In many ways, Fowler's book is not a traditional history. Readers who are looking for an exclusively historical approach to Mexico's War of Reform (1857–61) should consult his previous text La guerra de los tres años (1857–1861) (Paidós, 2020). As the author makes clear, the study of the War of Reform provides a historical example from which he wishes to extrapolate the “grammatical elements” that can be found in “all civil wars” (226). Therefore, his text could be understood as an exercise in social science that studies the Mexican phenomenon “from a civil wars studies perspective” and aims to provide “a new analytical framework for the study of civil war” (228).
Even so, any cursory reading of text reveals its author has maintained a firm historical methodology in the pursuit of this objective. His interest in exploring the minute details of the when, where, how, and who within his historical case study suggests that he remains very aware of how differing contexts can determine how his “grammar” might play out. As such, I would suggest that Fowler's work could best be categorized as an exercise in Applied History: an attempt to approach a present-day problem through the study of its historical iterations and the application of this interpretation to the present. The use of history in War and Strategic Studies is quite a recent expression of multidisciplinary crossovers. In the United States, this approach is associated with the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard's Kennedy School. In the United Kingdom, the Engelsberg Programme in Applied History was launched in 2018 by the Centre for Grand Strategy (War Studies Department, King's College London) and the Centre for Geopolitics (Cambridge University); this program also adopts the Applied History form of research.
Even though historians of Mexico are therefore not necessarily the target audience for this book, the arguments Fowler advances are nevertheless useful for understanding how and why the War of Reform came to happen in 1857 and for studying the numerous other civil wars that have taken place in Latin America since then. The book begins with a presentation of Fowler's proposed “grammar,” a series of tables or “small-scale map” (14) that outlines the geopolitical context, political actions, and social, cultural, and economic issues that condition the outbreak of civil war, its development, and its resolution. This multifaceted list of causes and consequences highlights the interaction between individuals (their will, action, and planning) and their circumstances (social, racial, economic, and cultural structures). It suggests that civil wars, in common with all historical events, derive from a complex interdependency of factors. As the disciples of the Annales School insisted, “total history” is needed if we are to comprehend any civil war fully.
Fowler makes clear that not all civil wars exhibit all the elements of his framework, and he cautions against his “grammar” being understood prescriptively. Instead, he hopes to offer a “starting point” (13) for studying civil wars. Nevertheless, the book then proceeds to analyze the Mexican War of Reform in function of the elements identified in the introduction. This of course has the effect of transforming the Mexican experience into a paradigmatic example. All the elements of Fowler's grammar are found in Mexico's War of Reform, and it thus becomes an example with which other civil wars can be usefully compared.
Although there are obviously downsides to this approach, not the least of which is the fact the grammar proposed looks less universal and more local than the author probably intended, the detailed discussions of the different elements and how they played out in Mexico places the proposed framework of analysis on a firm empirical footing. As a result, his book will be essential reading for all those interested in understanding Mexico's War of Reform.
