|
"The Art of War" by Baron de Jomini.
For many years, he was considered to be much more relevant than Clausewitz. Jomini was a ardent follower and commander under Napoleon. Clausewitz (though frequently accused of being a Napoleonic disciple) was actually an opponent of Napoleon and was an equally ardent student of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Jomini's premise "To arrive at the decisive point on the battlefield with superior power", was similar to N.B Forrest's, though with a great deal more detail and analysis. His relevant points tend to be buried under a rigid structure of didactic and prescriptive approaches. The two writers did know one another, and debated one another's writings (until the untimely death of Clausewitz).
I am away from my copy, but here is a bit of info on it.
Book Description
The Art of War by Baron De Jomini was considered by most military experts of the day, at the time of the American Civil War, to be the definitive work on strategy and warfare. Even today, it is highly regarded as a seminal work in the development of strategy.
Antoine Henri de Jomini was one of Napoleon’s most capable generals. He contributed to almost all of Napoleon’s major battles. Napoleon regarded him so highly he made him Baron De Jomini. At the close of the Napoleonic wars De Jomini became General and Aide de camp for the Tsar of Russia. His first-hand accounts and rigorous analysis of important battles is still a major resource on tactics, strategy and warfare.
Excerpted from The Art of War by Baron de Jomini - Special Edition by Antoine Henri De Jomini, G. H. Mendell, W. P. Craighill. Copyright © 2005. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
From the SUMMARY OF THE ART OF WAR.
"DEFINITION OF THE ART OF WAR.
The art of war, as generally considered, consists of five purely military branches,-viz.: Strategy, Grand Tactics, Logistics, Engineering, and Tactics. A sixth and essential branch, hitherto unrecognized, might be termed Diplomacy in its relation to War. Although this branch is more naturally and intimately connected with the profession of a statesman than with that of a soldier, it cannot be denied that, if it be useless to a subordinate general, it is indispensable to every general commanding an army: it enters into all the combinations which may lead to a war, and has a connection with the various operations to be undertaken in this war; and, in this view, it should have a place in a work like this.
To recapitulate, the art of war consists of six distinct parts:-
1. Statesmanship in its relation to war.
2. Strategy, or the art of properly directing masses upon the theater of war, either for defense or for invasion.
3. Grand Tactics.
4. Logistics, or the art of moving armies.
5. Engineering,-the attack and defense of fortifications.
6. Minor Tactics.
It is proposed to analyze the principal combinations of the first four branches, omitting the consideration of tactics and of the art of engineering.
Familiarity with all these parts is not essential in order to be a good infantry, cavalry, or artillery officer; but for a general, or for a staff officer, this knowledge is indispensable."
I have not read Nagl's book yet.
If Nagl meant that Jomini was a Napoleonic traditionalist who felt that war was a formal "scientific" pursuit, and whose writings convey much more a black and white approach, he may be right. Clausewitz was much more of a revolutionary "war as an art" thinker. His works require close study to appreciate the subtleties. Both bear study by the serious warrior.
"Cave ab homine unius libri."
TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910
De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
|
Linear Mode
