authors
data
Product: Book
ISBN-10: 1-85109-337-0
ISBN-13: 9781851093373
Publisher: ABC-CLIO Ltd
Country:
Year: September 1, 2000
Edition: New Edition
Number of pages: 384
Weight: 726gr
Binding: Paperback
ISBN-10: 1-85109-337-0
ISBN-13: 9781851093373
Publisher: ABC-CLIO Ltd
Country:
Year: September 1, 2000
Edition: New Edition
Number of pages: 384
Weight: 726gr
Binding: Paperback
editions
order
reviews
Great book! What an exciting read! 
I bought this book for my son's spiritual birthday because he loves military history. He carries it around with him all the time and is on the second time all the way through, since receiving it in April. Not only is it thorough in its coverage, but it is written in such a way as to encourage critical dialogue.
I bought this book for my son's spiritual birthday because he loves military history. He carries it around with him all the time and is on the second time all the way through, since receiving it in April. Not only is it thorough in its coverage, but it is written in such a way as to encourage critical dialogue.
A must If You Like Military History 
Ever since I was in high school long, long, ago, I have always wanted to learn about the history of the world, especially about why wars and battles were fought. Although my favorite time and study is the Civil War period and the Confederacy, other periods of history appeal to me. I love military strategy and in this book i found just what I wanted. Mr. Davis does not just explain the battle but before he describes it, he gives to you a background of events and then after a description of the battle, he gives to you all the important results. Then he gives to the reader some important references which I have very much used. You can't go wrong with the purchase of this valuable book. Buy-Read-Enjoy.
Ever since I was in high school long, long, ago, I have always wanted to learn about the history of the world, especially about why wars and battles were fought. Although my favorite time and study is the Civil War period and the Confederacy, other periods of history appeal to me. I love military strategy and in this book i found just what I wanted. Mr. Davis does not just explain the battle but before he describes it, he gives to you a background of events and then after a description of the battle, he gives to you all the important results. Then he gives to the reader some important references which I have very much used. You can't go wrong with the purchase of this valuable book. Buy-Read-Enjoy.
The Best of Both Worlds …
There are basically two types of non-fiction military history books: general and specific. General books might offer an overview of Viet Nam, while a specific book would address the Tet Offensive or tunnel rats. If you're an avid historian, general books are usually too … well … general! They provide a gloss-over in order to cram the entire subject into the confines of the book. Specific books, on the other hand, can bore you with an overkill of details. They are also limited in their focus to the subject of the book, often not addressing outside contributing factors. I initially began reading this book because I figured it would be something light I could skim over when I had 10-15 minutes of time here and there. I didn't expect much; after all, if a book trying to cover WWII in it's entirety was too general, how could the author hope to cover 100 different battles, over thousands of years, with any justice? Davis found just the right combination. The battles are covered concisely, but still offer important details (such as the French's mindset towards warfare … independent barons each seeking their own glory and not having the discipline to unite before attacking … being their downfall at Crece). Even if you're well-read, you will learn from this book. To top it off, the battles are presented in chronological order, so you can see similarities in strategies, intended by the leaders or not. My only ding on the book is that there are a few battles the author could have omitted for more-decisive ones. But hey, put 100 different historians in a room, and everyone's top 100 would probably be different! Check this book out. It's a great read.
There are basically two types of non-fiction military history books: general and specific. General books might offer an overview of Viet Nam, while a specific book would address the Tet Offensive or tunnel rats. If you're an avid historian, general books are usually too … well … general! They provide a gloss-over in order to cram the entire subject into the confines of the book. Specific books, on the other hand, can bore you with an overkill of details. They are also limited in their focus to the subject of the book, often not addressing outside contributing factors. I initially began reading this book because I figured it would be something light I could skim over when I had 10-15 minutes of time here and there. I didn't expect much; after all, if a book trying to cover WWII in it's entirety was too general, how could the author hope to cover 100 different battles, over thousands of years, with any justice? Davis found just the right combination. The battles are covered concisely, but still offer important details (such as the French's mindset towards warfare … independent barons each seeking their own glory and not having the discipline to unite before attacking … being their downfall at Crece). Even if you're well-read, you will learn from this book. To top it off, the battles are presented in chronological order, so you can see similarities in strategies, intended by the leaders or not. My only ding on the book is that there are a few battles the author could have omitted for more-decisive ones. But hey, put 100 different historians in a room, and everyone's top 100 would probably be different! Check this book out. It's a great read.
Four and Half Stars
This is definately not a novel you can sit down and read in one sitting but it is must for any history buffs. Anyone interested in how civilization came into being will need to ruffle through these pages to find that one battle they couldn't quite remember in the car (not that anyone does that). It is highly knowledgable about the general results and actions in many famous battles.
This is definately not a novel you can sit down and read in one sitting but it is must for any history buffs. Anyone interested in how civilization came into being will need to ruffle through these pages to find that one battle they couldn't quite remember in the car (not that anyone does that). It is highly knowledgable about the general results and actions in many famous battles.
Provocative (and frustrating) evaluation of great battles
Paul Davis undertakes an effort to identify the 100 most decisive battles in history. The three criteria that he uses to select key battles: »1. The outcome of the battle brought about a major political or social change. … 2. Had the outcome of the battle been reversed, major political or social changes would have ensued. … 3. The battle marks the introduction of a major change in warfare.« There follows the enumeration, with each battle covered in 4-5 pages, with (sometimes) maps, with a brief preface that outlines what happened and why the battles was important. The book reads pretty well and provokes a lot of thinking about the subject. However, there is some idiosyncrasy in the selection of battles. Of course, honorable people will differ, but some of the choices are strange indeed. Inchon is selected as a decisive battle; yet the Korean War was something of a draw. Hard for me to see how a long, bloody, and indecisive conflict could have a battle conceived as one of the world's most decisive combats. »Desert Storm«? A third rate power (Iraq) against the most powerful nation on earth? A one-sided conflict. Further, the invasion of Iraq in the 21st century suggests that there was nothing decisive about Desert Storm. Otherwise, why a revisitation of the conflict between the United States and Iraq? The fact that four of the hundred were from the Pacific Theater in World War II suggests a real imbalance. Further, the author uses a strange logic to argue that Pearl Harbor was decisive. A great loss led to the US entering the war. An awkward logic by which to label this decisive. Midway was much more important, since it wrecked much of the Japanese carrier capability. Another query: Why both Leipzig and Waterloo? How often does Napoleon need to be defeated for a decisive victory? And if those were decisive, why include Napoleon's great victories, since he was fated to lose (e.g., Jena)? Why Jena rather than his masterpiece at Austerlitz? The rationale for Jena is pretty weak. As other reviewers note, there is a heavy emphasis on Western battles. In the end, even though one can disagree with many of the selections, this is a good read and does lead to some thinking about what were the most decisive battles. The fact that such questions emerge suggests the utility of the volume.
Paul Davis undertakes an effort to identify the 100 most decisive battles in history. The three criteria that he uses to select key battles: »1. The outcome of the battle brought about a major political or social change. … 2. Had the outcome of the battle been reversed, major political or social changes would have ensued. … 3. The battle marks the introduction of a major change in warfare.« There follows the enumeration, with each battle covered in 4-5 pages, with (sometimes) maps, with a brief preface that outlines what happened and why the battles was important. The book reads pretty well and provokes a lot of thinking about the subject. However, there is some idiosyncrasy in the selection of battles. Of course, honorable people will differ, but some of the choices are strange indeed. Inchon is selected as a decisive battle; yet the Korean War was something of a draw. Hard for me to see how a long, bloody, and indecisive conflict could have a battle conceived as one of the world's most decisive combats. »Desert Storm«? A third rate power (Iraq) against the most powerful nation on earth? A one-sided conflict. Further, the invasion of Iraq in the 21st century suggests that there was nothing decisive about Desert Storm. Otherwise, why a revisitation of the conflict between the United States and Iraq? The fact that four of the hundred were from the Pacific Theater in World War II suggests a real imbalance. Further, the author uses a strange logic to argue that Pearl Harbor was decisive. A great loss led to the US entering the war. An awkward logic by which to label this decisive. Midway was much more important, since it wrecked much of the Japanese carrier capability. Another query: Why both Leipzig and Waterloo? How often does Napoleon need to be defeated for a decisive victory? And if those were decisive, why include Napoleon's great victories, since he was fated to lose (e.g., Jena)? Why Jena rather than his masterpiece at Austerlitz? The rationale for Jena is pretty weak. As other reviewers note, there is a heavy emphasis on Western battles. In the end, even though one can disagree with many of the selections, this is a good read and does lead to some thinking about what were the most decisive battles. The fact that such questions emerge suggests the utility of the volume.
keywords
related products
- search