The grand strategy of the Byzantine Empire

What Hacker News says

1. GolfPopperJun 2025
   The A Collection of Unusual Pedantry blog which the author references is an amazing introduction to this work of thinking (the challenges of military operations, and the forces that shape warfare and civilization). [1] If you're already familiar with ACoUP, or find Cataphracts fascinating, you might also enjoy Edward N. Luttwak's The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire of which one review says (and which I find a quality summary):

       "The Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire is written with a profound knowledge of the field, a thorough mastery of the sources and secondary literature, and a lively and engaging style that both specialists and general readers will appreciate."     —Peter B. Golden, Rutgers University
   

   1. https://acoup.blog/
   Show morethread
2. lionheartedMar 2014
   Luttwak's writing is often brilliant. Check out as many of his essays and summaries as you can. "Grand Strategy of the Byzantine Empire" drags and is difficult at times, but quite insightful.

   One important point, re: this article --

   > If you pursue military agrandizement so monomaniacally and consistently with realpolitick that you start to seriously threaten your neighbors and competitors then, if they are smart enough and act in time, you will provoke them into forming an alliance of resistance dedicated to doing whatever is necessary short of nuclear war, but including crushing your economy, to prevent you from getting big enough to dominate.

   That was a followed by a criticism of the realism perspective to international relations, but there's variants of realism --

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(international_relation...

   In particular, defensive realism seems the most sane and consistent with what actually happens in the world --

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_realism

   Which wouldn't advocate unlimited buildup of military resources. Compare offenseive realism, from Wikipedia --

   "The emphasis offensive realism puts on hegemony as states’ end aim stands in sharp contrast to defensive realism’s belief that state survival can be guaranteed at some point well short of hegemony. In a defensive realist mindset, security increments by power accumulation end up experiencing diminishing marginal returns where costs eventually outweigh benefits."

   So... that particular criticism of realism should perhaps be of offensive realism? As a sidenote, reading about realism on Wikipedia is certainly an interesting use of time.

   Show morethread