Customer Reviews

Frederick the Great

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

 

 

"It wasn't the army that protected Prussia for seven years: It was Frederick the Great." - Napoleon.

Frederick the Great is undoubtedly one of the most elusive characters of the 18th century: like Napoleon, historians and biographers will have to duke it out for a few more centuries before we can accurately assess who he was and what kind of ruler, and man, he was. Unlike Napoleon, he doesn't get a whole lot of attention (oddly enough, because hes been overshadowed by Napoleon). Who was Frederick? A philospher-prince, a diplomatic genius of the Enlightenment -- or a monster, an aggressor who tore apart continental Europe for his own ambitions on no legality other than "... he could" ? Obviously, the answer is likely neither. Since German unification under the Great Elector, Frederick has been seen, most unfairly, as the root of militarist Germany that dominated Europe in the period of 1870-1945. Most modern biographies focus heavily on rehabilitating his reputation, as this one does.

This isn't a very good biography in most regards: it is highly readable and written well, but it lacks in greater research and insight. Sir David Fraser, himself a military man, writes most uncritically about a man he clearly regards very highly. The account is bordering on obsequious. Nevertheless, we can be blessed that, because the biography is so old-fashioned, it spairs us the sensationalism of "psychological speculation," limiting the discussion of Frederick's sexuality and the other rumors of the period to a few pages.

I give this biography four stars for its outstanding military edge. With helpful maps of key battles, Fraser explains the events with the clarity that only an old military man could write with. Military administration is also handled extremely well. No small thing, the biography is well worth the read for this alone.

Not a great biography, but it has its strengths.

Once again, David Fraser, author of 'Knight's Cross: A Life of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel' has produced another masterful biography. This beautifully told story of Frederick the Great is an outstanding account of a great military leader. You can certainly feel that Fraser has a love for this subject, even when Frederick has committed a terrible blunder the author tends to put the best light on the event as possible. This is one of the best biographies I have read on Frederick the Great and superior to most that have been available to date. In over 700 pages the author tells the story of Frederick, his conflict with his father, his love for the arts, his role as a military commander, as a King, a diplomat, as the creator of the great Prussian Army.

The author's accounts of the battles fought by Frederick are excellent and you can understand why Fraser has such a deep respect for this man. There are many accounts of Frederick leading his troops in the thick of the fighting. Losing horses under him, his aids and Generals being killed alongside him, bullet holes through his clothing. This is a commander who led from the front. Fraser also shows the many mistakes made by Frederick which led to some of the bloodiest and costliest battles in Europe during this period. After reading of some of these battles you wonder why his men followed him into others, but they did and that is what stands out about this man. He actually cared for his troops, his people and his country.

This is a great story and covers all aspects of Frederick. I believe that the maps could have been a bit more detailed but they were good enough to follow the narrative. In all 18 maps were supplied and they assisted the reader in following the battles and movements of Frederick and his armies. The story flowed along smoothly and it was a joy to read, time slipped by effortlessly as Fraser helped you look into the man that was 'Frederick the Great'. I have no hesitation in recommending this book to anyone who enjoys a great history book. Well done to the author.

For the most part, this book could have been written a hundred years ago.

To give it its due, it is quite readable and provides a clear, lengthy, detailed narrative of Frederick's diplomatic activities and military campaigns. (There is some virtue to making the reader spend a few hours on the Seven Years War, rather than whipping through it in a few pages. Part of its dynamic and importance is that it was a very long war.)

I'm not sure who will really enjoy this book, though. Casual readers will find it way too long. Serious historians will be very disappointed by its narrow focus and its inattention to the massive body of scholarship on Frederick and Prussia during his reign. (The bibilography is grossly inadequate.) Even military buffs will want to know more about the organization of the various combatants and the important battles fought by Frederick's armies (including those of his allies and those he did not personally participate in).

The treatment of military and diplomatic matters lacks meaningful context. The military history is battles and campaigns; diplomatic history is Frederick's letters to his ambassadors and his fellow rulers and relatives. There really is no broader understanding of the larger context of how diplomacy and warfare related to the society within which it was located, how they affected the relationship between that society and the state that governed it. This is creaky old diplomatic history as a chess game played by monarchs.

I did a lot of 18th-century European history in college, so much
of this was a story I've heard before, and one that I like. For some newcomers, it might be overwhelming; for others it will seem relatively pointless.

I had my choice of reading either "Frederick the Great: The Magnificent Enigma" by Robert B. Asprey" or "Frederick the Great: King of Prussia" by David Fraser. I made a mistake by choosing the latter.

Before explaining why I was mistaken, I'll briefly compare the extras that each book--hardcover edition--has to offer. If you don't want to sweat this small stuff, skip to the bottom half of my review.

Fraser's book was published in 2001, Asprey's in 1986. Fraser's has whiter, thicker pages with 627 pages of narrative. Asprey's pages are duller and thinner, but his 5 pages of introduction and 629 pages of narrative are more densely printed (his pages have about 70 spaces and 44 lines; Fraser's have about 70 spaces and 33 lines).

Both books have battle maps and world maps, but Asprey's are significantly better. Both have photos, but Fraser's are glossy photos whereas Asprey's are printed on ordinary pages. Both have an index, many footnotes, and long bibliographies. Fraser threw in a genealogy tree of the House of Brunswick; Asprey has nothing like that.

A few final words before I explain my mistake. What about the believability of the author? I say don't worry about it unless you have some special need; for example, you're planning to write another biography of Frederick the Great. I'm confident that both Asprey and Fraser know their material well enough for average Joes like me. We finish reading either book, and for the next few days--before we forget almost everything we've read--we are neighborhood authorities on Frederick the Great. On controversial matters about whether Frederick was homosexual, whether he was anti-Semitic, or whether he was a benevolent conqueror or an imperialistic aggressor, we use our own judgment regardless of which book we have read.

Now for what really matters.

WHY MY CHOICE OF FRASER OVER ASPREY WAS A MISTAKE:

Fraser had too little consideration for his readers. Here's why:

1) Except for the first thirty pages, Fraser stopped translating the French quotations he made of Frederick. I didn't go through the whole book, but for the next fifty pages, I counted twenty-one passages in French--about 140 words--and there were no translations. If someone tries to tell you I am quibbling here because you can get a good enough idea of the meanings of these French passages by their context, don't believe them. You might get a vague, rough idea, but if you're like me, that's not good enough. I want to understand with confidence, and with rare exceptions, I want to understand every word I read. Yes, Frederick spoke and wrote in French, and maybe he thought in French, but that does not excuse Fraser. His failure to translate is rude.

2) Fraser is noticeably harder to read than Asprey. Fraser's sentences are often long, sometimes too long, sometimes tedious. An occasional, awkward expression doesn't help. Also some of his diction is stilted; for example, "auguries" (instead of "signs") and "diplomatist" (instead of diplomat), and fancy expressions like "comte du four," "à outrance," and "contra mundum."

If you want to read about Frederick the Great and you can't get a copy of Asprey's book, go ahead and read Fraser. Otherwise read the author who is friendly to his readers. That is Asprey.

Fraser is reasonably clear and informative. This account is replete with important details such as troop strength and casualty numbers after battles, as well as economic data updated to current values (as of publication).

Fraser also does an effective job at conveying important political developments without digressing too far into the extraneous, especially in regard to European dynastic family/political ties. The greatest strength of this work is that the chronology is straightforward and well explained. Therefore it is an excellent general reference for that era in Prussian history.

Unfortunately for those well versed on the sublime greatness of Frederick II you may not find anything new. Also Fraser consistently uses allusions and references in French and German without always explaining them, which may be tantalizing to some.

One of the reviews wonders exactly who will enjoy this book. Well, count me as that person. Yes, it is quite long for the casual reader, but it is quite, quite excellent. Let me say that i'm a military history reader, but mainly of American wars, so I knew absolutely zero about Frederick the Great or that time period in Europe. The book is a great book for me to learn about Frederick, the politics of Europe, and the Seven Years War.

This book paints Frederick in a generally positive light, as an enlightened leader, especially for those times. However, without having read any other book about him, the author strongly hints that his opinion has been greatly disputed by most historians, which motivates me to read more on this subject.

The book is written very clearly with one exception. There's too many French quotes in there, and my high-school French is not up to task.... But aside from this, I highly recommend this book to anyone like myself, who enjoys history, but has a 1700's European gap in his knowledge!