Though small in its dimensions, if compared with great European
battles, or with the giant contests of our own civil war, the struggle
at Bunker Hill is memorable and instructive, even from a purely military
point of view. Considering the numbers engaged and the short duration of
the fight, the destruction of life was enormous. Of all the
hardest-fought fields of modern times, there have been very few indeed
in which the number of killed and wounded has exceeded one fourth of the
whole force engaged. In its bloodiness and in the physical conditions of
the struggle, the battle of Bunker Hill resembles in miniature the
tremendous battles of Fredericksburg and Cold Harbor. To ascend a rising
ground and storm well-manned intrenchments has in all ages been a
difficult task; at the present day, with the range and precision of our
modern weapons, it has come to be almost impossible. It has become a
maxim of modern warfare that only the most extraordinary necessity can
justify a commander in resorting to so desperate a measure. He must
manoeuvre against such positions, cut them off by the rear, or deprive
them of their value by some flanking march; but he must not, save as a
forlorn hope, waste precious human lives in an effort to storm them that
is almost sure to prove fruitless. For our means of destroying life have
become so powerful and so accurate that, when skilfully wielded from
commanding positions, no human gallantry can hope to withstand them. As
civilization advances, warfare becomes less and less a question of mere
personal bravery, and more and more a question of the application of
resistless physical forces at the proper points; that is to say, it
becomes more and more a purely scientific problem of dynamics. Now at
Bunker Hill though the Americans had not our modern weapons of
precision, yet a similar effect was wrought by the remarkable accuracy
of their aim, due to the fact that they were all trained marksmen, who
waited coolly till they could fire at short range, and then wasted no
shots in random firing. Most of the British soldiers who fell in the two
disastrous charges of that day were doubtless picked off as partridges
are picked off by old sportsmen, and thus is explained the unprecedented
slaughter of officers. Probably nothing quite like this had yet been
seen in the history of war, though the principle had been similar in
those wonderful trials of the long-bow in such mediæval battles as Crécy
and Dupplin Moor. Against such odds even British pluck and endurance
could not prevail. Had the Americans been properly supplied with powder,
Howe could no more have taken Bunker Hill by storm than Burnside could
take the heights of Fredericksburg.
[Sidenote: Its moral effect]
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account