Peter Wilson doesn't write many books, but the few that he does write are very long and very German. Iron and Blood follows his epic history of the Thirty Years War and his even more epic history of the Holy Roman Empire. There is inevitably a degree of overlap over these three topics, although Iron and Blood takes a wide ranging, rather than forensic approach to 500 years of German military history.

The author has chopped his book into 5 sections: the 1500s, 1600s, 1700s, 1800s, and last, but certainly not least, the rather bloody 1900s of toothbrush moustsche notoriety. Each century is sub-divided into three chapters: 1. A summary of (numerous) wars. Those who like traditional battle narratives may be saddened to learn that Dr Wilson limits discussion of actual fighting to brief, dry summaries: Count Goring von Hess defeated Burgomeister Hitler Rommelstein at the battle of BarbarossaAuschwitz and then most of the Army succumbed to dystentery forcing an anti-climactic peace.

Select a format:

Audiobook) Settle in, for this is a long work. Wilson attempts to give a one-volume treatment to the military history of the German states/Germany, covering over 500 years. He captures a lot, but he can’t get everything. Wilson looks to dispel the myth that the German military really is based on the Prussian model and that it was at its peak in the 2 World Wars. There is far more to the story, as shown here. The author explores how militaries got along with broader society. This ranges from dry discussions of political support for fighter jet upgrades to midlly more interesting accounts of how German civilians coped with their nation's cataclysmic defeat in 1945. Iron and Blood delves into politics, economics, technology and social developments. Its long view of Germany's military history, magisterial detail and acute analysis provide a new understanding of what was once Europe's warring heart. The Economist

Iron and Bloodtakes as its starting point the consolidation of the Holy Roman Empire, which created new mechanisms for raising troops but also for resolving disputes diplomatically. Both the empire and the Swiss Confederation were largely defensive in orientation, while German participation in foreign wars was most often in partnership with allies. The primary aggressor in Central Europe was not Prussia but the Austrian Habsburg monarchy, yet Austria’s strength owed much to its ability to secure allies. Prussia, meanwhile, invested in militarization but maintained a part-time army well into the nineteenth century. Alongside Switzerland, which relied on traditional militia, both states exemplify the longstanding civilian element within German military power.

Retailers:

From the author of the acclaimed The Thirty Years Warand Heart of Europe, a masterful, landmark reappraisal of German military history, and of the preconceptions about German militarism since before the rise of Prussia and the world wars. For most of its existence German-speaking Europe has been splintered into innumerable states - some substantial (such as Austria and Prussia) and some consisting of just a few Alpine meadows. Its military experience has also been extraordinarily varied: threatened and threatening; a mere buffer-zone, and a global threat. I found it especially worthwhile in tracing the path from the mass levies of medieval times through the hiring of mercenary armies to the idea of a standing army. And as I said above, there is at last equal attention given to Austrian development: I've only found good looks at equivalent developing of the Holy Roman Empire's military in books written in German. This goes for the Swiss military evolution as well--their soldiers once admired as the epitome of the warrior.

The scholarship of this book is breathtaking [and] Wilson relates it with a command of his subject that is unparalleled. No one interested in the history of Europe, and of the Germans in particular, can afford not to read this stupendous book. Simon Heffer, Daily TelegraphPeter H Wilson, Chichele Professor of the History of War at Oxford University, has written a magnificent new book showing that Germans’ relationship to warfare is far too complex, varied and, indeed, interesting to be distilled so simplistically. Whereas most studies cover only the blood-soaked eighty years from the wars of unification in the 1860s to the end of the Second World War in 1945, Wilson takes his readers through a full half-millennium of German warfare, from 1500 to the present. His book’s geographical scope is similarly vast, encompassing all that once was German-speaking central Europe – lands which extended through and beyond modern Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Iron and Blood describes the martial actions behind the major political upheavals in this territory. Yet it also goes deeper, explaining how professional armies, technology and tactics developed, and how experiences of war and soldiering over a period of five hundred years profoundly shaped German society. From the author of the acclaimed The Thirty Years War and The Heart of Europe, a masterful, landmark reappraisal of German military history, and of the preconceptions about German militarism since before the rise of Prussia and the world wars. Iron and Blood takes as its starting point the consolidation of the Holy Roman Empire, which created new mechanisms for raising troops but also for resolving disputes diplomatically. Both the empire and the Swiss Confederation were largely defensive in orientation, while German participation in foreign wars was most often in partnership with allies. The primary aggressor in Central Europe was not Prussia but the Austrian Habsburg monarchy, yet Austria's strength owed much to its ability to secure allies. Prussia, meanwhile, invested in militarization but maintained a part-time army well into the nineteenth century. Alongside Switzerland, which relied on traditional militia, both states exemplify the longstanding civilian element within German military power. A thorough/detailed book indeed, but I've felt the balance of details was a bit off, some numbers could be omitted, as well as enumeration of certain facts. Overall, liked the book a lot and the title of the book lives up to its name. In defiance of this orthodoxy, Wilson’s astonishingly detailed new book is a military history not merely of Germany, but of all parts of Europe that were populated by German speakers, notably Switzerland, from 1500 to the present day. Every aspect of the armies and navies of German Europe is considered: the men (and later women) who served in them; their uniforms, weaponry, recruitment, pay and treatment; the relationship of the military with rulers and politicians; and the wars themselves.

The author of definitive books on the Holy Roman Empire and the Thirty Years War, Peter Wilson has with Iron and Blood written his masterpiece. Even the last 100+ years get an interesting and compelling rewrite. The key lesson is to NOT take the teleological view, reading all past events as if somehow (almost by destiny) culminating in the string of wars of 1866 + 1870-1871 + 1914-1918 + 1939-1945 and leading to the great reset, of "Zero Hour" in 1945 (followed by a new chapter). Therein lies a key tenet that focusing on the popular and unquestioned explanation of "Prussian militarism" makes for a crappy understanding of German-speaking peoples' history and military history. I can't pretend that looking at 'German' speaking people doesn't make for a complex and large history but it avoids the anachronisms that writing a 'nation' based history involves. The book'sMuch of the book is taken up with conflicts within or involving that strange entity, the Holy Roman Empire, the collection of mostly German-speaking states dominated by Habsburg Austria that, as Voltaire also quipped, was neither holy, Roman, nor an empire. At least until the middle of the 18th century, this alone made the German way of war quite different from those of unitary states such as England or France. The quasi-autonomy of the component parts, which nearly all maintained their own armies, required a decentralised and collaborative approach—the antithesis of the authoritarian model that emerged later with such awful consequences.