Editorial Review

On a May afternoon in 1943, an Army Air Forces bomber crashed into the Pacific Ocean and disappeared, leaving only a spray of debris and a slick of oil, gasoline, and blood.  Then, on the ocean surface, a face appeared.  It was that of a young lieutenant, the plane’s bombardier, who was struggling to a life raft and pulling himself aboard.  So began one of the most extraordinary odysseys of the Second World War.

The lieutenant’s name was Louis Zamperini.  In boyhood, he’d been a cunning and incorrigible delinquent, breaking into houses, brawling, and fleeing his home to ride the rails.  As a teenager, he had channeled his defiance into running, discovering a prodigious talent that had carried him to the Berlin Olympics and within sight of the four-minute mile.  But when war had come, the athlete had become an airman, embarking on a journey that led to his doomed flight, a tiny raft, and a drift into the unknown.

Ahead of Zamperini lay thousands of miles of open ocean, leaping sharks, a foundering raft, thirst and starvation, enemy aircraft, and, beyond, a trial even greater.  Driven to the limits of endurance, Zamperini would answer desperation with ingenuity; suffering with hope, resolve, and humor; brutality with rebellion.  His fate, whether triumph or tragedy, would be suspended on the fraying wire of his will.

In her long-awaited new book, Laura Hillenbrand writes with the same rich and vivid narrative voice she displayed in Seabiscuit.  Telling an unforgettable story of a man’s journey into extremity, Unbroken is a testament to the resilience of the human mind, body, and spirit. ... Read more

Reviews

One of the most stunning books of the year, September 24, 2010

Epic Biography, October 2, 2010

Another masterpiece by the author of "Seabiscuit", September 28, 2010

A well written, thoroughly researched story of survival, September 26, 2010

Amazing, tour-de-force, destined to be a bestseller, November 2, 2010

Best Book of the Year, November 2, 2010

War, survival and redemption., November 7, 2010

Marvelous, compelling story, November 5, 2010

An Incredible Tale of Hardship, Danger, and Courage., September 29, 2010

The Book of the Year, November 18, 2010

Editorial Review

In this thorough and evocative analysis, Martina Sprague tackles the myth of the Vikings, their unconventional battle tactics, cunning strategies, and bold use of any means at their disposal. From the innovative shipbuilding methods that produced flexible hulls and the ability to glide silently into shallow water, to Asatro, the polytheistic religion that honored the god of war, Sprague casts a fresh light and a scholarly eye on these fiercely independent people.

From the late 700s to the early 1000s, waves of strange and ferocious warriors from the barren lands of the North routinely swept into Britain and the Western Roman Empire. Plundering and pillaging, they left ruins in their wake; their trembling victims never knew when or where they would strike next.

Hailing from Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, yet beholden to no single king, government, or god, the Vikings fought for personal glory, material wealth, and a longing for adventure. They roamed as far as the Arab world, always following the code, "live hard, die with honor." ... Read more

Reviews

Title DOES NOT match contents!, October 3, 2008
I thought I would get a book with a lot more. Instead, I get a book that basically says Vikings used longships and that made them awesome.

I expected military history on the order of Dunnigan or Massie, but instead I got in-depth analysis such as Vikings drank beer before battle to get over their fear.

I only gave it two stars because it has some nice pictures of ships and weapons, although you could easily get the same ones elsewhere.

Stay away from this book. Its lightweight and has nothing new or interesting to say.

Written from a Tactician's Point of View, March 25, 2010
An excellent survey of Norse tactics, written from the point of view of someone who understands martial tactics. As a historian, special operations tactical analyst, and former Navy SEAL, I found the book to be a useful secondary source in writing a history of pirate hunting. Highly recommended.

Dissappointing to say the least., December 1, 2008
This book is extremely bad. Not only does the author not mention essential elements of Viking stratgey, such as the Hersyrs, the shield wall or the Swynfilking formation, but she says that the Vikings fought from ships in naval battles, for which there is absolutely no evidence. Worst of all, she assumes that the Jomsvikings existed, when much archaeological evidence, and most Viking historians, agree that they were mythical. Neither does she consider in any detail the Housecarls or the Byzantine Varangian Guard, both of which were important components of the Viking war machine. She also says very little about the circular fortifications of the Vikings discovered in several cities in Scandinavia, or the Vikings mastery of seigecraft. And, although she does quote primary sources, she does so without discussing the implications of them, and her selection of quotable material relates little to her topic. Altogether a purile and amateurish job of research from an author who, because she holds an MA, should know better.

Useless retread, July 26, 2009
As one of the other reviewers has said, the title of this book is a misnomer. It is really nothing more than a hodge-podge of Viking era political and cultural history, structured mostly in anecdotal form. There is nothing in this book that hasn't appeared in other, better, histories. That is also true of the pictures, clear though they are. I give the book two stars only because it is reasonably well-written. However, if you are interested in the Viking era and own more than three or four of the standard historical surveys of the era, you may well be able to write a better book than this one is. I am sorry I bought it.

Ok but misleading title, December 2, 2010
Note: I am reviewing based on a skim rather then a close read. While that might not seem fair to readers, I think it is acceptable as long as I frankly admit it.

I got this book because free is a very good price and so I was reasonably pleased. However the title is inaccurate and being so is annoying. Vikings didn't have unconventional battle strategies; they barely had anything that could be recognized as strategy or tactics at all. Vikings had no military system above the level of the primitive war band and armies and fleets were simply large war bands. Nor did they have any systematic science of warfare and or even a particularly sophisticated native style of warfare; battles were bar fights with weapons. The closest thing to "strategies" was the off-the-cuff improvisations of a given warlord which makes an entertaining read but is not really the same thing. This description sounds like the peculiarly militaristic form of intellectual snobbery, except the point is not to disdain, but to warn would be readers not to be deceived as to what they are getting. The book makes up for this with nice if overly glorified descriptions of Scandinavian culture at the time. In fact the book may be best compared with sagas then with military study. To say the former is inferior to the later is as absurd as saying poetry is inferior to science. The point is rather that poetry is not science.

If you want a reasonably good pop-history that is also entertaining(and indeed that is all the Vikings themselves would have asked of a historian)this book is satisfactory. It gives good narrative and quotes from sagas. It is not however a "military history" or a "military study" and indeed could not be.

Swift, prompt service, June 8, 2010
The prompt service I received from this vendor was remarkable. Within a week of placing my order, it arrived at my house. I'm very impressed.
... Read more

Editorial Review

Ben Macintyre’s Agent Zigzag was hailed as “rollicking, spellbinding” (New York Times), “wildly improbable but entirely true” (Entertainment Weekly), and, quite simply, “the best book ever written” (Boston Globe). In his new book, Operation Mincemeat, he tells an extraordinary story that will delight his legions of fans.

In 1943, from a windowless basement office in London, two brilliant intelligence officers conceived a plan that was both simple and complicated— Operation Mincemeat. The purpose? To deceive the Nazis into thinking that Allied forces were planning to attack southern Europe by way of Greece or Sardinia, rather than Sicily, as the Nazis had assumed, and the Allies ultimately chose.
 
Charles Cholmondeley of MI5 and the British naval intelligence officer Ewen Montagu could not have been more different. Cholmondeley was a dreamer seeking adventure. Montagu was an aristocratic, detail-oriented barrister. But together they were the perfect team and created an ingenious plan: Get a corpse, equip it with secret (but false and misleading) papers concerning the invasion, then drop it off the coast of Spain where German spies would, they hoped, take the bait. The idea was approved by British intelligence officials, including Ian Fleming (creator of James Bond). Winston Churchill believed it might ring true to the Axis and help bring victory to the Allies.

Filled with spies, double agents, rogues, fearless heroes, and one very important corpse, the story of Operation Mincemeat reads like an international thriller.

Unveiling never-before-released material, Ben Macintyre brings the reader right into the minds of intelligence officers, their moles and spies, and the German Abwehr agents who suffered the “twin frailties of wishfulness and yesmanship.” He weaves together the eccentric personalities of Cholmondeley and Montagu and their near-impossible feats into a riveting adventure that not only saved thousands of lives but paved the way for a pivotal battle in Sicily and, ultimately, Allied success in the war. ... Read more

Reviews

A Rollicking Good Read!, April 4, 2010

A masterwork of historical storytelling, April 1, 2010

Tasty Mincemeat, April 2, 2010

Good read, not great, May 26, 2010
I read an occasional spy book for their entertainment value. This one came highly recommended. I enjoyed it, but I did not find it nearly as great as many of the other reviewers.
It is the true story of a spy caper that is credited with diverting Hitler's attention away from the Allies invading Sicily in 1943. It is the same incident that was dramatized in an earlier book called "The Man Who Never Was," which was also turned into a movie back in the 50's. The author presents some new details these 50 years on that were suppressed in the original due to security considerations at the time.
There are certainly some interesting characters involved, including some of the leading lights of the British MI5 & MI6 operation. Ian Fleming makes a brief, but pivotal appearance, as do the real life inspirations for his "M" and "Q" characters in the James Bond novels. Kim Philby and Winston Churchill also make cameo appearances.

The gist of the spy story is the British secret service dropped a dead body off the coast of Spain rigged with phony letters designed to put the German army off the scent of the upcoming invasion of Sicily. The fact that this crackpot scheme worked certainly makes a good story. As in all books of this type, the British triumph, so there's not much in the way of suspense. There was a great deal of spycraft necessary to make this work that is elaborated in great detail, and there is certainly a lot of spying going on.

One of the more interesting ideas mentioned in the book was that the gambit's success may have hinged on the willingness on the head of the German intelligence effort, someone named von Renne, to swallow this "fish" story, not because he believed the story, but because he figured it for a plant. He wanted Hitler to fail, so he may have put his stamp of approval on the intelligence gathered in Spain because he doubted its probity. If this is true, it makes for a very different story. Unfortunately, it is not possible to do more than speculate about this possibility because von Renne was rounded up, tried and executed in the aftermath of the undersuccessful attempt to assassinate Hitler known as "Operation Valkyrie." So we will never know, but it certainly seems fishy that he never asked the hard questions about the veracity of the original intelligence reports emanating from Spain, which is unusual behavior for a spymaster of his stature.

Another interesting aspect is how the British's Project Ultra that cracked the German navy's Enigma coding scheme allowed British Intelligence to monitor how well their ruse was actually working. The Ultra project gave the British access to all manner of secret military communications and was a pivotal to the success of the entire war effort. Operation Mincemeat is certainly an interesting episode, but Project Ultra was much more important and, at least, to this Reader, a more engrossing story.

An Intricate, Tricky, Brilliant Plot, May 19, 2010
You may well be aware that in World War II the British played a fine trick on the Germans by letting them find a floating a body bearing bogus secret invasion plans. This is a well known and factual story, which was the basis of a 1956 film The Man Who Never Was. It might seem an easy enough trick, but the Nazis and their military intelligence branch Abwehr were no fools. The deception was one of astonishing intricacy, and has not been told in full until now. Ben Macintyre, who has given us fine presentations of slices of WWII history in _Agent Zigzag_ and of WWI in _The Englishman's Daughter_, turns his researcher's doggedness and storytelling skill to the tale of probably the greatest of military deceptions. _Operation Mincemeat: How a Dead Man and a Bizarre Plan Fooled the Nazis and Ensured an Allied Victory_ (Harmony Books) is a grand story, full of colorful and odd characters on both sides of the battle, and it traces the plot from its conception through the victory it brought. The plotters were careful to work their scheme down to the smallest of details, and it was because of this that the trick succeeded (and also because of a good deal of luck and because of taking advantage of the wishful thinking of individuals within German intelligence). All the details are here, and it is an exciting tale.

The point of the deception was to fool Germany about where Allied forces would land coming from the southern Mediterranean. Hitler had to be convinced that the push from Africa would not be to the obvious Sicily, but that the canny Allies were going to head toward Sardinia to the west and Greece to the east. The idea man whose "corkscrew mind" was most responsible for the corpse trick was Charles Cholmondeley (pronounced "Chumly"), a gangling giant with a six inch waxed mustache, who worked for MI5. His boss was Ewan Montagu, a wealthy barrister who had become an intelligence officer for the war. There were plenty of other contributors, including the creator of James Bond, Ian Fleming, who worked in intelligence during the war and had found the corpse plot - "A Suggestion (not a very nice one)" - in a detective novel. Macintyre has revealed that the body was that of Glyndwr Michael, a homeless Welshman who was found dead in London after eating rat poison, deliberately or by accident. Poor Michael had been a nobody when alive; when dead he was to change the course of history. It would not do just to put phony secret plans upon the body and float it away. Anything that might raise a Nazi eyebrow had to be anticipated. A new uniform, for instance, would look suspect, so Cholmondeley put on Marine battle dress and wore it every day for three months while the body was on ice. The secret plans were sealed carefully, including a deliberately-placed eyelash that would stay in their folds if they were undisturbed, but would fall out if they were opened. The body was taken by submarine to Spain, where it washed up as planned. The resultant dance between the pro-Nazi officers of neutral Spain, the German spies, and the British contacts resulted in the documents being carefully extracted from their envelopes without disturbing the seals, photographed, and replaced (without that eyelash) so that the Germans could think they had fooled the British undetected. Their head of intelligence in Madrid, eager to please and to make a name for himself, personally took the documents to Berlin, embellishing the story of how they came into his hands to make them seem even more plausible. There were questions the Nazis should have asked, holes in the story they should have seen, but the eagerness to believe this spectacular intelligence coup extended all the way to Hitler. (Goebbels alone seems to have had his doubts, but kept his skepticism to his diary.) The Fuhrer gave commands to fortify preparations in Greece and Sardinia, and Sicily dropped from precedence.

The exact degree of success of Operation Mincemeat cannot be calculated, and taking Sicily was no milk run, but British casualties were a seventh of what had been expected. By the time the Nazis realized that their forces were in the wrong places, Sicily was an Allied territory. The operation was deadly serious, but a reader gets the sense throughout that the plotters were having fun despite all the detailed steps and bureaucratic shufflings it took to make the plan go through. Macintyre, in a sparkling and gripping book, reminds us that in war, having plenty of guns is important, as is having well-trained soldiers. But imagination, and even whimsy, have their place in battle, too.

The definitive account of the "Man Who Never Was", April 15, 2010

Excellent update based upon recently declassified documents, May 19, 2010

Tried to like it, but..., September 13, 2010
2.5 stars. It took three weeks to muddle through this book. When the story stayed on point, I flipped through the pages with ease and looked forward to learning more. Unfortunately, the author provides too much rambling, irrelevant, mundane information that serves only to distract the reader from the real story. Maybe Mr. McIntyre thought the reader would find the mind-numbing minutia interesting...maybe he needed to meet a page requirement. For whatever reason, I found his style of writing very frustrating. Had this subject been placed in the care of a more fluid writer, I think I would have enjoyed it very much. Guess I'll skip Agent Zigzag.

Amazing and entertaining,, April 7, 2010

Better than the movie -- a real spy story to sink your teeth into!, May 10, 2010
Ben Macintyre can't seem to write a bad book, and he has a knack for finding unusual, quirky stories and characters or, as in the case of this book, the unusual twist/angle to a story that may already be well known to readers and movie-goers thanks to the 1950s publication and film of The Man Who Never Was. That film was an indifferent drama based on an incredible story, and Macintyre has done even better, delivering a far more complete narrative of that story, jam packed with interesting characters and coincidences.

Essentially, it's a spy story, set at the height of World War II, in the months leading up to the invasion of Sicily. Already the Allies were using all kinds of misdirection to feed inaccurate intelligence back to the Germans, but they were particularly concerned about the Sicily landings, not just as a trial run for D-Day but in their own right: if they were repulsed, there might very well never be a D-Day, just a stalemate. How to convince the Germans that the Sicilian attack was only a feint; a cover for the real attack on Sardinia or Greece? Some of the smart and very eccentric minds in the intelligence operations got pondering this, and decided to float a body, containing secret documents, onto a Spanish beach in hopes that the ostensibly neutral Spanish fascists would share the information they found with the Germans AND that the Germans would believe it. Sound incredible? This is the story of that operation, from idea all the way through to the Sicily landings, and it's quite something. Even those familiar with the story will find all kinds of quirky sidenotes -- the main protagonist, for instance, had a brother who was a Soviet spy: he was a typical ecccentric in that he founded a cheese-eating society at Cambridge, was a table-tennis nut, collected rare species of mice and, oh yes, spied for the Soviet Union. (In between producing films for Hitchcock and Eisenstein, and teaching Charlie Chaplin to swear in Russian, of course...)

If you're interested in taking a broader look at this kind of World War 2 intelligence coup, the best book of all (although not as lively or succinct a read as this one) is Churchill's Wizards: The British Genius for Deception, 1914-1945 by Nicholas Rankin, which covers Mincemeat and the various misdirection operations that surrounded D-Day itself.

Meanwhile, do hunt out Macintyre's other books, which include a book about jewel thief Adam Worth and one focusing on a little-known event in World War One that is a poignant mystery -- The Englishman's Daughter: A True Story of Love and Betrayal in World War I.

Highly recommended, and not just to military history buffs (whose ranks I would not include myself in.) ... Read more

Editorial Review

In his breakout bestseller, The Perfect Storm, Sebastian Junger created "a wild ride that brilliantly captures the awesome power of the raging sea and the often futile attempts of humans to withstand it" (Los Angeles Times Book Review). Now, Junger turns his brilliant and empathetic eye to the reality of combat--the fear, the honor, and the trust among men in an extreme situation whose survival depends on their absolute commitment to one another. His on-the-ground account follows a single platoon through a 15-month tour of duty in the most dangerous outpost in Afghanistan's Korengal Valley. Through the experiences of these young men at war, he shows what it means to fight, to serve, and to face down mortal danger on a daily basis. ... Read more

Reviews

Men Will Die for Their Friends, March 4, 2010

One of the best books ever written on what it means to be in battle, March 3, 2010

Amazing effort by the author, June 25, 2010
This is a pretty good book - certainly eye-opening - but didn't quite match up to my read of "The Good Soldiers" last year (by David Finkel).

That War's author, Sebastian Junger, chose to spend 5 months in the fiercest combat in Afganistan is very impressive and deserves a lot of credit. He also included exhaustive footnotes supporting research he cites. What comes through well is the violence the men faced every day, the extreme living conditions, the losses taken and imposed on the enemy, the brotherhood formed within the platoon. He is admirably apolitical (as are his subjects) even as he honors the soldiers he lived with.

What didn't come through to me was a personal connection to any of the soldiers. The book felt disorganized, like a lot of unrelated scenes strung together, making it tough to follow the action or see how soldiers changed or grew over time.

Also, a photographer was embedded with Junger almost the whole time, but there are only three photos in the book (all on the jacket). A few more images and a map or two of the area would have been a huge help to the reader in visualizing the soldiers, the geography, and the firefights. (The documentary film of the book just came out, called "Restrepo." I'm eager to see it, but would have been nice to have a few pics in the book to whet the appetite.)

In all, War is good, but if you're going to read just one of these two books about modern-day US soldiers' experience in combat, I'd recommend The Good Soldiers. It is set in Iraq instead of Afganistan, but the timing and issues are similar. And you get to know the soldiers personally - including the gut-wrenching feeling when one of them is killed or injured.

From a 173rd Wife, May 17, 2010
Sebastian Junger has been able to bridge the gap between what we know, and what our husbands don't want to tell us to either spare us the worry or to keep that part of their world separate from the home life. 'War' answers questions that I was afraid to ask, and not only goes in depth to describe what the day to day was like for our boys, but Sebastian seems to understand and explains (very well, in my opinion) the psychological toll of what the men see and do while deployed, as well as the aftermath when they return to Italy.
'War' is an emotional journey for this wife, finding it hard to continue at some points, having to return later after that familiar feeling of dread fades, even though I already know what's going to happen during that particular firefight.
The gut-wrentching realism is what it is supposed to be: truth.

A Study of Brotherhood More Than War, April 20, 2010

Fighting in the graveyard of empires..., March 8, 2010

He gets it right, May 14, 2010
I will preface this review by stating that I have experienced combat in Iraq and been in multiple engagements with enemy fighters. War is simply well written and gets right to the heart of the matter regarding combat. If you have no combat experience, you will understand it some after you read this book. Junger manages to capture in words what Soldiers feel and live. I have been back from Iraq for just over a year now and this book took me back and the memories were not bad. He was right and it is difficult to say that you miss depending on the man next to you for survival and having that man depend on you. A lot of books pick up major themes and ideas well but War also captures the minute details that give the reader the most accurate picture on warfighting that I have seen to date. I highly recommend this book and can say with confidence that you will not want to put it down until the last word is gone. Thank you Junger for honoring the Soldiers who represent the best of America.

Embedded Pulse Pounder With Sympathetic Eye, April 18, 2010

Dancing with the Devil..., May 1, 2010

Small skirmishes, not a war, April 15, 2010

Editorial Review

In The Wall Street Journal, Victor Davis Hanson named With the Old Breed one of the top five books on epic twentieth-century battles. Studs Terkel interviewed the author for his definitive oral history, The Good War. Now E. B. Sledge’s acclaimed first-person account of fighting at Peleliu and Okinawa returns to thrill, edify, and inspire a new generation.

An Alabama boy steeped in American history and enamored of such heroes as George Washington and Daniel Boone, Eugene B. Sledge became part of the war’s famous 1st Marine Division–3d Battalion, 5th Marines. Even after intense training, he was shocked to be thrown into the battle of Peleliu, where “the world was a nightmare of flashes, explosions, and snapping bullets.” By the time Sledge hit the hell of Okinawa, he was a combat vet, still filled with fear but no longer with panic.

Based on notes Sledge secretly kept in a copy of the New Testament, With the Old Breed captures with utter simplicity and searing honesty the experience of a soldier in the fierce Pacific Theater. Here is what saved, threatened, and changed his life. Here, too, is the story of how he learned to hate and kill–and came to love–his fellow man. ... Read more

Reviews

With Gene Sledge and The Old BreedBeedd
As I found outshortly after I first read With The Old Breed...Gene Sledge and I were in the same replacement draft which joined the 1st Marine Division on Pavuvu, British Russell Islands, but were in different units in the division. We both made the Peleliu and Okinawa landings, and his account of both battles--the savagery and bloodletting is exactly as it was. Coinicidentally, I was a stretcher bearer supporting Company K, 3d Battalion, 5th Marines, Gene's outfit but I didn't know that until long after the war. Gene became a close friend after his book was published and we exchanged experiences. With The Old Breed deserves every commendation it has received over the years, from Marine veterans and others We lost Gene to cancer several years ago, but his memory and memoir will live on and be an inspiration to Marines of this and future generations, as will the exploits of the 1st Marine Division in all of its combat operations. Benis M. Frank, Chief Historian of the Marine Corps, Retired.

SLEDGE: THE ROBERT GRAVES OF THE MARINES
Although the cover and the title may not sound that eloquent or poetic, make no mistake, Sledge's elegy stands along perhaps 10 other wartime biographies written this century. He not only recounts war and the charnel houses of these two battles, but does it in a way that is both extremely moving in a prose style that is very reminiscent of the Robert Graves' WWI "Goodbye to all That" or WWII's Farley Mowat's "And No Birds Sang."

Sledge, who is not a professional writer like the above gentleman but writes, in my opinion, equally as well. As such Sledge has written the quintessential experience of the Marine in the Pacific War. it is one of the best, eloquent, haunting, and poetic reads I have every come across, and more than most war memoirs it is very, very scary.

I think that one should be able to read through it quickly. I also liked it cause I ended up clawing through the jungle in the Horseshoe region on Peleliu and seeing nothing but gun positions, caves, and small human shaped holes in the coral landscape with Sake Bottles and used and unused cartridges in the holes.

I took this book to Peleliu in 1998. The Jungle has mostly come back and there are few tourists on the Island, and none off the very few trails. The caves are littered with broken Japanese Army helmets, some rusted badly, others with the green in good condition.

One can see nothing but jungle cleaved coral. After passing the usual "squid pots" (what the Japanese called the small coral caves and holes the dot the island), I was suddenly standing on an old oil drum, now rusted the same colour as the brown moss of the jungle. Then another drum.... rows of drums filled with coral. About at least 50 of them lined to a depth of three of four-deep covering the entrance to a coral cave. The front of the drums were torn and shredded by large calibre fire -- probably .50 calibre I surmise by the size of the holes. Despite its layers of armour I could not help but think that the Marines probably knocked the position out early, though it would have done them little good,as this position was covered by innumerable others.

Sledge describes the caves and squid pots all up to the top of the ridge. Day after day the Marines in Sledges unit went into this horror. Okinawa was Peleliu magnified 10 times -- and they were dehumanised by the entire experience to a degree that those who have never, perhaps today few ever can, experience such a degree of fighting.

It should be noted that the Marines and, later, the Army siezed the ridge after 4 months of fighting. 10,000 Japanese soldiers and about 2000 Americans died on this island 3 Miles Long and 1 mile wide. I came across their bones --- femurs, skull shards, and shredded bodies all over the island. All along I had Sledge's book to keep me dark company.

And so I recommend you the book. In the same way that Robert Graves kept me company in my wet soujourns to Vimy Ridge and Ypres in Belgium, so too did Sledge keep me company in that hot hell in the South Pacific.

This book on combat ranks in the very highest tier.
This account by E.B. Sledge, a Marine PFC who landed on Peleliu and
Okinawa, details the violence and brutality of these two battles so
realistically that it is a disturbing and haunting book. Peleliu was
supposed to last 3 to 4 days, but went on for 2 months and cost the
Marines 1,262 dead and 5,274 wounded. The statistics from Okinawa
contain a action, and 26,221 neuropsychiatric "non-battle
casualties." At Peleliu, Sledge "had tasted the bitterest
essence of war, the sight of helpless comrades being slaughtered, and
it filled me with disgust." Peleliu was a jagged coral island
which caused cuts and tears on contact with human flesh, and there was
a lot of such contact. "It was almost impossible to dig a
protective foxhole in the rock." Once inland one's senses were
overwhelmed by the sight and smell of corpses filled with maggots,
human excrement on top of coral everywhere, dysentery, rotting
American and Japanese rations, huge flies, knee deep mud, rainstorms,
tropical oven heat, snapping bullets, and exploding shells. More than
once Sledge saw a Marine slide down a ridge into rotting Japanese
corpses to find himself covered with maggots and vomiting from the
smell. Peleliu was an "assault into hell;" the landscape
"hell's own cesspool." After the landing, with Marines
suffering from heat prostration, even the water came from hell --it
came in old oil drums, and the oil residue caused the troops to retch
in the broiling sun. When Sledge sees his comrades cutting gold teeth
from the Japanese--some while they are still alive--he is disgusted
and sickened. But war, Sledge notes, made savages of them all, and
one day Sledge finds himself bending over a Japanese corpse with a
knife to cut out gold teeth. A corpsman tries to dissuade him, first
with one argument and then another, finally succeeding by pointing out
the threat from germs involved. Relentlessly, Sledge and his comrades
move steadily forward, forward into the "meat grinder,"
losing more and more men to injury and death, the grim
"inevitable harvest." The sight of dead Marines who had been
tortured and mutilated by the Japanese hardens Sledge and his comrades
against the enemy. Sledge tells of the terror of walking across an
open field facing Japanese machine gun fire while at the same time
receiving friendly fire from the rear from a Marine tank. But there
was something "Artillery is hell," and of all the terrors,
"the terror and desperation endured under heavy shelling are by
far the most unbearable." Sledge learned to steer clear of any
and all second lieutenants, who invariably did not know what they were
doing and were highly dangerous to the troops. Sledge made two
amphibious landings on Peleliu and one on Okinawa. The rule
recognized among the troops was that if you made more than two
landings you had used up your luck. Even so, Sledge was one of less
than 10 in his company of 235 men to escape alive and
unwounded--thereby beating the "mathematics of death."
("Statistically," Sledge tells us, "the infantry units
had suffered l50 per cent casualties in the two campaigns.")
Dr. Sledge, who is now a college biology professor, writes: "War
is brutish, inglorious and a terrible waste. Combat leaves an
indelible mark on those who are forced to endure it. The only
redeeming factors were my comrades' incredible bravery and their
devotion to each other." From Sledge's viewpoint, Peleliu and
Okinawa were very close battles. His experience showed him that the
success of the Marines was grounded on their discipline, esprit de
corps, tough training, the ability to depend on one's comrades, and
boot camp, which developed an expectation to excel, even under
stress. Of all the books on combat, this ranks in the very highest
tier. Reading it is an experience--a new and terrible experience--of
what Marine infantrymen went through during and after an amphibious
landing in the Pacific in World War II. Without Marines like
Dr. Sledge, who put their arms and legs and lives on the line in these
savage battles, history would have taken a far different course. I,
for one, am profoundly grateful for what he and his comrades did, and
want to thank him for what he endured. We owe him and his comrades
more than we realize.

Best book describing war
"With The Old Breed" is a stunning eye witness account of one Marines trip from Boot Camp to the South Pacific during World War II. Sledge writes an autobiographical and historical account of his own experiences as a member of K Company, Third Battalion, Fifth Marines, First Marine Division. Coming late to the war in 1944, Sledge "only" participates in two of the famous 1st Marine battles - Peleliu and Okinawa. Throughout his account he speaks of his training, the closeness of combat and the horrors of war.
After initially enlisting in the Marines in 1942, Sledge enrolled in Marine ROTC but like may others in his class, he felt the call of the war and after a semester he went to boot camp. It was here that he got his first taste of Marine training. By this time the Marines had plenty of combat veterans who had been rotated home to fill the ranks of instructors. The effect of having veterans train the newest can be measured by their initial survival in combat. The instructors prepared Sledge and his peers well with tough, realistic training - training that would keep them alive in the first days in combat. His state side training was followed up with more once he reached the Pacific and a healthy dose of iron discipline. Again, the hard training paid off for Sledge. Later in the war the Marines ran out of time for proper training and integration of new troops. The result was dead Marines, to new to know what to do. Training and discipline were the difference between life and death in the initial days in combat. Sledge received and absorbed his training and went home without a scratch.
Though Sledge does not specifically address it, I was struck by the closeness of the combat he faced. Peleiu was a only 12 square miles - 6 miles long by 2 miles wide. Given that the average artillery piece of the day could range more than 6 miles, Peleiu was a division sized knife fight that lasted 30 days. 30 horrible days of almost non-stop fighting. Even when sent to the "rear" artillery and snipers were a constant danger. Okinawa was more of the same but on a larger scale. 60 miles long and between 2 and 18 miles wide, the Americans put a Field Army up against more than 100,000 entrenched Japanese. The vast majority of the island was covered by indirect fire and snipers were again a constant danger. Multiple Corps fought side by side where the island was barely 3 miles across. That anyone survived let alone prevailed through 80 days of bullets filling the air is amazing.
Unlike many military writers who only saw combat in pictures, Sledge was there. He writes a Marines thoughts in Marine words. And unlike writers who wax poetic about the intense experience of men under fire, Sledge repeatedly calls warfare what it is - a waste. A waste of men and material. A destroyer of lives and land. The only good he finds in his service are the friendships that were born and continue. Okinawa is an "abyss" and he tells of a battlefield so littered with dead that pieces of flesh fly with the shrapnel and mud flung by exploding artillery and mortars. He recalls a friend tricking him into not pulling the gold teeth out of a dead corpse by warning him of germs. Only later does he realize that his friend was trying to save his soul not his health.
When old men sit and decide to send young men to kill and be killed, they should be forced to read Sledge's words. War not only kills but also justifies killing. There are times and places where there is no other way. Times when the greater good can only come from the horror of war. But those times are few and I doubt someone like Sledge could find many after seeing first hand what war does to both those who die and those who survive.

A masterpiece written by a front-line combat Marine
When reading about historical events, one must consider the source. Dr. Sledge is an excellent source on the subject of Marines in combat in WWII. Dr. Sledge was really there at Peleliu and Okinawa, and on the front lines. No post-war historian could possibly describe the realities of combat with the accuracy of one who was really there. This book is a treasure not only because of its accuracy, but because it is so rare. Bookstores today are full of first-person accounts of Vietnam War veterans, but similar writings by veterans of WWII are extremely rare. If you want to read a generalized, sanitzed version of combat in the Pacific war, pick up a typical history book. However, if you want a definitive description of young American Marines fighting the ghastly horrors of combat-the worst reality of war-then this book is a must read. In my opinion, books such as this should be mandatory reading for high school students, so that they might have some understanding of how many Americans have fought and died to preserve the freedoms they now enjoy.

The best personal account of WWII in the Pacific
With the Old Breed is the best memoir I have read on the Second World War. After a brief chapter about his introduction into the Marine Corps, Sledge brings us with him into the fetid, humid hell that was the Pacific theater. Sledge, a mortarman with 3/5, 1st Marine Division, graphically details his experiences at Peleliu (a pointless battle) and Okinawa.

His tales are moving and brutal. In one account, his vivid description of digging a fighting hole only to find the rotting corpse of a Japanese soldier 2 feet down literally made my skin crawl. Elsewhere he recounts the bitter personal brutality that was all too common between US Marines and Japanese soldiers. After reading this book, you will understand what Sledge meant when, in the introduction he writes, "it has been a burden to retain this story." We should be thankful that Sledge decided to share his burden with posterity, lest we forget the awful price paid by all who were involved.

Honest, Plain Spoken Account of Horror and Heroism
Three veterans of the First Marine Division have written accounts of WWII in the Pacific. E.B. Sledge in this book, William Manchester in "Goodbye Darkness," and Robert Leckey in "Strong Men Armed." Sledge's book gives an honest, plain spoken, first hand account of two horrific campaigns. He pulls no punches in describing the brutality and the horror, but he doesn't dwell on it. He merely describes it in a matter of fact fashion.

Leckey's book ("Strong Men Armed") doesn't dwell on personal experiences, but gives the vast panorama of the Navy/Marine Corps island hopping campaign, and helps to put Sledge's personal memoir into the context of the whole war in the Pacific.

Manchester's book ("Goodbye Darkness") reads something like the out-loud ruminations of a mental patient working through unresolved issues on the psychiatrist's couch.

Leckey is a noted military historian who has written a number of very good books on the subject. Manchester is a noted author, and of the three has the most recognizable name. Sledge, however, although not a professional writer, is the First Division alumnus who has written the best book on the Pacific War. (Leckey runs a close second and Manchester a distant third).

More than one way to survive...
Dr. Sledge wrote that in the slaughtering days of Peleliu there was no sound -- no sound because there was ALL sound, deafening assaults on the ear's physiology. Of the 9000 Marines who landed on the island's shores, 1 out 7 were dead within 24 hours. Ocean water was dyed red to 4 feet out. On shore, and weighted down with 90 pounds of survival gear and weaponry, men ran and fired and fought in 110-degree heat, with no water to drink. And that was only the beginning.

Accounts of organized slaughter abound, from Thucydides' "History of the Peloponnesian Wars" to the Civil War's "Andersonville," from Leon Uris's factual writings shaped as novels to Canada's Farley Mowat in his 40-years-after-the-war eloquent memoir "And No Birds Sang," and to Larry Heinemann's wrenching exposures of Viet Nam. All these writings are unspeakably moving, and when we close the covers, we think we understand ... until we come across a book like that of E.B. Sledge.

The accounts of Dr. Sledge touched me immeasurably of their own accord but also because I once loved a casualty of that South Pacific island's horrors, who, unfortunately, never quite found a way back to normalcy. I was too young and self-involved to comprehend. As he continued his fateful journey into alcoholism, my own soul stiffened and I left that tortured man.

Twenty-six years later I sought out Dr. Sledge, and after some time found a way to reach him. His words, in a letter to me, ought to be shared. Dr. Sledge wrote that his physician father offered advice that put Sledge "on the road to a postwar life of happiness and success." Some of the advice was this: "Don't ever feel bitter or sorry for yourself. You served your time in Hell, but you survived."

Survive he did, and well. Dr. Sledge went on to earn degrees in science and to become "Uncle Eugene" to his friends on the Alabama campus where he taught biochemistry and zoology. "Science was my salvation," he told me. "When combat memories bore down on me I lost myself in a difficult problem [in science]."

Read his noble book. In honoring him, we honor all who have served, and are now serving, the ideals of our country.

A vivid first hand account of the brutality of war.
Very few authors of books on the war in the South Pacific bring the vivid first hand experiences to light the way Dr. Sledge is able to do. He paints a picture that your mind and spirit is able to see as you read his words. He tells of the funny side of war, if there is one, the emense amount of hard work involved, and the brutality of war as he experienced it. The contrast of fighting on a barren coral rock, as was Peleliu, to the muck and mud of Okinawa is compelling.

As I have been a close personal friend of Dr. Sledge for over 30 years, I have heard many times in his own words the accounts of the battles fought on Peleliu and Okinawa. However, Dr. Sledge, in the words he writes is able to bring the battles to life, and involve the reader as if they were there. His story is so much like the man he is, strong, well prepared, confident, a believer in God, and willing to go to war for his country and "kill japs".

Anyone who wishes to gain insight into the nature of the war with the Japanese, and of war in general, needs to read this book.

The best first-hand account of Marine combat during WWII
Author Eugene Sledge served as a mortarman with the 1st Marine Division during the battles of Peleliu and Okinawa. His devasting account of the horrors he witnessed are a must read for anyone interested in WWII. This could be the best personal memoir of combat ever written. If you want a full appreciation of what the generation of Americans who endured WWII combat went through, buy this book now.

Sledge takes the reader with him as he joins the Marine Corp, goes through boot camp, and ends up with the grizzled combat veterans of the 1st Marine Division. He takes us through his initiation of combat on Peleliu, a coral island which had some of the worst fighting, up to that point, in the Pacific. Today, there is a general belief that the battle for Peleliu was unnecessary, owing to the advancement of the schedule for the invasion of the Philippines. If this was an unneeded battle, Sledge shows in full detail the horrible sacrifice young Americans suffered.

His account of the battle of Okinawa is even more devasting. Where Peleliu was a dry, parched hell, Okinawa is a hell of rain, mud, muck and decay. Sledge is unstinting in exposing the horror and ever-present danger facing those in the frontlines. He shows the casual brutality of combat, and does not turn away from showing the hatred most Marines had for the Japanese. He shows the close bonds that develop between the members of a combat unit, the terror of shell-shocked soldiers, dodging bullets & shells on stretcher bearer duty, the stench of fighting in the middle of human decay, and the loss that is felt when friends die.

"With the Old Breed" is mandatory reading for anyone interested in WWII. ... Read more

Editorial Review

The Civil War as you've never experienced it before, through original, first-hand reportage of The New York Times, the country's newspaper of record.  Available for the first time in a unique book/DVD package

The New York Times, established in 1851, was one of the few newspapers with correspondents on the front lines throughout the Civil War. The Complete Civil War collects every article written about the war from 1861 to 1865, plus select pieces before and after the war and is filled with the action, politics, and personal stories of this monumental event. From the first shot fired at Fort Sumter to the surrender at Appomattox, and from the Battle of Antietam to the Battle of Atlanta, as well as articles on slavery, states rights, the role of women, and profiles of noted heroes such as Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, the era comes alive through these daily first-hand accounts.

• More than 600 of the most crucial and interesting articles in the book—typeset and designed for easy reading
• Commentary by Editors and Civil War scholars Harold Holzer and Craig Symonds
• More than 104,000 additional articles on the DVD-ROM— every article the Times published during the war.
• A detailed chronology highlights articles and events of interest that can be found on the disk.

Strikingly designed and illustrated with hundreds of maps, historical photographs, and engravings, this book is a treasure for Civil War and history buffs everywhere.

"This is a fascinating and riveting look at the most important event in American history as seen through the eyes of an institution that was emerging as the most important newspaper in American history.   In these pages, the Civil War seems new and fresh, unfolding day after anxious day, as the fate of the republic hangs in the balance."  Ken Burns

"Serious historians and casual readers alike will find this extraordinary collection of 600 articles and editorials about the Civil War published in The New York Times before and during the war of great value and interest...enough to keep the most assiduous student busy for the next four years of the war's sesquicentennial observations."  James McPherson

"This fascinating work catapults readers back in time, allowing us to live through the Civil War as daily readers of The New York Times, worrying about the outcome of battles, wondering about our generals, debating what to do about slavery, hearing the words that Lincoln spoke, feeling passionate about our politics.  Symonds and Holzer have found an ingenious new way to experience the most dramatic event in our nation's history."
Doris Kearns Goodwin

"Harold Holzer and Craig Symonds have included not only every pertinent article from the pages of The Times, but enhanced and illuminated them with editorial commentary that adds context and perspective, making the articles more informative and useful here than they were in the original issues.  Nowhere else can readers of today get such an understanding of how readers of 1861-1865 learned of and understood their war." William C Davis

The DVD runs on Windows 2000/XP or Mac OS X 10.3 or later.



... Read more

Reviews

Just What the Doctor Ordered!, October 19, 2010
Beautiful Coffee Table sized book containing most of the writing in the New York Times from when it was actually written! Not dummied down in the least... The picture here looks drab but the book is anything but!

Tmely Reference for The Sesquicentennial, November 30, 2010
This splendid reference will be valuable to all Americans.

It will be particularly opportune for the Civil War history buffs as they track, celebrate or commemorate the events which occurred in our country's Civil War 150 years ago.

Keep it handy to read accounts as they occurred and were recorded for our nation's readers, and thereby bring new life to your study of the war as it "progressed" over the four years.

It includes a DVD as well as a great 42 page chronology of the four years.

An Outstanding Chronicle of the War, December 24, 2010
What I found most exciting about this book was the fact that it took the day-to-day articles about the war. What is forgotten after all these years is the living history aspect of the war. I am a big admirerer of the editors Harold Holzer and Craig Symonds, but I wanted to know who was in the trenches doing the research work. I was not familiar with the name Dwight Jon Zimmerman, but that the editors gave him great praise for putting things together, I decided to check him out. Turns out he's done a bunch of respected books, the most recent one about Medal of Honor recipients. So, while giving kudos to Harold and Craig, I want to say "Thank you" to Mr. Zimmerman--he did a great job assembling the articles. It must have been a huge task and I'm in awe of what he accomplished. It's evident by the praise Harold and Craig gave him. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Reviews

An Eye-Opening Account of the Ethnic & Geographic Impact of Stalin & Hitler, October 14, 2010
Rarely have I encountered a history that is as enlightening and thought-provoking as Snyder's account of the impact of forced starvation, genocide, war, ethnic cleansing, and geographic re-location on the peoples of Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, the Baltic Republics, and the formerly German Reich over the two decades between 1933 and 1953, when Stalin died. Residents of the region of Europe he calls the Bloodlands experienced atrocities of an unprecedented nature and scope in this period. What is especially striking is how many people were victimized multiple times in this relatively brief period--first by the Soviet authorities, then by the Germans, and then again by the Soviets as Stalin and Hitler imposed their insane doctrines on civilian populations.

Snyder is an extremely skillful writer and holds the reader's attention throughout in what could easily have been a dry treatise on the demographic dimensions of human suffering. He skillfully weaves in the gripping stories of individual people caught in the maelstrom, giving a human face to the numbers. I have to disagree with one reviewer who alleges this is just another study of the similarities between Soviet and Nazi totalitarianism; Snyder is careful to compare and contrast these two tyrannical regimes.

This is an engrossing book, but may be a bit too ambitious for people without some familiarity with modern European history. However, it is certainly worth reading and gives valuable new perspectives on the impact of the 30s, World War II, and the Postwar Era on residents of Eastern Europe. I recommend it highly to anyone interested in the history of the period.

Objective, well-written book about the horrors that occurred, October 29, 2010
"Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin" by Timothy Snyder, is a book about the intentional mass murder of over 14 million people between 1930 and 1947 in a general area that encompasses what is now Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine, and western Russia. And by murder, I mean that. As part of that 14 million number, Mr. Snyder counts only those that were outright killed, intentionally starved, or otherwise were put to death outside of military actions or by being worked to death. If you were to include the deaths that could have been predictably forseen as a result of certain actions taken, that number jumps to between 17 and 21 million people who were killed.

The author breaks the killing periods into 5 general subsets ... Stalin starving the Ukrainian kulaks in 1932-1933, Stalin's Great Terror of 1937-1938, Hitler and Stalin murdering and otherwise removing Polish, Latvian, Lithuanian, and Estonian intelligentsias from 1939-1941, Hitler's murdering the Jewish population and "undesirables" of many countries, intentionally starving Russian POWs and Soviet civilians, and executing civilians as part of partisan reprisals in 1941 - 1945, and people who died as a result of forced resettlements in 1945-1947.

While I've read extensively about World War II, I learned a great deal from this book. As one example, there were no purely death camps in Germany proper, they were all in Poland. While there were concentrations camps in Germany and many of these camps contained extermination chambers, their primary function was as forced-labor camps. Personnel assigned to the labor camps had a slim chance of surviving. There were 6 death, or extermination, camps set up in Poland ... Auschwitz, Chelmno, Belzed, Majdanek, Soribor, and Treblinka. Only Auschwitz had a labor camp attached to it, the other 5 existed purely to murder people. Of the people who arrived at the death camps other than Auschwitz, they were all usually killed within hours of arrival, and of those sent there, only about 100 people saw the inside of the camp and lived to tell of it. At Auschwitz, new arrivals were separated into those who would be killed immediately, and those who would work in the labor camp until they weakened and then they were killed. The survivor's tales from Auschwitz come from those assigned to the labor camps.

This book attempts, with great success, to show the vast scope of death in the bloodlands, and how Hitler's and Stalin's extermination policies were alike and how they differed. He also shows how the Wehrmacht was much more complicit in atrocities than the German soldiers of the time would have liked you to believe, and how international and allied policies overlooked much of the killing for a variety of reasons.

The book is grim reading, and while it is more of a scholarly study of the depredations of Hitler and Stalin, there are anecdotes contained within that are heartbreaking, such as the Polish-Jewish mother breastfeeding her infant mere seconds before they're shot, and a starving Ukrainian toddler hallucinating that he sees the food that will save his family's lives. It is not a sensationalist text; it calmly, objectively, and concisely discusses the horrors that occurred.

I highly recommend this book. It is the first book I've read that ties so many of the atrocities committed against the helpless into one highly readable and informative tome, and shows them as part of a larger tapestry against the framework of the times.

Excellent account of the loss of millions caught between two evils, October 15, 2010
Prof Synder has made a valuable addition to the history of the geonocide of the eastern european people who were caught between the expanionist and ethnic evil of nazi germany and the totalitarian political evil of soviet untion in the 1930's and WWII. While we are all familiar with the loss of life in this area from the Holocaust and death camps, we are reminded how many many more people were systematically killed by these two evil regimes. The soviet deliberate starvation of the ukranian people is 1933, the division of poland between the two nations and the subsequent extinguishing of the polish intelligentsia by both regimes, followed by the ethnice cleansing of jews by the nazis, and the politcal executions of anyone who stalin felt opposed his power. This geographical area was the site of the worst of human nature in the 20th century and this book does justice to the many who died there simply by being in this area caught between two of the centuries most evil regimes.

Bloodcurdling history, October 21, 2010
I would suggest taking a careful look at the Kindle edition of this book (the free sample) before ordering it: I downloaded the sample of this book and quickly discovered that the maps in the Kindle version were almost illegible. The book looked fascinating, and the maps are important, so I ordered the hardbound version instead.
---------------------
I have now owned the hardbound edition of this book for a week or two, and, although the book is excellent in every way, my reading progress has been slow because the subject matter is both terrifying and depressing. So far, the book has demolished many of my hazy ideas about what happened in the Bloodlands.

For example, I had a never-closely-examined "picture" of how Hitler killed six million Jews. That would be as follows: he rounded up the Jews living in Germany, took them to concentration camps like Auschwitz, and gassed them. We have all seen the film footage, which makes an indelible impression.

It turns out that my "picture" is completely wrong. Germany simply did not have enough Jews, and a huge number escaped through emigration while it was still allowed. The total of German Jews killed was 175,000. That is (don't mistake my meaning) in itself an incomprehensible, enormous number, but it does not account for six million dead. What Hitler did, in fact, was to conquer Poland (with the connivance of Stalin) and begin massacring Polish and East European Jews. A huge number were simply shot and tossed into unmarked mass graves. There were also "killing camps" (NOT concentration camps) where the average "stay" was just a day or two, and the victims were gassed without any pretense of work whatsoever.

One reason we Americans were slow in understanding the truth is that we (our troops) never even got to the Bloodlands, and so the massive crimes of Hitler and Stalin, amounting to 14 million dead, were simply things that we remained unaware of. I could recite the names of the monstrous killing camps and you most likely would not recognize them --- neither did I.

What we remain ignorant of are horrendous crimes such as Stalin's collectivization drive in the Ukraine, which was an utter failure. Shortly after his wife committed suicide (with a bullet through her heart), Stalin became actively malicious towards the Ukraine, seizing all their grain and selling it abroad, and causing a famine which killed 3.3 million people. This is described in the chapter on "Class Terror."

But then came the show trials and the Great Terror. This time, Stalin went after nationalities which he suspected --- Poles, Ukrainians, Belorussians -- and the Ukraine experienced a second wave of terror-murder, described in the chapter on "National Terror." All of this happened well before World War II, and all of this time Hitler was able to point to Stalin as a horrific example of Bolshevism ("Why You Should Vote for the Nazis").

Very soon, Hitler invaded Poland from the West, and Stalin (after a cautious pause) invaded from the East, and the stage was set for some of the worst crimes in human history. When you realize that Hitler, in annexing "his half" of Poland, had suddenly created a nation with more Slavs than any other nation in the world (aside from the USSR), and when you think of Hitler's lunatic insistence on "racial purity" --- in addition to his initial plan to steal the land of the Slavs, annihilate them, and populate the lands with German farmers --- a genuine shiver of terror runs down your back.

This is a long overdue, magisterial work, which will be a very valuable source for students, teachers, and researchers in the future.

The very best book on those murdered by Stalin and Hitler, October 11, 2010
In his first book, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF NATIONS, Timothy Snyder made the history of the old Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth his own. Doubtless few without ethnic ties to that vast region (those not Polish, Balt, Ukrainian, Belarusian or Ashkenazi Jewish) were interested in that seemingly obscure history. But anyone concerned with the mass murders of the 1930's and 1940's in Europe needs a second look, for it was in this region that the evil work of Stalin and Hitler most importantly occurred. It was here that Stalin taught other dictators how to kill and here that Hitler became his most accomplished pupil.

There has not appeared any previous book as brilliantly authoritative on this subject as Snyder's BLOODLANDS. He deserves a medal!

Superb geography of crimes against humanity, November 5, 2010
Bottom line: Buy this book for the reader on your holiday list who only has room on the shelf for one more book about WW2 history.

Look here for the best professional review of "Bloodlands" book by the Literary Review: [...].

Americans do not study geography in school the way Europeans and Asians do, and we have much to learn from Timothy Snyder's approach to counting, narrating and explaining some of the worst crimes against humanity committed during World War Two. They took place in a region where no GIs ever traveled, between Berlin and Moscow conprising all of Poland, Belarus and the Ukraine (among other regions). This bloody stage was covered up by the Iron Curtain from 1945 until 1989. As a result, the way World War Two history has been written (mostly by the victorious Allies) up til now misses fact, context and nuance.

"The best died first," Snyder writes in a paragraph that will haunt me the rest of my life.

Adding to the problems that historians face, according to Snyder, most of what is known about this planned killing has come from, and has been framed by, survivors. Survivors had luck or made choices which alter their view of the killing field, Snyder notes, and that in turn makes history problematic. For instance, it is hard for the survivor to accurately report or even understand the odds of his or her own survival, to detail the resources available at the time and compare them with resoruces available to others (especially in terms of energy--calories), or to comprehend all the possible choices which he or she did not take under extreme distress. Survivors cannot always remember every moral hazard they encountered, and they are not the best people to rate them. Snyder comments about this, both in the beginning and at the end of "Bloodlands," raising objections to conventional scholarship. But the dead victims of crimes against humanity never spoke. The dead perpetrators have rarely spoken. Less so the bystanders, living or dead. Survivors tell a tale that must be told, and they are in the majority when telling it. It is hard to see a way out of the perils Snyder warns of.

Getting underway with the narrative, Snyder chillingly introduces the reader to horrific killing fields where there were no survivors. Take Ukraine, for instance. There in 1932-1933, Stalin literally starved three million by ordering paid & well-fed employees ("party members") to take the grain away from the Ukrainian people before their eyes so they could not plant next season's crop, upon which they solely subsisted. To minimize the chances of resistance, the perpetrators regularly round up large numbers of people, took them away in the middle of the night to trenches dug in the woods farther than anybody could walk to (based on a rough estimate of the calories available), and shot them dead. These facts are undisputed. A third alternative fate was banishment to concentration camps in Siberia, where 25% died (not, apparently, the low number of 10% that Snyder asserts).

After killing all the livestock in the country, the remaining Ukranians starved to death. Men, women, children--all starved according to plan. Almost none of these people could read or write. They left almost no diaries. The few survivors had nobody to tell their stories to, unless they made contact with Westerners or Soviet dissidents. Afterwards, a few Russian homesteaders took the bait and migrated east to take over "abandoned" (I would say "widowed") Ukranian farms, only to return east when they could not abide the stench, no matter how hard they tried to fix up the dwellings. A few of these people wrote about what they found and sensed, particularly the silence that accompanies barren farmland bereft of animal presence. Even all the birds had been shot. Those few who told this story catalogued artifacts: skulls, bones, shallow graves, slowly decomposing human remains. At the time of the Ukrainian forced starvations, about 40% of the Soviet intelligence bureau whose employees perpetrated this horror was Jewish. (This can be verified because very Soviet passport contained the ethnic or national identity of the bearer. In addition, stalin kept lists.) These perps were later murdered ("purged" is a needlessly political term for having been tortured then hanged or shot), in turn, by Stalin, and before they died some of them clearly told the truth about what they had done in Ukraine in 1932. So there is a record. But statistically speaking, it is a miracle that primary sources even exist. Add to that the fact that Snyder has done most of his own translations of primary sources which many native speakers never even knew of, and you have a linguistic feat in itself which puts this book in the Pantheon.

Snyder places blame squarely and personally on Hitler and Stalin who imagined, designed and crafted the massacres detailed here, then set and controlled conditions to that the massacres could be carried out. I approve of the general movement by historians towards this approach, labeling leaders with the personal crimes they actually commit--in particular, these two men who were murderous psychopaths first, "political leaders" second. I am also aware that two men did not murder fourteen million people. I kept asking myself how many other killers were involved in every incident where Snyder counts the victims, and I noticed that (as he forewarns) it is easier to understand what the victim experienced than to understand what the actual perpetrators experienced. In the case of German bystanders who gathered to view a pile of Jewish bodies, or starving Ukranians who ate their own children, the reader almost cannnot make sense of the scene. Snyder points out that to say "it is senseless" is just as unhelpful; when any crime is regarded as beyond understanding, "beyond history," then we play into the hands of the mass murderer.

The facts are overwhelming, and I had trouble keeping tabs on the numbers. Paradoxically, Snyder realizes that when we focus on the statistics and logistics of massacres, we are only validating the aims of the killers. He admits that it is necessary for the historian to imagine, to try to understand, every single extinguished life, but on the scale of what Stalin and Hitler accomplished this is clearly impossible, and so Snyder's paradox makes for uneasy reading and digestion.

There are apparently some mistakes, as in any sweeping history, and Snyder's attempts to distinguish different kinds of killing and murderous policies sometimes seem forced. This may be because we are not used to thinking in these terms yet. We are not used to making distinctions yet between war and war crimes, between planned massacres and political policy, between necessary killing and murder, between leaders of a willing populace and criminals with power over a willing populace. I urge interested readers to compliment "Bloodlands" with "Human Smoke" by Nicholson Baker. Baker's book is a completely different kind of history, intimate vignettes compiled chronologically, but Snyder's answers only raise more of Baker's questions.

These two books are a good start for American readers training themselves to think holistically about war and global conflicts. No matter what your war experience, ethnic identity, personal beliefs or political leanings, these books will challenge you and horrify you. Read them both.

Three and a half stars.

How many is 17 million?, October 21, 2010
I cannot add to the factual content of other reviewers here. This is a great book. It is extremely well written.

I just want to comment on my reaction to the first chapter, which outlines the scope of the slaughter and genocide. I was remembering the "paper clip project" done by students in a middle school in Tennessee. They were studying the Holocaust and wanted to know "how many is a million?" Well, it takes a railcar similar to those used in the Holocaust to hold one million paperclips.

So how many is 17 million persons? Caught between Stalin's hammer and Hitler's anvil, the slaughter of whole populations of kulaks, intellectuals, Jews, army officers--any displaced person, or displaceable person--stuns one's imagination.

I found this book to complement Catherine Epstein's Model Nazi, about the development of a Nazi overlord in the part of Poland appropriated by the Nazi's early in WW II.

Humanist History, October 31, 2010
To the American reader with Easter European origins, perhaps the author's most fundamental achievement is to bring back to life the countless relatives that vanished.

As The Guardian wrote in its review: ' The figures are so huge and so awful that grief could grow numb. But Snyder, who is a noble writer as well as a great researcher, knows that. He asks us not to think in those round numbers. "It is perhaps easier to think of 780,863 different people at Treblinka: where the three at the end might be Tamara and Itta Willenberg, whose clothes clung together after they were gassed, and Ruth Dorfmann, who was able to cry with the man who cut her hair before she entered the gas chamber." The Nazi and Soviet regimes turned people into numbers. "It is for us as humanists to turn the numbers back into people." '

bloodlands, November 15, 2010
The most frightening book ever written...14 million people intentionally murdered by first the Soviets (Russians), then the Nazis (Germans), then local governments between 1930 and roughly 1948. Not many things keep me up at night, but this one did: graphic tales of murder and death, starvation of children, other items which border on the pornographic. I was familiar but not expert on the Final Solution, purges, Collectivization. What this book does is to add context to a series of events that can only be understood if considered together. Quite a feat of research and scholarship to bring it all together. My only complaint is that the book is perhaps about 50 pages too long. I also wish the publisher had placed the abstract in the front of the book (Kindle edition) vice the end, where I found it late. Shakespeare wrote that Nero was a fisher in the lake of darkness (Lear?). The lake was the bloodlands, and Hitler and Stalin were right there beside him.

Magisterial Work Highlights the Little-Known Genocides of Slavs, and Why No Slav Extermination, November 14, 2010
The single-volume work is very detailed and scholarly. It goes a long way towards redressing the imbalanced attention to the Holocaust, and the neglect of Soviet Communist crimes. Snyder concludes: "Fourteen million people were deliberately murdered by two regimes over twelve years." (p. 406).

During the Holodomor (Soviet famine-genocide of 1932-1933), at least 3.3 million Soviet citizens perished. Though most of these were Ukrainians, there were also many Polish and other victims. (p. 53).

Moving on to the Great Terror (1937-1938), Snyder comments: "Even as the Popular Front presented the Soviet Union as the homeland of toleration, Stalin ordered the mass killing of several Soviet nationalities...The most persecuted European national minority in the second half of the 1930's was not the four hundred thousand or so German Jews...but the six hundred thousand or so Soviet Poles..." (p. 89). "In 1937 and 1938, Poles were twelve times more likely than the rest of the Soviet Ukrainian population to be arrested." (p. 99)(and 40 times more likely to be murdered: p. 104). One-eighth of all Great Terror victims were Poles, although Poles were only 0.4% of the USSR's population. (p. 104).

Snyder continues (bear in mind the Jews constituted 1-2% of the population of the USSR): "The Jewish officers who brought the Polish operation to Ukraine and Belarus, such as Izrail Leplevskii, Lev Raikhman, and Boris Berman, were arrested and executed. This was part of a larger trend. When the mass killing of the Great Terror began, about a third of the high-ranking NKVD officers were Jewish by nationality. By the time Stalin brought it to an end on 17 November 1938, about twenty percent of the high-ranking officers were. A year later that figure was less than four percent." (p. 108). Snyder portrays all this as Stalin (before de-Judaizing the CP) having Jews do all his dirty work so that Jews would be the scapegoats for it. (This will not do. Jews had been strongly, and by deliberate choice, overrepresented in Communism long before Stalin. Jews in high positions in the USSR certainly knew what they were doing. They were active perpetrators, not pawns).

Contrary to recent revisionist Russian propaganda, at no time was a 1930's Polish-German alliance against the USSR in the offing: pp. 64-65. During the WWII period up to Barbarossa, some 200,000 Poles (mainly the intelligentsia) were murdered by the Soviets and Nazis. (p. 153). However, the Polish intelligentsia proved too large, and robust, to eliminate. (p. 293). Snyder downgrades the total eventual number of Poles murdered by the Germans to 1 million, along with another 1 million dead from mistreatment and casualties of war. (p. 406). In doing so, he ignores other sources (and NOT just postwar propaganda estimates) that cite a much higher number of Polish-gentile victims of the Nazis.

About eight million people, mostly Slavs, were eventually deported to the Reich for forced labor. (p. 294). The consequences of the German invasion of their erstwhile Soviet ally were as follows: "During this eastern war, the Germans also deliberately murdered some ten million people, including more than five million Jews and more than three million prisoners of war." (p. 155). On the other side of the coin, a much smaller number of captive Germans perished in Soviet captivity, comprising 185,000 civilians and 363,000 POWs. (p. 318).

The fact that the Germans did not murder many more Slavs owed entirely to practical reasons. Plans to exterminate tens of millions of Slavs by starvation (Hunger Plan, or as part of Himmler's proposal of 30 million locals' deaths: p. 234, 389), on the heels of Operation Barbarossa, fell through. (pp. 162-163, 187). The Germans, unlike their earlier Soviet counterparts, had proved incapable of inflicting Holodomor-style genocides owing to such things as a shortage of personnel needed to seal-off collective farms and cities against a transfer of food. (pp. 166-168; 172). Even the long-besieged Leningrad retained some access to outside food. (p. 173). Long-term German plans calling for the massive extermination of tens of millions of Slavs (GENERALPLAN OST), including 80-85% of Poles (p. 160), became moot as a result of Germany's defeat.

Snyder devotes some chapters to the Holocaust, and includes seldom-mentioned information, such as the function of KL Warschau (pp. 296-297), which was later reused as an NKVD camp. (p. 311). Snyder also realizes that the Germans sent Jews out into the countryside as spies (as by taking their families hostage)(p. 237) and that Poles' cut-throat gestures directed at doomed Jews [as in Lanzmann's SHOAH] did not necessarily imply an approval of their fate. (p. 266).

German revisionists, focusing on the vertriebiene, have tried to cover up Germany's genocidal crimes by inventing a nonexistent genocide of 2 million Germans by the victorious Allies. What are the facts? Snyder writes: "In all of this flight and transport, from early 1945 to late 1947, perhaps four hundred thousand Germans native to lands that were annexed by Poland died: most of them in Soviet and Polish camps, and a second large group caught between armies or drowned at sea." (pp. 323-324). However, Snyder has reversed the actual proportions of causes of death. In any case, the 400,000 figure, long buried in German archives (p. 405), is likely a maximum.

Interestingly, some Germans were afraid to board enclosed deportation trains, fearing that they were disguised gas chambers! (p. 322). During the actual postwar expulsion processes, probably no more than a few thousand (or at most a few tens of thousands) of Germans died. (p. 323). Perhaps about 30,000 Germans died in Polish-Communist camps in 1945 and 1946 (p. 322), and 19,000-30,000 were killed in Czechoslovakia. (p. 320, 499).

Germans were not the only ones massively relocated. For instance, 1.5 million Poles from the Kresy (Poland's eastern half, conquered by the USSR in 1939 and given away during the Teheran betrayal of Poland) were unilaterally deprived of their centuries-old domiciles without so much as being consulted.
... Read more

Editorial Review

Four US Navy SEALS departed one clear night in early July 2005 for the mountainous Afghanistan-Pakistan border for a reconnaissance mission. Their task was to document the activity of an al Qaeda leader rumored to be very close to Bin Laden with a small army in a Taliban stronghold. Five days later, only one of those Navy SEALS made it out alive.

This is the story of the only survivor of Operation Redwing, SEAL fire team leader Marcus Luttrell, and the extraordinary firefight that led to the largest loss of life in American Navy SEAL history. His squadmates fought valiantly beside him until he was the only one left alive, blasted by an RPG into a place where his pursuers could not find him. Over the next four days, terribly injured and presumed dead, Luttrell crawled for miles through the mountains and was taken in by sympathetic villagers who risked their lives to keep him safe from surrounding Taliban warriors.

A born and raised Texan, Marcus Luttrell takes us from the rigors of SEAL training, where he and his fellow SEALs discovered what it took to join the most elite of the American special forces, to a fight in the desolate hills of Afghanistan for which they never could have been prepared. His account of his squadmates' heroism and mutual support renders an experience that is both heartrending and life-affirming. In this rich chronicle of courage and sacrifice, honor and patriotism, Marcus Luttrell delivers a powerful narrative of modern war. ... Read more

Reviews

Absolutely Unimaginable
This book takes you inside the Navy SEALs training program in Coronado. You are with Marcus Luttrell throughout BUD/S and Hell Week. You fly with him and his teammates in a C-130 to the Hindu Kush, where the hunt begins for bin Laden's right-hand man. But then it all goes terribly wrong, up there in the mountains of Afghanistan.

This book, written by Patrick Robinson, reads like a fast-paced thriller, told in Marcus's understated voice. It is a rivetting, important, sad story of lost friends, valor, courage and the intricacies of modern war. It is an important book, destined to become an American classic.

An Outstanding Portrait of Bravery, Sacrifice & Survival
This book is a compelling, easy read that you will find hard to put down. The first part takes you through SEAL training in Coronado, CA and gives you a deep appreciation for just how hard it is to become a SEAL, while the second half takes you through a harrowing battle that in many ways validates just why the SEAL selection and training process is so difficult and so effective.

The battle sequence in Afghanistan and its aftermath is incredibly intense . The best screen writer in Hollywood couldn't have dreamt up something more intense, moving, and awe inspiring. If they make it into a movie it will in some ways be like a Afghani inspired version of Full Metal Jacket.

Reading this fills one with humility and gratitude for the sacrifice that all the members of our armed services make on our behalf, but especially for the men of the SEAL teams. All I can say is that I am very glad they are on our side.

As an aside, if you enjoy books like this you should check out Bravo Two Zero by Andy McNab, an SAS operative who served in the first Iraq war. I found it highly ironic that in both cases great misfortune results from acts of human mercy that elite soldiers felt compelled to take despite the clear risk it posed to their own lives. These books should be required reading for anyone who questions the character and moral fiber of such brave men.

Stop reading reviews...Buy the book!
Apparently some people are upset because Luttrell has an opinion and some attitude. I'll let you in on a little known secret...one does not survive any severe challenge without strong opinions and attitude. It is part of the man, therefore a required part of "his" story. Even if you still have your John Kerry bumper sticker still super-glued to your car and you truly believe in the vast right-wing conspiracy, you should buy this book for what it is, an amazing (and true) story and a great read. Stop pushing the liberal or conservative agenda for awhile and just be an appreciative American. Luttrell is the real deal.

The Story of Four Great Amercian Heroes
Lone Survivor is one of those books that you will either get, or you will not get. Retired Navy Seal Marcus Luttrell and British author Patrick Robinson have given us a spellbinding account of a Navy Seal mission in the mountains of Afghanistan in which 3 of Marcus' team members lost their lives. The minute-by-heart pounding-minute account of their ordeal will either grab you in the gut and make you thank God for the United States of Amercia, or you'll come away scratching your head wondering what the fuss is all about.

Because I am an ex-serviceman, I understand the warrior ethos with which the SEALs, and other special-forces type soldiers like them operate by. Luttrell is not shy about sharing his views about how those in the media, academia, and in politics have so much to say about "human rights" and "rules of engagement," without realizing what the stakes are on the battlefield.

Far from being "trigger happy Rambo-types," the account Luttrell and Robinson portray the SEALs in Lone Survior is of a group of men who are, at the core, deeply moral, patriotic men driven by love of God and country, not blood-lust. Their deliberation on whether or not to execute the goatherders brought me to tears.

It is easy for those of us who have never experienced war, being shot at,having our lives threatened by hostile action, etc. to say what we would or would not do in certain situations. But the fact remains that the Navy SEALS are highly trained combat specialists, mentally and physically, and those brave men who stories are told in Lone Survivor are owed a debt of gratitude from a nation who remains free because of their sacrifice.

RICK SHAQ GOLDSTEIN SAYS: "HELL WEEK IS WAR.. AND WAR IS HELL!!"
Right before I bought this book, I heard all the promotional "buzz" and "word of mouth" associated with it. When I started reading it, after the first 60-70 pages, which were kind of boring, I was saying to myself, "woe, were they really talking about this book, it's kind of boring!" Then we got to Navy Seal training. Ladies and Gentlemen, (Future readers.) I recommend you fasten your seat belts, fasten your chest harness, and it probably is good advice, to put a pillow behind your neck to protect you from whiplash! This story, then rockets non-stop for the next 320 pages. I'm a U.S. Veteran, and I thought my basic training was pretty tough. But after reading this book, I realize, I probably wasn't in basic training, I was on some kind of holiday, and instead of cussing out my drill instructor every night, I should have been sending him candy and flowers. Basic Seal training is tough, but they're just getting warmed up with some basics, such as: "they just bound our ankles together and then bound our wrists together behind our backs and shoved us into the deep end (Of the pool). This caused a certain amount of panic, but our instructions were clear: Take a huge gulp of air and drop to the bottom of the pool in the standing position. Hold it there for at least a minute, bob up for new air, then drop back down for another minute, or more if you could." All along the way, the instructors are declaring that most of the potential Seals won't be here at graduation, they'll either be thrown out, or quit. (Note: Only 30 of the original 180 made it!) A number of these highly motivated seamen dropped out during basic Seal training, and now.. And now... we get to "HELL WEEK"! I will attempt to briefly summarize "Hell Week" for you. What these cream of the crop, young American men, are put through, is hard to fathom. It is past inhumane. I'm surprised some politically correct ACLU representative isn't present, suing the Navy, but this is the only way to train the "best of the best"! And it's this training, that probably saved Marcus's life, in his ordeal in Afghanistan. 0500. "Give me 20 pushups! Go run into the freezing ocean in combat boots and fatigues. Get out of the ocean and roll around in the sand. (This will be referred to from here on out as getting "wet and sandy"!) Give me 20 more pushups. Now go on a multi-mile run down the beach, in soft or wet sand, with a million sand particles in your combat boots, and stuck in every crevice of your body, thereby acting like the most abrasive sand paper you'll ever have administered to your body. Oh you want to eat breakfast, well jump back in the freezing ocean, get out of the ocean, roll around in the sand (Getting "wet and sandy") run the couple of miles back (all in an accepted maximum time, or you're out of the Seals!) Give me 20 pushups! Now you can eat. Now pickup a log the size of a telephone pole. Run into the same aforementioned ocean (While still carrying the log!) Come out of the ocean. Get "wet and sandy". Give me 20 pushups. Do it again. Now pick up a boat and run down the beach. Put the boat in the water, turn it over and fill it with water, bring it back to shore. Get "wet and sandy"! Give me 20 pushups. Now get in the boat with your teammates and row backwards through the waves. Then turn around and paddle backwards through the waves. Hit the beach and get "wet and sandy"! Now I'll fast forward to diving drills in the pool. Wearing full diving gear, with heavy air tanks, jump in the pool, but your feet cannot touch bottom. If they touch bottom you're out of the Seals! To keep you company under water, there are friendly Seal instructors, pulling your masks off, pushing down on your back, and other assorted friendly, efforts to assist you in drowning. But here's my favorite from this exercise. An instructor will rip your air hose off and tie it in a knot. You have to reach over your back, since you can't see the hose, and try to untie the knot without drowning. If you can't make it, you're kicked out of the Seals. There are so many more tortuous tasks, that literally go beyond human endurance. These young men, are dedicated, and committed to the United States of America, and go where people don't want to go, and do what must be done! My favorite quote from this book, that will live with me forever, was by the infamous instructor Reno, during training: "THE BODY CAN TAKE DAMN NEAR ANYTHING. IT'S THE MIND THAT NEEDS TRAINING!" I could go on and on, about this book, and I haven't even gotten to the indescribable battle for "Murphy's Ridge". Even though, to some people, the battle, and the deaths of Marcus's teammates, and Marcus's survival, is probably the most discussed part of this book. I will never forget, the dedication, desire, guts, pride, and total, (And I mean total!) commitment, and their stretching the envelope of human endurance, by these amazing young American's! As a U.S. veteran, I salute, and remain in unending awe, of these unique, gifted, dedicated, American heroes! "God Bless America!"

Now words to describe the story
I picked this book up with great anticipation on its release date and read in in two sittings...I could not put it down. The story of the heroism exemplified by the warrior elite SEALS and the patriotism displayed by those who supported his family in their time of need is awe inspiring. Thank you Marcus, Mikey, Axe, and Danny...It is becaue of men like you and stories like this that inspired me to join the military. God Bless America...

I would like to add a comment to Mr. Swan. Did you read the part of the book where Mr. Luttrell describes where they develop there ego and why they are so extremely gung ho? It is in the part where he takes us through BUD/S and hell week, which if you could complete you would feel the same way the SEALS do...invincible. You must also be a liberal if you compare killing the herdsman in the book with terrorism. But since your "enlightened" liberal attitude is unable to see the obvious difference, I will point it out to you. The herdsman were informants, making them allies with the Taliban, hardly making them inoccent. A civilian buying food at a local market and getting blown up by a suicide bomber is innocent, not sure how you fail to see the difference...but what would I know, I am only a God-fearing, Mom-loving, dim whitted christian American.

In regards to the gun story, he was not carrying an M4, and Mr. Luttrell himself describes the incident as a miracle, not making any claim to understanding how his gun was always at his side, but you see Mr. Swan, when you put your faith in Jesus Christ miracles happen...

A Definite Must Read for Anyone
As an English teacher (reading mostly classics) I don't normally read books like this, but after hearing Marcus on the Today Show, I knew this book would be worth reading. A real page-turner (especially the second half), the book is so vividly told that every battle, every sacrifice, every hardship, and every triumph is vicariously experienced. To know what these men went through in a face-to-face battle against the Taliban (severely out-numbered) was eye-opening.

I had no idea the intricacies that went on in an operation -- whether emotional or physical. It's a miracle that Marcus is even alive after what he (and his team) endured, and what he endured no human should have to experience. This book will make you a better person - not just from the knowledge gained -- but for the fact that it will make you appreciate what men like Marcus do everyday defending our country.

A Victorian Lady Comments
How is it that a lady who reads Jane Austen and listens to classical music could have read this violent account of wartime heroism with rapt fascination? Because this is a story that speaks in unmistakeable human tones. It is a thrilling, terrifying, awe-inspiring tale of heroism at the limits of human endurance, and of a brotherhood of devoted men. An unforgettable story.

Read about REAL American Heroes
Having a voracious appetite to read ANYTHING about the SEALs, I couldn't wait to get this book. It served to reaffirm what I have felt since I first heard about "The Teams" - these guys are my heroes. This is one of the best SEAL books I have ever read. Marcus does a great job of honoring his fallen comrades. I've never met Danny, Mikey, Axe, Marcus or any of the brave soldiers who went to find them but I can honestly tell you that I think about them and their families daily. I can't say that I agreed with all of Marcus' political opinions but he's earned the right to say whatever the heck he wants. And by the way, because of guys like him, we also have that same right. God bless all of our armed forces and their families.

The ultimate tale for true patriots and fans of survivor stories
Do not listen to 1-star reviews of this book by those taking on elitist attitudes towards the lack of flowery adjectives and fluff. It's more likely the writer's politics that bother them, so they assume the stance of literature snobs. #1 - It's written the way it is because it's the recounting of a tale, a war story. Imagine sitting down with a beer, a crackling fireplace and a friend who has a very fascinating story to tell. He starts recounting his tale, backtracking as he needs to fill in the holes, and before you know it, hours and hours have gone by and you are spellbound. Luttrell wrote things the way he would think and say them, sometimes it's even humorous, but more often than not, it is harrowing. Luttrell did NOT write things the way a stoned poet would. We do not think in similes and metaphors and neither does he. Luttrell let his wit and personality shine through. By the end of this book, you will feel as if you personally know him.

#2 - "He's too political and anti-liberal"....In the first part of the book, Luttrell rants a little against the liberal media. At this point, some people closed the book and missed out on one hell of a great story. When you read further and "open your mind" (isn't that a favorite phrase of liberals?), it becomes very clear how Luttrell formed his opinions and solidified them on the battlefield. I can't understand how someone can read the book all the way through and then not see WHY he feels the way he does. Did they not read the heart-wrenching scenes where he watched his friends die? Did they not read about the numerous hells he faced? If any of us were in his situation and suffered the after-effects, we would also be centered on that ONE decision that could have changed everything. Luttrell is entitled to his opinions and he's more than earned the right to speak them. Too often we hear the opinions of those who have never been the very places they have such heated opinions about. Yet, when someone who has speaks honestly...he should be silenced? Honestly, who is more qualified to give their opinion? Marcus Luttrell? Or some group of rich idiots with guitars that somehow think this gives them political omniscience?

#3 - "Too self-aggrandizing, too much testosterone"...Okay guys, it's bad when this reviewer is a mother and seems to have no problem with "testosterone" in this book. Would it be better if Luttrell had added some scenes where he and the Taliban throw down their weapons and perform a ballet number in an opium field? I don't think some of these reviewers have personally known military or they are military (so say a few reviewers) and are just jealous because Luttrell's experiences are not typical. Most military personnel are not put in the position to be called heroes by their brethren. One thing most service members share is pride. Why? Because pride is what gives you a purpose for living when things get tough. Pride of service and loyalty is not arrogance. It's a survival tactic that forms the bonds of military brotherhood. If some had no pride in their liberal views, some wouldn't be writing bad reviews on an otherwise great book. Everyone possesses it and the man who says he doesn't is lying. Do you think Marcus Luttrell wakes up every day, looks in the mirror, and tells himself how awesome he is? I highly doubt it. Anyone who knows someone who has had to endure a fraction of what these men have to endure can tell you that. I've watched the despair of someone close to me because his friend died in Iraq and he's still living. Texas, the United States, his SEAL training...Luttrell is proud of them. Does that make him arrogant? No. His pride helps keep him sane after all that's happened...and that battle goes on long after the battlefield is left behind.

This book is not a dry, journalistic military recounting of events. It's full of heart and vigor. It's a military memoir whose heart lives on after the last page. The writing is raw and the overwhelming popularity of this book is because the events that transpire are told so realistically you will feel like they are happening to you. At times it's painful to read, at times you will laugh out loud, at times you will get angry, and you will cry no matter how tough you think you are, but when it's all said and done, you will feel like you just lived through these events alongside Luttrell. One of the last great American novels for true patriots.
... Read more

Editorial Review

Here is one of the most riveting first-person accounts ever to come out of World War II. Robert Leckie enlisted in the United States Marine Corps in January 1942, shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. In Helmet for My Pillow we follow his odyssey, from basic training on Parris Island, South Carolina, all the way to the raging battles in the Pacific, where some of the war’s fiercest fighting took place. Recounting his service with the 1st Marine Division and the brutal action on Guadalcanal, New Britain, and Peleliu, Leckie spares no detail of the horrors and sacrifices of war, painting an unvarnished portrait of how real warriors are made, fight, and often die in the defense of their country. 

    From the live-for-today rowdiness of marines on leave to the terrors of jungle warfare against an enemy determined to fight to the last man, Leckie describes what war is really like when victory can only be measured inch by bloody inch. Woven throughout are Leckie’s hard-won, eloquent, and thoroughly unsentimental meditations on the meaning of war and why we fight. Unparalleled in its immediacy and accuracy, Helmet for My Pillow will leave no reader untouched. This is a book that brings you as close to the mud, the blood, and the experience of war as it is safe to come.



Now producers Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg, and Gary Goetzman, the men behind Band of Brothers, have adapted material from Helmet for My Pillow for HBO’s epic miniseries The Pacific, which will thrill and edify a whole new generation. ... Read more

Reviews

Profound and unique insight into the WWII Pacific experience
First, I must admit a particular regard for this book as the granddaughter of Bill Smith (whom Leckie refers to as 'Hoosier'), who served with Leckie in How Company. Leckie offers nuanced insight into the ways in which he and his friends understood national military service, the `enemy', and the war more generally, and how these perspectives or ideas evolved among the men from North Carolina to Guadalcanal, Australia, and New Britain. Leckie steers clear from prototypes or cliches; there is no enblematic enlisted man or officer. Rather, these men are treated as real people coping (or not) with the profound uncertainty of their situation.

Perhaps this appreciation says more about my own lack of experience with combat/warfare. Thinking of Guadalcanal from a macro or military history perspective, it is easy to take for granted that marines' objectives - and the most efficacious means to pursue them - were always apparent to those involved. In this context, Leckie's account of warfare as a learning process was fascinating. For example, he describes: 1) the marines' first reactions to air battle and subsequent adjustment to air battle as a simple process of attrition; and 2) the uncertainty confronted by officers at various stages, against the backdrop of the US' limited military experience in the Pacific or in jungles more generally. In this way, Leckie also makes apparent the need - and efficacy - of severe hierarchy. For this reason, I think that reviewers' arguments positing a lack of regard for officers deserve qualification.

***UPDATE/REFLECTIONS***
Hoosier was wounded and evacuated early in the Battle of Peleliu; I believe that Chuckler and Runner were wounded later and evacuated with Leckie. Leckie and his friends stayed in touch - in the summer of 1985, my grandfather and his wife, as well as Runner (Juergens) and his wife, went to visit Leckie in New Jersey. There Leckie decidated a park in their honor, in honor of all marines who fought in the Pacific Theater (I uploaded a photo of the dedication plaque in the 'customer image gallery').

Although Hoosier never liked to share his experiences from the war, my father considers the book to be true to his character. And, while the HBO miniseries diverges considerably from the book, Hoosier's sense of humor appears true to form (the book provides far greater nuance and depth, different dialogue, and events unfolded differently). This edition of the book also includes a few photographs of Leckie, Runner, Hoosier, and others - some taken in their dress blues, and others on Guadalcanal.

That was victory
`Helmet for My Pillow" is a reissue from 1957. My one and only complaint is my usual one with reissues...please put in an updated introduction...tell us what has happened with the author or life, don't just reissue it and do nothing else. This will be made into a mini series which is probably the reason for the reissue. No matter what the reason it's definitely worth reading. Robert Leckie's descriptions create a picture; from his drill sergeant..." but above all he had a voice" to the exultation of leave in Australian after the battle of Guadalcanal. There are black and white pictures throughout the pages of the men he served with and of Leckie which definitely helps with the mind's pictures.

But most of all this book is remarkable. I have heard men describe their experiences with jungle warfare, both from WWII and Vietnam, but never with the awful clarity that is done in these pages. I grew up in the army and have been with the military all of my life and can agree with so much of what is said here, and said with far more ability than almost any other book I have read.
Leakie pulls no punches, not in the way many of the enlisted were treated by their officers or in his own `mistakes' that landed in him the brig.
Historically there is much in here that I have never read before, and I have read and listened to much. There are stories of the hunger the fighting men felt during battle and how Japanese forces would try to sneak into their camps at night for food. Then there are the descriptions of the `widow makers', trees that were weakened by artillery fire that killed 25 men as they broke and fell on them.
This is truly an incredible account, eye opening and worthy of your time and effort to read.

Absolutely spellbinding. Couldn't put it down.
One of the best personal memoirs of war I have ever read. Leckie is brutally honest about anything and everything to do with his experiences in the 1st Marine Division during WWII. Incredibly impressed by his sensitive candor and philosophical reflections on the impact of war on human beings. Having been an officer myself, I was truly shocked to read his descriptions of Marine officers blatantly stealing from enlisted men. I guess in wartime, they were willing to let anyone become an officer. Leckie pulls no punches but shows remarkable understanding, forgiveness, and mercy towards all his comrades and even the enemy. This book is a classic and a must-read for anyone interested in what combat in the Pacific theater was really like and about young men's reaction to war. Rest in peace, Robert Leckie. For those who fell, there is no hell. I thank God knowing you have been reunited with your comrades. Thank you for writing this book. It was a privilege to have read it. A great gift to those who have never known the horrors and sacrifice of war.

True hero giving credit to his fallen and wounded marines
"Helmet for my Pillow" is a book written by writer who was from my hometown of Rutherford, NJ. He had a personal relationship with his family physician William Carlos Williams the great poet. They spent much time together and you do not know how much of William's descriptive poetry style rubbed off on Leckie. I found his vocabulary to be extensive. You must keep in mind that he is describing a terrible yet historical time in U.S. history and he is attempting to give his fellow comrades in the marines their fair due. He never names a person by their real name and I think that is masterful because it shows how you do not want to get too personal with your fellow marines, because, they will be may gone at some point soon. He wrote the book after seeing 'South Pacific" when he walked out half way through the play and said to his wife Vera "I am going to write a book to tell the true story of what took place in the South Pacific". He wanted to honor his friends who gave up so much whether they lived or died. The book is hard reading but not as hard as he had it. He was a wild guy who tells the truth. He doesn't mix word or actions. Yeah, they drank a lot. From basic training to the awful islands where they would steal Saki when they could. After a while you begin to wonder if all the marines drank that much. Yet you must remember that his generation started the cocktail hour and they lived by "Its 5 O'clock, Dear Lets have a drink!". To sum it up they are making a huge HBO show 10 parts series about it, so whether you like it or not it is a must read to appreciate the show. I read it, and, I will have a much better understanding of what those men went through. I would recommend this book. I never met Mr. Leckie as far back as I can recall. My mother and uncles were his very close friends at St. Mary's high school, in Rutherford. He was the youngest of 8 kids and it is quite exceptional that the baby in the family turned out to be such a success. He wrote over 40 books in his lifetime and he is a man with a high school education. The Sisters of St. Dominic must have done a greast job teachingb him when he wasn't playing hookie.

View from the Front Line
I first read this book about thirty years ago when I first joined the army; I have just completed reading the re-issued version of the book as I have an interest in the Pacific war.

Personally I enjoyed Robert Leckie's story of his journey from induction to the front line with the US Marines in the Pacific, his descriptions of places like the Solomon Islands are spot on. I journeyed there almost fifty years after the end of the war in the Pacific, to assist in the location and disposal of WW2 ordnance in the islands and this work took me through many of the locations in the island chain, such as the Russells, New Georgia and Guadalcanal. Having also spent some time in tropical warfare environments and experiencing living in jungle conditions in the Australian army's battle school, I relate to the author and his descriptions of life in these island environments. The discomfort, being constantly wet and encountering various jungle animal nasties, as well as encounters with the enemy, often at night and in very close quarters is definitely something to keep one in a high state of tense anxiety.

I was also particularly drawn to his experiences spent in Melbourne, Australia, as Melbourne is my home town and looking at pictures of the young Robert Leckie in his Marine uniform reminded me of stories my mother related about families in Australia at the time hosting US servicemen into their homes. The period 1941-1942 were dark days for Australia, with the threat of Japanese invasion very real and many Australian families welcomed US service personnel into their homes at the time. Sadly many of these young men were to return to the Pacific and not see their homeland again.

Robert Leckie describes the various characters in his book with a bit of a larrikin's view, describing them by nicknames and also giving his impressions on many of the personalities; he strikes me as a person who didn't suffer fools irrespective of their rank or status. This character trait manifests itself through the book from his time in Recruit camp through to the time of his last battle.

In summary a well written book, with a serviceman's personal observations of places and personalities that give a grassroots experience of what it is like to be in the front lines. The book is more focused on the author's personal experiences and not so much on historical data, it allows the reader to experience life in the tropical South Pacific and gives them experiences of beach landings, patrolling in jungle and living in a dripping, wet environment. Together with the ever-present possibility of a contact with the enemy who could be as close as five metres when encountered due to the terrain. Well done, Robert Leckie!

What a great book!
For those who don't know, Leckie was a sportswriter for the Hackensack Record who enlisted in the Marines on 8 December 1941. The book is an authentic memoir of Leckie's career as a Marine from boot camp at MCRD Paris Island through his wounding at Peleliu.

Leckie is a gifted writer, his prose is very evocative and descriptive of his environment and the men around him. One of the most interesting things about the book is that throughout Leckie makes no effort to "polish up" his own image. He is quite forthcoming about his sojourns in the brig and about his disdain for officers. He makes no attempt to sanitize or rationalize the behavior of himself and his buddies in Melbourne. He is even frank about his affliction with enuresis (bedwetting) during the Cape Gloucester campaign.

As a result of his candor, his writing skills and his personality, a picture of Bob Leckie emerges that is almost stereotypical of a smart-ass, pugnacious, Irish reporter from back east. He comes across almost like a character played by Jimmy Cagney in a Ben Hecht screenplay. Whether that is an accurate description of the actual man, I can't say, but it is the one he paints of himself.

This was simply a thoroughly satisfying book, in fact it will remain on my shelf among other outstanding WWII memoirs such as Manchester's Goodbye Darkness and Fraser's Quartered Safe Out Here

Short Note of Praise
I read this and "The Old Breed." Two different books but telling remarkable stories of bravery, loss and horror. I recommend that this one be read before Sledge's work. After reading them both I've come to appreciate both their different styles and focus. What struck me most was when I read passages that described the same event but from obviously different perspectives. It is sad that as I watch "The Pacific" miniseries it only scratches at the strength both of these books convey. Read these books to get at the story because the screenplay makes compromises along the way.

True to life read about WWII in the Pacific- but not so much combat
You are very likely reading this review as this book is one of the major sources for the new mini-series "The Pacific". I haven't seen any episodes of that yet, and I read this book years ago, this is my second purchase. My dad suggested Helmet for My Pillow as he said it very accurately showed what war was like in New Guinea, where he also served.

What is interesting about this book is that it really isn't a combat story book so much. Hanging around with my Dad's WWII buddies down at the VFW allowed me to hear plenty of stories about the war- but mostly about sadistic DIs, bad and good officers, bad chow, funny stories about Basic Training, and sneaking out to get a beer or two. Not much about actual combat, and almost never any mention of their personal bravery- and these were guys with chests full of "fruit salad". Reading this book was exactly like listening to those veterans.

For example- the author never mentions he won the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal with Combat Valor. He does mention his time in the brig on bread & water, sadistic DIs, bad and good officers, bad chow, funny stories about Basic Training, and sneaking out to get a beer or two. Oh yes, he does tell a few harrowing combat stories. But it's more of how life really was for a Marine in WWII, not a bunch of war stories. The conditions in New Guinea- the rain, the mold, the malaria- those are told so well you feel as if your are there also.

Very well written, and very true to life. But- not a lot of combat stories. There are other books with better and more thrilling accounts of combat, this is not the best choice for those.

... Read more

Editorial Review

At a secret arms-design contest in Stalin’s Soviet Union, army technicians submitted a stubby rifle with a curved magazine. Dubbed the AK-47, it was selected as the Eastern Bloc’s standard arm. Scoffed at in the Pentagon as crude and unimpressive, it was in fact a breakthrough—a compact automatic that could be mastered by almost anyone, last decades in the field, and would rarely jam. Manufactured by tens of millions in planned economies, it became first an instrument of repression and then the most lethal weapon of the Cold War. Soon it was in the hands of terrorists.In a searing examination of modern conflict and official folly, C. J. Chivers mixes meticulous historical research, investigative reporting, and battlefield reportage to illuminate the origins of the world’s most abundant firearm and the consequences of its spread. The result, a tour de force of history and storytelling, sweeps through the miniaturization and distribution of automatic firepower, and puts an iconic object in fuller context than ever before. The Gun dismantles myths as it moves from the naïve optimism of the Industrial Revolution through the treacherous milieu of the Soviet Union to the inside records of the Taliban. Chivers tells of the 19th-century inventor in Indianapolis who designs a Civil War killing machine, insisting that more-efficient slaughter will save lives. A German attaché who observes British machine guns killing Islamic warriors along the Nile advises his government to amass the weapons that would later flatten British ranks in World War I. In communist Hungary, a locksmith acquires an AK-47 to help wrest his country from the Kremlin’s yoke, beginning a journey to the gallows. The Pentagon suppresses the results of firing tests on severed human heads that might have prevented faulty rifles from being rushed to G.I.s in Vietnam. In Africa, a millennial madman arms abducted children and turns them on their neighbors, setting his country ablaze. Neither pro-gun nor anti-gun, The Gun builds to a terrifying sequence, in which a young man who confronts a trio of assassins is shattered by 23 bullets at close range. The man survives to ask questions that Chivers examines with rigor and flair.

Throughout, The Gun animates unforgettable characters—inventors, salesmen, heroes, megalomaniacs, racists, dictators, gunrunners, terrorists, child soldiers, government careerists, and fools. Drawing from years of research, interviews, and from declassified records revealed for the first time, he presents a richly human account of an evolution in the very experience of war. ... Read more

Reviews

Compelling History, October 15, 2010
Chris Chivers knows how to tell a story that has historical significance, depth and insight. The Gun explains how one rifle changed the face of war in the late 20th Century. Formerly the New York Times correspondent in Moscow, Chivers takes the reader behind the scenes inside the Soviet industrial and propaganda machine, laying out a fascinating narrative of how the regime plotted and schemed to engineer myth while designing the automatic rifle that was the most significant technical factor in the North Vietnamese victory over the south. Chivers wraps his deep understanding about military history inside a refreshing compendium of characters - heroes, inventors, knaves and entrepreneurs. He knows the secret of story-tellling; the reader finishes each page by asking, and then what happened? - Bing West, Newport, RI

The Power of Iron, October 24, 2010
The AK-47 and its numerous variants and successors are ubiquitous instruments of destruction currently appearing in all troubled regions of the globe. The rifle, known for its quadruple attributes of extreme design simplicity, rugged durability, ease of use and tremendous destructive capacity has achieved legendary status. Of course, this is all well known and has been thoroughly discussed and written about. After all, the AK series are instantly recognizable to military, police, criminals, terrorists and the general public as the seminal firearms of the 20th Century.

C.J. Chivers of "The New York Times" and late of the USMC has, in "The Gun" provided, through the history of the AK series, a lucid exposition of the development of automatic weapons from their inception to the present time. Additionally and more importantly, "The Gun" explores a hitherto largely uninvestigated dimension of the modern assault weapon. He asks, "What is its role as a socio-political instrument of state and how did it achieve this goal?"

As might be expected, the originator of the eponymous weapon, Mikhail Kalashnikov, has become a mythical figure. It well-served the propaganda purposes of the Soviet Union to extol the virtues of a genuine, nearly unlettered proletarian who, enjoying the Benefits of the Worker's Paradise, arose from a humble and unassuming background to the pinnacle of firearms design. By legend, he proceeded virtually unaided and motivated primarily by Love of the Fatherland.

Hagiography aside, Kalashnikov (and the state-supported teams of machinists, engineers, industrialists, ballistics experts and legions of others) served a realpolitik purpose: they built a foundational weapon in accord with pragmatic considerations of state defense and did so expediently, logically, methodically and cheaply. The AK is a model of the axiom, "Form follows function." Its presence over 60 years after its inception is a testament to that, just as the Colt M1911, Browning Hi-Power, Bren, MG42 and their successors enjoy similar prominence in their own niches.

Chivers traces the history of the Gatling and Maxim guns; the prototype of the assault rifle, the German machinenpistole 43/sturmgewehr 44; the role of ammunition in the genesis of the military rifle, beginning again with WW-II German advances in the form of the 7.92x33mm Kurz cartridge, evolving to the M1943 Soviet round that powered the AK; the introduction and dissemination of AK rifles according to Soviet policy and, of course, the introduction of the ArmaLite AR-15 rifle, soon to become the standard US arm in the form of the M-16 series. In doing so, he acknowledges the role of the PPSh-41 submachine gun (a Soviet WW-II era arm featuring metal stamping, chromed barrel lining and a blowback action) but, in my estimation, underplays its contribution. Like the AK, this weapon was extremely simple, very robust, easily manufactured (millions were made in factories and small Russian machine shops during the war) and murderously effective at usual combat ranges. Also like the AK, it turned up in many subsequent conflicts, ranging from Korea to Vietnam. A curious omission from the history was the fallschirmjagergewehr-42(FG42)which also featured a gas-operated mechanism, a plastic stock (initially), a 20 round magazine and a selector for semiautomatic and full automatic fire. In other words, the FG42 was also a legitimate precursor to the modern assault rifle. Of course, the Thompson M1921, the "Chicago Piano", makes its necessary appearance. Despite its minor role in the civilian arena, the fearsome performance of this weapon in gangster-era criminal activities gave it a larger-than-life role in the American conscience and lead to laws banning the private ownership of automatic weapons in the US, laws which Chivers notes were not generally implemented outside Western Europe and North America...with devastating consequences.

As Chivers notes, no history of the AK series would be complete without a recounting of the follies and foibles surrounding its US counterpart, the M16. Initially, the US military assumed a dismissive attitude toward the concept of the assault rifle, despite emerging evidence of its deadly utility. Rather than simply stealing the design and reverse-engineering an American version of an obviously successful weapon, ideological blinkers initially prevented development of a comparable US combat arm. The M14 (successor to the M1 Garand) was heavy and cumbersome. It fired a round that was ill-suited to modern combat. By the time an alliance of arms manufacturers and unscrupulous agents convinced influential elements of the American military hierarchy of the need to purchase an American version of the assault rifle (which just happened to be on hand in the form of the Colt's AR-15), the AK was routinely arming the current adversary: the Viet Cong. The AR was rushed into action, despite known problems with the ammunition propellant and the propensity of the weapon to jam in use. Soon, it was discovered that the weapon was prone to rust and the gas-operated bolt assembly to fouling. No matter: a cover-up was in order and, despite losses to American personnel from misfiring in combat, perpetuated. While the modern version (the M4 carbine) is better, it is still suboptimal in comparison to its Russian counterpart in the author's estimation and as noted in a separate chapter at the book's end.

Arms sales and transfers have become a standard form of political influence. The USSR, as a centrally-controlled, "non-market" economy, manufactured, stockpiled, licensed and exported AK weapons to satellite nations and client states. With the collapse of the system, enormous weapons and ammunition stocks became available. Private arms dealers, corrupt government officials and simple thievery resulted in the appearance of AK variants in every "hot zone" on the planet. Chivers acerbically notes that, at present, the largest purchaser of AK weapons is...the US. We send them to regimes we are hoping to influence and whose loyalties we wish to secure worldwide and to proxies. Not surprisingly, other nations do that as well. So, Chivers reports that, with a humble small arm, the AK, weapons systems producers (US, Russia, France, China, Israel and others) have become major arms merchants, themselves; this is the socio-political connection which was not begun by, but seems to have been cemented into convention, by the AK-47. Chivers does well to remind the reader of the modern engine of this phenomenon.

The book concludes with some horrible vignettes dealing with the effects of assault weaponry in the Third World: the murderous Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda, the attack on an official in the Kurdish region of Iraq being two of them. Chivers readily acknowledges that "small wars" will be with us forever, AK or no AK. Its just that the tremendous destructive potential of the modern assault rifle magnifies the carnage. Despite the experiences of child soldiers; despite the combat experiences of literally millions of veterans worldwide; despite the adoption of RPGs and AK type weaponry by terrorists, wars will persist for all the reasons they always have. Perhaps, aside from the pragmatic and ideological attractions of armed conflict, there is another and more elemental aspect of combat. It was Homer in "The Odyssey" who wrote, "Iron has powers to draw a man to ruin"; true then and true now.

Interesting, but disjointed, October 31, 2010
"The Gun" provides some very interesting insights into the history of machine guns and modern arms trade, yet it is not a complete book, but rather a series of separate articles. It is hard to find a leading idea that would join the separate stories conveyed in "The Gun".

The book starts with an excellent historical account of developments of the machine gun and goes on to describe the invention of AK-47 and M-16 in this way. But then it stops - for no apparent reason. I would very much like to read about what were the developments in assault rifle design since 1960's, but the historical account stops there.

A very interesting chapter describes all the problems with the adoption of M-16 by the US armed forces. But the description is tiresome and definetely too detailed. For no good reason the author delves into who-said-what-to-whom-and-when and tries to figure out who deserves the blame for US Marines' deaths in Vietnam. It is an interesting story, but a different one from the historical account in other chapters. And just when I hoped that the author would describe a similar problems with a botched implementation of UK's SA80 rifle - the story shifts again.

Third topic covered in this book is terrorism and warfare in third world countries. But since the first part of the book was taken up by other subjects, this one is also covered in a partial fashion - with no real background or details. This part of the book reads more like a collection of trivia - from strange beliefs of African rebels, through partial retelling of terrorist attack during the Munich Olympics, to description of one person's gunshot injuries - with no clear train of thought to connect it.

There is also a discussion of morals and life story of M. Kalashnikov, which could be a nice study of lifestyle choices in a totalitarian state, but - when jammed between three other subjects - is just too brief and disjointed.

Despite those problems, the book is a fine read, interesting and engaging, but it feels like a "bait and switch" - starting on one topic for just long enough to instill curiosity, and then switching to different matters.

Don't buy the Kindle version. It is too expensive and full of bugs - simply an inferior product, and with no text-to-speech. (The bugs include: bad typesetting, typos, errors in format conversion, notes that are in wrong order, special formatting - i.e. bold text, chapter titles' emphasis - that is only visible when you use "next page" function and not when you skip directly to some chapter, the illustrations at the end are not listed in the table of contents and can be easily missed).

The Gun, November 17, 2010
I bought the book after hearing the author being interviewed on NPR's "Fresh Air ". He was fascinating. The book is very well written. Unfortunately it contains no photographs or diagrams of the various inventors or guns mentioned. I find this diminished my enjoyment in reading.

Fantastic read, October 27, 2010
Chivers' book, The Gun, is a masterpiece on many levels. Using the history of this weapon as a lens through which to analyze recent history is brilliant. The battle scenes are riveting and heartwrenching, and the characters are rendered with charisma.
The politics are head spinning, chiefly because most of us don't look at the world this way and I think we don't appreciate how much battle tactics reflect times, politics and ideologies. It's an important book with extraordinary analysis, but full of swashbuckling tales.

First rate - very well written and extremely well researched, October 29, 2010
If you have a even a passing interest in firearms, you should buy this book - I couldn't put it down!

From Armament to Icon - Unfortunately, November 11, 2010
It is scary how many people recognize the silhouette of the AK: the distinct banana clip, stubby barrel, and steep sight post. I realized this when my wife (perhaps due to my unfortunate influence) properly identified it in a book club discussion. As the author points out it has become the primary firearm of the world - "a weapon that rearranged the rules". It is carried by more than fifty national armies, hoisted by passionate guerillas, provided by dictators, used for intimidation and more by criminals, and wielded by child soldiers.

Seldom jamming, easy to maintain, simplistic in components and design, and lightweight with incredible firepower, the AK has been massed produced, "licensed" for production, and knocked off with impunity. If there was an accurate count on casualties inflicted by the AK since its inception, it may well be the leader far ahead of any single conventional weapon. The author notes, "The United Nations convened a conference in 2001 by noting that small arms were principal weapons in forty-six of the forty-nine major conflicts in the 1990s, in which 4 million people died." The AK has proved to be the perfect instrument for the proxy conflicts of the Cold War which eased itself smoothly into the terrorist weapon of choice.

The book covers Avtomat Kalashnikova and the propaganda surrounding the AK's development, includes a history of small arms weapon development covering Gatling, Maxim, Spandau, Thompson, and Schmeisser, features an examination of the differences in the process of development which leads to an overly long comparison with the US's M16, along with historic uses of the AK including Sadat's assassination and the Munich Olympics. And this is where Chivers may have gone wrong with this effort - it was just too long. However. it is now the new standard on the subject surpassing Kahaner's AK-47: The Weapon that Changed the Face of War, Cutshaw's Legends and Reality of the AK, Burrows Trigger Issues: Kalashnikov AK47, and Iannamico's AK-47 The Grim Reaper (along with many other efforts).

Samuel Cummings, a noted and colorful arms dealer, called the flow of arms "an index of the world's folly." The AK may well be the primary factor in that index. For those interested in a similar type of exploratory, look to Patrick Wright's "Tank: The Progress of a Monstrous War Machine".

Jack of all trades, master of none, November 2, 2010
This book tries to be everything for everyone and fails. I read glowing reviews and at least one excerpt from this book before buying it. It tries to be more than a history of the AK-47 but it is less than a book on intermediate caliber automatic weapons. On the plus side, it informed me of Soviet post- World War II small arms development and how it related to German developments. But it seems more of a collection of vaguely related topics, discussing Gatling and Maxim while almost skipping over John M. Browning and other innovators. The reviews indicated that this book would do much to discuss the early problem with the M-16 in Vietnam, yet it failed to provide any new information. Even with Soviet small arms, it leaves huge gaps. Although it discusses the Automat, there is no discussion of why this was chambered in 6.5mm Ariska or how it was operationally employed.

There certainly is not enough useful or complete information to keep this as a reference. I suggest you wait until it comes out in paperback or pick up a slightly used copy. I am certain that the price will fall dramatically in the next few months.

Four stories in one, December 28, 2010
C.J. Chivers knows wars and weapons very well. In The Gun, he sets out to tell us about the rise of automatic weapons, the development of the most widely manufactured automatic weapon in history (the AK-47), what happened when US forces first encounter the weapon and attempted to respond with their own, and the lasting legacy of the AK-47 in the post Soviet world.

On the plus side, this book is very well researched, has copious and helpful notes, and benefits from both the author's experience of being a Marine infantry captain as well as his time as the Moscow bureau chief for the New York Times. It is hard to imagine an author with a more suitable background for such a tale.

On the minus side, Chivers sometimes gives us too much detail, or stops a story in mid stride, only to detour to another before coming back to the first story. His style is a bit staccato, but the reader will be well rewarded for hanging in there to the end.

Of the four stories, I thought the section on the introduction of the M-16 into Vietnam, and the subsequent problems with that gun were the strongest part of the book. Chivers knows exactly what went wrong, who caused it, and can tell heart-breaking anecdote after anecdote about the US soldiers who died while trying to unjam their weapons as the Viet Cong approached with the far more reliable AK-47's. This is emotional stuff, told with the kind of detail that removes any doubt about the author's veracity. If he is looking for another book to write, I'd suggest making this a full length book.

I also enjoyed the section which detailed the AK-47's antecedents, especially the Gatling gun and the Maxim machine gun. Here, Chivers is blessed by two interesting and individualistic inventors, and by the story of how each gun changed the practice of warfare. He is really well informed here and this section makes a cracking good read.

I liked the section on the impact of the AK-47 as it becomes "...the world's gun...", but it is in this section that his urge to break away in mid stream from one story line to another becomes a bit exasperating. He does a very credible job of describing how the socialist countries had a tendency to overproduce arms to ridiculous extremes, and how the breakup of the Soviet empire dispersed a vast trove of weapons with a half life of fifty years or more int the third world.

Ironically, the section I liked the least was about the development of the AK-47 itself. Mikhail Kalashnikov's early life is interesting, but as he gets older, the story line becomes less compelling. The simple fact is that he is one of those guys who does something really impressive early in life, and never comes close to matching it as he gets older. Perhaps if Chivers had done more to explain step by step how the gun worked with visual diagrams, this would have caught my fancy more.

If you like well researched history by someone who knows what he's talking about, or you like military history, this will be a good book for you. ... Read more

Editorial Review

On the morning of April 2, 1865, Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, received a telegram from General Robert E. Lee. There is no more time—the Yankees are coming, it warned. Shortly before midnight, Davis boarded a train from Richmond and fled the capital, setting off an intense and thrilling chase in which Union cavalry hunted the Confederate president.

Two weeks later, President Lincoln was assassinated, and the nation was convinced that Davis was involved in the conspiracy that led to the crime. Lincoln's murder, autopsy, and White House funeral transfixed the nation. His final journey began when soldiers placed his corpse aboard a special train that would carry him home on the 1,600-mile trip to Springfield. Along the way, more than a million Americans looked upon their martyr's face, and several million watched the funeral train roll by. It was the largest and most magnificent funeral pageant in American history.

To the Union, Davis was no longer merely a traitor. He became a murderer, a wanted man with a $100,000 bounty on his head. Davis was hunted down and placed in captivity, the beginning of an intense and dramatic odyssey that would transform him into a martyr of the South's Lost Cause.

The saga that began with Manhunt continues with the suspenseful and electrifying Bloody Crimes. James Swanson masterfully weaves together the stories of two fallen leaders as they made their last expeditions through the bloody landscape of a wounded nation.

Reviews

Poignant, compelling account of the end of the Civil War

Compelling History that Reads like a Novel - What more could one want???


I think you will love this book. If history is what you want and Lincoln and the Civil War are your passions, then James Swanson has brought to life a period that is central to the American story. I have always found it amazing that some authors can take extraordinary historical events and make them as boring as watching wet paint dry, while others can put you right into the event. You feel you are there, and you can't put the book down until you are finished. This is what Bloody Crimes does for you.


When Swanson is done, you will understand the Civil War, and you will understand not just Lincoln but his counterpart, Jefferson Davis the President of the Confederacy. Davis was a man who many felt was destined to be President of the United States, West Point educated, an innovator who changed the army with his concepts of command and control before leaving for his position in the South.


In the early days of April 1865 word came to Lincoln that the North was ready to invade Richmond, Virginia, it had never happened before in four long years of fighting. President Davis was informed that you have to get out of Richmond, and get out now. Davis knew there were still things he had to do would take another 24 hours, but he instructed his wife to get ready to leave within hours.


As she was leaving she embraced him. He told her, if I live, you can comfort me when the struggle is ended, and then realizing how dire the situation was, he told her, I do not expect to survive the destruction of the constitutional liberty. The poignancy of the departure is striking. Even though most readers are dedicated to Lincoln and the sacredness of his mission, the author is able to get you into both corners sympathizing with both sides.


If one reads serious history, then you realize that true history may not be as it is portrayed in the history books. History is written by the victors, and so the losers are relegated to being bad guys no matter what the real story is. In this book some of the amazing things you will learn include:


* On April 4th, 1865 a week before his death, Lincoln is getting ready to enter Richmond himself and he thinks to himself, that thank God, he has lived to see the end to this horrid dream for four years, and now the nightmare is gone.


* In the midst of this horror show Lincoln talks about a man who came to visit him, and asked for an ambassadorship. Lincoln told him he could not accommodate him. He then asked to become a minister somewhere; Lincoln could not help him out. Well what about a civil service job - can't do it.
The man left after Lincoln gave him a pair of trousers. Even amongst the pain and horror of the war, Lincoln kept his sense of humor.


* Richmond has been taken, the city severely damaged, burned and looted. Lincoln accompanied by just a dozen soldiers takes a small boat to Richmond. Getting off the boat he quickly is seen by a handful of former slaves. The group enlarges within seconds, and they kneel down to him, grabbing his pants leg. Lincoln looks at them and tells them, not to kneel down to him, that is not right. Kneel only to God. He Lincoln, is only God's instrument, but they may rest assured that as long as he lives, no one shall put a shackle on their limbs, and they shall have the rights that God has given to every other free man, and citizen of the Republic.


* Jefferson Davis was a former Secretary of War in the American government. Learned, educated, the possessor of a vast library, he revered George Washington and the founding fathers. He was an able and elegant statesman. His library numbered books in the thousands, and Davis had studied every one of them.


* Lincoln meanwhile couldn't afford books, so he read the same books narrowly, and deeply. He had read Shakespeare, the Bible, politics and history, until he had thoroughly absorbed their contents and could quote from them verbatim.


* Lincoln knew he was not a perfect man, but thought that George Washington and Henry Clay were. He also felt that if Washington was not perfect, it was better if we thought of him that way. This allowed Lincoln to staff his government with super stars who were not perfect but thought of themselves as such. Lincoln found he could understand and deal with such men.


* Davis however could not deal with men who were not perfect. He could not abide men who failed to live up to the standards he set for himself. This would be his downfall.


* Lincoln dies, and it is a 1600 mile trip to Springfield. The detailed and sad events of the circumstances surrounding the hours it took Lincoln to die, the events, the chase, the mourning, it's all here in detail, and very well written.


* One million Americans viewed the open casket, and another 3 million Americans stood at the railroad sidings to see a man who would become immortal in history. Davis on the other hand travels throughout the South with a $100,000 bounty on his head.


This book and this author have it all. The event is a game changer. The Civil War changes everything. It addresses the one issue that the founding fathers knew they could not address. The founding of the Republic had to include slavery or the Southern states would not join the United States.


It was left to Lincoln to end slavery and begin the second founding of the United States with his election, and his actions. This will ultimately make him the second greatest President in American history after the founder George Washington.
Doris Kearns Goodwin a masterful historian in her own right returns the favor and calls Swanson a "master storyteller". Prominent historian Douglas Brinkley says that Swanson now "emerges as one of America's greatest historians."


I couldn't put the book down, and neither will you. Compelling history, our history, wars, battles, assassination, chases, ceremony, euphoria, sadness, and depression, it is all here, and told as well as it can be told. Give yourself a chance to relish a history told in a way that has never been told before. It is an exquisite book of hope, and reverence. Enjoy it, and thank you for reading this review.


Richard C. Stoyeck

Superb...Inevitably
How can one heap too much praise on James Swanson? He's among our best historians, as well as a most accomplished and vivid writer. What I admire and enjoy most about Swanson is his Jack Finney-like ability to whisk his readers off in a time machine, escorting them to a world long vanished. Astonishingly gifted.

"Bloody Crimes" isn't quite in the same league as "Manhunt" (inevitably, given that the latter dealt with an inherently more dramatic and suspenseful tale), but it's nevertheless outstanding. I wasn't completely confident that Swanson could meaningfully juxtapose the aftermath of Abraham Lincoln's death and the hunt for Jefferson Davis. Oh me of little faith. And even if he hadn't been successful, his rendering of both topics is fascinating. The aftermath of Lincoln's death is poignantly (but not sentimentally) evoked, while Davis (a largely and outrageously ignored historical figure) is magnificently painted in hues of self-sacrifice, integrity, courage, and dignity. Davis is emblematic of the chivalric code of honor. This was discerned by many a great man, including Pope Pius IX. During Davis' unjust imprisonment, the Holy Father honored him by sending gifts, including a crown of thorns crafted by the Supreme Pontiff's own hands. And yet Davis is almost unknown today; and, if known, scorned. Well, one can't expect much from a people whose idea of history is what was on MTV the night before.

Swanson deserves additional congratulations for pointing out that no court ever ruled the South's secession (or secession in general) unconstitutional. That's a tidbit worth keeping in mind!

I have no significant negatives to mention, but.... I'm not a fan of the title, which strikes me as rather irrelevant and gratuitously lurid. And I don't like the pretentiously designed and constructed dust jacket. No other complaints -- you'd be hard pressed to read better than this book.

What happened after the Manhunt

Bloody crimes
One of the best books on the conclusion of the civil war I have read.
The author follows the last few days and the immedidate aftermath of the civil war from the lives and death of the two presidents, A.Lincoln and Jefferson Davis. His research must have been extensive as he goes into great detail into their lives in these last days. I believe even the most knowlegeable civil war historian would learn many details and interesting antecdotes from this book.

Abraham Lincoln & Jefferson Davis
This extremely well-written book details the aftermath of Lincoln's assassination and also the hunt for Jefferson Davis in the wake of that killing. There are thumbnail biographies of both men throughout the book, but the concentration is on what happened after Ford's Theater.

Lincoln's death is written about in all of its grisly detail, ands then the laying out of his body in the White House and the Capital is covered. After that comes a day-by-day recounting of the funeral trail that made its circuitous way from Washington, through Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York State, Pennsylvania again, Ohio, Indiana and, finally, Illinois, where Lincoln was buried in Springfield, the town where he lived when elected President in 1860.

We are told of the various communities where the body was displayed competing with each other to have the most magnificent tribute to Lincoln, and some of the speeches that were made. Once the initial plans for the funeral and all that followed were set, the search for Jefferson Davis began in earnest.

Davis is shown as a man of upright character who truly believed in his cause (that became the "Lost Cause"). Even after the fall of Richmond and Lee's surrender he wanted to fight on west of the Mississippi. Even though he was advised to hurry along and get to a ship taking him either west or to, possibly, Cuba, he procrastinated, and this led to his eventual capture, and the nasty and untrue rumor that he was caught wearing his wife's clothes.

The former President was transported in chains to a casement cell in Fort Monroe, Virginia. When I was in the Air Force and stationed near Fort Monroe I had the opportunity to view this cell and, believe me, I would not have put a dog into it! There was a clamor to have Davis tried as a potential coconspirator in Lincoln's assassination, but no evidence for that could be found. Eventually, his imprisonment became less onerous and the Federal government, not wishing to have him executed and therefore create a Southern martyr, allowed him his freedom on $100,000 bail, after two years of incarceration.

The last part of the book tells the story of the remaining years of Davis' life, which he initially lived quietly at a Gulf Coast mansion willed to him by one of his supporters. He became a speaker for the Confederacy at many gatherings and never changed his belief in the righteousness of his Cause, but he did wish for reconciliation between North and South. When he died, his funeral train went from New Orleans to Richmond, eerily copying Lincoln's death train, with the same type of track side adulation his martyred opponent had in 1865.

To the reader who has an interest in the Civil War and the lesser known aspects of what happened after the guns fell silent, this is an excellent book to read to fill in their knowledge gaps, particularly as they relate to Jefferson Davis. I highly recommend it.

EXCELLENT!
Just finished this and was sorry to have the book end. This was riveting and I thought very interesting how the author used the parallels in lives of Lincoln and Davis. Anyone who enjoys reading about Lincoln, Civil War or the Confederacy will enjoy this. Fascinating, well written.

Exceptional history of what happned just after the Civil War
Bloody Crimes does a wonderful job of filling in the blank sports in certain parts of Civil War history. Here we see what happened just after the fall of Richmond, Lee's surrender and Lincoln's assassination. James Swanson takes the reader on not one, but two journeys. We follow the funeral train of Abraham Lincoln and are told about all the planning that went into it. At the same time we are kept up to date on the desperate desire of Jefferson Davis to live to fight another day by avoiding capture. His flight from Federal troops is fascinatingly told.

Swanson does a great job of exploring the tensions of the period and how rumors easily spread but how facts resulted in such things as Jefferson Davis going from shackled prisoner waiting for the hangman to free man and revered spokesperson for the Confederate cause. Most interestingly is that while Lincoln's fame seemed to ebb a bit at first, he grew in stature and by the bicentennial of his birth he was so well known and Jefferson Davis had become a minor player by comparison. I find it interested that according to Swanson, the opposite was somewhat true.

He deserves great praise for making this a very personal story and by willing to include little known anecdotes and dispelling more commonly repeated myths. All in all this is a very interesting book and I strongly recommend it to anyone interested in American History or the Civil War.

Bloody Crimes is the best written book about 2 icons of the civil war era
This book tells the comparative story of two giant's demise during the end of the Civil War. It reveals the amazing details of Lincoln's death and funeral....and coincides it with the escape of Jefferson Davis to his beloved South. I was surprised at the close relationship the American people had with Lincoln and how intense their suffering was...and how they showed their grief from Washington to Illinois. At the same time, I was amazed at the respect I gained from the great leader of the South and his devotion to his cause and his family. The journey both men took at the end of their era was a surprise to me...especially that of Davis. This is a great book, and I encourage everyone to read this book. It reveals such an intensity of the Northerners and the Southerners that I couldn't stop reading this book. The funeral train of Lincoln and the escape of Davis has given me a new understanding of the value of knowing how the people felt about their leaders and the Civil War.

Paired Tales Leading to Reunion
Four years ago, James Swanson brought out _Manhunt_, the exciting story of the pursuit of John Wilkes Booth after he had assassinated Lincoln. Swanson returns to April 1865 and to many of the same end-of-war themes in _Bloody Crimes: The Chase for Jefferson Davis and the Death Pageant for Lincoln's Corpse_ (William Morrow). It might not be as gripping as his first book; a chronicle of the course of the national obsequies for Lincoln and the hunt for the president of the Confederacy just aren't as inherently exciting as hunting down the president's killer. The dual narratives, however, reinforce each other to give a useful picture of the nation and its concerns in those first weeks after the end of the Civil War, and help us understand the start of a shaky reconciliation between North and South.

In this book, instead of following Booth, Swanson traces what happened to Lincoln once the bullet had entered his brain and chaos erupted within the theater. Swanson traces the details of the autopsy, and the embalming that would be done in the White House. Embalmers had had opportunities to learn about their new art during the war, but no task of preservation would be more challenging than to keep the president's body presentable during its 13-day, indirect train journey through ten cities before it got home to Springfield. At each stop, the casket was brought out to the city's newly made funeral arch or stage. Perhaps a million Americans viewed the body in its casket, with countless others weeping along the tracks as the train made its solemn, 1,645 mile journey. "Somewhere between Washington and Springfield," Swanson writes, "the train became a universal symbol of the cost of the Civil War. It came to represent a mournful homecoming for all the lost men. In the heartbroken and collective judgment of the American people, an army of the dead - and not just its commander in chief - rode aboard that train." In the meantime, the other president whose journey is described here was making his own way by rail. Jefferson Davis quit Richmond on 2 April because Union troops were advancing on the Confederate capital, and General Lee advised him to escape. Davis was convinced that he was merely making a retreat, that his forces could, in his words, "meet the foe with fresh defiance" because he would be calling upon the vast resources of the Confederacy to make an even larger army than any previous one. Davis was able to get as far as Irwinville, Georgia, before Union cavalry caught him and the dwindling companions fleeing with him. There were attempts to find evidence connecting Davis to John Wilkes Booth, but there was no connection, and only impostors and perjurers made one. Davis was to spend two years in captivity. In essence, Davis had done no more wrong than any other Southerner, and national reconciliation was eventually deemed more important than bringing him to trial. He was to endure shame and his measure of financial hardship, but he was to write his memoirs and become a favorite son of the fallen South, taking the role as the keeper of the Confederate memory and showing up at memorial and reunion ceremonies where he was affectionately welcomed.

Davis was to die in 1889, and his own death pageant began. There was a funeral train four years later that bore his body from New Orleans to Richmond, a train smaller than Lincoln's had been, and with fewer ceremonies. Floral arches along the way, though, often spelled out the sentiment, "He lives in the hearts of his people." They were the same words that had been on banners for Lincoln's traveling funeral pageant a quarter century before. It's one of the pleasing parallels Swanson has found in the two very different stories he recounts here, with liberal quotations from letters and contemporary accounts, making a vivid picture of a wounded nation taking first steps again toward unity.
... Read more

Editorial Review

The bestselling author of Mayflower sheds new light on one of the iconic stories of the American West

Little Bighorn and Custer are names synonymous in the American imagination with unmatched bravery and spectacular defeat. Mythologized as Custer's Last Stand, the June 1876 battle has been equated with other famous last stands, from the Spartans' defeat at Thermopylae to Davy Crockett at the Alamo.

In his tightly structured narrative, Nathaniel Philbrick brilliantly sketches the two larger-than-life antagonists: Sitting Bull, whose charisma and political savvy earned him the position of leader of the Plains Indians, and George Armstrong Custer, one of the Union's greatest cavalry officers and a man with a reputation for fearless and often reckless courage. Philbrick reminds readers that the Battle of the Little Bighorn was also, even in victory, the last stand for the Sioux and Cheyenne Indian nations. Increasingly outraged by the government's Indian policies, the Plains tribes allied themselves and held their ground in southern Montana. Within a few years of Little Bighorn, however, all the major tribal leaders would be confined to Indian reservations.

Throughout, Philbrick beautifully evokes the history and geography of the Great Plains with his characteristic grace and sense of drama. The Last Stand is a mesmerizing account of the archetypal story of the American West, one that continues to haunt our collective imagination. ... Read more

Reviews

Vivid history of the Little Bighorn battle, May 5, 2010
Nathaniel Philbrick is normally associated with nautical history, so it might be something of a surprise that in "The Last Stand" he has chronicled the Battle of the Little Bighorn, a military event that took place about as far from the ocean as you can get. But, it might be remembered that a large part of his "Mayflower" book was focused on the violent relations between the Pilgrims and Indians and on the slightly later King Phillip's War. Here in "The Last Stand", the author has returned to the subject of white-Indian relations and has created a vivid, engaging book.

Philbrick's "The Last Stand: Custer, Sitting Bull, and the Battle of the Little Bighorn" quite naturally invites comparison with 2008's "A Terrible Glory: Custer and the Little Bighorn" by James Donovan, about the same subject. Although both volumes present lengthy, quite comprehensive narratives, they do differ significantly. Donovan's book takes a more straightforward approach, while Philbrick's is more consciously "literary" in style, filled with numerous colorful incidents almost cinematic in impact. Additionally, Philbrick's "The Last Stand" devotes somewhat more attention to the Indian side of the story than does Donovan's volume.

Which book is "better"? The answer to that undoubtedly depends on the reader and his/her needs and expectations. Philbrick's volume is perhaps the more suited for random browsing or reading a chapter at a time, while Donovan's is probably better suited for focused, prolonged study. I personally enjoyed both Philbrick's and Donovan's volumes. Both books are representative of a much more balanced, even-handed approach to the Little Bighorn battle than had been characteristic of the past. Originally, accounts tended to overly laud Custer and his soldiers as peerless representatives of Civilization, done to death by a savage, scarcely human foe. By the latter part of the Twentieth century, however, it had become commonplace to reverse roles, depicting Custer and his men as mindless murderers and the Indians as peaceful, innocent victims. We now seem to have finally reached a point, as demonstrated in both Philbrick's "The Last Stand" and also Donovan's "A Terrible Glory", where the participants on both sides can be depicted as three-dimensional, realistic blends of virtue and flaw, neither demons nor angels.

Any serious student of the Little Bighorn battle - I count myself among them - can find elements in Philbrick's book (as in Donovan's) with which to disagree. The events are complex enough and the evidence sufficiently murky that this is inevitable. I cannot say that I learned anything wholly new here, but then again I've been studying the Little Bighorn battle for more than 40 years. An intelligent general reader, previously uninformed about the details, can come away from "The Last Stand" with a good understanding of the events and the people involved on both sides. If that reader should wish to proceed further with studying the battle, Philbrick supplies detailed notes and source lists.

Nice treatment, nothing new or noteworthy, May 25, 2010
As the owner of over 40 books on the Little Big Horn, I found this book to be a nice, reasonably "light" treatment of the Little Big Horn. If you are new to this particular event in our history, this is certainly a decent primer. I would also recommend "A Terrible Glory" by James Donovan, and "Son of the Morning Star: Custer and The Little Bighorn" by Evan S. Connell which was reviewed (quite favorably) in Time Magazine when originally released.

If you aren't new to this topic, and are looking for new insights - they are not here (in my opinion).

This is a well written, pleasant book and recommended to those who have little knowledge of the topic. Recommended for those folks.

Great detail, but treatment of characters is uneven, May 4, 2010

A story of two nations and one climactic moment., April 23, 2010

Thorough and well written account of the battle, May 11, 2010
This is a thorough and well written account of the Battle of the Little Bighorn, or Custer's Last Stand, as it is often called. The author pulls in a lot of interesting sources, like Private Thompson, and he obviously uses the Indian sources to describe the last stand battle. Other positive elements of this book are the maps and the picture sections (of which there are three including a number of Indian drawings of the battle).

His following of the battle is very similar to James Donovan's book, A Terrible Glory - what happened with Custer and his command at each part of the battle. Although I think that book does a better job of following the battle chronologically and logically.

A couple of concerns that I would voice that make it hard for me to give this book the top evaluation though.
1. He continues on and on about the drinking problems that the cavalry officers had especially Major Reno - OK already enough, we read it the first time that he had a drinking problem. And, he berates Benteen about his tendency to criticize his superiors time and again to the point of ad nauseum - OK, already!
2. His use of the different sources sometimes gets him lost in his stories. Although the Private Thompson source was interesting, it caused some confusion about what really happenend, especially when he quotes that Thompson claimed to have seen Custer alone at the Little Big Horn river prior to the massacre. Maybe some of these sources were better handled in the notes instead of being part of the main story.
3. He doesn't use primary notes during each chapter to provide the specific source for his statements in each chapter. Instead, he uses a general discussion on the chapter with the primary sources that he used. In spite of that, his sources are thorough.
4. He mentions at the beginning of the last stand chapter that an Indian source mentioned that Custer was killed or mortally wounded at the start of the battle when he crossed Medicine Tail Coulee crossing of the Little Big Horn river. I read this before in another source in 1960s (David Humphrey Miller's Custer's Fall which is worth the read) and personally, I believe this may be what in fact happened - that Custer was mortally wounded at the very start of the battle (not killed) and then the command broke down. He argues that this couldn't have happened because there were a number of cartridges from Custer's unusual rifle (Remington Rolling Block) on last stand hill but... couldn't someone else have used his gun at the end?
5. Last, his comments on how Custer died - that his brother shot him in the head, has no basis in fact and he doesn't provide a source for his comment in the chapter notes. So, this is conjecture and in fact, Custer's wounding at the Medicine Coulee has at least a source. If the author said that first and then led to this end, that would make more sense, but he didn't, causing me for one to scratch my head.
6. (This was written after I initially published the review.) Further, regarding Custer's death, according to the book, Where Custer Fell, the individuals who buried him mentioned that blood had come out of the head wound and not through the other wounds indicating that he died from the head wound and that the other wounds may have occurred after death. Also, no powder burns were found on his head unlike other suicides or others who were killed by colleagues.

On the positive side, there are some interesting new anecdotes (besides the Private Thompson digression):
1. Herendeen was a civilian scout for Custer who was with Reno. He also served in an ad hoc frontiersman group of about 150 of so men that the Indians kept away from (apparently for fear of getting their butts kicked). These men roamed the eastern face of the Big Horn mountains (e.g. modern Sheridan and Buffalo, WY).
2. One sergeant of Reno's group had a Sharp's rifle that was used for long range sharpshooting.

In short, as some individuals mentioned, this may be a good starting book for a student interested in this battle, but I would recommend James Donovan's book, A Terrible Glory, instead. Although some could say that Philbrick has a better writing style, and that is probably true, his use of the many sources to digress sometimes gets you lost in his story, and he appears to use Donovan's approach to how the last stand progressed. However, it is a good book and recommended for any student of the battle.

A Splendit Foray into the Past, May 8, 2010

Kindle Edition disappoints, August 6, 2010
I have been a fan of Nathaniel Philbreck for quite some time. The narrative of The Last Stand stood up to my expectations for his writing on the subject. I found his detailed account of events to be educational, enlightening, evocative. As a result, I read through it very quickly and had a hard time putting it down.

However, with that being said, I was highly disappointed in the Kindle Edition. Though it contained maps which were included in the book the plates of photos were not included. I shook my fist at Amazon when I discovered this because I would have found the reading even more enjoyable due to being able to better put faces to the story.

Now I am terribly hesitant to buy more Kindle Books,

Simply Spellbinding, May 8, 2010
Two nights ago, due mostly to a casual interest in the folklore surrounding Custer's Last Stand, I attended a reading at a local bookstore by Mr. Nathaniel Philbrick regarding his just released work "The Last Stand". I hadn't read any of his earlier works and I'm not even a casual historian. I purchased his book that night mainly out of curiosity.

This morning I began reading his account of the events and personalities that intersected at the Battle of Little Big Horn. Within the first 20 pages I was gripped by a sustained eagerness to witness the lush detail of the introduction of each character and the unfolding of an historic event in exquisite slow motion. Pausing only for food and other necessities I devoured this book cover to cover. Having just finished the book I can say I found it satisfying on every level.

I certainly agree with other early reviews that Mr. Philbrick's account is painstakingly researched and goes to great length to be even-handed in how it treats both individuals and events. Inevitably, more time is spent focused on General Custer, Major Reno, Captain Benteen and the many other military and occasionally political figures among the "whites", but my sense is that this imbalance stems mainly from the more abundant information (interviews, journal entries, letters home, etc) that exists to flesh out that perspective. In the end Sitting Bull comes off the best overall but that seems to be a reasonable conclusion based on the accumulation of available evidence rather than the result of propagandizing. No character is painted as entirely good or evil and each portrait seems realistic. The addition of innumerable lesser characters adds richness and insight into each facet of the work.

Here is a story with which I was already sufficiently familiar that I knew every main character, knew the political and cultural dynamic, knew the geography and basic time line and, of course, knew how the story ended. Nevertheless, I found "The Last Stand" to be a spellbinding account made vivid not by fictionalizing or flowery prose but by letting the reader watch as what often seem to be minor events and trivial interpersonal relationships culminate in a deadly drama. I never had the impression that these elements were being artificially juxtaposed in such as way as to force them to hold special meaning. Rather, by the end I felt as though I had gotten to know how the strengths and weaknesses of each main character played a role in how the events unfolded. Mr. Philbrick invites conjecture as to how different personalities might have changed the events, prevented the battle or changed the outcome but he is remarkably restrained in indulging such conjecture himself.

I know that other early reviewers, as well as the author himself, have made a point to draw parallels between Sitting Bull and General Custer as charismatic leaders, how this in a way was each man's "last stand" and all that. I don't dispute it, I just didn't care about it. I immersed myself deeply in the sweat and sounds and courage and fear and dust and death that made up this violent entry in America's historic record. I don't have a lot of intellectual insights to add to these reviews. I just loved the book.

Well written, but merely a synopsis of the work of many post 1950 authors, with nothing new added., May 25, 2010
There is absolutely no basis for his "theory" that Tom Custer shot George Custer - though it is an expansion of the thoughts in the pro-Indian Humphrey Miller book of the 1950's, which were widely discredited and had no factual basis.

The book is chock full of mis-quotes, mis-attributed quotations and mis-references.

He lists a bibliography 26 pages long containg some 780 listings, of which less than 40 (5%) were originally written prior to 1950, with less than a half dozen being written prior to 1900. Does he really think the reader will believe he gained an intimate knowledge of all these "references" in the two years he studied the battle between writing books? I have studied the battle over 50 years and do not think I have an intimate knowledge of 780 books, though I did spend hundreds of hours reviewing microfilm records of the period. Who is he trying to kid, here?

Among his glaring omissions as sources are Whitaker's biographies of Custer, the reports of the War Department, the Executive Branch and Bureau of Indian Affairs to Congress of the period, the wealth of information contained in the National Archives microfilm records, and the writings of the survivors (including their diaries and letters). It appears all his "conclusions" are merely rehashes of the conclusions of current era writers and researchers, and his version of "research" is to read someone else's work and then recast it his own words, without determining if the theory is true, false or has any factual basis whatsoever. It is doubtful that he cites a solitary primary source in his biography, nor does it appear that he knows the value of primary source documents in a work like this. At best the work is a poor regurgitation of other works.

He brings absolutely nothing new to the table (no new primary source document or fact. no new piece of evidence to confirm or alter an aspect of the battle). How can he when his version is merely a rehash of other writer's opinions, some without any factual basis, inter alia Custer being shot at the river and then Tom Custer killing his brother.

Read it to test your knowledge and find his mistakes.

Living history, May 3, 2010

Editorial Review

Reviews

I had to frequently remind myself that this is not fiction or fantasy, but real stories about real people., November 13, 2010
I chose this book to read because of the author, Oliver North. I was very curious to read what he had written. It is actually a part of a series that he has produced. Had I fully known the subject matter of the book, prior to my selection, I wouldn't have chosen it. (I shy away from war stories, due to the violence.) That would have been tragic for me. My timing (Veteran's Day) was a coincidence, but made it all the more relevant.

"American Heroes in Special Operations" is a compilation of short stories , reporting true Special Operations Force's events that have taken place since the launch of the War on Terror. The stories are reported with as much fact and detail as is allowed by law. The book includes: amazing photos, to help support the stories written about events in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq; detailed definitions for novices (like me); and most importantly, recounts the honors awarded to the participants in these events.

Once I started reading this book, I could not put it down. It is written in such a manner so as not to titillate the reader by the horrorifics of battle, but to recount the stories in as much detail as possible, so the reader gets a very good sense of what the participants endured. The words flow smoothly so it is easy to become engaged in the stories and with the participants. I was cheering for the good guys, boo/hissing the bad guys, and weeping for those who were lost. The stories seem so fantastic that I had to frequently remind myself that this is not fiction or fantasy, but real stories about real people.

I've found this book of true stories to be important to me, because it has helped me become more of a participant in the War on Terror, if only through new knowledge. I feel very strongly that this book belongs in every home in America. If there were ever a reason to get everyone moving in one direction at one time, it should be to collectively read this book so as to more fully appreciate what it actually means to go to war. This series should be mandatory reading for every government official.

Excellent Eye-opener, November 3, 2010
American Heroes: Special Operations gives an in-depth look into the hearts, minds, and operations of our elite heroes. It's easy as a observer to idolize these heroes who sacrifice everything, but this book gave me a deeper perspective and appreciation of those sacrifices. With North and Holton embedded with these elite warriors, readers are able to see the intricacies and frustrations these men face on a daily basis. What we see on the news is often slanted and a mere sliver of the truth, and that's why I love this American Heroes series because, in essence, it humanizes these warriors--it peels away the armor, the weapons, the deadly missions--and allows me to "see" a man behind all that gear and action. A man with a family, a dream. It's an absolutely fascinating, informative, realistic, and engaging read!

A Must Read for every american, November 4, 2010
This book is one of the most eye opening and realistic accounts of the bravery of our men fighting the war on terrorism. These are the guys you will never hear about or read about in the newspapers or see on TV, but may have the greatest influence on the war itself. If you are an American regardless if you support the war or not; you need to read this so that you will gain a better understanding of whats REALLY going on and the sacrifices the men and women in uniform are making so that we can have our everyday freedoms. A big thank you to both Chuck Holton and Oliver North for exposing the truth about what our "Men in Black" are doing and the impact they are having on the war.

Grateful and Proud, November 10, 2010
On the eve of Veteran's Day, I just finished American Heroes in Special Operations....it took me a day and a half to read it. I could not put it down. This book takes you on a journey inside the life and struggles of America's best and brightest. I was humbled by the courage and sacrifice of these brave young warriors. Regardless of your politics, if you read this brief summary of American Military history and don't come away with an awe and sense of gratitude and pride, you don't have a heart. Thank you Oliver North and Chuck Holton for shining a light on America's best. Thanks to all veterans past and present for your service. This is a must read.

Real stories about real heroes, December 14, 2010
The overwhelming thought lingering in my mind after reading this book was, "Am I worthy of this kind of sacrifice?" I can't help but take what these guys do personally. I live in a free society because of what our military does for us everyday, almost everywhere.

This second book in Oliver North's American Heroes series is a collection of stories and pictures about special operators in the fight against Islamic extremists. It once again proves: fact trumps fiction. The extremes of bravery and human endurance portrayed here challenges the imagination.

Reading this book will cause your sense of gratitude to swell and your perspective on life to take on new clarity. Buy it, read it, and have all you know do the same!

AMERICAN HEROES IN SPECIAL FORCES, November 15, 2010
VERY GOOD BOOK. ALTHOUGH MOST OF THE GUYS FEATURED IN THE BOOK PASSED ITS NICE TO HEAR ABOUT THE THINGS THEY DID TO SAVE EACH OTHER. THE WORLD WOULD BE A MUCH BETTER PLACE WITH PEOPLE LIKE THAT.

American Heroes in Special Operations, December 16, 2010
I maybe a bit prejudice as my heart donor, U.S. Army Ranger Ben Kopp, is featured in the 2009 chapter, but this is a great book about the men & women fighting for our freedom. I read the entire book and learned so much about our nation's bravest fighting personnel. This should be on your gift list this year as anyone who gets this book can not be helped but be blown away by such a thoughtful gift. Each chapter tells a complete story and when grouped together you can not help but be impressed by these heroes, one and all. No matter how you feel about war, everyone should support our brave heroes and Special Operations certainly has more than their fair share.
THANK YOU Oliver and Chuck Holton for writing this book to honor our heroes!

Special information, December 13, 2010
This is not my usual read, but I saw Oliver North on a television program and decided that I should read it since I know nothing about the special ops forces. I found much information that I wouldn't have gained anywhere else, I suppose, and I am glad that I read it. It's a book that one could read a page or two at a time. It's good to know that there are still "stout-hearted men".

American Heros in Special Operations, December 9, 2010
Once again Oliver North proves that not only is he an American hero but he has the uncanny ability to search out, describe and immortalize other like heros in such a way as to leave a lump in your throat... A thoroughly page-turningly important read. ... Read more

Editorial Review

Reviews

Great Read About A 38-Year Career, October 12, 2010
In General Hugh Shelton's autobiography, the reader is taken through his thirty eight year career, starting with his days in ROTC as an undergraduate at North Carolina state. While it would have been tempting for General Shelton to focus only on his most noticeable position --namely his stint from 1997-2001 as the Chairman, he conveys to the reader that it was all the other positions where he learned, implemented and worked to refine the leadership principles that led him into that position. Readers of current history will find many insights into the leadership of President Clinton that has been continually debunked, and also that of Rumsfeld, which has been hopelessly overplayed. There's plenty of anecdotal stories here, but all pale in comparison of the man who deftly fielded challenges with a combination of brains, and tenacity while keeping not only Army values, but his own intact.

Coming in at just over 500 pages, Shelton covers a lot of ground in this account of his 38 year career in the Army. He covers his childhood in North Carolina, Vietnam, other wars, small posts, exotic ones, and insight about the difficulties in moving a family around twenty-three times. This is a much-examined life, and throughout he gives thanks to the support of his wife Carolyn, and their family. He does much to tell everyone about the sacrifices military families make, starting with his own, with much candor.

This is good reading for anyone who has ever wondered, "How does someone become the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff?" or "What does a military career look like? What does it entail?" It's a valid question, since these men and women lead legions of warriors and also show up one day on our television screens. Younger readers will find the passages on Vietnam worth reading. While a big deal has been made by people like Thomas Ricks or MSNBC about his naming names, Shelton is even handed in telling readers who deserved kudos and who didn't. Perhaps this is the advantage of waiting almost ten years after retirement to write your memoirs! However, I am not convinced that many who are running quips have actually read the book as a whole.

Where the book does best is in the recounting of events that happened during war. The book could have used some editing to quicken the pace in a few places. It gets bogged down a bit, but oftentimes this is the case when a book is being written in chronological order. Regardless, this is a book worth reading. General Shelton comes across as an tireless, determined and insightful man. A person whom we were lucky to have as a leader, and fortunate to have written his memoir. -Kanani Fong, The Kitchen Dispatch, A military blog

DO NOT "HESITATE" YOU MUST READ THIS BOOK!!!!, October 15, 2010
I was given this book as a gift and thought it was a strange choice since I'm neither a military nor history buff, and had never heard of General Shelton... but after reading the book, all I can say is WOW! Putting his awesome military career aside, I was blown away by his personal triumph - a complete recovery from a near-death injury in which doctors said he would be paralyzed for life. Not taking that as an acceptable answer, he battled back to a near-perfect recovery - according to the book, the only one in medical history to do so. Too bad his successors didn't listen to him regarding Iraq; for if they had, I'm convinced that thousands of our nation's finest would be home with their wives, husbands and children, rather than laid to rest at Arlington Cemetery. An important book about an inspirational leader.

honesty at last, October 13, 2010
When the film Ben Hur was first released, stories circulated about movie goers who timed their arrival at the theater to coincide with the chariot race. For readers with a military background and for about the same reason, I recommend starting this extraordinary book at chapter 13, when General Shelton becomes chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. His comparison of Defense Secretaries Bill Cohen to Don Rumsfeld is insightful, entertaining and persuasive, candid almost beyond belief. If Shelton is no fan of Rumsfeld or General Tommy Franks, he sets forth the reasons and the context in the language of the street.

General Shelton may not be a great theoretician--nor does he claim to be--but he is a world-class observer of the first order.

His run-ins with Senator McCain weren't fun, but Shelton's recollections of professional encounters are entertaining and also insightful. (They're too hilarious to repeat here).

If chapters 1-13 are foreplay, they explains how general are born and bred. General Shelton is one of the top.

My only complaint is the length of the book, although the core is critical to understanding why the invasion of Iraq was pre-ordained to (you pick the word).

Loved it!, October 17, 2010
Grabs you from the first page, very interesting intercutting between the general's miraculous recovery from his life-threatening injury with a linear chronology of his amazing life. Don't think I've ever read as realistic accounts of the Vietnam War, and the behind the scenes scenario of what really played out in Haiti is enough of a reason to get the book in and of itself. After a few middle chapters that didn't seem to have quite the pace of the rest, it kicked back into high gear when the general got his 4th star and headed Delta Force and Navy Seals -- amazed that these stories cleared the government security censors - VERY COOL indeed!!

Great hero, great read, October 12, 2010
An inspirational book about an inspirational leader. Unbiased, well-written, General Shelton tells it like it is. Nice to finally see what happened behind the scenes and sometimes it's not pretty. The only thing that tops the General's heroic military career is his personal story... A complete recovery from a total paralysis after doctors said he'd be paralyzed for life??? Knighted by the queen? Congressional Gold Medal? The only negative I felt after reading the book is that the General is no longer Chairman; we need him leaders like him now, more than ever. The great news is that I no longer have to decide what to get friends and family for Christmas, this book is the perfect gift!

Highly motivational - Great Book, October 17, 2010
Forget about all the shocking sound bites about this book re "Clinton confesses shame about Monica Lewinsky to General Shelton" and "Cabinet Official Orders US Plane Shot Down to Start War" and "Al Gore Attacks General in Oval Office" and such: This is NOT a gossip tell-all (although those instances are detailed), but rather a well-written documention of how this great soldier rose from humble beginnings to impact history - and how he did so, all the while, through principles of character, honesty and integrity. So refreshing to read something like this written by someone WITHOUT an agenda, for it's clearly non-partisan. Highly recommended.

Book Review / Without Hesitation, October 31, 2010
In my view, an honest take from General Shelton, a great American. I read the book over a 2 day span. He relates some of his experiences during the course of his career in the US Army. His insight into the issues and his perspective are very helpful for someone to understand how things work the "Army" way. Good book, I would reccomend this to others who may have a desire to benefit from the General's experience and insight. As an aside I think the Army could go a long way in placing a higher value on the people in the service, and their quality of life.

Unmatched insight into an Unparalleled Military Career, October 31, 2010
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the detailed account of the life of General Henry H. Shelton. However, his path to such a storied military career almost ended before it began:


"When I returned to the First Battalion, 38th Infantry of the 2nd Infantry Division, I was assigned as the scout platoon leader. This was duty that I thoroughly enjoyed because it made use of the skills I'd just learned in ranger school, such as night patrolling, deep reconnaissance, and ambush.
Our battalion became part of the new 11th Air Assault Division, a test unit for the concept of helicopter-borne airmobile forces headed by Major General Harry Kinnard. We trained hard, first at company, then at the battalion, then all the way up to the full division level, deploying hundreds and eventually thousands of troops by UH-1 Huey and CH-47 Chinook with wide twin main rotors. This all culminated in a huge field training exercise, Air Assault II, during which we engaged the best of the 82d and 101st Airborne Divisions in South Carolina. The exercise validated the air-assault concept.
One of my missions was to secure a landing zone for the rest of the battalion to come in on, and that LZ was at Harmony Church.
I briefed my platoon that there would be four aircraft transporting us, and I assigned who was to board which one. At the predetermined time, four UH-1 helicopters made their sweeping arcs and touched down for us to board, and we sprinted out to our assigned choppers.
There were twenty-eight of us, seven assigned to each helo. I ran to board chopper two along with my radio-telephone operator (RTO), who had been assigned to the same bird. As I started to jump in, a voice from the pilot's seat cut through the roar of the rotor blades: "You can't get on here, I've got a weak engine. This thing doesn't have enough power. Go get on one of the other birds so we can take you both to Harmony Church."
I turned to Campbell, my radio operator, and shouted over the earsplitting whirl of the rotors, "You go jump on the third bird and I'm right behind you." Within seconds, we were at helo number three.
"I can only take one of you," the pilot shouted. "Got a full house in here already."
"Campbell, you jump on here and I'll get on the fourth one. We'll meet up at the church," I said.
"Will do, sir," he yelled back as he jumped on, the turbo shaft accelerating and the aircraft shooting skyward. I ran to the fourth bird and boarded with no problem, and we lifted off to join the formation to Fort Benning's Harmony Church.
Moments earlier the skies had been fairly clear, but visibility quickly diminished and we hit a fog bank. I put on a headset to hear what was going on. "Juliet One to Two, Three, and Four, let's take it easy and just follow the road for nav," crackled the voice over the chopper's radio.
Suddenly it was like somebody had thrown a white sheet in front of us. The fog was completely blinding. "Slow turn to the left, we've got to get out of this fog," I heard over the radio. "Nice and easy, slow turn to the left." I could feel the aircraft making the slow turn, and I was just looking out the open door and waiting to see that we had broken through. The moment it did, helo three banked into helo two and together they exploded in a tremendous ball of fire - the wreckage plummeting to the earth, rotors still spinning but the helos in a dozen separate pieces. Right before my eyes, I saw half my platoon killed instantly, including my RTO - whom I had just sent to his death by instructing him to board helo three."

The book goes on to chronicle Shelton's two tours of service in Vietnam, first as a Special Forces A-team leader with Project Delta and later as a company commander and staff officer with the 173d Airborne Brigade. Shelton followed his first tour in Vietnam with a stint at Fort Jackson, South Carolina where he served in a basic training unit for a year. As with most dedicated soldiers, he did not relish the prospect of remaining at Fort Jackson while a war was going on. Shelton volunteered to return to Vietnam rather than serve a tour with the 2d Infantry Division in Korea. By this point, readers should note that General Shelton concentrated on doing what he thought was right rather than following the career path of least resistance. He also did not seek out a high-ranking "sponsor" to help with his career development. Shelton's rise through the ranks was due to his skill, diligence, and hard work. His efforts were rewarded with an early promotion to Major - although the timing was not quite right as the conflict in Vietnam wound down. He had to wait five years before pinning on his gold oak leaves.

Although the details of Shelton's early career are interesting, the book's true strength lies in his recounting of events following his promotion to Lieutenant General. As the XVIII Airborne Corps commander, he meets President Bill Clinton for the first time following a horrific accident on "Green Ramp" at Fort Bragg, North Carolina when a malfunctioning Air Force F-16 crashed in the midst of hundreds of paratroopers waiting for a jump: "By the time we had completed the rounds of Womack Army Medical Center, the President had visited every troop personally - and there had to have been a hundred of them. Colonel Hal Timboe and I accompanied him for each of them.
When we walked out of that last patient ward, the President looked at Hal and asked, "Is that all?"
Timboe replied, "Mr. President, that is all with the exception of three on the top floor that are in grave condition. We have done everything we can but it just doesn't appear that they're going to make it."
"I want to see those three," the President replied without hesitation. At this time it was just the three of us, without any press; they were all gathered outside the building.
We took the elevator to the top floor, where the isolation units were located. After donning the special attire that was required to enter those rooms, the President privately entered each of them - where he stood beside each man and gently put his hand on him, privately reflecting, then saying a prayer.
During the elevator ride down, Hal reached over and handed the President a piece of paper and said, "Mr. President, this is a copy of what George Washington said about being a commander-in-chief." I can't quote it exactly, but it read something like this: there is no greater concern that a commander can show than to care for those who are seriously injured.
I could see how greatly the president was affected when he read it, then said, "It's just something that I had to do.'"

Shelton's dealings with President Clinton, who he clearly admires, do not end with the visit to Womack Army Medical Center. The general leads CJTF-180 into Haiti soon afterward, followed by promotion to four-stars and assignment as the Commander of U.S. Special Operations Command. He was then summoned to the White House for an interview for the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "Betty Currie (President Clinton's personal secretary) closed the door behind me as the President led me over to the two yellow chairs beneath the Rembrandt Peale portrait of George Washington at the north end of the Oval Office. Although there would be times when the President and I would sit on opposite sides of the ornate Resolute desk, for meetings such as this he seemed to prefer the comparative informality of the fireplace setting.
It began as a typical interview with the usual exchange of pleasantries, then the President seemed to focus in and there was no doubt that every one of my answers - and perhaps even the way in which I would answer - would have a direct bearing on whether I would serve out my time in uniform down in Tampa or side by side with the commander in chief, Secretary of Defense, and National Security Council. "Hugh, I've got a couple of items here that I would like to get your take on," he began.
We talked about everything from the fighting in Bosnia to the state of the Army. He asked what I thought of our Special Operations Command I could tell that my running SOCOM was of particular interest to him: "I want to talk with you about some of their capabilities, and how might use those capabilities in new ways," he continued, referring to the highly specialized equipment, procedures, and tactics of our Delta Force, Navy SEALS, and other top-tier Special Mission Units. Even though he did not take a note, there was no doubt in my mind that he was synthesizing every answer within the context of whether I would be of value to him in helping to solve whatever military challenges he was up against....he just took it all in and nodded; we had already gone ten minutes past the twenty minute cap that Berger had warned me about. But instead he continued for at least an hour. And I'm sitting there thinking, Gee whiz, I wonder who the next appointment is and I hope they don't mind waiting an hour to get in. By this time a crowd had started to form outside the door, looking in the peephole and undoubtedly wondering what was going on in there. Finally, Betty knocked on the door, and that ended the interview."

Compare his meeting with the President with Shelton's initial encounter with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld several years later:
"When I walked into his huge office for the first of many such meetings, I was totally unaware of the volatile minefield I was about to breach. The Secretary rose from his large desk and gestured to a circular table where we would meet. "Have a seat, Hugh", he said with an inviting smile, his eyes becoming slits behind his wire-rimmed glasses. We took seats at the table where I had met with Cohen every morning for the past three years, and where Rumsfeld would convene his morning meetings for that day forward. (Joining the two of us for those morning meetings would be General Myers [my Vice], and Paul Wolfowitz {Secretary Rumsfeld's Deputy.])
"Mr. Secretary, I hope you understand I don't want to be viewed as a member of the old team," I began, speaking in a sincere, positive, upbeat manner. "Yesterday, when President Bush raised his hand and took the oath of office, my allegiance transferred immediately to you and him and the current administration. So please consider me a member of your team and not a member of the old team that's just hanging around, because that's certainly not the case." As I spoke, he showed no reaction whatsoever - not a nod, not a glimmer of recognition, nothing. It was odd, but I continued, "Anything I can do to help you in the transition, or anything you need at any time, all you have to do is just let me know."
I stopped, but still he was just frozen - then it finally hit me. He was in his own world and not particularly listening to a thing I was saying. Frankly, it got a little tense. Still, I went on. "A great example of this is the upcoming QDR..."
At this point I stopped, since it was obvious that he had something he wanted to say. Finally, he asked me, "How do you view your job?"
That was easy because it's specifically delineated by federal statute. "Mr. Secretary, I am the principal military adviser to you, the President, and the National Security Council, and also - "
"No, you are not the adviser to the National Security Council."
"Well, I get your pardon, but according to Title Ten of the U.S. Code, it states very clearly that - "
"But not the staff, not the staff."
"No sir," I answered, allowing him to save face when he realized that I had him by the balls since I knew exactly how the law defined my job. "I don't deal with staff. I deal with principals. It is you and the other principals of the NSC that I advise." Of course he wasn't worried about the staffs - it was his lame attempt to cover up his misguided power play, kind of like, Oh, I must have misunderstood you, I thought you were talking about the staffs. So I thought to myself, We're going to need some heavy-duty cleaning supplies if all we're going to do is waste time having pissing contests like this. I even made it easy for him by volunteering that I was there to advise him, that I worked for him....."

As one might imagine, being at the center of power, while maintaining one's integrity and reputation as an officer that spoke his mind rather than one who told the political leadership what they wanted to hear makes for some interesting narrative covering the rest of General Shelton's tenure as Chairman.

Shelton, who had put in his paperwork for retirement months before 9/11, left the military on 1 October 2001. A few months later, Shelton suffered a fall that almost left him paralyzed for life from the neck down. Each of the chapters in the book begin with a sequential account of the accident and key events that followed. It is an effective literary device that holds the reader's attention. Even though you KNOW that he recovered, each little vignette leaves one wondering what will happen next.

As detailed autobiographies of senior military officers go, this one is better than most. As a first hand eyewitness to some of the events recounted within the book, I can tell you that the narrative is very accurate. Any inadvertant omissions, such as the fact that CJTF-180 first learned of the firefight (p. 246) between Haitian soldiers and U.S. Marines from watching CNN reports on television aboard the Mount Whitney, do not detract from the overall account.

In summary, this book provides both an unmatched perspective of the military aspects of the Clinton administration and the initial steps along the controversial road leading to our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan.



... Read more

Editorial Review

Days after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt met at the White House. It was Christmas Eve, 1941. As war raged throughout the world, the two leaders delivered a powerful message that still resonates today. Bestselling author and historian David McCullough relates a compelling story about the spirit of Christmas and the power of light in difficult, dangerous times. Beautifully designed with historic photographs that transport readers to the early days of World War II Includes a DVD of David McCullough s presentation of this story at the Mormon Tabernacle Choir s 2009 Christmas concert, to be featured nationally on PBS ... Read more

Reviews

Words and music that have stood the test of time, October 13, 2010
At first I was disappointed when I received this book, I expected more of a story. Then I put the DVD into the player and listened to David McCullough tell the story of 2 Christmas Carols with the backing of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. This is an excerpt from a 2009 PBS program. It only lasts 10 minutes but it is powerful. He relates how `Little Town of Bethlehem' was written as well as `I'll Be Home for Christmas`. Pictures are shown of Roosevelt and Churchill at the lighting of the National Christmas Tree in 1941- certainly a dark and scary time for the world. Then the story of the 2 Carols with appropriate pictures and his summing up is shown, "History can be a great source of strength and affirmation in difficult, dangerous times. And the words and music we love, and that have stood the test of time, mean still more when we know the story".

The narration and pictures are included in this small book, as well as the short speeches of Roosevelt and Churchill. It would take a tougher heart than mine not to shed a tear. This book is a touching and appropriate gift for history and Christmas lovers and especially for those who share memories of WWII or their loved ones that have been far away from home serving their country on Christmas.

Great Christmas book, October 18, 2010
I wasn't sure what to expect with this book - I bought it, read it, and absolutely loved it. It totally got me in the Christmas spirit. I love anything by David McCullough, but there was something about this particular Christmas story. I love that it is a book and DVD combination - the DVD is amazing and so inspiring. A great Christmas gift for others, but I would also recommend having a copy of your own.

A Christmas Gem!, October 13, 2010
What a gem this book is! The narrative that David McCullough weaves as he provides background on two favorite Christmas songs, intersecting them with Roosevelt's radio address from Christmas Eve, 1941, is compelling, illuminating, and touching. I would have to agree that watching the DVD (included with the book), where the songs are brought to life by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, adds significantly to the experience. The book is beautiful to look at and read; the DVD is spectacular, musically and visually. As a package, it's an exquisite and apt reminder of music's power to offer comfort and guidance in troubled times. Refreshingly free of the glitz, showiness, and superficiality so rampant in Christmas offerings these days, "In the Dark Streets Shineth" is one of the most heartfelt and genuine treatments of the Christmas spirit I've seen in years. Very enthusiastically recommended.

A beautifully executed idea, October 23, 2010
This book and DVD are breath taking, and your eyes may tear a bit when you have finished reading or listening. McCullough is my favorite author, The Mormon Tabernacle choir is far and above 99% of the choirs in the world, and these two songs are high on my list of favorites, especially "I'll be home for Christmas". Therefore, buying this book was a given when I saw it. It is excellent, and I will buy more copies for family members. My regrets are that it is too short. More music by the choir (a couple more verses of "O! Little Town of Bethlehem" would have given it 5 stars. That was a bit disappointing. But buy it, you won't be disappointed in the quality of the story/history, McCullough's narration, or the music that is there.

an excellant addition to your library, October 15, 2010
I too was expecting more of an actual story, and was a bit disappointed to hear that it only takes about 15 mins to read. But this is an amazing book. Such a powerful message and story. I was near tears when I learned the story behind the song "I'll Be Home For Christmas". It's a great book to share with friends and family.

Most uplifting!, November 7, 2010

One of the many things a friend and neighbour often does for me is share the latest additions to her personal library. I love stories, especially when related to real facts. I especially like the Second World War Era albeit I cannot rightly say why, but combined with the advent of Christmas, I am always spellbound!This one can only be described as a gem!

In the Dark Streets Shineth or a 1941 Christmas Eve Story as told by David McCullough relates the meeting and subsequent addresses by President Roosevelt and Prime minister Winston Churchill on the 24th of December 1941.

As President Roosevelt went on to say: "Our strongest weapon in this war is the conviction of dignity and brotherhood of man which Christmas day signifies".

In turn the Prime Minister would declare: "Here in the midst of war...here amid all the tumult, we have tonight the peace of the spirit in each cottage home and in every generous heart...
Here then for one night only, each home...should be a brightly lighted island of happiness and peace."

In this book you will find uplifting stories behind well loved songs such as "O Little Town of Bethlehem" and the unforgettable "I'll be home for Christmas" and marvelous photographs you will be able to share with the whole family.

In the Dark Streets Shineth is the sort of book that is sure to find its rightful place in your personal library and will surely be treasured for years to come.

I give it a 5 stars!

Please note this book review reflects my opinion only. I was neither asked to review it or to give it a positive review.

Warm and Inspiring, October 16, 2010
I love books by David McCullough and this time is no different. I enjoyed being taken back in time to a special moment when Churchill arrived secretly to America and met with Roosevelt right before Christmas during the War. This book tells the short story and shares their personal speeches. Then it also gives the history of the song "Oh Little Town of Bethlehem". That story is inspiring. It also includes the program on dvd along with the book when David McCullough shared this story with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir performing the songs. A quick read, but a great story to share every christmas. It makes you feel warm all over and truly feel the spirit of Christmas.

Great Christmas Story, October 25, 2010
Really liked the Christmas story. It's a short book, but an interesting read. It's been fun to read and share. ... Read more

Editorial Review

He was the greatest Indian warrior of the nineteenth century. His victory over General Custer at the battle of Little Bighorn in 1876 was the worst defeat inflicted on the frontier Army. And the death of Crazy Horse in federal custody has remained a controversy for more than a century.

The Killing of Crazy Horse pieces together the many sources of fear and misunderstanding that resulted in an official killing hard to distinguish from a crime. A rich cast of characters, whites and Indians alike, passes through this story, including Red Cloud, the chief who dominated Oglala history for fifty years but saw in Crazy Horse a dangerous rival; No Water and Woman Dress, both of whom hated Crazy Horse and schemed against him; the young interpreter Billy Garnett, son of a fifteen-year-old Oglala woman and a Confederate general killed at Gettysburg; General George Crook, who bitterly resented newspaper reports that he had been whipped by Crazy Horse in battle; Little Big Man, who betrayed Crazy Horse; Lieutenant William Philo Clark, the smart West Point graduate who thought he could “work” Indians to do the Army’s bidding; and Fast Thunder, who called Crazy Horse cousin, held him the moment he was stabbed, and then told his grandson thirty years later, “They tricked me! They tricked me!”

At the center of the story is Crazy Horse himself, the warrior of few words whom the Crow said they knew best among the Sioux, because he always came closest to them in battle. No photograph of him exists today.

The death of Crazy Horse was a traumatic event not only in Sioux but also in American history. With the Great Sioux War as background and context, drawing on many new materials as well as documents in libraries and archives, Thomas Powers recounts the final months and days of Crazy Horse’s life not to lay blame but to establish what happened. ... Read more

Reviews

Rich, deep, personal, November 4, 2010
When an excellent writer - who is also thoughtful and generous - focuses on a historical event that still holds mystery, the resulting work is often a glory for us all. This one is.

Powers's book is rich in detail and deep in research. And it's personal. You are with Powers and his brother in 1994 in Crow Agency, Montana, and you are with him again on the Pine Ridge when he visits "people who knew people who knew Crazy Horse." He tells you why he was attracted to this story after a lifetime of being a grownup. The finest work by this Pulitzer Prize winner may turn out to have been conceived when he was 12 years old.

A full appreciation of Power's book would probably benefit from at least some advance knowledge of the Plains Indian Wars, but readers don't really need it. If you do want to warm up to Powers, though, Ian Frazier's "Great Plains" would be a good and quick introduction - Frazier's description of the death of Crazy Horse could make anyone weep. Evan Connell's "Son of the Morning Star" is another instance of an excellent writer turning to an old but incomplete story and making a masterpiece of it. After you've finished Power's "Crazy Horse," set it on your bookshelf alongside Connell's "Morning Star." They're two of a piece.

This Story is so Well Told - I Couldn't Put it Down and Neither Will You - Five Stars !!!, November 20, 2010


A Story that Needs to be Told, and Thomas Powers Tells it Well - 5 Stars


At first I did not know if I could trust the book. I have read most of Thomas Powers' works, and was not sure how much expertise he could bring to this topic. Heisenberg's War and Intelligence Wars were both superbly written but far removed from this topic.


My fears were completely put to rest within the first few pages. It became obvious that the author spent years going deeper and deeper into the history of the American Indians, and their confrontations with the spreading of America through the Plains states and territories.


If you have any interest in a true history of the confrontation of our Native Americans, and the rapid expansion of territorial America than this is the book for you. If you think you understand this segment of American history from your school courses, you probably don't. As Americans, as free citizens, we need to understand what Powers is writing about. It is powerful stuff, and it needs to be told.


A book like this is a biography of many people. Allow me to mention two of them to you, to give you some insight into how the book is organized.


Crazy Horse
A warrior his entire life, a charismatic leader of his people. Prior to taking on General Custer, he was known for the Fetterman Massacre in December of 1866, when he lured approximately 80 US soldiers into an ambush against 1000 Indians. Up until that time, it was the worst defeat suffered by the US Army at the hands of the Indians. Little Big Horn would follow.


General George Armstrong Custer
How he lived, how he died has been molded for decades now by Hollywood's production of "They Died With their Booths On". The movie is so far removed from reality that they should not be mentioned in the same breath, which is probably true of most Hollywood movies. Custer was arrogant, self-absorbed, great at public relations, and brilliant as a leader. When you read the book, you will realize just how wrong he called it at the Battle of Little Big Horn, in which none of Custer's troops survived to tell the tale.


The purpose of the book is to inform us why Crazy Horse was killed? What were the conditions, what was happening at the time? What was the emotionality of the period? All of this Powers provides us in abundance. The author does this through documents, diaries, letters, official reports, books, newspaper clippings, notes and drawings.


There is urgency in the story; there is a richness in the tale. Was Crazy Horse murdered; was there a plot? If there was a plot than General George Crook, a West Point man was the plot creator. He was a strange man, a non-communicator, silent, very contained. He never drank and was an extraordinary hunter in his own right. He was also a friend of the legendary general, Philip Henry Sheridan.


Powers tells the tale in 35 chapters, and 462 pages. He also employs a very interesting, and original method in organizing the book. His 35 chapter headings are quotes, which in a sense forces you to read the chapter to figure out why you are finding the quote so interesting. Take a look at a few.


I always kept the oaths I made, but Crazy Horse did not (chapter 2)

He is no good and should be killed (chapter 11)

When Spring comes, we are going to kill them like dogs (chapter 18)

They were killed like wolves (chapter 23)

I can have him whenever I want him (chapter 28)

He was looking for death and it has come (chapter 32)


This book will change your entire understanding of America's sweep through the West. You will see the economic forces at work, gold, silver, rail roads. You will witness the endless negotiations between Washington representatives and the Indians, and then the agreements, and then the renegs of the agreements.


I promise you if you read this book, you will love it. The 30 plus page vivid description of the Battle of Little Horn is worth the price of the book alone. Crazy Horse had two thoughts that stuck with me from the battle. One is that war is too dangerous to treat casually. The other is that soldiers always tried to keep an enemy at bay, they wanted to kill Indians at a distance. The Sioux fighters are opposite. They wanted to charge in and touch the enemy with a bow, or a naked hand because no terror in battle is equal to physical contact. As Sitting Bull says, "This was a good day to die." Thank you for reading this review.


Richard C. Stoyeck

Definitive, December 4, 2010
After reading Bray's Crazy Horse a year ago, I approached Tom Powers' book with some trepidation. I'm pleased to say that Powers did precisely what Bray failed to do: sort through the evidence and parse together a coherent narrative, weighing sources and giving the reader ways to gauge their accuracy and reliability. you will finish the book with a clear sense of what happened and why.

Let me give you just one example of how Powers goes beyond the paper-shuffling in Bray's "biography": Bray reports that Crazy Horse's friend Touch the Clouds said, while looking down at the dying chief, "He got what he deserved." Sorting through the notes, we can discover that this "statement" was recorded by an Army officer responsible for Crazy Horse's death and the officer did not understand Lakota. Powers mentions the same report, and points out that what Touch the Clouds actually said in Lakota was probably "He was looking for death, and it came." It's a trivial point, but Powers uses it to title and end a chapter, and his correction shows a sensitivity to Lakota culture that is absent from Bray's book.

Although Powers most foregrounded source is Bill Garnett, a half-Sioux interpreter who didn't like Crazy Horse, what emerges here seems fair, if painfully sad, and the Indian sources, which Bray scarcely seems aware of, are present on every page. That does not mean a partisan polemic. Powers doesn't paint the players in black and white. Perhaps the saddest thing in the book is the universal prevalence of venality in humans.

There have been some complaints about the digressiveness of the book. I attribute that to our collective ADD. Powers understands that "we are all related," and like Dennis Banks' autobiography, the story begins before the central figure's birth and extends beyond his immediate surroundings. The book does need a good edit, but primarily because Powers tends to repeat certain telling or evocative details as if mentioning them for the first time. For the leisurely reader, it's a minor quibble.

Buffs and experts will quarrel over details, because the "true" story of Crazy Horse has been revocably lost to myth, lies, and love. But this is the book to measure the other historical accounts against.

Background Knowledge Highly Recommended, November 8, 2010
First off let me say that this book rates five stars for the scholarly work the author did on it, but I am rating it four stars for my personal interest level. The book contains 467 pages of text, and obviously involves more than "the killing of Crazy Horse." I have read several other books on the plains' Indians involving the Fetterman fight in Wyoming and the Custer battle in Montana in addition to others, and strongly suggest the reader of this book have some background information regarding this time period as it relates to the conflict between the cultures of the plains Indians and the United States army. The author goes into considerable detail in telling this story and provides the reader with the various viewpoints regarding incidents in the book. The book begins with the role of Crazy Horse in the December, 1866 Fetterman fight outside of Fort Phil Kearny in Wyoming. Also covered are the Battle of the Rosebud in June of 1876 in Montana involving George Crook, and, of course, Custer's rout at the Little Big Horn one week later. Other conflicts are also covered. In short, you may be getting more information than you care to digest regarding the conflict between these two cultures.

In addition to Crazy Horse we also learn about Chief Red Cloud, Spotted Tail, Young Man Afraid of his Horses, Touch the Clouds, American Horse, He Dog, Little Big Man, and other significant individuals, some of whom became scouts for the United States army. The book doesn't mention it, but such individuals were referred to as apples which are red on the outside and white on the inside.

This book is truly worth while, but be warned. When it contains 467 pages of text in addition to several pages of notes and index it is going to include much more than "the killing of Crazy Horse." Background knowledge of this subject would be highly recommended.

An outstanding book!, December 4, 2010
The writer did his work well! The book reads easily yet is very well documented. A difficult thing to pull off! This book isn't for the amateur who is expecting a politically correct apology. For that reader the book would be a tough go! You should have some knowledge of the time and place or the book will certainly be confusing. It is a balanced, well presented work on the subject. An outstanding work, highly recommended!

lots of facts, little understanding, December 19, 2010
This book is full of facts--it is choked on them, and sadly lacking in understanding of the Lakota culture. Truth is much more than fact. Win Blevins's STONE SONG is a much better account of Crazy Horses death, and his life.

Too much information, Not enough story, December 1, 2010
I certainly don't consider myself an expert on the period, and it is possible if you are, you will enjoy this book much more than I.

However, for me, it really got bogged down in detail. Thomas spends so much time setting the scene that the main event is obscured. We get information about calvary officers' Civil War service and a lot of details that dont advance the story. It just got to be too much for me.

I should say I can actually understand some of the very positive reviews here. Thomas did seem to really do his homework, and if you were already hooked on this period of history, I guess you would have a much more positive view of it. Just not my cup of tea. For a much stronger book of the same period, try Son of the Morning Star: Custer and The Little Bighorn

Unfocused, November 17, 2010
It maybe that I had little knowledge of the events of this era before reading this book that is the reason that I thought it relatively dull and full of unnecessary detail. Characters are well-painted and the writing is good. Unfortunately, major events get caught up in endless, tedious detail. It feels like everything, and I mean everything, from every single interview the author completed showed up in the final draft. With better editing this book could have been better, but as is it just feels like a large heap of facts spread over a loose timeline. I would only really recommend this for a serious armchair historian of this era. Otherwise skip it. There are better books more worth your time.

Drowning in Detail, November 22, 2010
I got about 80 pages into this book and simply gave up. There is way too much detail in this book, too many confusing names of too many characters and he does not tell a coherent story. Very disappointing. ... Read more

Editorial Review

History isn't always made by great armies colliding or by great civilizations rising or falling. Sometimes it's made when a chauffeur takes a wrong turn, a scientist forgets to clean up his lab, or a drunken soldier gets a bit rowdy. That's the kind of history you'll find in The Greatest Stories Never Told.

This is history candy -- the good stuff. Here are 100 tales to astonish, bewilder, and stupefy: more than two thousand years of history filled with courage, cowardice, hope, triumph, sex, intrigue, folly, humor, and ambition. It's a historical delight and a visual feast with hundreds of photographs, drawings, and maps that bring each story to life. A new discovery waits on every page: stories that changed the course of history and stories that affected what you had for breakfast this morning.

Consider:

• The Pilgrims landed on Plymouth Rock because they ran out of beer
• Some Roman officials were so corrupt that they actually stole time itself
• Three cigars changed the course of the Civil War
• The Scottish kilt was invented by an Englishman

Based on the popular Timelab 2000� history minutes hosted by Sam Waterston on The History Channel�, this collection of fascinating historical tidbits will have you shaking your head in wonder and disbelief. But they're all true. And you'll soon find yourself telling them to your friends.

Reviews

The overlooked past brought into the spotlight, September 8, 2003
Beyer is an author who is dedicated to making history interesting and fun, which he does so well in this collection of one page stories. I found the book especially interesting because of the background work the author had put into his research (the imprint of the History Channel did not hurt either) which raised these tidbits above the normal trivia, or potential urban legends. Beyer highlights some things that should not be lost in the mists of history, and points out historical facts that may be glossed over in many other history books. There is nothing earth shattering here, but more than a few will make you scratch your head, or share with others in conversation. A great book for dipping your toe in history - each story is about a page of text and is well illustrated. There is just enough to get you the interesting point without boring you. It's a truly fun and fascinating book.

Something for everyone in this friendly and fun book, April 5, 2003
This is not a coffee-table book, it's a briefcase book, a bathroom book, a bedside book, a stuck-in-traffic book. It's a book for dads and kids, a book for teachers and students, a book for priests and ministers (great sermon material!), and a great gift for practically everyone. My personal favorite involves what Bat Masterson and Wyatt Earp were doing during the 1920s--I won't give away the story but Wyatt was in Hollywood and Bat was in Manhattan! It's clear that the author is not a student of history, he's a lover of history, and the enthusiasm and excitement with which he approaches his subject comes through on every page.

Charming and Quirky, March 31, 2003
I always hated history in school -- and I hardly ever watch the History Channel -- so I approached this book with great trepidation. I was pleasantly surprised to find myself paging eagerly through the well-written, highly entertaining historical vignettes (each one takes up a mere two pages, perfect for subway reading). Some of them made me laugh out loud; once I had to fight the urge to turn to the stranger next to me and ask if he knew what had killed Atilla the Hun. (I'm not telling.) Although not written for kids particularly, this is also a great book to share with older children . . . especially those who complain that history is dull.

At least one story told wrong, February 26, 2005
I'm an avid reader of history, as well as processing a degree in the subject. So imagine my surprise when, after receiving this book from a friend of mine for Christmas, I read the erroneous account of the Children's Crusade of 1212. I had done research on this topic, so I was horrified to read the completely inaccurate account of what occurred. Had the author not read any historical analysis on the subject from the last 50 years? If he had, he would have realized that there were actually two crusades - one consisting of mainly French people led by Stephen of Cloyes who, when told to turn back by King Philip II, did so. That ended that crusade. The other one, led by a shepherd from Germany named Nicholas, led a group across the Alps into Italy. Some left for home while others continued on to Rome. It's interesting to note that in Rome, many received dispensations from their crusading vows because these "children" were either too old or because they were pregnant. Perhaps until relatively recently, people believed in the Children's Crusade because it represented a morality play or because some historians gave too much credit to chronicles (like Chronica Albrici monachi Trium Fontium) which were written long after the crusade supposedly occurred, rather than relying on more contemporary sources. Nor did they realize that the latin word "pueri" used in the chronicles can have several meanings (such as unmarried men rather than children).

In the final analysis, you just can't rely on books like these to really teach you history. The best you can do is read what they tell you and then try to verify it. If only the author had bothered to check the History Channel's own account of the Children's Crusade on their website, or perhaps read the excellent paper done by Peter Raedts in the Journal of Medieval History, or even just checked out the brief but accurate entry online in wikipedia. The book gave two pages to this event, and sadly got it completely wrong.

For this gross oversight, I am compelled to give it one star. Readers of history, never just believe what you read - verify.

A Fun, Easy & Educational Read for All Ages, July 21, 2006
What a great little book! Based on a series of History Minutes developed to air on The History Channel, every two-page spread of this little gem provides a short, easy-to-read and very interesting story-behind-the-story that most of us don't know.

The most interesting of these 100 brief stories are those in which one decision by one person ended up changing history and life as we know it, even today. Some of those include:
* Lost in Translation - where a poor word choice caused the first use of the atom bomb.
* BA-BUMP Goes the Stethoscope - about the doctor who invented it out of modesty.
* Cooking With Radar - about the invention of the microwave oven.

But the mix of story themes also keeps this book interesting, including insights into people we know by name without knowing much about them, like Proctor and Gamble, John Harvey Kellogg, Lionel of Lionel Trains fame, James Bond, and many more.

I also enjoyed it because it's easy to read 2 or 3 stories during lunch or just before dozing off at night. And, at the risk of sounding like a commercial, it's a great gift for kids who love to read because they'll have the inside scoop on many, many popular cutlure stories that their friends (and often teachers) won't know.

Enjoy.

"History would be a wonderful thing,if only it were true", November 17, 2004

This is a fun little book for anyone from 8 to 80,who likes to read history.It is more like the kind of stuff you see in Ripley's Believe it or Not,Strange but True,Interesting Facts,etc.There are 100 stories covered in 200 pages and half of that is pictures.One can skip through this book in an hour or two without difficulty.I guess most people would find it just a light read;but there is a real good reference section for anyone who wants to see the source or basis of any of these stories.
Stories are from all over the map and cover from B.C.to the present time .Some of the things you'll find:

Saint Patrick was an Englishman by birth.

The music for "The Star-Spangled Banner" was from a popular
English drinking song.

Where did the term "boycott"come from?

Did you know a US Warship fired a torpeo at another Warship carrying President Roosevelt, missing it by about 100 yards.

How a dead man duped Hitler.

And that's just for starters!

Oh Yeah, My title was a statement made by Tolstoy;who knew a thing or two about history.Then again,who knows,maybe he didn't say that at all.

Tasty tidbits, March 31, 2003
History (with a capital H) is usually presented with the heavy thud of finality. But Mr. Beyer celebrates those moments when history turned on a whim, in this delightful bite-sized book. And so we discover that the Civil War changed its course thanks to three cigars, that the stethoscope was invented by a bashful physician, and that a sex goddess provided the know-how for cell phones.

Those who love history will find new bits to wonder over. And those of us who nodded off in class get to discover that history is, in fact, packed with the wonderful quirks of human nature. Mr. Beyer has collected a broad assortment of stories and tells them with wit and aplomb.

This book makes a great conversation starter. And probably a good gift for dads and graduates.

Fascinating facts, November 25, 2003
A very entertaining collection of stories of unusual events and people from history. Arranged chronologicaly, starting with the Romans who stole time, and proceeding through such enthralling tales as the man who didn't discover America because he wanted to get home,and king Edward II' valiant but futile attempt to ban soccer (now I know why he was murdered, it was enraged footer fans). Some cherished myths are briskly disposed of, like the notion that medieval people thought the world was flat, and we learn that the Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth Rock because they'd run out of beer. A few of the stories in this book were known to me already, most weren't. At $12.57, that's only about 12 cents per fascinating fact, cheap at the price I would say. Who would you say was the most unlikely person to have saved the life of Abraham Lincoln's son? If you don't know already you need to buy this book.

A fascinating, eye-opening, un-put-down-able treat, April 27, 2003
If you are a freak for interesting tidbits about our kaleidoscopic world, this is a book I'd wager you'll read from cover to cover.

From the discovery of tobacco as a medicinal herb, to America's first president (no it may not have been Washington), to the invention of a stethoscope by a modest French doctor who didn't want to put his ear to the bosom of female patients, to the truth about the background of baseball (spoiler: its cricket for dummies, afterall :)), to the death of Attila the Hun which happened in quite a [boring] manner on his wedding night from a nosebleed while he was drunk, to a story of 3 cigars that may have helped the union side in the civil war....etc etc...this compilation is an absolute ripper.

It's chronicled sequentially from 46 BC to 1990 AD, very well researched (Beyer has worked with the Discovery and the History channels if I am not mistaken) and spiffy enough to open up on any page and get engrossed. Not the stuff of heavyweight history, this, but if this were taught in schools History just may have been the most popular period.

A highly recommended gem for your stash.

A tasty and authentic treat!, April 11, 2005
Assisted by historians at Harvard and Boston University and librarians at the National Archives and Library of Congress, this book is well-researched and visually rich. But it's also colorful and snappy, a testament to how lively history can be in the hands of someone who truly loves it. Beyer gives us 100 bite-size histories, tasty morsels that are curiously strong. My 11 year old son devoured several stories in one sitting; I consumed the book in one weekend. From events that changed nations...to inventions that changed the world, this collection is a joy, a real page-turner. ... Read more

Editorial Review

In this companion to the HBO(r) miniseries-executive produced by Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg, and Gary Goetzman-Hugh Ambrose reveals the intertwined odysseys of four U.S. Marines and a U.S. Navy carrier pilot during World War II.

Between America's retreat from China in late November 1941 and the moment General MacArthur's airplane touched down on the Japanese mainland in August of 1945, five men connected by happenstance fought the key battles of the war against Japan. From the debacle in Bataan, to the miracle at Midway and the relentless vortex of Guadalcanal, their solemn oaths to their country later led one to the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot and the others to the coral strongholds of Peleliu, the black terraces of Iwo Jima and the killing fields of Okinawa, until at last the survivors enjoyed a triumphant, yet uneasy, return home.

In The Pacific, Hugh Ambrose focuses on the real-life stories of the five men who put their lives on the line for our country. To deepen the story revealed in the miniseries and go beyond it, the book dares to chart a great ocean of enmity known as The Pacific and the brave men who fought. Some considered war a profession, others enlisted as citizen soldiers. Each man served in a different part of the war, but their respective duties required every ounce of their courage and their strength to defeat an enemy who preferred suicide to surrender. The medals for valor which were pinned on three of them came at a shocking price-a price paid in full by all.

... Read more

Reviews

A Generation Removed, March 6, 2010
The 10 segment HBO mini-series will focus on the Pacific theater as seen through the eyes of Robert Leckie, John Basilone and Eugene Sledge. Based on the books "With the Old Breed" by Sledge and "Helmet for my Pillow" by Leckie as well as other first person accounts and interviews, the series includes battles in Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima and Okinawa as well as the marines return after VJ Day. The Pacific is the companion book to the series but differs in some ways. It also features the stories of Ensign "Mike" Micheel who got his first experience as a dive bomber at the Battle of Midway and that of Lieutenant Austin Shofner who was a POW in Manila after being part of the initial unsuccessful attempt to hold the Philippines.

As in HBO's prior WW II series, The Pacific manages to personalize events which have been portrayed on more of an epic level in presentations such as Victory at Sea. In doing so, it succeeds in conveying the larger than life terror that citizen soldiers faced just a few months removed from their everyday lives in their hometowns. Micheel describes the "puckering" he feels while preparing to dive bomb an enemy aircraft carrier. A marine experiencing repeated bombing runs by Japanese airplanes writes in his journal: "We are all nervous wrecks." As Shofner struggles to survive the extremes of deprivation in an enemy POW camp, his friend tells him "Death isn't hard. Death is easy." It is at that point that Shofner knows his friend will not survive the camp.

What is extraordinary is how the men surmount these challenges and fight in the face of fear, doubt, lack of food and water, sleep deprivation and the illness that can result from all of these factors. Seeing the War in the Pacific through the eyes of the men who fought it, the reader comes to understand that while military strategy initiates each battle, individual acts of teamwork, sacrifice and courage drive the results that follow. It is impossible not to constantly ask yourself if you would have measured up under similar circumstance. It becomes increasingly difficult to answer confidently in the affirmative.

The Pacific also illustrates how little information each person at the battlefront has about the larger context in which he is operating. Due to the necessity to keep military strategy secret as well as the challenges in conveying information on the front, marines exist on a diet of rumor and speculation as to what will next occur. The book also does a good job of showing the incredible logistical challenges involved in providing food, water and other supplies every day to large numbers of field personnel scattered across a wide area under hostile conditions. Technical resources, battle strategy, national will and individual courage determine military success in The Pacific but the ability to keep men hydrated determines whether they will be able to fight at all.

My favorite parts of the book are the descriptions of American dive bombers. Just reading about a pilot idling his engine to begin an 8,000 foot virtual free fall dive to drop a thousand pound bomb on an enemy ship causes some "puckering." If the pilot survives the dive, he hopes to have enough gasoline to find his own fleet on return and then ends by dropping his Dauntless onto the moving top of an aircraft carrier. When needed, Ensign Micheel volunteers for a second mission later the same day.

My father was a gunner on a destroyer escort in the Pacific. At his knees as a small child, I sat through countless viewings of Victory at Sea. As I got older, I could never fully understand how much a part of him his service was. I now know more about the war in which he served but I'm not sure I am that much closer to understanding what he felt. Reading books like The Pacific gives me some idea for how an 18 year old kid from East Boston could spend 3 years on a ship at war, return home with one photo over his workbench, a knife and a set of tattoos and never once talk about his experiences with his son. I wish I could have known him better and, at the same time, hope that I could have served as resolutely if needed.

A passable yet dry account of The Pacific War..., March 7, 2010
As a huge fan of Band of Brothers I couldn't wait for the series to start so I picked up Ambrose's The Pacific in order to fill the time and give me a back story for when the series starts. The Pacific certainly did that and more as I now want to read a lot more on the war against the "Japs". With The Pacific I think the subject being covered was what triggered this, as Ambrose's style of writing is both a hit and a miss.

The pros are that I oftentimes wonder as I am reading other memoirs/bios of WWII veterans as to where and how they fit in with one another. With The Pacific the mini bios of the marines and naval pilots are all woven together in a linear timeline so you always know where they are and what they are doing in relation to one another. This is fascinating to me because it adds many levels of detail that help to create an overall richer account of The Pacific War. Add to this the different elements of who they are, i.e. officer, dive bomber and so on, and we are treated to a more in depth look at the structure of the US forces battlling the Japanese in the Pacific ocean.

The cons, and I really only have one worth mentioning, is that Ambrose's style of writing can be rather dry and stiff at times, feeling as though we are getting a recitation of facts instead of a narrative that is weaving the facts together. Although this style can work I oftentimes found that the writing style was having troubles catching my interest and I had to draw myself back in order to continue my own narrative of what Ambrose was telling us.

Overall the book is workable as a companion volume to the upcoming HBO series for not only illustrating the lives of some of the men being represented but in also layering more detail with the inclusion of other equally fascinating men, notably Shofner and Micheel, who were perhaps more fascinating to read about because of their experiences as a POW in a Japanese POW camp and as a dive bomber, respectively. I would certainly recommend to read the other more immensely readable WWII memoirs of the Pacific Theater, i.e. Helmet For My Pillow and With The Old Breed, in order to get a better feel for what will be depicted in the HBO series, and pick up The Pacific as a companion volume instead of a stand alone history of the Pacific War.

3.5 stars.

I hope the series is better than the book, March 18, 2010
I just bought this book the other day. I've read a LOT of history on WW2, perhaps 200+ books.

As the author explains in the Introduction, this book is meant not as a detailed military analysis of the battles that are covered within it, nor is it meant to be a biography, per se. The author claims to be striving for an "in the moment" veteran's-eye view, with all misconceptions, errors of fact, and rampant war rumors (which accompany any combat operation) left intact, for affect. Direct quotes from the players...and related players...are intentionally lacking.

So, if you can imagine a book that has minimal dialogue or quotes, erroneous historical facts cited often, and strives on purpose to have all the depth and breadth of a casual conversation, you end up with what seems to me like a book that HAD a lot of potential, but any time it got near any topic of interest, it did its best to get off the subject and move on to the next topic, as fast as possible. I want to know exactly what these guys were thinking, feeling and saying in these moments, in as much detail as the author could have rested from his subjects via extensive interviews and research. This book reads more like a field report, all to often just too brief and bound by short sentences, consisting of the barest-of-bones facts.

In the end, it's VERY hard to read. Stilted, encumbered by its self-inflicted "style", it is a lost chance to really contribute to our history in the war...and it was done on purpose, all for the sake of conducting what I would call, a failed experiment in writing.

I hope the mini-series is better. I'd skip this book, I don't think that you'll find it a page-turner. :-/

Mediocre, March 28, 2010
As indicated by other reviewers, this seems to be a rush job. There is little overview of the war in the Pacific, the principals are portrayed via minute details that don't really flesh out their characters, and the battle descriptions are often confusing partly due to the quality of the writing and partly due to the lack of good quality maps. This is not in the same league as Dad's WWII books such as Band of Brothers.

Shoot first, write later, May 14, 2010
First they shot the t.v. series, then they wrote the book. And it shows. If you have read any of the underlying histories upon which The Pacific is based, you will find this a severely compromised read. The book lacks structure, theme, passion, originality, careful editing, literary or academic rigor. Although this can easily be chalked up to the rush job attempt to get a companion piece out in time for the mini-series, other factors are also at play.

First and foremost is the fact that Mr. Ambrose has taken on his father's mantle of WWII historian, but lacks the chops to fill Ambrose Sr.'s shoes. The Pacific strings together episodes in the lives of a pilot and various marines in a patchwork that doesn't give the reader any sense for each individual's achievements, or for the greater successes/failures of the war. It's as if he read a handful of stellar biographies and autobiographies, cut and pasted the high points, and put them down in random order.

Eugene Sledge's autobiography is particularly butchered. Ambrose takes the incident with Lt. Mackenzie and turns a complex, revealing mismatch between enlisted marines and their officer into a bland encounter that leaves out the crucial detail: Mackenzie had failed to completely empty the grenade, and but for its location it would have killed several marines as a "harmless prank."

This book was given to me as a gift by a good friend, so the price was exactly right. But for anyone trying to decide whether or not to lay out $26+ for a WWII book, I'd really suggest spending it on something else.

The Son is Not the Father, June 3, 2010
This was the toughest book to read about one of the most compelling periods in US History I ever experienced. It took days and days of slogging through trite, trivial, uninspired, grammatically awkward prose that left my feet with mental blisters. I read Sledge's With the Old Breed and, as is often true with many such books about this greatest of American feats of arms, I was dissapointed when it ended, even though in some ways I wish it had never been written, or experienced, by the author or his buddies.

Not so with young Ambrose. I am sorry to say I believe this book would have never seen daylight had it not been for his famous name and the commercial interests of the HBO series of the same name. I can't wait to see the series on DVD, in spite of the book.

I met one of Carlson's Raiders last Sunday at Church. Kenneth M. "Mudhole" Merrill fed a belt and a half of ammunition to machine gunner Chapman while Chapman killed almot 20 Japanese soldiers in the Makin Raid. He went on to Guadalcanal where he spent 36 days behind the lines, fighting and somehow surviving. He is very old, very elegant, very kind, very wise.

Unlike Merrill, the men and women of Ambrose's book, from John and Lena Basilone to Shofner and all the others, seem less-than-life-size paper cut outs in the untested hands of an author who could not paint a serviceable, much less soaring, vivid, real picture of what others have established in our collective minds for time and all eternity.

The best I can say for this book is, Hugh, keep at it and feel more, think less. Take people and their words at face value and don't try to make it up like "Even the vets got nervous in the service" on page 393. "...an airplane streaked westward." Really?

Spend your money on the DVDs or Blu Ray. Borrow the book but be prepared for highly annoying, literary mosquito bites the whole way through, and lots of yawning. You'll get through it because it's unAmerican not to. But you won't like it. And your memories of it will be drawn from Sledge and Manchester and the hero writers who were there.

Needed an Editor, April 13, 2010
I am in my mid-fifties, and have been reading history books since i was a teen. I do not apply the same literary standards to nonfiction as I do fiction. That being said, this is the most poorly written book I have read in 30 years. Surely there was no editorial review. The formatting is odd; Ambrose's syntax is often flawed; he never met a cliche he didn't insist on using, and the chapter rotation is so abbreviated that he apparently couldn't keep track of what he had already included in background material, and so proceeded to repeat it multiple times. Surely an editor would have stopped the excruciatingly endless coverage of Basilone's War Bond tour, stopped the clumsiest use of dialogue Iv'e ever read, and settled Ambrose's odd confusion as to whether he wanted to be omniscient or merely speculative of his character's motivations. The tv mini-series is excellent- watch it- skip the book

It's No Band of Brothers, March 23, 2010
Well, I need to either begin or end the review with these words, so let's get it out of the way right off the top: The Pacific just isn't as good as Band of Brothers. It is an easy but inevitable comparison. As The Pacific finds its way to television screens in the form of a ten-part mini-series, it also makes its way to store shelves (and to the list of bestsellers) as a book. Written by Hugh Ambrose, son of Stephen Ambrose (who wrote Band of Brothers), it landed on the list just days before the airing of the first episode.

Now, I know that it may be unfair to immediately draw comparisons between the two but really it is inevitable. The publisher knew this, putting the words Band of Brothers right on the cover of The Pacific. If they can sell it to us on that basis, I think we are free to evaluate on that same basis.

Band of Brothers rose or fell on the strength of its characters and the growing (and declining) relationships between them. It was tightly focused on one small group of soldiers-E Company, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne. It followed these men from boot camp all the way to the end of the Second World War. In men like Major Dick Winters it had heroes and in men like Captain Herbert Sobel it had villains. It was a fascinating story that was well-told and easily adapted into a fantastic mini-series. The Pacific, on the other hand, began as the mini-series rather than the book. Based on two famous Second World War memoirs-With the Old Breed by E.B. Sledge and Helmet for a Pillow by Robert Leckie-the mini-series is a product of the same team that brought us Band of Brothers. Through one episode it shows great promise.

The book is a companion or an add-on to the series. It ranges much farther than Band of Brothers ever did, focusing on soldiers from different branches of the military-Army, Navy and Marines. It focuses on men who never encountered one another during the war. Therefore, it does not have the interplay and fraternity between the characters that helped make Band of Brothers what it was. Instead of the relationship between characters, we find tension between telling the story of the war and telling the story of individual soldiers and airmen within that war.

So, for example, Ambrose is constantly switching between what people actually did and saw and what they might have done and might have seen. In one sentence he'll say, "He dove into the trench, cutting his foot on a jagged piece of shrapnel" and then follow it by saying, "He might have noticed the smoke from the explosion." Ambrose continually switches back and forth between what the soldier actually saw, as recorded in his memoirs, and what he might have seen based on the historical record. Though it may seem like a small thing, I found it quite maddening as it showed to me that The Pacific doesn't know what it wants to be-history or biography. In the end it becomes a bit of both but does neither with the excellent of Band of Brothers.

Is The Pacific a bad book? No, not at all. There is a lot to gain from it both in terms of history and in terms of learning about individual soldiers. At the same time, I just can't help but feel that it's not all it could be; that it was a rush job and one that lacks precision and focus. I wanted more of the men and less of the facts. I wanted to feel about the men in this book like I felt about Winters and Sobel and Guarnere and like I'm sure I'll feel about the men in The Pacific mini-series. After all, the series has already shown that it will be more about the soldiers and less about the big picture of the war.

So here is my advice. If you have not read With the Old Breed, read that first. You owe it to yourself. It is one of the best books you'll read on the Second World War. Then, if your appetite for reading about the war and about the Pacific campaign still remains, go ahead and read The Pacific. You will encounter Sledge again, but you will also encounter another set of characters that are worth meeting.

Ok, but really hard to read, April 2, 2010
I really enjoyed Band of Brothers and D-Day by Stephen Ambrose so I was really looking forward to this book. I have to admit I don't have a background about the war in the Pacific and I was looking forward to an interesting narrative about some of the battles and events that shaped the war. This really isn't that book. It reads like a history book with references and quotes actually notated. That's not really too bad, but it's really dry, it doesn't present the true facts like a history book and it doesn't really captive the reader like a first person account. I could have probably tolerated the content mix, but the presentation just makes the whole book unreadable. The book follows 5 different soldiers and 5 different story lines. The problem is you only get 2-3 pages of any storyline at one time. You start reading about one soldier and just when you get into the storyline, the author switches to another soldier in an entirely different place fighting an entirely different battle. So 3 pages for soldier 1, 3 pages for soldier 2, 3 pages for soldier 3.. And then back to 3 pages for soldier 1. I think I could have really enjoyed it if I could have followed the individual storylines. It would have been much better if you could have had an entire chapter on each soldier, or even 5 mini novels that would have some continuity. It looks like the author may be a gifted historian, but he fails as a writer in creating a captivating novel.

The best word to describe this book is "tedious", March 21, 2010
I loved the HBO miniseries "Band of Brothers", and am eagerly awaiting the release of "The Pacific" on DVD. That was my Dad's war, he served in combat in that theater of operations, and the Pacific theater never seems to have received the same treatment in literature and movies as was heaped on the European war.

When I saw this book, I thought it would be another entertaining adjunct to the HBO miniseries... and boy was I wrong!

As the author states right in the Intro, he made a concerted effort to have as little overlap as possible with the HBO production. Unfortunately, that effort covers some of the most significant actions in that theater, which doesn't leave a whole lot for Ambrose, I guess.

He focuses, evidently, on different men and different aspects of the battles. Now, this could have worked if he'd gone into perhaps more depth than the miniseries can possibly do in such a format, but instead he elects to give short shrift to the battles, and instead focus on the minutiae, leaving the feeling that these were more along the lines of skirmishes than major battles. The early part of the book spends time on the Guadalcanal invasion, and I had absolutely zero... ZERO ... impression that the battle was as intense and desperate as it was in real life.

Further, he seems to go out of his way to avoid the actual battles when possible, spending a LOT of time on what these guys were doing on their leaves and furloughs; camp life in the rear; their escapades in New Zealand, Australia, and back stateside; etc.

For example, one of the major figures in the book is Medal of Honor recipient "Manila John" Basilone... and if I ever read one more word about his War Bond tour and stateside duty, my eyes will completely glaze over and I'll fall into a coma.

No, no, no... if you're looking for a book on the actual WAR that took place in the Pacific, avoid this thing.
... Read more

Editorial Review

Search the annals of military history and you will discover no end of quirky characters and surprising true stories: The topless dancer who saved the Byzantine Empire. The World War I battle that was halted so a soccer game could be played. The scientist who invented a pigeon-guided missile in 1943. And don't forget the elderly pig whose death triggered an international crisis between the United States and Great Britain.

This is the kind of history you'll find in The Greatest War Stories Never Told. One hundred fascinating stories drawn from two thousand years of military history, accompanied by a wealth of photographs, maps, drawings, and documents that help bring each story to life. Little-known tales told with a one-two punch of history and humor that will make you shake your head in disbelief -- but they're all true!

Did You Know That:

• One military unit served on both sides during the Civil War
• The War of Jenkins's Ear was actually fought over a sea captain's ear
• Daniel Boone was once tried for treason
• A siege on Poland in 1519 gave birth to the marriage of bread and butter

Discover how war can be a catalyst for change; an engine for innovation; and an arena for valor, deceit, intrigue, ambition, revenge, audacity, folly, and even silliness. Want to know how the mafia helped the United States win World War II, when the word bazooka was coined, or how Silly Putty was invented? Read on!

Reviews

UNBELIEVABLY ENTERTAING AND FASCINATING, November 4, 2005
I first bought this book for my dad who is total military history buff. But I happened to start reading it myself and was completely taken in by these stories. I'm the last person you'd ever find reading a book about the history of war. But I couldn't put it down. Each story--just two pages--are utterly intriguing, juicy morsels of fascinating information. There's also a tremendous amount of humor in the book. I read it from cover to cover and then passed it on to my dad. My dad is the kind of guy who owns virtually every book ever published on the subject of military history. Because he knows so much, I thought maybe he wouldn't dig this kind of approach. Boy was I ever wrong. He couldn't stop reading his favorites out loud to me--which was essentially the entire book. Bottom line: this book is one of those few gems that is so well done and so interesting that it will appeal to high school kids, retirees, men, women, etc. I went out and bought Beyer's first book after finishing this one and it's just as wonderful. If you're looking for a gift that's educational but fabulously entertaining, you can't go wrong with these.

My brother will like it., December 18, 2005
I'm a fan of non-fiction, but not of military books in general. My brother "doesn't read books." But there were so many cool things Beyer's first book [The Greatest Stories Never Told] that I was sure he would love it. He did. If anything, this War Stories book is even more interesting. Even for me, there is a lot to hold my interest, and I am definitely not in the typical military history book group. The best part is that all the stories are really true, not just probably true, and the sources are in the back of the book so you can check it out.

A gift book for all, December 19, 2005
When I first saw The Greatest Stories Never Told by Rick Beyer, I bought numerous copies. They made great gifts for my college nephews, cousins, father, brother-in-law, etc etc. including one I keep in my guest bedroom for visiters. It was perfect.
Now when I first heard the title of his new book, I was a bit hesitant. I am so not into military history I thought, so I only got a few copies to give away. BUT...then I started reading.. One, the book is perfect for when you only have a few minutes at a time to read a couple of pages. AND THEN these are tidbit of tales that do astonish and stupefy. I certainly might not have heard of the female Lawrence of Arabia, or that Santa Anna of the Alamo story had something to do with the invention of chewing gum. And now I need to order more copies including another one for me, as my friend took mine away when she started reading it in the car.

You Can't Read Just One, March 7, 2006
This little book might be called a bathroom reader of military trivia. Just some of the little tidbits to be learned include: America's Worst General (Commander in Chief of the Army in 1796), the American traitor who led the American Army to victory at Saratoga, the origin of the song Taps, the word Bazooka, the Battle where 32 american soldiers and more than fifty wounded and there was no enemy, the invention of G.I. Joe.

I could go on, there are a hundred tales here, but you should be able to get the idea. One thing though, like with peanuts, after you read one, you're unlikely to be able to put the book down.

Unbelievable stories!, October 6, 2007
I am a social studies teacher and my jaw dropped reading these short tidbits on historical events -- this is such a great writer in easy-to-understand language. My students love it when I tell them stuff like this you'll never find in a textbook.

Great bathroom reading, May 21, 2007
This book is full of interesting little tidbits that are only a page spread long each, perfect for the coffee table or bathroom. It's great for whetting your appetite for a particular historical event, which, in my case, usually sends me to other books or online to find out more detail.

First read of a Rick Beyer work, August 28, 2007
I usually stick with known writers like David McCullough, Walter Isaacson, and Stephen B. Oates. This time I went for a new name and I'm glad I did. I had read about the little known reason why Mr. Lincoln had ordered a raid on Libby Prison in Richmond, but it had never been so interestingly explained as Mr. Beyer does in this book. It's by far one of the best books on military history that I've read. I'll describe it as having a good sense of drama with a scholar's meticulous attention. Unlike my newest one, "Kill Me If You Can", Beyer's book is one that anyone interested in military history will enjoy. No, this is not a veiled commercial. I'll assure you that unless you're an exception, you'd hate my book. Truthfully, I'm beginning to believe my motive for writing it was to see just how many people I could alienate. Bob Miller

A pleasant diversion, October 5, 2007
This book was nice distraction. To be honest, the first time I saw it and looked at the format I thought it wouldn't be that good but actually I was pleasntly surprised. Although I was familiar with many of the stories, Beyer managed to surprise me with a few new angles on some of these bits of trivia. Better yet, he came up with several new stories I had never heard.

Great book. I look forward to more of this type.

Many interesting factoids, February 13, 2008
This book is highly entertaining and is chock full of interesting facts. It is so interesting that it answers many questions that you never thought to ask like "how did the bazooka get its name?" Nothing deep, but a pleasurable read. I found my self wanting to share many of the stories with friends and family. A quick read and worth the time.

Interesting short stories, March 4, 2006
Book gives small snippets of interesting stories of war. Some are commonly known, and others are 'different'. Wish there was more info on some of the stories though... ... Read more

Editorial Review

With a new chapter. The phenomenal bestseller—over 1.5 million copies sold—is now a major PBS special.

Winner of the Pulitzer Prize, Guns, Germs, and Steel is a brilliant work answering the question of why the peoples of certain continents succeeded in invading other continents and conquering or displacing their peoples. This edition includes a new chapter on Japan and all-new illustrations drawn from the television series. 32 illustrations. ... Read more

Reviews

I guess some folks don't have the patience, July 13, 1999
I think some of the reviewers here didn't read the book closely enough to understand the context of some of Diamond's arguments. He never says that biogeographical effects are the ONLY causes history. His main purpose is the search for the ultimate, extremely general causes for the broadest of trends in human history and prehistory.

By the time the Mongols roared across Asia, or the Moguls invaded India, many cultures around the world already changed so much that bioregional factors, though seminal in the creation of these broadest trends, weren't nearly as important as the political, religious and economic ones. He is not ignoring religion and so on but, he states plainly several times that isn't his focus. He is looking for ultimate causes--before humans had extremely advanced mental concepts like religion.

He also wanted to point out the devastating influence of disease on history. It was surely the European germs that did most of the conquering of Native Americans. The guns and horses were almost incidental. Later on, once Europeans had established themselves, then we can focus on economic and political systems. But we can't ignore the effects of the diseases unleashed on the Americas. These plagues gave the Europeans a very lucky boost that catapulted them beyond the wealth and power of China, India or the Middle East--long before the Industrial Revolution made this gap obvious.

Another thing that some people seem to be having trouble with is his assertions about the native intelligence of tribal peoples around the world. (If you read the book, you notice that he is not just saying this about the New Guineans.)

He takes pains to point out what he means by this. He not talking about some mysterious genetic superiority of tribal peoples. It's all straight up culture. Tribal culture forces people to be better generalists than they'd have to be in literate civilizations. They can't rely on embedded support structures like books for memory or experts for obscure fields. They have to be pretty good at a lot things. Otherwise they die. They have to be better at memorizing things because they can't count on computers or books to remember things for them. Living in a dangerous, wild environment makes them cautious and aware of all that is going on around them. That was all he meant. The circumstance of tribal peoples force them, only in very broad ways and only on an individual basis, to be smarter and more curious than civilized people.

And in the end it does them no good. Because civilized societies are SMARTER than tribal societies. That is why tribal society has been steadily disappearing over the millenia. They just can't compete.

Finally, of course the book is repetitive. In fact he sums up his argument in the preface of the book. You needn't even read the rest if you don't want to. The rest of the book consists of him reiterating his points from different angles to point out the objections he has managed to answer and the many questions that still remain. He is just following scholarly practice and exposition--just to make things clear that he has thought about this.

He knows that his theory can't explain everything. In the epilog he points out that China, India and the Middle East are good counter examples to his idea. They each had an expansionist rise to great power--a time when they were unafraid to try new ideas and explore new ways of doing things. If the highly complex forces of economics, politics, religion had arrayed themselves differently. We might all be speaking Arabic now. Or Cantonese. Europe was just lucky to be in the right place at the right time for things to come together as they did.

Science in the service of History, October 4, 2000
In one compelling volume, the famous biologist Jared Diamond tackles the most important question of global history: Why did Europeans come to dominate the New World?

This question has been answered by others before; Diamond's idea that Europe's geography is the cause ("geographical determinism") has also been proposed before. Any student of history can drag up a case or two of this thesis. Baron Montaigne, for example, proposed that Europe's primacy stemmed from its superior government, which could be derived directly from the coolness of its climate.

The deep significance of this book is that Diamond's thesis is not simply idle speculation. He proves that the Eurasian land mass had by far the best biological resources with which to develop agricultural societies, and was thus more able to form large, coherent, and powerful social entities.

To support this idea, Diamond introduces thorough set of well-researched data on what kinds of plants and animals are necessary to support a farming society. He investigates the biological resources available to potential farmers in all parts of the world. The people of Eurasia had access to a suite of plants and animals that provided for their needs. Potential farmers in other parts of the world didn't-- and so their fertile soil went untilled.

After establishing this strong foundation, Diamond falls into repeating ideas about the formation of large-scale societies. These ideas, while unoriginal, are still compelling, and Diamond presents them in a very clear and well-written way.

His other major original contribution comes when he discusses the diseases that helped the Old World conquer the New. Building on his earlier chapters dealing with Old-World domesticated animals, he shows that these very animals were the sources of the major plagues (such as smallpox) which virtually annihilated New World populations. The fact that Old Worlders had immunities to these diseases was a direct result of their agricultural head-start.

Along with these monumental contributions to History, this book has its drawbacks. If you're looking for a narrative explaining Great People, Great Events, or Modern Ideas, you will be sadly disappointed. Diamond's thesis offhandedly assumes that it is difficult to believe Shakespeare's plays or Newton's laws could have been written by hunter-gatherers.

If you are looking for reasons why Europe came to dominate the world, rather than, say, China, Diamond presents mixed results. He mentions the 14th century self-isolation of China, but does not analyze it. He also brings up the odd theory about the relationship between the coastline lengths of Europe and China and trade potential; this idea is provably wrong.

If you are looking for a book that explains the world's history of the past 500 years, look elsewhere. Guns, Germs and Steel exhausts itself by effectively, coherently, fundamentally, definitively, and entertainingly explaining the preceeding 15,000.

I do not hesitate to recommend this book to anyone with an interest in world history. The scholarship is first-rate, and the thesis is incredibly significant. The technical details, while complete, are presented in a very easy to understand way, and Diamond's writing style is fun and engaging. It fully deserved the Pulitzer prize.

A strong theory convincingly argued, but marred by bias, January 24, 2001
According to Diamond, four factors are responsible for all historical developments: 1) availability of potential crops and domestic animals, 2) the orientation of continental axis to facilitate the spread of agriculture, 3) transfer of knowledge between continents, and 4) population size.

Diamond states that "those four sets of factors constitute big environmental differences that can be quantified objectively and that are not subject to dispute." Fair enough, but what *is* subject to dispute is that there might be some other factors at work. Thomas Sowell in Race and Culture does a good job of developing the thesis that the exchange of information among European cultures, facilitated by Europe's plentiful navigable rivers, was the key to Europe's technological and economic rise. David Landes in the Wealth and Poverty of Nations attributes China's conscious decision in the 1400's to isolate itself form other nations as the key event (decision) that caused it to lose it's technological advantage and fall behind Europe. (Diamond briefly touches on 15th Century China in the final chapter, but manages to boil this as well down to an accident of geography.)

This is unfortunate, because the book contains a wealth of excellent material which is excellently explained. Many of the core causes which Diamond explores ring very true, and his points are persuasively argued. The connection between the development of agriculture and the subsequent unequal rise of military capability worldwide is very convincing. But convincing though they may be, reading these theories one can't shake the sneaking suspicion that Diamond is selectively presenting evidence which he's has found to support his previously drawn conclusion, and neglecting evidence which runs counter.

Diamond plants these doubts through his sometimes-careless prose. Consider the following statement, which he includes in the introduction to his chapter on the rise of food production:

"My fellow farmhands were, for the most part, tough whites whose normal speech featured strings of curses, and who spent their weekdays working so that they could devote their weekends to squandering their weeks' wages in the local saloon. Among the farmhands, though, was a member of the Blackfoot Indian tribe named Levi, who behaved very differently from the coarse miners - being polite, gentle, responsible, sober, and well spoken"

I thought for a moment that I'd wandered into the script for "Dances With Wolves." Note that had this statement been turned on its head - had he, for example, recounted an unflattering anecdote about Native Americans or Hispanics -my instincts would immediately warn me that the author's biases might be influencing how he chooses to present the evidence. I myself am a Black American, I'm all too painfully aware that we've had to wade through some pretty grim stuff penned by authors clutching at straws to support their racist white supremacist views of the world. In this case Diamond does the reverse by aiming his negative bias towards Caucasians, but if I'm truly interested in unbiased science then my skepticism should remain the same.

That I lead with these criticisms is evidence of my disappointment in what could have been an excellent book, and indeed much of it *is* indeed excellent. This is a book that taught me much and has indeed changed my view of world history in many ways. I do recommend this book - the details are good and many of the theories ring true, but in the same breath I would warn against accepting Diamond's conclusions in their entirety without a bit of skepticism.

In summary, Guns, Germs, and Steel contains an important feature which David Landes's Wealth and Poverty of Nations so conspicuously lacks: a grand unifying theory which links the disparate growth rates of diverse societies worldwide. But Diamond's tidy conclusion that world history is simply a deterministic result of geography and nothing else is not entirely satisfying, especially in that it might cause us to be complacent about the future. I accept that accidents of geography have had a huge effect on mankind, and Diamond convincingly argues this. But culture and human decisions do matter. Diamond argues that human ingenuity is simply the result of the accident of having a larger population from which to draw innovations - but societies that internalize this philosophy do so at their considerable peril.

A new view of where the fertile ground is found..., October 3, 2001
GUNS, GERMS, AND STEEL is a persuasive discourse of competitive plausibility regarding the challenging question why population groups on different continents experienced widely divergent paths of development. Contrary to the voluminous objections cited in the many of the reviews below, Professor Jared Diamond, clearly an enthusiastic proponent of environmental determinism, presents a set of premises consistent with evidence provided from a wide range of disciplines, but he does not attempt to answer the question of genetic diversity, including differentiated intelligence, among racial groups as many reviewers have inferred. If anything, implicitly, the author appears to support promulgations of differentiated intelligences; he sets out to demonstrate intelligence was not the root cause to Eurasian dominance.

On at least two occasions Diamond, without equivocation, stated he found on average the New Guinean to be more intelligent than the average European or American. He was prompted to undertake this investigation as a result of a question posed by a New Guinean friend - Why white people developed so much cargo (material goods) and brought it to New Guinea while the indigenous had so little. Diamond summarized his findings as follows: "History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples environments, not because of biological differences among people themselves."

Beginning 13,000 years ago, the author illuminated the conditions or circumstances that may have facilitated growth for some groups and inhibited the same for others. Diamond accepts the out of Africa theory for the dispersion of Homosapiens to the other continents (for purposes of his treatise Europe and Asia are indivisible), and like the old axiom of real estate, the importance of location, location, location becomes readily apparent. For Diamond, food production is the ultimate cause of variable rates of development for different peoples. He illustrates how the abundance of wild plants subject to domestication and availability of large mammals served as immediate factors to transition from hunter/gatherer bands and tribes to sedentary agriculturally based chiefdoms and states.

Diamond lists what he proposes as proximate causes to European dominance:

1) Germs - based on close proximity to domesticated animals, immunities were developed infectious strains Europeans would carry to other areas, resulting in the decimation of non-immunized populations. In turn, those groups had few autochthonous diseases that would affect the invaders.
2) Invention of writing- relatively sedentary lifestyles facilitated devotion of more time and effort to the creation of methodologies to control and coordinate commerce. These systems eased transfer of information among society members, and had further implications to the establishment of hierarchical political organization.
3) Axial orientation of the different continents - east/ west orientation was conducive to transmigration of people, products, and technologies. Plants best suited to specific climatic conditions were readily transferable; geographic encumbrances were less severe and population isolation was not as significant.
4) Establishment of hierarchical organizations - food production instigated the growth of artisan classes focused on technological improvement, leisure classes devoted to functions unrelated to subsistence, organization of massive armies comprised of professional soldiers, and religion, which allowed individual groupings to live together under codification without killing one another.
5) Continental Isolation - Landmasses that were separated by geographic or ecological boundaries were under less pressure to develop or adopt new ideas, products or technologies from competing civilizations.

Some of the author's theories were not defended as successfully as others. His explanation why Sub-Saharan Africans were unable to identify species (the water buffalo and Zebra are two prime examples) that may have been used in farming and commerce seemed rather weak. Capture, taming and subsequent selective breeding for temperament seems as viable here as he indicates was the case on the Eurasian plains for other species. Similarly, he does not offer a convincing argument regarding the American Indian's failure to domesticate the Bison, although the inference seems to be the lack of cultivatible plant life was certainly a factor.

Overall, Diamond provides a compelling theory of the differences in development rates among different peoples, linking a wide set of factors that are not generally considered in parallel in the historical record. For anyone with even peripheral interest in the evolution of different societies, this is an enthralling book.

Love it or hate it, you should read this book, September 24, 2002
As an avid reader with absolutely no previous contact with the field of anthropology, I found this book to be mesmerizing. Jared Diamond has achieved great success with "Guns, Germs and Steel" (national best-seller, Pulitzer Prize), but it has also made him the target of strident, often venomous criticism...

Diamond's general thesis is that the West conquered the world rather than vice versa because of a fluke of nature. In short, Eurasia was home to an important number of crops and animals that readily lent themselves to successful domestication. This domestication resulted in mass food production, which the author claims is the "ultimate" cause of Western dominance. Food production, in turn, led to a number of "proximate" causes related to the rise of the West: farms and animal herds led to stationary populations and excess food to support a specialized class of bureaucrats and soldiers; it also increased population density, which, along with close contact with animals, led to germs and the subsequent genetic resistance of Westerners to those diseases. Finally, Diamond concludes, the unique East-West axis of Eurasia and the absence of any impenetrable geographic barriers fostered the spread of new crops, technologies, etc., which gave rise to many competing communities, whose competition further increased the western lead over the rest of the world.

Diamond's arguments are persuasive on the surface, and even the biggest skeptic will have reason for pause after reading his book. However, the final chapter reveals that he can't really resolve a fundamental question: why did Europe, rather than the Middle East, India or China come to conquer the world? Almost the entire book is dedicated to explaining why the Eurasian landmass was blessed with the prerequisites for large civilizations rather than the Americas, Africa and Australia. His terse explanation for why Europe in particular dominated leaves much to be desired and explained.

In this reviewer's opinion, the recent book by classicist Victor Davis Hanson ("Carnage and Culture") provides a plausible epilogue for Diamond's piece. Hanson completely and explicitly rejects Diamond's geographic determinism, but I don't think the two theses are incompatible or in any way mutually exclusive. In fact, it seems to me that Diamond and Hanson support one another, as the latter's assertion that the war-making efficiency of liberal democracies beginning in the Hellenistic period explains Europe's ultimate triumph.

In closing, as an introduction to anthropology and a cogent depiction of one school of thought on the rise of the West this book is marvelous. Approach it with an open-mind, reflect on the thesis and the supporting evidence, and then draw your own conclusions. Love it or hate it, you owe it to yourself to read this book.

An overrated book, November 9, 2003
Jared Diamond is a thoroughgoing geographical determinist. His book highlights both the strengths and the weaknesses of this approach.

Diamond's major topic is the Neolithic Revolution. His intention is to demonstrate that environmental conditions were not equally suitable to the development of agriculture on different continents. Eurasia, he contends, was the most appropriate place. It had the largest number of domesticable plants and animals, an east-west axis favoring the diffusion of inventions, offered good possibilities for inter-continental communication, and was the largest and most populous continent. So the Eurasians were first in developing agriculture, gaining thus a headstart in history. Agriculture led to rising polulations and created a dynamic that prompted the evolution of states, writing and a sophisticated technology (guns and steel). These social and technological advantages, plus immunity to the most dangerous infectious diseases (germs), allowed Eurasians to easily subdue the natives of the Americas, Australia and Southeast Asia.

On the whole this argument, which takes up the first 410 pages of the book, is convincing. Diamond is also right to insist on adopting a long time-frame. As early as 8000 years ago Eurasians had a substantial edge over their rivals on other continents, making it unlikely for those peoples and civilizations to catch up.

Had Diamond stopped writing at this point, he would have published a good work.

However, he was not content to treat only the Neolithic Revolution, but wanted to cover all major turns in world history. Hence the last 15 (!) pages of the book are devoted to a completely different subject. Having explained the rise of Eurasia, Diamond now wants to explain the rise of the West. Quickly the question becomes: Why Europe, not China? Borrowing an idea from Eric Jones ('The European Miracle'; but beware: Jones' approach is much more sophisticated than Diamond's, avoiding any kind of monocausal determinism) Diamond provides a simple answer: Europe was geographically more diverse than China. Therefore it did not become politically unified. Political fragmentation led to openness and openness to progress - ideas and inventions that were rejected at one place could succeed at another.

This speculation is not plausible at all.

First, there is no geographical NECESSITY for European fragmentation and Chinese unity. Europe has many features favoring political unity. Its long coastline and a great number of navigable rivers allow for easy transportation by water, offering an important asset to any would-be imperial power. The Romans took advantage of this to the utmost, and if they were able to conquer a great part of the continent, there can surely have been no compelling GEOGRAPHICAL reason for later powers to fail. Diamond himself seems to realize this, when he admits that India had even more agricultural core areas than Europe. Yet India was ruled as a unified empire for most of its history.

Second, Diamond's explanation - even if assumed to be correct - accounts only for INNOVATION. It tells us why certain inventions made by Chinese craftsmen were never introduced into the production-process of China's economy. A more important question to ask would have been why many significant inventions were not made in China in the first place. A prime example coming to mind is modern natural science, which was never developed in the Middle Kingdom.

Third, it is easy to see that Diamond's argument is undermined by his own evidence. As he tells us, China was scientifically and technologically ahead of Europe (and the rest of the world) for more than 1000 years. If China could achieve this superiority despite its supposed geographical disadvantages, we cannot escape the conclusion that those disadvantages either did not exist or were of minor importance. Europe, on the other hand, remained a cultural backwater for most of its history despite its supposed geographical advantages. Again, we cannot but conclude that these advantages either did not exist or were of minor importance.

Thus Diamond's environmentalism is completely refuted by Chinese and European history before 1500 a.d. Moreover, no other version of geographical determinism is likely to fare better. Since China's geography did not change within the last 2000 years, every purely geographical interpretation of its history must be wrong. It will either fail to account for the period of Chinese superiority or for the period of Chinese backwardness.

Diamond's errors are grounded in his method. Geographical determinism can explain the Neolitic Revolution, because this transformation was brought about by small bands of hunter-gatherers extremely dependant on their environment. Even so, Diamond needs FOUR causal factors to account for its different outcome on each continent (1. The wild plant and animal species available; 2. Orientation of the major continental axis; 3. Possibilities for inter-continental communication, 4. Size of area and population of a given continent). When we look at the great Eurasian civilizations, we have to deal with a type of society vastly more complex and far less dependant on its environment than are bands of hunter-gatherers. Yet Diamond wants to explain the history of these civilizations with reference to just ONE causal factor (the impact of geography on political unity). Instead of becoming more sophisticated in accordance with its subject, Diamond's approach turns brutally simplistic just as it is applied to the most difficult problem of world history.

It is unlikely that the rise of the West can ever be explained geographically. Any serious attempt to write global history for periods after the Neolithic Revolution will have to be sensitive to the complex interplay between geography, economy, technology, politics and culture that shapes the development of large societies. The work of Max Weber and Fernand Braudel provides good examples of the kind of scholarship needed for this task. Jared Diamond's book not only fails to rise up to this standard, but is crude, superficial and disappointing even from a geographical point of view.

Clearly Diamond did not know when to put his pen down. His book would have been better if he had refrained from addressing topics unsuited to his method.

A Question for the Ages, February 12, 2000
Many years ago a New Guinea native asked Jared Diamond a simple question: "Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?" Only slightly rephrased, Diamond devotes this book to answering the question why, from the depths of the primeval forests of Africa, mankind emerged at different rates, some achieving the heights of civilization and technology while others remained virtually in the Stone Age? And why did people on some continental landmasses prosper while people on others lagged behind, especially because some locations, like the California Coast, are mild and desirable while others, like Northern Europe are harsh and forbidding?

Diamond's thesis is that some populations got a head start over others in the development of civilization. But the head start resulted from favorable geography and natural resources, not from any innate superiority. Given the same location and advantages, any group of people over time would have reached the same result. The first beneficiary of geography happened to be the Fertile Crescent. The "cradle of civilization" not only had all five major large mammals (sheep, goats, cattle, pigs, and horses) available for domestication, but they also possessed the major wild seed groups that would become domesticated grain and cereals. Not all areas are so favorably endowed.

Once hunting and gathering gave way to food production, population density took hold, which in turn made possible civic development and technology. The head start then spread roughly along the same parallel east to Asia and west to Europe. Diamond contrasts Eurasia's wide girth and similar climates with America's and Africa's narrow waist and elongated longitude. Technology and culture can shuttle back and forth vast distances between east and west, but climatic zone differences as well as mountain ranges and deserts inhibit flows north and south.

I have two criticisms of the book. One, it has no footnotes so that one can source out the author's materials. For example, on page 108 Diamond asserts that early man, because of his ego, would rather hunt giraffes than gather nuts. Is that theory his, or someone else's? The very nature of a book such as "Guns, Germs, and Steel" requires that it pile theory upon theory to make a picture puzzle of a distant and hidden past. If key pieces don't fit, the picture may take a decidedly Cubist theme. A few footnotes would help the reader who wants to delve deeper into a topic.

The second criticism is the author's failure to address the role of human intelligence in the development of civilization. Considering the grief Charles Murray took into for writing "The Bell Curve," which held that certain populations have actually raised their intelligence level through centuries of using their brains to solve problems, one understands why Diamond steers clear of the topic - no academic can afford to be tinged with even a hint of racism or euro centrism. Plenty of professors on the leftist fringe stand ready to point the accusing finger any anybody who deviates from the acceptable norm. But surely scholars can deal with the role human intelligence in a non-racist way; after all, the physiology of the human brain is the same in all Homo sapiens. Diamond owes it to his readers to complete the mosaic he has created.

Diamond has an excellent hammer that he uses too often, January 3, 2003
As the saying goes, when you have a hammer, everything looks like nails. I found Diamond's basic hypothesis that the march to civilization is accelerated (if not determined) by availability of useful, domesticable plants and animals and a geography suited for the transmission of the plants and animals (and later ideas) over a large distance very compelling.

The two places he fails in what would otherwise be one of the best books I've read is he seems to be working toward a personal agenda, and he applies his theories to inappropriate situations. His personal agenda is not hidden, with his discussion of New Guinea's tribesmen fairly glowing. I guess it's better to have it out in the open than hidden, but it makes the work seem like a justification for his preconceptions rather than an unbiased research into the broad strokes of history.

His very compelling basic point is that when numerous small groups (tribes, etc) compete, the rate of adoption, modification, and usage of available resources will be fairly constant across any group of people. The rate is only modified by the quality of those resources and the number of people with access to them, because if one society fails to use its resources at the best rate of human invention, a competing society will force the adoption either through competition or conquest.

The problem is, and he acknowledges it in one sentence and ignores it in another, is that when societies (especially dictatorial ones) no longer feel competitive pressure, they can behave in largely unpredictable ways governed only by happenstance and psychology. He tries to explain the failures of the Aztecs and (especially) the Incas to use the wheel by describing them as "Island Cultures" since they did not have competing societies nearby. He later uses the same argument about China.

The problem is that there is a range between small tribes and enormous islands where his theory only partially applies, and where much of written history has occurred. His arguments to explain why Europe was not one big island (meaning politically unified) were not very compelling, but given the fact that Europe wasn't unified his theory does explain why the West outpaced China in the past 600 years. His troubling assertion that the fertile crescent couldn't compete with Europe in modern times merely due to resource depletion (since it had been civilized for so long) was only in passing and lacked much backing in statistics or research.

Unlike some other reviewers, I don't feel he was too hard on the West's modern conquest of the native peoples of the Pacific, the Americas, and Africa. He points out that disease made the lands empty, and that much of the pushing out of the natives was inadvertent due to the actions of people behaving just as our prehistoric ancestors did (and every other continent's ancestors did) for thousands of years. And when he chooses the words "exterminated" (in modern colonization) over "displaced" (in prehistoric colonization) he does it because he has the historical facts to back him up in one case, and only conjecture in the other, and he acknowledges the difference at least a few times.

I definitely recommend this book if you are unfamiliar with the geographical element of the prehistoric move to civilization. Just keep in mind this is a theory that by nature no longer applies, and stopped applying somewhere between 100-600 years ago as modern communication destroyed geographic separation.

interesting theory - difficult to read, February 28, 2002
In July 1972, Author Jared Diamond, was walking along
a beach on a tropic island of New Guinea, where as a
biologist he studied bird evolution. By chance, he
ran into a local politician, named Yali, who was
working to liberate what was then Papa New Guinea from
the Australia government. After hours of
conversation, Yali posed the question, "Why is it that
you white people developed so much cargo (technology)
and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had
little cargo of our own?" Why did wealth and power
become distributed as they are now, rather than in
some other way? Diamond was troubled that he did not
have an adequate response to Yali's Question. Fast
forward 25 years -- Diamond writes a 425 page answer.

The most common explanation to this question involves
implicit or explicit assumptions based on biological
inequalities. Usually these racial explanations are
cast in some sort of Darwinian argument where
causality is often left in question. Diamond thesis
attempts to refute these theories with an alternate
theory. Relying on a combination of history,
archeology, and microbiology, and genetics, Diamond
suggests that the most striking differences between
the long-term histories of different cultures have
been due not to innate differences in peoples
themselves but to differences in their environments.
These environmental factors include: continental
differences in the wild plant and animal species
available as starting materials for domestication;
environmental factors affecting rates of diffusion and
migration; and continental differences in area or
total population sizes. Diamond believes that these
geographical inequalities set different civilizations
on pre-determined trajectories to develop political
organization, technological advancements, and immunity
to disease that allowed them to encounter and conquer
other civilizations.
A cultural historian in a past life, I get all excited
about this sort of thing.

As one can imagine, trying to explain the history of
civilization in one volume is an arduous task.
Diamond chooses to explain his theory in broad strokes
then uses natural experiments at distinct points in
history to demonstrate how his ideas play out. This
is a general problem with all meta-histories.
Historical methods teach us that it is virtually
impossible to forge a bulletproof argument without
delving into the minutia. But when focusing on the

"big picture" issues, there is just too much
information to cover. Diamond does a very good job
managing this balance. He begins by outlining his
methods and follows through on his explanation with
dedication and accomplishment. He goes into just
about the right amount of detail on every subject and
infuses the traditional historical approach with a
healthy dose of scientific discovery. The chapters
concerning the domestication of plants and large
animals are a joy to read. While speaking on the
familiar new world conquest, Diamond is balanced in
the application of his detailed examples to forward
his theories. Notably, Diamond uses Australia and the
south pacific to demonstrate the dissemination of
technology and China to discuss the application of
unified language and political entities. In fact,
with my American History background, I was more
partial to the Euro centric examples.

So what's bad about the book? One of my pet peeves
involves arguing by anecdotal evidence and I cringed
every time Diamond brought up some story about a
bushman to illustrate his point. But this was a minor
annoyance. Another problem is Diamond's paucity of
footnotes. There were several portions of prose that
I felt should have been annotated with further
discussion and evidence. I should also warn you that
this book is a little dense. Be prepared for a 20
page discussion about the cross pollination of
language. It's a good idea to remember that I've got
a degree in this stuff. Back when I was younger,
smarter, and more exciting, I used to pour through
thousands of pages of this garbage every week. Beaten
into submission by a desk job and dearth of ...
pitchers of beer, I found the last 100 pages of Guns,
Germs, and Steel difficult to get through

So if you are up for the challenge, "Guns, Germs, and
Steel" is a insightful and rewarding book. For me, it
was probably a good substitute for chasing women and
the cultural/political theories almost kept me warm at
night. All joking aside, I guarantee that this book
will change the way you think about European conquest.

Captivating, Flawed Scientific Review of Human Prehistory, July 6, 2000
Once in a while a book comes along compelling enough to bring mind altering new perspectives, spark extended contemplation, and arouse fresh interest in overlooked fields of study. This is one of those books. In Guns, Germs, and Steel Diamond investigates human prehistory from a scientific perspective drawing on numerous disciplines to develop a hypothesis that the globally unbalanced rise of civilization and technology was primarily a function of advantageous environmental conditions and resources available to those societies where civilization arose. Though the present landscape may suggest that early societies were on a relatively equal environmental playing field, Diamond's scientific review of the evidence indicates convincingly otherwise. A particularly persuasive point in the book argues that environmental conditions amenable to agriculture (mild climate, indigenous protein-rich plants, and large indigenous domestication-ready animals) facilitated a food surplus and consequently denser populations with surplus time for some members of the society to take on trades, invent, engineer, lead, develop government, heal, build, paint, etc. Innovations then fuelled more surplus time perpetuating a tornado of advancement, sparked in large part by the proverbial flapping butterfly wings of agriculture.

Diamond's book challenged my fractured knowledge of human prehistory leaving worldview shattering ideas in its wake. His book also sparked my renewed interest in geography, anthropology, archaeology, weather, and geology among others. The book's fusion of the scientific method with the study of history was quite potent and refreshing, though at times overly reductionist. As such, less scientifically reducible elements like culture and religion are not considered within his hypothesis.

At times the book did seem to forgo scientific rigor for political correctness. For example, though Diamond relies on numerous examples of relatively recent non-human elements of natural selection and genetics to build his case, he is unwilling to discuss the potential role of human biological variation created by our settling contrasting environments. Considering modern humans resided and/or began migrating to new and varied lands over 100,000 years ago, there seems sufficient time for some physiological variations to develop that may be relevant to Diamond's case. Unfortunately for this reader, anticipating a compelling argument either way, Diamond just states that environment-induced genetic variations are irrelevant to societal development (and "loathsome" to even think about) as if it were a self-evident axiom. Curiously, he challenges this axiom himself by postulating that the people of New Guinea are likely smarter than the average human considering the mental acuity necessary to survive in their harsh environment.

Overall, besides some minor disappointments, this was a spectacular book and I highly recommend it. ... Read more