(This is Part 4 of a series. Go back to Part 3.)
The battle of Marathon in 490 BC was one of the most important battles in history. It halted the Persian invasion of the small Greek city-states, and in particular the small city-state called Athens.
The miraculous victory of the outnumbered Greeks over the mighty Persian Empire on the plains of Marathon that September day in 490 BC saved the world's first fragile experiment in democracy, which had begun in Athens only 17 years earlier.
The victory would need to be confirmed 10 years later in the crucial battle of Salamis, but the battle of Marathon marked the high water mark of the Persian Empire. It also marked the beginning of the ascendancy of Greece and its independent-minded culture. It's not an exaggeration to say that the Golden Age of Greece began with the Battle of Marathon.
Buoyed by their independence and their new-found faith in themselves, the Greeks produced such world-defining figures as Socrates, Aeschylus, Plato, Thucydides, Sophocles, Aristotle and so on—a literary, artistic and philosophical pantheon which not only created the foundations of Western culture, but which would not be equalled until the Renaissance many centuries later.
The concepts of democracy and independent inquiry were born in Athens. In fact, in no other language except Greek did the words for "citizen" or "freedom" even exist. The battle of Marathon was literally, as the historian J.F.C. Fuller observed, "the birth cry of Europe," and by extension, the birth cry of the notion of individual freedom and expression.
And yet all this depended upon the actions of one wily general, a Greek commander named Miltiades. Let's take a look at what he did to pull this rabbit out of his hat:
Miltiades' Greek army of 10,000 men was arrayed on the plains of Marathon facing a Persian army of about 20-30,000 sent by Darius, the emperor of Persia. The formidable Persian legions had landed from the sea and were now arrayed, with their ships at their backs, facing the Greeks.
The Persian line was deployed in the usual arrangement, with the most seasoned legions in the center, and then extending out in a straight line, the left and right flanks consisting of other infantry.
Miltiades had his soldiers arrayed in a similar straight line facing the Persian line. But because he was facing a much larger force he came up with a creative solution: He thinned his center ranks from a depth of eight ranks to a depth of only four, and used the extra soldiers to strengthen his left and right flanks to a depth of 12 ranks.
After the initial engagement of the armies, the Persians began to win in the weak Greek center, just as Miltiades anticipated. The Greek center began to give way and staged a gradual "retreat," backing away toward a nearby ridge. Naturally the Persian troops in the center, sensing victory now, began to enthusiastically pursue the Greek center, pushing it farther and farther back.
Meanwhile the strong Greek flanks on left and right had been winning their part of the battle, pushing the Persian flanks back and turning them in from the center. So as the Persian troops pursued the "defeated" Greek troops in the center, pushing forward, the Persian soldiers gradually became enveloped on both sides by the Greek flanks.
Then the "defeated" Greek troops in the center stopped, regrouped and suddenly charged back down from the ridge. The surprised Persian center was pushed back and collided with the disoriented Persian infantry being pushed back by the Greeks on both flanks.
The mighty Persian army, now surrounded on three sides by Greek infantry and on the fourth side by the sea, had nowhere to go—and disintegrated. The Greeks had won.
The basic principle illustrated by this battle is an example of a military principle that has wide applicability elsewhere in life. It is this:
Retreat, then attack from the side.
This particular military principle, for instance, is used in the personal martial arts of aikido, jujitsu and others. By feigning weakness against the opponent he is encouraged to attack. As the opponent attacks his energy comes forward and he becomes momentarily unbalanced, and thus open to skilled control or attack from the side, where he is much more vulnerable.
The brilliant Carthaginian general Hannibal used this principle in 216 BC to defeat a much larger Roman army at the battle of Cannae. Hannibal deliberately placed his weakest troops in the center and instructed them to retreat slowly as if being defeated.
As the battle began the Romans pressed forward eagerly in the center, smelling victory. Now Hannibal snapped his trap shut: He instructed the strong African infantry on the flanks to close in on the sides of the forward-extended Roman army. Meanwhile Hannibal's cavalry circled around and charged the Romans from the back. The Roman legions, now surrounded, disintegrated.
This principle can also be used in everyday life. For instance, you are a "warrior" when you struggle to bring a project to completion. You are a warrior when you work to save the environment. You are a warrior when you feed the poor. You are a warrior when you attempt to bring light to your corner of the world. How can we apply this principle in such cases?
Let's say you are having difficulty with some project. Following the principle of Retreat, then attack from the side, you would go away from the project for a time ("retreat"), then return to it from a new angle ("attack from the side"). Einstein used this principle repeatedly in developing his General Theory of Relativity.
Nor does the principle necessarily have to be used in an adversarial way. For example:
Suppose you are negotiating with another party and the negotiations have become stalled. What then? Our principle would suggest conceding a few points ("retreat") to make the other party more receptive and open, and then bring a fresh set of proposals ("attack from the side") that approaches the negotiation from a new and more creative angle (what negotiators call the third way).
This approach can be surprisingly powerful and has been used repeatedly in a number of difficult but successful international negotiations.
This principle can also be used on a more personal level. For instance, when we stop arguing with reality about something or other (we "retreat"), we then become more peaceful.
In that more peaceful atmosphere, our inner guidance can more easily be heard. And therefore the actions that arise from this more detached place are often more creative, practical and effective.
"Detached" here does not mean "indifferent." "Indifferent" means that one does not care. "Detached" means that one cares and is present to the moment, doing whatever one can, yet detached from insistance on a particular outcome.
(This is the end of Part 4. Go to Part 5.)
—jim sloman, 6.23.03 for 11.08.03
|
