Customer Rating: 
Summary: Overreaching
Comment: One has a sneaking suspicion reading this volume that Hanson started with his conclusion first (that Greeks invented the so-called "Western" way of war which, according to Hanson, requires emphasis on "decisive" battles) and worked his way back. The "uniqueness" of the Western way of war remains unproven (proving it would require an analysis of methods of waging war by other civilizations), and moreover it is far from clear that Hanson's "Western way of war" has been actually waged by Western states.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Suffers from some factual/interpretive errors and the author's political agenda
Comment: There are some things about this book that are worthy of praise and I agree with many of its points (though he oversells some of them.) When Victor Hanson is writing about the military aspects his style is very interesting and refreshing. I particularly like the statistics/tables in the back--since they provide a sense of perspective and strengthen some arguments.
However, there are aspects of this book that made me skeptical and my fears were confirmed after doing some fact checking. In trying to prove his point VDH sometimes pushes the margins. For example, stating that Philip was wounded by a sling bullet at Methone, when contemporary accounts point to an arrow being the cause. VDH also dismisses Greek cavalry before Philip as being only 10 hands tall...never mind that is the *smallest* find of a classical Greek horse. (They were more like 13 hands high on average...small, but not Lilliputian.) This concerns me as I must now approach the entire work more skeptically.
There is an even larger criticism. VDH writes with a modern political agenda at the forefront, and one has the impression that he selectively picks information to reach pre-ordained conclusions, rather than conducting a thorough, balanced review. This is unfortunate as it removes the sense of historical objectivity. If I was searching for a modern political argument I wouldn't be buying a book ostensibly about ancient warfare.
In summary, I can only recommend this book to the discriminating reader that already has developed a balanced knowledge of Greek warfare.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Jump off point
Comment: This book provides a student or casual reader interested in Greek warfare and anthropological study a good base from which to work from. A little technical at times, he sometimes gets bogged down in some areas, but finishes brilliantly. With the history of Greek warfare fresh in your mind, it's a must to go into "Soul of Battle," right after - it's a wonderful transition into a supurb book on leadership.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Too much of a stretch!
Comment: This book examines the development of war in ancient Greece through the dark ages after the collapse of Mycenean civilization and through the Classical period, Hellenic Period and up to the conquest of Greece by Roman Legions.First of all it is important to be aware that the author assumes the readers knowledge of primary texts of the era. He refers frequently to books such as Herodotous Histories, Thucydides Peloponnesian war, Xenophon's Anabasis and the works of Plutarch, Arrian, Polybius and Xeno amongst others.
Victor Davis Hanson believes that the way we fight today is a direct descendant of the Greek method of fighting. He contends that the successes of the Greeks against Persian armies dictated the development of war down to the present day.
This is a huge contention and one that I believe he fails to support. He speaks at length about the "Western way of war" without establishing how this differed significantly from other military systems. His contention that it was only in Greece that shock battle developed is flawed. Shaka, king of the Zulu nation, independently developed shock battle tactics, and he can be only one of many who came to the same end result from different starting points.
At times I felt that Hanson was trying to be sensationalist in making contentious statements that are ill supported by argument. Some examples of this tendancy are the following brave assertions!:
"The great Chinese military strategist Sun-tzu is sometimes cryptic, often mystical, and always part of some larger religious paradigm."
"Too many scholars like to compare Alexander to Hannibal or Napoleon. A far better match would be Hitler...."
"[The Hellenic Siege engine] was impractical gigantism on a magnitude comparable to the contemporary B-2 American bomber...."
However, in the end of the day what this book does give the reader is a well detailed account of some of the most important battles of the classical Greek and Alexandrian campaigns. Hanson focused primarily on infantry actions and comments little upon the naval engagements. But his analysis of battles involving heavy infantry phalanxes is detailed, interesting and enlightening. The illustrations of key battles serve as a useful visual guide to walk the reader through the events in sequence. And good use is made of contemporary illustrations from vase painting and sculpture to support the analysis.
A useful read for those with an interest in military history who want to concentrate on battles and the tactics involved.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Origins of Western Art of War.
Comment: This handsomely produced book is lavish with illustrations and diagrams. Pictures of Greek panoply and other weapons, as well as diagrams of phalanx warfare all contribute to a vivid portrayal of ancient and classical Greek warfare. Victor Davis Hanson is in usual form here providing a convincing over-view of Greek Hoplite warfare, while re-stating many of his controversial opinions that have appeared in his other books. VDH believes Greek Hopilte warfare to be the natural evolution of the free Greek city-states. Other contemporary cultures were primarily dynastic and centralized, while Greece developed into 1,000 independent Political entities. Geography and climate clearly played some part in this development, but it was also the unique outlook and desire of the Greeks themselves to resolve warfare quickly and decisively. VDH provides his usual pro-Occidental outlook in comparing Greco-Western martial developments to their less effective Eastern and Asian counter-parts. Again, many Liberal and Politically-Correct minded persons might take offensive here, and pehaps there are holes in some of these arguments. Still, one can't help but admire VDH's bold and controversial statements. Unlike so many today he is not affraid to make harsh judgements which are quite down-to-earth, but often not very subtle!
VDH has particular wrath to vent toward the conquests of Alexander whom he credits with ushering in an era of warring Hellanistic dynasties that would utilize resources from the conquered Persian empire to wage total war that was unknown to the earlier Greek Polis state. VDH considers Alexander a drunkard and thug! Pretty strong language to describe one of the universial Western images of classical times. Perhaps Alexander's army was brutal in conquest, but probably no more than any other great empire. VDH's obsession with making him out to be Hitler in Antiquity seems a bit odd and threatens to unbalance his narrative at times. We can deffinitely see that VDH has an aggenda here, to downgrade Alexander as a Western icon of Hellenistic culture. True, the Romans probably did make him into the larger than life conquerer that we know today. Still, with the steady development of Greek warfare it's difficult to imagine that someone sooner or later would not have become a conquering Alexander. VDH seems to mourn the loss of the tradtioanl culture of Hoplite warfare, that well ordered slaughter between neighboring city-states, but its development into an imperial system was bound to take shape sooner or later. Otherwise the Greeks themselves would have become victem to eventual conquest by an outside empire, as was the case later with the Romans.
If you don't mind VDH's tirades against Alexander, then this is still a most excellent work with great illustrations and diagrams which help to bring a vivid impression to life of warfare in ancient and classical Greece. The book does make you want to read more, including the primary works of the period.
