What are you currently reading ?

[kipt]

Finished "Road To Disaster: A New History Of America's Descent Into Vietnam" by Brian VanDeMark.  Not a book I would normally read, but it was a present.  Starts with a background of Vietnam and the French, along with America's support of the French.

The Domino theory was prevalent during the Eisenhower years and continued into Kennedy and Johnson.  McNamara is a central character, at first pushing for something that would bring the North Vietnamese to a table, but later regretting how everything escalated.

The military doesn't come off in a good light here; asking for more troops, the end is near, they can't take it much longer.  The NVA and the northern Vietnamese were in it for the long haul, especially when US support at home was eroded.

The book is well written, but I thought too long.  The author, a historian, uses a lot of references to psychologists and social studies professors to relate how people are unwilling to change their mind, and won't give up because of already sunken costs.  (I thought too much of these references). President Johnson agonized over this and it took a long time for him to accept reality.  A large part of his intransigence was not wanting to be the president for the first loosing war for the US.  He was very much a political animal and deferred to the military for a long period of time.

It was however a well written book, too long for me and while I am glad I read it, I'm glad it is finished.

[Ithoriel]

Fitting in nicely with my current fascination with Gangs of Rome 2, I've just finished Lindsey Davis' "Death on the Tiber" and "Invitation To Die."

Both in her Flavia Albia series, set in the reign of Domitian. The first, a novel, deals with power struggles among the criminal families of the time. The latter, a novella, deals with Domitian's Black Banquet.

"One of the most macabre banquet stories, perfect for a Halloween party, is of the black banquet thrown by the Emperor Domitian, known for his cruelty but also for rebuilding Rome. He swathed his hall in black, had all the food dyed black, and placed each quaking guest beside a gravestone with his name on it. The guests thought they would never make it out alive, especially since Domitian talked about slaughter all through the meal, but it turned out to be a diabolical prank, and after reducing his guests to a gibbering mess, the emperor sent them home and showered them with gifts." - Nina Martyris

Both well up to Lindsey Davis' usual standard.

[kipt]

Finished "Wilson's Creek: The Second Battle of the Civil War and the Men Who Fought It" by William Garrett Piston and Richard W. Hatcher III.  A confusing battle.

General Nathanial Lyon, evidently a zealous type who decided quickly and wanted to punish the rebel traitors, moved on the Southern forces (some State Guards and others actually Confederate troops) south of Springfield Missouri.  Franz Sigel convinced Lyon to split his forces and have Lyon attack from the north while Sigel attacked from the south.

Southern forces were commanded by Ben McCulloch and Sterling Price.  They had been intending to march on the Union troops that morning but were surprised by the Union attack.  Unlike many attempted envelopments, the Union attack worked.  At first the Southerners were very disorganized but eventually came together and routed Sigel.

The northern attack at first pushed the rebels back but finally were attacked themselves as McCulloch and Price moved troops to face them on "Bloody Hill".  Lyon was killed, the first Union General to die in the Civil War.  The Union regrouped north and the rebels were too beat up, short of ammunition and supplies, so did not follow.

The book goes into the origin of many of the companies on both sides and where known talks about the uniforms.  Many blue and grey on both sides.  Also, The Missouri State troops were not at this time part of the Confederacy, but were defending their state.  Because of this, some carried the Union Flag, which caused some confusion on the battlefield.

Good book.

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

This article.
My stepdad being awesome
He was a noted sci-fi illustrator in the 70s & 80s.

And my mum gets a mention too!

https://wearethemutants.com/2024/05/06/alien-renaissance-an-interview-with-illustrator-bob-fowke/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1pLIRjPp12vhHtgBtutgljWMk6iGmlPBSk4I3daHntFgkEl60CUHLpYGY_aem_ATHnp5PXtW4QsRjc5Q8IqPBM6fdTJHDwrbKwp__iIKuU9FL_8v2xnilL5QVVOGqT3O963rmAKodQxlx_20heq2ec

[fsn]

Very cool!

[paulr]

Very cool indeed 

[kipt]

Finished "A Series Of Military Experiments Of Attack And Defense: Made in Hyde Park, in 1802, under the Sanction of HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF with Infantry, Cavalry, and Artillery AND In the Island of Jersey, in 1805" by Lieut. John Russell, 96th Regt.

Experiments on how long it would take cavalry and infantry to attack artillery or infantry, over a certain distance, and how many shots the artillery could do.  This is where it gets interesting...

Cavalry attacking artillery from 600 yards advances at a walk, trot, gallop and covers the distance in 102 seconds.  according to the trials, the gun fired 13 times!

Infantry attacking artillery from 250 yards covers the distance in 115 seconds with the gun firing again 13 times!

Later in the notes there is a quote from Captain Tielk, in his Field Engineer, that says a field piece may be fired six times per minute and that it could be fired quicker than that but accuracy would suffer.  This seems very fast and because only one gun and crew was used it appears to me that the ammunition was adjacent to the gun and it was not relaid.

According to Hughes in "Firepower..." a light gun could fire at 8 rounds per minute but was limited to 2 rpm except for canister at 3 rpm.  This during Napoleonic times, so Hughes seems to agree on rate of fire.

According to Coggins in "Arms and Equipment in the Civil War", cavalry from 650 yards would receive 2 solid shot in 48 seconds and 2 canister at 34 seconds (or a total of 82 seconds). Infantry from 350 yards would receive 11 canister in 3 minutes and 36 seconds (or 216 seconds).  This later in the era with better guns and powder and it seems Coggins is going with the official rpm.

So, with Lieutenant Russell figures, it appears that the effects of artillery based on his experiments would be degraded by more accurate aiming and relaying, smoke and location of the caisson.  He used his information to instruct infantry, cavalry and artillery commanders on how much fire they could expect during and attack and decide accordingly.

[fsn]

That looks like an excellent book!

I have ordered it! Hughes has been my go-to for many years. In fact, I based my dissertation on it - "A Statistically Accurate Set of Wargames Rules for the Napoleonic Period".   

Regrettably, Coggins covers the wrong civil war for me.

Thank you.

[kipt]

Finished "Stay and Fight It Out: The Second Day at Gettysburg, July 2, 1863 - Culp's Hill and the North End of the Battlefield" by Kristopher D. White and Chris Mackowski.  this is part of the Emerging Civil War series by Savas Beatie.

Maps, pictures, OB, vignettes on the commanders; overall , well done.  The fight at Culp's Hill was very intense, as was the evening attack on East Cemetery Hill.  The book covers it extremely well.

[kipt]

Finished an Osprey "Essex-Class Aircraft Carriers 1945-61" by Mark Stille.  Typical Osprey, with pictures, statistics, and narrative.  A bit beyond WWII so of minor interest to me.

[kipt]

Finished a great booklet "Studies From The Franco-Prussian War: 1. The Mitrailleuse" by Steve Shann.  If you are interested in the FPW I strongly suggest you get this booklet.

It discusses the weapons development, trial tests, its tactical use, combat reports by battery commanders and its subsequent testing and retirement after the war.  very effective in the right conditions, even able to force Prussian batteries to retreat, but often targeted by multiple batteries when starting to fire.  This in itself shows that the Prussians thought it was a dangerous opponent.

Highly recommended!

[flamingpig0]

Finished a great booklet "Studies From The Franco-Prussian War: 1. The Mitrailleuse" by Steve Shann.  If you are interested in the FPW I strongly suggest you get this booklet.

I think Shann wrote a set of Franco-Prussian wargame rules

[kipt]

And 2 books on the French Army; Empire and Republic.  Have the first but can't find the second.

[kustenjaeger]

Just started 'Destruction of the Imperial Army' vol 1 covering 1870.

Edward

[kipt]

Finished "Lossberg's War: The World War I Memoirs pf a German Chief of Staff" by Fritz von Lossberg.  Edited and translated by MG David Zabecki and LTC Dieter Biedekarken.

Lossberg fought all through WWI, mainly in the West, but some time in the East.  He was Chief of the General Staff (COGS)for the XIII Corps (as a Lieutenant Colonel), Deputy Chief, Operations Division, OHL (still LTC), Third Army CoGS (Colonel), Second Army CoGS, First Army CoGS, Sixth Army CoGS, Fourth Army CoGS (promoted to Major General - equivalent to a US Brigadier General), Army Group Boehn, CoGS, and Army group Duke Albrecht of Wurttemberg CoGS.  As can be seen he was assigned all over because he had a reputation as a defensive expert.

As Chief of the General staff in his various assignments. he essentially ran the corps and armies, but getting agreement with the General in command.  This is a peculiar trait of the German Army.  The heads of corps and armies were typically high ranking nobles, but not trained in the General staff procedures.  Most often when the high command had meetings and briefings, only the various Chiefs of General staffs were there.

Often von Lossberg would request, and receive, Vollmacht, which let him issue orders under his own authority.  He was highly regarded by the majority of the German high command.

A lot of the book describes the various battles he was involved in and shows how much transfer of divisions from the front lines to the rear and their relief going to the front.  Because of the high attrition rates this happened very frequently.  This activity doesn't show in the high level books on WWI.

[kipt]

Finished "The Journal of Military History" Vol 87, No. 4
Articles include:
American Prisoners of War in the Captive Atlantic, 1812-1815,
"An Uninteresting Mass of Correspondence": Censorship and the Mundane in the British Epistolary History of the First World War,
American Military Misfits: The U.S. Army's Special Organizations and Enemy Alien Servicemen, 1942-1966,

as well as 106 book reviews.

[kipt]

Finished "The Union Assaults at Vicksburg: Grant Attacks Pemberton, May 17-22, 1864" by Timothy B. Smith.

After Grant's crossing of the Mississippi and beating the Confederates defending the Vicksburg area 5 times, he felt that the rebel defenders would be demoralized and by attacking Vicksburg's defenses right away, the city would fall.  It did not.  Sherman's Corps attacked on the 19th but actually with only one division, Blair's.  A brigade from McClernand's Corps also attacked.

All attacks were handily repulsed due to the extensive works by the Confederate engineer, Captain Samuel Lockett, and the terrible terrain.  Vicksburg is on a bluff and there are many drainage streams and bayous surrounding the city.  This resulted in many ravines adjacent to the high ground where the roads into the city were located.  The ravines were blocked by abbatis and cut trees, and the road were all targeted by the defensive works.

The battle on the 22nd was to be simultaneous by all three Union Corps (Sherman, McPherson and McClernand) starting at 10:00 AM.  Again, all were repulsed.

So this is the story of those attacks and the commanders and regiments involved on both sides.  Good descriptive writing and even though it would be an interesting game, making the terrain at a regimental level would be daunting.  And ultimately frustrating for the attacks.

[steve_holmes_11]

Not reading, but I recently discovered the "We have ways of making you talk" podcast.

Historian James Holland and Comedian / History Grad Al Murray talk in detail about aspects of WW2.

Fascinating stuff, the two obviously enjoy each other's company, and love the subject.
Al Murray is far better informed than necessary for a modest history graduate.
They also take a popular yet "top down" view of the conflict, with proper consideration for production, logistics and operational art.

Worth listening, if only for their 9 parts on D-day

https://www.youtube.com/@wehaveways

[paulr]

Thanks for the recommendation, will have a listen

[Ithoriel]

Listened to their D-Day podcasts (actually 10 part iirc) on Thursday and Friday. I agree with Steve, well worth a listen.