The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, NapoleonBevan, Wilson Lloyd
History
The world's leading conquerors : $b Alexander the Great, Cæsar, Charles the Great, the Ottoman sultans, the Spanish conquistadors, Napoleon
Bevan, Wilson Lloyd
History; Kings and rulers
But there was in his strategy more than a spontaneous brilliancy
adequate to rescue him from the difficulties of a position he had not
anticipated. In his campaigns we see evidence enough of caution and
calculation. Especially in the matter of numerical superiority he was
careful not to allow himself any hazards in a decisive engagement.
The battle of Pharsalus is the only one in which it is certain that
he won a victory with an army inferior in numbers to his opponent. In
this case nothing else could have been done, for Pompeius, who was in
control of the sea, would have removed his army from Greece if he had
been outnumbered. There was but one way of forcing a pitched battle
under these circumstances, and it was part of superior strategy to
induce an enemy relying on superior numbers to confront troops superior
in quality. But such chances Cæsar only took when obliged. There was
little of the bravado element in his wars. The situation was outlined
beforehand. The almost mathematical result bears witness to the
presence of that same type of cool reflection which in the political
side of his career makes the founder of the Roman Empire something of
an enigma. It is hard to believe that a man can be just as unfeeling
and unethical in statesmanship as when he is directing the movements of
masses of troops. Cæsar’s genius stands for an abnormal development of
intellectual power disciplined to serve the ambitious purposes of a man
bent on enjoying personal rule, who, to a unique degree, had measured
the capacity of other men and himself.
* * * * *
CHARLES THE GREAT
I INTRODUCTORY
Out of the chaos in Western Europe due to the collapse of Roman
provincial rule in the fifth century, there came into being various
Teutonic states. They all bore the mark of the early tribal
organization of the German peoples and took up the work, more or less
successfully, of assimilating the orderly elements and traditions
of Roman polity. In the Italian peninsula the permanence of these
political creations was short-lived, except in the case of the
Lombards, who maintained an enduring rule, largely because they adhered
to a crude policy of isolation and set well-considered limits to their
desire for expansion. In Spain, the Goths, despite the predominance of
the Roman provincial element, succeeded, with the help of the Church,
in attaining a fairly centralized organization for several centuries
until it was swept aside by the irresistible pressure of the Moslem
conquest. To the North, in France, which was first of all the seat of
various Teutonic peoples, the Franks, under the astute leadership of
their tribal monarchs, gradually absorbed all the territory of the old
Roman province of Gallia, adding to it the land to the east which had
been the home of their ancestors before they had crossed into the Roman
province.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account