The Rise and Decline of the State (Paperback)

by Martin van Creveld (Author) "Definitions of the state have varied widely..." (more)
Key Phrases: tribes without rulers, legal persona, New York, United States, World War (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review
"...this study offers two major scholarly contributions. First, the state is regarded as "merely one of the forms" the organization of government has assumed; therefore it is not eternal. Second, Van Creveld points out that development and spread of new institutions--"abstract organizations" in the author's words--since a quarter of century ago have started to take over some of the state functions..." X. Hu, Social and Behavioral Sciences

"Martin Van Creveld provides an insightful history of the state and the most lucid analysis to date of the contemporary challenges it faces...This is an important book." Peter Schwartz, Whole Earth

"This is a book which many more should read than will, such as anyone teaching 'Western Civilization' or 'Modern Europe', anyone interested in intellectual history, or anyone simply interested in the political condition of the modern world." Richard A. Oehling, H-Net Reviews

"'The Rise and Decline of the State'--a tight display of erudition counterpointed by occasional heavy-handed attempts at humor--makes the case." Washington Times

"Van Creveld's latest study is an important and wide-ranging scholarly work, in addition to being both beautifully written and a thoroughly engaging reading. It is crucial reading not only for students of military and political history, but also for those of Western utopian literature, since it clearly highlights throughout the links between fact and fiction. Besides its value to academics, this expansive and interesting review of the evolution of the nation-state worthwhile and enjoyable reading for anyone with an interest in political science and history." UTOPIAN STUDIES

"This study is not only brilliant history; it is insightful and brimming with scores of fascinating and plausible hypotheses..." The Journal of Interdisciplinary History

Product Description
The state, which since the middle of the seventeenth century has been the most important of all modern institutions, is in decline. From Western Europe to Africa, many existing states are either combining into larger communities or falling apart. Many of their functions are likely to be taken over by a variety of organizations that, whatever their precise nature, are not states. In this unique volume Martin van Creveld traces the story of the state from its beginnings to its end. Starting with the simplest political organizations that ever existed, he guides the reader through the origins of the state, its development, its apotheosis during the two World Wars, and its spread from its original home in Western Europe to cover the globe. In doing so, he provides a fascinating history of government from its origins to the present day. This original book will of interest to historians, political scientists and sociologists.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 448 pages
• Publisher: Cambridge University Press (August 28, 1999)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 052165629X
• ISBN-13: 978-0521656290
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.5 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.4 out of 5 stars See all reviews (8 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #324,724 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

33 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Historical analysis as it should be written (well, almost), February 12, 2006

By	Arkadiy Dubovoy (Virginia) - See all my reviews

I will start my review with what I consider two weaknesses of this book.

First, one of the previous reviewers commented on questionable accuracy of the historical facts presented in the book. I found one minor factual error and one mistake with the events I personally witnessed (p. 375). The factual error is the statement that Andropov started campaign to tighten discipline and, as part of it, he launched a campaign against drunkenness. In reality, Andropov indeed started wide-spread disciplinary measures, but the "credit" for the disastrous anti-drunkenness campaign of 1985 goes to Gorbachev.
The mistake is van Creveld's statement that after Afghanistan "adventure ended in defeat, in 1988, the Soviet leadership was left without an armed force which could have imposed unity on the country." This is nonsense. It is equivalent of saying that as a result of defeat in Vietnam, the US Army was destroyed. In fact, Soviet Army was used successfully afterwards exactly for the purpose of maintaining internal stability: in January of 1990 26,000 Soviet troops stormed overnight Baku (the capital of Azerbaijan) effectively "restoring the order" and killing 130 and injuring 700 people in the process. Also, in 1991-1992 the 14th Army under the command of General Lebed had effectively stopped the civil war between Moldova and Transdnistria and restored peace in the region. Only several years later, by murdering General Rokhlin and starting the First Chechen War, KGB started in earnest the destruction of Soviet Army as a fighting machine and political force (General Lebed was killed later).

The second weakness of this book is its writing style. Unfortunately, Professor van Creveld has an intractable predilection for large, convoluted, and unwieldy sentences, especially in the first two thirds of the book. Combined with the book's poor editing, it leads sometimes to outright blunders. Here is an example of a sentence taken from page 350 of the paper-back edition:
"The idea that complete sovereignty, including the unrestricted right to wage war, was too dangerous to entertain in the age of modern technology suffered another blow as a result of World War I and the 10 million casualties (in dead alone) that it wrought."
Not only must you parse this phrase in order to understand it (and you, by necessity, will become good at parsing by page 350 of this book), but this sentence, judging by the context, means exactly opposite: the idea that sovereignty understood as a right to wage war has become too dangerous did not suffer any blows, but was, in fact, confirmed by the horrors of World War I.
My purpose in pointing this out is to allay the anxiety of the future readers of this book. If you cannot understand some passages, this is not because you are stupid, but because of the regrettable way this book was written and edited.

Why would you bother to read a book which is difficult to read and may not be very accurate? There are a few reasons:
First, Professor van Creveld excels in making sense out of the heap of seemingly unrelated historical events. The breadth and depth of the scope of this book is so immense, that it must have inconsistencies by definition (because, for example, historians frequently disagree on the meaning and significance of historical events). This book is not meant to be a source of exact historical information, and you should not use it as such.
The historical analysis offered in this book is essentially Hegelian, i.e. the author presents different forms of political organization at the dawn of human civilization and then shows in minute detail how those organizations changed in time to become the modern state. The author combines an enormous amount of information - facts, dates, historical anecdotes - in order to prove that the modern state is not "the end of history," but only another stage of political development of human society. The author further shows that the modern state had outlived its usefulness and is due to be replaced by a different form of socio-political organization.

The second reason to read this book is the pleasure of following Professor van Creveld's process of historical thinking. Very few historians can match his erudition and intellect, and you can learn a lot simply by reading his thoughts on the subject.

Except for a very vague outline in the last five pages, there is no prediction of the future in this book - Professor van Creveld is too wise for that. Don't look for any practical advice either. If you need to know what kind of shelter to build, what gun to buy, and whether you must invest in ammunition, or gold, or both - look somewhere else. This book is a purely academic exercise, albeit of the highest order.

The Rise and Decline of the State was first published in 1999. Despite all the events of the last 6-7 years (9-11, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) this book holds its own remarkably well. I only want to comment that the extent of the UN "oil-for-food" corruption scandal was not known in the late 1990's, otherwise Professor van Creveld would probably expand on his opinion about the role of the UN (p. 385). It may well turn out that a hundred years from now historians will admire the honesty, dedication, and accountability of our state bureaucrats compared to their ruthless and corrupt non-government bureaucracies.

Overall, I think that The Rise and Decline of the State is well worth the time and effort necessary to study it. You will look at the current political and social events from a completely different perspective after reading this book. Anyone interested in history and politics must be aware of and pay attention to the discussion presented in this book.

42 of 48 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Brilliant, December 25, 2000

By	Steve Jackson "stevejackson100atyahoocom" (New England) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)

Every once in a while you come across a book that goes beyond being interesting or thought-provoking, but is a veritable five lane intellectual super-highway. Martin van Creveld's The Rise and Decline of the State is such a book.

Prof. van Creveld's work revolves around this point: prior to the seventeenth century (with some exceptions) rule was seen as personal. The monarch personally ruled over a given region and the people owed him their loyalty. The state was not the abstract entity that it was to become. The change from personal to abstract rule brought with it profound consequences in virtually all aspects of life.

Along the path from personal to abstract rule, many thinkers and rulers played a role, but Hobbes was decisive. [p. 179.] Also important were Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau.

Of course, personal rule didn't guarantee that you would live in a libertarian paradise. Nonetheless, personal rule carried with it certain obligations: the sovereign (generally as a servant of God) was under the law and his powers were limited. The modern, bureaucratic state has almost unlimited powers. Even worse, the total state often leads to total war. In earlier times, wars between "states" were really quarrels between ruling houses and the common man could escape involvement. Not so with the modern state: you are a citizen of the state and owe it your exclusive allegiance. [p. 185.]

There is a lot more a reviewer could comment on in this book. Prof. van Creveld has all sorts of interesting things to say about the rise of the state and changes in crime, education, war, and the economy.

I do have one quarrel with the book. On page 178, Prof. van Creveld says that Christianity teaches that God "is believed to possess no fewer than three different bodies." Since Prof. van Creveld is not (so far as I can tell) a Mormon, I'm at a loss to see how he came up with that idea.

21 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A brilliant book, August 11, 2000

By	J. Michael Showalter (Nashville, TN United States) - See all my reviews

In this book, Van Crevald gives a synopsis of the rise in importance of the state and then a synopsis of forces that could (or will) lead to its decline. As a work of political history, I suggest that this work is invaluable-- both to students who lean toward institutionalism and neorealism.... For a book of political science, this book is relatively a fun read: I don't want to say it is impossible to put down, but damned close!

I would suggest that this book is a MUST read for anyone who has been conditioned to think politically along the line leading from Morganthou to Waltz because it MIGHT hint at things that are to come, especially (and initially) for non first or second tier states.