wwatts1734's review against another edition
4.0
John Keegan is arguably the best military historian of the 20th Century, and this book is his go at the Great War. Overall this was a great book. Of course Keegan goes into the usual topics of the Great War - the political run up to the war, the various offensive strategies of the European powers, the offensive blitz of August 1914 and then the stalemate that presided over the Western front and most of the Eastern front for the remainder of the war. Trench warfare, the butchery of the machine gun and the artillery, the innovations of the aeroplane and the U Boat, all of this is standard fare in histories of the Great War.
What I particularly liked about this history was Keegan's treatment of non-standard topics. For example, Keegan spent a good amount of time discussing the Russian army. While most WWI histories skip over the Russian front between Tannenburg in August 1914 and the 1917 revolutions, Keegan delves into the Brusilov offensives, which were the relatively successful Russian campaigns against the Austrians and the Turks. He goes into Gallipoli and the horrible war planning that went into that campaign. He discusses the African campaign, which may have been the only theater of that war which followed the 19th century model of warfare. He talks about the Italian front, with its repeated yo-yo between the Germans and the Italians may have actually been a more frustrating effort than France. I was amazed at the extent of the German army's conquests during the war, so much so that the territory of Germany expanded over three fold between July 1914 and November 1918.
My only criticism of this history is a common criticism of Keegans works. The man is very technical and spends a tremendous amount of time discussing tactics, strategy, arms, ships and many of the minutiae of war. While this is fascinating to some, Keegan tends to miss the big picture, which is what it all was for, and the overarching consequences of the war.
Nevertheless, I really enjoyed this book. I would highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in the First World War.
What I particularly liked about this history was Keegan's treatment of non-standard topics. For example, Keegan spent a good amount of time discussing the Russian army. While most WWI histories skip over the Russian front between Tannenburg in August 1914 and the 1917 revolutions, Keegan delves into the Brusilov offensives, which were the relatively successful Russian campaigns against the Austrians and the Turks. He goes into Gallipoli and the horrible war planning that went into that campaign. He discusses the African campaign, which may have been the only theater of that war which followed the 19th century model of warfare. He talks about the Italian front, with its repeated yo-yo between the Germans and the Italians may have actually been a more frustrating effort than France. I was amazed at the extent of the German army's conquests during the war, so much so that the territory of Germany expanded over three fold between July 1914 and November 1918.
My only criticism of this history is a common criticism of Keegans works. The man is very technical and spends a tremendous amount of time discussing tactics, strategy, arms, ships and many of the minutiae of war. While this is fascinating to some, Keegan tends to miss the big picture, which is what it all was for, and the overarching consequences of the war.
Nevertheless, I really enjoyed this book. I would highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in the First World War.
jhall45's review against another edition
5.0
Great Summary Work
An essential summary for understanding the outlines of the conflict which has resulted in so much discord in the past century. Keegan focuses on military aspects of the war, in particular major tactical or technological innovations employed to attempt to break the Western front stalemate.
An essential summary for understanding the outlines of the conflict which has resulted in so much discord in the past century. Keegan focuses on military aspects of the war, in particular major tactical or technological innovations employed to attempt to break the Western front stalemate.
binstonbirchill's review against another edition
4.0
I've only read a handful of books about World War I and this is the first that covered the entire war. Keegan does a great job of setting the stage for the conflict and laying out the war plans and expectations of each of the major powers. With only 427 pages of text it's impossible to give a detailed account of any one phase in the war but what is given helps put together the overall picture of the war. He jumps from the Western Front to the Eastern Front based on when there are lulls in the fighting (winter) and also covers the fighting on the periphery. At times it can be a bit heavy on statistics but some of the comparisons he draws from those statistics really illuminate just how terrible certain battles were. The book has a great mix of strategy, analysis, and personal accounts. Those looking for anything more specific in any area will want to delve deeper but for what this book was intended to be, a very solid overview of the war, it definitely hits the mark.
Side note: Maps are essential, good maps are a blessing. A few of the maps contained within were frustrating because they didn't have some of the locations in the text noted... I always find that disappointing. On the positive side there were a good amount of maps and they mostly did a good job of showing what needed to be shown.
Side note: Maps are essential, good maps are a blessing. A few of the maps contained within were frustrating because they didn't have some of the locations in the text noted... I always find that disappointing. On the positive side there were a good amount of maps and they mostly did a good job of showing what needed to be shown.
mjsteimle's review against another edition
I'm putting this aside in favor of a series of YouTube documentaries on WWI. This book is very fact-heavy, and I wasn't getting much out of written descriptions of battalion movements and battle plans. The visual format of a documentary is a much better format for me to understand the details of the war. That being said, I did learn a lot from the portion of the book that I read, and I'm hesitant to put it aside. The thorough part of me wants to see it through to the end, but the part of me interested in a number of topics realizes that I need to move on.
eoinmeen's review against another edition
3.0
Even though I enjoyed just enough of this book (mainly the beginning and end), it's more memorable for being a forgettable slog.
davehershey's review against another edition
3.0
What draws me to history books is to get a feel for what it was like to live in the moments described. What would it have been like to cross the Rubicon with Caesar or to march into Russia with Napoleon? The trenches of WWI are possibly one of the worst places in history to find yourself. While Keegan does a good job of telling the story of the Great War, he seemed to focus more on names and dates then on getting down in the dirt. So the book offers a great history, from beginning to end, of the war, but I didn't feel like I was there.
Most of the time when Keegan describes a battle, he takes pains to say which armies were there. So we hear that it was the French such and such divisions with help from this and that brigade opposed by German armies 18, 20 and 21. It got to be kind of like reading statistics - you get that this is big, for the numbers of armies and bombs and such are large. But after a while the affect wears off and it starts to mean little.
The best parts of the book then are when he does offer quotes from soldiers in the trenches, or insights into the characters of the people fighting the war. But those tend to be lost in the details of everything else. Maybe in a book this size, covering what it covered, doing more was impossible. Which is why it is a great volume to get into the ins and outs of the Great War. But if you want to feel it, you have got to listen to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast on the War!
Most of the time when Keegan describes a battle, he takes pains to say which armies were there. So we hear that it was the French such and such divisions with help from this and that brigade opposed by German armies 18, 20 and 21. It got to be kind of like reading statistics - you get that this is big, for the numbers of armies and bombs and such are large. But after a while the affect wears off and it starts to mean little.
The best parts of the book then are when he does offer quotes from soldiers in the trenches, or insights into the characters of the people fighting the war. But those tend to be lost in the details of everything else. Maybe in a book this size, covering what it covered, doing more was impossible. Which is why it is a great volume to get into the ins and outs of the Great War. But if you want to feel it, you have got to listen to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast on the War!
rallisaurus's review against another edition
2.0
Not a bad book, I'm just not very interested in military history.
nerdofdoom's review against another edition
3.0
Good...I'm not too fond of Keegan's straight up histories. I much prefer his books like face of battle, the mask of command, and intelligence in war that are mostly analysis. Worth reading but martin gilberts book by the same name was better and shorter.