Beyond the Boundaries of Fantasia: An ancient imagining of the future of leadership

find the self-movement

LISTENING FOR LEADERSHIP

Caesar wrote the most complete narrative of the Battle of Pharsalus. Of course he may be trying to depict himself in a certain (presumably favorable) light. For the moment, we are interested less in historical accuracy and more in Caesar's self-presentation: how does Caesar present himself as a leader in battle?

Military historians often see battle narratives in two ways, as generals often see battle in two lights. The first is the technical, the calculating, the 'Jominian' -- battle as game. The second is the psychological, the motivational, the 'Clausewitzian' (and perhaps 'Napoleonic'). We've already looked briefly at two 20th century commanders (Patton and Bradley) whose contrasting leadership styles fall on different sides of the Jomini-Clausewitz spectrum, and we've gone a bit deeper into these two theorists' work in an earlier assignment.

Now let's use this lens to focus on two aspects of Caesar's depiction of himself and Pompey.

TO DO

In the passage below, highlight (using hypothes.is) and label passages either 'psychological' (Clausewitzian) or 'diagrammatic' (Jominian). For example, if the narrative mentions specific distances between battle lines, or the range of particular weapons, or the relative positions of various units, then label the passage 'diagrammatic'. If the narrative mentions soldierly spirit, or endurance, or enthusiasm, or battle rage, then label the passage 'psychological'. Every time you assign a label, explain your reasoning.

This page has tags: