War in Ancient India c12.119

c12.119

One of our modern thinkers speaking of European countries, writes that ‘most traditional history is merely fairy tale’ where the actual battles are misrepresented, where the methods of slaughter are called the ‘art of war,’ where the successful general or admiral fills a great place, and where war is made to seem chiefly an instrument of progress and where peace is treated as if it were only the outcome of victory. The same writer continues: ‘War is the favourite subject of historians...... Most teachers and writers of history even to-day, perpetrate in schools and universities the old obsession with war.’ There is some truth in the observation. But every historian must protest against the statement that most traditional history is fairy tale. To wholly discredit the writings of earlier historians is to ignore altogether one of the chief sources of history. Besides, it will be no history if the subject of war is not treated in it. We are told that war as a subject of history would be excusable if the truth were told about it. It is the general belief that historians do tell the truth and truth only, unlike writers of historical novels, historical dramas, and similar literature. War is not the sole subject of history. Bad history deserves condemnation; but history written with the sole object of propaganda for peace, suppressing statements of facts, deserves equal condemnation. The historian is as much actuated by the desire for peace as the politician. Abolition of war is a delusion and a snare. It is beyond the pale of practical politics. War is a law of human existence. It cannot be eradicated; but it may be ennobled. Let us therefore prefer conciliation to coercion, and aim more at peace and less at war. Let us aim at the annihilation of international anarchy, and the substitution of world peace. Let us resolve on the renunciation of war and make the ties of peace too strong to break. Let us think and act not in terms of nationalism but in terms of internationalism.