Gods of War

by James Lacey, Williamson Murray

Hannibal vs. Scipio. Grant vs. Lee. Rommel vs. Patton. The greatest battles, commanders, and rivalries of all time come to life in this engrossing guide to the geniuses of military history. “A compelling study of military leadership.”—James M. McPherson, Pulitzer Prize–winning author of Battle Cry of Freedom Any meeting of genius may create sparks, but when military geniuses meet, their confrontations play out upon a vast panorama of states or civilizations at war, wielding the full destructive power of a mighty nation’s armies. Gods of War is the first single-volume, in-depth examination of the most celebrated military rivalries of all time, and of the rare, world-changing battles in which these great commanders in history matched themselves against true equals. From Caesar and Pompey deciding the fate of the Roman Republic, to Grant and Lee battling for a year during the American Civil War, to Rommel and Montgomery and Patton meeting in battle after battle as Hitler strove for European domination, these match-ups and their corresponding strategies are among the most memorable in history. A thrilling look into both the generals’ lives and their hardest-fought battles, Gods of War is also a thought-provoking analysis of the qualities that make a strong commander and a deep exploration of the historical context in which the contestants were required to wage war, all told with rousing narrative flair. And in a time when technology has made the potential costs of war even greater, it is a masterful look at how military strategy has evolved and what it will take for leaders to guide their nations to peace in the future.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Military History, War, Biography

388 pages, Kindle Edition

First published May 19, 2020

About the author

James G. Lacey is the Marine Corps University’s Major General Matthew C. Horner Chair of War Studies, where serves as professor and course director for War, Policy, and Strategy, as well as Political Economy at the Marine Corps War College. He holds a Bachelor of Arts in History from The Citadel and a Ph.D. in Military History from Leeds University.

Reviews

[Boudewijn · Rating 3 out of 5]

In Gods of War professor James Lacey examines some of the most celebrated militairy rivalries - spanning from ancient Rome to modern times. He examines the iconic matchups in which these commanders were pitted against eachother, such as Caesar versus Pompey, Grant against Lee, Napoleon facing Wellington, and Rommel versus Montgomery, alongside Patton.

Biographies are presented, which gives you an insight to the subsequent characters. Events leading up to the battle and the actual battle itself - that is basically the setup of each chapter dealing with a particular rivalry.

Interesting, for sure, a good introduction to the personalities involved, but lacking depth and analysis. In my eyes, it could have benefitted from deeper analysis regarding the factors contributing to victory and defeat for each general, such as the strategic decisions, tactical maneuvers, and historical contexts that explains why on general won and the other one lost.

[William Harris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was recently provided with a copy of "Gods of War" by James Lacey and Murray Williamson for review. I am pleased to report that this fascinating and well written work contributes significantly to recent scholarship in Military History. Before looking at the details of formatting and so forth, it is worth noting that the thesis the authors are advancing is fundamentally that our fascination with the "Decisive Battle" often linked to the individual
"Great Captain" with a genius for war, is both misleading and rooted in our history prior to the influences of the Industrial Revolution and the French Revolution. The book examines military leaders generally regarded as outstanding and then demonstrates how few of them had quite as much genius at the strategic level as they are generally credited with as a consequence of their operational and tactical aptitudes. The authors approach their thesis by pairing off famous commanders, for example Grant and Lee or Caesar and Pompey, and demonstrating their thesis through examination of their best known battles. This is not a chronological chronicle of every significant battle in history, but the commanders chosen as well as the battles discussed, are very useful in enabling the reader to get a better grasp of their guiding principle. Their conclusion, following their illuminating discussion of Montgomery, Rommel and Patton, is that modern warfare, linked as it clearly is to technological and industrial change as well as sweeping changes in society rooted in the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, is too complex to be mastered at the strategic level by a single commander because there is simply too much information to be absorbed and collated. Modern warfare, and strategic success, requires a far more technocratic approach involving many different individuals and fields contributing to understanding the implications of battlefield failure or success. An example of this not working might be the American experience in Iraq and the Middle East following their smashing victories in Desert Storm. In other words, without a far more nuanced approach to strategic concerns than any single mind is likely to encompass, it is entirely possible to win a battle or war and lose the ensuing peace! Definate food for thought. The battlefield analyses of individual commanders and their experiences are both intriguing and thoroughly readable, especially for the avid student of military history.

[S S · Rating 3 out of 5]

super detailed and insightful, but i think i'm just super burned out from all this military history. maybe something more girlypop next lol

[Peter Goodman · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Gods of War: history’s greatest military rivals,” by James Lacey and Williamson Murray (Bantam, 2020). Lacey and Murray are both prolific military historians, and I suspect this book is the culmination, or one of the culminations, of a lifetime of work. It flows so quickly and easily, yet is based on such depth of knowledge, it could only have come from highly polished professionals. They are not chronicling individual great generals, but only those who confronted one another while at the peak of their individual powers, and so were an even match. The pairings: Hannibal and Scipio; Caesar and Pompey; Richard I and Saladin; Napoleon and
Wellington; Grant and Lee; Rommel, Montgomery, and Patton.
I was most intrigued by the confrontation between Richard and Saladin. Richard apparently was in fact a great soldier, and Saladin, once he consolidated power among the Muslims, also was a great soldier. It is not enough, in each of these cases, to be superb on the battlefield. Lacey and Murray argue that the greatest leaders also had a sense of the strategy of their wars. Thus, Hannibal, despite his brilliance and ingenuity, did not have any idea how to bring the war with Rome to a successful conclusion (because, for one thing, the Roman state was tremendously resilient). And so, despite all his victories, he could never defeat Rome, which both wore him down and then, under Scipio, outsmarted him on the battlefield. Their account of Waterloo (though confusing) is revelatory. Napoleon, after the brilliance of his offensive, taking the British and Prussians by surprise, made mistake after mistake, while Wellington made almost none. Of Grant and Lee: Lee, an exceptional battlefield commander and tactician, had no concept of a strategy to bring the Union at least to the bargaining table. Grant, on the other hand, had an exceptional grasp of the overall war, how to keep the many parts working together, how to handle huge forces over great territories. I think Grant turns out to be the greatest of the generals, with Wellington not far behind. As for the World War II leaders, he finds flaws in Montgomery and Patton, but almost none in Rommel. The Allies do not come off very well, even in victory. Although they credit the Americans with having a deep, well-trained officer corps and great flexibility. Will there ever be great individual war leaders again? They don’t think so. Modern society is too complex, the field of conflict too immense, for any one person to be able to grasp it all at once.

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/bo...

[Chase Metcalf · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary: Authors take an interesting approach to exploring the role of military genius in creating military success. By contrasting some of the great military rivalries throughout history the authors explain the limits of military genius, the importance of organizations, and some of the key factors supporting military success. In the end they highlight that the French And industrial revolutions led to the end of “decisive battle” and emphasize the importance of good strategy executed as part of an adaptive system to military success. Interesting and informative read for those seeking to understand the role of military genius.

Key Highlights:
- All great generals must ultimately possess a certain ruthlessness
- Rarity of military genius means there must be other factors at work in determining military success
- Society and politics play a major role in dampening pursuit of power and generating systems capable achieving success absent military genius
- Industrial Revolution enabled a resilience of the state and elimination of “decisive battle”
- After 1812 victory depended on assembling resources and organizing alliances to overwhelm adversary
- Despite passing of decisive battle generalship still matters - it’s just of the Eisenhower type with ability to manage alliances and remain focused on larger strategic framework
- Ultimate victor is the one who fights his battles with an achievable strategic purpose in mind
- Great strategists must accept no single person capable of seeing whole strategic situation in all its complexities
- System should seek to develop whole team of strategic thinkers/practioners
- Avoid getting overwhelmed by nuances - focus on a simple explainable vision as foundation of a strategy that can implemented by team and adapt as situation evolves
- Better to look for good strategy than great strategist

[Scott Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

(Audiobook)Ever wonder what it would be like to watch two military titans go at it head to head? Think Ali-Frasier, but only with a lot more firepower and a lot more at stake. Well, if that is what you are looking for, then give this book a gander. Lacey looks throughout the course of military history to find just such matchups. He finally settles on a few: Scipio vs. Hannibal, Pompey vs. Caesar, Richard I vs. Saladin, Wellington vs. Napoleon, Grant vs. Lee and Rommel vs. Montgomery vs. Patton. Before he gets to the title fights, he defines what he is looking for in "military geniuses" and how some could be great commanders, but didn't face an equitable peer.

From there, it is an analysis of the lives and military actions of the men in question. In most cases, the fateful encounters do not happen right away. Sometimes, there are multiple matchups, and others, there is only big match up. Lacey attempts to judge each based on capabilities, noting strengths, especially where some are good at the tactical and operational, but just don't have the strategic, or they have a good strategic sense, but the battlefield execution doesn't always pan out. Overall, he is extremely complementary of Grant and Scipio, who might have had the best balance of all concerned.

The reader is good with the material, but the rating is probably the same audio or e-copy/hard copy. More for the casual military reader, but even a military historian might have a little fun reading this one.

[Ed Barton · Rating 4 out of 5]

A well written and easy to read book, covering matched pairs from history - Hannibal & Scipio, Caesar & Pompey, Richard & Saladin, Napoleon & Wellington, Grant & Lee, and the WWII generals Patton, Rommel and Montgomery - the authors successfully argue that strategic genius is exceedingly rare, and we often confound tactical brilliance with strategic vision. In each grouping, battles as well as biographies are dissected, with high level observations made. While a student of military history will likely know almost all of the battle and biographical elements, the high level analysis as it aligns to strategy brings this analysis new color. I would have preferred a bit more depth on each grouping - but that would necessitate a multi-volume anthology rather than a 350 page book. A good read and one that every officer, historian or student of military history and tactics is likely to enjoy.

[Zeb Kantrowitz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Many of the early rivalries didn't interest me, but the later ones of Napoleon/Wellington, Grant/Lee, Rommel/Montgomery/Patton were the ones that really interested me. First Lacey gives you a significant biography of the character and then takes you to the time when they were in conflict and lastly he gives you what followed.

He especially spends time trying to explain how the character of the rivals was set when many were children and the effect of their upbringing on the type of warrior they became. When it comes to the last three groupings, Lacey describes how these generals were better than their contemporaries in using new weapons and therefore revised their strategies to better fit their use.

All in all it was a decent description of the these men their lives and their victories and defeats.

[Casey · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is well researched and well written. The authors' theory in the book is that wars are not decided by decisive battles, but on the strategy of generals. He covers a vast period of time starting with Hannibal's invasion of Italy and ending with World War II highlighting Patton, Rommel and Montgomery. While it is not as detailed as biographies on the indviduals, the authors give enough information to understand the main generals highlighted in the book.

This is a good book and I recommend it to anyone who is looking for a good read about the give and take between generals over time and a different theory on how war is won.

I received a free Kindle copy of this book courtesy of NetGalley and the publisher with the understanding that I would post a review on Net Galley, Goodreads, Amazon and my nonfiction book review blog. I also posted it to my Facebook  page.

[Randal White · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent reading. The author explains a wide range of important battles, the strategies employed by the generals leading the battles, and how those strategies affected the outcomes. Each battle is described in a short, concise chapter, that allows the reader to gain a lot of knowledge quickly. One can then chose the battles you were interested in for a more in depth study.

[Derek Monahan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great book for someone who's just getting into military history. You will at least have heard of all these names, and this book provides a snapshot of why history lauds them so. It addresses the questions of what makes a great commander, how much does that have to do with their historical and societal background, and what the lasting effects of their command might be.

[Billie · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent review of famous rival generals and their battles. I have read the authors work before and have enjoyed them. Very insightful looks at Grant/Lee, Wellington/Bonaparte and Hannibal/Scipio. Among others. Highly recommended to those interested in military history.

[Mahalia Gosla · Rating 3 out of 5]

I used this as a writing reference when it comes to the warmongering characters. This also helps with character charting to emulate historical figures. I recommend this book to anyone who loves history or looking for reference material for their novels.

[Jeroen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent read

[Jonelle · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the first military nonfiction I've read and I learned a lot