I thought this was totally fascinating as well as super useful for the kinds of classes I teach. Lynn does a sort of extended case study approach to the questions of whether there are cultural/civilizational "ways of war" and how to more broadly understand the relationship of culture and warfare. I found basically all of these fascinating except the ones on ancient China and India, where our sources are so skimpy that we can't say much
Lynn is brilliant at coming up with analytical frameworks for military history. In this book, his framework is about discourses of war v realities of war. A discourse of war is what a society's conversation/conception about what war should be, which could be anything the Greek conception of war as a short, decisive clash between citizen-soldiers to medieval notions of chivalrous warfare to imperial Japanese notions of warfare as an exercise of spiritual purification.
All societies talk and think about war a certain way, which shapes the way they practice it (this is a classic constructivist approach). If, for example, you are an early modern aristocratic military officer, you may view the average commoner soldier as too stupid and disloyal to practice a more improvisational form of warfare. Hence, you might believe that they must be drilled and regimented to the utmost and deployed in fixed, linear tactical formations that, to modern eyes, seem kind of dumb. Lynn's point is that the kind of massed-volley fire formations we see in the 18th and early 19th century weren't simply tactical adaptations to technological change (mainly the challenge of achieving decisive shock effect with short-ranged and inaccurate musketry) but reflections and extensions of cultural and social views.
I enjoyed almost all of this book, especially the incredibly helpful chapter contextualizing Clausewitz as well as the fascinating critique of race-focused accounts of the Pacific War in WWII. Highly recommended for military historians of any kind as well as the general enjoyer of military history.