This is one for those who enjoy military history. That said, this is not exhaustive on any of the 12 battles Walsh examines and there may be some who do not find additional insight. Thanks to Netgalley for the ARC. While it wasn't for me, I know this will be appreciated.

A Rage to Conquer: Twelve Battles That Changed the Course of Western History by Michael Walsh

Michael Walsh’s A Rage to Conquer sets out to explore twelve pivotal battles in Western history and the commanders who fought them. As a sequel to Last Stands, the book dives into the idea that war is an unavoidable and integral part of the human experience, shaping societies and history alike.

The book covers a wide range of figures and conflicts, from Achilles at Ilium to Patton at the Battle of the Bulge. Some battles, like Midway or Austerlitz, are well-known, while others, such as the Siege of Antioch, highlight lesser-known moments in history. Walsh clearly did his homework—there’s no shortage of research here.

That said, A Rage to Conquer didn’t live up to its potential for me. The writing is verbose, often burying key insights under layers of tangents. Instead of the history coming to life, it felt more like wading through a dense lecture, with the author’s opinions often overshadowing the events being discussed. Walsh’s stance on war as a “manly pursuit” is laid on thick, and while it’s fine for an author to have a perspective, this one felt overly jingoistic and sometimes downright reductive.

The afterword was where things really went off the rails. Walsh veered into political commentary about the U.S. military, the aftermath of 9/11, and his opinions on modern leadership. His takes—ranging from critiques of women in combat to the supposed necessity of bloodshed to restore masculinity—might appeal to a specific audience, but they overshadowed the historical analysis I was hoping for.

There were some bright spots—I did learn a few new things about the battles, and the inclusion of lesser-known leaders was refreshing. But overall, the book felt more like a vehicle for Walsh’s worldview than a balanced examination of history.

Unless you’re a conservative reader with a specific interest in military history that leans into political commentary, this one might not be for you. For me, the writing style, heavy-handed opinions, and lack of balance made it a tough read.

I'm not going to be posting my review on this book unless requested because I had to add it to my DNF pile. I wanted to like it, but It wasn't long before I knew I wasn't going to, right at the beginning in fact. When the author started talking about how the violence of war is necessary and how it wasn't PC to say that, I got a bad taste in my mouth. I soldiered on, though, hoping that the tone of the book would change. It did not. On top of the misogynistic tone and what came across as a strong desire to be un-PC just for the sake of being un-PC, the writing was very dry and boring. I love history and love learning, but this book was less exciting than a textbook. I finally gave up and DNFed it.

First let me say, I have multiple history degrees, and I have spent years studying both cultural and military history. I have some experience reading and evaluating both primary sources and history books. I also understand not every book is written well and that even with a wealth of information from primary sources, writers can still miss the mark for many readers. Also, both of my parents and my stepfather are military veterans, and I am no stranger to war, the sacrifice, and the mental effects war can have on both men and women. My entire master's thesis focused on this topic.

This book is clearly not geared towards me since I am not a man and can't have the innate rage that Walsh says all men have in their desire for war and death or as the title suggests "to conquer."

Basics: it is several chapters, a rather quick read, and you can see that the author has explored the idea of using primary sources for support.

I was excited to read this based on the premise, but once I got into the introduction, I knew it was not for me. I should have stopped and simply Dnf'd the book then, but I pushed and waded through the absolute verbose vitriol that Walsh uses to exalt the military men he focuses on such as Alexander, Napolean, Caesar, and others, coupled with his belief that war is inevitable and glorious.

I wish I had stopped reading this when he said "if women are fighting in your front lines, then you're losing" or later when he speaks about how the purpose of a female is to punish man or lure them and she only lives for childbirth, or when he started going into the wonders of war and equating it to sexual release for several pages. Maybe I should have stopped when he talked about war having to be an art because if it were anything else then men couldn't accept the brutality and violence willingly that men need to be able to do to be vigorous, strapping, masculine men. I certainly don't even want to get into his diatribe against the "soft" and weak USA post 9/11. (but seriously, why was that even part of an "evaluation" about the 12 battles)

In between the glorification and the personal biases, there is a tiny bit of historical fact sprinkled in for those that want to venture into this work. For those that believe in their innaterage to conquer, this book is definitely for you, and you will love it

Thank you NetGalley and the publisher for the eARC of this work in exchange for my honest review.

A Rage to Conquer Twelve Battles That Changed the Course of Western History by Michael Walsh was received directly from the publisher and I chose to review it. I had never read this author before but I was involved in some of these battles. The author is very knowledgeable about the battles and is also very head strong in his thoughts on war and the like, which some readers will not like. Of course the twelve battles chosen are subjective but if you, or someone you buy gifts for likes to read military history, this may just be the book for you or them.

2.5 rounded up

An interesting summary of twelve "important" battles in Western history, and famous commanders, with an emphasis on von Clausewitz. Where I took issue with the book was Walsh's rather simplistic view that "man" is hardwired to warfare, further, that the problem with politics and the world today is that manly men need to get out there and slaughter and shed blood. Jingoistic at best.

A Rage to Conquer by Michael Walsh examines twelve battles that changed the course of Western history. The author views war as an important part of every culture that has led to societal change throughout history.

He covers several well-know leaders and a couple who are lesser known. They include Achilles, Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar, Bohemond, and Patton along with others. Specific important battles are covered in detail. However, the writing felt extremely verbose to me. It took a lot to wade through the words used to get to the important nuggets Walsh was trying to share. While the writer obviously did a tremendous amount of research and is extremely knowledgeable, his points sometimes got lost in the tangential wording.

The book is obviously well-researched, but read too much like a textbook. I was looking for more straight history, but the author’s views come through loud and clear rather than providing a balanced view of events. I wanted the history to come to life, but it didn’t. Nevertheless, I did learn some new things about some of the various battles covered in the book.

St. Martin’s Press and Michael Walsh provided a complimentary digital ARC of this novel via NetGalley. All opinions expressed in this review are my own. The publication date is currently set for January 28, 2025.

A bit tedious for me, but I shared with my husband who enjoyed reading it. He especially appreciated the 9/11 part.

Sorry. For me, this is a DNF. The writer is quite knowledgeable and erudite and a fine writer. But there's a goodly amount of bombast here along with an apparent glorification of warfare; and I'm just not interested. My thanks to NetGalley, the author, and the publisher for providing me with a complimentary ARC. All of the foregoing is my independent opinion.

"A Rage to Conquer: Twelve Battles that Changed the Course of Western History," a sequel to Michael Walsh's "Last Stands" and published by St. Martin's Press, is an impressive compendium of cultural information relating to Western warfare. I am working from an ARC graciously provided to me by the publisher. Many readers will be well aware of the format employed here of identifying key battles and commanders and tracking warfare and its development. That said, this book is a good bit more than that. The author begins with a brief but vital examination of Clausewitz' thoughts on war. This identifies key thematic concerns that the author then explores as he examines the historical record. So far so good, but the title is more than a wee bit misleading: the battles, from antiquity to the present are here but serve as sort of touchstones for much broader and far ranging discussion of cultural concerns relating to war. Add to this that the author seems to hew actively to Thomas Carlyle's "Great ManTheory of History," and I would argue that battles here are far less significant than the focus on great commanders and the broad consequences of their actions as revealed in their campaigns. There is a lot going on here, and the work, while occasionally dense to the point of obscurity, is also quite engrossing at its best. This book is not for everyone. The author's views are anything but politically correct, but he has clearly done his homework, and if you have the time and patience, it is a rewarding read.

A Rage to Conquer
By Michael Walsh

This is an amazing book. The author discusses twelve battles that shaped the course of history. But what he gives us is so much more: in-depth information about the combatants; what made the victors so much greater than not only the losers, but even their contemporaries on the winning side; what caused them to be the men they were at such pivotal moments; and most importantly, how their battles impacted history.

Here we see Achilles, Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Julius Caesar, Constantine, right down to George S. Patton, Pershing and MacArthur. Throughout the book there are so many ideas about the hows, the whys, and the results that it will take a while after finishing the book to process them all.

Mr. Walsh is obviously a very intelligent and thoughtful man. In fact the only problem I found with this book, was that I needed to have my dictionary by my side while reading it. I am a well-educated woman with a wide vocabulary, but words like "tetragrammatonic" were not on my radar!

Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for the chance to read an ARC of this gem of a book.

This book was a little information heavy to me. It read like a textbook, which isn't my go to style for nonfiction. However, it was well researched and informative. It just wasn't my preference.

DNF at 10%. Lots of flowery language and hard to follow. Not what I was expecting by the title of the book.

The author covers what he believes to be the twelve most important battles in Western history. I had set this book down several times unsure if I would pick it back up. It just didn’t grasp my attention and felt very much like required reading for a history class. I’m sure this book will be more enjoyable to non-fiction history fans.

Thank you NetGalley and St. Martin’s Press for the advanced digital copy in exchange for an honest review.
#NetGalley

There are many quotes in this book so I shall start off my review with one. "For those who like that sort of thing", said Miss Brodie in her best Edinburgh voice, "That is the sort of thing they like." Readers will be able to tell right from the beginning if this is the sort of book they will like, especially if they hate the woke agenda, and the political correctness. War it seems is great. A a former classical music critic for Time magazine, a writer of articles under an assumed name, a Disney channel movie creator, and resident in a rural part of blue state Connecticut and Ireland this seems like a brave comment to make. I usually don't review the writers of the book, but since so much of the writer's opinions are present in the book, here are mine. The author was born in 1949 and graduated college in 1971, which would make him 22 at the time. Maybe like a former vice president and a current president with foot problems Walsh also couldn't go to Vietnam because of well reasons. I do thank him for his service in the field of classical music reviewing.

The book when not loaded with odd comments and ideas is actually well written, and researched. There are plenty of quotes so readers should probably look to others for better more balanced telling of the tale. As a primer, though it works quite well. The style is in the way of a lecturer one that has been honed over many years of repeating, without contrary information getting in the way. The ending does go a tad off the rails as Walsh discusses the post-9/11 era, and finds that many of his arguments don't really hold up well but bombasity hides this well, and if one gets to the end, one is probably either in full agreement or too tired to argue.

The composer Wagner is mentioned five times in this book, but without the moment that probably means the most to Walsh. I talk of the scene in Apocalypse Now where Colonel Kilgore attacks the Vietnamese village to the music of Wagner. I am sure a seminal moment in the life of Walsh. This book has an audience people who like that sort of thing. I am not one. I do want to thank Michael Walsh for his service in the field of classical music reviewing.

Ever since man existed, war has followed. In the book A Rage to Conquer, author Michael Walsh takes the reader through a lengthy and sometimes painstaking analysis of twelve of the most important battles in Western history. Beginning with an overview of war by the philosopher Carl Von Clausewitz. From there the reader encounters a number of names, some instantly recognizable such as Achilles, Alexander, Constantine, Caesar, and Napoleon--and some that are not like Aetius and Bohemond. The final entry in the book is devoted to American war leaders Pershing, Nimitz, and Patton.

There is considerable detail about each of these formative wars and their place in history. I learned a lot from reading about these wars, far more than I learned in school. I was particularly interested in the characterizations of Alexander and Napoleon, but one chapter that stood out to me was the Crusades led by Bohemond and others as the forces of Christianity took on the Muslim world. While I heard about the Crusades, I had no formidable background to understand this early war of the worlds. The chapter on the American leaders was another favorite, especially the story of George Patton.

In a final chapter, the author takes on the events of 9/11/2001 as another failure by the United States. Walsh is right in that America has not won a war since World War II, and have made a mess of many military engagements since then. He is critical of both Democratic and Republican leaders, claiming the last great President was Ronald Reagan. This chapter will turn off some readers who may quit reading the book at that point. The writer has a right to state his opinion, just as the reader has the right to form their own opinions of the book.

I give the book four stars. At times the reading is tedious, and there are lots of bloody descriptions of war and atrocities that follow--rape, plunder, imprisonment, etc. But it all goes back to Clausewitz--war is hell, it is inevitable, and these wars had a formative experience on the world at the time they were fought. I reviewed an ARC and it offered no maps or illustrations which would have helped. Hopefully they make it in the publication.

I want to thank the author, publisher St. Martin's Press, and NetGalley for the opportunity to review this work. I attest this review is my own unbiased opinion of A Rage to Conquer..

I found this book to be an interesting and I believe a historically accurate description and analysis of a 11 commanders/battles. These started with an analysis of Clausewitz 'On War' then turned to Achilles through Patton. He states that history is a one-way street, meaning that he does not make an attempt to view the past through the cultural aspects of the present. This leads to a paragraph on slavery which may be offensive to some, as will his statement 'Any culture that is forced to rely on women in combat is destined to lose, and lose. badly." His afterword is not a summation of the previous chapters as much as a critical analysis of the US response to the 9-11 attacks. He advocates for a strong preparation for war by the nation with non-restraint when going to war, i.e. if you go to war than go in with a strategy to win. He criticises both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars as not just ill advised but politically run (and lost). The book is worth reading and re-reading but needs to be taken with a 'strong stomach.'

Michael Walsh quotes the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz (a veteran of the Napoleonic Wars) who said that "War is merely the continuation of policy/politics by other means. [It is] a genuine political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse/dealings/interaction..." Basically and however unpleasant, war is a legitimate tool of diplomacy. He then goes on to examine 12 important battles and their architects that had great influence on the development of Western history from Achilles and Alexander to Nimitz and Patton.

I thought his recounting and explanations of the various battles and leaders was very interesting - much information that I wasn't familiar with in many cases. But his summation in the Afterword was full-guns-blazing-take-no-prisoners straightforward and forceful. It is almost certain to offend sensitive readers with certain ideological leanings, but I found his logic to be quite persuasive. In a nutshell, he states that America has been in a decline since WWII.

<i>One notes that in all the conflicts [since WWII]... these wars of choice were fought along the invented limiting principle (found nowhere in the ancient world) that wars (a) should be defensive, fought in response to some provocation, and (b) any response should be 'proportionate' to the initial injury. In other words, the goal has always been to return to the status quo ante – a recipe for an unstable stasis that must eventually fly apart.</i>

He offers a particularly harsh judgement of the presidents since Reagan who have responded to aggression with wimpyness (my word, not his) and a desire not to be "rude," and the conflicts we have been involved in have been disastrous. (His strongest criticism falls on both Bushes.) And as much as I hate the idea of war for our nation, I have to agree with much of his arguments that America has allowed itself to be pushed around by other nations, all of whom know we won't respond with any aggression (except for Reagan's presidency), and we've become a weak nation that values peace over freedom.

I suspect a lot of reviewers will give the book low ratings because of his bellicose words, but much of my study of history seems to agree for the most part with him. (I rec'd a digital advance copy of this book from the publisher for review purposes. This did not affect my rating.)

A nonfiction book that covers the twelve most important battles in Western history. According to the author, “war is foundational to every society throughout history.” He also writes that to rely on women in combat is destined to lose. Walsh starts with Troy to 9/11, showing great admiration for the military tactician Napoleon. Throughout history, he writes, great nations and great commanders fought to destroy an opponent. He brings history to life as he considers a group of courageous commanders and the battles they waged that became crucial to the course of Western history.. This book was interesting but I do not always agree with his strong opinions. It is worth reading and think ing about war. The author write about military history and the complex interplay between war and the world.

I do not begrudge Michael Walsh his political views, or his bombast. But, properly understood, they are seasoning, not the main course.
There are books you pick up again and again. There are books that you pick up and put down. And then there are books that you pick up, and put down very slowly, and inch away from, because they might snap at you. This is one of those, and I am more than a little disappointed.