20 



ranks, and so lias infantry been in all the armies of Europe ever since, 

 except our own for the last forty-five years. It was the Duke of 

 Wellington who first thought two enough, being of opinion that British 

 pluck would supply the place of the third, and the anticipation has 

 proved true. With the same force we present the same extent of front 

 with one-third fewer men, or we make, in other words, two Englishmen 

 to do the same service as three Frenchmen, Germans, or Russians. 

 The fine heavy cuirassiers of Napoleon, at Waterloo, repeatedly charged 

 the squares of British infantry without making any serious impression 

 on them. An officer of engineers, still living, told me that he was in 

 one of these squares when assailed, and that one trooper only broke 

 through the line, his horse being shot in the act, and himself dismounted 

 and made prisoner. When the Russian cavalry attempted a charge 

 at the corps of Lord Clyde, at Balaklava, he told me himself that he did 

 not think it worth while to form square, and only three back a wing of 

 his single regiment to receive them. The Highlanders gave them a 

 volley and they sheered off. 



As to the best national cavalry, it ought to be that of the people who 

 have the best horses, the best riders, and who can best afford to main- 

 tain it. We are that people ourselves, and all that seems necessary to 

 insure it is adequate discipline and riddance of military coxcombry in 

 dress, arms, and equipment. Our heavy cavalry overthrew that of the 

 Russians in the Crimea on the Russians' own chosen ground, but our 

 light cavalry was sorely punished when on the same field it madly 

 attacked infantry and artillery. 



Between the equipment of ancient and modern cavalry, thus exists 

 one striking difference worth notice. The ancients were ignorant of the 

 stirrup. There is no name for it in classic Greek or Latin, in 

 Sanskrit or in native Persian. There is, however, in Arabic, and this 

 may lead to the belief that the Arabs were its inventors. In European 

 record there is, indeed, no authentic account of the use of the stirrup 

 before the seventh century, corresponding with the first of the 

 Mahomedan era. At present there exists no people from " China to 

 Peru " without it, and we find it difficult to understand how a trooper 

 would maintain a firm seat and make an effective use of sword or 

 lance in its absence. The bridle, of course, was always used, and 

 the celebrated Cuvier insists that our dominion over the horse depends 

 on the toothless space for the insertion of the bit between the molar 

 and canine teeth. 



But you may desire to know the extent of the evils which a barbarous 



