« AnteriorContinuar »
fure-grounds, the inhabitants, like those of Hamburgh, had no way to employ their riches for profit but in trade. At the same time, being situated between the two mighty empires of Rome and Parthia; it required great address and the most affiduous military discipline, to guard it from being swallowed up by the one or the other. This ticklish situation preserved the inhabitants from luxury and effeminacy, the usual concomitants of riches. Their superfluous wealth was laid out on magnificent buildings, and on embellishing their country-seats. The fine arts were among them carried to a high degree of perfection. The famous Zenobia, their Queen, being led captive to Rome after being deprived of her dominions, was admired and celebrated for spirit, for learn, ing, and for an exquisite taste in the fine arts,
Thus, by accumulating wealth, a manufacturing and commercial people become a tempting object for conquest; and by effeminacy become an easy conquest. The military spirit seems to be at a low ebb in Britain: will wo phantom appear, even in a dream, to disturb our downy
rest ? Formerly, plenty of corn in the temperate regions of Europe and Afia, proved a tempting bait to northern favages who wanted bread: have we no cause to dread a similar fate from some warlike neighbour, impelled by hunger, or by ambition, to extend his dominions ? The difficulty of providing for defence, consistent with industry, has produced a general opinion among political writers, that a nation, to preserve its military spirit, must give up industry; and to preserve industry, must give up a military spirit. In the former case, we are secure against any invader: in the latter, we lie open to every invader. A military plan that would secure us against enemies, without hurting our industry and manufactures, would be a rich present to Britain. That such a plan is possible, will appear from what follows; tho I am far from hoping that it will meet with universal approbation. Το
prepare the reader, I shall premise an account of the different military establishments that exist, and have existed, in Europe, with the advantages and disadvantages of each. In examining these, who knows whether fome hint may not Vol. III,
occur of a plan more perfect than any of them.
The most illustrious military establishment of antiquity is that of the Romans, by which they subdued almost all the known world. The citizens of Rome were all of them foldiers: they lived upon
their pay when in the field; but if they happened not to be successful in plundering, they starved at home. . An annual distribution of corn among them, became necessary; which in effect corresponded to the halfpay of our officers. It is believed, that such a constitution would not be adopted by any modern state.
It was a forc'd constitution ; contrary to nature, which gives different dispositions to men, in order to supply hands for every necesfary art. It was a hazardous constitution, having no medium between universal conquest and wretched slavery. Had the Gauls who conquered Rome, entertained any view but of plunder, Rome would never have been heard of. It was on the brink of ruin in the war with Hannibal. What would have happened had Hannibal been victorious? It is easy to judge, by comparing it with Carthage. Car
thage was a commercial state, the people all employ'd in arts, manufactures, and navigation. The Carthaginians were subdued; but they could not be reduced to extremity, while they had access to the sea. In fact, they prospered so much by commerce, even after they were subdued, as to raise jealousy in their masters; who thought themselves not secure while a house remained in Carthage. On the other hand, what resource for the inhabitants of Rome, had they been subdued ? They must have perished by hunger ; for they could not work. In a word, ancient Rome resembles a gamefter who ventures all upon one decisive throw: if he lose, he is undone.
I take it for granted, that our feudal system will not have a single vote. a system that led to confusion and anarchy, as little fitted for war as for peace. And as for mercenary troops, it is unnecessary to bring them again into the field, after what is said of them above.
The only remaining forms that merit attention, are a standing army, and a militia ; which I shall examine in their order, with the objections that lie against
each. The first standing army in modern times was established by Charles VII. af France, on a very imperfect plan. He began with a body of cavalry termed companies of ordonnance. And as for infantry, he, anno 1448, appointed each parish to furnish an archer: there were termed franc-archers, because they were exempted from all taxes. This little army was intended for restoring peace and order at home, not for disturbing neighbouring ftates. The King had been forc'd into many perilous wars, some of them for restraining the turbulent spirit of his vassals, and most of them for defending his crown against an ambitious adversary, Henry V. of England. As these wars were carried on in the feudal mode, the soldiers, who had no pay, could not be restrained from plundering; and inveterate practice rendered them equally licentious in peace
and in war. Charles, to leave no pretext for free quarters,
his subjects a Small tax, no more than fufficient for regular pay to his little army*.
* This was the first tax imposed in France without consent of the three eftates: and, however un,