Reviews for Warfare in Antiquity: History of the Art of War, Vol. 1

The average rating for Warfare in Antiquity: History of the Art of War, Vol. 1 based on 2 reviews is 4 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2011-06-11 00:00:00 David Osterberg One of those more or less indispensable tomes that, for all its faults and obsolescences, said something that needed said, and very persuasively. Its basic thesis is that traditional reports of ancient battles (such as found in Herodotos or Arrian, say) tend to overemphasize the quantity of the enemy and underemphasize the quantity of the protagonist. The Persian invasion of several millions, or the many millions who defended against Alexander, for instance, are the paradigmatic examples of exaggeration. Delbruck's method is to survey the battle sites where possible and read the old accounts, and then calculate the amount of space necessary for the number of enemy troops reported. normally, the space is grossly insufficient; the famous quip is that the Persian invasion of attica would have the head of the column reaching Athens prior to the end of the army leaving Ctesiphon, or so. It might be objected that we don't need a scholar to tell us that ancient historians exaggerate--this is true, but a subliterate cynicism that simply doubts for the sake of doubting itself is not the same as identifying an error and explaining it. Delbruck bridges this hyperskeptical abyss for us. The basic conclusion is that the outcome of ancient battles is normally decided by quantity rather than quality of soldiers--this is why the Romans excelled, with their control of land and sea routes that permitted an efficient massing of force on chosen terrain. Differences in tactics or equipment, as well as purported individual genius, are diminished in this accounting. Thoughtful presentation of many of the famous battles, such as those covered by Livy in the Second Punic War and so on.

Review # 2 was written on 2007-10-01 00:00:00 Trevor Bates A most enjoyable book. One which corrected misconceptions of some history I had learned, and really provided a better backdrop for ancient european history than I've had in the past. That may speak as much to the quality of education as quality of book. It is layed out strangely, with each chapter lasting about a 1-1.5 pages, followed by several pages of "excursis", followed by a page or two of foot notes. The translation is a little bit strange also (originally german), and you can definitely hear the German/Prussian in the prose. If you like ancient history, this is interesting due to methods and changes in warfare. He only rarely touches on political, social, or even military upheavals; focussing on how how people fought changed. I find particularly fascinating how over the centuries the maneuver unit has shrunk as we get better at communicating and better at killing.