Customer Reviews

Atlas of Military Strategy - the Art Theory and Practice of War4 1618 - 1878

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Yes, it is biased, but Dr. Chandler is British. Yes, the coverage of the U.S. War Between the States is flawed. However, this book's stregth lies in its treatment of the development of military strategy, essentially from the Thirty Years War (1618 -48) through the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. It is not a detailed military history of these times; for that, one consults works that deal specifically with a particular period. For example, Chandler's "Campaigns of Napoleon" treats the Napoleonic Wars in scholarly thorough depth. However, this book is excellent as an overview as to how military thinking changed and evolved over times, affecting the way battles were fought. Chandler also demonstrates how the evolution of weapons changed the thinking of commanders, whose options were enhanced by changes in weaponry. The many maps are well-done visual aids to demonstrate a commander's use of terrain and his prrinciples of manouvre. If Chandler takes justifiable pride in the generalship of Marlborough and Wellington, well, they were tactical geniuses. If, as it is, his treatment of American wars is less than objective and factually flawed, it should not prevent a prospective purchaser from buying this book for its stated purpose as an overview; there are many fine works dealing with all aspects of the Civil War, but this book has been a constant companion since being published in 1980 and it is an excellent starting place for anyone with a burgeoning interest in tactics and strategy.

I bought this book thinking that it would provide a solid overview of the 250+ year period that it advertised. Boy, was I wrong. Anytime the text deals with English/British forces, you might want to get out a CD and play "God Save the Queen" while you read, for Chandler is devoid of objectivity. The result of his incredibly Jingoistic prose renders these portions of the Atlas of little value. That may seem good by comparison once the author betrays to the reader his poor handling/understanding of the American Civil War. Chandler's treatment of Gettysburg is an absolute joke, and his description of the action on 2 July is so far off base that the errors contained in the text cannot be considered as coming from any "historian" SUPPOSEDLY of merit. As a result, I have already removed this book to the garage, where it is piled with other belongings that are earmarked to be given away.

This atlas, containing numerous errors and indifferent quality of facts, results in a sloppy maze that leaves one wondering what it contains that it worthwhile. It was a great disappointment.

Wonderful book, clear and concise illustrations; not your usual Amerocentric diatribe