2002 January–February 11
further refined since Richardson’s era, and theyhad a place in policy deliberations during the“mutually assured destruction”phase of the ColdWar. But Richardson’s own investigations turnedin a somewhat different direction. A focus on ar-maments presupposes that the accumulation ofweaponry is a major cause of war, or at least has astrong correlation with it. Other theories of the ori-gin of war would emphasize different factors—the economic status of nations, say, or differencesof culture and language, or the effectiveness ofdiplomacy and mediation. There is no shortage ofsuch theories; the problem is choosing amongthem. Richardson argued that theories of warcould and should be evaluated on a scientific ba-sis, by testing them against data on actual wars. Sohe set out to collect such data.Richardson was not the first to follow this path.Several lists of wars were drawn up in the earlyyears of the 20th century, and two more war cata-logues were compiled in the 1930s and 40s by theRussian-born sociologist Pitirim A. Sorokin and by Quincy Wright of the University of Chicago.Richardson began his own collection in about 1940and continued work on it until his death in 1953.His was not the largest data set, but it was the bestsuited to statistical analysis.Richardson published some of his writings onwar in journal articles and pamphlets, but hisideas became widely known only after twoposthumous volumes appeared in 1960. Thework on arms races is collected in
Arms and Inse-curity
; the statistical studies are in
Statistics of Dead-ly Quarrels
. In addition, a two-volume
Collected Pa- pers
was published in 1993. Most of what followsin this article comes from
Statistics of Deadly Quar-rels
. I have also leaned heavily on a 1980 study byDavid Wilkinson of the University of California,Los Angeles, which presents Richardson’s data ina rationalized and more readable format.
The catalogue of conflicts in
Statistics of DeadlyQuarrels
covers the period from about 1820 until1950. Richardson’s aim was to count all deathsduring this interval caused by a deliberate act ofanother person. Thus he includes individual mur-ders and other lesser episodes of violence in addi-tion to warfare, but he excludes accidents and neg-ligence and natural disasters. He also decided notto count deaths from famine and disease associat-ed with war, on the grounds that multiple causesare too hard to disentangle. (Did World War I“cause” the influenza epidemic of 1918–1919?)
Figure 1. The Great War in La Plata (1865–1870), also known as the War of the Triple Alliance, is ranked among theworst calamities of modern history, yet it is little known outside the countries where it was fought:Paraguay, Uruguay,Argentina and Brazil. The war reached magnitude 6, meaning that about 10
combatants died. Shown here is a detail of“After the Battle of Curupaytí,” by the Argentinian artist Cándido López, who lost his right hand at Curupaytí andtherefore learned to paint with his left. The painting is held by the Museo Nacional de Bellas Artes in Buenos Aires.