The plaque, in part, reads:
"For want of a nail the shoe was lost,
for want of a shoe the horse was lost,
for want of a horse the rider was lost,
being overtaken and slain by the enemy
all for want of care about a horseshoe nail.
Benjamin Franklin"
The history of the above verse has been lost to antiquity, but it was not created by Benjamin Franklin. It was published in Franklin's "poor Richards Almanac," but Franklin was not the author.
""For Want of a Nail" is a proverbial rhyme showing that small actions can result in large consequences.
This proverb has come down in many variations over the centuries (see historical references below). It describes a situation in which a failure to anticipate or correct some initially small dysfunction leads by successively more critical stages to an egregious outcome. The rhyme thereby relates a conjectural example of the "butterfly effect", an effect studied in chaos theory, involving sensitive dependence on small differences in initial conditions. The rhyme's implied small difference in initial conditions is the lack of a spare horseshoe nail, relative to a condition of its availability.[1] At a more literal level, it expresses the importance of military logistics in warfare.
Of course such chains of causality are perceived only in hindsight. No one ever lamented, upon seeing his unshod horse, that the kingdom would eventually fall because of it.[1]
A somewhat similar idea is referred to in the metaphor known as The Camel's nose.
Also note that the word "want" in the poem refers to the archaic definition of "want" which means "lacking", rather than the modern definition meaning "desiring".
The proverb is found in a number of forms, starting as early back as the 14th century:
De. (positively formulated) "Diz ?agent uns die wî?en, ein nagel behalt ein î?en, ein î?en ein ros, ein ros ein man, ein man ein burc, der ?trîten kan"; The wise tell us that a nail keeps a shoe, a shoe (keeps) a horse, a horse (keeps) a knight (or man), a knight, who can fight, (keeps) a castle (c. 1230 Freidank Bescheidenheit)
"For sparinge of a litel cost, Fulofte time a man hath lost, The large cote for the hod."; For sparing a little cost often a man has lost the large coat for the hood. (c 1390 John Gower, Confessio Amantis v. 4785–4787)
The earliest reference to the full proverb may refer to the death of Richard III of England at the Battle of Bosworth Field. This short variation of the proverb (shown to the right), was published in "Fifty Famous People" by James Baldwin. The story associated with the proverb, describing the unhorsing of King Richard during battle, would place the proverb's origin after the Battle of Bosworth on 22 August 1485. It should be noted that historically Richard's horse was merely mired in the mud. In the story, the proverb and its reference to losing a horse is directly linked to King Richard famously shouting "A Horse! A Horse! My Kingdom for a Horse!", as depicted in Act V, Scene 4 from the Shakespeare play Richard III, which was written circa 1591. It's interesting to note that Kings are often considered Knights as well, which links the "Knight" variation to this story, and it also explains the "kingdom" reference prevalent in many of the variations. Note the similarities of the French quotation below by Jean Molinet, which is contemporary with this event. Even the later Franklin variations (shown at right) – printed during conflict between England and America, when American culture and politics were shedding any reference to Kings and England[10] – would have the references to a King stripped out of a popular proverb, further circumstantially enforcing the argument that this story is the source of the original proverb. Either year – 1485 for King Richard's death or 1591 for the Shakespeare play – the combined events in the story from "Fifty Famous People" plus the inclusion of the full proverb predate any other reference to a full causal chain of events; nail – shoe – horse – followed by at least one other dependent loss (i.e. rider, knight, battle, kingdom).
Fr. "Par ung seul clou perd on ung bon cheval"; by just one nail one loses a good horse. (c 1507 Jean Molinet, Faictz Dictz D., v768).
"The French-men haue a military prouerbe; 'The losse of a nayle, the losse of an army'. The want of a nayle looseth the shooe, the losse of shooe troubles the horse, the horse indangereth the rider, the rider breaking his ranke molests the company, so farre as to hazard the whole Army". (1629 Thomas Adams (clergyman), "The Works of Thomas Adams: The Sum Of His Sermons, Meditations, And Other Divine And Moral Discourses", p. 714")
For want of a naile the shoe is lost, for want of a shoe the horse is lost, for want of a horse the rider is lost. (1640 George Herbert Outlandish Proverbs no. 499)
In British Columbia Saw-Mill Co. v. Nettleship (1868), L.R. 3 C.P. 499 (Eng. Q.B.), a variation on the story is given a legal flavour:
"Cases of this kind have always been found to be very difficult to deal with, beginning with a case said to have been decided about two centuries and a half ago, where a man going to be married to an heiress, his horse having cast a shoe on the journey, employed a blacksmith to replace it, who did the work so unskilfully that the horse was lamed, and, the rider not arriving in time, the lady married another; and the blacksmith was held liable for the loss of the marriage. The question is a very serious one; and we should inevitably fall into a similar absurdity unless we applied the rules of common sense to restrict the extent of liability for the breach of contract of this sort."
Don't care’ was the man who was to blame for the well-known catastrophe: ‘For want of a nail the shoe was lost, for want of a shoe the horse was lost, and for want of a horse the man was lost.’ (1880 Samuel Smiles, Duty)
Benjamin Franklin included a version of the rhyme in his Poor Richard's Almanack. (Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richards Almanack, June 1758, The Complete Poor Richard Almanacks, facsimile ed., vol. 2, pp. 375, 377)
Melisande, a 1901 short story by E. Nesbit, makes a passing reference: "It's a very good thing you didn't," said the King. "You've done about enough." For he had a mathematical mind, and could do the sums about the grains of wheat on the chess-board, and the nails in the horse's shoes, in his Royal head without any trouble at all.
You bring your long-tailed shovel, an' I'll bring me navvy [labourer- in this context referring to a navvy shovel (square mouth shovel)]. We mighten' want them, an', then agen, we might: for want of a nail the shoe was lost, for want of a shoe the horse was lost, an' for want of a horse the man was lost—aw, that's a darlin' proverb, a daarlin'.(1925 S. O'casey Juno & Paycock i. 16)
(excerpted from (
visit link) )