vtsaogames | 07 Dec 2016 8:27 p.m. PST |
If you had to make a choice between Dowling's "Brusilov Offensive" or Buttar's "Russia's Last Gasp", which would you suggest? |
mghFond | 07 Dec 2016 11:22 p.m. PST |
I'd be interested in both. Haven't read either though so sorry, can't help you. I am awaiting a book order from Amazon the German 1916 campaign against Rumania and a military history of the 1912-13 Balkan Wars. Sorry don't have the exact titles with me at the moment. |
bobspruster | 08 Dec 2016 3:17 a.m. PST |
Butter's "Clash of empires" was a good read, but I can't give an opinion on Dowling. |
NKL AeroTom | 08 Dec 2016 7:33 a.m. PST |
Have you read Norman Stone's "The eastern Front 1914 – 1917" ? |
vtsaogames | 08 Dec 2016 8:06 a.m. PST |
No, but read first two Eastern Front books by Buttar (Collision of Empires and Germany Ascendant). Also read a book about the Brusilov Offensive back in the 70's and cannot find anything about that book again. |
Ed von HesseFedora | 08 Dec 2016 8:26 a.m. PST |
What kind of information are you after? I've read all of Buttar's WW1 Eastern Front books. They give a great operational/strategic story with the occasional tactical detail with the view from both sides. I've not read Dowling, though, so cannot compare. |
mghFond | 08 Dec 2016 12:26 p.m. PST |
Yes, Buttar's Collision of Empires was good. And agree also on Norman Stone's classic, read that ages ago and enjoyed it. Tannenberg: Clash of Empires by Dennis Showalter is excellent also, really goes into hour by hour detail of those first battles from both sides point of views. |
John Leahy | 08 Dec 2016 12:50 p.m. PST |
Was the Brusilov 70's book by Ballantine? Calsh of Empires is an awesome book! Collision of Empires was solid.I read Stone too. Wasn't as in depth but that was expected based on what he was covering. Thanks, John |
vtsaogames | 08 Dec 2016 5:29 p.m. PST |
Was the Brusilov 70's book by Ballantine? All I recall was it was hardcover. I used to work in the NYU Library and new history books went past my desk first. |
vtsaogames | 08 Dec 2016 7:28 p.m. PST |
What kind of information are you after? I'm interested in what Brusilov's technique was, how much was derived from other generals and how much was used in the German storm-trooper offensives later. |
Blutarski | 08 Dec 2016 9:04 p.m. PST |
"I'm interested in what Brusilov's technique was, how much was derived from other generals and how much was used in the German storm-trooper offensives later." Go to the CARL (Combined Arms Research Library) website, access the digital library and search under "Brusilov". IIRC, I think it is the first entry – "The Brusilov Offensive". Based upon the stilted language, I suspect it was either written by a non-native English speaker or translated from another language. Either way, the author offers some interesting insights related to your point of interest. B |
vtsaogames | 09 Dec 2016 8:09 a.m. PST |
Thank you Blutarski. I will check that out. And likely get Buttar's new book too. I still have to finish my book on King Phillip's War and the diary of a Union soldier that I found in a flea market. Plus the free Kindle books Andrew Preziosky turned me onto the other day. Am I all over the place? Yeah. |
monk2002uk | 09 Dec 2016 8:29 a.m. PST |
Be cautious about interpreting any links between Russian and German stormtrooper tactics. All sides worked hard throughout the war on refining infantry attack tactics. For the German army, there were multiple initiatives from the outset that evolved gradually into what has come to be known as 'infiltration' tactics. This term is a misnomer and there was no one point in the history of the German army when stormtrooper tactics appeared, despite what some of those involved wrote. Robert |
vtsaogames | 09 Dec 2016 1:24 p.m. PST |
I hear you. I read the PDF listed above link It is indeed written by someone who didn't speak English as their first language. It had some interesting data. The book I read back in the day said that Brusilov noticed that concentrated attacks gave the target away by the pre-attack buildup and by the long bombardment. So he attacked along a wider front with a shorter bombardment. He also noticed that cavalry divisions were a tip off to coming attacks, that they had half the combat personnel of infantry divisions but used twice the tonnage of supplies (forage). So he sent the cavalry elsewhere, which further confused the enemy about where he would attack. Finally, he had his infantry sap forward, in some places to within 50 yards of the Austrian lines. His initial attack caused way more trouble for the enemy than the continued attacks that HQ insisted upon. That's what I remember from the book read back in the 70's. I'm hoping that newer books will have more of that kind of detail. |
NKL AeroTom | 10 Dec 2016 6:22 a.m. PST |
From what I read Brusilov simply bought the Russians up to speed with what was the norm elsewhere: actually using recon, not letting the artillery withdraw until the infantry had finished fighting (if at all), having plenty of reinforcements ready to go, and other basics that were sorely lacking in Russian doctrine before he showed up. Brusilov didn't influence Strosstruppen tactics at all from what I can tell. The first stormtroopers were assault pioneers formed in 1915, and coming to fruition under Willy Rohr. The first true stormtrooper attack was in October 1915 in the Vosges. Almost a year before Brusilov's offensives |
rsutton | 10 Dec 2016 2:39 p.m. PST |
I'm a little late to the conversation but have to speak highly of Buttar's books. I currently have 'Russia's last gasp' on my 'to be read' pile. That's NOT a comment on Dowling's work BTW … just haven't read it. I've also just received my copy of 'Fall of the double eagle' by JR Schindler. So far very good (only read first chapter), although bizarrely a book on a defining campaign with not a single illustration of map in it. Kind regards Robin |