Keegan

[Guest Benoit Douville]

I am sorry if this had been debeated before but I want to know what do you all think about the Historian John Keegan. I think he is one of the best Historian of World War I. I just bought this volume yesterday:

[DrB]

I think John Keegan is a "every-person's author."

He can relate history in a most entertaining way without being officious or tedious. Easy to read and understand, I believe he is accurate, truthful and objective in his observations. He calls a spade a spade (or something more specific than that)

This owner will never surrender, "The Face of Battle," "Fields of Battle," "The First World War" and "Six Armies in Normandy."

I believe he ranks with the contemporary authors of military history, Holmes et. al. and probably ranks with the "oldies but goodies" such as Chandler.

My "observation."...doubtless others will take umbrage with this, but....everyone has an opinion.

DrB

[paul guthrie]

He's a fine historian and this is a good 1 volume history, Martin Gilbert's may well be better.

[AndyHollinger]

Wonderful book ... nothing new to the avid reader ... but well written and some interesting ideas.

[the german]

Hello,

I read the book (german translation) last year. I think it contains some very good and a few bad parts. I like the first chapters which deal with the pre war period, because they are pretty objective.

In my opinion, for instance the "1st Ypres" (chapter 4) is poor.

One of the main sources Keegan used for the german sight, was "Ypern 1914" from Werner Beumelburg. Ypern 1914 and Flandern 1917 by Beumelburg are the worst volumes of the "Schlachten des Weltkrieges, Reichsarchiv".

Keegan picks up all the stereotyped terms, that Beumelburg used in 1928, including the "anthem-singing children and students" of the volunteer regiments.

Keegan says, that all of the 25 000 dead soldiers in the mass -grave in Langemark were students ?! Then he transfers the famous "father and mother" by Käthe Kollwitz from Vladslo to Langemark!

Like "Dr B" says, it might be a question of individual observation or may be an inaccurate german translation.

Hinrich

[Ste]

I have read The Face of Battle and A History of Warfare and think they are remarkable books written by a remarkable historian. His prose is lucid, his grasp of detail formidable, yet perhaps the most striking aspect of his writing (as displayed in these two books) is his ability to distil persuasive conclusions about matters of fundamental import from diverse sources. One can learn more about the nature of success in battle from The Face of Battle than through reading a dozen accounts of the battles the book surveys (Agincourt, Waterloo and Somme). I think it no exaggeration to say that some of his passages are sublime.

I can therefore accept Keegan's mistakes in The First World War, as pointed out above, as the honest errors of an otherwise supreme historian. One should recall that although he is undoubtedly an authority on the Great War, the scope of his works is much broader than that.

I was fortunate enough to study under a famous historian as an undergraduate, and recall my experiences with fondness and gratitude. I can therefore imagine, with not a little envy, the impact Keegan has had on generations of cadets at Sandhurst.

Cheers,

Ste

[Guest Benoit Douville]

Hi all,

I appreciate your input concerning Keegan. I am just starting to read the book and I will give my input later. As for Beumelbourg, I have one of his book(The German point of view of the War) and I personally really enjoy it, I like the way he tell the story.

Regards