Sir Julian Corbett and the Theoretical Study of War

Abstract

This article deals with the specific views of the British naval historian Sir Julian Corbett (1854–1922) on the theoretical study of war, i.e. his theory on theory. What were Corbett's main ideas and how do they compare with those of Carl von Clausewitz and Antoine-Henri Jomini? To what extent are Corbett's ideas original? The conclusions reached are that, first, the intellectual kinship between Corbett and Clausewitz is especially pronounced in this aspect of military theory. Second, the intellectual affinity between Corbett's and Jomini's views on the theoretical study of war is indeed negligible. Finally, it is argued that Corbett presents only one original idea regarding the theoretical study of war and that this idea is problematic.

Key Words:

• Corbett
• Clausewitz
• Jomini

Acknowledgements

This article originated as a paper for the Research Seminar in War Studies at the Swedish National Defence College, which was presented on 8 November 2005. The author is grateful for the comments provided by his respected friends and colleagues at the College and elsewhere. Any remaining deficiencies are those of the author.

Notes

¹Azar Gat, A History of Military Thought – From the Enlightenment to the Cold War (Oxford: OUP 2001), paperback edition, 675–6.

²For the extensive literature on Mahan, see, for example, Charles C. Taylor, The Life of Admiral Mahan (New York: George H. Doran 1920); William D. Puleston, Mahan: The Life and Work of Captain Alfred Thayer Mahan, U.S.N. (New Haven, CT: Yale UP 1939); Robert Seager II and Doris D. Maguire (eds.), Letters and Papers of Alfred Thayer Mahan (Annapolis, MD: US Naval Institute Press 1975); and Robert Seager (ed.), Alfred Thayer Mahan: The Man and his Letters (Annapolis, MD: US Naval Institute Press 1977); William E. Livezey, Mahan on Sea Power (Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press 1981); and Jon Tetsuro Sumida, Inventing Grand Strategy and Teaching Command: The Classic Works of Alfred Thayer Mahan Reconsidered (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins UP 1997).

³See, for example, Donald M. Schurman, Julian S. Corbett, 1854–1922: Historian of British Maritime Policy from Drake to Jellicoe (London: Royal Historical Society 1981); and Donald M. Schurman, The Education of a Navy – The Development of British Naval Strategic Thought, 1867–1914 (London: Cassell 1965), 147–84. See also Peter Marsh Stanford, ‘The Work of Sir Julian Corbett in the Dreadnought Era’, US Naval Institute Proceedings 77/1 (Jan. 1951), 61–71; Liam J. Cleaver, ‘The Pen Behind the Fleet: The Influence of Sir Julian Stafford Corbett on British Naval Development, 1898–1918’, Comparative Strategy, 14 (Jan. 1995), 45–57; and William R. Hawkins, ‘The Man Who Invented Limited War’, Military History Quarterly 4 (Autumn 1991), 105–11.

⁴For texts that deal with some of Corbett's theoretical thinking, see Barry D. Hunt, ‘The Strategic Thought of Sir Julian S. Corbett’, in John B. Hattendorf and Robert S. Jordan (eds.), Maritime Strategy and the Balance of Power: Britain and America in the Twentieth Century (London: Macmillan 1989), 110–35; Eric J. Grove, ‘Introduction’, in Julian S. Corbett, Some Principles of Maritime Strategy[1911] (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press 1988), xi–xlv; and Geoffrey Till, Seapower: A Guide for the Twenty-First Century (London: Frank Cass 2004). As for the relevance of his theoretical thinking in comparison with his historical work, see Martin van Creveld, The Art of War (London: Cassell 2000), 155–6; and Schurman, Julian S. Corbett, 62.

⁵Corbett, Some Principles of Maritime Strategy. The two versions of the ‘Green Pamphlet’ are included in the Appendix, 305–45.

⁶A few of his historical books also contain elements of a theoretical nature, see, for example, Julian S. Corbett, England in the Seven Years’ War: A Study in Combined Strategy (New York: Longmans, Green 1907), 2 vols.; and Julian S. Corbett, The Campaign of Trafalgar (New York: Longmans, Green 1910).

⁷For three brief and narrative accounts of this part in Some Principles, see Hunt, ‘The Strategic Thought of Sir Julian S. Corbett’, in Hattendorf and Jordan, Maritime Strategy and the Balance of Power, 122–3; Michael Handel, ‘Corbett, Clausewitz, and Sun Tzu’, Naval War College Review 53/4 (Autumn 2000), 106–23; and David Jablonsky, ‘Editor's introduction’, to ‘Some Principles of Maritime Strategy’, in Roots of Strategy, Book 4 (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books 1999), 153–4.

⁸For a study of Clausewitz, see Peter Paret, Clausewitz and the State (Oxford: Clarendon Press 1976); Beatrice Heuser, Reading Clausewitz (London: Pimlico 2002); and Gat, A History of Military Thought, 158–265. For a study of Jomini, see John Shy, ‘Jomini’, in Peter Paret (ed.), Makers of Modern Strategy – from Machiavelli to the Nuclear Age (Princeton UP 1986), 143–85; and Michael Howard, ‘Jomini and the Classical Tradition in Military Thought’, in idem Howard (ed.), The Theory and Practice of War (Bloomington: Indiana UP 1965), 3–20.

⁹Alf W. Johansson, Europas Krig (Stockholm: Tidens Förlag 1988), 22–3. For such a view, see also, for example, Gat, A History of Military Thought, Book I.

¹⁰Corbett's intellectual debt to Clausewitz is discussed in Christopher Bassford, Clausewitz in English: The Reception of Clausewitz in Britain and America, 1815–1945 (New York: Oxford UP 1994), Chapter 11; and Heuser, Reading Clausewitz, 124–33. A comparison of Corbett's thinking with that of Clausewitz and Sun Tzu can be found in Handel, ‘Corbett, Clausewitz, and Sun Tzu’, 106–23.

¹¹Corbett, Some Principles, 3.

¹²Ibid., 3.

¹³Ibid., 3–4. This line of thought can be found in Carl von Clausewitz, On War, translation by Michael Howard and Peter Paret (Princeton UP 1984), 141.

¹⁴Ibid. 4.

¹⁵Ibid., 5–6.

¹⁶Ibid., 6.

¹⁷Ibid., 6–7. For references to ‘genius’ or ‘natural talent’, see Clausewitz, On War, 100–12 and 147.

¹⁸Corbett, Some Principles, 7–8.

¹⁹Ibid., 8. In truth, Clausewitz argued that, although ‘the art of war’ was a better term than ‘the science of war’, both were misleading. Instead, he described war as a form of ‘human intercourse’ and ‘part of man's social existence’. See Clausewitz, On War, 149.

²⁰Corbett, Some Principles, 8–9.

²¹Ibid., 9.

²²Ibid., 10.

²³Clausewitz, On War, 71.

²⁴Ibid., 132.

²⁵Ibid., 136.

²⁶Ibid., 140.

²⁷Ibid., 141. Emphasis in original.

²⁸Ibid.

²⁹This quote from Clausewitz can be found in Clausewitz, On War, 141; and in somewhat different wording in Corbett, Some Principles, 4. According to Eric Grove, Corbett seems to have used a German version of On War and did his own translations. This is why his citing of Clausewitz sometimes differs from the Howard/Paret translation.

³⁰Clausewitz, On War, 148.

³¹Ibid., 148–9.

³²Ibid., 149.

³³Ibid., 156 and 158.

³⁴Ibid., 578.

³⁵Ibid.

³⁶Ibid., 581.

³⁷Ibid., 593.

³⁸See Corbett, Some Principles, 29–30n. Notes 28 and 29 are written and added by the editor, Eric Grove. Since the present author does not read French a condensed version in English edited by J.D. Hittle has been used. This forced decision, which is not an ideal solution but should still serve the purpose of this section, i.e. to compare Jomini and Corbett as regards the theoretical study of war. See Antoine Henri Jomini, Summary of the Art of War[1838], edited by J.D. Hittle and entitled, ‘Jomini and his Summary of the Art of War’ (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books 1987). Rather than being a translation of the original French version, Hittle's condensed version was based on a translation into English by C.H. Mendell and W.P. Craighill from 1862. Strangely, Hittle's edition contains an introduction of relevance to this study, ‘The Present Theory of War and its Utility’, which is not included in the Mendell/Craighill translation that appears in Antoine-Henri de Jomini, The Art of War (London: Greenhill 1992). Having studied an original French version published in 1855 and compared it to Hittle's condensed version the introduction mentioned above seems to have been approximately halved, although what the author regards as the essential parts still remain. Jomini's work, in Hittle's version, is henceforth referred to as ‘Summary’.

³⁹It should be noted, however, that Jomini is quoted and discussed in other chapters of Some Principles.

⁴⁰Jomini, Summary, 437.

⁴¹Ibid.

⁴²Ibid., 437–8.

⁴³Ibid., 553.

⁴⁴Ibid., 555.

⁴⁵Ibid., 555–6.

⁴⁶Corbett, Some Principles, 4.