"Osprey Ess. History ( RCW): No references or bibliography?!?" Topic

Hi, I was tempted by this book while in the FLGS. However, upon leafing through it, I could not find any references or bibliography!

Are these in the book, but in some other place than the usual ones, or are they not in the book at all?

Are they available online, on some webpage of supplemental information or errata?

Thanks!

But did it have pretty pictures (smile)?

Dan

I don't see this as an issue. Osprey's history is a short introductory text, and it has apparatus consistent with that – index, photo citations and the odd textual citation.

A bibliography of texts used would be many pages long and eat up valuable page space. It would only be a smattering of texts available anyway. Worse, it would be almost entirely books in languages other than English, so pretty much useless to most people buying the book.

Citing references in such a book would also be rather odd. It's not an academic text, and its target audience would have no means to check the references, even if they cared. And more pages wasted.

They might have included a "further reading" section, but two minutes on Google or Amazon will supply that.

If I have a complaint about Bullock's book, it is that too many of the illustrations are excessively large. The space could have been usefully filled with more illustrations or text. If that was too costly, it could have had some basic orbats, glossaries of tricky terms, or similar.

(If you want a decent bibliography, I can tell you that Jonathan Smele's is excellent. Of course it is a trifling 600 pages long. And that is without including works in Russian, Polish, Ukrainian etc. You could probably triple page count for a full one.)

I have the RCW book from Osprey and it is a perfect intro to a very confusing period! Well worth the price.
William

Well, most other Ospreys have at least partial bibliographies, so why should this book be the exception? Indeed, even articles in decent military history magazines include them.

Bullock may know his subject, but the lack of even a short bibliography (or "further reading" section, if you will) gives his book an unfortunate similarity to the category of picture books that are written by non-expert contract writers on behalf of publishing houses…

"They might have included a "further reading" section, but two minutes on Google or Amazon will supply that."

I think this is mandatory. Part of the attraction to Osprey's is that it does offer an introduction to a period. But in my view, some sort of bibliography is necessary for these types of publications.

First, it somewhat backs up the facts and premises that is written. A proper history book might have footnotes every few sentences.

Second, a Google search will show a lot of information of various quality. An introductory book should point you in the right direction for the quality references out there. Otherwise, you have the Wiki problem.

Third, you risk dumbing-down the entire line of books on the publisher's list by not including this information. For every report or article I have ever written since the 2nd grade, some sort of bibliographical information was required.

Bibliographical info is not just for academics. It conveys information, backs up research and offers a starting point for further research. In my view, it should be just as important as proper grammar and a title for the book.

Best,
Steve
cavalcadewargames.com
nycjadie.wordpress.com

If you were to include references or a bibliography, it might imply that there were OTHER opinions than what was just presented. That might upset people who just payed $20 USD for the last word on the subject.

I have all the AST books through Gauntlet. They are no substitute for this book, because they are not intended as histories at all. They are uniform books. I would have been furious if I had bought those on the basis that I would learn about the RCW from them.(They are also every bit as scatter-brained as the Osprey RCW books. The "Whites" book does not even cover Cossack uniforms!)

Bibliographical info is not just for academics. It conveys information, backs up research and offers a starting point for further research.

I'm sorry, but no-one interested in "further research" would start from this Osprey. It is a perfectly good thing in its own right, but it is only really a pretty pamphlet.

If Bullock listed all his sources, it would run to many pages. All completely wasted information (especially given that much would be in Russian).

A "further reading" page would have been useful, but that is not what a bibliography is.

I did academic history at University and I have no issues with academic apparatus. I cite references and provide bibliographies to my work in Pygmy Wars. But a short general history has no reason for such things.

I'm sorry, but no-one interested in "further research" would start from this Osprey. It is a perfectly good thing in its own right, but it is only really a pretty pamphlet.

I am interested in "further research," yet I would have considered starting from an Osprey, so that would make your blanket statement false.

If Bullock listed all his sources, it would run to many pages. All completely wasted information (especially given that much would be in Russian).

A bibliography would not have to be all-or-nothing.

A "further reading" page would have been useful, but that is not what a bibliography is.

How about a "select bibliography," then? Is that precise enough for you?

I don't see the point of a "select bibliography", I confess. You either cite your sources or you don't. How do you decide which references to leave out. (My bet is that the hardest to find will be left out, which tend to be the most specialised and therefore have the hardest to check pieces of information.)

If it is meant as a reading list, then it can be called such.

(BTW, I never suggested that no-one would start researching a project from any Osprey. On more esoteric subjects I can see where they might be a starting point. However this Osprey costs $ 12.89 on Amazon and I can buy Mawdsley's perfectly good history for under $ 10 and the excellent Figes book for $16.50. The only reason for preferring this one is precisely because you are not interested in great detail.)

I don't see the point of a "select bibliography", I confess.

Ok…

You either cite your sources or you don't. How do you decide which references to leave out.

Hmm, yet another all-or-nothing proposition…

You could decide by taking a figurative step back, looking at the big picture, and disregarding (for the sake of your readers) sources that delve into picky little details.

BTW, I never suggested that no-one would start researching a project from any Osprey.

I never suggested that you had.

On more esoteric subjects I can see where they might be a starting point. However this Osprey costs $ 12.89 on Amazon and I can buy Mawdsley's perfectly good history for under $ 10 and the excellent Figes book for $16.50.

Thanks for the two other suggestions. Incidentally, that resembles the beginning of a reading list. Now, was that all that difficult to do?

The only reason for preferring this one is precisely because you are not interested in great detail.

Ooh! More all-or-nothingness! How about the possibility that one might prefer this one because it is in the local gaming store, and you would like to support them, yet would also like to be able to leaf through a book before buying it?

First, I would like to thank Mark Plant for his really fascinating work in "Pigmy Wars" and for his excellent bibliography about the Russian Civil War. I am very, very grateful to him for all the great books he made me read, first of all the wonderful "Carnets de route d'un artilleur à cheval 1917 – 1920: Mes Chevaux dans la poussière et dans la boue" by Serge Mamontov, which is one of the most interesting war memories I have ever read. So, thank you. And if anyone wants to read more about the Russian Civil War, I advise him to take a look at the Pigmy Wars pages.
I also think that Orlando Figes "A People's Tragedy: the Russian Revolution: 1891 -1924" is the first book to read if you want to learn something about the period. By the way it took eleven years for Figes' book to be translated and published in France!
But, about the Osprey book, which seems to be a decent summary of the war and will be read by non-specialists, a "further reading" page, or two, would have been useful, I think. Look for instance at "The Anglo-Irish War", from the same publisher. It seems to me that if you take the pain to include a chronology and an index, you can as well add some reading tips. A few of the illustrations of "The Russian Civil War" are not of a great interest. So some could have been deleted to make some space.
But I like to read bibliographies, so maybe my opinion is a bit biased!

Dear gentlemen, a word of explanation about the Osprey Essential from the author. Five years after the fact I stumbled across this thread by accident. First, you are all correct in your questions and judgments. An Osprey Essential is only 100 pages according to the series parameters. Half way through writing it I had to ask the publisher for 50 extra pages as a minimum,the only exception in the series, I believe. There was indeed a sources list, quite extensive, and in multiple languages, some 20 pages or more, as a short list…a result of 27 years of part time interest and approximately $120,000 USD USD in expenditures over the field at large. In addition to the sources, I sent the publisher two maps that I considered critical: a very detailed one on the Dnieper-Crimean defenses and a two page detailed map of Siberia showing the major partisan groups, communications and logistics. Sadly, Osprey pulled the maps and the sources and substituted the chronology and index which I did not write or want. I was not told about these changes and was equally shocked with you when I saw the final result. At least the editors gave me the extra 50 pages for which I was grateful. The editors also arranged the sizes of the paintings and photos to fit the format they were creating, and they required 100 images for visual interest. Actually, I could have used double the page size, at least, for a simple introduction to the subject. Hopefully, my two books on RCW armored units and the Czech Legion book will help some, and at least these do have the sources in the back. By day I'm a military historian in Dept. of Defense, but I teach history at night at various colleges. Knowing that my task was hopeless, I decided to write like a college lecture…so that others could have an accurate and short book at hand from which to delve deeper into a particular subject of interest for them. I confess I did not completely understand how the RCW fit together until I finished the final page. Hopefully, I will have spared others much of the sweet agony I had to go through piecing all together through the long years. PS. Also tossed out was my interpretation of the last hour and execution of the Romanovs. I dealt with the shrine archive at Ekaterinburg for that and perhaps all extant sources and applied some fresh logic. Ah! I close now giving you my respects and honoring all of you for your promotion of the RCW. Live long and prosper. David

Dear David,

Great to read your reply and learn about your experiences with Osprey. Your RCW Essential Histories title is one of my favourites from this publisher and I always recommend it as a primer to anyone expressing an interest in this conflict (and that's not only because there's a whole chapter on the Makhnovists which others might mention ;) ).
I also have your Red and White armour titles which make fascinating reading.

I guess Osprey books "are what they are" to coin a hackneyed modern phrase and we hobbyists and history types have to accept that. There are some truly awful ones out there (nice pics; shame about the accuracy) and some very good ones amongst which I include yours.

You mention that there is a fair amount of material that didn't make it into EH69 – maps, sources and such. How about putting these out on a supporting website promoting the book? There are plenty of other authors that have done something similar.
Thanks,
Mike

David, I enjoyed your book immensely.

You're a wargamer? And in Colorado?

I live in Denver. We should talk…