War before Civilization Reprint Edition, Kindle Edition

Keeley provides the best available book on the nature of war in primitive societies. The scholarship cited is extraordinarily detailed and yet very readably presented. It would do an injustice to the balance and knowledge of the author to attempt to inadequately summarize many of his conclusions in this review, but the main one may be attempted: devastating levels of chronic warfare were present in the vast majority of primitive societies on which data is available from archeological and ethnographic analysis. Warfare was actually, adjusted for population size, more destructive of life in many primitive societies than even such horrible events in modern societies as the Civil War, World War I, and World War II. The peaceful savage is indeed a myth. Mankind's propensity for war seems deeply embedded in human nature, but so too is the desire for peace. War is not invariably inevitable. Keeley offers thoughts on factors that may predispose to warfare and possible mechanisms for reducing its occurrence, but there are no simple answers to one of the greatest of human challenges - the avoidance or mitigation of war.

It's always fun to read a book that completely demolishes some widely held, uncritical belief system. This is one of those books. Many people believe that prehistoric hunter-gatherers existed in a state of primordial harmony with nature and with each other. The advent of civilization (ie - writing, economic specialization, centralized government et al), they say, put an end to the harmony and replaced it with merciless violence, endless suffering, and reprehensible inequality.

Keeley demonstrates that modern civilization is unequivocally *not* more violent than primitive hunter gatherers. On the contrary, the death rates of modern foraging groups and the archeological remains of brutally slain skeletons suggest that civilization is significantly less violent than prehistoric humans. Some might object that the evidence in favor of this position has been fabricated by Western anthropologists who are intolerant towards other ways of life and who seek to glorify their own civilization. I ask such objectors to actually look at the evidence: piles of bludgeoned trophy skulls found in a cave in Germany, mass graves of skeletons with bronze spear points lodged deep in their bones, modern massacres in which one tribe surprises a group of unarmed enemies and kills them all, regardless of age or gender. The most stunning fact is that if the death rates of hunter-gatherers prevailed during the blood soaked 20th century, 2 BILLION people would died--not 100 million!!!

Some might be wary of simple ratios, and insist that absolute numbers are more important than relative ones. Keeley has an ingenious response to this objection: if absolute numbers are more important to such people, then surely they would feel more comfortable receiving surgery in a tiny 3rd-world hospital than in a huge 1st-world one. The absolute number of people who die in first world hospitals is far higher (because so many more people receive treatment there), but the relative number is far lower. Yet, I don't think anyone would prefer getting surgery in a 3rd world hospital just because fewer people die there. Civilization, like modern hospitals, may generate more absolute deaths than it's primitive predecessor, but statistically it is a much safer place.

This book shows that the costs of civilization--material inequality, large-scale warfare, centralized and hierarchical political authority--may be well worth the benefits.

The book has a simple premise - primitive societies, far from being peaceful and cooperative tend to be highly violent. The perception of peace derives from the fact that "they" fight wars differently from "us" and are much smaller. He also describes the evasions that scholars use to "hide" the casualty figures of primitive warfare - namely counting war dead as "murders" because they didn't die in a good old fashioned battle the way westerners would fight.

Keely deals with the different types of combat these societies tend to engage in and highlights how a society based on raids and ambushes can be as, if not more, deadly (in relative terms)than full scale modern warfare based around huge armies. In basic sum if two tribes with 50 people each fight a war and kill 10 people over a year that is a catastrophically high casualty rate for those tribes but it won't register as much for a state of 200 million people.

Keely marshals an impressive array of evidence and examples and offers explanations that will make sense to people who are not anthropologists. The book is well organized and makes the solid point that "primitive" warfare isn't "inferior" warfare. It can be very effective (horribly effective in some cases) and fits the needs of these societies.