Henry David Thoreau – Biography and

Works
Henry David Thoreau was born in Concord, Massachusetts on July 12, 1817. As an American
born essayist, poet, philosopher, naturalist, historian, editor and social critic; Thoreau had been
deeply influenced by Emerson’s Nature (1836) and he remained pure Transcendentalist all his
life.

Henry David Thoreau (1817-62)

Graduated from Harvard, he began his lifelong friendship with Ralph Waldo Emerson
developed transcendentalist beliefs through his companionship with Emerson by the
philosophical commitment of seeking an ultimate truth within and beyond all natural existence.

His best known work, Walden, or Life in the Woods, which grew out of his two year retreat to a
cabin by the edge of Walden Pond, is also distinguished by its close observation and
meticulously detailed description of nature. Walden (1854) is one of the greatest works of
American literature. From 1845 to 1847, Thoreau lived alone in a hut he built for himself on the
north shore of Walden Pond, a few miles from Concord. While there he wrote A Week on the
Concord and Merrimack Rivers (1849). This book is loosely organized around the story of a
river trip which he had once taken with his brother.

A leading transcendentalist, Thoreau wrote his world famous Walden about his stay in the
pond side hut proved him as an experienced woodsman to fill the details about plants, rivers
and wildlife in his masterpiece. Walden is a hopeful book, encouraging people to lead sincere
joyous live. Thoreau sees the world as “more wonderful than it is convenient; more beautiful
than it is useful.” Thoreau died on May 6, 1862, at the age of 44 due to tuberculosis.
The Battle of the Ants by Henry David
Thoreau: Summary
The essay The Battle of the Ants is extracted from Walden, is the detail description of the war
of the ants, with minute detail that is unnoticeable to us. The minute observation of the war has
manipulated Thoreau's thoughts to a great deal, heading to the human war and war among
nations.

Henry David Thoreau (1817-62)

He gives the conclusion to the mankind – war is destructive and painful not only during the war
itself but also after the war. After all, any kinds of destruction do not carry any principles of life.

One day when the writer went out his wood-pile, he saw two large ants fighting with one
another. When he looked further he saw that there was a war between two races of ants, the
red ants and the black ants. Usually two smaller red ants fought with one larger black ant. The
whole area was covered with fighting ants. Both sides were equally determined to fight a
deadly fight. In this war the red republicans and the black imperialists were taking part. They
were fighting noiselessly and more seriously than human soldiers.

Then the writer observed a couple embracing each other and determined to fight till the end of
the day or their lives. The red fighter was in the enemy area. He had cut off one feeler of the
enemy. The black ant was dashing him from side to side and he had killed several red ants.
Both parties seemed to have decided not to move back. They were fighting either to win or to
die. At that time a single red ant arrived there getting excited. He had not lost any of his limbs.
He arrived there like Achilles to avenge or rescue his Patroclus. When he got an opportunity
he sprang upon the black ant. Now the three of them were fighting for life. The writer felt that
there were musical bands on both sides to excite the slow fighters and to cheer the dying
fighters. They were like human beings. The more one compared them with human beings, the
less difference one would find between them. Such a battle had never taken place there. They
were fighting for principle heroically and like patriots. The results of this battle would be
important and memorable.

The writer took up the chip on which the three were struggling, carried it into his house and
placed it under a glass. Holding a microscope to the red ant, he saw that the ant had cut the
foreleg of the enemy and that his own breast was torn by the black ant. After half an hour he
found that the black ant had cut off the heads of the red ants and was carrying them as the
signs of victory. When the glass was raised the black ant went off over the window-sill in a
crippled state. The writer thought of the battle all the daylong and he was sad at the ferocity
and the widespread destruction.

The Battle of the Ants by Henry David

Thoreau: Critical Commentary
In the essay 'The Battle of the Ants' Thoreau is concerned with an event; he has a story to tell.
And like any essayist, he also has a persuasive purpose, a purpose, like that of any narrative
essayist, is to offer an interpretation of the story – an interpretation that uses the story as a
means of commenting on some aspect of experience.

Henry David Thoreau (1817-62)

The story of "the battle of the ants" takes up almost the entire piece. His story is lively, violent
and it turns out to have an expected end. Our first task is to identify the principal parts of his
narrative, to see how they are proportioned to one another and how they are put together.
Looked at in this way, his narrative falls into roughly two equal sections: the scene near the
woodpile and the scene inside his house. Within these manageable sections we can consider
the basic elements of narration – description, dialogue and commentary – and examine the
effects they create.
Description predominates in both sections. First, the writer sees two ants fighting. The he looks
further and finds the chips covered with such fights describes the widespread-fight there.
Finally, he is limited to the fight between one black ant and two red ants. In the second section,
the writer takes up the chip on which the three ants are fighting. There he examines them with
his microscope. The red ants have severed all the limbs except one of the black ants, and the
black ant also cut off the head of the red ants and departed from there.

Since the characters of this story are black ants and red ants, there is no dialogue. The story
seems to make sense when Thoreau gives us the first hint of interpretation: "The red
republicans on the one hand and the black imperialists on the other". "I was myself excited
somewhat even as if they had been men. The more you think of it, the less the difference."
Once he provides the commentaries we can begin to see point of the story.

While telling the story, Thoreau does not omit himself; one is likely to forget that the precision
and objectivity of this reporting imply an attitude, a method of observation. In every case he
describes his method drawing close to the phenomenon. Ants carry on their warfare under a
tumbler as he watches with a magnifying glass.

The famous ant war stands on its own as a narrative masterpiece and factual observation of
nature, but the transition to seeing it as a mock epic of human battle representing humanity's
courage and tragic pride is quite natural. The ants become Greek "Myrmidons" (the Greek
word means "ants"); a particularly fierce ant becomes an Achilles; and Thoreau comments, "I
was myself excited somewhat even as if they had been men. The more you think of it, the less
the difference".

The narrator is no more than the writer himself. Being close observer of this nature, he has not
let anything of this surrounding escape from his notice. He has given philosophical dimension
to his naturalistic observation. Thoreau went out to his wood-pile where there was pile of three
stumps. There were two large ants, one red and other much larger and black. They were
fighting fiercely with one another. Having once got hold they never let go, but struggled and
wrestled and rolled on the chips incessantly. They were fighting a life-and-death battle. Later,
the author noticed that the chips were covered with such several combatants. It was not a duel,
a fight between two, but it was a bellum, a war between two races of ants. The red ants were
fighting against the black. Thoreau has symbolized the participants of the war with the red
republicans on the one hand, and the black imperialists on the other. On every side they were
engaged in deadly combat. This war has been compared with the Trojan war of the "The Ilia". It
has also been also compared with other historical battles. The war of the ant caused great
sensation in the mind of the author.

It is very known fact that a war is waged for might or right. Participants attempt to make the
opponent either to accept or refuge certain claims. In any case, there is injury and carnage.
Both parties lose much of their wealth and many of their people. Russell says that a war is
violent not only during the war but also after the war. He says peace after war is more violent
than the war itself. When all are dead, or injured, there is nothing left except sufferings to both
parties. The red ants were killed and the black was alive but he had neither feelers not any
physical strength. One of the legs had also gone. He had become totally handicapped. He
would live his remaining days being a patient or a handicapped. Those who see them realize
the result of war. Thoreau’s feelings were excited and tormented by witnessing the struggle, its
ferocity and carnage. It was like a human battle occurred at his door. In fact, neither victory nor
the cause of the war was important. When there is to see destruction everywhere, victory or
cause of the war is only nonsense.

Battle of the Ants Essay

Henry David Thoreau uses ants to describe his view of human wars that
have occurred in history. In the beginning of the Walden story he states, “I went to
the woods since I wanted to live”. He goes on to suggest that he wanted to learn
from the woods. Incidentally, he meets with ants in combat. Clearly, he personifies
the ants in a bid to make a connection between them and humans. The first
attempt to make a comparison between the two is when he compares the war
between the ants with that between the Trojans and Greeks. Such a comparison
indicates the motivation and intentions of the author. He seeks to approach human
wars in an allegorical manner rather than directly because the latter would attract
aggression and opposition from his society.
In the writing, he notes that there are differences between human battles
and ant battles. While human beings will fight for materialistic possessions, the
ants, on the other hand, fight because of their principle. When dating the ant battle,
Thoreau makes mentions of the Fugitive Slave Act, which is an additional example
of the valor of ants’ battles relative to human conflicts. What is more, Thoreau
believed at the time that armed confrontation was only relevant in cases of slavery.
 During his observation of the ants fighting, he notices that he was not
watching a simple battle, but the battle of the ants. He uses this opportunity to
indicate the manner to which the brutal struggle for life and death mimics the
human wars. In widening the scope of war that he was witnessing between the
three ants, he refers to them as Myrmidons, which is a means of invoking the
images of Greek warriors in their endeavors of conquering all lands. Still, it is not
until at the end of the paragraph that he does indicate a more sound comparison.
He refers to the battle as the “Black imperialists and Red Republicans Internecine
war”. Hence, he is comparing the red ants to people of that day and the black ants
to the imperial parties that were ruling during the time.
In his writing, Thoreau compares the ant battles to human wars, which is an
effort to indicate the nature of humans. According to him, the wars by humans are
because of wealth possessions or their understanding of material wealth. At one
point, Thoreau focuses his attention on individual combatants. He observes that
small red ant fights with a large ant and interprets this to mean their philosophy is
to either conquer or die. According to him, this is the same case with humans.
They employ all the available tactics in their bid to conquer all, which includes
using foreigners to fight in their wars. In addition, humans use propaganda in the
human wars so that they can win their battles. Lastly, he ridicules human wars and
the behaviors of the citizens of conflicting nations. They will sing their respective
rhythmical music to excite them while their combatants are dying in the war fields.
Towards the final paragraph, the author concentrates on one black ant and
two red ones. The three are battling on a woodchip that he extracted from the
battlefield and observed using a microscope at home. In his example of the ghastly
awards that hang from saddlebow, he is comparing the horrific human battles to
living heads of killed ants that were now covering the combatants under his
observation. According to him, even after the realization of the mass killings that
occur during wars, they continue to fight. It is for these reasons that he wonders
about the fate of the surviving ant. Once the black ant emerges victorious and
walks away, he wonders the meaning of this turn of events and the effects of the
war on the black ant itself. Clearly, this is a direct indication of the effects that wars
have on human beings and their ignorance to that fact. Thoreau suggests that wars
negatively affect humans, but humans either ignore it or are unaware of this fact.
 I agree with Thoreau that wars have been part of humans for a long time.
Similar to the ants, humans fight with little regard of the damages their actions
have on themselves and their families. Despite evidence that wars led to deaths
and destroy economies, countries continue to prepare themselves for war. The
United States, Russia, and China are in the forefront of funding their military in
preparedness of possible battles in the future. The First World War facilitated the
creation of the League of Nations to prevent possible war outbreaks, but the
Second World War will soon take place. What is more, despite lessons learned
from wars in Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan, the world continues to fight for material
wealth as suggested by Thoreau.