Can any military history buffs help me out?

[Seigfried Of Pandy]

I'm currently a freshman in college not taking any military history/science courses but am very interested in self teaching or learning my self. Does anyone know any good basic text books or books in general to get me started?

edit: fixed error in title

[riddaraan]

wikipedia.org?

[isladar]

John Keegan's The Mask of Command and The Face of Battle are both excellent introductions to military history, tactics, and criticism. He is an excellent writer, managing to avoid the usual scholarly pitfall of dry and unaccessable text. His descriptions of Alexander the Great's campaign as well as the Battle of Agincourt are phenominal.

[Mizango]

I've read "The face of Battle" when I was in College, like Isladar said it is a really good introduction to history. I wanted to major in history but I decided to go the Comp. Engineering, but to this day I am still an avid history buff to no end. I like to read advanced politics and ancient history personally.

Go with what Islader said and you should be good to go. When you get a little into history let me know and I'll be happy to give you a list of more detailed information.

Good Luck with everything Seigfried.

[Skyylya]

Just buy a textbook. Unless you're looking for something along the lines of a history with threads of fiction you'll get as much out of a history text as anything else.

I recommend ancient - 20th century russian history and eastern european....well really any history from about italy to japan from ancient times til about 150 years ago is very interesting.

American history I find very boring simply becuase it's so young, 200 years isn't history compared to the rest of the world however if you're interested in military history alone we've sure made the most of our 200 years in killing people.

[Mizango]

Just buy a textbook. Unless you're looking for something along the lines of a history with threads of fiction you'll get as much out of a history text as anything else.

I recommend ancient - 20th century russian history and eastern european....well really any history from about italy to japan from ancient times til about 150 years ago is very interesting.

American history I find very boring simply becuase it's so young, 200 years isn't history compared to the rest of the world however if you're interested in military history alone we've sure made the most of our 200 years in killing people.

I'd have to second this; while American history can be interesting, it is still considered infantile compared to the rest of the world. Reading ancient texts can really give you insight (if you are looking at the big picture) as to why some leaders and countries behave the way that they do. You will see in the end that we aren't all as different as outwardly perceived.

I also suggest keeping an open mind and taking in other peoples histories as well, you will gain a new appreciation for other cultures that rival those of our own. I wish more people liked history It really is a beautiful and fascinating science.

[sephir]

my uncle came here from England on vacation and did one of those city tour things a while back. The tour guide hated him because whenever she would say something like "This building was built in 1650" he would always respond "oh so its pretty new then".

But is there any specific period of history that you are looking for?

[Osede]

If you really interest into them, I'm suggest you might try to get few books from various country/region. Since that usually for different country, they got different point of view even thought them were all talking about the same event's history.

I think the most significant case is the relationship between muslim/jewish/christian.

[Seigfried Of Pandy]

hey thanks for the quick responses guys, ill look into the face of battle. but yeah i tend to agree with you guys that even though I'm American and I tend to be bias into being interested in my own history i feel like looking into other areas will be more interesting and informative just if nothing else because of the fact that American history just is much shorter then everywhere else.

[Dexster]

All depends on what time frame your looking at. I personally enjoy WW2 history but my major interest is military strategy and there is a million books that i could recommend... If its like 1900+ century history I would probably start with something in WW1. Go spend a few hours at a bookstore and find something you enjoy. Best Nazi Germany book i've found is Rise and Fall of the Third Reich. As far as Strategy How to Make War... Become an Effective Armchair General.

[Daahan]

Obviously the Art of War is where someone should always start.

But honestly, if you're really in to doing military history, don't just dive in to the military history books right away.

I'm not accusing you of doing this, but so many people jump in to military history because "it's cool and it involves tactics and strategies and other cool and stuff and heroes." That's cool and all but that is only a small section of the importance of military history.

If you want to start off, read about the actual war first. Find books that give general backgrounds about why the war started, what the economic and political factors were, etc.

You have to know the essence and purpose of a war before you dive right in to the sheer military aspects of it.

[isladar]

If you want to start off, read about the actual war first. Find books that give general backgrounds about why the war started, what the economic and political factors were, etc.

You have to know the essence and purpose of a war before you dive right in to the sheer military aspects of it.

While Keegan's stuff is decidedly military history, it is certainly not just a "And then they outflanked them FUCK YEAH" description -- when he speaks of Agincourt, for example, he talks extensively about how during the French's second and third charges, they were not only disarrayed by the funnelling technique used by the British, but by the fact that they were flanked by archers. Archers were traditionally a position for the lower class, and as such, the nobles and founded knights of the French wouldn't engage them; they got systematically slaughtered for their prejudices.

The discussion regarding class and tactics was incredibly engaging, as well as his psychological profile of Alexander.

(Also, I would highly recommend finding a copy of Kenneth Branagh's Henry V. Yeah, its Shakespeare, but holy christ is it good. The depiction of Agincourt is amazing, and his St. Crispin's Day speech gave me goosebumps.)

[Dexster]

(Also, I would highly recommend finding a copy of Kenneth Branagh's Henry V. Yeah, its Shakespeare, but holy christ is it good. The depiction of Agincourt is amazing, and his St. Crispin's Day speech gave me goosebumps.)

Im going to check this out today. Thanks for the tip.

[Elesirdur]

John Keegan's The Mask of Command and The Face of Battle are both excellent introductions to military history, tactics, and criticism. He is an excellent writer, managing to avoid the usual scholarly pitfall of dry and unaccessable text. His descriptions of Alexander the Great's campaign as well as the Battle of Agincourt are phenominal.

I should preface my comments that I have a BA in History in which I primarily studied the history of human conflict and warfare. I'm by no means an expert, but I hope I can provide some insight.

Also Keegan's aptly named A History of Warfare is an excellent primer for the subject.

In the introduction to Face of Battle Keegan notes that the specific discourse of "Military History" is quite different from what he writes, which is more like a history of armed conflict in civilization. In public/private universities, courses on the History of WWII or specific seminar courses on Historiography or specific aspects of human conflict are not really military history. They are history courses that analyze the impact and influence of events on larger groups, etc.

Military History, to be specific, and as one of my profs said, is pretty much just "tank counting". Looking at battles and actions, knowing the Order of Battle, how many died on this side, what kind of logistical concerns were required for the battle, how many artillery shells were expended, in what way did the units manoeuver on the field, so on and so forth. That's the kind of stuff that's taught in the courses of Military History at military Academies and War Colleges. To be blunt, military history in the strictest sense is about how others have made war in the past and from that information you learn how to make war now and into the future. There's not the focus on the impact of warfare on the greater society, on those that are left out of battles, of women, of children, of industry and the economy, and it's often at a very strategic/tactical level, where the individual soldier, airman, or seaman is merely a cog in the military machine - because that's the way a military functions best.

The other thing I will mention, and it's a subject that kind of gets on my nerves as well as the collective nerves of academic historians is 'popular history.' And the writings on the history of warfare and military actions are just rife with this kind of clap-trap. The kind of books that "expose" FDR's supposed collusion with Winston Churchill to hide the Japanese JN5 submarine transmissions that told of the attack on Pearl Harbor from the U.S. Military elite to allow the attack to happen to bring the U.S. into WWII? Yeah, that kind of crap. And the sad thing is that there's so much of it out there talking about military history from early history to the modern era. Written by journalists, fiction writers, amateur dilettantes, even soldiers themselves, but without the education and knowledge of how to put together properly researched and analyzed history. Were they selling their books as something lighter, that's fine. But because they call it "history" it gets lumped in with all the scholarly research and other accredited work and the public can't tell the difference except that the academic stuff is hard to read and the 'popular' books are just so darn gripping. Now, that sword is double edged and John Keegan pretty much revolutionized the way in which good, academically acceptable military history can be written so it's gripping and engaging even to the laymen. Modern historians know that they can't just keep writing the same old dusty tomes if they want to make any money off their books and things have gotten a lot better.

Anyways, using books like Keegan's works or books you might find on your local University/College's bookstore shelves for history courses you can go from there, use their bibliographies to read more on subjects you are interested in.

Academic journals also house fascinating, cutting-edge research that you wouldn't always find in books. Plus, it's up for the scrutiny of peer review so these are often the best places to find the truly scholarly essays and papers. If you can access online resources like jstor.org you'll be in heaven (and have wicked resources for writing papers, I used jstor so much during my university career)

[Elesirdur]

I also suggest keeping an open mind and taking in other peoples histories as well, you will gain a new appreciation for other cultures that rival those of our own. I wish more people liked history It really is a beautiful and fascinating science.

Just wanted to qft this quickly.

One of the best history courses I took during my BA was a course on the history of warfare in Canada's aboriginal societies. It was taught by a sessional prof who had just finished his PhD a few years ago (at the same university from one of my favorite profs too) and was really into the topic. I was fascinated by learning more about Canada's first nations peoples, especially their violent and warmaking past which was a reality that most modern textbooks just whitewash over. Not to mention, in the class of about 25, we had four first nations students who were really into the course. One of them even brought in their great grandfather for an oral history lesson, telling stories passed down by his Kwa'kwa'wak'a (I think I spelled that correctly, old anglicized name was Kwakuital) ancestors about the making of war canoes and costal raiding against the Salish.

[Iono]

Read the 3 kingdoms!

[Unyango]

Panzerkrieg by McCarthy and somebody, a nice detailed history of Hitler's tank army juggernaut, from their formation, to conquering Europe and their destruction despite their gallant efforts.

[Daahan]

Read the 3 kingdoms!

It's the Romance of the Three Kingdoms

never take the true name of that great piece of literature for granite you swine.