Most Helpful Customer Reviews
21 of 23 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Refreshingly Different Look at Medieval Warfare, June 30, 2000
This review is from: Medieval Warfare: History of the Art of War, Volume III (Paperback)
Most historians speak of the Middle Ages as a period when cavalry had the ascendancy over infantry. Delbruk argues that there was no such thing as cavalry during the Middle Ages, and until the coming of the Swiss phalanx, not much in the way of infantry. Simply putting an armed man on horseback doesn't make him a cavalryman any more than handing a weapon to a peasant makes him an infantryman. Cavalry was a disciplined group of horsemen fighting as a unit. Mounted knights were an undisciplined group of horsemen fighting as individuals. A troop of cavalry should be able to defeat an equal number of knights, but a single knight defeats a single cavalryman. For a good description of what the military aspect of mounted knighthood was all about, read Delbruk's description of the encounter between two knightly armies at Pillenreuth. That alone is worth the price of the book. Delbruk doesn't stop with a description of the military art of knighthood. He studies every aspect of medival warfare, drawing insightful and iconoclastic conclusions.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5.0 out of 5 stars
A different take on Medieval Warfare, October 18, 2011
This review is from: Medieval Warfare: History of the Art of War, Volume III (Paperback)
I was attracted to this book because of the emphasis on German history. The majority of books on this subject in English focus too heavily on England (which was a backwater kingdom during this period). Many of the battles and engagements in the book I had never heard of and I found it very enlightening. The book was originally written in German and published in Berlin in 1923. So some of the grammar can be disjointed and I attribute this to the translation. But this doesn't detract from the ideas that Delbruck puts forward, since modern scholars are still debating the ideas of Medieval knighthood. I think he really wanted to brush away the romantic Victorian notions of Knights that were (and still are) prevalent at the time. I think it was refreshing that he did not devote a whole section to the hundred years war. As a German he knew that Medieval Germany was constantly at war during the Medieval Period and chose to focus on it. So this book puts a heavier emphasis on the defeat of the Hungarians, the Teutonic conquest, the campaigns of the Holy Roman Emperors in Italy, and the feuds of the German nobility. One of the most fascinating aspects of the book is the history of the Swiss military machine. Most books treat the Swiss as skilled mercenaries that suddenly materialized out of the ether to batter their enemies. Delbruck analyzes how the Swiss military system came into being during their battles for independence during the Medieval Period. History that is mainly relegated to footnotes in the majority of histories. So read this book if you are really dedicated to studying Medieval Warfare and history and tired of the same Anglo-centric histories.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
5 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Disappointing, June 26, 2002
This review is from: Medieval Warfare: History of the Art of War, Volume III (Paperback)
It is in this volume that Delbruck's sense of racial superiority shows the most. Although the longest volume in the work it deals almost exclusively with warfare among medieval Germans. He virtually ignores the Crusades, the Reconquista, the Hundred Years War, and Manzikert. His argument against including the Crusades is that they did not do anything to change warfare in Europe, but later mentions that the English experiences in Syria led to the development of the long-bow. This definitely should have been explored more. The best move Delbruck could have made to improve this volume would have been to split it into two books. Had he done that he could have dealt with the Hundred Years War in the same way that he dealt with the Punic Wars, gone into more detail about the Crusades, explored the Reconquista and the Norman migrations, and given the Byzantine Empire the focus it deserves. Delbruck's analysis of the Swiss (whom he constantly refers to as "German") contribution to modern warfare is amazing, however, and makes the work worth reading.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
