Rating: 
Summary: A greater understanding
Review: What polarising reviews readers have given on this book here at Amazon. However the first crime this book is accused of, Anglocentrism, I find a little unfair. As Muir points out on the very first page of his preface (and a point made by one of the reviewers of this book) - "The Anglocentrism of [writers on the Peninsular War's] approach was not simply the product of a national bias...but rather reflects the fact that for the period of the Napoleonic Wars there is an extraordinarily rich collection of first-hand British accounts of combat, which appears unmatched in any other language." He goes into far more detail on this, but I think you get the point. Napoleonic Warfare has been a fascination for from the time I read John Keegan's account of Waterloo in "The Face of Battle" - and that is the point of Muir, taking up the Challenge that Keegan posed - this is a book of action and battle order rather than general army life. I found Muir's style suited very readable. He interlaces his arguments with supporting information from quotes out of contemporary diaries and biographies. I liked this because it made the information more than a dry recounting of a structure, but it also gave you a chance to test Muir's theories for yourself based on his supposed supporting information. It is also pretty easy to track down the source of his quotes if you wish to find its context in further detail. I did find the section Part III which dealt with Command and Control the most difficult to read. It overlaid the roles of a number of different armies and men which I found a little confusing. I am not sure how to do it better - but maybe it would have been easier splitting that section up by country rather than by military rank. The book is divided into 4 sections - 1 - The introduction which has chapters on the Eve of the battle, and on Battles and Battlefields. Part 2 takes up very much where John Keegan left off and describes the conduct on the battlefield of various sections of the military so Artillery, light infantry, cavalry and so on. I did wonder where were the Engineers and the Wagon train. Part 3 is command and control which is the role of various ranks and two very interesting chapters on morale and attitudes. I thought there were some interesting cross-overs in this chapter with Myerley's book "British Military Spectacle". Part 4 is the aftermath of the battle. There is an excellent bibliography at the end of this all. I think Muir has done a very good job in attempting to extend John Keegan's work on Napoleonic War. I don't think this is by far the end of studies that could be done on nineteenth century battles though.
Rating:
Summary: A greater understanding
Review: What polarising reviews readers have given on this book here at Amazon. However the first crime this book is accused of, Anglocentrism, I find a little unfair. As Muir points out on the very first page of his preface (and a point made by one of the reviewers of this book) - "The Anglocentrism of [writers on the Peninsular War's] approach was not simply the product of a national bias...but rather reflects the fact that for the period of the Napoleonic Wars there is an extraordinarily rich collection of first-hand British accounts of combat, which appears unmatched in any other language." He goes into far more detail on this, but I think you get the point. Napoleonic Warfare has been a fascination for from the time I read John Keegan's account of Waterloo in "The Face of Battle" - and that is the point of Muir, taking up the Challenge that Keegan posed - this is a book of action and battle order rather than general army life. I found Muir's style suited very readable. He interlaces his arguments with supporting information from quotes out of contemporary diaries and biographies. I liked this because it made the information more than a dry recounting of a structure, but it also gave you a chance to test Muir's theories for yourself based on his supposed supporting information. It is also pretty easy to track down the source of his quotes if you wish to find its context in further detail. I did find the section Part III which dealt with Command and Control the most difficult to read. It overlaid the roles of a number of different armies and men which I found a little confusing. I am not sure how to do it better - but maybe it would have been easier splitting that section up by country rather than by military rank. The book is divided into 4 sections - 1 - The introduction which has chapters on the Eve of the battle, and on Battles and Battlefields. Part 2 takes up very much where John Keegan left off and describes the conduct on the battlefield of various sections of the military so Artillery, light infantry, cavalry and so on. I did wonder where were the Engineers and the Wagon train. Part 3 is command and control which is the role of various ranks and two very interesting chapters on morale and attitudes. I thought there were some interesting cross-overs in this chapter with Myerley's book "British Military Spectacle". Part 4 is the aftermath of the battle. There is an excellent bibliography at the end of this all. I think Muir has done a very good job in attempting to extend John Keegan's work on Napoleonic War. I don't think this is by far the end of studies that could be done on nineteenth century battles though.
| 
