romans exhibited an extraordinary genius for organization and adaptation. The site of a Roman city was usually selected on territory sloping toward a river. If the area chosen were terminated by another embankment sloping in the opposite direction, a perfect site, from the Roman point of view, was available. The city with its walls flanked on one side by the river was approached by a bridge, the end of which on the bank opposite the city

was defended by a tete-de-pont. Within the walled area or enceinte a castle was constructed which commanded the whole system of defense and provided a final refuge for the garrison. If the walls failed, the side of the town opposite the river, on account of the escarpment, was difficult of access and the protecting wall on this side was comparatively easy to defend. The walls connecting the river walls and the escarpment walls presented the weakest parts of the fortifications. It was therefore necessary additionally to protect the towers and walls in this position with ditches. In order that the defenders might harass the flank of besiegers, the gates were flanked with towers that projected well out from the walls. The Romans took care not to surround a hill with a wall. Their principle was to carry a defense wall across the summit of the elevations of any city site. The typical example of the Roman system, as carried out on a great scale, is the city of Rome herself. The Romans, according to Vezetius, found that the enclosure of a fortified place ought not to be in one continuous line, for the reason that battering rams would thus be able too easily to effect a breeching; whereas, by the use of towers placed sufficiently close to one another in the rampart, greater safety would be provided. In erecting the walls for their fortifications of cities, the Romans built two strong walls of masonry separated by an interval of 20 feet, which interval was filled with the spoil from the extramural trenches. This fill formed the base for a parapet walk. The Roman military camp, curiously enough, has exerted a tremendous influence upon civil architecture. This is because the Emperor Diocletian, upon his abdication, laid out at Spalato, in Dalmatia, a great palace based upon the plan of the military camp. The carefully cut masonry walls enclosed a rectangular space. Four gates gave access to the palace city, one in the centre of each of the walls. Two intersecting avenues connected these entrances. In the usual camp, the quarters for officers and soldiers were built of brick or wood. The general-in-chief was provided with elaborately protected quarters adjacent the Prætorian or principal gate. the Castra, palace of Diocletian, quarters for servants and for the guards were constructed. At Mousmieh, the ruins of the Prætorium or Guard-house, with its curious handling of constructive detail, established an architectural type which exerted notable influence on later work.

In

Byzantium. The ancient Greek city, Byzantium, was built on a site that was strategically excellent, surrounded, as it was, by water on three sides and protected from the ravages of the barbarians by a wall on the north side. The traditions relating to the construction of the walls cover all the discoveries and technique of the various ages of Greek and early Roman civilization. The Byzantine walls of mediæval Constantinople consist of three distinct sections: that on the west toward landward side; secondly, that on the Golden Horn; and third, that on the Marmora or the seaward side. The Byzantine city was completely enclosed by these wall sections. In the design of all of the Byzantine fortification construction, æsthetic possibilities have been suppressed and completely subordinated to the requirements of defense.

The widespread influence of Constantinople carried the spirit of the Byzantine science of military engineering throughout Mesopotamia, Asia-Minor, northern Africa and southern Spain. At Granada, in Spain, the hill dominating the city was crowned with the stronglyfortified palace of the ruler. The enclosure was surrounded by a strongly-built wall, reinforced by great defensive towers that served to render the palace, in its day, practically impregnable.

Its

The

Middle Ages.-The traditions of Rome, with here and there modifications due to Byzantine influence, determined the arrangement of the defenses of the fortified towns and castles of the Middle Ages. The cities were often protected by several walls; at other times the city proper was located upon the highest available ground and surrounded by heavy walls. suburbs were outposts, furnished with protective towers and curtain walls. From the 3d to the 11th centuries the Roman defensive system underwent but little modification. most notable existing example of this period is the reconstructed Visigothic city of Carcassonne. This was a frontier city of the greatest importance. During the 13th century the Visigothic enceinte was thoroughly repaired and the celebrated Tresan tower and Narbonnaise gate on the eastern side were erected. The castle is the most carefully defended work of the period and the precautions taken to ensure its safety arouse the admiration of all who study its intricate arrangement of moats, ramparts and barbicans, or advance fortified towers. gusa, on the eastern shores of the Adriatic, and Haidra, Africa, serve to visualize for us the massive picturesque security that made these cities practically unconquerable previous to the use of artillery. In Italy the great feudal lords, commanding lofty sites in the neighborhood of cities, erected secure fortresses. During the first half of the 12th century, due to the intolerable depredations of the half-savage nobles, the various cities of northern Italy overcame and dispossessed the majority of the feudal chieftains and forced them to come into the cities. The great residences that they built were provided with high and strongly-fortified tow

ers.

Ra

These constructions made it possible for the nobles to defy the municipal restrictions and set at naught the conventions of the city. The famous leaning towers of Bologna, the Asinelli and Garisenda (12th century) are among the very few remaining examples of the Italian defensive towns of the Middle Ages.

Castles. The castles serving as a refuge for a town garrison differed in general plan from the castles of the isolated nobles, which aimed to procure the security that was so well obtained in the Chateau-Gaillard, built by Richard Coeur-de-Lion in the Andelys. Selecting a place where a sharp bend in the Seine formed a stategically strong peninsula, and this peninsul being made secure, on a lofty promontory on the opposite bank the major fortress was buil To the south a tongue of rock, less than 15 in width, served to connect the isolated promontory with the adjacent hills. This was the only attackable point of the fortress. To protect this vulnerable point a strong tower flanked by subordinate ones and curtain walls was built and so commanded the plateau. This

outwork was separated from the enceinte o: the castle by a deep ditch excavated in the rock. The body of the place consisted of two parts, the lower court, and, separated from this by a moat, the internal castle, with its elliptical enceinte. The strength of the defense culminates in the keep or donjon. The donjon was to the castle what the castle was to the fortified towns its last retreat, and upon it therefore was lavished the utmost care.

Artillery-Modern. Toward the middle of the 15th century artillery had attained a great development. As a result of this progress the problems of attack and defense were wholly changed. In attack, how strangely modern reads this excerpt from the 'Past and Future of Artillery,' by L. Napoleon Bonaparte, Vol. II: "Instead of erecting bastiles all round the town, the besiegers established before the great fortresses a park surrounded by an intrenchment, beyond the reach of cannon. From this point they conducted one or two branches of the trenches towards the point where they established their batteries. . . . We have arrived at the moment when trenches were employed as a means of approach concurrently with covered ways of timber." It was obligatory, in view of the new agencies of war, to replace the picturesque high, machicolated towers and battlemented walls of feudalism with low breastworks on an extended line. The persistency of tradition, however, caused the retention in numerous places of feudal forms until well in the 17th century.

The following formula, developed by Violletle-Duc, epitomizes the necessities of the problems that determined the character of the transition to new and modern military architecture: "To command the outside parts at a distance and the approaches by horizontal fire of artillery, and to provide against escalade by works of a great elevation with crest-works, according to the ancient system for close defense."

The castle of Bonaguil (Charles VII) is one of the very few military structures that have been preserved that was designed to fulfill the spirit of the formula just enunciated. The requirements of present-day defensive civic architecture are based upon the fundamentals that appear in the planning of the castle of Bonaguil and shape the fabric of the numercus modern armory buildings designed for the housing and training of the military safeguard of the nation. Typical examples of the modern adaptation of the newer principles of military architecture, where the necessities of protecting military stores of arms and ammunition from mob and riot assault require the masses and parts of the fabric to be so disposed that the attacking force may be seen while the defenders are hidden from sight, and a possibility of obtaining a cross and defile fire may be provided at all vulnerable portions of the structure, are to be found in the armories of the 8th Coast Artillery and the 15th Infantry, New York City. Bibliography. Consult Britton, Architectural Antiquities, Vol. III (London 1807-26); Clark, Medieval Military Architecture' (London 1884); id., Fortification' (London 1907); Enlart, Manuel d'archéologie française) (Paris 1904); Harvey, The Castles and Walled Towns of England (London 1911); McGibbon and Ross, 'Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland from the Twelfth to the Eighteenth

VOL. 19-5

MILITARY COURTS-MARTIAL. For each general or special court-martial the authority appointing the court appoints a judge-advocate, and for each general court-martial one or more assistant judge-advocates when necessary. The judge-advocate prosecutes in the name of the United States and under the direction of the court prepares the record of its proceedings. In conjunction with the president of the court, he authenticates the record by his signature and, at the end of the trial, transmits the same to the reviewing authority. Should the accused, for any reason, not be represented

by counsel, the judge-advocate from time to time throughout the proceedings advises him of his legal rights. During the trial he sees that the accused has full opportunity to interpose such pleas and make such defense as may best bring out the facts, the merits or the extenuating circumstances of his case. In so far as such action may be taken without prejudice to the rights of the accused, any advice given him by the judge-advocate should be given or repeated in open court and noted upon the record. The judge-advocate is not challengeable; but in case of personal interest in the trial or of personal hostility toward the accused he should apply to the convening authority to be relieved. Throughout the trial the judge-advocate should do his utmost to present the whole truth of the matter in question and should oppose every attempt to suppress facts or to distort them, to the end that the evidence may so exhibit the case that the court may render impartial justice. The accused has the right to be represented before a general or special courtmartial by counsel of his own selection, for his defense, if such counsel be reasonably available. This counsel performs such duties as usually