All Chapter Download Test Bank For Structure and Function of The Human Body 15th Edition by Patton

Download the full version of the testbank or
solution manual at testbankbell.com
Test Bank for Structure and Function of the

Human Body 15th Edition by Patton
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-
structure-and-function-of-the-human-body-15th-
edition-by-patton/
Explore and download more testbank or solution manual

at https://testbankbell.com
Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.
Test Bank for Structure and Function of the Body, 16th

Edition, Kevin T. Patton,
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-structure-and-function-
of-the-body-16th-edition-kevin-t-patton/
testbankbell.com
Test Bank for Memmlers Structure and Function of the Human

Body, 9th Edition: Cohen
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-memmlers-structure-and-
function-of-the-human-body-9th-edition-cohen/
testbankbell.com
Test Bank Memmler’s Structure and Function of the Human

Body, 10th Edition Taylor – Cohen
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-memmlers-structure-and-
function-of-the-human-body-10th-edition-taylor-cohen/
testbankbell.com
Solution Manual for Principles of Instrumental Analysis,

7th Edition, Douglas A. Skoog, F. James Holler, Stanley R.
Crouch
http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-principles-of-
instrumental-analysis-7th-edition-douglas-a-skoog-f-james-holler-
stanley-r-crouch/
testbankbell.com
Solution Manual for Contemporary Auditing Real Issues and
Cases 8th Edition by Knapp
http://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-contemporary-
auditing-real-issues-and-cases-8th-edition-by-knapp/
testbankbell.com
M Advertising 3rd Edition Schaefer Solutions Manual
http://testbankbell.com/product/m-advertising-3rd-edition-schaefer-
solutions-manual/
testbankbell.com
Financial Accounting Tools for Business Decision Making

Kimmel 7th Edition Test Bank
http://testbankbell.com/product/financial-accounting-tools-for-
business-decision-making-kimmel-7th-edition-test-bank/
testbankbell.com
Understandable Statistics Concepts and Methods Enhanced

11th Edition Brase Solutions Manual
http://testbankbell.com/product/understandable-statistics-concepts-
and-methods-enhanced-11th-edition-brase-solutions-manual/
testbankbell.com
Test Bank for Canadian Organizational Behaviour, 10th

Edition, Steven McShane, Kevin Tasa
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-canadian-organizational-
behaviour-10th-edition-steven-mcshane-kevin-tasa/
testbankbell.com
Test Bank for Pediatric Nursing An Introductory Text, 11th
Edition: Price
http://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-pediatric-nursing-an-
introductory-text-11th-edition-price/
testbankbell.com
Test Bank for Structure and Function of the Human Body 15th
Edition by Patton
Full download chapter at: https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-structure-and-function-of-the-human-body-15th-
edition-by-patton/
Chapter 01: Introduction to the Body

Thibodeau & Patton: Structure & Function of the Body, 15th Edition
MULTIPLE CHOICE
1. The word derived from two word parts that mean “cutting apart” is
a. physiology
b. homeostasis
c. anatomy
d. dissection
ANS: C DIF: Memorization REF: p. 3
OBJ: 1 TOP: Introduction
2. The study of how the body functions is called

a. physiology
b. homeostasis
c. anatomy
d. dissection
ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: p. 3
3. The correct sequence of the level of organization is

a. cellular, chemical, tissue, organ
b. chemical, cellular, tissue, organ
c. chemical, cellular, organ, tissue
d. chemical, tissue, cellular, organ
ANS: B DIF: Memorization REF: p. 5
OBJ: 3 TOP: Structural levels of organization
4. The smallest living unit of structure is considered to be at the

a. chemical level
b. cellular level
c. organ level
d. tissue level
5. The reference position for all body directional terms is the

a. anatomical position
b. prone position
c. supine position
d. sitting position
ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 6-7
OBJ: 4 TOP: Anatomical position
6. The relationship between the knee and the ankle can be described as
a. the knee is inferior to the ankle
b. the knee is distal to the ankle
c. the knee is proximal to the ankle
d. both a and b above
ANS: C DIF: Application REF: pp. 7-8 OBJ: 5
TOP: Anatomical directions
7. The relationship between the heart and the lungs can be described as
a. the heart is distal to the lungs
b. the heart is medial to the lungs
c. the heart is lateral to the lungs
d. both a and c above
ANS: B DIF: Application REF: p. 7 OBJ: 5
8. The term most opposite proximal is

a. medial
b. superior
c. anterior
d. distal
Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 1

ANS: D DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
OBJ: 5 TOP: Anatomical directions

9. Because humans walk in an upright position, the two terms that can be used interchangeably are
a. posterior and ventral
b. posterior and inferior
c. posterior and superficial
d. posterior and dorsal
10. The term most opposite medial is

a. dorsal
b. lateral
c. superficial
d. none of the above
11. The relationship between the skin and the muscles can be described as
a. the skin is superficial to the muscle
b. the muscle is superficial to the skin
c. the muscle is deep to the skin
d. both a and c above
12. A cut dividing the body into anterior and posterior portions is called a
a. sagittal section
b. frontal section
c. transverse section
OBJ: 5 TOP: Planes or body sections
13. A cut dividing the body into upper and lower portions is called a
a. sagittal section
b. frontal section
d. coronal section
14. A cut dividing the body into right and left portions is called a
a. sagittal section
b. frontal section
d. coronal section
15. The mediastinum is part of the

a. dorsal cavity
b. ventral cavity
c. abdominal cavity
d. both b and c above
OBJ: 6 TOP: Body cavities
16. The two major cavities of the body are the

a. dorsal and ventral
b. thoracic and abdominal
c. pleural and mediastinum
17. The diaphragm divides the

a. dorsal from the ventral cavity
b. abdominal from the pelvic cavity
c. thoracic from the abdominal cavity
d. pleural from the mediastinum

18. The upper abdominopelvic regions include the
a. right and left hypochondriac and umbilical
b. right and left lumbar and umbilical
c. right and left iliac and epigastric
d. right and left hypochondriac and epigastric
19. The middle abdominopelvic regions include the

a. right and left lumbar and umbilical
b. right and left lumbar and epigastric
c. right and left iliac and hypogastric
d. right and left iliac and umbilical
20. The lower abdominopelvic regions include the

a. right and left iliac and umbilical
b. right and left lumbar and epigastric
c. right and left lumbar and hypogastric
d. right and left iliac and hypogastric
21. The brain is in the

a. ventral cavity
b. cranial cavity
c. mediastinum
22. The spinal cavity is part of the

a. dorsal cavity
b. ventral cavity
c. cranial cavity
23. The left upper quadrant of the abdominopelvic cavity includes all of the
a. left lumbar region
b. left iliac region
c. left hypochondriac region
d. left inguinal region
ANS: C DIF: Application REF: p. 10 OBJ: 7
TOP: Body cavities
24. Using the maintaining of a constant temperature in a building as an example of a feedback loop, the thermometer would be an
example of a(n)
a. sensor
b. control center
c. effector
d. positive feedback loop
OBJ: 9 TOP: The balance of body functions
25. Using the maintaining of a constant temperature in a building as an example of a feedback loop, the furnace would be an example
of a(n)
a. sensor
b. control center
c. effector
26. Using the maintaining of a constant temperature in a building as an example of a feedback loop, the thermostat would be an
example of a(n)
a. sensor
b. control center
c. effector

27. The abdominopelvic region that can be found in each of the four quadrants is the
a. umbilical
b. hypogastric
c. epigastric
d. left iliac
ANS: A DIF: Application REF: p. 10 OBJ: 7
TOP: Body cavities
28. The lower right abdominopelvic quadrant includes all of the

a. right hypochondriac region
b. right lumbar region
c. right iliac region
d. right epigastric region
TOP: Body cavities
29. An example of a positive feedback loop would be

a. maintaining proper body temperature
b. forming a blood clot
c. uterine contractions during childbirth
ANS: D DIF: Application REF: p. 15 OBJ: 9
TOP: The balance of body functions
30. An example of a negative feedback loop would be

a. maintaining proper body temperature
b. forming a blood clot
c. uterine contractions during childbirth
31. A midsagittal section through the head would divide

a. the forehead from the chin
b. the nose from the back of the head
c. the right eye from the left eye
TOP: Planes or body sections
32. A transverse section through the head would divide

ANS: A DIF: Application REF: pp. 8-9 OBJ: 5
33. A frontal section through the head would divide

ANS: B DIF: Application REF: pp. 8-9 OBJ: 5
34. If this kind of section were made through the center of the head, both the right and left eyes would be on the same section.
a. Coronal section
b. Midsagittal section
c. Transverse section
d. Both a and c above
ANS: D DIF: Application REF: pp. 8-9 OBJ: 5
35. The relationship between an organ and organ system is similar to the relationship between a cell and
a. an organism
b. the cellular level of organization
c. a tissue
ANS: C DIF: Synthesis REF: p. 6 OBJ: 3
TOP: Structural levels of organization

36. The heart is an example of this level or organization.
a. Tissue
b. Organ
c. Organ system
d. Organism
ANS: B DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 4-5
37. Blood vessels are examples of this level or organization.

a. Organ system
b. Tissue
c. Organ
d. Cellular
ANS: C DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 4-5
38. On a directional rosette, a letter L would stand for

a. “left” if it is opposite the letter R
b. “lateral” if it is opposite the letter D
c. “lateral” if it is opposite the letter A
d. “lower” if it is opposite the letter U
39. Which of the following terms do not refer to a part of the head region?
a. Olecranal
b. Zygomatic
c. Frontal
d. All of the above terms refer to parts of the head
ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
OBJ: 8 TOP: Body regions
40. Which of the following is not controlled by a negative feedback loop?

a. Body temperature
b. Blood oxygen concentration
c. Fluid levels of the body
d. Blood clot formation
41. The organ level of organization contains all of these lower levels.
a. The cellular and tissue levels only
b. The chemical and tissue levels only
c. The chemical, cellular, and tissue levels only
d. The chemical, cellular, tissue, and system levels
42. This structure physically separates the pelvic cavity from the abdominal cavity.
a. Mediastinum
b. Diaphragm
c. Mesenteries
d. None of the above
43. The lungs are located in the

a. thoracic cavity
b. mediastinum
c. dorsal cavity
44. A scientific experiment testing a new drug used two groups, one getting the drug and one getting the sugar pill. The group getting
the sugar pill is the
a. test group
b. hypothesis group
c. control group
d. observational group
TOP: Scientific method

45. A scientific experiment testing a new drug used two groups, one getting the drug and one getting a sugar pill. If the two groups had
the same result, it would indicate
a. the drug was safe and effective
b. the drug was ineffective because it did no better than the sugar pill
c. the experiment was a failure and no information could be gained
d. both b and c
ANS: B DIF: Application REF: p. 4 OBJ: 2
46. A scientific experiment testing a new drug used two groups, one getting the drug and one getting a sugar pill. If the group getting
the drug did much better than the group with the sugar pill:
a. it would indicate that the drug was more effective than the sugar pill
b. a theory would be formed
c. the control group would be shown to have improved because of the drug
d. all of the above
47. In the metric system

a. a meter is longer than a yard
b. a centimeter is longer than an inch
c. a nanometer is longer than a micrometer
d. all of the above
OBJ: 2 TOP: Metric System
48. If a person lost a little more than 3 pounds on a diet, they would have lost about
a. 500 grams
b. 1000 grams
c. 1500 grams
d. 2000 grams
TOP: Metric System
49. The word supine describes

a. the body lying face downward
b. an anatomical direction
c. the reference position of the body
d. the body lying face upward
50. Which process is used as the principal technique used to isolate and study the structural components or parts of the human body?
a. Imaging
b. Dissection
c. X-rays
d. Resection
TRUE/FALSE
1. The word dissection is derived from two word parts that mean “cutting apart.”
ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 3

2. The cell is the smallest living structural unit of the body.
ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 6

3. An organ is defined as a group of several types of cells working together to perform a specific function.

4. The reference position for the directional terms of the body is called the anatomical position.

5. The prone position is a position in which the body is lying face down.


6. The prone position is a position in which the body is lying face up.

7. The supine position is a position in which the body is lying face up.

8. Superior means toward the head.

9. Because humans walk upright, superior and superficial mean the same thing.

10. Anterior and proximal are opposite terms.

11. Medial and lateral are opposite terms.

12. Proximal and distal are opposite terms.

13. Because humans walk upright, inferior and deep mean the same thing.

14. Because humans walk upright, ventral and anterior mean the same thing.

15. Because humans walk upright, dorsal and posterior mean the same thing.

16. The hand is distal to the elbow.
ANS: T DIF: Application REF: p. 7 OBJ: 5

17. The foot is proximal to the knee.
ANS: F DIF: Application REF: p. 7 OBJ: 5

18. The nose is superior to the mouth.

19. The mouth is inferior to the chin.

20. The big toe is lateral to the little toe.

21. The ears are lateral to the nose.

22. The heart is medial to the lungs.


23. The skin is superficial to the ribs.

24. The lungs are deep to the ribs.

25. The bones of the arm are superficial to the muscles of the arm.

26. The nose is on the anterior side of the body.

27. The navel is on the dorsal side of the body.

28. The vertebrae are on the dorsal side of the body.

29. A sagittal section divides the body into upper and lower parts.
ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 8-9

30. A sagittal section divides the body into right and left parts.
ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 8-9

31. A frontal section divides the body into front and back parts.

32. A transverse section divides the body into upper and lower parts.

33. The two major cavities of the body are the abdominal and thoracic cavities.

34. The two major cavities of the body are the dorsal and ventral cavities.

35. The diaphragm divides the thoracic cavity and the abdominal cavity.

36. The mediastinum is in both the ventral and thoracic cavities.

37. The pleural cavity is in both the thoracic and dorsal cavities.

38. The brain and spinal cord are in the dorsal cavity.

39. The cranial cavity contains the brain and spinal cord.


40. The upper abdominopelvic area consists of the right and left hypogastric and the epigastric regions.

41. The lower abdominopelvic area contains the left iliac region.

42. The middle abdominopelvic area contains the umbilical region.

43. The epigastric, umbilical, and left lumbar regions are all in the middle abdominopelvic area.

44. Homeostasis refers to the relatively constant internal environment the body tries to maintain.

45. A negative feedback loop is one way the body tries to maintain homeostasis.

46. The sensor in a feedback loop compares the actual condition to the “normal” condition the body tries to maintain.

47. The effector in a negative feedback loop does something to move the regulated condition back to “normal.”

48. The sensor in a negative feedback loop detects a change in the regulated condition.

49. In the negative feedback loop, the effector is the link between the sensor and the control center.
ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 14-15

50. The formation of a blood clot is an example of a negative feedback loop.

51. The control of the volume of body fluid is an example of a negative feedback loop.

52. The regulation of blood pH is an example of a positive feedback loop.

53. The contraction of the uterus during childbirth is an example of a positive feedback loop.

54. The arms and legs are part of the axial body portion.

55. The head and trunk are part of the axial body portion.

56. The arms and legs are part of the appendicular body portion.


Visit https://testbankbell.com
now to explore a rich
collection of testbank,
solution manual and enjoy
exciting offers!
57. Feedback loops continue to improve throughout life, reaching their peak in late adulthood.

58. The word organism can be used to describe a living thing.

59. A body in a supine position has its dorsal side to the ground.

TOP: Anatomical position | Anatomical directions
60. A body in a prone position has its dorsal side to the ground.

TOP: Anatomical position | Anatomical directions
61. On the compass rosettes in a figure, the letter P opposite the letter D would stand for the word proximal.

62. The thoracic cavity is divided into two parts, the mediastinum and the dorsal cavity.

63. The midsagittal and transverse sections, which divide the abdomen into quadrants, intersect at the base of the mediastinum.

64. The diaphragm divides the axial from the appendicular region of the body.

65. The word leg refers only to the part of the body between the knee and the ankle.

66. Women can have one more body function regulated by a positive feedback loop than men can.

67. Exercise helps to maintain homeostasis.

OBJ: 9 TOP: Health and Well-Being: Exercise Physiology
68. The cell is the simplest level of organization in a living thing.

69. When reading a compass rosette in a figure, the letter L can mean either left or lateral.

70. When reading a compass rosette in a figure, the letter P opposite the letter D stands for posterior.

71. The dorsal cavity is a made up of a single cavity containing the brain and spinal cord.

72. The abdominopelvic region is divided into four quadrants, the left and right lumbar regions on the upper part and the left and right
iliac regions on the lower part.


73. The cells in the body live in a water environment that contains dissolved salts and other substances.

OBJ: 9 TOP: Balance of body functions
74. The terms ophthalmic and orbital both refer to the eye area.
ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)

OBJ: 6 TOP: Descriptive terms for body regions
75. In the scientific method, a hypothesis is based on observation.

OBJ: 2 TOP: Scientific method
76. The single method used for all scientific investigation is called the scientific method.

77. An accepted hypothesis must be retested numerous times to become a theory.

78. If the effects of a drug are being tested by a scientific experiment, two groups would be used: a group that gets the drug and a group
that gets an inactive substance. The group that gets the inactive substance is called the control group.

79. The term atrophy describes a body structure that is at the peak of its efficiency.

80. The term dystrophy describes a degenerative process on a body structure due to lack of use.

81. The study of the structure of an organism and the relationships of its parts is often defined as physiology.

MATCHING
Match each of the following terms with its correct definition.

a. Anterior
b. Lateral
c. Superior
d. Medial
e. Proximal
f. Superficial
g. Posterior
1. Toward the head, upper or above
2. Toward the midline of the body
3. In humans, this term means the same as ventral
4. Nearest to the point of origin
5. Toward the back of the body
6. Nearest the surface of the body
7. Toward the side of the body
1. ANS: C DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

2. ANS: D DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
3. ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
4. ANS: E DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
5. ANS: G DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
6. ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7
7. ANS: B DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

Match the body region with the correct body part.
a. Skull b.
Groin c.
Chest d.
Mouth
e. Brachial
f. Wrist
g. Cephalic
h. Antebrachial
i. Antecubital
j. Cervical
k. Axillary
l. Femoral
m. Lumbar
n. Popliteal
o. Tarsal
p. Plantar
8. Arm
9. Head
10. Cranial
11. Oral
12. Inguinal
13. Thoracic
14. Carpal
15. Sole of the foot
16. Neck
17. Thigh
18. Armpit
19. Depressed area in the front of the elbow
20. Lower back between ribs and pelvis
21. Ankle
22. Forearm
23. Area behind the knee
8. ANS: E DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)

9. ANS: G DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
10. ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
11. ANS: D DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
12. ANS: B DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
13. ANS: C DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
14. ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
15. ANS: P DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
16. ANS: J DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
17. ANS: L DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
18. ANS: K DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
19. ANS: I DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
20. ANS: M DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
21. ANS: O DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
22. ANS: H DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
23. ANS: N DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)
Match the term with the correct definition or explanation.

a. Hypothesis
b. Scientific method
c. Theory
d. Experimentation
e. Control group
f. Test group
24. A hypothesis that has been supported by repeated testing and has gained a high level of confidence
25. A systematic approach to discovery
26. A group that does not get what is being tested
27. A reasonable guess based on previous informal observations

28. A process used to test a hypothesis
29. A group that receives what is being tested
24. ANS: C DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4

25. ANS: B DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4
26. ANS: E DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4
27. ANS: A DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4
28. ANS: D DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4
29. ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4
ESSAY
1. Explain the concept of homeostasis. Why is this so important to the survival of the body?
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Application REF: pp. 12-14 OBJ: 9

2. Explain a positive feedback loop. Give an example of a positive feedback loop in the body.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Application REF: p. 15 OBJ: 9

3. Explain a negative feedback loop. How does a negative feedback loop assist in maintaining homeostasis?
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Synthesis REF: p. 15 OBJ: 9

4. List and briefly explain the levels of organization in the body.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 4-6 OBJ: 3

5. List and briefly explain the process of the scientific method.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Memorization REF: p. 4 OBJ: 2

6. Develop and explain an experiment that tests the hypothesis that people with high levels of vitamin C in their diets have fewer
colds than people with low levels of vitamin C in their diets.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)

7. Explain the difference between a hypothesis and a theory.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Application REF: p. 4 OBJ: 2 TOP: Scientific method
8. Explain how the control group is used to determine the success of the test group and the experiment.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Application REF: p. 4 OBJ: 2 TOP: Scientific method

9. What is the relationship between a meter and a yard, an inch and a centimeter, and a pound and a gram?
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Application REF: p. 4 OBJ: 2 TOP: Metric System
10. Describe anatomical position. Explain the terms supine and prone.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)

TOP: Anatomical position
11. Name and explain the 10 anatomical directions.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)

12. Name and describe the three planes or body sections.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Memorization REF: pp. 8-9 OBJ: 5

13. Describe the parts of the ventral body cavity.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)

TOP: Body cavities
14. Describe the parts of the dorsal cavity and explain what each part contains.
ANS:
(Answers may vary)

TOP: Body cavities
15. What makes up the axial portion of the body? What makes up the appendicular portion of the body?
ANS:
(Answers may vary)
DIF: Memorization REF: p. 13 (Table 1-2)


Exploring the Variety of Random
Documents with Different Content
The profiteers were determined to “see this thing through,” to the
bitter end. The Statesmen would fight to the last man. The old
gentlemen on military service boards were outraged by poor devils
with wives and babes who tried to evade conscription. At dinner
parties and banquets these same old gentlemen, in clean linen, grew
purple in the face with eloquence about the unthinkable shame of
peace without victory. They would sacrifice their last son, or at least
all their numerous nephews, on the altar of patriotism. They would
go without sugar to the end of time rather than yield to a brutal
enemy. Noble sentiments! But some of the sons and the numerous
nephews who were going to be sacrificed on the altar of patriotism
were secretly hoping that diplomacy, or strategy, or some miracle of
God might find some decent way of peace before that sacrifice was
accomplished. They were in love with life, those boys of ours. They
didn’t want to die, strange as it may have seemed to those who
thought it was their duty to die and look pleasant about it.
They were unfair, those fellows who sat in wet trenches cursing
the levity of England, writing sonnets, some of them about the
murderous old men and the laughing ladies. It was true that some
old men were making money—piles of it—out of all this business of
war. It was true that some of the pretty ladies seemed callous of the
death of the boys they “vamped.” It was true that large numbers of
men in factories and workshops were making fantastic wages in safe
jobs while poor old Tommy was dodging death in the mud for
fourteen pence a day. It was true that war and casualties had
become so familiar to the mind that many folk at home were
beginning to accept it all as a normal thing. It was true that
cheerfulness, gaiety, high spirits, were adopted as the only code of
life, and that melancholy, fear, pessimism, prophets of woe, were
barred as people of bad form. It was true that the imagination of the
average man and woman at home was incapable of visualising a
front line trench or a battlefield under a German barrage fire. It was
true that the newspapers were full of false optimism and false
victories. It was true that in a war against militarism England had
been militarised, and that officers on seven days’ leave from Hell-on-
Earth were insulted by little squirts called A.P.M.’s because they
didn’t carry gloves or because their collars were too light in colour,
with a thousand other tyrannies. It was true that the hatred of
women against “the Huns” was not shared by men who had come to
have a fellow-feeling in their hearts for German peasants caught in
the trap of war against their will, with no less courage than the men
who killed them or whom they killed. It was true that parsons
professing Christianity were more bloodthirsty than soldiers who
cried out to God in hours of agony and blasphemed in hours of rage.
It was true that in England in war time there was a noisy
cheerfulness that seemed like callousness to those condemned to
death. But it was not true that England was indifferent to the
sufferings of the men, or that all that optimism was due to
carelessness, or that all the laughing ladies were having the time of
their lives because of war’s delightful thrill and the chance of three
husbands, or more lovers, in rapid sequence as battle followed battle
and wiped out young life.
The Agony of England
Beneath the mask of cheeriness England agonised. Fathers grew

old and white and withered because of their sons’ sacrifice, but kept
a stiff upper lip when the telegraph boy was the messenger of
death. The mothers of boys out there suffered martyrdom in wakeful
nights, in dreadful dreams, though they kept smiling when the boys
came home between the battles and—worst of all—went back again.
They hid their tears, steeled their hearts to courage. Even the pretty
ladies—the most frivolous, the most light-hearted—gave their love so
easily because it was all they had to give, and they would grudge
nothing to the boys. Apart from a vicious little set, the women were
beyond words wonderful in service and self-sacrifice. In spite of all
the weakness of human nature and the low passions stirred up by
the war, the British people as a whole during these years of great
ordeal were sublime in resignation and spiritual courage. In millions
of little houses in mean streets, and in all the houses of the rich, to
which a double knock came with news of a dead or wounded boy,
the awful meaning of the war burnt its way into the soul of the
people. But they would not yield to weakness and had a stubborn
obstinacy of faith in final victory—somehow, in a way they could not
see. Anyhow, they wouldn’t “let down” their men or show the white
feather. They did not know that many of the men were sullen
because of this unreasonable optimism, this “bloody cheerfulness.”
They did not know that in the trenches, under an awful gunfire,
many men looked back to England as to another world, which they
no longer knew, from which they were cut off by spiritual distances
no longer to be bridged, and for whose safety, frivolity, profiteers
and prostitutes they were asked to die, to be shell-shocked, gassed
or mutilated, under incompetent generalship and for inadequate
reasons.
The meaning of the war in those men’s minds had become less
simple and clear-cut since the days when it seemed a straight fight
between idealism and brutality—the Allies with all the right on their
side against the Germans with all the wrong. To the end some men
thought like that, and they were lucky. They were the generals, the
statesmen, and, now and then, the fighting men with unbending will
and purpose. But to many of our officers and men sitting in their
ditches, as I know, the war was no longer as simple as that. It was
no longer, they thought, a conflict between idealism and brutality. It
had developed into a monstrous horror, a crime against humanity
itself, in which all the fighting nations were involved equally in a
struggle for existence against powers beyond their own control. The
machinery of destruction was greater than the men who were its
victims. Human flesh and spirit were of no avail against long-range
guns and high explosives. The common German soldiers, blown to
bits by our guns, torn to fragments by our mines, poisoned by our
gas, as our men were so destroyed, had no more responsibility for
these devilish things than we had. It may have been so in the
beginning—though that was doubtful. What did they know in their
peasant skulls? But now they were just the victims of the ghastly
madness that had stricken us all, of the crime against civilisation into
which we had all staggered. There was no getting out of it, of
course. The Germans had to be killed or they would kill us, but the
whole damned thing had happened against the will of those who on
both sides of the lines cowered under screeching shells and hated it.
Surely to God, they argued, it ought not to have happened! It was
civilisation that had been at fault, not those poor devils in the mud
and mire.
It was the statesmen and politicians who were guilty of this thing,
or the Kings and the Emperors, or the schoolmasters and the
journalists, or the whole structure of society based on competition
and commercial greed, supported by armies and fleets, or the
incurable stupidity of the human race, or a denial of God in the
hearts of men; but not the fault, certainly, of those fellows from
Bavaria and Saxony who were waiting for our next attack and writing
picture-postcards in their dug-outs to women who would soon be
widows. So many of our men began to talk and think, as every
padre knows and as I know. So, even in France, the soldiers argued,
if we may believe Barbusse and others, whom I believe as evidence
of that. So certainly the German troops were thinking, as I heard
from prisoners and afterwards from those who had fought to the
last. The original meaning of the war altered, or was overwhelmed,
as man sank more deeply into the mud and misery of it on both
sides. It was only a few who held fast to its first principles of right
and wrong, simple, clear, and utterly divided by a line of trenches
and barbed wire.
Unbroken Loyalties
The “Long, long way to Tipperary” had carried our men far from
the first enthusiasm with which they had joined up as “crusaders for
civilisation.” And yet they had an instinct of loyalty in them stronger
than all their doubts, angers and ironies. Again and again, before
their battles, and at the worst time, it rose and carried them through
to desperate endeavour or frightful endurance. It was loyalty to their
own manhood, to their division and battalion, to their comrades, to
the spirit of this hellish game, and to the old, old spirit of race which
they could not deny. The orders might be wrong, but they obeyed.
The attack might be doomed before it started—and often was—but
they went over the top, all out. The battalion might be wiped out
under high explosives, but the last of the living, lying among the
dead, held on to their holes in the earth until they were relieved or
killed or captured. Comradeship helped them. It was the best thing
they had all through, and very wonderful; and, more wonderful still,
they kept a sense of humour, whimsical, ironical, vulgar,
blasphemous, and divine, which made them guffaw at any joke
suggested by a pal and laugh in the face of death itself if it were not
immediate in its menace. To the end the British Army kept that
saving grace of humour, denied to the Germans, not so common
with the French, but our most priceless gift in a world of horror. So
they went on with the job of war, while the casualties tore gaps in
their ranks.
New men came out to take their places. Fresh contingents arrived
from the Overseas Dominions. There were new and monstrous
battles. The Australians had already come to France after the tragic
epic of Gallipoli, in which they too had lost the flower of their
manhood. The Canadians had been a strong link on the British front
since the early battles of Ypres. In England conscription took the
place of recruiting. There was to be no escape from the ordeal for
any able-bodied man unless he was wanted for a home job or could
get one to save his skin or his conscience.... The war went on in
France and Flanders, in Italy, Russia, Palestine, Turkey, Africa. The
British Empire was all in, everywhere, on sea and land. The area of
destruction was widened as the months passed and the years.
Battles became more murderous because the technique of war was
becoming more “efficient,” its weapons more deadly. Guns increased
in number and in range. Poison gas supplemented high explosives.
Aeroplanes increased in size, in power, and speed of flight; in bomb-
dropping activity. Tanks arrived. The British battles in Flanders five
months long, after those of Arras and Vimy and Messines, were
more ghastly, more sacrificial, than those of the Somme. They were
fought in mud and blood. Men were drowned in shell craters.
Battalions were blotted out by machine-gun fire, high explosives and
gas shells.
The War of Exhaustion
The Germans gave way slowly, after stubborn defence, from every
yard of cratered earth. Their own roads were choked with the traffic
of the wounded—an endless tide of human agony. Behind them
there was a welter of death and wreckage. Their man power was
giving out on the Western Front. The collapse of Russia, stricken by
infernal losses—four million dead!—with the very machinery of its
life broken down under the weight of war, in revolt against the
corruption of its own state, enraged by treachery from within, and
weakened by a spreading anarchy among men who declined any
longer to be slaughtered like sheep, gave Germany her last and only
chance of flinging fresh forces on to the Western front and smashing
through to victory by a last prodigious effort.
France was exhausted, but not yet spent. Her youth also had been
thrown into the furnace fires recklessly, without a chance, time and
time again, from the very beginning. Some of her generals had
blundered, quarrelled, intrigued, while the manhood of France was
bleeding to death. Battalions of young boys—as at Souchez—had
flung themselves against almost impregnable positions and had
fallen like grass before the scythe. Her coloured troops had been
slaughtered like poor dumb beasts in storms of fire. Grand offensives
in Champagne had been broken after losses hidden from the French
people, though leaking out. The defence of Verdun, saving France
from surrender, had drained it of its most precious life’s blood. There
were periods when France almost despaired, when there seemed no
hope at all of final victory, but only of gradual extermination, which
would leave France anyhow with but women and cripples and
blinded soldiers and old men, and politicians, and profiteers. At the
back there were periods of mortal depression. At the front the spirit
of the men was sullen. There was mutiny in many ranks. They
refused to be launched into another of those “grand offensives” at
the bidding of generals who wasted blood like water. The French
Army ceased fighting, while the British struggled in Flanders, at the
cost of 800,000 casualties in five months.
Germany’s Last Offensive
Then came the crash of the German offensive in March of 1918:

against the British line first. They had 114 Divisions, many fresh
from Russia, against 48 under British command, tired after Flanders,
and thinly scattered over a big front. It was the last thrust of the
German war machine, and marvellously organised, directed and
fought. The German Army, in spite of many blunders in High
Command, had shewn a dynamic energy, a driving force, a relentless
will, and a marvellous valour which was wellnigh irresistible. The
German soldiers were no less brave than the British or French, no
less wonderful in self-sacrifice, no less enduring in agony. Their final
effort, when they put in the last of their man power, was a supreme
achievement to which we must render homage if we have any
chivalry in our souls, in spite of a loathing of war which now makes
all such retrospect a nauseous horror. The German sergeants and
machine gunners who carried out the new tactics of “infiltration”
were great soldiers and gallant men.
The thin British line—after that struggle in Flanders and battles
round Cambrai—was broken by the sheer weight of that terrific
impact, and the British troops fell back fighting, until out of whole
divisions only a few hundreds were left standing, and there was but
a ragged line of exhausted men between Amiens and the sea.
The heart of the English-speaking peoples—all of them now, for
the United States was with us at this time—stopped beating for a
while, or seemed to do, as the news of that German advance went
over the wires of the world. After all the battles of the French and
English, their struggles, their slaughter, their sacrifice, their
endurance, it looked for a little while as though it had all been in
vain, and that all was lost. That was not ten years ago. It was less
than seven. Yet can we recall even those days, when we felt stone
cold, with a sharp anxiety thrusting its knife into our brains as the
Germans came across the fields of the Somme, retaking all that
ground which had been fought for yard by yard—drew near to
Amiens, turned on the French, smashed their line as the British line
had been smashed, and drove down to the Marne as in the first
month of the war? Truly it looked like defeat. How near we were to
that was only known at the time, perhaps even now, to those of us
who saw with our own eyes the wild and tragic chaos of our falling
back, the exhaustion and weakness of the French and British troops
who had fought down to their last few men in every battalion, and
the old battle grounds in possession of the enemy. Frightful weeks;
ghastly emotions; scenes to sear one’s imagination for ever. Yet now
—hardly remembered, so strange and self-protective is the human
mind!
Looking back on that time, trying to recapture its sensations and
philosophy, I cannot remember any absolute despair in England and
France. By all the rules of the game we had nearly lost—within a
hair’s breadth—yet we did not acknowledge that. There was no cry
of surrender from either of the nations, which still had a fixed faith
that ultimately we should win, somehow. There was something
astounding in the stolidity of the British people on the edge of great
disaster. To men at the front it seemed ignorance of the extremity of
peril. But it was the spirit of the race steadying itself again to fresh
ordeals, unyielding in pride; they could not be beaten, it was
unthinkable. To hint it was a treachery. If more men were wanted
the youngest brothers would follow their older brothers. So it
happened. Three hundred thousand boys of eighteen, the last
reserves of Great Britain, were shipped over to France to fill up the
frightful gap. From the factories which had been pouring out the
material of war, not only for the British Army but for all the Allies, all
but the most indispensable men were enrolled. The physically unfit,
soldiers many times wounded, old crocks, were sent out to the
depôts in France.
America Comes In
One new power was almost ready for active service on the side of
the Allies. If France could only hold out long enough, this new and
arduous weight would be bound to turn the scale at last against
German man-power, drained down to its last reserves. The United
States Army was pouring into France with great tides of men,
magnificent in physique, keen in spirit, and unscarred as yet by the
fires of the war. They were untrained, ignorant of lessons that could
only be learnt by deadly experience, and their Generals were novices
in the organisation and handling of vast masses of troops, as the
British had been. They were bound to make ghastly mistakes. They
would waste their men as ours had been wasted, by faulty staff
work; but sheer weight of numbers and the spirit of brave men
would in the long run be irresistible. Had we the time to wait for
them?...
We had been waiting long for them—too long as some thought,
not realising the diversity of racial views in that great country and
knowing little of its historical character and meaning. Vast numbers
of its people had come from Europe in the past, distant or recent, to
escape—Europe. They had wanted to get away from the very
hatreds and rivalries which had led to this monstrous conflict. They
desired to live secure, in a civilisation where the common man might
work in peace and liberty without being flagged to fight for some
Kings’ quarrel or the ambitions of diplomats, or the fever of racial
passion. Great numbers of them could not understand what the
European quarrel was about when all was said and done. Anyhow, it
had nothing to do with them, in the Middle West and the West,
though New York seemed to be worried. Many intelligent Americans,
shocked to the soul by this breakdown of civilisation in Europe,
believed sincerely that the best service they could render the world
was to stand on one side, to act finally as arbitrators between the
exhausted nations among whom neither side could win—it looked
like that—and to lead the stricken peoples back to sanity and peace.
German Americans had a natural sympathy with the old fatherland
though dismayed by its ruthlessness. Irish Americans still disliked
England too much because of bitter and traditional memories to
weep tears over her sacrifice or to glow with pride at the splendour
of her spirit. Czechs, Slavs, Swedes were utterly neutral. In any
case, apart from all racial strains, the war in Europe was enormously
distant to the souls of men on isolated farmsteads, or to the crowds
in the main streets of little towns west of New York. They elected
President Wilson to keep them out of the war, and that strange man,
with his mingling of mysticism and practical politics, his moral
eloquence, and his autocratic methods, his mental disgust at war
and violence, and his belief that the spiritual destiny of the United
States was not to be fulfilled in terms of military force, or by any
entry into the quarrels of the Old World, made them resist for a long
time the strain of almost intolerable pressures, such as the German
U-boat war and the rising passion of American opinion, in many
classes not neutral, not indifferent to the cause of France and Great
Britain, but tortured by shame, impatience, rage, because the
Government of the United States refused to call its people to a
crusade on the side of right and justice.
All the old stock in America, or nearly all, millions of people in little
American homes who read English books, whose minds were soaked
in English history, whose ancestors had sprung from English and
Scottish soil, panted for their deliverance from a neutrality which was
a fraud and a shame in their hearts. They were not neutral. They
never had been. They were all for England. Millions of others—
remembering Lafayette, and filled with a deep sentiment for France,
an enormous admiration for French heroism—enraged against
Germany for the ruin she had made in France—loathed the policy of
President Wilson, which seemed to them cowardly, selfish and
unworthy. The pressure on Wilson became stronger and more
insistent. Germany helped them in every possible way by deliberate
insult, by methods of sea warfare outside the traditional code of
common humanity; by plots, incendiarism, and sabotage within the
United States itself in order to check the supplies of stores and
ammunition addressed to England and France. When war was finally
declared by the United States in the spring of 1917, the American
people, apart from small minorities, were no longer neutral or
indifferent, and a tidal wave of enthusiasm for service swept over all
barriers and oppositions from coast to coast. It rose higher and
higher as the months passed, reaching to a spiritual exaltation,
unlike any emotion that had ever possessed that nation before. It
had different motives, different manifestations from those which
possessed the peoples of Europe engaged in the war. The Americans
were not conscious of self-interest. There was no sense of menace
against them such as Great Britain had partly felt. There was nothing
they desired to gain for themselves. It was a crusade on behalf of
civilisation. It was also unconsciously a desire in the American mind
to prove that in spite of all their material wealth, their comfort of life,
their peace and security, they were ready to suffer, to make sacrifice,
to spend their energy, and their dollars, to give their manhood and
their courage for a spiritual ideal. The United States would prove to
the world that it had a national soul. It would prove to itself that all
the different strains of race within its citizenship had been merged
and moulded into a national unity, responsive to the call of
patriotism, disciplined by a common code, obedient to the voice of
the State speaking for the whole people.
The very suspicion that certain sections of American citizens might
be cold to this enthusiasm, even disloyal to the State, made
American patriotism more self-conscious, demonstrative, and
vociferous than in European nations where it was taken for granted.
There was a spreading intolerance of the mass mind because of the
need of unity. A nonconformist to this enthusiasm was marked down
as a traitor or a shirker. Every American citizen, man, woman and
child, had to prove allegiance to the state at war by some kind of
service and self sacrifice, in work or dollars or both. Woe betide all
pacifists, conscientious objectors, or indifferentists. American
methods of work, business organisation, industrial energy, dollar
“drives,” were all diverted from peace to war. Financiers, industrial
magnates, engineers, organisers, gave their service to the State and
“speeded up” the war machine. The entire manhood of the nation
was mobilised, drilled, equipped with an utter disregard of cost, and
with driving zeal. It was a terrific demonstration of force, physical,
moral, emotional, set in motion by generous impulses and terrific in
potentiality.
In France and Flanders I saw the arrival of the first American
troops, and then the following tide of men, behind the lines of the
fighting front. It seemed to me then, as it does now, a miracle of
history. After three hundred years the New World had come to the
rescue of the Old. They marched over fields like those of Agincourt
and Crecy where our bowmen and pikemen had fought before
America was on the map of the world. And yet those men of the
United States Army, different in type from ours, belonging to a
different civilisation, spoke the English tongue, and no difference of
accent could break our sense of kinship with them. Even though
they did not all spring from our stock and blood they were in some
way heirs of our tradition, our code of law, our root ideas. We
watched them pass behind the lines with a sense of comfort and a
kind of wonderment. They were magnificent men, untouched as yet
by the strain of war, marvellously fresh, like our first youth which
was now dead. Their numbers grew and grew. One came across
their camps everywhere, but one question was like a sharp sword in
one’s brain: Had they come in time? The Germans were on the
Marne again. Paris was being shelled. Marshal Foch had no reserves.
In a few days, if the Germans made another thrust, Paris might be
surrendered and the spirit of France broken, and the British army
involved in general defeat. Such things were unuttered. They were
thrust aside even from one’s own mind. But they kept one’s brain on
the rack.
The Counter-Attack
Then Foch attacked. As rapidly as his line of blue men had come
up to strengthen the British Front after the German break-through—I
shall never forget the ride of the French Cavalry, on lean horses wet
with sweat, and the hurried tide of blue transport waggons, driven
by coal-black negroes, and the endless line of guns with dusty,
sullen gunners coming to support us when our men had fought back
for three frightful weeks—he withdrew them from our Front. They
vanished like a dream army. English and Scottish Divisions were
entrained for the French Front. Our own lines were thin and weak.
Foch was taking the ultimate risks. American infantry and American
Marines were put in at Chateau Thierry for their baptism of blood.
French infantry, withdrawn from other parts of the line, left almost
without defence, were rushed to the Marne. The German salient
thrust out like a battering ram, pointing to Paris, was attacked on
both sides, at its junctions with the main line. It was pierced and
broken. The enemy was panic-stricken and thrown into a mad
disorder.
“Who attacked?” asked German prisoners.
“Foch’s Army of Reserve,” was the answer.
“He has no Reserves!” they said with rage. “It was impossible for
him to have an Army of Reserve.”
It was an Army of Reserve gathered piecemeal, flung together,
hurled forward in a master stroke of strategy, at the last minute of
the eleventh hour. It was the second “Miracle” of the Marne.
That battle broke the spirit of the German people and of the
German army. They knew that only retreat and defeat lay ahead of
them. They had struck their last great blow and it had failed. They
had used up their man-power. They, certainly, had no Army of
Reserve. They could only hope that the French and British were as
exhausted as themselves and that the Americans were still unready.
They prepared for a general retreat when the British army took the
offensive of August, 1918, and never stopped fighting along the
whole length of its line until the day of armistice, while the French
and Americans pressed the Germans on their own front.
The American army, inexperienced, raw, not well handled by some
of its generals, fought with the valour which all the world expected,
and suffered great losses and made its weight felt. The sight of the
American troops was a message of doom to the Germans. They
knew that behind this vanguard was a vast American army,
irresistible as a moving avalanche. However great the slaughter of
these soldiers from the New World, pressing on in the face of
machine-gun fire, and lashed to death, millions would follow on, and
then more millions. The game was up for Germany, and they knew
it, and were stricken. Yet they played the game, this grisly game, to
the end, with a valour, a science and a discipline which was the
supreme proof of their quality as great soldiers. It was a fighting
retreat, orderly and controlled, although the British army never gave
them a day’s respite, attacked and attacked, captured masses of
prisoners, thousands of guns, and broke their line again and again.
The Last Three Months
That sweep forward of the British in the last three months was an
astounding achievement. They were the same men who halted on
the armistice line down from Mons as those who had begun the
attack three months before. They had few reinforcements. They had
gone beyond their heavy guns, almost out of reach of their
transport. Their losses had been heavy. There was no battalion at
more than half its strength. They had been strained to the last fibre
of nervous energy. But they had never slackened up. They were
inspired by more than mortal strength, by the exultation of advance,
the liberation of great cities, the rescue of populations long under
German rule, the fever of getting forward to the end at last.
The delirious welcome of the liberated peoples awakened some of
the first emotions of war which had long seemed dead. The entry
into Lille was unforgettable. The first men in khaki were surrounded
by wild crowds of men and women weeping with joy at the sight of
them. Their buttons and shoulder straps were torn off as souvenirs.
They were kissed by old women, bearded men, young girls, babies.
Once again rose the cry of “Vivent les Anglais!” as in the beginning
of the war. Our men were glad to be alive that day to get the
welcome of these people who had suffered mental torture and many
tyrannies during those four years under German rule. The fire of
gratitude warmed cold hearts, re-lit enthusiasm, made it all seem
worth while after all. Surely the French in Lille, the Belgians in
Bruges, the people of Tournai, Cambrai, Valenciennes, Liége, have
not forgotten those days of liberation. Surely they did not join in the
cynical chorus which rose against England in France, or at least in
the French press, during the years that followed? That to me is
unbelievable, with these memories in my heart.
It was Marshal Foch himself who acknowledged with generous
warmth that in these last months of war it was the hammer strokes
of the British army which did most to break the German war
machine to bits, by enormous captures of prisoners, guns, and
ground. General Ludendorff has said so, squarely, in his books; and
history will record it, though it was quickly forgotten in some
countries and never known in others. It is only for the sake of truth
that it is worth recalling now, for there is no boast of victory in the
hearts of men, knowing its cost and its horror, and no glory left
about that war except the memory of the world’s youth which
suffered on both sides of the line.
The Coming of Peace
So it ended, with a kind of stupefaction in the minds of the

soldiers. It was an enormous relief, followed by a kind of lassitude of
body and spirit. Ended at last! Incredible! At the front on the day of
armistice there was no wild exultation, except in a few messes here
and there behind the lines. The men who had fought through it, or
through enough of it to have been soaked in its dirt, were too tired
to cheer or sing or shout because peace had come. Peace! What did
that mean? Civilian life again? Impossible to readjust one’s mind to
that. Impossible to go home and pick up the old threads of life as
though this Thing had not happened. They were different men. Their
minds had been seared by dreadful experience. Now that peace had
come after that long strain something snapped in them.
Many of them had a curiously dead feeling at first. They thought
back to all the things they had seen and done and suffered, and
remembered the old comrades who had fallen on the way. Perhaps
they were the lucky ones, those who lay dead, especially those who
had died before disillusion and spiritual revolt against this infernal
business. A war for civilisation?... Civilisation had been outraged by
its universal crime. A war against militarism? Militarism had been
enthroned in England and France. Liberty, free speech, truth itself,
had been smashed by military orders and discipline over the bodies
and souls of men. A war against the “Huns?” Poor old Fritz! Poor
bloody old Fritz! Not such a bad sort after all, man for man and
mass for mass. They had put up a wonderful fight. The glory of
victory? Well, it had left the world in a mess of ruin, and the best
had died. What would come out of this victory? What reward for the
men who had fought, or for any nation? The profiteers had done
very well out of war. The Generals had rows of ribbons on their
breasts. Youth had perished; the finest and noblest. Civilisation had
been saved? To Hell with a civilisation which had allowed this kind of
thing! No, when peace came, there were millions of men who did
not rejoice much, because they were sick and tired and all
enthusiasm was dead within them. They were like convicts after long
years of hard labour standing at the prison gates open to them with
liberty and life beyond. What’s the good of life to men whose spirit
has been sapped, or of liberty to men deprived of it so long they
were almost afraid of it? Strange, conflicting emotions, hardly to be
analysed, tore at men’s hearts on the night of armistice.
Shipwrecked men do not cheer when the storm abates and the
bodies of their dead comrades float behind them. Nor did our men
along the front where it was very quiet that day after a bugle here
and there sounded the “Cease fire!” and the guns were silenced at
last. Peace!... Good God!
II.—THE UNCERTAIN PEACE
Ten years after.... The memory of the war days is fading from the
mind of the world. The ten million dead lie in their graves, but life
goes marching on. Self-preservation, vital interests, new and exciting
problems, the human whirligig, are too absorbing for a continual
hark-back to the thought of that mortality. We are no longer
conscious of any gap in the ranks of youth, torn out by the
machinery of destruction. We do not realise the loss of all that spirit,
genius, activity and blood, except in private remembrance of some
dead boy whose portrait in uniform stands on the mantelshelf. A new
generation of youth has grown up since the beginning of the war.
Boys of ten at that time of history are now twenty, and not much
interested in that old tale. Girls who were twelve are now mothers of
babes. The war! Bother the war! Let’s forget it and get on with life.
In that youth is right. It is not in its nature nor in moral health to
dwell on morbid memories. But it is hard on those whose service is
forgotten—so soon. In England—ten years after—there are still
58,000 wounded soldiers in the hospitals—and in France great
numbers more; but they are hidden away, as a painful secret of
things that happened. Only now and again the sight of their hospital
blue in some quiet country lane, near their hiding places, shocks one
with a sharp stab of remorse. We had forgotten all that. We hate to
be reminded of it.
Fading Memories
Even the men who fought through those years seldom speak of
their experience. It is fading out of their own minds, though it
seemed unforgettable. They are forgetting the names of the villages
in France and Flanders where they were billeted, or where they
fought, or where they passed a hundred times with their guns and
transport under shell fire. Good heavens!—don’t you remember?—
that place where the waggons were “pasted,” where the Sergeant-
Major was blown to bits, where old Dick got his “Blighty” wound?
No. Something has passed a sponge across those tablets of memory
—things that happened afterwards. Now and again at Divisional
banquets officers try to revive the spirit of those days and exchange
yarns about trench warfare and days of battle. It is queer how they
remember only the jokes, the laughable things, the comradeship, the
thrill. The horror has passed.
Something else has passed; the comradeship itself, between
officers and men, between all classes united for a time in common
sacrifice and service, annihilating all differences of rank and social
prejudice and wealth at the beginning of the war. It seemed then as
though nothing could ever again build up those barriers of caste.
The muddiest, dirtiest, commonest soldier from the slums or the
factories or the fields was a hero before whom great ladies were
eager to kneel in devotion and love, to cut away his blood-stained
clothes, to dress his wounds. In the canteens the pretty ladies slaved
like drudges to give cocoa or any comfort to “the boys” from the
front. In the trenches or in ruins under shell fire young officers wrote
home about their men: “They’re too splendid for words!... I am
proud to command such a topping crowd.... They make me feel
ashamed of things I used to think about the working man. There is
nothing too good for them.” The British Government thought so too,
and promised them great rewards—“homes for heroes,” good wages
for good work, “a world safe for democracy.”
The Barriers of Class
Ten years after, the classes have fallen apart again. The old
hostilities between Capital and Labour have been revived with
increasing bitterness in many minds. The old barriers have been
rebuilt in many countries. For a time, even in England, there was a
revolutionary spirit among the men who had served, and a sense of
fear and hostility against those who had said that nothing was too
good for them. “Our heroes” became very quickly “those damned
Socialists,” or those “dirty dogs” who are never satisfied, or those
lazy scoundrels who would rather live on the “dole” than take an
honest job. The men who had saved England were suspected of
plotting for her overthrow, subsidised by Russian money and
seduced by the propaganda of a secret society inspired by the spirit
of Anti-Christ.
Ten years after the closing up of ranks, the surrender of self
interest, and a spiritual union, England is again seething with strikes,
industrial conflict, political passion, and class consciousness. There
are still a million and a quarter unemployed officially registered in
Great Britain, and half a million more not on the registers and worse
off. Instead of “homes for heroes” the working people in the great
cities are shamefully overcrowded. In the agricultural districts of
England young men who fought in the Last Crusade and marched
with Allenby to Jerusalem, or those boys who left their fields in ’14
for the dirty ditches in Flanders—for England’s sake—are getting
twenty-five shillings a week, upon which a single man can hardly live
and a married man must starve. And ten years after they poured out
their blood and treasure without a grudge, without reservation, first
in the field and last out of it, the old “quality” of England or their
younger sons are selling up their old houses to pay taxes which are
extinguishing them as a class, depriving them of their old power and
prerogatives, and changing the social structure of the nation by an
economic revolution which is almost accomplished. On both sides
there is bitterness, a sense of injustice, and an utter disillusion with
the results of victory.
The Great Reaction
Ten years after the beginning of the war there is no sense of

security in Europe or the world. “The war to end war,” as it was
called, has done nothing of the kind. Beneath the surface of the
present peace there is a lava of hatreds and resentments which
bode ill for the future peace of the world. There are larger standing
armies in Europe now than in 1913. There are more causes of
quarrel, and none of the old quarrels have been extinguished—those
racial rivalries, those national ambitions, that commercial
competition. The war settled no argument for more than a period of
exhaustion. The idea of a “world safe for democracy” is falsified ten
years after by a swing-back to extreme forms of nationalism and
autocratic government through the greater part of Europe excepting
the British Isles and France. The German Republic, established after
annihilating defeat, is only biding its time for the return of monarchy,
and its present government is anti-democratic. Parliamentary
institutions, the safeguard of democracy, have been overthrown or
contemptuously treated in many nations. Italy, Spain and Hungary
are under military dictatorships. Russia is governed by a new-fangled
tyranny under which there is no liberty of speech, conscience or
economic life. Turkey, powerful again, is ruled by a committee of
generals. Poland, Czecho-Slovakia, Belgium, are in military alliance
with France which, under Poincaré, ridiculed the possibilities of
peace based on the goodwill of its neighbours, and relied for safety
on a supreme army and the rule of Force.
The Peace Treaty
The Treaty of Versailles, which imposed the terms of peace upon

Germany and her Allies after their complete surrender, was the direct
cause of all the troubles that beset us after the war. It violated the
hopes of all moderate minded people, who believed that the world,
after its frightful lesson, was ready for a new chapter of civilisation in
which militarism might be overthrown as the greatest curse of life,
and in which the common folk of nations might be made secure in
their homes and work by a code of international law and arbitration.
The statesmen who presided over the Peace Conference—
Clemenceau, Wilson, Lloyd George—had the fate of the world in
their hands. Waiting for their decisions, their new plan of Europe,
was a world of emotionalised men and women, ready and eager
then, for a little while, to respond to a generous idealism which
would lift all peoples above the morass of hatred and misery into
which they had fallen. The German and Austrian peoples, starved
and defeated, without a rag of pride left to cover their humiliation,
fierce with anger against their war lords—their Junkers and their
politicians of the old brutal caste—were ready also, for a little while,
to join hands with the world democracy in a new order of life. They
were conscience-stricken, ready to make amends, resigned to an
awful price of defeat—provided they were given their chance of
recovery and the liberty of their national life. They clung desperately
to the words of President Wilson who, before their surrender, had in
his Fourteen Points and other messages to the world outlined a
peace which would be generous to the defeated if they overthrew
their old gods, and would be based on justice, the rights of peoples,
and the commonwealth of nations rather than upon vengeance and
hatred.
Fair words, holding out prodigious hopes of a new and better
world! But when the terms of the Peace Treaty were made known
they struck a knock-out blow not only to German hopes but to all the
ideals of people who had looked for something nobler and more
righteous by which the peace of the world should be assured. It was
a peace of vengeance. It reeked with injustice. It was incapable of
fulfilment. It sowed a thousand seeds from which new wars might
spring. It was as though the Devil, in a jester’s cap-and-bells, had
sat beside Clemenceau in his black gloves, and whispered madness
into the ear of Wilson, and leered across the table at Lloyd George,
and put his mockery into every clause. In that Hall of Mirrors at
Versailles the ideals for which millions of men had fought and died—
liberty, fair-play, a war to end war, justice—were mocked and
outraged, not by men of evil, but by good men, not by foul design,
but with loyalty to national interests. Something blinded them.
The Territorial clauses of the Treaty, based theoretically upon “the
self determination of peoples,” created a dozen Alsace Lorraines
when one had been a sore in Europe. The old Austrian Empire was
broken to bits—that was inevitable—but Austria, with its great
capital of Vienna, was cut off from its old source of life, condemned
to enormous mortality—which happened—and many of its people
were put under the rule of their ancient enemies. The Austrian Tyrol
is now the Italian Tyrol. Austrian property and populations are now
in the hands of Czechs and Slovaks and Serbians. Hungary was
parcelled out without consideration of nationality or economic life.
Lines were drawn across its waterways, its railway system and its
roads. Its factories, forests and mines were taken from it. Many of
its folk were handed over to Roumanians and other hostile peoples.
The German colonies in Africa were divided between Great Britain,
France and Belgium, although it is a biological necessity that
Germany should have some outlet for the energy and expansion of
her population if another war may be avoided. The Danzig corridor
was made between one part of Germany and another. Greece was
given an Empire in Asia Minor and Thrace, over Turkish populations
which she could only hold by the power of the sword at the cost of a
future war—which she has already fought and lost, abandoned by
the Governments which yielded to her claims.
The resurrection of Poland, by which one of the greatest crimes in
history was blotted out and national liberty given to the peoples of
Esthonia, Latvia and Lithuania, stand to the credit of the
peacemakers, although these new nations have no security in the
future if Europe relies upon force rather than law. Other frontiers
drawn carelessly across the new map of Europe will be blotted out in
blood if ever again the passions stirring from the Rhine to the Volga
rise against the barriers imposed upon them in this uncertain peace.
The Fantastic Figures
But it was on the economic side of the Treaty and in its

interpretation that the statesmen of the Allies seemed to be stricken
with insanity, which infected many of their peoples until recent
months. Germany, they insisted, had to pay all the costs of the war,
for the damage she had inflicted and the ruin she had caused.
Theoretically, that was just if one took the view that every German
peasant, every German mother in a cheap tenement, every German
worker on starvation wages, every little sempstress, or University
student, ten or twelve years old when the war began, shares the
responsibility of those war lords and militarists who challenged the
world in 1914.
Practically it was not only unjust but idiotic, because it was
impossible, as everybody now acknowledges. It is almost beyond the
scope of mathematics to calculate the losses of the Allies in the war.
The British Government spent more in four and a half years of war
than in two and a half centuries previously. Could Germany pay that
back? England advanced two thousand million sterling to her Allies,
and borrowed nearly a thousand millions from the United States on
behalf of her Allies. Could Germany pay all that? France had
borrowed vast sums from her peasants and shopkeepers which she
debited against Germany; she owed Great Britain nine hundred
millions sterling, she had to restore the great track of ruin, with all
its destroyed homes, churches, farmsteads, châteaux—thousands of
villages wiped off the map so that hardly one stone remained upon
another—at a price which has loaded her with increased burdens of
debt far in excess of actual cost because French contractors desired
enormous profits. It was right and just that Germany should repair
that damage in the war zone, every brick of it and every stone. But
could she do so in money payments, in addition to all those other
claims? Could she pay also for war damage in Belgium, in Poland, on
the high seas, wherever her guns had reached? Italy had great
claims against Austria. Could Austria, brought to the edge of ruin,
amputated, lopped of all sources of wealth, pay that bill of costs?
Could Germany, the chief debtor, pay for the British unemployed in
the “devastated districts” of England and Scotland, whose ruined
trade was due to the war? All that, and then the pensions of
wounded soldiers and the widows of dead men and orphan children?
It would have been splendid if that were so. It might have been just
even to bleed the working folk of Germany, the younger generation,
the old women, the wounded and cripples even, the victims and
heirs of their war lords, to the last pfennig in their purses, if it is
justice that the individuals in a nation and their children and
children’s children are responsible for the guilt of their Governments.
But, justice or injustice apart, the absurdity, the wild impossibility, of
extracting all that vast tribute from the defeated enemy in terms of
transferable wealth, ought to have been manifest to the most
ignorant schoolboy of thirteen or fourteen years of age. Yet it was
the illusion passionately professed by many great statesmen, by
sharp-witted business men, by bankers and financiers, and by the
gullible public who took their word for it, in France, Great Britain,
and the United States.
The Golden Lie
Or was it just one great lie to deceive the people of the victorious
nations and to keep them quiet by golden promises which the liars
knew in their hearts could never be fulfilled? One is tempted
sometimes to think so. It is now so transparently clear that not even
the richest and most powerful nation in the world of commerce—the
United States of America—could pay one tenth of the sum expected
from Germany after her overwhelming defeat, and the ruin of her
world trade, without overwhelming financial disaster, that it is
incredible that the greatest statesmen of the Allies and all their
experts and advisers could ever have believed in such mad
economics. Year after year there were assemblies of financial
gentlemen who solemnly sat round tables estimating Germany’s
capacity to pay. Year after year they reduced their estimates until
they were brought down to 6,600 millions, and then by easy stages
to 2,200 millions, while Europe sank deeper into economic misery;
while British trade declined; while Austria starved; while France grew
desperate for these payments; while Russia was famine-stricken;
while Germany poured out paper money which became worthless,
until her bankruptcy could no longer be concealed.
Future historians will be baffled by that psychology. They will hunt
desperately for some clue to the mystery of that amazing folly which
took possession of many people. They will call it perhaps the Great
Financial Hoax, and argue that it was a deliberate deception on the
part of the world’s leaders, afraid to confess to their nations that
after all their sacrifice there would be no “fruits of victory,” but only
heavy taxation, to pay for the costs of war which could not be
shifted on to enemy nations. I do not think it was quite as simple as
all that. I think in the beginning that sheer ignorance of the most
elementary economic laws led men like Clemenceau and Lloyd
George to over-estimate the power of a nation like Germany to
transfer wealth in money values to other nations. They did not
understand that all transferable wealth—or nearly all—can only be
obtained by a trade balance of exports and imports, and that the
potential energy of a nation, its factories and plant, its public
buildings, bridges, organisation and industry, are not transferable
except by a balance over exchange of goods. They were so
hopelessly ignorant of international finance that they actually did
believe that they could “squeeze” Germany of vast sums of money
which could be divided among the Allies for the settlement of their
immense bill of costs, without damaging their own trade or allowing
Germany to trade unduly in the markets of the world. One British
statesman promised his people that Germany should be squeezed
like an orange until the pips squeaked. French statesmen, like
Poincaré, dazzled the eyes of their people with golden visions. They
balanced their budget by the simple method of assuming that all
that war debt would be paid by Germany when pressure was firmly
applied.
It was only later, when the politicians began to get a clear notion
of economic laws, by the painful lessons of reality and disillusion,
that they began to deceive their peoples and keep up the bluff. They
were afraid to tell the truth after all those falsities. In France, long
before the entry into the Ruhr, French economists, business men and
senators confessed privately that France could never hope to get
anything like her claims against Germany, and some of them, more
candid than others, shrugged their shoulders and said: “We dare not
tell the people—the shock would be too great.” The French Press
kept up the conspiracy of this deception, audaciously and
persistently throwing the blame of delay in getting German
payments upon Great Britain who did not stand by them in exerting
“pressure.” In Great Britain, dependent upon export trade for her
main source of wealth, and seeing the deadly stagnation of Europe
and its increasing loss of purchasing power, the truth of economic
law was more quickly perceived, and its statesmen shifted their
policy and forgot their golden promises more rapidly and with more
public candour.
The Downfall of Idealism
Looking back upon the years after the war, one sees that the
idealism, which for a little while might have changed the face of the
world if there had been great and noble leadership, fell with a crash
in many hearts because the interpreters of the Peace Treaty were
appealing not to the highest but to the lowest instincts of humanity;
to greed rather than justice; to vengeance rather than
reconstruction; to lies rather than truth. If only there had been one
great leader in the world who had cried: “We were all involved in
this crime against humanity, although Germany’s guilt was greatest;
let us in the hour of victory put vengeance on one side and so shape
the peace that the common folk of the world will have a better
chance of life,” I believe that in the time when the agony was great
and the wounds were still bleeding the hearts of people would have
leapt up to him. They would have responded if he had pleaded for
generosity to the defeated nations, if he had refused to punish the
innocent for the guilty, if he had asked them to forego the pound of
flesh demanded in the name of Justice, to forget the horror of the
past, to escape from it together, to march forward to a new chapter
of civilisation not based on standing armies, balances of powers, and
cut-throat rivalry, but upon new ideals of international law, business,
common sense, and Christian ethics.
People will say—do say—“It would have been weakness to let the
Germans off. They deserved to be punished. They would have made
a peace of terror, if they had had the chance of victory. There is
Justice to be considered. Justice demands its due, or God is
mocked.”
That is all true. It would have been weakness to let the Germans
off, but the surrender of their Fleet, the destruction of their Army,
the enormous sum of their dead was not a “let off.” They were
broken and punished, in pride and in soul. They would have made a
peace of terror? Yes, that is certain, and they would have aroused,
intensified and perpetuated a world of hate by which later they
would have been destroyed. Their war lords would have made a
worse peace than this of ours; but that is no argument why we
should have imitated their methods and morals.
The League of Nations
There was one institution created by the peacemakers which held

out a promise of a better relationship between nations than that of
military alliances and armed force divided into an uncertain Balance
of Power. All that was wrong in the Peace Treaties might be put right
by the League of Nations. The seeds of war sown by the Treaties
might be made to blossom into the laurels of peace by the League.
Although the Supreme Council set up by the Allies for the
enforcement of its military provisions might act on purely
nationalistic lines, the League of Nations would build up the
international moral sense, and establish a Court of Appeal by which
injustice, aggression, and the war spirit could be extirpated between
all nations subscribing to its code of laws, and the spirit of
arbitration.
President Wilson comforted himself for any little defects which
might have crept into the Peace Treaties by this new instrument of
idealism which he had helped to create with a very passionate
enthusiasm. It was his great gift to the world and, as he hoped, the
fulfilment of the promises he had made to the world in his messages
before and after the ending of the war, appealing so poignantly to
the secret hopes of humanity that when he came to Europe as the
great arbitrator of its councils, he was received as the leader,
spokesman, and prophet of the New World which was to be built out
of the ruins of the Old. The rejection by the American Senate of all
that he had done killed Wilson. It also destroyed all immediate
hopes of European recovery based upon the League as an
instrument of reconstruction, co-operation and peace. It was one of
the great tragedies of history. Yet, looking back now upon the
reasons of the American refusal to enter the League of Nations, it is
clear that it was not entirely due to the personal antagonism which
President Wilson had aroused by certain defects of character—his
autocratic methods, his rejection of good counsel, and his mentality
in the beginning of the war, nor to a national selfishness on the part
of the American people, desiring to withdraw rapidly from
responsibilities which they had incurred by their entry into the war.
From the American point of view, at that time, the war had proved
more than ever the supreme good fortune of the United States in
being remote from the hatreds and quarrels of that mess of races in
Europe out of which their people had escaped in the past. They did
not understand Europe. They had no direct interest in its national
rivalries. They could not control or abate its passions. All opponents
of the Wilson policy regarded it as a calamity that the United States
should surrender its geographical immunity from the evil heritage of
the Old World and deliberately involve its future in that arena of
ancient feuds. By entering the League of Nations it seemed to many
that the people of the United States would be dragged into new
wars in which they would have no direct or indirect interest, and that
they would have to support and enforce the maintenance of
European frontiers, re-drawn by the Peace Treaties, and already the
cause of passionate resentment. They did not approve of all that
parcelling up of territories which had taken place under the
benignant name of “mandates”—British dominion in Palestine and
Mesopotamia, French rule in Syria, the gobbling up of German
Africa, the Greek Empire in Asia Minor. Were they to use their
strength to support that new combination of powers which one day
was bound to be challenged and resisted? Above all was the New
World to enter into military alliance with France and Great Britain to
support a policy of domination in Europe which could only last as
long as the German people and their Allies were suffering from war
exhaustion—a one-sided pact which would make for the tyranny of
certain powers, or at least their military supremacy over other
nations of the world? That would be a surrender of the whole spirit
of the American people, who believed their destiny to be that of free
arbitrators, and not partisans, in the future of civilisation; friends of
liberty and democracy everywhere, and not allies on one side of a
line. They had come into the war, they believed, as crusaders for
that ideal, defenders of liberty wantonly attacked. They hated the
thought that the ideal should be narrowed down to the future
defence of one group of powers, who might in their turn attack or
oppress the democratic liberties of their neighbours. For this reason,
among others, they rejected the pact of security given by President
Wilson to France in agreement with England. For these reasons, not
ignoble or merely selfish—although, I think, unsound—they refused
to enter the League of Nations.
This withdrawal of the United States took away the strongest pillar
upon which the League had been founded. Its weakness was
immediately apparent. It was incapable of world judgments backed
by the greatest economic power in the world. The exclusion of
Russia, Germany, Austria and Hungary from its deliberations and
decisions made it seem—to hostile observers—an instrument
designed merely as a partisan body, upholding the opinions of the
victorious Allies and giving a sham morality to their policy.
That was unfair, because the Assembly, and its work behind the
scenes at Geneva, in which forty-three nations were represented, did
very quickly develop a spirit of international co-operation and law
rising above the low moralities of national selfishness. The
representatives of the League included large numbers of men who
were passionately inspired with the purpose of restoring order into
the chaotic conditions of Europe after war, healing its wounds,
creating good will in causes of quarrel by methods of arbitration and
persuasion, for the commonweal of peoples. The work and spirit of
Geneva was one source of light in a world of darkness, in those
dreadful years from which we have just emerged, and for that
reason it raised a standard of idealism round which millions of men
and women in many countries—even in the United States—rallied as
the one hope of the future.
It may be said without exaggeration that for the six years
following the war civilised humanity has been sharply divided into
two camps of thought—those who believe in the spirit of the League
of Nations, with its message of international co-operation and its
faith in peace by arbitration; and those who have no faith at all in
this idealistic purpose, and who believe in Force as the only method
of international relationship and the settlement of quarrels. Those
two camps still exist. The argument between them still goes on, and
will never cease until civilisation gives allegiance to a new code of
law.
What frustrated the League in its work and decisions, after the
withdrawal of the United States, was the interpretation of the Peace
Treaties by the Great Powers, and the economic folly which took
possession of European statesmen. The League as one half of the
Peace Treaty found that its other half thwarted it in every possible
way. The left hand worked against the right. It was useless for the
League of Nations to press for the economic co-operation of Europe
when the Supreme Council and the Allied statesmen enforced
decisions which enlarged the area of ruin and thrust stricken people
deeper into misery. It was futile for the League to discuss
disarmament when France was building up a system of military
alliances, creating a Black Army, and lending enormous sums of
money to Poland and other States for maintaining their standing
armies. It was almost hopeless for the League of Nations to offer its
services for arbitration and to talk high moralities about international
justice when, to avenge the murder of some officers by unknown
assassins, Italy bombarded Corfu, killing innocent children; and
when Italy and France were secretly conniving with the Nationalist
Turks for a war against Greece, which was abandoned in its agony to
the horror of Smyrna.
The France of Poincaré

All Chapter Download Test Bank For Structure and Function of The Human Body 15th Edition by Patton

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

All Chapter Download Test Bank For Structure and Function of The Human Body 15th Edition by Patton

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

All Chapter Download Test Bank For Structure and Function of The Human Body 15th Edition by Patton

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Download the full version of the testbank or

solution manual at testbankbell.com

Test Bank for Structure and Function of the

Explore and download more testbank or solution manual

Test Bank for Structure and Function of the Body, 16th

Test Bank for Memmlers Structure and Function of the Human

Test Bank Memmler’s Structure and Function of the Human

Solution Manual for Principles of Instrumental Analysis,

M Advertising 3rd Edition Schaefer Solutions Manual

Financial Accounting Tools for Business Decision Making

Understandable Statistics Concepts and Methods Enhanced

Test Bank for Canadian Organizational Behaviour, 10th

Chapter 01: Introduction to the Body

2. The study of how the body functions is called

3. The correct sequence of the level of organization is

4. The smallest living unit of structure is considered to be at the

5. The reference position for all body directional terms is the

8. The term most opposite proximal is

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 1

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 2

10. The term most opposite medial is

15. The mediastinum is part of the

16. The two major cavities of the body are the

17. The diaphragm divides the

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 3

19. The middle abdominopelvic regions include the

20. The lower abdominopelvic regions include the

21. The brain is in the

22. The spinal cavity is part of the

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 4

28. The lower right abdominopelvic quadrant includes all of the

29. An example of a positive feedback loop would be

30. An example of a negative feedback loop would be

31. A midsagittal section through the head would divide

32. A transverse section through the head would divide

33. A frontal section through the head would divide

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 5

37. Blood vessels are examples of this level or organization.

38. On a directional rosette, a letter L would stand for

40. Which of the following is not controlled by a negative feedback loop?

43. The lungs are located in the

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 6

47. In the metric system

49. The word supine describes

ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 3

2. The cell is the smallest living structural unit of the body.

ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 6

ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 6

ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

Copyright © 2016, Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. 7

ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

8. Superior means toward the head.

ANS: T DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

10. Anterior and proximal are opposite terms.

ANS: F DIF: Memorization REF: p. 7

11. Medial and lateral are opposite terms.