f is to an army what a skilful minister is to a monarchy — it seconds the views of the chief, even though it be in condition to direct all things of itself; it prevents the commission of faults, even though the commanding general be wanting in experience, by furnishing him good councils.
How many mediocre men of both ancient and modern times, have been rendered illustrious by achievements which were mainly due to their associates!
Reynier was the chief cause of the victories of Pichegru, in 1794; and Dessoles, in like manner, contributed to the glory of Moreau.
Is not General Toll associated with the successes of Kutusof?
Diebitsch with those of Barclay and Witgenstein?
Gneisenau and Muffling with those of Blucher?
Numerous other instances might be cited in support of these assertions.
A well-established staff does not always result from a good system of education for the young aspirants; for a man may be a good mathematician and a fine scholar, without being a good warrior.