Arrows of the Chace, vol. 2/2: being a collection of scattered letters published chiefly in the daily newspapers 1840-1880Ruskin, John
History
Arrows of the Chace, vol. 2/2: being a collection of scattered letters published chiefly in the daily newspapers 1840-1880
Ruskin, John
Authors, English -- 19th century -- Correspondence; Letters to the editor -- Great Britain; Ruskin, John, 1819-1900 -- Correspondence
Now, the practical difference between ancient and modern war, as
carried on by civilized nations, is, broadly, of this kind. Formerly,
the persons who had quarrelled settled their differences by the
strength of their own arms, at the head of their retainers, with
comparatively inexpensive weapons such as they could conveniently
wield; weapons which they had paid for out of their own pockets, and
with which they struck only the people they meant to strike: while,
nowadays, persons who quarrel fight at a distance, with mechanical
apparatus, for the manufacture of which they have taxed the public,
and which will kill anybody who happens to be in the way; gathering
at the same time, to put into the way of them, as large a quantity of
senseless and innocent mob as can be beguiled, or compelled, to the
slaughter. So that, in the words of your contributor, "Modern armies
are not now small fractions of the population whence they are drawn;
they represent--in fact are--whole nations in arms." I have only to
correct this somewhat vague and rhetorical statement by pointing out
that the persons in arms, led out for mutual destruction, are by no
means "the whole nation" on either side, but only the individuals of it
who are able-bodied, honest, and brave, selected to be shot, from among
its invalids, rogues, and cowards.
The deficiencies in your contributor's evidence as to the totality of
loss do not, however, invalidate his conclusion that, out of given
numbers engaged, the mitrailleuse kills fewer than the musket.[31]
It is, nevertheless, a very startling conclusion, and one not to be
accepted without closer examination of the statistics on which it is
based. I will, therefore, tabulate them in a simpler form, which the
eye can catch easily, omitting only one or two instances which add
nothing to the force of the evidence.
In the six under-named battles of bygone times, there fell, according
to your contributor's estimate, out of the total combatants--
At Austerlitz ⅐
Jena ⅙
Waterloo ⅕
Marengo ¼
Salamanca ⅓
Eylau 1/2½
while in the under-named five recent battles the proportion of loss was--
At Königgratz 1/15
Gravelotte 1/12
Solferino 1/11
Worth 1/11
Sedan 1/10
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account