View of the battlefield of Lake Trasimene from
the place where consul Flaminius was killed
the place where consul Flaminius was killed
When travelling usually I follow not so much this or
that travel guide, but I follow my mind and sometimes my photo camera, which is
actually the same. So when I was in Tuscany in Italy a few weeks ago, I found
it more interesting to be led by the Montaigne’s footsteps and to walk on the
battle field of Lake Trasimene where Hannibal ambushed a Roman army than to see
the great objects of art admired by many, although one can doubt whether most
of them really admire them or that they admire them “because they have to” (as
a pen friend remarked to me). But it is not up to me to judge the truth of the
admiration of others. That would be quite arrogant and these “others” could
probably say the same about me, and with right. Anyway, I remember that when I
was in Florence a few years ago I walked into a church and my eye was caught by
a statue on the wall and, although not being an art connoisseur, I immediately
saw how excellent it was and when I looked up in my travel guide who had made
it, I saw that it was by Donatello. Since Donatello is recognized as a famous
and very good sculptor, I concluded that there must be something objective in
what is good art and what is bad art and that even a layman can see that and
can sincerely enjoy it. Nevertheless, my feeling tells me that my mind must
lead me to other places when I am on a travel. Or most of the time.
Anyway, walking on the battle field of Lake
Trasimene I wondered why Montaigne hadn’t been here, since he needed to make
only a brief detour in order to go there. Montaigne writes several times about
Hannibal in his essays, although not over consul Flaminius who was commanding
the Roman army there, if I am right. I think that a walk, or rather a horse
ride a Montaigne’s case, would have given him new insights and would have
stimulated him to new themes, if he had looked at the details of the battle and
had compared the reports of Livy and other authors with what he had seen in
person on the terrain. And certainly he would have got inspiration if he would
have studied what had happened after the battle, if he didn’t know it already.
For after the Romans had heard about what was a calamity for them (15.000
soldiers had been killed, 6.000 had been taken captive and only 4.000 soldiers
escaped), they were seized by panic and, as they had done so often in such
situations in the past, they appointed a dictator who was charged to solve the
situation and, of course, to beat Hannibal. However, Quintus Fabius Maximus,
the new man on the top of the Roman Republic, chose the strategy of avoiding a direct
confrontation with Hannibal. Instead he used a tactics of law-level harassment
in order to exhaust his opponent and to give Rome time to rebuild its military
strength. By doing so Fabius got the nickname Cunctator or “Delayer”. But the Romans were not very charmed by
this approach. They dismissed Fabius and elected two consuls instead, who gave
battle to Hannibal in the Battle of Cannae, which was even a worse defeat for
the Romans than the Battle of Lake Trasimene. Apparently, Fabius’s strategy of
avoiding and exhausting was not so bad. Even more, the same method was used by
the Russian generals Barclay de Tolly and Kutuzov in 1812 when Napoleon invaded
Russia and occupied Moscow. In this case the strategy was a big success and
Napoleon was forced to leave Russia, which actually meant the end of his reign.
Of course, Montaigne couldn’t have known about Napoleon, but without a doubt a
few other such instances would have come to his mind. If he would have written
about them, I think he would have given his essay the title “Whether one must
always directly confront an enemy” and the upshot would have been that
procrastination is not always as bad as it looks on the face of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment