Keegan has a unique insight, understanding and knowledge, from a point of view all too rare in the analysis of war and warriors. He makes numerous points very clearly that change my outlook and insight significantly. So many things in history we look at are viewed in a current context, and so many fail to look from the time perspective of the participant, but to look as it takes place over time and it place in development is most insightful. ( )

Keegan's history traces warfare from pre-history through the Greeks and Romans to modern times and explores how tactics, strategies and equipment have changed. While the book is a little dry in places, it drives home the point that warfare as we know it is neither natural or an inevitable extension of politics as Clauswitz asserted. Total war in fact turns Clauswitz's premise on its ear because it is, in today's terms suicidal ( )

Filled with useful information, exciting stories and strange paradoxes. Is really one long argument with Clausewitz about why war is NOT always a continuation of policy with other means, and why this outlook actually is a recipe for disaster. War is much more related to cultural matters than Clausewitz allowed. ( )

A little too generalized history of warfare. The book revolves around a couple of ideas which he tries bring forward with rather shallow arguments. Unfortunately the book is also riddled with factual mistakes that further undermine the message the book tries to convey. To give just one example, for 3 (three) times in the book he places Roman Dacia in modern day Hungary! I would say this is a gross mistake especially when it cames from such an authority in ancient history. To prove my point check the following links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Da...
In the following map the free Dacians are represented with red while the Roman Dacia is represented with blue. As an overlay you have the current borders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ro... ( )

3444. A History of Warfare, by John Keegan (read May 14, 2001) This is the first book I have read by Keegan, and considering how well-known he is I suppose that is somewhat surprising. This is well-written and a lot of what he says is interesting and makes sense. But it is somewhat theoretical and ranges over the whole history of warfare and is not very chronological. Overall it is a good book, worth reading. ( )