Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1917-06-22
HANNIBAL VS.. NAPOLEON.

General Petain. the new French
chief. 10 described ~ Q strAteetst :fath.
or than q tactician, n who deploreg
the lack OF strategy characteristic o&
this war. ono who 10 opposed to the
sway Of such pure tacticians Of Voch
Petain's appointment, and Nivelle. the
admirable tactician, becomes suboE.
dinate to superior strategy.
Tactics wins battles but strategy
wins wars. Better tacticians than
Foch and Nivelle. than Hindenbufg
and Mackensen, have rarely IL over
appeared. But to win this wa some.
thing more than Tanneburg and Cor.
lice. or than the Marine. Ypres and
It Ia said. has recosnized from the
first. He realized that the SUCCESS OF
the Marine was largely thrown away
BY the lethargy of Field Marshal
French and the tactical caution Of
the French command, He counts the
battle of Ypres rather than that Of
the Marine as the decisive affair He
that will include British, French and
Italian movements, also Russian IL
possible. A right strategy he consid.
ers would have defeated Germany be-.
fore this.
Petain is Hannibalic rather than
Napoleonanic in his theory Of war.
In this he conforms to the Prussian
school of Moltke. and DIVORCES from
his brethren in arms who are com.
mitted to Napoleon, Foch and Nivelle
are expounders of the Napoleonic ira.
dition. whereas the disciples OF Mott.
he are devotees of the Hannibalic con.
ception and practice.
But Petain differs from the Prus-
slams, although perhaps not from
Moltke himself. The Prussians, ev-
cry one of them in this war, have dis.
played Hannibalic mastery Of tactics.
And they nave been dominated by the
tactical exigency-they have none Of
them risen to H%annibalic strategy.
Such is Petain's criticism Of his enc
mics warfare.
Whereas Hindenburg, Mackensen,
and the rest preach the tectics Of
Cannae and have VIGOROUSLY exemp-
lifted them. Petain talks H%annibaiic
strategy. and strategy of the Cartha-
ginian's invasion Of Italy. II the
nephew of the great Moltke had been
guided by Hannibalic strategy. he
would not have lost the Marine by q
vain attempt to create a vast Cam.
nae. a sublimated Sedan. Instead he
would have seized Calais and Bou-
iogne, Rouen and Havre, which were
his for the taking, thereby placing
a wedge between England and France,
and securing near bases against Eng
land. II Hannibalic strategy had OBJ
tanned In the allied command after
the Marine. the British and French
would have hurried into Belgium,
Antwerp would have been really de-
fended n the battle Of Ypres would
have been fought between Antwerp
and Brussels. perhaps.
Napoleon. no doubt, was the most
coneummate tactician in history. Han.
nibal excepted. He was a wonderful
s~trategtst. Of course. but 1t is to be
remarked that under the conditions Of
his time a mighty tactical success
such as Austerlitz or Jena sufficed. It
did not suffice in Hannibal's time, nor
does 1t IN this war-to the surprise of
the Germans. The C~arthaginian was
not merely the Incompatible battle-
artist of Cannae. but the greatest
strategist in history. That is what
Petain realizes, but what the success
sors and disciples Of the great Moltko
scarcely have grasped.
h war has proved the Hanni.
balic conception to be more profound
than the Napoleonic. But Petain, It
is possible. is a better Hannibalist
than Hindenburg. It is to be hoped
that Sir Douglas Haig can subordinate
himself. AS for the Italian general
tssimo. Count Cadorna has proved a
master strategist himself. It should
be realized that the best tactician,
Pershtng or another, whom we send
to France. should Loyalty accommo-
date himself to the French strategical
Observation-Disclosures Journal.