Rating: 
Summary: A great primer, which is anyway what it intends to be..
Review: For what A.Beevor is interested in covering he's doing a great job. I start off with this remark because i think quite some unfair criticism had been directed at his book for a variety of reasons. I think that some of that criticism is to a degree justified. Beevor is an author who's more adept in the logistics at war and the descriptions he can put together from eyewitness accounts or other source books. He's much less adept on the "whys" and especially on the "hows". His function is more like that of a reporter who was there and who relays what he saw. Often he fails on the "bird's eyeview" perspective or at going in more depth and he has trouble going into the collective psychologies of the sides involved. This is more apparent in other history books he's written like the "Battle of Crete" where he totally failed to capture the psychology of the Cretan who fought there and even that of the German which was more researchable (?) in comparison. I think he exhibits the some of same flaws in "Stalingrad". But having said all that, for what this purports to be I'd have to repeat that it's one of the must-reads on the subject. It's an account that uncovers all the data you'd need to understand the enormity of what went on, and the truly horrifying scale of that incredibly significant battle. True, his penchant for detail might tire those readers not very much interested as to what brigade did what or what sector was covered by what army. Nevertheless, this is a definite cantputdowner of a book even if you'll have to resort to more books if your intent is to get a fuller understanding. However, if you read Beevor's book you'll already have a very vivid picture of what went on in Stalingrad, a picture very much upsetting in the atrocities and horrors it lays out for us. On another note, for some reviewers who think Beevor's account is "too favorable" for the Russians or "pro-soviet" i think this is a total exaggeration. Beevor lists in detail the atrocities of the soviet army towards its very own soldiers:
-executions for deserters or for those "not exhibiting adequate courage", or sending whole platoons to certain death with less than inadequate equipment (something the Germans commited too but for different reasons partially) or the total disinterest for civilian casualties while the city was under siege. Overall, a great primer on this tremendous historical event. Perhaps a more complete book on this event is yet to be written but there are several books on the market each covering this battle from different perspectives.
Rating: 
Summary: Outstanding Account Of The Stalingrad Battle
Review: This was the first book I read dedicated to the battle of Stalingrad and I can think of no better book I could have started with. Exhilarting, haunting, breath taking this book covers the human aspects of both sides of the fighting in Stalingrad in chilling detail but it also goes into detail of the troop movements and strategic aspects of the battle. Beever also starts by giving a brief yet useful insight into the 14 months from Barbarossa in June 1941 to Operation Blau in August 1942 to give a bigger picture of how the Wehrmacht found itself embroiled in the Southern city of Stalingrad, much further East than Moscow. The desperate struggle of wounded German soldiers trying to get the last remaining airfield in the Kessel before the Russian's closed in will probably haunt me for a long time to come. The sheer recklessness with which both sides, especially the Russians, treated the lives of their men sends a shiver down my spine and Beever portrays all this in a gripping narrative that you cannot put down. If you want to read just one book on Stalingrad and don't know which one to choose, I would suggest you choose this one.
Rating:
Summary: Easy reading
Review: Great book. What impressed me was the fact that it is so easy to read. Usually I have difficulty with history books, but this one kept me interested. A real eye opener to what really happened. I would also recommend his other book, about the fall of Berlin.
Rating:
Summary: The best on the subject
Review: Believe all the glowing reviews of this book. It is the best book about the battle of Stalingrad, bar none! The author takes the reader from the events leading to the attack on Stalingrad, to the war of attrition in the city, to the encirclement and finally to the destruction of the vaunted Sixth Army. The way the author describes what both the Wehrmacht and the Red Army had to go through is riveting and really an example of excellent writing. There's one more thing that I admired with this book. Just when I was to about to feel sorry for the foot soldiers of the Sixth Army (exposed to the murderous Russian winter, lice infestation, hunger, etc.), the author brings everything into the proper perspective by mentioning what the same soldiers did with their prisoners (sometimes shooting or force marching them to death)and with the civilian population (like assisting the notorious Police Batallions and the SS with the murder of Jews). Maybe nobody deserves to suffer what 6th Army went through, but after what they did to the conquered people of Russia and other countries, you tend to think that maybe they did deserve to suffer like they did. The author mentioned not just once how the Red Army's discovery of the mountains of dead Russian POWS left to die in the bitter cold by their German captors somehow ignited the anger and thirst for revenge in the common Russian soldier. In conclusion, an excellent book. Personally I rank it up there with "The Thirty Years War" by C.V. Wedgwood.
Rating:
Summary: Concise history of the great campaign and its aftermath
Review: Having read many works concerning Stalingrad, I suspect that we may be approaching the point where a definitive, detailed, multi-volume history of the great battle could be possible. Indeed, this should probably be attempted before the surviving veterans all pass on. That being said, this is a very acceptable single volume account of the Stalingrad campaign. It compares favorably with Craig's work, _Enemy at the Gates_. One of the strengths of Beevor's work is his view of the Russian side of the struggle. This is attained through access to now available Soviet archives. It is also attained through the greater willingness of Russian veterans to speak of their experiences without the distorting rhetoric often associated with The Great Patriotic War. The candid discussion of desertion and outright collaboration on the part of some Russian soldiers forms one of the most interesting aspects of this book. Likewise, the fate of approximately 85,000 German soldiers who entered Soviet captivity never to return is treated with even greater detail than that revealed by Craig. Again, I suspect that Beevor enjoyed access to records-- and candor-- that Craig and earlier writers did not. While I do not completely agree with all of Beevor's conclusions, he makes a convincing case for the primary responsibility of Paulus for the destruction of the Sixth Army through failure to maintain an uncommitted panzer reserve in the late fall of 1942. This failure on the part of a commander is too often ignored in works which blame the destruction of the Sixth Army on Hitler's "stand fast" order and von Manstein's failure to send a "breakout" order. Students of the campaign should add this volume to their library.
Rating: 
Summary: yet another stalingrad book ..
Review: I give this one star because that is what it is worth when you compare it to the many superior books that have been written on the subject matter. I found Beevor's style of writing to be rather dull. I had to force myself to finish the book. From all the praise on the back & inside cover I was expecting to read the greatest book of all time, but sadly not.. I prefer to read books about WWII written by the soldiers that actually fought the battles. In my opinion, some modern Historians have a tendency to just rip stuff straight from the archives & other written sources. Students could do it with a few well thought out trips to the library. (An exception to this of course is Stephen Ambrose who spent his time with veterans.) Beevor's discussion and analysis of Hitler throughout the book was incredibly superficial. Beevor portrayed Hitler as being solely focused on trying to capture Stalingrad for the gratification of his ego, also that he was militarily incompetent. Milch only gets a passing mention and Manstein is portrayed simply as a hypocrite. Poor Manstein even cops it from Beevor for apparently being Jewish and therefore is portrayed as being traitorous to all sides!! A bit harsh I feel considering the circumstances of the time. . Beevor also memoans that fact that in the encirclement priority was given for rations to Germans soldiers over the Rumanian troops. Well all I can say that if the Germans are going to fight and the Rumanians fronts crumble then it made perfect sense to keep the strongest fighters fit and healthy. Also, Beevor only gives one line to the commander of the 71st (lower Saxony) Major-General Hartmann who recieved the Knight's Cross. Why? The maps in the book were also sub-standard. The photos are the usual stock standard that everyone has seen before. Also, my eyes popped out of my head when he had in his references a non fiction section featuring Heinz Konsalik & Theodor Pliever! I was almost expecting to see Sven Hassel as a reference! If you want a decent book that towers over Beevor's book, try 'Stalingrad' by Heinz Schroter (umlaut over the o). Pan 1958. And yes ... Schroter was actually there.
Rating: 
Summary: A Common WW II book
Review: The great battle is only written in a rather straight forward way and is rather dull. Nothing special can be found in this book.
Rating:
Summary: All history should read like this
Review: I cannot comment on the historical accuracy of this book (e.g., whether it presents a conventional or more radical interpretation of particular events), nor can I compare it with other books on the siege of Stalingrad. That aside, I can recommend this book to anyone seeking a well-written view of what has to be one of the biggest military losses in contemporary history. Aside from descriptions of troop movements, officers' meetings, close-range combat, and all the other things you might except from a battle history, Beevor also intersperses it with material from interviews with survivors, as well as diary fragments and quotes from letters home. The result is a horrifying, in-depth view into what the battle was like for those fighting it, rather than an analysis of anonymous divisions. I greatly appreciated the human face put on German soldiers. While never ceasing to condemn the brutality of the Nazi regime, "Stalingrad" also reminds us that a large proportion of the army (perhaps even the majority, though I know too little about history to say that - it's just the sense I get from the book) were not rabid, anti-Semitic Nazis (or even members of the party), but human soldiers - and all that implies. In other words, capable of suffering and inflicting suffering (both of which they did in great amounts), capable of giving and accepting mercy (both of which they did in amounts surprising to one accustomed to the all-Germans-evil-people view of WWII). But the clearest thing I gleaned from this book was the utter perverse, double-edged miracle of it all: The first "miracle:" that Hitler's army's managed to defeat anything at all, considering Hitler's poor military strategies coupled with his obsession with controlling all troop movements from afar and his inability to take advice. The second: the defense of Stalingrad (and the Soviet Union in general), considering Stalin's overbearing impatience and the utter brutality of the Soviet regime. For example, early in the battle for Stalingrad, a secondary line of soldiers was positioned behind the front line, except these were security agency members, and their job was to shot (!?!?) anyone thought to be retreating, In the early weeks of the battle, Stalin provided Hitler with stiff competition for who could kill the most Soviet soldiers. "War is hell" goes the cliché, and this book shows that, in this particular case especially, we can add to that: "War is [unbelievably stupid, unnecessary] hell."
Rating:
Summary: Still one of the "must have" books on Stalingrad.
Review: I have re-read my copy after a couple of years and conclude that it is as good as I first thought. It stands alongsides Joel Hayward's "STOPPED AT STALINGRAD: The Luftwaffe and Hitler's Defeat in the East 1942-1943" and John Erickson's "THE ROAD TO STALINGRAD" as an essential study of the hell that was Stalingrad.
Rating:
Summary: Good But Not Great
Review: * The stage for Antony Beevor's historical work STALINGRAD -- THE
FATEFUL SIEGE opens on 22 June 1941, when Hitler's armies drove into
the Soviet Union. The Nazis scored victory after victory, driving to
near the gates of Moscow before German panzers bogged down in mud and
snow. A massive Soviet counteroffensive in early December 1941 threw
the invaders back, but German resistance solidified and the
counteroffensive ran out of steam. A rash series of further
counteroffensives in early 1942 were crushed, leading Hitler to
believe that one more push might knock the Soviets over once and for
all. The new offensive, PLAN BLUE, would drive down to the Caucasus to
seize the oil fields there, while simultaneously driving to the Volga
to secure the flank of the offensive. BLUE kicked off on 28 June
1942, driving the Red Army back. However, the Soviets were able to
stabilize a defense anchored around Stalingrad on the Volga. When the
German 6th Army under Friedrich Paulus reached Stalingrad, they found
themselves in a bitter war of attrition in the ruins with the forces
of Soviet General Vasily Chuikov that ground down both sides. Just as it seemed the Germans were coming close to finally wiping out
Chuikov's men, on 19 November Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov launched a
huge encirclement operation, codenamed URANUS, that trapped 6th Army
in Stalingrad. A German relief effort, codenamed WINTER STORM, under
Erich von Manstein failed, as did a hopeless supply airlift, and 6th
Army was finally wiped out in early February 1943. Stalingrad was one
of the biggest battles in history, with hundreds of thousands killed
on both sides, and was one of the turning points of the war. Antony Beevor does a good job of portraying the concentrated brutality
of the battle of Stalingrad, providing both high-level "battle map"
discussions and views of the troops on the ground, derived from
extensive interviews. There are a lot of interesting anecdotes in the
story. When the tide of battle turned against the Germans, Soviet
night patrols would set up scarecrows dressed as Hitler in front of
German positions, with a sign inviting the Germans to take a shot at
them. The scarecrows were booby-trapped for good measure. Another
interesting story concerned the assault of the Soviets on the Italian
8th Army, protecting the German flank. When a whole battalion of
Italians surrendered without a shot and an Italian sergeant was asked
why they didn't offer resistance, he replied: "We thought it would be
a mistake." I do have to criticise STALINGRAD for a certain lack of focus. I read
Beevor's FALL OF BERLIN and gave it a better than average rating, even
though it seemed to give me more information than I really wanted. As
most historical works are generally more than I'm interested in and I
understand that authors want to be thorough, I usually discount that
as a criticism. However, on comparing notes with other reviewers I
found that there was a general consensus that Beevor's writing tends
to be repetitive and carries too much dead weight. On reading STALINGRAD this becomes more obvious, and I think this
would have been a really good book if the author had been better
focused and cut it to about 300 pages instead of the actual 425. This
is still a good book and very readable -- but it could have been great
instead of merely good.
| 
