Just want to wish everybody a 
Happy Thanksgiving as this is the first major holiday since I have been blogging. I hope that everybody is as blessed as I am with a great family and multiple reasons for happiness.
Image from http://whatscookingamerica.net/Poultry/TurkeyCartoon.jpg
Clausewitzean Ideas of War and how they Relate to Present Conflicts
As I am getting ready to begin the final class for my MA and complete my Thesis I have been re-reading Clausewitz and his ideas and theory of War. One of the things that that has struck me the most and made me realize how much Clausewitz is misunderstood is the way in which his most famous quote from the book about how “War is the continuation of policy by other means”[1] is completely taken out of context in most history.
If you read his book further, and I assume that most generals, staff chiefs, and even military historians have then it is clear that this quote is just a starting point given the numerous caveats and expansions on that simple statement in his theory. Indeed, the very section that this quote heads explains what he means in a very concise and unambiguous manner; it is worth quoting in full.
“We see, therefore, that war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse, carried on with other means. What remains peculiar to war is simply the peculiar nature of its means. War in general, and the commander in any specific instance, is entitled to require that the trend and designs of policy shall not be inconsistent with these means. That of course, is no small demand; but however much it may affect political aims in a given case, it will never do more than modify them. The political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it, and means can never be considered in isolation from their purpose.”[2] Continue reading
I was thinking this morning about how important learning a second language is to good scholarship. It hit me because I was not required to learn a second language for my undergrad, I wish I had been. My chosen historical specialty is 18th – 19th century Prussian history. It is kind of hard to see how I could do any really good research without learning German and maybe French. Luckily, I am married to a German woman and had no choice but to learn German if I want to talk to any of my in-laws since most of them don’t speak a lick of English. How could I expect them too since they all live in Germany?
Learning German has stood me in good stead the longer I have been studying history and especially in conducting research for my thesis. I have made several trips to archives in Germany and Austria conducting research for my thesis and these trips would have been completely wasted with no knowledge of German. I probably would not have made them in the first place. Continue reading
I ran across this piece by Jay Luvaas again today and it got me thinking about why I like Military history and if it is a worthwhile pursuit. My short answer is that I don’t know why I like it and yes it is.
The long answer is that I guess I like military history because war is the most extreme pursuit man engages in. Extreme sports such as base jumping, free diving, mountain climbing, etc have nothing on the sheer rush and danger of engaging in the single most dangerous thing man has come up with; hunting our fellow man. I have personally been to combat but I studied military history long before I joined the military. I started reading military history in grade school and the first military history book I ever read was about D-day in 1944 and I still have it.
As to whether military history is worthwhile, I have to say yes here as well. Weapons, equipment, and systems may change but one element has remained a constant throughout the history of war and that is men. Men are at the heart of war and it men and their reactions to the stresses of combat and command that dominate the study of war. I would even hazard to wager good money that a Roman Legionnaire would react the same way in combat today if given the same training as today’s soldiers and vice-versa. The study of war is at heart the study of human nature in its most elemental form. There are lessons to be learned from the way Crassus fought at Carrhae that are relevant on the modern battlefield because the nature of men has not changed to nearly the degree that the nature of the weapons we employ has. That is why I believe that the study of military history is still relevant and why it will remain so for the foreseeable future.
One of the most consistent features of accounts of the German Wars of Unification are the assertions that the Prussian possession of the Dreyse Needle Gun was decisive in and of itself because of its impact on Prussian tactical formation and the flexibility it gave the average infantryman.
Dreyse Needle-Gun at the J.M. Davis Gun Museum, Claremore, Oklahoma
Make no mistake, the Dreyse was a technological marvel for its time, it indeed gave the Prussians tactical flexibility and radically increased their rate of fire when compared to muzzleloader equipped armies of the time. The tactical innovations it allowed were few but important. Perhaps the single most important innovation it allowed was that it allowed the infantry to reload from the prone of lying down position. It also allowed the infantry to carry more ammunition as part of his basic load and made possible marching fire or the ability for infantry to fire and reload while on the march. Continue reading