<p>Personally, as has already been noted, Lord
Kitchener never was and never pretended to be anything
more or less than the good military man, and by
the time of the Great War he was already an elderly
military man. The type has much the same standards
and traditions in all European countries; but in
England it is, if anything, a little more traditional,
for the very reason that the army has been something
separate, professional, and relatively small—a
sort of club. The military man was all the more
military because the nation was not military. Such
a man is inevitably conservative in his views,
conventional in his manners, and simplifies the
problem of patriotism to a single-eyed obedience.
When he took over the business of raising the first
levies for the present war he was confronted with
the problem of the English Trades Unions—the very
last problem in the world which one could reasonably
expect such a man to understand. And yet he did
understand it; he was perhaps the only person in
the governing class who did. If it be hard to explain<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_26" id="Page_26"></SPAN></span>
to the richer classes in England, it is almost
impossible to explain to any classes in any other
country, because the English situation is largely
unique. There is the same difficulty as we have
already found in describing how vast and even violent
a transformation scene the growth of the great army
appeared; it has been almost impossible to describe
it to the chief conscript countries, which take a great
army for granted. The key to the parallel problem
of the Trades Unions is simply this—that England
is the only European country that is practically
industrial and nothing else. Trades Unions can
never play such a part in countries where the masses
live on the land; such masses always have some
status and support—yes, even if they are serfs.
The status of the English workman is not in the
earth; it is, so to speak, in the air—in a scaffolding
of artificial abstractions, a framework of rules and
rights, of verbal bargains or paper resolutions. If
he loses this, he becomes nothing so human
or homely as a slave. Rather he becomes a
wild beast, a sort of wandering vermin with no
place in the state at all. It would be necessary
to explain this, and a great deal more which
cannot possibly be explained here, before we
could measure the enormity of the enigma facing
the British official who had to propose to the English
the practical suspension of the Trades Unions. To
this must be added the fact that the Unions, already
national institutions, had just lately been in a ferment
with new and violent doctrines: Syndicalists had
invoked them as the future seats of government;<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_27" id="Page_27"></SPAN></span>
historical speculators had seen in them the return to
the great Christian Guilds of the Middle Ages; a
more revolutionary Press had appeared to champion
them; gigantic strikes had split the country in every
direction. Anyone would have said that under these
circumstances the very virtues and attainments of
Kitchener would at least make it fairly certain that
he would quarrel with the Trades Unions. It soon
became apparent that the one man who was not
going to quarrel with the Trades Unions was
Kitchener. Politicians and parliamentary leaders, supposed
actually to be elected by the working classes,
were regarded, rightly or wrongly, with implacable
suspicion. The elderly and old-fashioned Anglo-Egyptian
militarist, with his doctrine and discipline
of the barrack-room and the drumhead court-martial,
was never regarded by the workers with a shade
of suspicion. They simply took him at his word,
and the leader of the most turbulent Trades Union
element paid to him after his death the simplest
tribute in the plainest and most popular language—“He
was a straight man.” I am so antiquated as
to think it a better epitaph than the fashionable
phrase about a strong man. Some silent indescribable
geniality of fairness in the man once
more prevailed against the possibility of passionate
misunderstandings, as it had prevailed against
the international nervousness of the atmosphere
of Fashoda or the tragic border feud of the
Boers. I suspect that it lay largely in the
fact that this great Englishman was sufficiently
English to guess one thing missed by many more<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_28" id="Page_28"></SPAN></span>
sophisticated people—that the English Trades
Unions are very English. For good or evil, they
are national; they have very little in common
with the more international Socialism of the Continent,
and nothing whatever in common with the
pedantic Socialism of Prussia. Understanding his
countrymen by instinct, he did not make a parade
of efficiency; for the English dislike the symbols of
dictatorship much more than dictatorship. They
hate the crown and sceptre of the tyrant much more
than his tyranny. They have a national tradition
which allows of far too much inequality so long as it
is softened with a certain camaraderie, and in which
even snobs only remember the coronet of a nobleman
on condition that he shall himself seem to forget it.</p>
<p>The other matter is much more important.
Though the reverse of vivacious, Kitchener was
very vital; and he had one unique mark of vitality—that
he had not stopped growing. “An oak should
not be transplanted at sixty,” said the great orator
Grattan when he was transferred from the Parliament
of Dublin to the Parliament of Westminster.
Kitchener was sixty-four when he turned his face
westward to the problem of his own country. There
clung to him already all the traditional attributes of
the oak—its toughness, its angularity, its closeness
of grain and ruggedness of outline—when he was
uprooted from the Arabian sands and replanted in
the remote western island. Yet the oak not only
grew green again and put forth new leaves; it was
almost as if, as in a legend, it could put forth a new
kind of leaves. Kitchener, with all his taciturnity,<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_29" id="Page_29"></SPAN></span>
really began to put forth a new order of ideas. If
a change of opinions is unusual in an elderly man,
it is almost unknown in an elderly military man.
If the hardening of time was felt even by the
poetic and emotional Grattan, it would not
have been strange if the hardening had been
quite hopeless in the rigid and reticent Kitchener.
Yet it was not hopeless; and the fact became
the spring of much of the national hope. The
grizzled martinet from India and Egypt showed
a certain power which is in nearly all great men, but
of which St. Paul has become the traditional type—the
power of being a great convert as well as a great
crusader. It is the real power of re-forming an
opinion, which is the very opposite of that mere
formlessness which we call fickleness. Nor is the
comparison to such an example as St. Paul
altogether historically disproportionate; for the point
upon which this very typical Englishman changed
his mind was a point which is now the pivot of the
whole future and perhaps of the very existence of
Christendom. For many such Englishmen it might
almost be called the discovery of Christendom. It
can be called with greater precision, and indeed with
almost complete precision, the discovery of Russia.</p>
<p>Military bureaucratic systems everywhere have
too much tendency to work upon one idea, and
there was a time when the military and bureaucratic
system of the British in the East worked on the
idea of the fear of Russia. It is needless here to
explain that sentiment, and useless to explain it
away. It was partly a mere tradition from the<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_30" id="Page_30"></SPAN></span>
natural jingoism of the Crimean War; it was partly
in itself a tribute to the epic majesty of the Russian
march across mysterious Asia to the legendary
Chinese Wall. The point here is that it existed;
and where there exists such an idea in such
military rulers, they very seldom alter their idea.
But Kitchener did alter his idea. Not in mere
military obedience, but in genuine human reasonableness,
he came late in life to see the Russian as the
friend and the Prussian as the enemy. In the
inevitable division of British ministerial councils
about the distribution of British aid and attention
he was the one man who stood most enthusiastically,
one might say stubbornly, for the supreme importance
of munitioning the magnificent Russian defence.
He mystified all the English pessimists, in what
seemed to them the blackest hour of pessimism, by
announcing that Germany had “shot her bolt”;
that she had already lost her chance, not by any of
the Allied attacks, but by the stupendous skill and
valour of that Russian retreat, which was more
triumphant than any attack. It is this discovery that
marks an epoch; for that great deliverance was not
only the victory of Russia, but very specially the
victory of the Russians. Never before was there
such a war of men against guns—as awful and
inspiring to watch as a war of men against demons.
Perhaps the duel of a man with a modern gun is
more like that between a man and an enormous
dragon; nor is there anything on the weaker side
save the ultimate and almost metaphysical truth,
that a man can make a gun and a gun cannot make<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_31" id="Page_31"></SPAN></span>
a man. It is the man—the Russian soldier and
peasant himself—who has emerged like the hero of
an epic, and who is now secure for ever from the
sophisticated scandal-mongering and the cultured
ignorance of the West.</p>
<p>And it is this that lends an epic and almost
primeval symbolism to the tragedy of Kitchener's end.
Somehow the very fact that it was incomplete as an
action makes it more complete as an allegory.
English in his very limitations, English in his late
emancipation from them, he was setting forth on an
eastward journey different indeed from the many
eastward journeys of his life. There are many such
noble tragedies of travel in the records of his
country; it was so, silently without a trace, that the
track of Franklin faded in the polar snows or the
track of Gordon in the desert sands. But this was
an adventure new for such adventurous men—the
finding not of strange foes but of friends yet
stranger. Many men of his blood and type—simple,
strenuous, somewhat prosaic—had threaded their way
through some dark continent to add some treasure
or territory to the English name. He was seeking
what for us his countrymen has long been a dark
continent—but which contains a much more noble
treasure. The glory of a great people, long hidden
from the English by accidents and by lies, lay before
him at his journey's end. That journey was never
ended. It remains like a mighty bridge, the
mightier for being broken, pointing across a chasm,
and promising a mightier thoroughfare between the
east and west. In that waste of seas beyond the<span class='pagenum'><SPAN name="Page_32" id="Page_32"></SPAN></span>
last northern islets where his ship went down one
might fancy his spirit standing, a figure frustrated
yet prophetic and pointing to the East, whence are
the light of the world and the reunion of Christian
men.</p>
<p class="printed">
<i>Printed in Great Britain by</i> <span class="smcap">The Field & Queen (Horace Cox) Ltd.</span>,<br/>
<i>Bream's Buildings, London, E.C. 4</i>.<br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />