"Balanced Book on Montgomery?" Topic

Can anyone recommend a book that gives a balanced view of Bernard Montgomery as a wartime general?

The best bet would be to ignore all books by USA authors!

Gentlemen, take your starting positions: seconds out, round two!

The best bet would be to ignore all books by USA authors!

I'm not sure the British authors would be any less unbalanced, so are there any French, German, or Italian books about Monty?

Hey, I'm serious here :) I've read general histories of WWII, books about specific campaigns, and books about Eisenhower and Patton and Bradley, but never one about Montgomery. Surely there must be something that isn't hopelessly biased one way or the other! Right? Right…?

Problem is that most British authors are either strongly pro- or anti- Montgomery too. He was that sort of man.

It's not quite what you're looking for but Douglas Porch's Hitler's Mediterranean Gamble spends quite a bit of time on Montgomery's strengths and weaknesses & comes across as a balanced work.
link

There's a family memoir by his brother (himself a distinguished officer) which is quite interesting link There were times when even they couldn't stand him!

Of the more formal biographies, the probably best known is Nigel Hamilton's Monty – The Lonely Leader. link It's very pro-Montgomery though.

"The best bet would be to ignore all books by USA authors!"

Are there books by American authors? Why would we bother, for the same reason I don't know of any bio's of Patton by British authors.

Monty and Rommel: Parallel Lives by Peter Caddick-Adams is a balanced account. Of course, arguably only half if it is about Monty. The writer does IMO a good job of explaining the conflicting current and future political and military considerations that Monty had to balance, and why an aversion to casualties was as much forced on him as chosen by him.

Pendulum Of War: Three Battles at El Alamein by Niall Barr is likewise well balanced although it stops, of course, in 1942 and isn't specifically about Monty.

Bios are not the problem. It is the calumny about Montgomery in general campaign accounts that is the real issue.
Ralph Ingersoll started it all with his awful book 'Top Secret'

Some of the campaign specific histories are good, particularly Carlo D'Estes Decision in Normandy and Bitter Victory. About Normandy and Sicily respectively.

D'Este spends most of his book criticising Montgomery and he knows he went over the top because he changed his view in later writing:

link

D'Este is the one who first made the totally false accusation the scheming British 'hid' 100,000 infantry replacements in the UK to help preserve the Empire post-war.

I would recommend "British armour in the Normandy campaign" by John Buckley or "Colossal cracks " by Stephen Hart. Neither book is written praising Montgomery and both are pretty objective.
For Tuscaloosa, here is a pro Patton Biography by a British author " PATTON: A STUDY IN COMMAND", by Herbert Essame

Carlo D'Estes work is a travesty and one of the least objective books I have ever read, any book mentioning phase lines is pretty desperate in my opinion and the same goes for Charles Whiting, Michael Reynolds and Max Hastings who are all dire historians not worth the cover price even in a remaindered book sale.

LOL, just goes to show you can't please everyone… I would put myself in the monty fan camp and thought d'este was ok. At least he blamed the right people for Falaise.

Max Hastings is a jounalist and Mike Reynolds an SS fanboy, I'm not sure either ever claimed to be historians. As for Charles Whiting, aka Leo Kessler…

Not a fan of D'Estes book on Normandy. Many far superior books on a much discussed campaign.

Your all a bit harsh on Max Hastings. He ran counter to the Citizen Solider allied victory parade style and so gets trashed. An interesting if journalistic approach to the subject challenging the popular narrative. Far more useful than Estes.

I've been around long enough to have started with Paul Carrel propaganda history and now to have seen the pendulum over correct. Reynolds is also useful in context but not as a sole source.

TomT

Hasting's is a 'didn't they do well-er'. That is those who contend that Germany lost before the Allies landed on June 6th. That the Allied victory was due simply to their overwhelming numbers and that the real miracle is that the vastly outnumbered Germans lasted as long as they did.
He is in the group who have swallowed whole the self-serving memoirs of the German Generals and their excuses as to why they were robbed of their well deserved one-on-one victory. Hasting's work reeks of admiration of the Germans and a disdain for the Allied Generals who (he believes) won in spite of their ineptitude.
Reynolds is an SS groupie who is not averse to using unchecked German claims in order to preserve the myth of the SS uber-soldier.
I dispute the pendulum has swung away from the populist 'german soldier admiring' view of WW2.

Mike Reynolds is nothing like "an SS fanboy" or "an SS groupie". He does, however, know what sells military history books -- hence the covers.

All the best,

John.

.Mike Reynolds is nothing like "an SS fanboy" or "an SS groupie". He does, however, know what sells military history books -- hence the covers.

That is a matter of opinion and guided by where you stand (on the subject)in the first place. However I will give you a specific example of where he ignored the references he had to hand in order to promote the myth.
He claims Will Fey destroyed 15+ Shermans from 23rd Hussars at Chenodolle (Aug 7th 1944) in 'Sons Of The Reich' page 72.
A simple check on the War Diary of 23rd Hussars shows they were not even in action that day.
Reynolds uses extracts from the War Diary of 23rd Hussars in the same chapter (footnote 22 & 23) but by the time he gets around to repeating the Fey claim (footnote 60) he decides this document is no longer worthy of a mention. Reynolds thus had access to the original paperwork and chose to ignore it. Why did he do that?

War Diary 23rd Hussars
Aug 1
0700 Regt in posn high ground S River Souleuve. B Sqn patrols towards BENY BOCAGE. 3 RTR pass through
1400 (6742) Move to BENY BOCAGE. Harbour there. 1 OR KIA, 4 wounded. 6 Shermans received. 2 Shermans 1 Stuart struck off.
Aug 2
0500 (7135) Advance 23 H leading with 8 RB on route. BEAULIEU-LE DESERT-PRESLES
100 2 a/c's destroyed LA INHHARDIERE
1500 B Sqn made contact CHENODELLE and held up. A Sqn attacked by Panthers EAST of LE BAS PERRIER
2000 (T 7233) Regt moves tp posn S of LE BAS PERIERE with 8 RB in support. 3 OR's KIA, Majot WATT, 2/Lt GUNYON and 9 OR's wounded.
Aug 3
In posn LE BAS PERIER Heavy shell fire and mortaring
1400 8 RB relieved by 2 Warwicks. 4 OR's KIA, 12 OR's wounded
Aug 4-5
LE BAS PERIER. 3 OR's KIA, 5 OR's wounded 4 OR's missing
Aug 6
0300 A and B Sqns withdrew to harbour LA BARBIERE 6938
1500 RHQ move to LA BARBIERE
1600 Enemy begin to counter-attack LE BAS PERRIER posn. Beaten off by C Sqn and 2 Warwicks. Estimated enemy strength-1 Bn.
Lt. ROBSON and 3 OR's KIA Capt. PHILLIMORE, 2/Lt.TREANOR, Capt. CROUCH and 9 OR's wounded. 2 OR's missing.
Aug 7
1500 C Sqn harbour LA BARBIERE. Capt. TAYLOR and 7 OR's wounded.
Aug 8-10
LA BARBIERE 6 Sherman V, 3 Sherman Vc 1 3 Ton lorry 5 Half tracks received.
4 sc cars, 1 3ton lorry 4 half tracks 12 Sherman V 3 Sherman Vc struck off. 1 OR killed

From 'The Story Of The Twenty-Third Hussars 1940-1946
pages 104-107
Published April 1946.

The Germans did not continue their onslaught after dark and
when dawn (7th)came we were able to re-occupy most of our positions.
Sporadic and half-hearted attacks were launched during the morning,
but in nothing like the strength of the previous day. When patrols
were able to go into the woods in front of our position the reason for
this was obvious, for the slaughter was found to have been terrific.
We knew later that the last counter-attack was made by the newly
arrived Tenth SS Panzer Division, whose orders had been to take
our ndge and that of the Fife and Forfar whatever the cost. But the
cost had been too high and that badly mauled formation never fought
again until much later when, with its equally battered brother the
Ninth SS, it was launched against Arnhem.
'C Squadron and the 'B' Squadron troop were relieved at midday,
having fought a magnificent battle. Particular praise is due to Maior
Hagger, whose first big engagement as a Squadron Leader it was, and
whose determination and coolness had been a great factor in the
holding of Bas Perrier on August 6th. His leadership undoubtedly
had a most excellent effect on the hard-pressed Warwicks.
The Regiment re-assembled at La Barbiere and began to reform
for the next battle. All ranks were able to look back on a week of
great achievements. For rather less casualties than at Caen, the Regi-
ment had inflicted heavy damage on the enemy and had advanced a
substantial distance. They had withstood every kind of assault and
had given far more than they got. Moreover, everyone felt that the
enemy could not withstand such treatment for long and that some day
soon we should be advancing into France with the Americans, leavinc.
the battered slopes of Bas Perrier ridge many miles behind.

During the week of August 1st to 7th, the advance to Chenedolle
and the battle on the hill cost the Regiment the following casualties :-
Killed 2 officers
19 other ranks
Wounded 6 officers
47 other ranks