Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
French revolution and its effect essays
short note on impact of french revolution
French revolution and its effect essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: French revolution and its effect essays
How do military historians explain war? To answer a question like this, one must look to the scholarship. However, works alone cannot explain the total scope of war, which means that historians take from the scholarship, and input what they deem necessary to the explanation of war. The Western experiences of war shaped the outcome of further study into warfare. Authors like Victor Davis Hanson, John Lynn, John Keegan, Martin van Creveld, and Niall Ferguson explain in detail to what extent the Western way of war is superior to any other.
The goal in studying the Western way of war revolves around the concept of superiority in warfare. The comparison and distinction of Victor Davis Hanson, Carnage and Culture (2001), and John A. Lynn, Battle (2003), emphasized their overwhelming background in military research. Both historians possessed the adequate means to tell an incredible military story of which Hanson excelled at the ancient level with Greco-Roman history and Lynn as an expert of European history of the eighteenth and nineteenth century’s between the periods of Louis XIV and Napoleon. Hanson concluded that the Western way of war is far superior to that of the Eastern, and he begun his research with the Greek civilization and their early form of democracy. Alternatively, Lynn centered his research on the influences and/or limitations of the political and social aspects of warfare including that of the East.
The greatest single work to influence either historian was John Keegan’s book, A History of Warfare (1993). Lynn acknowledged the importance of Keegan’s thesis, but Hanson followed in the Western superiority theme originated by Keegan. Hanson published his work in 2001 before the 911 attacks and added an a...
... middle of paper ...
...usewitz, Genius, and the Rules.” The Journal of Military History Vol. 66, No.4 (Oct., 2002): 1167-1176. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3093268
Rothenberg, Gunther E. Review of Battle: A History of Combat and Culture, by John A. Lynn. The Journal of Military History Vol. 68, No. 3 (Jul., 2004): 943-945. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3396733
Van Creveld, Martin. “The Clausewitzian Universe and the Law of War.”
Journal of Contemporary History Vol. 26, No. 3/4, The Impact of Western Nationalisms: Essays Dedicated to Walter Z. Laqueur on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday (Sep., 1991): 403-429. http://www.jstor.org/stable/260653
Wert, Hal Elliott. Review of Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise of Western Power, by Victor Davis Hanson. The Journal of Military History Vol. 67, No. 2 (Apr., 2003): 545-547. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3093471
Throughout history there have been few military theorists who have influenced military thinking. The military revolution that occurred during the American Civil War changed the face of warfare. The theories of both Antione-Henri Jomini and Carl von Clausewitz, the two most prominent military theorists of the 19th Century, can be seen in many aspects of the conflict. While Jomini’s tactics played a large role on the battlefield, the strategic concepts of Carl Von Clausewitz best characterize the nature of the Civil War. The writings of Clausewitz proved prophetic in three distinct areas: the strength of the defense over the offense, the concept of “Total War” used by General Grant, and the theory of war as an extension of policy.
Moseley, Alexander. "Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy." Just War Theory. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 10 Feb. 2009. Web. 31 Mar. 2012. .
Stewart R. W. (2005). American Military History (Vol. 1). The United States Army and the
Bard, Mitchell G. The Complete Idiot's Guide to world War II, Macmillan Publishing, New York, New York, 1999
Tzu, Mo. Against Offensive Warfare. Ed. Michael Austin. Reading the World: Ideas that Matter. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 2010. 254-255. Print.
...aphy. More importantly, it will show the students how Dulbrek enhanced military history to not only focus on technical details but to also take into account the contextual, social and economic aspects as well. He was also an advocate of history with pragmatic applications, and was able, to a degree, bring this into academia despite staunch initial rejeciton by the scholarly community; however, as this paper had earlier examined, pragamtic applications of history conflicts with histiography and this issue remains unresolved. Another reading that I was seriously considering was Carl von Clausewitz's On War, the first military historian that employed “war theory” and had the instigated the first historical shift in military histiography, but I chose Dulbrek's since his influence on the change in military historiography was the most important as this paper had examined.
First, war is universal due to its violent nature, violence in its application knows no bounds, and it is the common factor that identifies the war and without it the war is nothing more than a diplomatic effort to reach the end. However, wars blow out only when the diplomacy fails. Violence is the war engine. Although the application of violence evolved through time and its severity varies according to communities, cultures, and the means and methods used. Demonstrating the violence through the application of force to subjugate the enemy is the central idea of war. “War is a clash between major interests,
It is interesting and even surprising that the two major strategies regarding war were developed by European contemporaries of the late eighteenth and nineteenth century. Antoine Henri de Jomini (1779-1869) approached his philosophy of war in a structured, scientific manner. Carl von Clausewitz (1780-1831) took a more fluid, open-ended approach to his philosophy of war. The fact that they lived during the same time period in Europe is also fascinating in that they likely knew of each others’ writings as well as potentially influenced and were influenced by the philosophy of the other. Jomini’s scientific approach is more applicable to the tactical and operational levels of war while Clausewitz approaches war as more of an art or interaction between people that is more appropriate to the strategic and political levels of war. Although their two war strategies are presented as opposing strategies, by comparing concepts from each of the theorists to the other theorist’s work shows that they are actually more complementary than competing in that they are addressing different levels of war. The concepts to be evaluated are Clausewitz’s “Trinity of War”, “war as a continuation of politics”, and the “unpredictability of war” as well as Jomini’s definition of strategy and his “Fundamental Principle of War”.
Trapp, James. The art of war: a new translation. New York: Chartwell Books, 2012. Print.
- - -, ed. "The Anti-War Movement in the United States." English.Illnois.edu. Ed. Oxford Companion to American Military History. 1st ed. Vers. 1. Rev. 1. Oxford Companion to American Military History, 1999. Web. 24 Feb. 2014. .
1. Allen, Thomas B. “One Revolution Two Wars.” Military History. 27.5 (2011): 58-63. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 26. Oct. 2011.
Clausewitz's On War, first published in 1832, until now remains one of the most influential studies in understanding character, nature and conditions of warfare. In his book Clausewitz not only traced an interaction of intension and planning with the realities of combat, but by exploring the relationship of war to policy, politics and society gave a new philosophical justification to the art of war. (Heuser, 2002)
Keegan, John and Richard Holmes. Soldiers: A History Of Men In Battle. New York: Viking Penguin Inc., 1986.
Amongst military theorists and practitioners who studied war, its origin and implications, Carl von Clausewitz assumes a place among the most prominent figures. With his book On War, he demonstrated his capability to provide thorough historical analysis and conclusions of the conflicts in which he was engaged, and as a philosopher he reflected about all encompassing aspects of war. Today, Western armies conduct modern warfare in a dynamic environment composed of flexible and multiple threats in which civilians form a substantial part. Studying Clausewitz provides current military and political leadership useful insights to understand twenty-first century warfare. He explains the nature of war, provides an analytical tool to understand the chaos of warfare, and he argues for well educated and adaptable leadership capable of creative thinking. Although he died before his work was complete, his writing style was ambiguous and unclear at some moments, and current technology reduced some of his tactics obsolete, his work still arouses and inspires military and political strategists and analysts.