Ancient battles echo through the chambers of history, not just in the corridors of the History or English departments at universities, but also on the stage where the epics of Homer, Iliad and Odyssey continue to mesmerise audiences, as do shows and operas about the wars that created the Roman and Persian empires and many others.
The assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 BC may be the most famous assassination in history, to cite Barry Strauss’s book. In 1599 or 1600, Shakespeare immortalised the Roman general in an eponymous play. Caesar won many battles but what good did that do?
Plato reportedly said, “Only the dead have seen the last of war.” To those who thought warfare was extinct, the Russian war in Ukraine provided a wakeup call. To those who thought China was a state focused entirely on its economic development, a firm believer in international trade, and a country that would never initiate a war, Beijing’s saber rattling in the wake of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan is a reminder that the dragon can still breathe fire.
Sadly, wars always lead to death and destruction. Even the winners don’t come out ahead. The Duke of Wellington wrote a letter to a friend in 1815 after he had won the Battle of Waterloo in which he said, “Nothing except a battle lost can be half as melancholy as a battle won.”
Countless examples throughout history illustrate the wisdom of the adage that “wars are not just a zero-sum game but a negative-sum game.” Yet warfare is here to stay. It seems to be part of the human genome. The question often arises: Are there any lessons from ancient warfare that can be transferred to modern warfare?
The temptation is to say no. Through the millennia, technology has changed dramatically. Battles once fought with clubs and stones were then with swords and shields on foot, then with men on horses, and then with men riding on chariots. Gunpowder and big guns changed warfare dramatically. The battlefield changed yet again as tanks and aircraft arrived, to be followed decades later with aircraft carriers and submarines. Nuclear missiles, bombs and now drones show that technology continues to change at rapid speed. Cyber security is the latest weapon to enter the panoply of ways to inflict death on the enemy.
But the correct answer to the question is yes. There are certain constants that can be considered the immutable principles of warfare. The earliest writer on the subject was Sun Tzu in China, whose phrase, “All warfare is based on deception,” continues to be as valid today as it was when he wrote it more than two millennia ago in his timeless classic, The Art of War.
Another precept that rings through the halls of history is that while warfare played a very important role in ancient statecraft, it was just one of the tools of statecraft, with politics and diplomacy playing equally important roles. Wars were used as a last resort.
And when they were fought, the winning strategy was often based on speed and surprise, best demonstrated by Genghis Khan. Strategic surprise is rare but it can be achieved, as Hannibal did when he crossed the alps with elephants a few centuries prior to Christ, and in modern times in the Six Day War by Israel in 1967 and in the Yom Kippur War by Egypt in 1974. Tactical surprise is easier to achieve and has often been the deciding factor throughout history.
It was best to avoid mounting a frontal attack on the enemy, where his defenses were strong. It was best to attack him in his weak spots. Thus, the winning strategy was often indirect, as articulated and documented by Basil Liddell-Hart in his book, Strategy.
In order to be won, wars have to be fought with a clear objective. In fact, Clausewitz’s text, On War, lists this as the first principle of warfare.
From time immemorial, engineering has played a big role in overcoming obstacles put in place by the enemy as well as natural obstacles such as terrain and rivers. All that has changed is the science and technology that goes into engineering.
The biggest unknown in warfare has always been the response of the enemy. German Field Marshal Helmut von Moltke, the elder, put it well: “No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.”
In the end, what counts the most is a factor that no one can control: luck. It was the quality that Napoleon valued the most in his generals. Luck has played a critical role throughout military history.
Ultimately, statecraft matters even more than warfare. Alexander the Great, without doubt a master of command, created a massive empire by winning just about every battle and defeating the once invulnerable Persian empire. But Alexander’s empire was too big for him to control it. He had not built the institutions necessary to support it. Nor had he groomed his successors. It fell apart rather quickly.
A similar disaster befell Genghis Khan centuries later who created the largest land empire the world had ever known. His sons doubled it in size. But then it all collapsed a couple of centuries later because in-fighting broke out among his successors.
Hannibal surprised the Romans by crossing the alps on elephants but lost momentum and could not take Rome. He died without tasting the fruits of victory. Rome retaliated by razing Carthage to the ground.
At the height of his powers, Julius Caesar was assassinated by the senators who felt threatened and isolated by his rise. The last knife to find its way into his flesh was wielded by none other than his close friend and confidante, Brutus.
The list of victories that went sour is endless. In more recent times, Napoleon surrendered in Waterloo and was packed off to a small island -- St Helena -- in the Southern Atlantic Ocean to spend the rest of his days. The British empire on which the sun never set is now just “a small island to the north of France,” to quote Napoleon. Hitler conquered all of Europe only to lose it. His downfall came ignominiously in a bunker which now lies buried under a parking lot in Berlin. Just across the street is the Holocaust Museum.
If there is one thing we learn from history it is that we learn nothing from history. Wars should be avoided at all costs.
The assassination of Julius Caesar in 44 BC may be the most famous assassination in history, to cite Barry Strauss’s book. In 1599 or 1600, Shakespeare immortalised the Roman general in an eponymous play. Caesar won many battles but what good did that do?
Plato reportedly said, “Only the dead have seen the last of war.” To those who thought warfare was extinct, the Russian war in Ukraine provided a wakeup call. To those who thought China was a state focused entirely on its economic development, a firm believer in international trade, and a country that would never initiate a war, Beijing’s saber rattling in the wake of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan is a reminder that the dragon can still breathe fire.
Sadly, wars always lead to death and destruction. Even the winners don’t come out ahead. The Duke of Wellington wrote a letter to a friend in 1815 after he had won the Battle of Waterloo in which he said, “Nothing except a battle lost can be half as melancholy as a battle won.”
Countless examples throughout history illustrate the wisdom of the adage that “wars are not just a zero-sum game but a negative-sum game.” Yet warfare is here to stay. It seems to be part of the human genome. The question often arises: Are there any lessons from ancient warfare that can be transferred to modern warfare?
The temptation is to say no. Through the millennia, technology has changed dramatically. Battles once fought with clubs and stones were then with swords and shields on foot, then with men on horses, and then with men riding on chariots. Gunpowder and big guns changed warfare dramatically. The battlefield changed yet again as tanks and aircraft arrived, to be followed decades later with aircraft carriers and submarines. Nuclear missiles, bombs and now drones show that technology continues to change at rapid speed. Cyber security is the latest weapon to enter the panoply of ways to inflict death on the enemy.
Sadly, wars always lead to death and destruction. Even the winners don’t come out ahead. The Duke of Wellington wrote a letter to a friend in 1815 after he had won the Battle of Waterloo in which he said, “Nothing except a battle lost can be half as melancholy as a battle won.”
But the correct answer to the question is yes. There are certain constants that can be considered the immutable principles of warfare. The earliest writer on the subject was Sun Tzu in China, whose phrase, “All warfare is based on deception,” continues to be as valid today as it was when he wrote it more than two millennia ago in his timeless classic, The Art of War.
Another precept that rings through the halls of history is that while warfare played a very important role in ancient statecraft, it was just one of the tools of statecraft, with politics and diplomacy playing equally important roles. Wars were used as a last resort.
And when they were fought, the winning strategy was often based on speed and surprise, best demonstrated by Genghis Khan. Strategic surprise is rare but it can be achieved, as Hannibal did when he crossed the alps with elephants a few centuries prior to Christ, and in modern times in the Six Day War by Israel in 1967 and in the Yom Kippur War by Egypt in 1974. Tactical surprise is easier to achieve and has often been the deciding factor throughout history.
It was best to avoid mounting a frontal attack on the enemy, where his defenses were strong. It was best to attack him in his weak spots. Thus, the winning strategy was often indirect, as articulated and documented by Basil Liddell-Hart in his book, Strategy.
In order to be won, wars have to be fought with a clear objective. In fact, Clausewitz’s text, On War, lists this as the first principle of warfare.
From time immemorial, engineering has played a big role in overcoming obstacles put in place by the enemy as well as natural obstacles such as terrain and rivers. All that has changed is the science and technology that goes into engineering.
The biggest unknown in warfare has always been the response of the enemy. German Field Marshal Helmut von Moltke, the elder, put it well: “No battle plan survives first contact with the enemy.”
In the end, what counts the most is a factor that no one can control: luck. It was the quality that Napoleon valued the most in his generals. Luck has played a critical role throughout military history.
Ultimately, statecraft matters even more than warfare. Alexander the Great, without doubt a master of command, created a massive empire by winning just about every battle and defeating the once invulnerable Persian empire. But Alexander’s empire was too big for him to control it. He had not built the institutions necessary to support it. Nor had he groomed his successors. It fell apart rather quickly.
Alexander the Great, without doubt a master of command, created a massive empire by winning just about every battle and defeating the once invulnerable Persian empire. But Alexander’s empire was too big for him to control it. He had not built the institutions necessary to support it. Nor had he groomed his successors. It fell apart rather quickly.
A similar disaster befell Genghis Khan centuries later who created the largest land empire the world had ever known. His sons doubled it in size. But then it all collapsed a couple of centuries later because in-fighting broke out among his successors.
Hannibal surprised the Romans by crossing the alps on elephants but lost momentum and could not take Rome. He died without tasting the fruits of victory. Rome retaliated by razing Carthage to the ground.
At the height of his powers, Julius Caesar was assassinated by the senators who felt threatened and isolated by his rise. The last knife to find its way into his flesh was wielded by none other than his close friend and confidante, Brutus.
The list of victories that went sour is endless. In more recent times, Napoleon surrendered in Waterloo and was packed off to a small island -- St Helena -- in the Southern Atlantic Ocean to spend the rest of his days. The British empire on which the sun never set is now just “a small island to the north of France,” to quote Napoleon. Hitler conquered all of Europe only to lose it. His downfall came ignominiously in a bunker which now lies buried under a parking lot in Berlin. Just across the street is the Holocaust Museum.
If there is one thing we learn from history it is that we learn nothing from history. Wars should be avoided at all costs.