(This is Part 22 of a series. Go back to Part 21.)
Probably the military commander that I've become most impressed with in my examination of various generals is John Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough, whose greatest victory was at the Battle of Blenheim in 1704.
I'm impressed with Marlborough not only because he was a great general, but also because he was a great humanist in his conduct of military affairs.
For instance, he always took great care of his soldiers. It becomes clear after a while that they weren't just chess pieces for him, they were fellow human beings. He really cared about their welfare.
And Marlborough was extremely gracious to defeated enemies. In the Battle of Blenheim, for instance, while Marlborough commanded the overall battle, his fellow general Prince Eugene of Austria commanded the Austrians on Marlborough's right flank.
After the battle (which we'll go into in a moment), Prince Eugene was harsh to defeated general Tallard and his soldiers. Eugene was not alone in this—this was how it was done; this was how the victorious treated the defeated.
But Marlborough was different. He treated the defeated general with great respect and consideration, did several significant favors for him, and did everything possible to see that Tellard's soldiers were also well-treated. Again, one senses that he saw them as fellow human beings rather than defeated enemies of no consequence.
Although courteous to an extreme, Marlborough was also witty and knew how to stick up for himself; he was nobody's fool. Witness the following incredible exchange between Marlborough and Tallard after the victory:
Marlborough: I am very sorry that such a cruel misfortune should have fallen upon a soldier for whom I have had the highest regard.
Tallard: And I congratulate you on defeating the best soldiers in the world.
Marlborough: Your Lordship, I presume, excepts those who have had the honor to defeat them.
In the Battle of Blenheim, Marlborough used the principle of concentrating strength against weakness. He did this by creating a diversion elsewhere so that the place where he actually wanted to attack became weaker.
Marlborough's diversion took the form of an attack on both flanks by his infantry. He continued these attacks on both the left and right flanks until the enemy committed his last reserves into the "main" battle on the flanks, thus leaving their center open.
The timing had to be exact. Marlborough's cavalry attack through the center had to come at exactly the right moment, after the French had fully committed their reserves.
Only then would the enemy's center reach its emptiest moment, and only then would Marlborough be truly attacking at the weakest point—one which he had created.
His extreme calmness during the battle was noted by many. I suspect he was something of a fatalist, or had an interesting philosophical perspective. He waited calmly throughout the battle until the exactly right moment was reached—and then ordered the cavalry through the center.
Breaking through the enemy's center, the English cavalry now attacked the enemy troops on their flanks. And Tallard's army collapsed.
Note that in this assault on the center, Marlborough was following the line of least resistance, the path through which the least resistance lay. He was also following the
line of least expectation, since at that moment the center was the place where the enemy least expected him.
Now let's see how these general principles can be applied to other areas of life.
(This is the end of Part 22. Go to Part 23.)
—jim sloman, 10.2.03 for 12.29.04
|
