What do you think?
Rate this book
Der Soldat. Ein Nachruf
Warum "Ein Nachruf"? Weil die Ära des Soldaten, wie wir ihn kennen, zu Ende geht. Heute taugt der Soldat nicht mehr zum Siegen: Selbstmordattentäter, sogar Partisanen sind ihm überlegen, erst recht die Drohnen, die Atomraketen, die Computer und auch menschliche Kampfmaschinen wie die Navy Seals. Der "klassische", der "symmetrische" Krieg ist so gut wie gestorben.
Wolf Schneider geht dieser Entwicklung nach und nimmt dies zum Anlass einer umfassenden Erzählung: einer Geschichte des Soldaten, seines Handwerks, seiner Waffen, Strategien, atavistischen und kulturellen Motive, seiner gesellschaftlichen Stellung. Was waren das für Menschen, die da töteten oder auch nicht wie taten sie es und warum? Wie ist es ihnen ergangen auf dem Kasernenhof und in den Schlachten, die Länder verwüstet, Kulturen zerstört und Völker ausgerottet haben? Was trieb sie zu den Waffen und wenn ihnen die Waffe in die Hand gezwungen wurde: Was zwang sie, von ihr Gebrauch zu machen?
Wolf Schneider breitet in diesem Buch eine umfassende Weltgeschichte der Menschen aus, die andere Menschen töten sollten der Begeisterten (die gab es) und der in Uniform Gepressten, der Schinder und der Geschundenen, der schreienden Opfer und derer, die man allenfalls "Helden" nennen könnte.
Wolf Schneider geht dieser Entwicklung nach und nimmt dies zum Anlass einer umfassenden Erzählung: einer Geschichte des Soldaten, seines Handwerks, seiner Waffen, Strategien, atavistischen und kulturellen Motive, seiner gesellschaftlichen Stellung. Was waren das für Menschen, die da töteten oder auch nicht wie taten sie es und warum? Wie ist es ihnen ergangen auf dem Kasernenhof und in den Schlachten, die Länder verwüstet, Kulturen zerstört und Völker ausgerottet haben? Was trieb sie zu den Waffen und wenn ihnen die Waffe in die Hand gezwungen wurde: Was zwang sie, von ihr Gebrauch zu machen?
Wolf Schneider breitet in diesem Buch eine umfassende Weltgeschichte der Menschen aus, die andere Menschen töten sollten der Begeisterten (die gab es) und der in Uniform Gepressten, der Schinder und der Geschundenen, der schreienden Opfer und derer, die man allenfalls "Helden" nennen könnte.
543 pages, Hardcover
First published March 4, 2014
4 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
November 5, 2025
randomly grabbed this book at the library and was immediately reminded why i usually check out books before i read them bc this deserves the bad rating it has. LOL
it's strikingly obvious that this book was not written by a historian bc it tries to be a book not so much about war (of which there are already countless ones, as the author correctly points out) but a book about the soldier, which would kind of make you expect that there would be primary sources, drawing on things said and written by..... you know. soldiers. and then the author barely consults any primary sources at all and just recounts what we (aka people who are into military history) have all heard a million times before. yes, he does focus on the soldiers' experiences and obviously study of primary sources is always limited by access in many ways but genuinely what was the point of this? there is really nothing to be gained from this if you have a decent background in studying history.
now you might say this was me being misled about the aim of the book or reading something into the title (and the introduction) that wasn't actually supposed to be the aim of this book but even if we leave that aside i didn't enjoy reading this at all bc the writing? i hesitate to say bad bc the author was an expert on the german language but i did not appreciate it at all. the tone and the wording was bizarrely polemic, and considering the author's background in journalism (and teaching journalism) i am assuming this was a deliberate choice (or rather, i hope it was bc otherwise he is as bad at that as he is at crafting an interesting historical work with a new angle on a topic).
he also liberally conflates nonfictional sources with fictional books, which sure is interesting. once again: yes, most (if not all) of the fiction books he quotes were written by former soldiers. but they're still FICTION and using fictional narratives to make sweeping claims about real life certainly is a slippery slope. i'm not against using the way something is portrayed in fiction as support for your arguments (esp in this case where you're trying to illustrate the mindset and the experiences of soldiers with fictionalized accounts written by former soldiers) but i'd say you would do well not to put fiction and nonfiction next to each other with no distinctions when you quote from them.
it's also worth pointing out that this book was published in 2014 so some of the assertions he makes about the future of warfare and the soldier are frankly hilarious (in a depressing way) in 2025. like i hate to break it to you bestie but despite drones, despite cyber warfare, despite the nuclear threat..... the soldier has very much not gone extinct in the way you thought he would. now obviously that's not really the author's fault in itself, we're all wrong about the future sometimes by the very nature of it being, you know. in the future, but it ties into the strangely agressive rhetoric of the book bc the conclusions are presented in such a fashion to real make them seem inevitable when literally every day someone in 2025 can see that. well. it wasn't!! they're still here and they're still fighting mr schneider. and i doubt they're going away anytime soon.
anyway. not recommended for anyone really. maybe try a comprehensive study by a historian instead. or read some of the books he quotes, there's some real classics in there.
it's strikingly obvious that this book was not written by a historian bc it tries to be a book not so much about war (of which there are already countless ones, as the author correctly points out) but a book about the soldier, which would kind of make you expect that there would be primary sources, drawing on things said and written by..... you know. soldiers. and then the author barely consults any primary sources at all and just recounts what we (aka people who are into military history) have all heard a million times before. yes, he does focus on the soldiers' experiences and obviously study of primary sources is always limited by access in many ways but genuinely what was the point of this? there is really nothing to be gained from this if you have a decent background in studying history.
now you might say this was me being misled about the aim of the book or reading something into the title (and the introduction) that wasn't actually supposed to be the aim of this book but even if we leave that aside i didn't enjoy reading this at all bc the writing? i hesitate to say bad bc the author was an expert on the german language but i did not appreciate it at all. the tone and the wording was bizarrely polemic, and considering the author's background in journalism (and teaching journalism) i am assuming this was a deliberate choice (or rather, i hope it was bc otherwise he is as bad at that as he is at crafting an interesting historical work with a new angle on a topic).
he also liberally conflates nonfictional sources with fictional books, which sure is interesting. once again: yes, most (if not all) of the fiction books he quotes were written by former soldiers. but they're still FICTION and using fictional narratives to make sweeping claims about real life certainly is a slippery slope. i'm not against using the way something is portrayed in fiction as support for your arguments (esp in this case where you're trying to illustrate the mindset and the experiences of soldiers with fictionalized accounts written by former soldiers) but i'd say you would do well not to put fiction and nonfiction next to each other with no distinctions when you quote from them.
it's also worth pointing out that this book was published in 2014 so some of the assertions he makes about the future of warfare and the soldier are frankly hilarious (in a depressing way) in 2025. like i hate to break it to you bestie but despite drones, despite cyber warfare, despite the nuclear threat..... the soldier has very much not gone extinct in the way you thought he would. now obviously that's not really the author's fault in itself, we're all wrong about the future sometimes by the very nature of it being, you know. in the future, but it ties into the strangely agressive rhetoric of the book bc the conclusions are presented in such a fashion to real make them seem inevitable when literally every day someone in 2025 can see that. well. it wasn't!! they're still here and they're still fighting mr schneider. and i doubt they're going away anytime soon.
anyway. not recommended for anyone really. maybe try a comprehensive study by a historian instead. or read some of the books he quotes, there's some real classics in there.
Displaying 1 of 1 review