Knight in Battle

Rating:
Summary: Great overall view of Medieval battles!
Review: This is an engaging read about four little-known battles that describe the historical setting and the circumstances involving each battle. The battles covered are: the Battle of Arsuf 1191, the Battle of Lincoln 1217, the Battle of Mauron 1352, and the Battle of Marignano 1515. Oakeshott writes in such a way as to bring historical figures to life. I especially liked the description of King Richard the Lion-Hearted and the crusaders' march to Arsuf while being harassed by the forces of Saladin.
The book also contains maps and illustrations of armor and weapons which I found to be helpful. After reading this book, it is easy to see how the methods of warfare, the armor, and weapons developed during the Medieval period. I highly recommend this book.

Rating:
Summary: Quite good
Review: Contrary to what my fellow countryman said here, it's exactly the way they put their shoes on (and many other interesting things, like how they handled their swords, how they rode their horses, what they ate and where they slept) that makes a history and an understanding of the epoch. This book is perhaps not the best, but good enough in the line of "technical-historical" books available about the medieval knight, one of the books intended to show how the things worked, not to retell a story of some specific event.

Rating:
Summary: Par for the Series
Review: Not that I think Mr. Oakeshott is one I'm just frustrated..A Knight in Battle, second edition...

I read this book with the hope of gaining insight to ... well, a knight in battle. If you come to the book with my informational wants you too will be disappointed. And what should a body expect when the blurb on the back of the book says, "...and examines how the development of weapons altered armor and fighting techniques?"

What should the thesis of a book with the title, A Knight in Battle be? Shouldn't one expect the book to be about a knight's armor, his weapons, his tactics as they directly interact in battle? Wouldn't it be reasonable to get increasing measures of detail about how armament was crafted under driving military considerations? Shouldn't a reader expect to find the rational for each weapon (the sword, the cudgel, the maul, the pike) their strengths and weaknesses, details of how they arrived at best practice, and the resume of a man who became proficient in the use of these implements of war?

Well, if these are all reasonable expectations, and a potential reader is after what I was, then you too will be disappointed. What you will find on the pages of this book is a fair to rousing summary of the politics, social motivations for four battles--Arsuf, Lincoln, Mauron, Marignano--with some of the stuff I was looking for tossed into the potpourri bowl so that it at least had that knight in battle smell. Mr. Oakeshott can write fair enough and his accounts are filled with interesting, historical and biographical detail of said battles. But he desperately needed someone to keep him on his thesis.

Bon appetite

Rating:
Summary: Oooooohhhh, fruit cake!
Review: Not that I think Mr. Oakeshott is one I'm just frustrated..A Knight in Battle, second edition...

I read this book with the hope of gaining insight to ... well, a knight in battle. If you come to the book with my informational wants you too will be disappointed. And what should a body expect when the blurb on the back of the book says, "...and examines how the development of weapons altered armor and fighting techniques?"

What should the thesis of a book with the title, A Knight in Battle be? Shouldn't one expect the book to be about a knight's armor, his weapons, his tactics as they directly interact in battle? Wouldn't it be reasonable to get increasing measures of detail about how armament was crafted under driving military considerations? Shouldn't a reader expect to find the rational for each weapon (the sword, the cudgel, the maul, the pike) their strengths and weaknesses, details of how they arrived at best practice, and the resume of a man who became proficient in the use of these implements of war?

Well, if these are all reasonable expectations, and a potential reader is after what I was, then you too will be disappointed. What you will find on the pages of this book is a fair to rousing summary of the politics, social motivations for four battles--Arsuf, Lincoln, Mauron, Marignano--with some of the stuff I was looking for tossed into the potpourri bowl so that it at least had that knight in battle smell. Mr. Oakeshott can write fair enough and his accounts are filled with interesting, historical and biographical detail of said battles. But he desperately needed someone to keep him on his thesis.

Bon appetite

Rating:
Summary: Par for the Series
Review: What the previous reviewer has missed is that this book is part of a longer series on the subject, a series that includes books specifically dedicated to armor, weapons, horses, and castles. Secondly, Oakeshott isn't interested in presenting the readers with long descriptions so one can come up with some kewl stats and new proficiencies for their D&D game. He is interested in historical fact and placing the medieval knight into this historical context. As he does in the other books of this series, Oakeshott both dispels that annoying romanticism out there that distorts the true merits and shortcomings of these historical people, and gives us insight into those details that other, more general, histories don't provide. Third, Oakeshott does keep to his thesis, and this would have been noticed by the previous reviewer if that reviewer had realized the four battles explained by Oakeshott represent four different and very important developments in medieval combat.

In short, this is an excellent book, but it is not an exhaustive reference guide to the medieval knight. It was not intended to be. For a complete picture of Oakeshott's factual fecundity and depth of insight it is critically important to read this book along with the other books in the series.