"Warfare is a Great Affair of the State" Lecture

Earlier today, I had the privilege of attending a talk with Dr. James Zainaldin, a guest lecture at Harvard University. Zainaldin, a specialist of ancient Roman-Chinese relations and philosophies, discussed the role that military hegemonies play in shaping our philosophical understanding of warfare. 

 

Zainaldin's hegemony of choice was, understandably, Rome, highlighted by two case studies: The treatises of Onasander and Frontinus.

Onasander and Frontinus were dissimilar lads. Onasander appears to have been a philosopher himself, writing expositions on the art of generalship from a layman's perspective. He was based outside of the empire, writing in Greek, and offered an outside-looking-in vantage point. Onasander's style was abstract and cerebral. He gave flexible, one-size-fits-all advice: Things like It's better to have more soldiers than to have fewer soldiers and Try to hit him before he hits you.* Onasander's advice was like a tool in a toolkit; an effective general would memorize a repertoire of "tools" and deploy them when necessary.

Frontinus, by contrast, wrote with clinical specificity. A powerful Roman consul himself, Frontinus infused his treatises with his own familiarity with Roman military deeds. In the year 84 AD, he might write, consul X performed Y maneuver and routed the forces of Z. Audiences here must unpack the wisdom of former generals for themselves. What made these maneuvers successful? What lessons were to be learned?

Of course, Frontinus was also motivated by his loyalty to portray Rome's military in a favorable light. In a recent reading of a USMC dossier about counterinsurgency in Iraq, I noticed that Major General Glynn (the author) referenced specific examples in U.S. military history that he felt should be replicated, much in the style of Frontinus. Is it reaching too far to say that we adopt a "Frontinian" approach to the art of war because are living "inside the empire"? The United States is undeniably the military titan of the contemporary world, much as Rome dominated its own era. I would be interested to see if contemporary treatises in non-U.S. nations are more akin to Onasander's style.

*Not verbatim Onasander.