Rating: 
Summary: The French Military Debacle of 1870
Review: "It seems in retrospect as though fate had decided that there should be no humiliation which the French army should be spared." That one sentence accurately captures the tenor of Michael Howard's masterful history of the Franco-Prussian War. First published in 1961-and representing Howard's debut as a military historian - his history of the stunning Prussian victory over the heavily favored French has stood the test of time and rightfully confirmed his place as one of the preeminent historians of war in the twentieth century. Howard tells the story of the war primarily from the French perspective, and it is a stinging indictment of that country's political and military system at that time. Disgraced French commanders such as Bazaine or Bourbaki are more pitied by Howard than criticized for their performance. He argues that primary fault for the disasters that befell the French armies were more the product of a defective French military system that put such incompetent men in command of large armies, rather than the fault of the incompetent commanders themselves. Only occasionally does Howard divert his attention to the Prussian side, and when he does it is most often to discuss the friction generated between Moltke and Bismark or to describe the usually quick and effective Prussian reaction to halting or diffident French moves. However, Howard seems to place no stock in the notion of a German genius for war. For instance, he is quick to point out the many mistakes Moltke's army made, particularly in the early days of the conflict, and notes that more often than not the French troops gave just as good as they got in open battles with the Germans. In many ways, the Franco-Prussian War marked the culmination of the dramatic military reforms begun by Scharnhorst after the disastrous defeat at the hands of Napoleon at the Battle of Jena in 1806. Prussian improvements in military recruitment, training and organization, and most notably the development of a General Staff responsible for managing the immense requirements of modern war were all brought to bear on the French and in many accounts is credited with the stunning victory. Howard recognizes the revolutionary implications of the railroad, telegraph and rifled weaponry, and also notes the decisive influence Prussian military planning and organization had in the conflict. Indeed, he notes that the war was a watershed event in military history. On the one hand, the conflict included perhaps the last successful cavalry charge in history, as well as the final employment of Vauban's time-honored siegecraft techniques developed in the 17th century. Yet, the war also held some harbingers of future warfare, such as the deliberate bombardment of civilian populations at Strasburg and Paris in an attempt to undermine civilian morale and storm troop tactics developed to minimize casualties in attacking positions defended by troops with rapid firing rifled weaponry. Nevertheless, in the final analysis, Howard seems to credit the French more with defeat than the Prussians with victory. Finally, it should be noted there are a lack of adequate campaigns maps, which makes many portions of the book difficult to follow.
Rating:
Summary: The French Military Debacle of 1870
Review: "It seems in retrospect as though fate had decided that there should be no humiliation which the French army should be spared." That one sentence accurately captures the tenor of Michael Howard's masterful history of the Franco-Prussian War. First published in 1961-and representing Howard's debut as a military historian - his history of the stunning Prussian victory over the heavily favored French has stood the test of time and rightfully confirmed his place as one of the preeminent historians of war in the twentieth century. Howard tells the story of the war primarily from the French perspective, and it is a stinging indictment of that country's political and military system at that time. Disgraced French commanders such as Bazaine or Bourbaki are more pitied by Howard than criticized for their performance. He argues that primary fault for the disasters that befell the French armies were more the product of a defective French military system that put such incompetent men in command of large armies, rather than the fault of the incompetent commanders themselves. Only occasionally does Howard divert his attention to the Prussian side, and when he does it is most often to discuss the friction generated between Moltke and Bismark or to describe the usually quick and effective Prussian reaction to halting or diffident French moves. However, Howard seems to place no stock in the notion of a German genius for war. For instance, he is quick to point out the many mistakes Moltke's army made, particularly in the early days of the conflict, and notes that more often than not the French troops gave just as good as they got in open battles with the Germans. In many ways, the Franco-Prussian War marked the culmination of the dramatic military reforms begun by Scharnhorst after the disastrous defeat at the hands of Napoleon at the Battle of Jena in 1806. Prussian improvements in military recruitment, training and organization, and most notably the development of a General Staff responsible for managing the immense requirements of modern war were all brought to bear on the French and in many accounts is credited with the stunning victory. Howard recognizes the revolutionary implications of the railroad, telegraph and rifled weaponry, and also notes the decisive influence Prussian military planning and organization had in the conflict. Indeed, he notes that the war was a watershed event in military history. On the one hand, the conflict included perhaps the last successful cavalry charge in history, as well as the final employment of Vauban's time-honored siegecraft techniques developed in the 17th century. Yet, the war also held some harbingers of future warfare, such as the deliberate bombardment of civilian populations at Strasburg and Paris in an attempt to undermine civilian morale and storm troop tactics developed to minimize casualties in attacking positions defended by troops with rapid firing rifled weaponry. Nevertheless, in the final analysis, Howard seems to credit the French more with defeat than the Prussians with victory. Finally, it should be noted there are a lack of adequate campaigns maps, which makes many portions of the book difficult to follow.
Rating: 
Summary: The best account of this War yet!.
Review: Concise, clear, to the point, unbiased account of a very complicated subject.
You must understand the difficult internal political climate of France at the time to get the grip of some of the consequences of it, the author puts that in perspective brilliantly.
For the Germans (hard to believe mind!) IT WAS A PURE DEFENSIVE preemptive strike... (Sounds bloody actual is'nt it).
One of the best XIX'th Military History Books around.
Rating: 
Summary: Apparently best work out, but still lacking
Review: Have it on good authority that this is the best book available on this subject but it sorely needs battle graphics. Without the graphics you really can't get much of an image of how that battles were fought.
Rating:
Summary: Apparently best work out, but still lacking
Review: Have it on good authority that this is the best book available on this subject but it sorely needs battle graphics. Without the graphics you really can't get much of an image of how that battles were fought.
Rating:
Summary: an authoritative treatment of a complex conflict
Review: Howard does a masterful job in detailing the the military preparations of both sides before the conflict, describing the war itself, and even going into some detail about the increasing importance of technology in "modern" warfare (especially transport). However, there are some shortcommings - the chief among them are the maps. While they are useful in giving the reader an idea of what happened where, they really needed to be more detailed, showing troop movements and positions. I also thought the lack of perspective on the war was disappointing - after all, the Franco-Prussian war was instrumental in the creation of German nationhood, the birth of the Fourth republic, and a foundation stone of the First World War. None of these important after-effects were discussed in any detail whatsoever. As a book of pure military history, though, Howard's book is beyond reproach.
Rating:
Summary: an authoritative treatment of a complex conflict
Review: Howard does a masterful job in detailing the the military preparations of both sides before the conflict, describing the war itself, and even going into some detail about the increasing importance of technology in "modern" warfare (especially transport). However, there are some shortcommings - the chief among them are the maps. While they are useful in giving the reader an idea of what happened where, they really needed to be more detailed, showing troop movements and positions. I also thought the lack of perspective on the war was disappointing - after all, the Franco-Prussian war was instrumental in the creation of German nationhood, the birth of the Fourth republic, and a foundation stone of the First World War. None of these important after-effects were discussed in any detail whatsoever. As a book of pure military history, though, Howard's book is beyond reproach.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant telling...no battle maps
Review: Howard's survey of the war and its context within the sphere of European politics before WWI is exactly what a succint war history should be--except that it is sorely lacking in maps of troop deployment and maneuvering. Considering the level of detail that Howard's text delves into in this regard, this deficiency is both surprising and disappointing. (Note that maps that feature towns and prominent geographical features are themselves present, but--trust me--you will miss having the battle maps.) Other than this weakness, I couldn't have asked for more from the book. I recommend it as the best I've seen on the subject.
Rating:
Summary: Boring but informative
Review: I actually have not finished the book yet, so forgive my hypocrisy. From an information and accuracy perspective it is probably the best book on the war. However it is a bit of a tough read, so be prepared. Howard details technology and warfare of the time, along with politics and the like and the book doesn't miss much. However, perhaps that is the reason it seems so long. overall I would say a good book.
Rating:
Summary: Boring but informative
Review: I actually have not finished the book yet, so forgive my hypocrisy. From an information and accuracy perspective it is probably the best book on the war. However it is a bit of a tough read, so be prepared. Howard details technology and warfare of the time, along with politics and the like and the book doesn't miss much. However, perhaps that is the reason it seems so long. overall I would say a good book.
| 
