Symmetry on the western front in WWII

The bazooka vs panzer book whetted my appetite for some more WWII western front stuff (I still have that 20mm US army miniatures hanging around), so I picked up this new Osprey pitting German and US armoured infantry against each other.

There didn’t seem to be much difference between the Panzergrenadier and armoured infantryman when it comes to equipment and armoured fighting vehicle. There were some differences in replacement policy but those went for the armies as a whole and didn’t affect tactical and operational employment. Zaloga refers to a German preference for attacking mounted in their AFVs, but that is not what happens in the examples, so we don’t have any idea how that plays out.

Armoured divisions on both sides suffered when defending because they had a smaller infantry complement than an infantry division. And while the Americans had the luxury of being on the strategic offensive and thus only having to defend occasionally, the German army by the end of the war had to plug gaps with whatever came to hand, thus putting the armoured divisions at a disadvantage.

Apart from an offensive or defensive stance the determining factor in the outcome of this match up was that the Americans had much more stuff and were better at coordinating them. So while the Germans even struggled to get artillery support for their attacks, the Americans could pour artillery on enemy attacks, supplemented with air attacks when the weather was good.

My main problem with the book is that the combat narratives, and especially the last one, are not that clear and are badly supported by the maps. Especially in the last case it is hard to figure where the combat is taking place to St Vith and other places which are constantly referred to in the text. To sum up: I lost interest at some point.

Looking back it wasn’t written in the stars that the last four books I read would all be from the Combat and similar Duel series, but that’s how it played out. I’ve warmed to these series but my impression has been confirmed that the best of these are the ones that pit different styles of warfare against each other. With the armoured infantrymen and the World War I askaris, there is a less interesting dynamic than between Apache vs US cavalry and bazooka vs tank.

Asymmetry on the western front in WWII

After a couple of colonial contests, I was happy to shift to World War Two. I had been intreagued by the match up between the bazooka and German close defense systems for tanks.

Steven Zaloga is an authority on tank warfare, and his knowledge on this subject does not disappoint. The dynamic interaction between antitank tactics and close defense is explained well, debunking some myths on German mesh side armour. And there were some weirdly interesting solutions suggested, like the Vorsatz P.

It was all rather marginal though, as infantry weapons were responsible for only a small amount of tank losses, with tanks, aircraft and artillery doing the most damage. The main impact may have rather been to give infantry the idea that they wouldn’t have to face tanks empty handed. Also the bazooka was used far more often to take out enemy strong points than to fight tanks.

Zaloga then delves into one example where tanks and infantry were pretty evenly matched, during the Ardennes offensive in December 1944. As this fight took place in favourable circumstances for the infantry, with limited vision due to fog and houses, the infantry was able to get close to the tanks and on their weak side and rear armour.

Sadly, lacking in the account is the perspective of the German tankers and their attempts at close defense here. All in all the technical/tactical account of the start didn’t mesh too well with the combat narrative.

And yet another forgotten colonial war

Even when I was young, we didn’t play Cowboys & Indians any more and Westerns have declined as a movie theme. But despite the relative neglect, the Indian wars remain a fascinating colonial conflict.

By the time the U.S. army took on the Apache tribes in the middle of the 19^th century, the issue was no longer in doubt. The demographic and industrial weight of the US totally overshadowed that of the hunting and farming Apache who number in the tens of thousands.

This was a war of relatively small battles, neither side bringing more than several hundred combatants to the fight. However, each Apache killed had long term consequences for the survival of his tribe, while there was a steady flow of new recruits for the cavalry.  At the same time, expanding settlement reduced the hunting grounds on which the Apache depended, thus forcing them into raiding.

Nevertheless, the struggle was a long and bitter one, which could only be brought to an end by employing Apache versus Apache. This although the cavalry itself made significant strides in its counter guerilla capabilities. Equipment and tactics were adapted to the climate and Apache warrior society.

Likewise the Apache adapted to the western world, improving their weaponry, and finding ways to sabotage telegraph communications. They also used their superior knowledge of the terrain to move and live undetected.

The only way to really get at them was to use scouts from rival tribes. There was little sense of common cause between these tribes and for many warriors the opportunity to stick to their warrior lifestyle, plus a gun and free meals, was too good to be missed.

McLachlan does an excellent job using first hand accounts from both sides to illustrate the challenges that both sides faced and how the social-political dynamics of the Apache and white settler society made conflict inevitable. The narrative flows well, the analysis is crisp and the illustrations fit the narrative. Probably the best Osprey book that I’ve read on ‘non-western‘ armies.

Another forgotten colonial war

Got a bit frustrated with my lack of reading lately and so decided to take on some lighter stuff, and Ospreys have proven excellent in that regard. Easy to pick up and lay down on the commute.

First off was King’s African Rifles vs Schutztruppe, continuing the theme of forgotten colonial wars. Not a middle of the military history road subject. First of all it deals with an African side show in World War I, when troops from British colonies tried to conquer the German colonies. And secondly, it prominently features the African soldiers fighting the war.

And compared to most Osprey books, there is more information on the non-western protagonists. It is made clear that in the British units, with fewer white NCOs, more responsibility devolved on the black NCOs especially when the (always white) officers became casualties.

And the author very cautiously treads the subject whether having more European NCOs was better for battlefield performance. There are even a few passages from the memoires of black participants.

On the other hand, in the operational narrative, the perspective of the black soldiers fades into the background. The prime actors there are the natural environment dictating the tactical and strategic decisions made by white officers. And you can still wonder how the askaris felt about fighting a colonial war.

On all the other elements the book score above average. It does a good job of explaining the challenges of bush warfare in southeastern Africa and the differences in British and German policies towards war in Africa. Also, the operational narrative is clear and highlights the most important factors which are brought together in the final analysis. Special kudos for the illustrations, which are very well integrated into the narrative, reinforcing it with examples.

The Beginning of the End in the Pacific

Another recent acquisition that I want to take a closer look at. The Osprey Duel book on Kamikaze vs US Navy Ships is very interesting as it comes much closer to the essence of that series by opposing two entirely different weapon systems. The differences in performance between two tanks is mostly overcast by their tactical employment (is your army on the strategical offensive/defensive?), but in this case the kamikazes were a fundamental departure in Japanese air operations, and it took the Americans considerable time to adapt.

Author Mark Stille provides a lot of relevant detail and analysis on kamikaze tactics, anti aircraft defense and damage control. The book also contains extensive descriptions of actual kamikaze attacks, which gets a bit repetitive. And the technical detail comes at the expense of the psychological aspects of the kamikaze. But all in all one of the better Ospreys in this series that I've encountered.

As a relative noob to the Pacific Theatre I hadn't realised how badly the Japanese navy and air force had been beaten in the Marianas and early stages of the Philippines campaign. This meant that I had missed the level of desperation the Japanese leadership had already been reduced to by that time. It also means they were cynical and criminal in pursuing the war for another year when it was obvious they could not win it.

So when I saw that John Prados had been interviewed on exactly this subject by New Books in Military History about his Storm Over Leyte: The Philippine Invasion and the Destruction of the Japanese Navy, I listened to the podcast. 

Prados has many interesting things to say about the fundamental shift in Japanese naval strategy at this stage, which effectively gave up their old doctrine for big surface fleet action for targetting an invasion force. The book goes deep into the intelligence side of the preparations for the campaign (which is where Prados has professional expertise) and how it affected strategy. A good interview that left me much more knowledgeable. 

Check out the other books in the NBiMH series as well!

Review: German Infantryman vs Soviet Rifleman – Barbarossa 1941

German Infantryman vs Soviet Rifleman – Barbarossa 1941 by David Campbell

My rating: 4 of 5 stars



Describes the fighting of German an Soviet troops in the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa, so a combination of first line Soviet troops and the new armies that were hastily thrown into battle in July.

There's a lot of Glantz but not much in terms of accounts by Soviet participants, which would have been a great boon in understanding what it was like for Russian soldiers.

The choice to show three encounters from this early phase of Barbarossa can be defended although I think a comparison of fighting in June/July, August/September and October-December would have better shown the development of fighting capabilities of the Wehrmacht and Red Army over time.

I guess the Combat series is picking up for me, but it has not reached its potential.




View all my reviews

Tell Me: Should I Review For Osprey?

A few weeks ago, Osprey advertised they are seeking bloggers and reviewers that wish to receive Osprey books to review.

I guess I would be qualified (by their not too demanding standards) because I already read lots of Ospreys and have published over a dozen reviews on this blog and commented on a bunch more on Goodreads.  What makes it an extremely tempting offer is that the coming months will see quite a few interesting volumes, from Malplaquet to Quatre Bras and Waterloo (not a very great distance in Euclidian space).

There might be a point of being forced to read books that I wouldn't read otherwise, but I think I could get over that.

The biggest issue is of course whether I can maintain my independent opinion in the face of receiving free books. I would be open about which books I have received for free, of course. But warning your audience is not always enough.

I have been quite critical of some Osprey publications, especially its anglocentrism and I think I would continue to be, but it might dull my edge. In fact, my critical approach might also be a reason for Osprey not to send me any books, but that would be a telling decision on what it seeks to achieve. For that reason, it would be interesting just to try.

But I'd like to know what you think. How do you approach reviews where you know the author has received a free copy? Would it also affect what you think of reviews that were written about books I paid for? And do you think I should let myself in with this at all?

Napoleon's Imperial Headquarters

These two Osprey books form a miniseries, with the first describing the growth and zenith of Napoleon’s headquarters while the second focuses on the 1815 campaign. I bought them to get a better idea of the organisation the imperial household so I could get an idea who was who among the memoirists like Flahaut, de Montesquiou, Mameluke Ali and Fain. 

The books in question plus extra

Apart from that, it was useful to learn the distinctions between the emperor’s Aides de Camp (general officers to be used for independent assignments), his officiers d’ordonnance (junior officers used for inspections and reconnaissance) and the personal Aides de Camp of the Major-Général, Berthiér. Especially as the latter included quite a few critical of the emperor.

For my interests the first part paid too much attention to the civil household, equipment (from coaches to cutlery) and details of camp layout. I would have preferred to learn more of the actual operation of army headquarters. The more limited focus of the second booklet makes it better than its sister. It contains useful information on the composition of the staff, on travel speed and arrangements and a bit more on the actual activity in the army staff. The details on what Napoleon ate and where he slept are more useful to me here as well.

What struck me is that the books are heavily Napoleonophile: the marshals are described as unthankfull and treacherous, and all the mistakes are somebody else's fault. I was actually amazed to find that Pawly had any good words for Soult as Major-Générale. But maybe that’s just playing to the expected audience.

The obvious point to continue the quest are the first few chapters of Elting's Swords Around A Throne.

Review: Emigre and Foreign Troops in British Service (2) 1803-15

Emigre and Foreign Troops in British Service (2) 1803-15 by René Chartrand

My rating: 2 of 5 stars



Second part of Chartrand’s overview of foreign units in British service. As in the revolutionary wars, the British used many foreign units to increase their army. The foreign element in the regular army increased from 17,000 (or about 11%) in early 1804 tot 54,000 (over a fifth) in late 1813.

There was a change in recruiting grounds, however. With access to the continent limited by extended French control and many French émigrées reconciled with the Napoleonic order, the Mediterranean now became a major source of manpower, with Spanish, Italians, Greeks, Albanians, Maltese, Minorcans enlisted. Outside Europe native troops were taken on extensively (in addition to native troops of the East India Company).

Of course, the King’s German Legion and Brunswick contingents still remained as ‘European’ foreigners (but these are treated in separate Osprey books). The 60th regiment also was mostly composed of Germans and other foreigners.

Like its sister book, this is rather an eclectic list of units and uniform details, lacking a overarching narrative, let alone analysis. Only for people with special interest in this subject.




View all my reviews

Review: Emigre and Foreign Troops in British Service (1) 1792-1803

Emigre and Foreign Troops in British Service (1) 1792-1803 by René Chartrand

My rating: 2 of 5 stars



First part of Chartrand’s overview of foreign units in British service. The 18th century tradition of employing troops from Switzerland and smaller German princedoms was continued and many French émigrées were recruited to fight the fledgling Republic. A number of similar units were taken over from Dutch service after the French overran Holland early 1795. Dutch and French colonial troops were also incorporated when overseas possessions were conquered by British expeditions.

Most of the units were employed in colonial warfare, especially the West Indies, where disease resulted in high rates of deaths. The reasons for employment overseas were probably to lower chances for desertion and to spare British troops from the bad conditions.

Like its sister book, this is rather an eclectic list of units and uniform details, lacking a overarching narrative, let alone analysis. Only for people with special interest in this subject.




View all my reviews

Review: British Forces in the West Indies 1793-1815

British Forces in the West Indies 1793-1815 by René Chartrand

My rating: 3 of 5 stars



Overview of British forces in the West Indies during revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. Not generally known is that this was a major theatre of war for the British at the time (also a major market!) where tens of thousands of troops were sent to attack French colonial possessions, the most important being Saint Domingue, even after it became independent. There was serious concern that the slave revolt in Saint Domingue would spread to other colonies, as it did on Dutch Curacao in 1795 and Jamaica in 1796.

This was also a brutal theatre, with maybe as many as 45,000 British troops dying of fever in the decade up to the peace of Amiens in 1802.

The book is a bit eclectic as it includes so many different and often temporary units, like foreign regiments recruited in Europe, local militias and (Dutch)colonial troops from enemies taken into British service. Interestingly also has images of Jamaican Maroons, black troops from Surinam ('redimusi') and Cuban slave hunters with dogs.



View all my reviews

Review: Napoleon's Overseas Army

Napoleon's Overseas Army by René Chartrand

My rating: 3 of 5 stars



Broad description of the dress and actions of French colonial units during the revolutionary and Napoleonic wars. With the 20 year struggle between France and Great Britain, it is not surprising that fighting also reached France's and the Dutch colonial possessions, as the Britons steadily gobbled up the French empire overseas, with only a short intermission after the Peace of Amiens in 1802.

This book focuses mainly on the Americas, rather than Asia and Africa. The war of independence of the former slave population of Saint Domingue, present day Haïti, features prominently. There's even a short section on the Dutch colonial troops in the West Indies.



View all my reviews

Crisis Loot

Okay, so I brought some stuff back with me, despite all the talking.

Some books for my Waterloo project. Although I have more than enough books on the Brits already. But on the Fields of Glory offers a battlefield guide and A Commanding Presence focusses on logistics. I'm a sucker for logistics.

Bought at very reasonable prices at David Lanchester

Three Ospreys about the 100 Years War. A project for 2027... or 2028. Teenage dreams since reading the Thea Beckman Geef Me De Ruimte trilogy.

Gained at the bring & buy

You must be worrying whether I bought anything wargames related at all and I can set your mind at ease here. I bought the hard copy of Chain of Command plus some dice, counters and the jump off points. Yes, I have the pdf version, but I like giving these guys money. They won best participation game award at the show and well deserved for the Hardest Working Men In Showbiz.

To the right is the Crisis complimentary miniature in the package (will fit in somewhere in my slavery & maroons project) and a bunch of Japanese 16th century civilians. They will fit well with any stuff I might ever do on samurai.

Purchases from Too Fat Lardies and Dave Thomas

I also added some 1/72 Stuarts, M3 halftracks and a Jeep to my American WWII forces. Too bad that I didn't like the SHQ 20mm Americans and almost nobody else makes them. Given the flood of Germans, Soviets and British I find this lack of love for the Americans in 20mm and 28mm (excepting the US paras of course) surprising.

Very spirited discussion around amateurism and professionalism in the wargaming hobby on the Dutch Miniature Wargaming facebook page (not just due to my post here). My mind is brewing with ideas. Damn! I have no time for that!


ps more beautiful pictures of Crisis at Little Lions and Modus Reg Magni Momenti

Armies of the Balkan Wars

With my interest piqued in the Balkan Wars because of their effect on the outbreak of WWI, chance has it that I had just received my copy of Armies of the Balkan Wars 1912-13 from Osprey's Men At Arms series. It's written by Philip Jowett, who's written a dozen Ospreys on first half of the 20th century subjects and illustrated by Stephen Walsh who has done over 30 books for Osprey now.

Armies of the Balkan Wars follows the standard MAA format: it starts out with a short introduction and chronology of the two wars. I hadn't realised the wars were so close after each other and that the second war had been so bloody, despite lasting only a month. Another factor I'd not taken into account was that the war against Italy (in Libya and the Aegean) was only ended in October 1912.

Reading other stuff about the road towards WWI makes me also see how much of the politics is left out (eg the Russian involvement in creating the anti-Ottoman coalition). I understand why MAA leaves it out, but the complicated politics of the region deserve more. Especially as the book's subtitle claims this was the 'priming charge for the Great War' but nevere really explains how.

Then follows the major section on all the belligerents. Most armies used an age-based system of conscription, allowing them to raise considerable reserves. Also there was a small additional reservoir of irregulars in the Ottoman territories and foreign volunteers that fought on the side of the ant-Ottoman coalition. However, that also meant that the quality of the majority of troops was low. Especially the Turkish army in Macedonia was hampered by being composed mostly of local reserve troops.

The most remarkable effort was made by Montenegro, a microstate of only 250,000 inhabitants that raised an army of 40,000 by conscription all men between ages 17 and 62. The fact that it lost over 10,000 men during the war was not only a high price to pay for the army, but for the country as well.

The strength and losses of the belligerent states. No records
of Romanian or Turkish losses in the 2nd Balkan War

The graph shows that losses in the two war, although short, were heavy. This had to do with the backward logistics and medical arrangements, amplified by the stationary nature of the war (sieges). Of the 265,000 losses in the Turkish army in the First Balkan War, 75,000 resulted from disease and 115,000 were taken prisoner. I assume these numbers include deserters as well.

From the section on weaponry and other equipment we can conclude that most armies were in short supply to fully equip their war time armies. Although the anti-Ottoman coalition managed to plug most of these gaps with remaindered equipment of more advanced armies, the result was an even greater lack of standardisation and more logistical problems. That leads to the same conclusion as the small section on uniforms, which is that it all wasn't very uniform.

All in all the book is not special. The Men At Arms formula remains very general and I tend to prefer the campaign series for detail. I was impressed by the photographs and illustrations though.

Warfare in Al-Andalus

It took me a while to finish this last part of the Al-Andalus project because I needed to sit down and have a look at the books again.

My reading list for Andalusia

These three books are  bound together by the author and illustrator and this results well researched books, which draw their strength from David Nicolle´s good knowledge of Arabic sources and the in beautiful paintings of Angus McBride. But there´s also a broad variety of photographs and maps that add to the text without overlap between the books.

The weakest of the three books is El Cid and the Reconquista, 1050-1492. Spanning four and a half centuries, it suffers from bad organisation. By splitting up the discussion of the armies over different periods, any sense of continuity of change is lost. There is quite a lot of emphasis on equipment at the expense of other subjects, which feel rather general.

This is the only book of the three giving much detail on the armies of the Christian kingdoms. They relied on royal retainers, military religious orders and later urban militias to expand to the south. Their equipment and tactics were heavily influenced by their Arabic opponents.

One of the important lessons is that it is hard to talk of Christian or Muslim armies, because both sides employed warriors of both faiths and many different ethnicities: Spanish born, but also Arab and Berber Muslims, and Spanish as well as French Christians, not forgetting renegades. El Cid’s story is the best known of these soldiers fighting on both sides.

A model showing the Gibralfaro and Alcazaba of
Malaga and the double walls connecting them

Much better is the Moors, where the development is much better explained. Organisation, equipment, architecture and naval warfare are all better structured. It details the change from a Ummayad caliphate based on Spain to Almoravid and later Almohad empires that were both rooted in North Africa. These were seen, by the Muslims as well as the Christian, as foreign invaders. Their fundamentalist teachings meant that they remained separated from the Spanish elites.

Interesting is that these invasion always followed on fragmentation of the previous Muslim empire. Encroachment by Christian kingdoms then forced the Spanish Muslims to call for help from the south. They would have rather remained masters of their own fate.

The walls of Ronda served the town well, but the town
surrendered after its water supply was compromised

Granada 1492. The Twilight of Moorish Spain, on the last campaign is well structured, but has the advantage of a limited period of time with relatively few changes in equipment and organisation. It rolls like a narrative of the campaigns, with good analysis of the strategic considerations on both sides.

The war was pretty one-sided due to the infighting among the Granadese pretenders, although the financial burden of the war would have set limits on the Spanish side had it lasted longer. On the other hand, the quick progress was probably a factor in the ability to gain new loans.

The walls of the Alcazaba of Malaga
One of the few fortresses to stand up to Spanish cannon

But it was not only the internal strife on the Granadese side that won the Spanish the war. This war was about raid and sieges. And while the Granadese gave as good as they received on the first count, the Spanish enjoyed a marked advantage in the latter department. Although there was some artillery in the forts, the Spanish had more and better. Most sieges against smaller towns were therefore resolved quickly. Only Malaga and Granada could put up prolonged resistance. 

Having seen the terrain around Malaga and Ronda, I got the impression that the war in Al-Andalus was a struggle over valleys, with fortification providing control over the areas. This suited the Spanish well as fortifications could be taken at ease most of the time.

The church door of Alozaina commemorating the capture
of the town by Spanish troops on June 21st 1484

Looking at the long term, Granada’s long survival had only been obtained by bending its knees deeply to the Christian kingdoms, war among the Christians and support from North Africa. When these points were resolved in the late 15^th century with the unification of Castile and Aragon, and the loss of connections to Muslim rulers across the Straits of Gibraltar, the days of a Muslim state on the Iberian peninsula were marked.

One minaret remains of the mosque of Ronda

Check out my earlier post on the struggle between Christians and Muslims from the perspective of the other side of the Mediterranean, that is from Rhodes.

Dutch and Belgians at Waterloo Ospreys

Yes, the day before yesterday was the 198th anniversay of the Battle of Quatre Bras, and so today is that of the Battle of Waterloo. And then I found out I was not the owner of the two Osprey Men at Arms about the Dutch and Belgians in the campaign! Incredible. So I rectified that omission last Friday. I hope nobody noticed them missing in my collection...

Prussian Napoleonic Tactics by Hofschroer

Prussian Napoleonic Tactics 1792-1815 is a refreshing departure from most Osprey books in that it wants to make a point. Although Peter Hofschoer uses a chronological approach to make it, at least it provides a starting point for discussion. 

Hofschroer is out to disprove the historical narrative of a decrepit and outdated Prussian army getting humiliated by Napoleon and Davout at Jena and Auerstädt and that national heroes like Gneisenau and Stein revamped the army so that it could redeem Germany from 1813 to 1815. You can see how well that fits in with 19^th and 20^th century nationalist historiography.

In the opposite corner, Hofschroer posits that reforms had been ongoing all the time since Frederick’s late reign and that the post-Jena reforms were therefor not so revolutionary. Hofschroer shows that the regulations indeed kept pace with developments elsewhere, for example the introduction of light infantry: riflemen were added to regular infantry units in 1787 and specialist battallions of Fusiliers in 1793.

But Hofschroer goes further by also showing that the tools provided by the regulations were used on the battlefield, in particular on the Revolutionary Wars and the 1806-7 campaign. Although it is hard to tell how representative the examples are, they show what the Prussian army was capable of. This suggests wider application and that Prussian soldiers were tactically on par with the French rather than mindless automatons.

But if the tactical capabilities of the Prussian army were not the problem in 1806-7 this means that the full weight of the defeat lies at the hands of the commanders. So what exactly changed between the Revolutionary Wars and 1806-7 and then the German Wars of Liberation? Because there seems a considerable continuity in commanders over time. Brunswick and Rüchel commanded both in 1792-5 and 1806-7, and with credit in the first period. Yorck and Blücher were also exponents of the Frederician army and seem to have done a reasonable job after 1807.

Given the size and scope of the book the answers to these questions are not found here. Considering the point Hofschroer wishes to make, it is not surprising that the focus of the book is on the period up to 1807. The later reforms and campaigns get only a third of the pages.

Apart from the different angle and the extensive examples, what are the other strong point of the book? It contains ample illustrations and maps, which are useful although in some cases the narrative is so complex that it would have been more informative to have a sequence of smaller maps. It is also not common for Osprey writers to extensively use of sources in languages other than English. So, in conclusion, this is a very good Osprey.

Assaye, or how Anglo-centric history can be a pain in the arse

I Read Simon Millar's Osprey Campaign book on the battle of Assaye. In this battle Arthur Wellesley defeated a Maratha alliance to establish British control over a central part of India. I was hoping this would give me some background on Wellington's formative years as a commander.

And while the book is probably okay in terms of explaining the campaign and the battle, it has a fatal and unforgivable flaw. It's completely anglo-centric. We have no clue about the motivations and actions of the Indian commanders other than through English eyes. Just look at the bibliography.

Millar seems oblivious of this and even strengthens the bias of his sources by adopting their language and mindset. How can he not see that his perspective language is extremely coloured? All the adverbs used for the Indian rulers are negative: sullen, vengeful, indolent, corrupt. The Brits (and often their allies) are always disciplined, resolute, gallant.

Look at this description of the preliminary negotiations to the campaign, which has the English supporting one faction of the Maratha Confederacy against another. According to Millar,Wellesley's brother and governor of the East India Company 'played his diplomatic game with consummate skill' which comes down to 'he demanded absolute submission from him'. Not even the slightest hint of reflection on the fact that this was the legitimate ruler of a foreign country.

All the pretty excuses of colonialists to intervene  pass by: bad administration, the fear of French influence etc. As if that is enough reason to take over a country. Because the EIC was not an institute with the aim of civilisation, but of profit making and exploitation.

Besides this guy is a Wellington fan boy. He even has Wellesley leaping 'nimbly' from his wounded horse.


While this is probably not a badly researched book it falls hook line and sinker for imperialist (orientalist?) reasoning. I could have understood this if this had been a book published in the 1960s, but not in 2006. It would be funny if it wasn't bad judgment.

Trouble is of course that this is just a stronger expression of presumed superiority that a certain strand of Anglo-Saxon historians displays when writing about foreigners (I will give some examples concerning Waterloo in the future). It makes it easy to understand the exasperation many of their allies have felt in the past. It also makes it hard work to read these kinds of books.

Book shoppping: comics and Ospreys

Some good book shopping on Saturday with Michiel!

The best time was actually spent in the comic shop. Hadn't been in a long time and I got myself the new Okko (part 8 in the series), a new collection of short reports by Joe Sacco, published in the Anglo-Saxon world as Journalism, a book of pretty easy football jokes which may spur on one of the kids into reading (so with as few words as possible), a collection of Lovecraft stories adapted to comics by a Dutch cartoonist and finally a long lost prize from my youth: The Twilight Companions by Francois Bourgeon.

The bonus prize was the free comic for the national comic week. Good timing!

Look out the coming weeks for reviews.

Also bought a few Osprey's at Atleest in my hometown, a specialised bookshop combining anthropology, archeology with Chinese, Japanese, Middle Eastern, Indian and Egyptian studies. And a nice section of military history, among which the various Osprey series.

I picked up the new The Portuguese in the Age of Discovery 1300-1580, The New Zealand Wars 1820-72, British and Prussian Napoleonic Tactics and the Fortresses of the Peninsular War 1808-14.

Left a lot for later as well (eg the one on castles of the Teutonic knights in the Baltic), and there was some stuff out of stock that I would have liked (the Raid series on the James-Younger gang  and the Napoleonic Cavalry tactics). And there's been a reprint of Arthur and the Anglo-Saxon Wars, which is expected to arrive soon.

The good news is of course that I will have to go back some day.


Ps Musical accompanyment for this week: Black Rebel Motor Cycle Club. This Friday I'll be seeing them live!

Scandinavian crusades in the Baltic

Michiel bought a bunch of second hand Ospreys from the Dutch equivalent of eBay. And this one he already had, so I got it from him (it's good to have friends!). It's a quick read, but not necessarily a very worthwhile one.

For me the book was badly organised and confusing. The language is a bit convoluted sometimes, and David Nicolle might have done a better job editing his Swedish (?)co-author.

It already starts with the exposition of the Baltic crusades. This doesn´t go much farther than generalisations about causes and motivations you can find everywhere. Then you get a chronology and a very short introduction about the organisation of the armies, which basically says we don´t know much about it. Strangely, much of this context is stuck on at the end of the book.

Most of the book is about weapons and armour, broken up in four time periods for both the Scandinavians and their Baltic opponents. This leads to fragmentation and repetition, because in every one of these some development in the make of swords must be mentioned, even if it is irrelevant.

The part on strategy and tactics, despite the terrible writing style, offers the best bits of the book. The influence of the terrain and the very small size of the forces involved explain how the campaigns were slow and grinding and stuck to main rivers and siegecraft. And unlike the west, the winter was a season suited to campaigning.

As always, the illustrations by Angus McBride are the real boon. But that won´t save this book. It doesn´t inspire further research, nor does it give you the barest necessities to start a wargame army. It could have done with a couple of examples of important campaigns.