Customer Reviews

Ripples of Battle: How Wars of the Past Still Determine How We Fight, How We Live, and How We Think

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Hanson is an excellent writer with a vigorous style, and "Ripples of Battle" is a pleasure to read. The book explores the "ripples" that flowed from three battles--Okinawa, Shiloh, and Delium--and explains how those ripples changed the world.

Human history would have been very different had the Greek philosopher Socrates been killed at the otherwise obscure Battle of Delium in 424 BC. At the time, Socrates' most profound thinking was yet to come and Plato was only a child. If Socrates had fallen along with hundreds of other Athenians, "the entire course of Western philosophical and political thought would have been radically altered" (216).

The Battle of Shiloh was likewise a crack in time. Among other things, the fighting changed William Tecumseh Sherman from a failure to a hero and taught him that it was far less costly to wage war against civilian infrastructure than to fight a pitched battle against a modern army. The March to the Sea began with the hard lessons that Sherman learned at Shiloh.

And at Okinawa, America learned how difficult it would be to force Japan to surrender, enduring fanatical resistance and suicidal attacks that cost the lives of thousands Americans and tens of thousands of Japanese. Hanson argues that the experience yielded a cold American resolve and a willingness to use atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Whether you agree with Hanson's conclusions or not, the journey is worth the price of admission. History is often written is if key outcomes were inevitable, as if Socrates were ordained to lay the foundations of western philosphy or the north were bound to win the Civil War. But history is contingent, and the only way to fully appreciate the significance of a given occurrence--especially the "near run things" that crop up in battle--is to think about what might have happened if the event had turned out differently. In this respect, Hanson's book bears a kinship to the "What If? series of essay collections--in fact, Hanson's original essays on Delium and the fate of Lew Wallace after Shiloh can be found in those books.

Of course, the biggest ripples that flow from these battles might be those that remain unseen. We know that Socrates did not die at Delium and that the intellectual world as we know it depended on his survival--but we don't know whether Delium, or Shiloh, or Okinawa or any other event or battle ended the lives of other geniuses who might have changed history, for better or worse. Those imponderables are left to more speculative works than this.

If you enjoyed "Carnage And Culture," I am sure you will also like "Ripples Of Battle." Mr. Hanson is an academic who knows how to write clearly, and in a style which can best be described as conversational: you feel as though you are in his classroom (a small classroom, not a lecture hall) and he's just chatting with you. Whether he's writing about the movements of hoplites and cavalry at the Battle of Delium, the plays of Euripides, Socratic philosophy, Japanese kamikaze pilots, or the miraculous feats of Nathan Bedford Forrest at the Battle of Shiloh, it is all explained so that the layperson can understand it (without being "dumbed down") and it is all fascinating. Mr. Hanson is a writer who has more ideas in one chapter than most authors have in an entire book. If you think I'm just blowing smoke, consider what's under discussion in the chapter on the Battle of Delium, which took place in Greece in 424 B.C. : there is the background to the battle (why it was fought); the strategy and tactics of the battle itself; Greek religious beliefs ( the victorious Boeotians wouldn't let the Athenians gather up their dead from the battlefield, so they could be buried quickly - before the bodies started to decay. This was to retaliate for the fact that the Athenians, after the battle, occupied a Boeotian temple); how the battle changed the way future battles were fought (the Boeotians introduced the concept of holding back a "strategic reserve," to be brought into the battle at the proper moment. They also coordinated cavalry with infantry and arranged their hoplites in deepened columns); the importance to the history of Western philosophy that Socrates (the Greeks saw no contradiction in combining a life of martial action with a life of contemplation) survived the battle. These are just a few of the things that are discussed - so you can see that the book is not just about the nuts-and-bolts of the battles. Personally, I found this one chapter "worth the price of admission." However, the other chapters are equally good. For example, we learn how the Battle of Shiloh rehabilitated the career of General Sherman (who, only a few months before, had been referred to as "crazy"); forged the friendship/partnership between Sherman and Grant; made a popular hero of Confederate officer Nathan Bedford Forrest (who single-handedly rode into a brigade of Sherman's troops, took a point-blank bullet in the back, near his spine, yet managed to lift a Union soldier off the ground and plop him behind him on his horse to use as a "human shield" while Forrest galloped back to the Confederate position. Forrest was back in action two months later. It is also noteworthy that after the war, for a short while, Forrest was the head of the newly formed Ku Klux Klan); and, in a bizarre twist of history, resulted in the writing of the novel "Ben-Hur" (which, by 1936, had earned the greatest amount of money of any novel in American history) - but, I don't want to give THAT story away! "Ripples Of Battle" contains so many different threads and ideas that there really is something here for everyone - even the serious student of military history, who may know these battles inside-out, will find much to think about. Is this book perfect? Of course not. Mr. Hanson has lots of opinions, and some of them (depending upon which side of the fence you are standing on) are bound to rub you the wrong way. For example, in the chapter on Shiloh, the author writes that Sherman was so appalled by the carnage that he thought there must have been a better way of fighting the war - namely, carry it to the civilians - which led to the March To The Sea. Fair enough, so far. But I didn't agree with Mr. Hanson's assertion that Sherman's March caused "ripples" which affected the way later wars were fought. Frankly, I don't see the evidence, and the author is very lax in supplying any. I also didn't agree (and many Southerners won't, either) with Mr. Hanson's claim that Sherman left the "little man" alone - that on his March through Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina his troops specifically targeted only the homes and farms of the rich people who supported secession. If Mr. Hanson really holds this view, I find it amazing. He is too good a military historian to be unaware of what happens when troops (especially unopposed troops) are unleashed on the countryside and are told to "live off the land." The idea of Sherman's March was to destroy the Southern infrastructure and to break the morale of the general population - period. Still, this book is full of so many good things that even the occasional slip-up cannot cause me to lower my opinion of the whole. This is a book that is well-worth reading.

Victor Davis Hanson explores some of the consequences and effects of three battles: Okinawa, Shiloh, and Delium. The book starts off with Okinawa in which the author lost an uncle. This provides a very personal touch as the author explains his efforts to find out more information about his Uncle.

In discussing all three battles the author covers some of the obvious consequences, like the lost of loved ones and how that affected families back home. He reviews some of the changes to military strategy after each battle and changes in politics. He also shows that there are many less obvious consequences to each battle.


Okinawa:

In Okinawa, near the end of World War II, the Americans launched an invasion that was bigger than Normandy. The Americans saw it as a stepping stone to the invasion of the Japanese islands. The Japanese wanted to make the battle so bloody that they thought the Americans would decide Japan would be too hard and ask for peace. The Japanese lied to the civilians on Okinawa. The civilians were told that Americans would rape the women and kill the children. Many of the civilians helped in the defense of the island. The Japanese would do almost anything to kill an American solider. After awhile the marines decided that the Japanese didn't value their own lives.

The author traces the decision to use the Atomic bombs to the horrendous loses at Okinawa. Up until Okinawa the plan had been to use Okinawa as a base for close to 10,000 bombers to soften up the islands, followed by large invasion. After realizing just how expensive a normal invasion would be, the atomic bomb was more seriously considered.


Shiloh:

The battle of Shiloh was the first battle in the United States Civil War to have a huge body count. Thousands on both sides were killed. The South was able to launch a surprise attack, which after the first day seem to indicate that they were winning the battle. The North was able to rally and drive the South away.

There were a lot of interesting consequences from this battle. This is where both Grant and Sherman had their baptism of fire; they became well known and were given larger commands. Johnston, who had lead the South, died on the first day. And for decades afterwards many in the South believed that if he had lived, they wouldn't have lost the Civil War. Because of the chaos of war, another Union solider, Lew Wallace, became disgraced. He spent the next forty years trying to get redemption. And in part this is what leads him to write "Ben-Hur." Colonel Forrest, on the Confederate side, gained great recognition because of his successful daring actions. He was given a much larger command and was very effective. He was very capable and ruthless. After the Civil War he was asked to lead the KKK, and because of his fame, he was able to get large numbers of people to join the KKK.


Delium:

The Battle of Delium was fought between Athens and the Boeotians in 424 B.C. Athens was badly defeated.

Being so long ago there is less known about what happened, and all of the consequences from this battle, nevertheless, the author is able to show some key results of this battle. One of the Athenians, Alcibiades, gained great fame from this battle, and because of the fame he was able to rise in power, but eventually he helped destroy Athens. Some of the first real uses of tactics were used in this battle. Up until this battle, most battles were two armies just rushing at each other. Socrates was also at Delium. Much of the contribution Socrates made to Western thought happened after this battle.


Consequences in General:

The last chapter of the book explores why some battles seem to have more of an effect. Some of the factors are timing, the number of dead, how important they are in an overall war, how well publicized the battle was, and other factors. The author notes that the effects of 911, the Terrorist attack on the United States, are still happening.


This is a good book for anyone interested in Military History. The author writes very well. He knows his military history. The book is easy to read and hard to put down. There are a lot of interesting ideas and observations. This book is well worth reading.

I'm a great fan of VDH - his academic career, his style of writing, his outspokenness on current geopolitical events, and his political outlook. That carries this book for me, but probably not in the way he had intended.

With this one VDH wants "to show that while all battles are not equivalent in their effects upon civilization, they do share at least this common truth: there will be some fundamental and important consequences beyond other more normal occurrences...Battles really are the wildfires of history, out of which the survivors float like embers and then land to burn far beyond the original conflagration. To teach us those important lessons we must go back through the past to see precisely how such calamities affected now lost worlds -- and yet still influence us today." (16) To illustrate his point, VDH then walks us through three examples: Okinawa (1945), Shiloh (1862) and Delium (424 BC).

It is no revelation that battles -- all battles -- have some effect on the future, rather through premature deaths, the ensuing revectoring of cultural trends and relationships, or changes in the mindsets of survivors, as well as in other ways that may not become apparent until long after the battle. It also goes without saying that some battles will have a more profound impact than others. To this extent Ripples brings nothing to the table, not even in the choice of battles that VDH describes. They were important, to be sure, but were not unique in the degree of impact on humanity.

The book's strength actually is in VDH's storytelling and conclusions. He doesn't describe each battle in detail; rather, he describes some of the more important ripples emanating from each. For revisionists that decry the use of the atomic bomb on Imperial Japan in 1945, VDH shows that Okinawa, and the use of suicide attacks in general, presaged to Allied war planners the degree of death that awaited an amphibious invasion of the home islands and the ensuing campaign to defeat the Japanese. He then ascribes these lessons, learned by company and field grade officers in World War II that later rose to high levels of command and planning, as the basis for our strategic and operational thinking during the Korean War years and the war in Vietnam. (59) He even links Japanese suicide attacks to modern Islamist and Palestinian tactics. (38) There is merit to his reasoning, but conclusiveness of this connecting thread awaits more thorough research.

And so it goes with Shiloh and Delium. Shiloh was the second chance needed by General's Grant and Sherman that put them on the road to senior Union commands and a quicker Confederate defeat. (89) VDH also describes the battle's impact on national politics and future Presidential administrations. As for Delium, it set the tone for Western tactical thought (235) and even for the strategy of preemptive attack. (179) There is more to his telling of each of these battles -- notable participants, circumstances, ripples, and so forth -- but this illustrates how he supports his thesis.

In his last chapter VDH delves into the question of what makes some battles more lastingly important to subsequent human affairs than others. He ascribes this to tactics, numbers, the dead, location, timing, political aftershocks, and luminaries, all of which "affect the ripples of a given battle." (248). To this he adds the presence of historians or, more specifically, historical remembrance. (250) It is the latter that lets the ripples pass, visibly at least, down through history, affecting later generations in ways that may seem all out of proportion to the circumstances of any given battle.

In the end VDH's book is fascinating, but certainly is not as profound as some of his previous works. His storytelling more than his thesis is what brings me to favor him with four stars.

Edward Shepherd Creasy's classic Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World would seem to be the prototype of this book. But Dr. Hanson's theme is more subtle than merely listing the big hinges of fate. The battles he picks caused less dramatic but still far-ranging influence on our policies and even our attitudes. It's a very interesting read, as are all of VDH's writings.

I don't quite go along with some of the suppositions. Sherman's march to the sea was far from the first punitive campaign in history, though he persuades me that Shiloh caused Sherman to take up that style of war. The battle of Delium's influence must have been very subtle indeed, as the connecting thread is vanishingly faint, to my mind. Invoking a what-if influence, of Socrates possibly having been killed in that battle, is cheating; for by that standard any battle that any future famous person survived would have to count as an influential battle.

The Shiloh section is best for the account of how careers were launched and scuttled, how reputations were born, and how myths were created. His description of how the savagery of the fighting on Okinawa greased the skids for the deployment of the atom bombs is well done. The Imperial Japanese expected a bloodbath, expected Okinawa to fall, but did not expect that their show of suicidal fanaticism would prompt the Americans to one-up their brutality. And that's what stopped the war and, according to Hanson, provides precedent for Americans to escalate the modern War on Terror way beyond what the jihadists bargained for.

Hanson's storytelling powers and erudition are wonderfully entertaining, whether you agree with his points or not. The book's a bargain simply for the history lessons.

As a student of military history , and part time teacher of Ancient World History I truly appreciated Mr. Hanson's work. Immediately you know that he knows what he is talking about. He uses good source material and thoroughly explains and supports his thesis.
He has enabled me to take a more broad look at not only the military aspect of culture but how it relates to a culture's social, political and economic aspects as well. One must consider all of those factors when considering why and how people fight.
Some may criticize his over emphasis on "western" ideas, but for the most part his point is hard to argue against. Free people have more to fight for and fight better. Even though battles throughout time have been lost by the west, the wars usually are not. By combining the western thought with the western military, it is no wonder why the west has been so successful in conquering and even making this world better.
I also say you need to take this book almost one battle at a time. It is not a book you can read in one sitting. I found myself finishing one battle and contemplating over the implications before going to the next one.
Kudos to Mr. Hanson.

I thought Victor Hanson's theory is interesting and in a way profound. In essence, the author proposes that everyone knows about the major battles, and major battles have impact since they usually impact the outcome a war, but they minor battles can create ripples in history that have an effect on future events that may be more signficant than the battles everyone knows about.

The author selects the Battle of Okinawa, The Battle of Shiloh, and the Battle of Delium. The ripple effects are derived from the impact these battles had on the participants. To most people, these battles are minor and obscure. Okinawa shouldn't be, but was overshadowed by other events.

The key point of Okinawa (aside from the author's personal interest, a relative died there) was western culture's reaction to suicide bombings that Japanese used in the battle and the significance of the desire to fight to the last regardless of the outcome. The Japanese were fighting to extract casualties and for strategic advantage. The hope was to deter the imminent invasion of the home islands. The ripple here is the parallel of what we might do faced with Islamic extremists. In WWII, we used the A-Bomb on Japan, and Afganistan we are using Daisy Cutters.

In Shiloh, which probably the author's strongest argument, the battle impacted the pyschology of the south (The Lost Opportunity), the key focus of two generals ideas about prosecuting the war (Sherman and Grant), and how in a few moments careers are made and broken (Lew Wallace). All of these had impact far beyond the battle, the war, and the century.

Victor Hanson is an excellent writer and brings and interesting perspective to the subject. This is a very good book and well worth reading, it will make you think. (Chaos theory which an example is the fluttering of a butterfly in China impacts the weather in North America.)

When we think of battle, we usually think of the effect that the engagement has in the outcome of the war, or perhaps how a specific general excels or disgraces himself. Seldom do we think of what effect such a battle may have on the outside world. Sometimes, the only effect is on the relatives of those fallen in battle. Other times, however, there are wider repercussions.

Ripples of Battle, by Victor Davis Hanson, doesn't quite live up to what the cover promises, which is a shame. Its subtitle is "How wars of the past still determine how we fight, how we live, and how we think." Unfortunately, the book isn't quite as far-ranging as this sounds. It covers three battles: the American invasion of Okinawa in World War II, the battle of Shiloh in the American Civil War, and the battle of Delium in 422 BC. In looking at these battles, Hanson discusses some of the aftereffects they had on western society. This is fine, and actually quite interesting, but the title makes the book sound like a broad sociological text and the innards don't quite deliver this.

Once I got past these preconceived notions, I actually found the book quite fascinating. Hanson begins by discussing the bloodbath that was the battle of Okinawa. The Japanese garrison of 110,000 troops was almost completely wiped out, fighting to the last man. The Americans themselves lost over 15,000 men with over 33,000 wounded. The Japanese garrison had no illusions that they could defeat the Americans at this point in the war, but that didn't matter. Instead, they meant to take as many Americans with them as they could. While suicidal banzai charges and kamikaze aircraft attacks were periodic occurrences before, Okinawa saw the first instances of organized suicide attacks. The sole purpose of every Japanese soldier was to take as many Americans with him as possible. This is obviously a ripple that has affected the waters of the modern day, with suicide bombers blowing themselves up for a cause. What the modern day bombers seem to have missed from this history lesson, however, is the fact that it did not work. The Americans were not stopped at Okinawa. They did not sue for peace, horrified at the losses they took. Instead, their determination was strengthened and they forged ahead. This is one of the major facets of the Okinawa campaign, though Hanson does discuss others.

As interesting as these stories were, however, I found the Shiloh history to be even more fascinating. Shiloh was, up to that point, the bloodiest day in the Civil War. It also resulted in the rise in stature of General Sherman, who eventually began the strategy of economic warfare, burning his way through the Confederate economy while killing relatively few people. General Lew Wallace was disgraced at Shiloh, and he spent the rest of his life trying to clear his name. One way he did this was by writing the novel Ben-Hur. Nathan Bedford Forrest, a southern cavalry officer, also rose to prominence on that fateful day, and he became one of the driving forces behind the Ku Klux Klan. There were also others. This entire chapter is just one fascinating insight after another, and Hanson does an admirable job of presenting everything in a clear, concise manner.

There is one problem with Ripples of Battle, however, and that is the final chapter. The battle between the Athenians and the Boeotians of Thebes does not follow the theme of the book as closely, and isn't as interesting either. The main problem is the discussion of Socrates, who was one of the few Athenian survivors of the battle. Hanson spends an entire section of the final chapter discussing what would have happened to western philosophy, from Socrates himself to Plato and elsewhere, if he had died. This falls into the realm of "what-if" though, and doesn't fit. The rest of the book deals with real and unforeseen consequences to the battles in question. Since Socrates didn't die, it has no place here. The rest of the chapter does fit, however, with the first instance of real infantry tactics and the future effects on Athens from various survivors of the battle. Hanson fails to make it interesting, though, constantly repeating himself (especially in the Socrates section) and generally making it a chore to read.

Hanson redeems himself, however, with an interesting epilogue that ties the whole book together, though he does suffer from repetition yet again. He discusses the various impacts battles can have on us as a society, and how there are so many different reasons that a given battle can affect us. Sometimes it's the accessibility of the history, sometimes it's who's involved (if Socrates had not been involved in the battle of Delium, much of it, if any, would not have been recorded). Hanson relates a lot of what he's discussed to the World Trade Center attacks and the current war on terrorism. We do not know how current violence, like the genocide in Rwanda, will affect us as time goes on, but we can make a supposition based on how it's happened in the past.

Battles will continue to be an important part of history, and Hanson is trying to show the importance of studying them. The study of history has changed to a study of cultural trends, which Hanson believes is incomplete. The point of this book is to show how the study of great men (and women) and how they fight each other can still be an important aspect of history. In The Ripples of Battle, he does an effective job, creating a fascinating read as well.

David Roy

If you're looking for the nitty-gritty of battles, I'd suggest looking elsewhere than Hanson. That's simply not what he does. But what he does do -- and does extremely well -- is approach battles from a thematic perspective and link them in intriguing, insightful ways, usually in light of Western culture broadly conceived. His Soul of Battle and Carnage and Culture followed this approach. In this book, Hanson uses three battles (Okinawa, Shiloh, and Delium) to argue that war has broad, far-reaching consequences on culture and society, often decades and centuries after the event itself.

By far, his discussion of Okinawa is the book's most interesting chapter. The Japanese suicide attacks during that battle resonate loudly in our own time, and Hanson connects such attacks, as well as the responses to them, to the modern-day variety. Debates about using the atomic bombs are always fascinating; Hanson makes a fine contribution. Moreover, Hanson's introduction about his namesake uncle who died on Okinawa makes for great reading and drives home how battles affect us in sometimes strange and surprising ways.

But the rest of the book has much to offer as well, especially in the realm of what ifs (e.g. what if Socrates had died at Delium? what if Albert Sidney Johnston had not died at Shiloh?). I highly recommend it.

This book examines how historical events little known to us in the 21st century continue to shape current events. He focuses on three battles that are less well known by the general public, Okinawa in WWII, Shiloh of the Civil War and Delium of the Peloponesian War. While Victor Hanson does not approach these battles in terms of tactics and numbers, he does provide enough detatil of the battle so the reader will understand what happened and why this particular battle shaped the course of history. He does an excellent job of relating how battles of the past still influence American culture today. He also examines how the effects of these battles helped shape the reaction of the United States in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. In this way, Victor Hanson brings a new and very intelligent prospective to the current debates of the War on Terror. By using the long lens of history, he presents an argument as to why the war has to be fought and won.