Jomini and Clausewitz

[SSVilla]

I need a recommendation for books, articles, or some easy introduction to Jomini. I downloaded The Art of War, which is available for free from Project Gutenberg (for anyone interested), but I want sort of an introduction with commentary. If the article, monograph, essays, or book happened to have some civil war battles or generals included in the commentary that would be even better.

My interest stems mostly from the undoubtable influence Jomini had on the generalship during the Civil war. I have in mind notably Halleck, who translated volumes from Jomini, which I cannot bring myself to read — they are so long — but I am sure if I understood Jomini I'd see his influence on many other generals as well.

I am currently listening to

https://share.libbyapp.com/title/6228658

Which is just what I am looking for, but in this case it's a "very short introduction" that yet explains the entire concepts well enough. I can already see how many of his principles operated during he civil war, which speaks volumes about Clausewitz timeless theory.

I'll perhaps share passages later and ask you like tell me who this reminds you of? It's a great book and I highly recommend it for an introduction…

I am still looking for a short introduction to Jomini.

 

[SSVilla]

From NPS.gov

 

[James Brenner]

Makers of Modern Strategy, From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Peter Paret, ed. Has essays on various military strategists and theorists to include Clausewitz and Jomini. It was one of our textbooks in the War College.

 

[SSVilla]

Makers of Modern Strategy, From Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age, Peter Paret, ed. Has essays on various military strategists and theorists to include Clausewitz and Jomini. It was one of our textbooks in the War College.

Thanks for sharing this. I have seen Peter Paret as a reference somewhere but didn't know him. I'll look for him.

One of the most astounding things I found, but it was before this research, was reportedly General Don Carlos Buell stating that he thought if a skillful general was conducting it, the war could have been won without a single battle, just through maneuver. That was taking it too far and also discounting the fact that he might not have wanted a battle but if someone like Bragg wanted to give him one there was nothing he could do to prevent it. However, learning about Jomini and Clausewitz has helped me understand somewhat Generals Buell, McClellan, and Halleck. General Halleck thought his "bloodless" capture of Corinth was a great achievement while he then complained after he left the western theater, that the war had not produced any great generals. I always thought that statement from Halleck was some caustic comment meant to disparage others, but seen in the light of a Halleck's training and knowledge, I think it rings differently. If he expected Jominian bloodless victories through maneuvers he was going to be disappointed. The best example was Rosecrans capturing Chattanooga, a great achievement through maneuver that backfired so long as a large dangerous army was gathering nearby to counterattack him (and him not expecting it).

The notion that wars could be won through maneuver and minimal engagements, capturing strategic objectives, was popular in Europe at the time. I didn't know that until learning about Jomini. Clausewitz instead wanted to remind his generals that the point of war is battle and that never should be lost sight of. It's grim, repugnant, but served no one to pretend otherwise.

Grant, had this to say about comparing the wars in Europe to the ACW:

From Conversations with General Grant.

 

[James Brenner]

You might also find Art Lykke's strategy model of ends, ways, means, and risk useful.

 

[James Brenner]

Paret translated On War. That is what he is best known for and is the accepted translation.

 

[James Brenner]

Apologies for these sporadic, stream-of-consciousness posts. One other book that is also very interesting is Michael Handel, Masters of War, Classical Strategic Theory.

 

[DixieRifles]

Dr. Tim Smith's book, "Bayou Battles for Vicksburg: The Swamp and River Expedition, January 1 - April 30, 1863", introduces the two theories at the start of the book. However, all through the first few chapters, he compares the differences between Pemberton's strategy and Grant's. He also describes how a few other generals who remained stalwarts of the Jominian students, including Grant's commander, Halleck.
"Both sides in the early Vicksburg Campaign heavily utilized the Jominian principles of decisive points, secure supply lines, raids on enemy supply routes, supporting columns, and other facets of the Jominian's argument to wage war."
Neither theory covered the idea of utilizing flooded creeks, rivers, and bayous in a subtropical swamp environment to outmaneuver the enemy. There was no established plan for digging canals to circumvent the enemy's fortifications. Yet, Grant did start from the Jominiam theory and improvised as best he could.

So this book may give you some examples of the two theories, at least in the first 3 or 4 chapters.

 

[Zack]

With a Sword in One Hand and Jomini in the Other

Amazon.com: With a Sword in One Hand and Jomini in the Other: The Problem of Military Thought in the Civil War North (The Steven and Janice Brose Lectures in the Civil War Era) eBook : Reardon, Carol: Kindle Store

With a Sword in One Hand and Jomini in the Other: The Problem of Military Thought in the Civil War North (The Steven and Janice Brose Lectures in the Civil War Era) - Kindle edition by Reardon, Carol. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like...

www.amazon.com

I've not read but I've seen this recommended before.

 

[Josh The Lighthouse Guy]

With a Sword in One Hand and Jomini in the Other

I second this recommendation.

 

[SSVilla]

Dr. Tim Smith's book, "Bayou Battles for Vicksburg: The Swamp and River Expedition, January 1 - April 30, 1863", introduces the two theories at the start of the book. However, all through the first few chapters, he compares the differences between Pemberton's strategy and Grant's. He also describes how a few other generals who remained stalwarts of the Jominian students, including Grant's commander, Halleck.
"Both sides in the early Vicksburg Campaign heavily utilized the Jominian principles of decisive points, secure supply lines, raids on enemy supply routes, supporting columns, and other facets of the Jominian's argument to wage war."
Neither theory covered the idea of utilizing flooded creeks, rivers, and bayous in a subtropical swamp environment to outmaneuver the enemy. There was no established plan for digging canals to circumvent the enemy's fortifications. Yet, Grant did start from the Jominiam theory and improvised as best he could.

So this book may give you some examples of the two theories, at least in the first 3 or 4 chapters.

I think I'll like that book very much. I am adding it to my list. Thanks for all these references and recommendations, everyone.

 

[DixieRifles]

I think I'll like that book very much. I am adding it to my list.

Well this book was a must have for me as it covers Grants expeditions in the Mississippi Delta where I grew up. It covers several battles which is a lot to cover. He has only one organizational table for units only at Arkansas Post. I was hoping for more info about units at Fort Pemberton.
I prefer his books on Vicksburg Assaults and Grierson's raid.