A History of Warfare - John Keegan

Interesting, but fundamentally flawed.

This book is not a history of warfare at all, but a political-military treatise, heavily biased to a single point of view. However, it is an interesting read and also thought-provoking - so I gave it 2-stars.


Keegan makes a range of claims in this book which are fundamentally incorrect. Three such lines of argument are discussed below, but there are many others and I wonder if Keegan has even misinterpreted some of the 'facts' he suggests about tribal warfare in South America.

1. He claims that there is no Clausewitzian way of interpreting, or applying, nuclear force. Nuclear force is applied to give weight to political and military bargaining. The threat of use provides its power. In the case of the Cold War, the East-West military balance in Germany was primarily ensured through the West's nuclear armament offsetting the East's conventional armament. The lack of use of a weapon does not make it irrelevant.

2. He over-simplifies the role of the castle. He contends that the use of gunpowder made the castle obsolete. This is again incorrect. The castle approach may be no substitute for mobility, but the principle has been applied widely (if poorly), even in the 20th Century. Further, his claim that it was impossible to take a castle prior to the arrival of the cannon is also flawed - as history shows a range of methods which were applied successfully (such as at the successful seige of the 'impenetrable' Rochester castle in 1215).

3. He denegrates the role of citizen armies. This flies in the face of 20th Century and 21st Century history and is, quite frankly, dangerous. The proof of history is that citizen armies are vastly more trustworthy and loyal to their homeland than their alternatives.

This book is very anti-Clausewitz, which is not helpful at all. I suspect that it was Keegan's intention to make an impact by attacking a giant of the genre. This is rather like the Clausewitz vs. Sun Tzu debate - which I also find counter-productive.

A true premier work on this subject would be one which could take existing theories and meld them into something new. This book neither attempts nor succeeds in doing any such thing. One for the vaults...

Gross misinterpretation of Clausewitz

Keegan sets out on a bold crusade to discredit Carl von Clausewitz and fails - miserably. Two major problems:

1) Keegan is oblivious of the fact that Clausewitz's phrase "war is a contiunation of politics by other means" is the antithesis in a dialectical argument, whose thesis is the point that "war is nothing but a duel [or wrestling match, a better translation of the German Zweikampf] on a larger scale." His synthesis, which resolves the deficiencies of these two bold statements, says that war is neither "nothing but" an act of brute force nor "merely" a rational act of politics or policy. This synthesis lies in his "fascinating trinity" [wunderliche Dreifaltigkeit]: a dynamic, inherently unstable interaction of the forces of violent emotion, chance, and rational calculation.

2. Keegan limits the Clausewitzian definition of politics to western, secular government-based power. This is totally wrong. Clausewitz made no limits on the term "politics" - it is Keegan who does that, claiming that pre-state cultures cannot possess a certain cultural or religious policy that can lead to war. Every society, from iron age nomads to modern states have their own political agenda, their own set of normative rules or religious creeds that can evolve into warfare in order to benefit the tribe/society.

History of Warfare

This is an interesting look at warfare throughout human history. It looks at the various developments from primitive ritualised warfare, the use of horses and chariots, the growth of iron weapons, the building and development of forts and the discovery and implementation of gunpowder and more besides. It is fascinating to read, but fairly dry in places (hence the 4 stars). It takes some perseverance, but the dividends from sticking with it are worth the extra work. Overall a good read with some interesting information to give you a deeper insight into human society and the development of warfare.

A readable history of warfare!

This is simply excellent. The narrative is well-written, never stuffy and pitched for a level above beginner. Keegan places the development of armies, arms, materials and transport in various sections. This makes for easy reading, learning and entertainment. I find this combination unusual in books about war. At almost every page I wanted to know more about the history of the particular tribe, nation, war or armaments being described. I like his personal slant; though he does give fair credit to other views. Recommended.

Ambitious in scope, engaging in style

Few books in the market provide a better general overview of the history of warfare since the dawn of war-making. In this ambitious piece of work, Keegan ranges effortlessly across epochs and continents to tell the story of more than four millennia of world history. If all this sounds a little daunting, the book is written in an accessible style that constantly engages the reader and ensures that you'd probably not need to go over a paragraph twice.

One of the great strengths of the book is its thematic layout. What might have been a long and humdrum narrative is enlivened by intelligent chapter divisions that deal with the different `ages' in warfare according to specific themes. This breaks the account into more manageable portions. The overall structure and coherence of the narrative is always preserved.

Keegan offers something more for the informed reader through the inroads he makes into military philosophy. Notably, he highlights the limitations of Clausewitz's `war is merely a continuation of politics' by demonstrating the intimate connections between war-making and culture.

This book is a must-read for any military history enthusiast, or anyone else interested in a first taste of this genre.