Scan barcode
ihorbook's review against another edition
3.0
Менше цікавих і нових для мене фактів, ніж хотілось би, і більше розмірковувань про Клаузевіца, ніж доречно для книжки з такою назвою. Але написано гарно і як оглядовий, вступний текст - окей.
mercerhanau's review against another edition
I’m no historian and can’t really argue with much of what the author said, so I’ll refrain from giving it a star rating. Not really my genre, but I did enjoy some vivid descriptions and opening my mind to why different cultures across time have engaged in this thing I think is so stupid and detestable. (I still think it’s stupid and detestable.) I listened to the audiobook as an incidental book recommendation trade with my dad—he read Gideon the Ninth and I read A History of Warfare—and while it was a bit of a slog, I’m glad I finished it.
Pretty jargon-y. I’m not sure he ever spelled out the difference between real war and true war, perhaps assuming the reader already knew from reading the work of the historian he was referencing.
I have some questions/oppositions to dated language (i.e. “primitive” cultures). He also says women are ambivalent about war-making, even if they are sometimes the cause or pretext… It was written in the ‘90s, so I wonder what he would make of female soldiers today.
He also addresses testosterone’s role in aggression briefly, and mentions how people with XYY chromosomes have a slightly higher-than-average proportion who are violent criminals. Where’s the study? How else are XYY people different than XY? According to kidshealth.org: “Boys with XYY syndrome — also known as 47,XYY — might be taller than other boys. Other symptoms can include problems with spoken language and processing spoken words, coordination problems, weaker muscles, hand tremors, and behavioral problems.”
Pretty jargon-y. I’m not sure he ever spelled out the difference between real war and true war, perhaps assuming the reader already knew from reading the work of the historian he was referencing.
I have some questions/oppositions to dated language (i.e. “primitive” cultures). He also says women are ambivalent about war-making, even if they are sometimes the cause or pretext… It was written in the ‘90s, so I wonder what he would make of female soldiers today.
He also addresses testosterone’s role in aggression briefly, and mentions how people with XYY chromosomes have a slightly higher-than-average proportion who are violent criminals. Where’s the study? How else are XYY people different than XY? According to kidshealth.org: “Boys with XYY syndrome — also known as 47,XYY — might be taller than other boys. Other symptoms can include problems with spoken language and processing spoken words, coordination problems, weaker muscles, hand tremors, and behavioral problems.”
zalnash's review against another edition
3.0
After a brilliant start, Keegan ventures into an ever more confuse exposition of the evolution of - mostly western - warfare, only to conclude it in utmost chaos. The author's erudition is unquestionable, unlike his sense of structure, which leaves his work feeling very incomplete. Keeping into account that it was written in the 1990's, the concluding chapter and the closing words on the potential for the rise of a "warrior-protector of civilization" hasn't aged very well.
Worth a read nevertheless, but lackluster on its own.
Worth a read nevertheless, but lackluster on its own.
spinnerroweok's review against another edition
4.0
This book tries to cover a lot of territory from ancient tribal warfare to the nuclear bomb and post colonial rebellions. The book looks at social and technological aspects of warfare. Its long chapters with titles such as Stone, Flesh, Iron, and Fire loosely center around those topics. It is nearly impossible to separate them from one another.
The big takeaway from the book for me is how limited war really is. We put social limits on war such as not allowing women and children to participate. (Yes, there are exceptions.) There are technological limits such as how accurate a firearm can be. And there are logistical limits based on how can an army keep its fighters supplied with food, water, and munitions.
Of particular interest to me were the social and logistical limits. In primitive societies, it seems war is very ritualized and limited as to when, where, and how it is fought. Thus large scale death is avoided. Logistical limits seemed to limit the size of any fast growing, large scale empire such as the Huns or Alexander the Greats movement. It was also interesting to see how these limits can be somewhat thwarted, at least for a time, by the willingness of combatants to fight such as the Confederacy holding out against the United States in the American Civil War.
The only problem I had with the book was largely my own expectations. I would expect it go to go one way, and it would go another. Therefore, I was struggling with the text. I normally embrace this kind of challenge to my thinking, but for some reason, it just irritated me. I think I felt as if I was missing some important information. This book could have easily been twice the length and still not have been comprehensive enough for me. Maybe that was the real challenge I had with the book.
If you are interested in learning more about war, I would recommend this book.
The big takeaway from the book for me is how limited war really is. We put social limits on war such as not allowing women and children to participate. (Yes, there are exceptions.) There are technological limits such as how accurate a firearm can be. And there are logistical limits based on how can an army keep its fighters supplied with food, water, and munitions.
Of particular interest to me were the social and logistical limits. In primitive societies, it seems war is very ritualized and limited as to when, where, and how it is fought. Thus large scale death is avoided. Logistical limits seemed to limit the size of any fast growing, large scale empire such as the Huns or Alexander the Greats movement. It was also interesting to see how these limits can be somewhat thwarted, at least for a time, by the willingness of combatants to fight such as the Confederacy holding out against the United States in the American Civil War.
The only problem I had with the book was largely my own expectations. I would expect it go to go one way, and it would go another. Therefore, I was struggling with the text. I normally embrace this kind of challenge to my thinking, but for some reason, it just irritated me. I think I felt as if I was missing some important information. This book could have easily been twice the length and still not have been comprehensive enough for me. Maybe that was the real challenge I had with the book.
If you are interested in learning more about war, I would recommend this book.
jcovey's review against another edition
2.0
Some of the most obfuscating, impenetrable prose I've ever come across. I read it in high school, and I remember at the time being half of the opinion that it was my own fault as an inexperienced reader. It was a much delayed vindication when I read Steven Pinker's guide to clear writing, 'The Sense of Style', where he uses this book as an example of ferociously confusing writing.
aldean's review against another edition
5.0
This book sat on my shelf, beautiful but unread, until I heard a fascinating interview on NPR one night with a historian who turned out to be John Keegan, soon to be my favorite military historian. I started reading this the next day.
This in an ambitious work, attempting as it does to cover al of military history from pre-history all the way through the then current-day late Twentieth Century. That Keegan manages to write such a book that covered that vast sweep of years in a manner both informative, reflective, and highly readable was a feat that impressed me then, and continues to impress me today. He avoids trying to be too exhaustive, expertly selecting representative incidents and episodes to trace the development of humanity's expertise in group violence throughout the ages. An thoroughly enjoyable read.
This in an ambitious work, attempting as it does to cover al of military history from pre-history all the way through the then current-day late Twentieth Century. That Keegan manages to write such a book that covered that vast sweep of years in a manner both informative, reflective, and highly readable was a feat that impressed me then, and continues to impress me today. He avoids trying to be too exhaustive, expertly selecting representative incidents and episodes to trace the development of humanity's expertise in group violence throughout the ages. An thoroughly enjoyable read.
natemanfrenjensen's review against another edition
3.0
An in-depth and interesting history of the development of warfare. Examines the premise of warfare as an extension of politics.
bloodravenlib's review against another edition
4.0
I found this book very fascinating. I found the ideas intriguing, but found I needed to read closely to grasp them fully.