"Does anyone still read books other than Ospreys?" Topic

I have a large collection of Osprey books and am also a member of their website which I find useful. While I appreciate the content of the books and the work put into them by their authors and illustrators I still only see them as a secondary source, with the original source quite often being beyond the financial reach of a lot of wargamers. The authors go to great lengths to list the primary sources in the rear of their books to show where their resource material has come from. This is useful to those of us who wish to read further into the historical period and I've even found myself in National Libraries around the country in search of these rare volumes to find more information on the subjects.

Now I'll come to the point. I recently read an article in Wargames Illustrated which cited mostly Osprey books in it's resource section with no real primary sources listed. The article covered a period which should have been very involved and to list only Osprey books does not do it any justice as there are numerous other works including uniform guides, pamphlets and even a specific society. This also stands for every period.

The question is has the wargaming hobby come to the point where the participants only read Osprey books or do they also read other source material?

This is in no way condemning Osprey or the fantastic service they provide it is a question I raise following the article I read. The name and content of the actual article has been deliberately missed from this post and there is no intention to cast any aspersion on Wargames Illustrated which also provides a service to the wargaming community. It is merely to see if we're still reading and not just looking at illustrations!

Ospreys are fairly brief and perhaps quite to the point and they do have good illustrations.

They are no substitute for reading 'proper' books as you really have to spread your attention over several different authors to understand a particular subject.

I just finished up the Norman Conquest as pointed out by a friendly TMP'r.

TMP link

I don't rely on Osprey books unless I need a quick primer on a subject I'm not familiar with. But my interest in military history pre-dates Osprey, so I'm used to seeking other sources. But the quality of Ospreys have improved over the decades, so I'm no longer as leery of them.

Using them as sources for an article in a gaming magazine doesn't strike me as sacrilege, because I don't see such a publication as "serious" history. I'd be concerned if it happened on a more serious publication.

I use Ospreys as a painting reference mostly, I read multiple books by various authors when trying to understand particular battles or segments of history.

I also read books other than Ospreys (although I do own a fair number of them).

I only use Ospreys as painting references.

I will use Osprey for a "101" intro to a new historic period. If I get seriously interested in a historical era whatsoever, I move into more in depth reading.

I don't read them
Still do hard copy of AWI,F&I,ACW,WWII.Much prefere these to the quick overview but that said they do have some nice pics,maps etc

uses it as a baisc source and then look for other books to clear up any parts Osprey didn't cover.

"Books other than Ospreys?" I'm sorry? Ospreays are, for the most part, "booklets" or possibly "pamphlets"--not that I don't have a fair number.

Yes, some of up still read books now and then. But please note that by no means all books are primary sources--and by no means all primary sources are books.

Other side of the question. What percent of your Osprey book have ypu read cover to cover?

In my case under 10% at best and more likely less.

Painting reference and browsing books at best.

I've been known to take one on vacation for something light to read and be done with before I get home.

As above, I consider an Osprey to be a booklet and painting guide.

I gave up reading Ospreys a long time ago. Too light weight, questionable research and interpretation.

I have bought a couple over the last decade or so, and not really seen any improvement.

Pretty pictures, but I can get most of them from other places, and there is always better quality information available.

There was an Osprey on the Ottoman Empire that covered 900 years on 8 plates. Do the math.

Later specialized ones are fine. I just FINALLY got the AWI Loyalist one. Good stuff.

I remember when Ancients manufacturers would use the WRG books exclusively. Those who strayed often suffered. We've gotten past that I hope.

There is no such thing as too many references.

Sure, I read books all the time. Right now it's Bing West's "The Strongest Tribe."

I like Ospreys too.

Ospreys are a good starting point if you are getting into a new period or subject especially with modeling and painting were a good picture is worth a 1000 words. If the Osprey wets your appetite you can always look for more in depth reading material.

Every Osprey is a potential surprise. Some are pretty solid and cover an amazing amount of ground, others don't even come up to the knees of a lazy "Reader's Digest" version and a few are completely wrong and should be scrapped and replaced by a better version.

My ratio of other books vs Osprey gives the others a massive advantage over Osprey.

Always read books, and not on kindle either, just plain paper books. Own plenty of Ospreys, read them & use as reference material at times.

Referring to the original post. Does the writer really believe that most gamers only read osprey books? Sounds like (maybe unintentionally) a great" jump off" point for all those gamers who want to show how "clever" they are in reading the original scripts and eye witness accounts. Not a single respondent will say "I have only ever read Osprey books for my military knowledge".
So the answer is "no one, has only ever read Osprey books"

How about "Do you find Ospreys to be a really good primer for a project ,or would you not consider them as a useful source?"

Recently with osprey rule sets I have seen a few newer players that "get all the history" they need using osprey as their sole source. Occasionally run into DBA players who express the same game argument

I use Osprey books for painting references or to see if a new period might interest me. They are usually concise overviews and if I find the period interests me enough, I'll move on to better resources.

Depends on the volume. Some Ospreys are superb, some are dire, most are at least a competent introduction. They are almost always useful.

Henry

Find that hard to believe of the DBA players I know, most of whom have done plenty of research, and used Fanaticus and other sources to try and get accurate armies.

I find Ospreys to be of very mixed quality. Some try to cover too much in a single volume, others rely too heavily on sometimes discredited sources, and others are by authors with pet theories.

The real challenge is that historians don't have to have a definitive view of dress, equipment or tactics, but wargames must make some sort of decision. Even the best documented armies still have issues of contention, such as leather cuirasses for Late Roman legions. Start investigating the equipment of another culture based on a couple of possible burials, and a mural, plus Roman accounts, and many Ospreys of neccesity, contain a lot of 'best guess' and speculation.

Maybe a more pertinent question is why did the WI article only reference Ospreys?

My guess would be something to do with the fact that they are both commercial organisations…

Cerdic,I think you may have hit the nail on the head there as the same article only mentioned 2 manufacturers of figures for the period the article was written for. I am aware of at least another 5 who weren't mentioned and have specific figures for the period, none of which advertise in the magazine. I'm sure that is a concern for those businesses who choose not to advertise but is it a fair representation of the figures available to fight the period? Is this bias towards "favourites" of the magazine? Is it possible to have an article in any magazine that shows plenty of references and is unbiased?

What does everyone think? I'm sure the answer to the last question is yes, it is possible and I have read many articles in the past which do this.

I use Ospreys mainly for initial painting guides, I find some very good others not so good. I have over 400, and they are always new one's under the Christmas tree every year! I prefer Histoire Collection, and the sort of books published by the Pike & Shotte society. Caliver books publish some great stuff on uniforms as well. I would say that Osprey books only make up about 20% of my collection, so I use mainly "other books" for my research.

CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT

If you were doing a doctoral dissertation or writing a serious work on a historical item ANYTHING out of Osprey would deservedly doom it to oblivion.

But as I said-- context. Within the context of war games they are "good enough." They give you the overview, the big picture well enough. Most people buy them for the painting guides, which themselves are "good enough." Minor details in painting are not going to affect in any way whatsoever the play of the game, and minor errors in historical fact will not affect it either as you are going to be using some rule set most likely unconnected with Osprey's academic excellence or the lack thereof.

Lives do not depend on war games, the existence of nations do not hang in the balance. It's merely a game, a silly, stupid game, and there is absolutely no real connection between what we put on the table top and real life.

They are pamphlets in every sense of the word. If you want to get a reasonable understanding of the general topic of the period for the smallest outlay of cash you can-- buy an Osprey book. If you want an in-detail deep and highly accurate disquisition of the period. Prepare to spend several hundred bucks on real books.

Ospreys are good enough for war games though.

I used to have a lot of them, over 200. Gave em all away. I have the books to use instead, and I now work only in Imagi-Nations so I didn't need the painting guides either.

nowday i'm not able to find an Osprey booklet which could tell something new to me..including colour plates..the new "versus" series is even childish for my standards

Dear Italwars

Unfortunately I must agree.

Scrolling down I was going to conribute to this topic, until I got to Otto's post. He pretty much nails it. This is Wargames Illustrated you're talking about, not a peer reviewed journal.

I have never used Osprey for painting guides, got all of that from Funken Volume one and two. I do not consider myself an expert in any respect, but I have read a lot of Napoleonic books over the years. I read Napier and Oman twice, and understood both much better the second time around.

I have no experience of current Osprey titles, but I did find their Campaign Sereies very useful when I explored Napoleonic battlefields in central europe about 20 years ago. I found the text a little heavy, but the maps and diagrams were useful. And the illustrations were particularly useful "on the ground".

I took the appropriate Osprey with me to each battlefield, together with photocopies of a more serious work such as Napier, Oman, Petre etc. By far the two best books for walking around Waterloo and the Peninsular battlefields were Jac Weller's "Wellington at Waterloo" and "Wellington in the Peninsula".

Despite the above, I often find myself leafing through one of the Napoleonic titles when I find myself in a bookshop.

I still have them on my shelf, but have not opened one for more than ten years.

When I was teaching history to 13+ and PSS level in English preparatory schools I found the better Ospreys – especially the Campaign series – perfectly satisfactory resources.

Indeed, they offered far more information and detail on battles and campaigns for the Wars and Revolutions theme on the CE papers than any school textbooks, with which my pupils could easily impress their examiners!

And, if one simply wants background material for a toy soldier wargame, Otto is absolutely right.