idea to be a new departure altogether in armored protection, or rather
to be a return to the original thought which produced the Gloire and
vessels of her class. In point of fact, while we have always clung to
the armored citadel, France has discarded the belt altogether, and
gone in for speed and light armor, as well as for a much lighter class
of armament. Time alone, and the circumstances of actual warfare, can
prove which nation has adopted the wisest alternative.

A glance at the engraving will show the striking contrast between the
existing service types as to armored surface. The Marceau appears
absolutely naked by the side of the solidly armed citadel of the Nile.
The contrast between the future types will be, of course, still more
striking, for the reasons given in the last paragraph. But while
remarking upon the paucity of heavy plating as exhibited in the
service French battleships, we would say one word for the angle at
which it is placed. The receding sides of the great vessels of France
give two very important attributes in their favor. In the first place,
a much broader platform at the water line is afforded to secure
steadiness of the ship and stable equilibrium, and the angle at which
the armor rests is so great as to present a very oblique surface to
the impact of projectiles. The trajectory of modern rifled guns is so
exceedingly flat that the angle of descent of the shot or shell is
practically _nil_. Were the sides of the Royal Sovereign to fall back
like those of the Marceau or Magenta, we seriously doubt whether any
projectile, however pointed, would effect penetration at all. We
conclude, then, that a comparison of the Marceau with the Nile as
regards protective features is so incontestably in favor of the
latter, that they cannot be classed together for a moment. In speed,
moreover, though this is not a point under consideration, the Nile has
the advantage. It is impossible, however, to avoid the conviction that