- 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 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.
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 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.