Using Sun Tzu's The Art of War to evaluate Civil War battles and leaders.

major bill

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
No Civil War general ever studied The Art of War by Sun Tzu or Sun Bin's Art of War by Sun Bin. Neither of these ancient Chinese military treatises had been translated in to English or even French. This does not mean that the tactical advice given by Sun Tzu did not apply to the Civil War.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu was written somewhere around 500 BC. but some of it's basic truths still apply today. I though we might look at a couple of suggestions by Sun Tzu and evaluate how the advice applied to the Civil War.
sun.jpg

Sun Tzu said "Success in warfare is gained by carefully accommodating ourselves to the enemy's purpose." Many Civil War generals were good at understanding the enemy's purpose and using it against them, other generals were not so good. I would say that General Lee had an advantage over General McClellan. Lee understood that McClellan purpose was to win a great victory by capturing Richmond, but was unwilling to risk defeat to achieve that great victory. McClellan on the other had did not fully understand Lee's purpose. Lee wanted to drive McClellan away from Richmond and was willing to take any risk and willing to accept any losses to do so. If McClellan could have came up with a stratagem that lured Lee in to battles that destroyed Lee's army, then Richmond would have fallen. McClellan did not understand that destruction of Lee's army was the goal not the capture of Richmond.
 
Who can come up with an example of this Sun Tzu passage? "Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."

Another passage to ponder: "Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted." Were there any Civil War battles where exhausted troops were less effective than the better rested troops they faced?
 
Who can come up with an example of this Sun Tzu passage? "Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."

Another passage to ponder: "Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted." Were there any Civil War battles where exhausted troops were less effective than the better rested troops they faced?
#1 federals at Raymond, MS

Used the leading brigade as bait to entice the Confederates to attack a much larger force
 
In one of Tom E's recent post it tells/shows the Union Rgt leaving their colors in one area to draw attention/fire away from their actual location. Interesting that.
 
Sun Tzu seems keen on deception. Sun Tzu says "All warefare is based on deception." "Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable, when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near."

The above passage make me think of Shiloh. Although there was plentiful reports of the Confederates being near, Grant and Sherman were convinced the Confederates were unable to attack and so could not be near.
 
Who can come up with an example of this Sun Tzu passage? "Hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him."

Another passage to ponder: "Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted." Were there any Civil War battles where exhausted troops were less effective than the better rested troops they faced?
Would Missionary Ridge/Chattanooga apply here to the “hold out bait to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.”

From Bragg’s perspective he had the Federal troops bottled up but the whole time they were actually making preparations for a breakout which was ultimately successful.
 
No Civil War general ever studied The Art of War by Sun Tzu or Sun Bin's Art of War by Sun Bin. Neither of these ancient Chinese military treatises had been translated in to English or even French. This does not mean that the tactical advice given by Sun Tzu did not apply to the Civil War.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu was written somewhere around 500 BC. but some of it's basic truths still apply today. I though we might look at a couple of suggestions by Sun Tzu and evaluate how the advice applied to the Civil War.
View attachment 422138
Sun Tzu said "Success in warfare is gained by carefully accommodating ourselves to the enemy's purpose." Many Civil War generals were good at understanding the enemy's purpose and using it against them, other generals were not so good. I would say that General Lee had an advantage over General McClellan. Lee understood that McClellan purpose was to win a great victory by capturing Richmond, but was unwilling to risk defeat to achieve that great victory. McClellan on the other had did not fully understand Lee's purpose. Lee wanted to drive McClellan away from Richmond and was willing to take any risk and willing to accept any losses to do so. If McClellan could have came up with a stratagem that lured Lee in to battles that destroyed Lee's army, then Richmond would have fallen. McClellan did not understand that destruction of Lee's army was the goal not the capture of Richmond.
I believe the full audio of the book is on Youtube for free if you're interested.

 
Back
Top