"New book - Challenge of Battle by Adrian Gilbert" Topic
6 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Early 20th Century Media Message Board
Areas of InterestWorld War One
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Profile Article
Featured Movie Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Ponder | 17 Mar 2014 6:59 a.m. PST |
Howdy, Subtitled "The Real Story of the British Army in 1914," and published by Ospery. Gilbert is willing call portions of the Official History deliberate prevarications. He looks primarily at British sources. I'm about halfway through, so far thumbs up. Ponder on, JAS
|
IagreewithSpartacus | 17 Mar 2014 7:17 a.m. PST |
Does it give the colour scheme of British Horse Artillery in 1914? |
Ponder | 17 Mar 2014 7:23 a.m. PST |
No, such details are not within its scope. He does have good descriptions of the employment of artillery – JAS |
Ponder | 19 Mar 2014 9:35 a.m. PST |
Howdy, My review on amazon.com: 5 stars I recommend this book. Long ago and far away I read the "official" history, and the conclusions did not pass the smell test. Then came Terence Zuber's "The Mons Myth – A reassessment of the battle" and I wondered why it took nearly 100 years for the book to be written. Now comes Gilbert's "Challenge of Battle" where the author is will to call portions of the official history "deliberate prevarications." I welcome Gilbert's effort. It will be interesting to see how long before the book is criticized for being "revisionist?" Frankly, British military history for 1914 can use this revision. Mons and LeCateau were not British victories. It was refreshing to see the word rout in used conjunction with the aftermath of LeCateau (and quoted from a primary source). The BEF were not elite troops. Gilbert does an excellent job summarizing the capabilities of the BEF and their shortcomings, as well as comparing them to the Germans. The detailed accounts of artillery usage were most welcome. The graphic support for this book is adequate, and maps well done (good maps are essential in my opinion). Ponder on, JAS
|
Etranger | 19 Mar 2014 7:50 p.m. PST |
It's long been known that the British Official History 'modified' its findings to mollify various senior officers. Even wiki covers it link link It strikes me that someone's trying to produce a new pro-German mythology. Zuber certainly is
.. |
Ponder | 20 Mar 2014 6:38 a.m. PST |
Howdy, I disagree with your terminology of "mythology." It's not simply Zuber noting inaccuracies, Martin Samuel's documented the official history as patriotic propaganda in his book "Command or Control." Ponder on, JAS
|
|