which he achieved, prove without doubt his personal power. But he does not, however, take rank with the greatest even in his own age. Not only was he inferior on the whole to his great rival, and not to be compared as a general to men like Turenne, but it may well be doubted whether he was equal as a diplomatist to Louvois or Marlborough. Still his achievements were such as any statesman might be proud of.
If he did not initiate, he gave force and cohesion to the European resistance to Louis XIV. He held the reins of the Grand Alliance. He alone of the allied sovereigns could always be depended upon in that cause. His energy never tired, his hatred never softened. No difficulties daunted, and no scruples thwarted him. If, after a careful survey of the resources of France at this time, any is of opinion that under favourable circumstances Louis XIV. would have been able to found an enduring power, to William III. he may justly attribute the failure of the French schemes. When this has been said, much of the real greatness of William has been explained. We recognise to the full his energetic self-devotion to a great cause. His success was due to no merit as a general. No striking instance of bravery has ever been recorded of him. But this is not needed in a general. He was a wretched organiser; his armies were never provided with the equipments which were even then recognised as necessary. He never showed the slightest sign of real strategic ability. The only battle which he ever won was that of the Boyne, where his forces out-
