Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise to Western Power

A fabulous and thought provoking piece, by one of the worlds foremost intellectuals. Most criticisms of it him merely reflect individual biases and not the breadth of knowledge contained within this worthy tome.

A bit repetitive in places; I think Hanson ought to credit his readership with the intelligence to understand his points more quickly, but an interesting thesis nonetheless. His analysis of several ancient battles and the societies that were involved seems sound. I am less sure of his predictions of future western military domination in an era where technology trumps discipline and ideals. I rate the work heavily because it is interesting and thought-provoking.

Although Hanson logically explains the world domination by European powers for the past 500 years and foreseeable future, his brilliant basic argument is seriously undercut by his right-wing nonsense. He attributes military success to the inherent individualism of a free society; he ignores the fundamental element of a free society, the ability of people to trust each other without the need for police and other regulatory enforcers.It's worth reading, nonetheless.Basically, he argues that individualism, rationalism and personal initiative of a free people are the keys to European success. It's an absolutely valid thesis; unfortunately, he didn't include the equally vital discipline, personal responsibility and willing obedience. Yet, it's easy enough to overlook his flaws and focus on his main theme that specific cultural traits make the vital difference.Basically, Hanson argues that European individualism has its roots in classical Greek democracy. His weakness is not knowing why such democracy arose in Greece, just as a similar fierce democracy arose in Scandinavia. Not knowing "why" matters, but it doesn't take away from his basic emphasis on personal freedom and responsibility.Actually, two key factors explain European success. First is the willing acceptance of discipline needed for a united cause; second is the personal initiative to come up with aa good alternative if the first element fails. These principles apply to all elements of a free society. Great warrior societies perish, great commercial societies vanish, and great religions die. Enduring societies produce guns, butter and prayers.Freedom works, because people with free choice volunteer to vigorously defend their societies. People who are free to choose achieve far more than those who are coerced or drafted. This applies to war as well as economics, religion, politics, the arts and justice. Hanson limits his examples to war, which is the great weakness of his book.Strangely enough, Hanson laments ". . . some key ingredients of traditional Western warfare appear to be all but gone. Mercenary armies in America and Europe are the norm." It's an odd comment on today's voluntary, well-paid and highly professional US military, compared to the conscription of draftees in the past.However, the fundamental basis of a free society is trust. It applies to business, which is why Enron, WorldCom, Tyco and Halliburton are such distressing symbols of greed over honesty. In analyzing the Tet Offensive of 1968, Hanson blames "liberals" for the American loss of Vietnam. He doesn't seem to understand that it was the public loss of trust in the military and political leadership of the 1960s that brought defeat. In 1944, the Battle of the Bulge was a similarly rude shock for Western society which expected the war to be over before Christmas - - - but, in those days politicians and generals were trusted.Ignoring such elements of a free society constitute major flaws in this book. But, it doesn't undermine the basic premise that certain basic cultural values give Western society an unprecedented military and economic advantage for the past several hundred years. Ours is a confrontational society based on competition in business, an adversarial legal system, a win-lose political debate rather than compromise and mediation, and a system of checks and balance on the use of political and economic authority.Those qualities made Western society into the world's superpower. It's time to look at 5,000 years of history to examine qualities that created earlier dominance in war, economics or religion. We tend to think of Western society as the pinnacle of material and spiritual achievement, as all previous societies thought of their accomplishments. Surely one lesson of history is that the qualities which create success are not those which sustain it.Hanson is well worth reading for his one-note theory of modern power -- he says it is the Western knack for killing. It is much more. There is a whole quilt of qualities, not merely one little blood-soaked patchwork piece. He offers a nice first step in understanding the worldwide acceptance of current European values -- but, he ignores many other elements that create the whole patchwork quilt.The greatest danger to our freedom comes from absolutist dogma such as Hanson's assertion, "Western civilization has given mankind the only economic system that works . . . . . " Egypt under the Pharaohs was the longest surviving and wealthiest society of its era -- which collapsed because it could not accept change. Our society is scarcely the only one that works -- though it may well be the best for modern times. Hanson needs to look beyond his own cloistered little ivory tower to see the beauty of other societies.Fortunately, a free society is a process of continual change. Unlike past nations, which enshrined a conservative heritage of tradition rather than accept change, Western society will likely continue to evolve to meet and match ever-changing conditions. Hanson aptly shows one reason why. But, there are many more reasons it is so.

Having just finished this book in two days, I can recommend it as an excellent read to absolutely anyone interested in military history, or world history in general. As a person who has read very extensively about many of the battles discussed in this book, the author's assessments of the facts seem to largely be spot on, and there was never any real point where his command of what actually happened was in any doubt. I can also say that the quality of the analysis in this book concerning the battles he discusses is quite through. Saying that the book is about battles is actually sometimes inaccurate, often it discusses entire campaigns and focuses in on the important points, so as to give the reader a better overall view of the situation and the context in which the wars were waged.The general premise of this book is that certain aspects of western culture have given the western world certain key advantages when fighting opposing armies, specifically the rationalist mindset, a proclivity for innovation, free debate, a focus on organizational discipline ect. Some people may look at that summary and decry it as racists or imperialist, however the author quite commonly applauds the courage and bravery of many of the non western peoples from the Aztecs to the Zulus. His point is that because western notions about how to fight a war, i.e. through, direct "shock" engagements, designed to annihilate opposition, were so different from many other cultures, i.e. at the other extreme, the Aztecs waged war to capture prisoners for human sacrifice, and often battles were ceremonial lasting for perhaps a day, after which both sides went home largely unmolested. These radically different ideas on how to conduct warfare, helped to provide people like Cortez significant advantages that grew entirely out of how they viewed the world and the purpose of warfare. In fact the author cites multiple occasions where the Aztecs might have killed Cortex but instead tried to capture him for sacrifice. Had they simply killed Cortez and his men, like the French or British probably would have done, then they might not have been wiped out so easily, given their vast numerical advantage. I could give more examples, but then i would just be retyping the entire book. Suffice to say that the author makes his point in a systematic, entertaining, and brilliant fashion.One last thing I will add is that while many books about war, are naturally one sided, and tend to portray the victors as righteous heroes while the defeated are vilified, I found essentially no instances of this happening in this book. The author is quick to point out the moral and ethical flaws of both sides. For example, he mentions the racism and brutality towards prisoners characteristic of the Japaneses in World War 2, but also talks about the firebombing of Tokyo that killed thousands of innocents. In my opinion it is a fairly balanced reading of history, abet one with a point, but balanced nonetheless. At the end you are left with the conclusions that no one is truly innocent in war, but at the same time, uniquely western cultural assumptions and developments have helped to given them a decisive edge.

Excellent book, well researched, showing the relationship between culture and carnages in typical battles which occurred from antique til modern ages, recommended to military personnel and historians

AWESOME

I was very skeptical at first about this book. The argument about the link between Western art of war and culture seemed to me very risky. I still have my doubts but I must admit Hanson's reasoning is crystal-clear logical and very, very attractively delivered. I feel inspired not bored, educated without patronizing. Excellent history and Hansen at its best. Wholeheartedly recommended!

Boring! Repetitive chants of the almost religious belief in freedom and democracy. Self-contradictory in its arguments, revealing little knowledge or wisdom.