Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rome vs Han essay- want get some opinions
We are sailing into deep waters, now.

We do have late Roman military works that discuss strategy, and the precepts of Vegetius and Maurice do not articulate a battle-seeking strategy. Their emphasis is very much like the thoughts of Sun Tzu - fight only when you are sure of winning, it is best to win a war without battles, cause dissension among the enemy, and manipulate logistics (starve the enemy) in order to win. Chest-thumping heroics are not part of the strategic plan. These ideas may seem simple, but the reiterated need to emphasize them in both the East and the West suggests that many generals found these concepts difficult to swallow. Evading a superior enemy force sounds easy, but it looks cowardly or dishonorable, and may sacrifice valuable territory or important religious/cultural sites to enemy looting.

Of course (I can always argue both sides) dramatic battles do not always win the war. Leuctra was fairly decisive, but Leuthen didn't knock Austria out of the 7 Year's War, and Carthage lost in spite of Cannae, and Germany lost despite Tannenberg.
Felix Wang
Reply


Messages In This Thread
"The Seres" - by Eleatic Guest - 05-22-2006, 11:18 AM
Real Name Rule - by Caius Fabius - 05-28-2006, 10:24 PM
Democracy - by Caius Fabius - 05-30-2006, 10:47 PM
Re: Rome vs Han essay- want get some opinions - by Felix - 07-20-2006, 05:32 PM

Forum Jump: