University of the Military Academy: Difference between revisions
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
There is disputation how professional soldiers came to be regarded as a base class. On the one hand, the idea that a country's army should consist of ordinary citizens, who have regular professions in peacetime and are only assembled for war, persisted in Themiclesia for a long time after a professional force came into existence. Such a citizen army was regarded normatively, whereas a professional army, though strategically necessary, was deemed erroneous, and that stigma may have bled over to the individuals who served in that force. It is noted that ancient Themiclesian writers divided society into two broad sectors of those "who feed" and those "who are fed"; the former was required to produce, and the latter consumed it with some sort of justification. It seems professional soldiers were beyond this equilibrium and thus cast in a negative light. | There is disputation how professional soldiers came to be regarded as a base class. On the one hand, the idea that a country's army should consist of ordinary citizens, who have regular professions in peacetime and are only assembled for war, persisted in Themiclesia for a long time after a professional force came into existence. Such a citizen army was regarded normatively, whereas a professional army, though strategically necessary, was deemed erroneous, and that stigma may have bled over to the individuals who served in that force. It is noted that ancient Themiclesian writers divided society into two broad sectors of those "who feed" and those "who are fed"; the former was required to produce, and the latter consumed it with some sort of justification. It seems professional soldiers were beyond this equilibrium and thus cast in a negative light. | ||
It has also been argued that ancient Themiclesian society regarded those who held no land from the state and instead held it from another individual as occupying a lesser social position in some senses. Such a lessor-leasee relationship, when concerned with interests other than land, was often asymmetrical and characterized by {{wp|clientelism}}. Earlier forms of clientelism could confer lordship rights over the junior member of the relationship. Within this paradigm, professional soldiers may transparently be deemed weaker, less estimable individuals who possessed no independence or means. | It has also been argued that ancient Themiclesian society regarded those who held no land from the state and instead held it from another individual as occupying a lesser social position in some senses. Such a lessor-leasee relationship, when concerned with interests other than land, was often asymmetrical and characterized by {{wp|clientelism}}. Earlier forms of clientelism could confer lordship rights over the junior member of the relationship. Within this paradigm, professional soldiers may transparently be deemed weaker, less estimable individuals who possessed no independence or means. Additionally, service in the army was often a form of punishment. | ||
The lot of professional soldiers who were part of Themiclesia's international strategy, especially vis-à-vis the situation in Columbia, changed after the overthrow of the Republic. Historians describe this as a time of "change in the air" where individuals bound to servitude, whether domestic, penal, or military were given an unprecedented latitude to select choose future careers. Some viceroys ordered the prisons in their provinces emptied so that lands left to waste following the 20-year civil war would be productive again, and many slave-owners manumitted slaves following an agreement to supply crops at an advantageous price level. Similarly, soldiers who served in the Restorationist army were given the choice to leave service following the end of the war—the Emperor had declared that he had no more use for a professional army (in reality he was bankrupt): | |||
{{quote|In view the great sacrifices you have made for Us in Our service, and out of the great virtue of forgiveness, We solemnly decree and declare for now and ever that your pledge to Our service, We forget, renounce, and utterly esteem for nothing; your liberty and indemnity we do now solemnly and forever restore to you and your decendants.}} | |||
For what this act was worth, he also changed the law to the effect that current and former professional soldiers no longer existed under a statutory stigma. Thus, after 1531, professional soldiers no longer suffered from legal disabilities, though the social stigma against professional soldiers persisted for many generations afterwards. Such problems include reduced eligibility to marry, the inadmissibility to certain religious orders and technical trades, and an increased likelihood of prejudice at higher social circles. | |||
==History== | ==History== | ||
Revision as of 14:31, 3 November 2022
邦學, prang-ghruk | |
 | |
| Type | university military academy |
|---|---|
| Established | January 2, 1813 |
| Affiliation | Themiclesia |
| Budget | INT'L$54,330,200 (2015) |
| Chancellor | Prof. Drang Ser-qan, Lt. Gen. |
| Vice-Chancellor | Prof. Lwai Lek, Lt. Gen. |
Academic staff | 1981 |
Administrative staff | 1278 |
| Students | 1572 |
| Undergraduates | 1238 |
| Postgraduates | 842 |
| 455 | |
| Location | , , |
The Army Academy (邦學, prong-gruk) is a chartered university and military academy in Themiclesia.
Background
Commissions before 1800
Unlike other disciplines of utility to the state, such as law and accounting, there was no public institution for the systematic and liberal study of military knowledge prior to the establishment of the Army Academy in 1813. This implies that most military knowledge was only passed down through public record-keeping, treatise publications, and private tutoring.
When the defensive establishment set up along Columbian trade routes were agglomerated to form the Colonial Army, individuals who showed promise and competence in service could expect further training under the patronage of a superior officer and later promotion to higher ranks. The Colonial Army is known to have possessed a formal officer training programme called the Campus of the State's Children (國子學), since an official is appointed for this purpose. Since the Colonial Army was organized independently from the metropolitan military, its training system did not spreaded back home.
As the situation stood in the 17th century, members of the metropolitan military services, whether regular or militia, who show aptitude in leadership, mathematics, and administration are routinely promoted to petty offices or staff offices, though further promotions were exceptional. Officers above the rank of a commander of 250 (二百五十長) were appointed by the Chancery, on the basis of a viceregal recommendation (守選) or a passing grade at an special examination (邦選) open only to the children of officials. The children of the aristocracy were legally eligible to be appointed without either qualification, though they seldom found it difficult to obtain one of the two.
Station of soldiers in society
Under the law codes of the late antiquity, professional soldiers were one of the base classes (等下) in Themiclesia. This stood in contrast to the class of commoners (等公民), who were regarded as the "ordinary" people. The legal stigma, acquired from enlistment, was hereditary, and prevented from one from seeking office, except within that profession. Base individuals were legally prohibited to live in certain areas, particularly around the imperial and viceregal residences and certain religious structures. They also possessed separate cemetaries.
There is disputation how professional soldiers came to be regarded as a base class. On the one hand, the idea that a country's army should consist of ordinary citizens, who have regular professions in peacetime and are only assembled for war, persisted in Themiclesia for a long time after a professional force came into existence. Such a citizen army was regarded normatively, whereas a professional army, though strategically necessary, was deemed erroneous, and that stigma may have bled over to the individuals who served in that force. It is noted that ancient Themiclesian writers divided society into two broad sectors of those "who feed" and those "who are fed"; the former was required to produce, and the latter consumed it with some sort of justification. It seems professional soldiers were beyond this equilibrium and thus cast in a negative light.
It has also been argued that ancient Themiclesian society regarded those who held no land from the state and instead held it from another individual as occupying a lesser social position in some senses. Such a lessor-leasee relationship, when concerned with interests other than land, was often asymmetrical and characterized by clientelism. Earlier forms of clientelism could confer lordship rights over the junior member of the relationship. Within this paradigm, professional soldiers may transparently be deemed weaker, less estimable individuals who possessed no independence or means. Additionally, service in the army was often a form of punishment.
The lot of professional soldiers who were part of Themiclesia's international strategy, especially vis-à-vis the situation in Columbia, changed after the overthrow of the Republic. Historians describe this as a time of "change in the air" where individuals bound to servitude, whether domestic, penal, or military were given an unprecedented latitude to select choose future careers. Some viceroys ordered the prisons in their provinces emptied so that lands left to waste following the 20-year civil war would be productive again, and many slave-owners manumitted slaves following an agreement to supply crops at an advantageous price level. Similarly, soldiers who served in the Restorationist army were given the choice to leave service following the end of the war—the Emperor had declared that he had no more use for a professional army (in reality he was bankrupt):
In view the great sacrifices you have made for Us in Our service, and out of the great virtue of forgiveness, We solemnly decree and declare for now and ever that your pledge to Our service, We forget, renounce, and utterly esteem for nothing; your liberty and indemnity we do now solemnly and forever restore to you and your decendants.
For what this act was worth, he also changed the law to the effect that current and former professional soldiers no longer existed under a statutory stigma. Thus, after 1531, professional soldiers no longer suffered from legal disabilities, though the social stigma against professional soldiers persisted for many generations afterwards. Such problems include reduced eligibility to marry, the inadmissibility to certain religious orders and technical trades, and an increased likelihood of prejudice at higher social circles.
History
19th century to the PSW
The government extended its confidence and respect towards normal schools to the Army Academy, recognizing in it the traditional academic prerogatives, including appointment of the school’s own staff, power of its own budget, over its own police force, and, most importantly, over its own curriculum. To ensure an adequate supply of experience on the field, it was made mandatory for commissioned officers to offer lectures in the academy from time to time; this imitates the Forest of Letters, the opportunity of teaching in which was highly regarded by many civil servants. Little remains today of this primordial Academy, except in teaching methods, the composition of the academic roster, and its permanent relationship with the officer corps. Per its requirements, no-one under 25 or without previous academic experience/training was likely to enrol; teaching style was therefore different from most contemporary military academies but similar to the Forest of Letters.
There are general subjects and lectures offered but no curricular coursework in the normal sense. All work was done through research and debate; this was the standard in Themiclesia in well-regarded academies. Fields of study included domestic and foreign military theory, domestic and foreign history, law, mathematics, geography, music, engineering, and the natural sciences. Each became an independent department as the Academy took up more staff of all nationalities. Other than military officers, professors in other areas were also invited to lecture. By the later part of the 19th century, all major Casaterran schools were represented in the Academy, leading to many celebrated debates, eagerly recorded by students. In 1901, the ex-Ostlandian general Bankstein and Tyrannian general E. B. Nobb, had an argument with each other, lasting 49 hours without rest; it only ended when Nobb and Bankstein attempted to expel each other by their swords. Students took turns to record their arguments, which found their way into many dissertations for the next decades.
In 1857, renowned Tyrannian general Harold Smith Barfield was retained by the Academy for life, upon an annual salary of £10,000, an unexpectedly large amount; when the Chancellor was invited by the government to explain this choice, he instead asked for a new endownment, saying, "Wise prime ministers, your predecessors, have put it at the founding of our school, this is a scheme that will fruit only after a hundred years; in the meantime, we must contend ourselves with watering and fertilizing invisible roots, because only with a good foundation will a large tree be self-sustained, through thick and thin and thunder and storm, without the care of gardener, for a thousand years."
At the end of the 19th century, the Army Academy achieved regional recongition as an enviable place of study. Dayashina annually sent cadets to study there, a practice that would continue until 1937 when hostilities between Themiclesia and Dayashina rendered it untenable.
Late 19th century
The Army Academy's degree, via the Regiment Act of 1851, became a mandatory qualification for any military commission outside of the navy, militias, and ethnic minority units. Fiscally, the Academy was run by its student body, which imposed a high tuition plus fees with the stated objective of maintaining faculty and premises, though often the decision to raise money stemmed from a desire to maintain the student body's social characteristics and to prevent "freeloaders" from enjoying the facilities funded by wealthier students. Thus the Academy became a sanctuary for the propertied classes to seek education, which was part of the idealized portrait of a gentleman. In return, these students saw military and liberal arts education as passes towards performance in the social scene, which increasingly controlled the civil service and armed forces.
Modern era
Structure
Admissions
Admission to the Army Academy is by written application; enrolment targets are set each year by the Academy, according to the projections provided by the Army Department, Ministry of Defence. Most years, the Academy admits around 100 – 200 candidates, closely matching the annual retirement rate of the officer corps. The applicant must possess an undergraduate degree in the Liberal Arts from a recognized university or equivalent foreign institution; qualifications in other fields is always an asset. The Academy strongly recommends having a graduate degree in history, as this would make intensive study of military history, which is mandatory in the Academy, much more familiar. Aside from this, the Academy also considers a first-level Civil Service Qualification to be a charactistic of all competitive applicants, as this guarantees a minimum understanding of Themiclesian laws, traditions, culture, and administrative practices; higher qualifications are not required or expected at this point. There is no upper age limit to admission, though any applicant over the age of 35 will be considered unusual.
Upon presentation of such qualifications, the applicant must submit a short written statement of intent to be enrolled at the Academy; at this point, the candidate may also annexe any written material which he thinks may recommend him above other applicants, since admission is usually competitive. Admission decisions are made by the Academy's admissions department, which takes a hollistic view of the candidate's academic ability, personal character, and commitment. As Themiclesia considers junior cadets a form of child soldiery, such experience is not generally possible; if the candidate has this experience in a foreign country, they are politely reminded that it will be ignored to ensure fairness to domestic applicants. There is no "application form" as such, as the ability to write a good letter and present oneself in a favourable light is, in and of itself, a skill judged by the admissions department. Application decisions are rendered two to three months ahead of the commencement of the upcoming academic year. Those accepted will receive a letter to notify them of the fact; while those rejected will be invited to apply again for the following year.
Tuitions and grants
Relationship with the Consolidated Army
Because the Army Academy is so named, it is a common misconception that the Aademy was created to train officers for the Army. While this is true in the modern day, is very distant from the historical development. A saying in the Academy is that the "Academy made the Army, not the other way around." Indeed, the conceptual and structural foundations of the Consolidated Army were laid down by the alumni of the Academy. The need to integrate the armies was first argued and debated in the Academy, and the political impetus needed to achieve it was, in no small part, generated by its alumni who later entered politics or the civil service, since the Academy was the only organization that connected the hundreds of agencies, services, and units that made up the Themiclesian army. Up to 1900, Themiclesia's command structure was exceptionally flat and fluid: though staff officers were appointed to advise the War Secretary, he made all final decisions and controlled individual regiments, battalions, and even companies that were statutorily established. The most senior military officers in peacetime were colonels, who were limited to the purview of their own regiments.
Premises
Societies and factionalism
The Academy at the end of the 19th century was divided into several factions that differed on certain fundamental beliefs about the structural, social, and political philosophy of the armed forces.
Epsilon Society
At the one end, the Epsilon Society openly supported "Conservative philosophy"—the Great Settlement, the unwritten constitution, and that the armed forces were a specialized part of the Civil Service. They usually stated that the Civil Service was equivalent to the state, and its head, the emperor, through the government, exercised bureaucratic control over the armed forces exactly as he did over other parts of the Civil Service. The Epsilon Society, also deeply ingrained in historic textualism, rejected any special relationship to the Navy, believing it was ultra vires for the armed forces to be associated with each other, without the statutory sanction. For similar reasons it also did not accept the notion of a "Themiclesian Army", believing intsead it was a "group of forces with independent mandates and legal status" that "at times share a common leadership." It also championed the notion of parliamentary supremacy and sovereignty, believing that statutes, orders-in-council, and military commands, in this order, had their respective legal effects; this also formed part of their philosophy that the military was not distinct from civil government and should, in all contexts except statutorily excluded ones, be subject to the same law. By extention, every military officer was also a "petty judge", in that he interpreted the laws relevant to his office as the highest principle of its execution.
According to independent commentators, members of the Epsilon Society were overwhelmingly from the "privileged classes", those who were entitled to enter the bureaucracy through rural elections; as a rule, a sibling or cousin was also a bureaucrat, and the cadet himself may choose not to enter the military but the bureaucracy upon graduation, retaining the right to become a military officer under mobilization. Admittedly, this was far more common in the early and mid-1800s, but even by 1900 the reputation of the Academy bolstered by foreign lecturers in military and other fields in history made it an independently desirable place to study. As such, students of other universities audited courses or even graduated there, never to have a military career at all. Since Conservative cadets tended to be those who had the choice of joining the bureaucracy as a first option after graduation, and more than likely some parts of their families were already in the bureaucracy, it was thus not surprising that their position was thoroughly pro-bureaucracy.
Progressive Society
At the other extreme, the Progressive Society built on the Academy's rule of free education and sought to introduce foreign theories about the relationship between state and military.
Athletics
Noteworthy alumni
Trjuk Krjên-magh
Trjuk Krjên-magh (筑柬寞) was a Conservative MP for his home city between 1847 and 1849. With an existing degree in mathematics, he joined the Army Academy after his bid to retain his seat in the 1854 general election failed, he became Director of Education of Mhje′ Prefecture then Marshal there in 1855. After entering into a dispute with the Secretary of State for War that year, he resigned and returned to the Academy, attaining a doctorate in 1862, in discrete calculus. In 1863, he accepted a commission as colonel in the 2nd Regiment of Marines. Against his men's desire to fight, he ordered the surrender of the regiment in the Battle of Liang-la in 1867. After a public inquiry, he was allowed to remain in office. Due to his superior credentials, the Ministry of Administration made him Captain-general in 1870. He died in this office in 1881. To date, he is not the only alumnus of the Academy to have become Captain-general of Marines, but he is the only one to have specialized in discrete calculus to have attained to that office.
Yutaka Ueda
Yutaka Ueda was a Dayashinese cadet of the Imperial Dayashinese Army who came to study, at the expense of the IDA's High Command, at the Army Academy between 1913 and 1920. He was associated with the School of Law and specialized in military law and co-operation between military and civil authorities. In 1918, he published his dissertation On the Justification and Interpretation of Law in the Military, in which he argued that the military forces must be given a measure of independence from politics and possess a clear ethic to prevent corruption by political factions. The following year, the dissertation was read before a panel of six professors and ten tenured colonels of the Themiclesian Army and reportedly generated "a sudden quiet" amongst the faculty and students, who were expected to heckle out criticisms. This was radical for Themiclesian attitudes at the time, which generally accepted that the democratic will was the highest law of the land and could not be questioned, especially in the military. After several hours of intense debate, the college awarded Ueda his degree as Master of Laws. Despite having several papers not yet published, he was suddenly called home under pressure, ostensibly for his controversial thesis.
During his studies in the Army Academy, Ueda was part of the Progressive Society and the Alpha-Gamma-Eta fraternity. These cadets were known for their radical views about the relationship between government and military, generally favouring a greater divide between them than had been the case. Their chief opponents, the Epsilon Society, followed the Conservative doctrine that the military was an extension of the civil service and must adhere to the government, through statute and budget. Ueda noted that the Epsilon Society tended to be from more established (sometimes aristocratic) families that owned vast tracts of land, while the Progressives were mostly from the middle class that arose through commerce or industry. Comparing himself to the middle class, Ueda called the Epsilons the "Society of Rent Collectors". While upholding careful scholarship, he also developed a firey reputation from instant, witty rebuttals to unsound lecture material. This led some faculty members to detest him, while others made him their assistants and gave him special guidance. In 1915, he was the finalist in a stenographed debate, leading the Progressive argument, against Conservative debaters. The transcript was published for the student body to vote, which ultimately came down on the Conservative side. This may have been one of his motivations to assert the benefits of the radical paradigm in his dissertation.
Notes