Hi Gian,
This isn't meant as an attack but, rather, an observation. I suspect the answer to your question of "why don't we have these sorts now?" is much simpler and inherent in how we actually judge a "great general". If we use the criteria of "big battles" and "major coalition warfare" as the criteria for defining great generals, then you are right. But what if we don't?
I would suggest that we should base our criteria for "greatness" solely at he strategic and grand strategic levels, and leave out the tactical and grand tactical (operational) levels - basically something that Norfolk does with his list. Within those constraints, I would argue that we need to further differentiate between functional areas: organization, operations and innovation. Admittedly, they are all inextricably linked, but I think that it is important to analytically separate them since it is quite possible for an individual to be "brilliant" in only one functional area.
Marc
Bookmarks