What are you currently reading ?

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Sounds a good read, will keep an eye out

[Chris Pringle]

Pulling out my calculator, the average age comes to 40.36 years old.

Several over 50 Generals; Jenghiz Khan, 51, Simon de Monfort, 53, Timur 62, Marlborough, 54, Dumouriez, 53, Lake, 59, Blucher, 73, Bugeaud, 52, Pelissier, 61, Joseph Johnston, 57, RE Lee, 57, Moltke,66. 

I've read a couple of striking instances recently where the relative ages of the opponents seemed to have a very important impact.

One is from Michael Reynolds's classic "Steel Inferno: I SS Panzer Corps in Normandy"
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Steel-Inferno-Panzer-Corps-Normandy/dp/1885119445
where he makes a point of contrasting Kurt "Panzer" Meyer (33) racing round the front lines on a motorbike vs deskbound British brigadiers in their 50s who never left their command posts. Consequently Meyer manages to just about hold the line against huge odds, while the British miss opportunities.

The other is the young Napoleon (28) vs the geriatric Austrian Beaulieu (70) in Italy in 1796. Hard to find a better illustration of youthful dynamism and energy vs elderly ponderousness. In fact I've just written a draft BBB scenario for the first week of the campaign, culminating in the two battles of Dego, which should highlight this very aspect. It's in the BBB Yahoo group files now.

Chris (deskbound)

Bloody Big BATTLES!
https://uk.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/BBB_wargames/info
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.co.uk/

[FierceKitty]

Pulling out my calculator, the average age comes to 40.36 years old.

Several over 50 Generals; Jenghiz Khan, 51, Simon de Monfort, 53, Timur 62, Marlborough, 54, Dumouriez, 53, Lake, 59, Blucher, 73, Bugeaud, 52, Pelissier, 61, Joseph Johnston, 57, RE Lee, 57, Moltke,66. 

Tokugawa Ieyasu was seriously wounded in action at 73.

[Westmarcher]

I've read a couple of striking instances recently where the relative ages of the opponents seemed to have a very important impact.

One is from Michael Reynolds's classic "Steel Inferno: I SS Panzer Corps in Normandy" where he makes a point of contrasting Kurt "Panzer" Meyer (33) racing round the front lines on a motorbike vs deskbound British brigadiers in their 50s who never left their command posts. Consequently Meyer manages to just about hold the line against huge odds, while the British miss opportunities.

The other is the young Napoleon (28) vs the geriatric Austrian Beaulieu (70) in Italy in 1796. Hard to find a better illustration of youthful dynamism and energy vs elderly ponderousness.

Don't suppose it would be helpful of me to mention George Brinton McLellan (age 36) vs. Robert Edward Lee (age 56), Chris?   

[Chris Pringle]

Don't suppose it would be helpful of me to mention George Brinton McLellan (age 36) vs. Robert Edward Lee (age 56), Chris?   

You must remember young George had a difficult childhood, i.e., being a US military observer at the Crimean War.

Chris

[Dr Dave]

McClelllan - there's a good one  . Seeing the Brits in the Crimea would certainly give him a lot to try and emulate. Poor little Napoleon, being named after a prolific loser who always abandoned his army when it got into tricky spots is a difficult one to live down to, but George managed it.

Wasn't Kurt Meyer quite tall as well? Was it his youth, height or all that positive combat experience gained over the previous 5 years?

I think Brueys was younger than Nelson at the battle of the Nile.

I think age might be a bit of a poor comparison start point. Someone did a study of senior US army officers (general rank and above) years back by looking at their West Point photos. And guess what the single most prominent feature was to reach high rank... a strong angular jaw line!

[mollinary]

Steinmetz against Ramming and Archduke Charles.  Moltke against Benedek. 

[fsn]

Wolfe (32) vs Montcalm (47)?

[Chris Pringle]

Wasn't Kurt Meyer quite tall as well? Was it his youth, height or all that positive combat experience gained over the previous 5 years?

I think age might be a bit of a poor comparison start point. Someone did a study of senior US army officers (general rank and above) years back by looking at their West Point photos. And guess what the single most prominent feature was to reach high rank... a strong angular jaw line!

Dr Dave, good points. Perhaps age is irrelevant except, in the two cases I cited, simply as a symptom of large armies and large casualties allowing meritocracy to operate and talented commanders to emerge at a relatively young age.

Chris

[kipt]

Finished "Weapons of Choice" by John Birminghham.  This is a military Sci-Fi read.  A UN battlegroup in 2021 gets sent back to 1942 due to an experiment by a civilian ship traveling with them.  Most of the group ends up in the middle of the US fleet heading for the battle of Midway with some unfortunate consequences (blue on blue fire, meshed together).  Two of the carriers are sunk as well as several DD's and CA's on the '42 fleet and similar to the 2021 group.

Japanese also have an encounter and do not go to Midway.  And things happen from there.  More books in the series.

All in all a fun read.

[cameronian]

Found a copy of Mark Adkins book "Goose Green - A battle is fought to be won" in my bookshelf that I must have hidden away years ago in a back row. The first major land battle of the war from both Argentine and British point of view.

Best single book on a modern battle I've read for a long time and by far the best Falklands War book I've seen.

A powerful and emotive read, especially the fight on Darwin Ridge and the command decisions made by 2 Para's Lt Colonel "H" Jones (and Major Kebble after the CO's death) and Lt Col Paiggi, the Argentine commander.



 

Hugh Bisheno's 'Razors edge' is also excellent on the Falklands, cracking photo of maggie on the cover.

[KTravlos]

I have not posted on this thread in quite some time. Between work, play-testing the Bloody Big Balkan Battles scenarios, my reading has slowed to a crawl. I finished a couple of books for my Salvation and Catastrophe project on the Asia Minor War 1919-1922. I remember posting about one, the collection of articles by Venizelos and Metaxas written in the 1934-5 period. I also read Svolopoulos pamphlet "The Decision for the Expansion of Greek Dominion in Asia Minor", a very pro-Venizelist piece of work that uses the term scientific without in my opinion understand it. I also finished the English edition of the Greek General Staff's "Abridged History of the Asia Minor Campaign". Very detailed, but with lots of typos. This all in October.

Since then I have been wrestling with Howard's "The Franco-Prussian War", which I am using for the theme at the 19th Century Warfare and War-game Facebook group. And I am reading Eric Larson's "Devil in the White City" which is phenomenal, but has also disturbed me a lot.

KT

[kipt]

Finished "The First of the League Wars: Its Lessons and Omens" by JFC Fuller, 1936.  The League he is referring to is the League of Nations, which he thought was a very bad idea; winners (of WWI) imposing their will on the losers, particularly Germany), and would start another conflict.

The first part is a good history of the Italo-Abyssinian War, with maps.  Hadn't read about that before.

For the larger part of the book he expounds on the League.  This is what he has to say about disarmament.
"Is this the folly of fools or the wisdom of knaves?  Both, because at Geneva the crooks manipulated the cranks and the cranks manipulated the people. The Conference was an immense hypocritical swindle, in which each nation maneuvered for the strongest position in the next was, and meanwhile attempted to appear innocent and peace-loving."

It goes on from there.

Another theme however is Communism versus Fascism.  He says" Whilst the process of Communism is destructive, that of Fascism is transformative:..."  There are parts of Communism he applauds but really he is a Fascist, being defined by his writing.

The first part was interesting, the second part propaganda from my point of view.

[kipt]

Finished "Warfare in Woods and Forests" by Anthony Clayton.

Disappointing in that there is little theory of what units need to do.  One small section on military writings about what to do, but a lot of fluff.  "Men who were frightened or cold, even if well trained, might fumble among the trees, especially in a forest gloom. In addition, all muskets were noisy and smoky, and, if old or badly maintained, could be dangerous to the musketeer."  Nothing but filler here.

[Leman]

A pity, as one wonders how non-specific waffle gets past the publisher.

[kipt]

Finished "The French Foreign Legion: A Complete History of the Legendary Fighting Force" by Douglas Porch.

This is a very good book, but long (634 pages and then footnotes to 694).

As the title says this is a complete history, up to the publication date of 1991.  It discusses history and myths of the Legion along with the actions the Legion fought.  It has a history of the notable commanders and vignettes of minor officers, NCO's (the backbone of the Legion, as in most units) and the enlisted.   It talks about the recruiting process at various periods in time and the recurring theme of desertion.  Severe discipline, but perhaps not quite as the cinema or history portrays it.  But then the Legion enlisted many who needed the discipline and/or a fresh start.

One could enlist under an assumed name, but that caused problems when the 5 year enlistment was up.  A promise of French citizenship after the 5 years fell afoul of the bureaucracy when actual names and history was required.

Seems like the Legion rarely sent complete units, but made up "march battalions" or bigger units from several of their regiments.

Liked it a lot.

[Terry37]

I'm about half way through the 7th and final book in The New World series by Michael Hopf - "Those Who Remain". Once finished I plan to start the first book in a new series by him titled "Driver 8",and can't wait.

Terry

[Steve J]

Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars by Duncan Head. A great little book for a complete novice of the period. Using it to get ideas for my ImaginAncients armies for use with 'To the Strongest' rules.

[Leman]

An amazing book which I still routinely use when putting together Hellenistic armies  (currently TtS Polybian Romans). It is the only WRG hardback I've ever come across and I've had my copy for nearly 40 years.

[Steve J]

The Chariot Wars book by Nigel Stillman is excellent too.