Customer Reviews

Victory of the West: The Great Christian-Muslim Clash at the Battle of Lepanto

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

An excellent book that from now on (but just until I'll write my own narration of Lepanto ....) will be the unquestionable reference work on the subject. Almost one hundred years ago Alethea Wiel, in The Navy of Venice (London, 1910) wrote: "They (the six Venetian Galleasses positioned in front of the Christian fleet) bore so distinguished and important a part in the crushing defeat of the Turks at Lepanto as to have, it is said, secured the victory to Venice and her allies." This in one of the various points that Niccolò Capponi, leading Italian military historian, probed and researched in depth providing full evidence of what really happened the 7th of October 1571. Many errors, constantly repeated since the times of Jurien de la Gravière (and perhaps earlier) by almost all the authors, have been so eradicated with the help of an opulent amount of newly discovered archival documents.

Some inaccuracies: at page 187 the moschetto, a small piece of artillery was named after a bird, a special kind of falcon; at page 192 Antonio (and not Arturo) Surian, called the Armenian, was a very well known inventor and not a Master Gunner. This is all I have been able to discover so far but, being green with envy, I am sure that reading the book again I'll be able to uncover other crucial blunders of the same magnitude.

Summing up: a virtually flawless, superior level academic work that can be read with absolute ease and pleasure.

For many Westerners, history is something that happened last year and this deliberate ignorance of the past gives rise to many false beliefs today. Chief among them would be the belief in the West that we have always been aggressors in the Levant and Islam is simply now fighting back. Even a cursury examination of history reveals the dangerous falsehood in that belief.

Niccolo Capponi's book on the Battle of Curzolaris (AKA Lepanto to many Americans)is well worth the time to read. Though he breaks no real new ground, his detail and love of subject (pre 16th century Med cultures, esp. Italy)shows. Copiously end noted with many charts comparing manpower, ships, armaments, losses etc (about 20% of the book), the book puts together an engrossing story of a world at war.

From the pre League political climate and the earlier attempts to forge a concerted Christian force to battle the Ottomans as they ravaged the shores of Europe, Mr. Capponi's book does an admirable job of illustrating the problems and weaknesses of Christian Europe at this time. He notes how the new Pope, Pius V would be the mover and true shaker of the enterprise. to do so, he had to overcome a relucant Spain, many suspicious Italian states, the crusading orders of St Stephen and Hospitallers, the machinations of France trying to aid its Ottoman allies(!), and everyone's suspicions of Venice. By devious use of subsidies and reminders of religious duty, Pius finally cobbles together his League.

Ironically it would be the Ottoman capture of Famagusta(Cyprus), a Venetian possession and the treatment of the garrison and inhabitants that would cause a creaky alliance to tun into a avenging force that went on to destroy the bulk of the Ottoman fleet. It is here that Capponi is strongest, his detailed knowledge of the people involved paints the battle in colorful detail. He highlights the bravery of both sides and gives credit where it is due to both Moslem and Christian bravery.

The battle itself is well treated but it is the prefacing of the battle and the aftermath (often surprising and sad at the same time) that is the best part. This time was not one of cleanly divided lines, politically or religously. Both sides had no problems with slavery or disrupting lives and livelihoods in the region. Alliances were often temporary and often surprising. Both sides were torn with factional infighting but for this once, the Christian side was less so. It can truly be said that this was one of the turning points of history....

Niccolò Capponi has written a fascinating and detailed history of Europe and the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century and the fractious relationships between the European states,the Venetian Republic,and the Papacy. Often more suspicious of each other than of the Turks, they finally merged into a shaky Christian coalition which faced down the Sultan's navy at the battle of Lepanto. Although full of historical and military detail, "Victory of the West" is a very readable book, laced with humor and compassion, and much attention to good storytelling. When the two naval forces finally face each other, I guarantee you won't be able to put the book down until the finish!

Niccolo Capponi's "Victory of the West" is a very useful and enjoyable text overall (the info on Mediterranean maritime culture and naval ordnance being especially interesting), but I was genuinely staggered at the end of the book, when the author declared in the Epilogue that, "The Europeans had realized that they could not win in a sword fight with the Ottomans and that in the long run it was not worth trying". Capponi was referring to the Holy League's emphasis on heavy artillery and arquebuses at Lepanto, but, given that the Turks had more ships than the Christians to begin with, the advantage in gunpowder weapons should be viewed more as an equalizer, than anything else. Also, the final arbitrating factor in any all-out galley fight was always hand-to-hand combat; given this, Capponi's declaration sounds downright ludicrous. The European Christians of that time had a very rich martial tradition concerning the use of single-handed swords, two-handed swords, pikes, half-pikes, halberds, partisans, etc., as even a cursory examination of the manuals by Achille Marozzo, Angelo Viggiani, Giacomo di Grassi, and other contemporary fencing masters quickly reveals. The HTH skills of the Spanish, Italians, and other Europeans were certainly respected by the Ottomans. There is also a distinct sense of irony in Capponi's assertion, considering that earlier in his book, he described how the Venetian captain Antonio de Canal "was busy clearing the enemy decks with a two-handed sword".

In addition to the above, I also personally feel that John F. Guilmartin has given better explanations for the demise of the Ottoman Navy, in both his classic text, "Gunpowder and Galleys", and his more recent book, "Galleons and Galleys". Capponi attempted to dismiss the loss of skilled Ottoman manpower, by claiming that the Algerian corsairs could fill those ranks; ostensibly, he's unaware of the fact that the Barbary corsairs did not have a tradition of the use of the devastating Turkish composite bow, and thus the corps of Turkish naval archers lost at Lepanto could clearly not be replaced--not immediately, in any event. Guilmartin argued persuasively about archery culture's weaknesses, and one of its most obvious weaknesses was that it took a lifetime to make a good archer, and so the losses of skilled archery units could not be brought back up to strength quickly. Capponi never even touched on any of that.

I want to stress that, if you're passionate about 16th century naval history, you really should own this book, for it has much to recommend it--just be aware of the author's inaccurate and problematic assertions listed above, which are clearly idiosyncratically-based, as opposed to being hoplologically-based.

by far the best book I have read on this battle, full of information and ancedote

A good description of this so important battle events that lead to it and the main characters involved.

The description of the battle itself could be more extended, but I realize that without animation and modern resources it is hard to describe a 500 ship melee.

Maybe someone could design an adequate animation to complement a fine book like this one?

I hate it when a book title does not describes a book properly. This is one of these books. This book is a study of about 30 years that lead up to the battle of Lepanto. If it is exciting and interesting it is because it was such a period of history. This book does describe it well, however there is little new in this study.

What is interesting is some technical information on the boats and gunpower.

Unfortunately there is only a very brief description of the actual battle which is what I wanted.

Then there is a little bit on the after-effects which are not that great as Lepanto is one of those historical events that is important not because of what it did, but what it stopped.