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

« Ripples of Battle, How wars of the past still determine how we fight », how we live and how we think (Victor D. Hanson) traite de trois batailles (Okinawa, Shiloh et Delium), dans un ordre chronologique inversé, et analyse leurs répercussions historiques et la manière dont elles ont influé sur le destin personnels de leurs acteurs. On y retrouve au fil des pages les figures emblématiques de Sherman (le « héros hansonien » absolu), Nathan B. Forrest, Alcibiade ou Socrate.Hanson démontre avec pertinence la puissance et les implications historiques de chacune de ces batailles sur le long terme. Le chapitre sur Delium est le plus réussi, notamment dans la manière dont est abordé son impact sur des destins individuels. Et si Socrate avait été tué à Delium ? Et Si Alcibiade ne l'avait pas sauvé ?. Puis, dans un second volet, l'auteur analyse en quoi Delium a façonné la pensée Socratique (donc celle de Platon et donc celle de toute la philosophie occidentale), comment elle a pesé sur la vie politique d'Alcibiade (et donc indirectement sur la chute d'Athènes), comment elle annonçait la révolution de l'ordre oblique d'Epaminondas. Le sous-chapitre sur Thespies, petite cité grecque dont les Hoplites ont été sacrifiés aux Thermopyles puis à Delium est aussi particulièrement intéressant (on parle rarement des « perdants » de l'Histoire, et cette cité qui a perdu deux fois 75% de sa population mâle en deux batailles et édifiante à ce sujet). Hanson traite d'Okinawa de manière parfois personnelle (en évoquant l'histoire de sa famille) et Shiloh de manière plus classique.Hanson parle aussi dans « Ripples of Battle » de son sujet fétiche à la manière spécifiquement occidentale, slon lui, de mener la guerre. Dans sa conclusion, Hanson fait également de très pertinents commentaires sur la France d'après le carnage de la première guerre mondiale et de sa tentation de « sortir » du modèle occidental.Non traduit en français, cet ouvrage d'Hanson est pourtant avec « Le modèle occidental de la guerre » le plus réussi des ouvrages de Victor Davis Hanson.

This book is brillantly written, it walks you with the Author througn the impact to his family that his uncle's death had on his familty both those that were alive at the time of his uncles death and those who were yet to be born. It reinforces that not just the death of a Marine but also the small death the family suffers for a long time. It is gut wrenching not only with his uncle death but also with wondering of the what might have been if he had not died. It descibes what happens when loved ones lose that dead relative. It also shows how wars of the past still impact current wars,

Hanson has a unique writing style that is academic with a folksy, personal twist. He takes a series of battles and makes the point that they are unique in the reverberations they caused. And then he relates some of them to his own life and family history. It's a fine read with plenty of "meat" to keep you interested. My only criticism is that it can get repetitive at times.

This one covers how things got to be and why some things became the way they did. Well written and heart felt. It brings forth the evolution of tactics which brought forth strategy.

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.