Abstract
Charles H. Coates and Ronald J. Pellegrin published Military Sociology: A Study of American Institutions and Military Life (University Park, MD: The Social Science Press) in 1965, providing the first and only authoritative military sociology textbook. Military sociology as a field ballooned after World War II up through the Vietnam War into the mid-1960s. Belligerent times of the Cold War found the stars aligned for a university-level textbook market for military sociology. Then, during relative times of peace in the latter half of the 20th century, the military as an institution became somewhat invisible in higher education. Since 9/11, however, military sociology has experienced a resurgence, an initial falling, and is now stabilizing and growing in some ways. Consequently, it is more widely being taught but not with the focus and necessary depth it once had, or still needs.
Many scholars and practitioners are despondent about the loss of military sociology at powerhouse research universities such as Chicago, Northwestern, Michigan, Maryland, and Texas A&M. Yet, there has been a diffusion and diaspora of interest in the military as an institution post-9/11 worldwide. Military sociology (and sociology of the military) doors are wide open at campuses evidenced by more research published on and about the military than ever before in mainstream sociology journals (e.g., Marriage and the Family and Sociological Quarterly, among others); more military specific journals directly dealing with human issues (e.g., Critical Military Studies and Military Behavioral Health alongside the premier Armed Forces & Society); grants going to scholars at doctoral universities; books being written about contemporary military topics including volumes on military specific sociological theory and military affairs methods (e.g., Routledge has been leading in this area—see references below); military sociological work being undertaken in a range of countries around the world from Canada to Norway to Slovenia to India and South Korea (to include some new online military journals in these areas such as the Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies); new institutes dealing with military human issues on prominent university campuses (e.g., Syracuse, Purdue, Texas Tech, and University of Southern California); programs appealing to veterans on college campuses no longer stigmatized but celebrated and embraced to include those at elite schools such as Harvard and Columbia; degree programs about military issues (e.g., St. Leo University now offers a B.A. in Veteran Studies); military related courses covering social issues; and sociology being respected at military academies that are now including more faculty, courses, programs, with cadets studying such topics more than at any time in their histories. Thus, the stars have again aligned for a university-level textbook market, and Military Sociology: A Guided Introduction meets the demand smartly and comprehensively.
Military Sociology considerately offers both a valuable and essential contribution to the field of military sociology in numerous ways. Foremost, it anchors military sociology, providing much of the rich and detailed information about the field that has not been captured anywhere in one space. Second, it wraps up two customs of uniting and presenting scholarship in schoolhouses via books: first, it offers the traditional textbook, and second, a collection of primary readings is included. In this way, Military Sociology brings utility because it is marketed and presented as a textbook with all the features, trappings, and peripherals involving a textbook with both primary and secondary resources—important because the field, as the authors indicated, lacked a text for some time.
There are four worthy comparisons to Military Sociology (although not referenced in Military Sociology). First, two texts are War, Peace, and the Social Order by Brian E. Fogarty (Routledge, 2000) and Systems of War and Peace by Theodore Caplow and Louis Hicks (2nd edition, University Press of America, 2002). Second, two readers are the Routledge Handbook of War and Society edited by Steve Carlton-Ford and Morten Ender (Routledge, 2010) and Anders Sookermany’s prodigious open-access edited volume Handbook of Military Sciences (Springer, 2023).
The first two books above do not involve an in-depth look at a select few sources of scholarship seminal in military sociology. Instead, they are about the breadth of the field and provide short-shrift treatments on a range of topics. The two volumes are also heavy on peace topics as their titles indicate. The latter two volumes are more recent, providing more depth on select works, with stand-alone chapters in the volumes, deal more with (recent) war than peace, and include a cornucopia of sociologists. Chapter contributors wrote them and do not have a series of threads linking them to other selections in the volume other than the wars or the military.
Further, the four books above do not all focus on military sociology explicitly. Military Sociology bridges the books as both a traditional textbook and a treatment of extraordinary people and reading selections in war and the military. On a practical level, Military Sociology is two books in one.
As a “textbook,” Military Sociology is not conceptually or theory-specific. Indeed, the authors cover theoretical orientations in military sociology, especially those of Morris Janowitz (i.e., professionalism) and Charles Moskos (i.e., institution/occupation model). They go deeper rather than wider in the field—this is accomplished unambiguously with 50 different “Spotlights” featuring scholars and studies from Manon Andres to Laura Miller to Donna Winslow. Indeed, the overall scholarship spotlights of the book are outstanding, well-representative, and super appealing. For example, a Spotlight on British military sociologist Anthony King and his growing up in Manchester, England, and studying Manchester United “football” fans is intriguing. This early work led him to study cohesion, violence, and the military (pp. 66–69). Thus, there is a cool and keen storytelling quality with the Spotlights and an appealing foundation from broader underpinnings such as the history of demography working up through direct application to the military. Again, I think the reader will be excited to learn nuance details throughout the book. For example, the tragedy befallen Emile Durkheim—his son dying as a soldier in World War I—was new to me and had me thinking about his work in a new light (pp. 25–28). I find this humanizing of the field particularly satisfying, gratifying, and holistic.
While the Spotlights are uber informative, research methods in military sociology are left wanting in the volume. The field of military sociology has long relied on a range of methods, from ethnography to case studies to big data demography. Indeed, it pioneered some of these areas. The authors could have highlighted this more. For example, Routledge has published three notable edited volumes on research methods featuring mostly sociologists and social science scholars with contributions. 1
Further, since the book is about war in times and places—perhaps far more could have been made of sociologists that have historically gone where service members go—Morris Janowitz went to London, England, on General Eisenhower’s staff and earning a Purple Heart in 1945 from a V-2 rocket attack; Samuel Stouffer and his team to World War II Europe; Charles Moskos to Vietnam and Somalia; David Segal to the Sinai; John Wattendorf to the Persian Gulf; Laura Miller to Macedonia; and Remi Hajjar to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Beyond methods, Military Sociology is, however, interdisciplinary without compromising sociology, and there is a good deal of cross-national comparative work. Peace studies and social movements folks in sociology will find pleasant surprises in the book as it includes much about violence and nuclear war.
Military Sociology is encyclopedic and righteously comprehensive. There is a straight line from World War II to Afghanistan, comprising much foundational knowledge not found elsewhere. The book covers the classics. Nevertheless, the field is rapidly burgeoning, and since the book goes deep rather than broad, relevant subtopics are absent such as drone warfare, popular culture, and transgender issues. Nonetheless, the core is represented well—further, the Parting Thoughts chapter concluding the book champions study of various future warfare scenarios.
The writing style and the reading level are more than satisfactory and appropriate for the market, especially upper-class undergraduates and graduate students. It is approachable for educated audiences interested in military affairs. In my experience, undergraduates (both civilian and military) in sociology-oriented courses can grow tired of historical readings—especially in sociology courses where they are pining for a connection to contemporary issues and “hot topics.” Sociology textbooks, however, are notorious for being almost slow journalism with hip, trendy pieces that are no sooner dated. Anyone teaching Military Sociology volumes can further contemporize the volume with supplemental readings, as I did in our senior undergraduate Armed Forces & Society course this past spring semester.
In terms of presentation, as a teacher, I do very much like the italicized keywords (e.g., “socializing agents” and “military self” p. 46; “intersectionality” p. 108; and “cultural lag” p. 175) throughout the book. They make the book an actual introduction to sociology and cultural anthropology for a military schoolhouse—identifying foundation sociological terms, defining them, and then providing direct military and war-related examples. In some instances, almost complete sentences are italicized, such as “. . . family obligations are seen as interfering with work . . .” (p. 191). For a textbook, these terms and axioms help students as standouts for teaching and learning. Other examples of being student-centric in the book are Reader Guides, Spotlights, study questions, references, and further readings. The Reader Guides are executive summaries launching each chapter for the reader of what is to come. The Spotlights are baked into the chapters but blocked off within each, with three or more per chapter. Each chapter concludes with four thoughtful questions for discussion, endnote references directly from the chapter, and recommendations for further reading.
Foremost, Military Sociology is more a Sociology of War book. While it presents more broadly as military sociology, it is more war-heavy than military organization-specific. However, the latter is undoubtedly well represented. Consequently, it could be taught in any discipline, from international relations to military sociology to military history to strategic studies, as a set of modules on war. There is heavy spillage into the social science of war literature, more broadly to offshoots of political science, including defense and strategic studies and war studies, among others, where the book would have appeal. There is some rich military-social history here too. Kudos to the authors for completing a foundational text for the 21st century to begin the education of the next generation of military-social science thinkers.
