History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)

Book Description

Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.

Customer Reviews:

Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03

Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.

Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09

There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.

For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.

Very Interesting.......2007-03-07

It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.

History as Science Fiction.......2007-01-10

Anatoly Fomenko has written a very intriguing book, full of pictures, charts, and computer 'proof' of his thesis: backwards of AD900 we don't really know what happened or when. Between AD900 and AD1600 there is more certainty, but there is still a lot of fuzzy ground, and things don't get reliable until we get past the 1600's where the printing press made it very difficult for the perpetrators of this timeline manipulation to change anything that had been committed to print. The Dark Ages did not happen. Books were burned for a reason. One organization has doubled the actual length of its existence by expanding the real chronology. Read why.

I had always wondered why Christ died about AD33 and yet men waited until the 11th century to form the Knights Templar, the Cathars, etc and go after the Holy Land by force. Why the 1000 year gap? Turns out there wasn't more than a 10-12 year gap and he proves it using astronomy. This also implies that the planet is not as old as we have been told, and current Christian and other creationist scientists are already championing that idea without being aware of Fomenko's book. The two groups, creationist scientists and the Russian mathematical analysts corroborate each other. Fascinating.

Of course, all this flies in the face of what we have been told traditionally is the 'proper' chronology of western civilization, and most readers will experience 'cognitive dissonance' in reading this book. It means that our history going backwards from AD1600 becomes progressively more incorrect and unreliable until it cannot be trusted at all... in the space of 700-800 years.

Naturally, the curious, open-minded reader will want to know WHO did this, WHY, and did any of the events we think of as really ancient ever happen?
Dr. Fomenko is a respected scientist/mathematician at Moscow State University who has already answered these questions to the satisfaction of his initially skeptical colleagues. Most of them are now believers, a few still refuse to believe (the usual diehards), and of course the western press has ignored Fomenko's work -- for obvious reasons when you read the book. The ones who perpetrated this chronology ruse have a lot to answer for. They are still with us. That's why this book is a well-kept secret.

I gave the book a 4-star rating because I was unable to check out some of his claims; those I checked were as he said. But if even 1/3 of his claims are true, this punches a big hole in what we think is our history, the meaning of western civilization, our educational process (for repeating the ruse as gospel), and the trustworthiness of the organization that perpetrated this ruse, well-intentioned or not.

This book relates to current research into a Young Earth paradigm, to John Keel's discoveries about our planet, and Fr Malachi Martin's insights (in his now out-of-print books). We are indeed sheep who are manipulated and kept ignorant -- for a reason. While knowing what these men have to say may be the "booby prize" (as in: 'what can you do with this knowledge?'), it will provide interesting reading. Didn't someone say: "...and the Truth will set you free."?? For you to judge if this book contains the truth.

Moscow 1941: A City and Its People at War

Average customer rating:

Excellent account of wartime Moscow
history
Moscow 41
Vicktor
Below the radar screen -- the Battle of Moscow

Moscow 1941: A City and Its People at War
Rodric Braithwaite
Manufacturer: Knopf
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 1400044308
Release Date: 2006-09-26

Book Description

A brilliantly researched and realized history, an essential addition to the literature of World War II.

The 1941 Battle of Moscow—unquestionably one of the most decisive battles of the Second World War—marked the first strategic defeat of the German armed forces in their seemingly unstoppable march across Europe. The Soviets lost many more people in that one battle than the British and Americans lost in the whole of the war. Now, with authority and narrative power, Rodric Braithwaite tells the story in large part through the individual experiences of ordinary Russian men and women.

Setting his narrative firmly against the background of Moscow and its people, Braithwaite begins in early 1941, when the Soviet Union was still untouched by the war raging to the west. We see how—despite abundant secret intelligence—the breaching of the border by the Wehrmacht in June took the country by surprise, and how, when the Germans pushed to Moscow in November, the Red Army and the capital’s inhabitants undertook to defend their city. Finally, in the winter of 1941–1942, they turned the Germans back on the very outskirts.

Braithwaite’s dramatic, richly illustrated narrative of the military action offers telling portraits of Stalin and his generals. By interweaving the personal remembrances of soldiers, politicians, writers, artists, workers, and schoolchildren, he gives us an unprecedented understanding of how the war affected the daily life of Moscow, and of the extraordinary bravery, endurance, and sacrifice—both voluntary and involuntary—that was required of its citizens.

Customer Reviews:

Excellent account of wartime Moscow.......2007-09-03

To start off, I was quite surprised at how much I wound up enjoying this book, the author did a superb job in some cases. But as with all books it was close, but not perfect, at least for my taste.

I was happy to see the open mind which the author had when it came to the stories of the 28 Panfilovtsi (part of the 316th Rifle Division under the command of Panfilov) and Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya. He addresses both of the stories that came out right after these two respective events occurred, both in 1941, and shows how today there are many who are trying to break down the myths that have been built up around these two events. In the case of the 28 men from Panfilov's division, it was said they all died to a man while defending the way to Moscow, also are quoted the last words of the Commissar who was with them. But, how would anyone know these last words if they all died? Later it was found out that a few were taken prisoner, some escaped, another went home to his home town in Ukraine and collaborated with the Germans, after the town's liberation he was hanged, etc. All these details were hushed up so that the propaganda value would remain. The same with Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya. Her story is retold and the newly found facts brought to light as well. I'd also mention that the author tries to dispel some of the built up myths about the Soviet regime during this time. For instance the idea that all liberated soldiers were sent to GULag camps, simply not true and the author provides the relevant numbers for what happened to how many. Also details about the fact that the Germans routinely recruited Red Army prisoners and those that went over to them to spy on Red Army, thus there was reason to suspect those coming back from POW camps when liberated or those who had escaped from German captivity or encirclements. At the same time there are accounts of those who were innocent or jailed for the political beliefs, not something that should surprise anyone. There is no excuse for it, this is a regime that took many lives, both innocent and guilty. Yet, at the same time there is no reason to exaggerate the good or the bad, simply see it for what it was.

These are a few examples I felt obligated to highlight as I always look toward small details like these in any book to see how good the research is behind the book. The author goes through a small history of Moscow and then a good account of activities before and on the eve of the German invasion. His interviews give a good insight into people's thoughts, moods, and ideas about what the future held for them before the war began.

The author then takes us through the first few months of the war noting the encirclements that the Germans unleashed onto the Red Army and the horrible losses Red Army soldiers suffered. I also found interesting what one interviewee mentioned, an entire artillery regiment close to the front lines, when the war began, was caught in the midst of changing their artillery, the new ammunition had arrived but it wouldn't fit their guns. Their infantry protection had retreated and they had no other choice but to give up. This was something I've never encountered before, a very interesting detail that shows the surprise the Germans were able to achieve and to a degree the fact that the Red Army, no matter their number or the number of weapons at their disposal, could never put their strength to proper use in the first period of the war.

How the civilian population suffered in Moscow is recounted, shortages, hunger, depression, arrests, etc. All are dealt with and given that much more resonance as we remember that much of the information is from people who were there and either witnessed this or themselves went through it. At times it's near impossible to imagine oneself in such a situation. At the same time millions were evacuated to remote regions were they had to build up cities from scratch, or so it seems. The military aspect isn't covered here in as much detail as I would have liked, but the human aspect is. I'd say to date this is one of the better works I've read about the Eastern Front, especially 1941 in the English language. A lot of interesting details, testimonials, and revelations.

history.......2007-08-17

I was very dissapointed by this book. I really expected more from someone of the author's stature, considering the opportunities he had and position he held. The subject is not only not professionally researched, it is mainly anecdotal, which is not a problem in itself,it is just slightly naive in making its point.

The subject of this book, together with the subjects that were interviewed should have made a superb story had the author been a professional historian with the requisite objectivity. History makes a point in itself - the 'historian' does not have to help. Too bad - an opportunity missed.

Moscow 41.......2007-08-02

The book is written by the author, who loves Russia. You will get a notion on how Moscow city (but not the defence) logistics had functioned at those critical days of 41. The backbone of the whole story is a summary of the memories of more than seventy muscovites, but among those one will hardly find the descrption of the battle itself. Some assertions seem really astonishing, for example, that in April 42, a salmon and red caviar was available in Moscow food stores! Certainly you will find many more.

Vicktor.......2007-07-25

I picked this book up based on the other reviewers and expected a compelling account of the battle for Moscow. Unfortunately this book is confusing jumble of personal vignettes (some only about the battle - others covering the characters for the length of the war - others covering a good deal of the characters lives before and after the war) and an overview of the actions of Stalin and a couple of generals. The writing style gives no immediacy to the fighting and develops no particpants characters usfficiently for the reader to feel invested.

I give 3 stars because it is clearly well researched and provides information not covered elsewhere.

Below the radar screen -- the Battle of Moscow.......2007-05-28

Franklin Delano Roosevelt has been visciously attacked over the years by America's "right wing" for allowing Eastern Europe to fall into the hands of Joseph Stalin and his communist government at the end of World War II. One reason why the charge has stood up is that many Americans are not, and never have been, fully aware of the the massive contributions that Stalin, backed by millions of Russian people who often lost their lives under brutish conditions, made to winning World War II. Much of the success that the Allied armies had after D-Day resulted from the simple fact that the German Army had already been deeply depleted on the Eastern front because it invaded, and ultimately failed in the Soviet Union. Many more Russian soldiers died than soldiers from any other country. The punishing battle fought to win Moscow cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of Hitler's troops. The six hundred mile march to Moscow -- and Russia's intervening winter -- took its toll on the German army. The Russians, and Stalin, in particular, had been unprepared for the invasion. But when it finally happened, Stalin's generals amassed massive troops from all over the country and destroyed many of Moscow's resources themselves so that the Germans could not utilize them when they marched into the city. Stalin used savagery and brutality to fight Hitler. It was only these tactics -- along with Russia's sub-zero temperatures and huge land mass -- that allowed Stalin to beat down the Fuhrer. Without Stalin, Hitler may well have conquered Europe for good. This is why Roosevelt's critics are wrong.

Rodric Braithwaite has amassed a huge amount of information about this all important battle. He also has included a treasure trove of nuggets and photographs of ordinary people. But in some sense, the book does not really have a coherent organization that hangs together at the top. For the most part, we don't really know what is going on throughout the battle by the elites on both sides, who are directing the battle. The scope of the book is massive, fascinating, but also confusing at times and sometimes densely written.

History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2 (Chronology)

Average customer rating:

Check and see
Suprise! Suprise!
Prescient St Augustine?
Something of a disappointment
Romulus courts Helen, Paris founds Rome, Moses goes to Troy..

History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2 (Chronology)
Anatoly T Fomenko
Manufacturer: Delamere Resources LLC
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Assyria, Babylonia & Sumer | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

Historiography | Historical Study | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

Medieval | World | History | Subjects | Books

German | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Russian | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Spanish | Poetry | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Chinese | Classics | Literature & Fiction | Subjects | Books

Mythology & Folklore | Encyclopedias | Reference | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Controversial Knowledge | Religious Studies | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

History | Religious Studies | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Celtic | Earth-Based Religions | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Magic & Wizards | Fantasy | Science Fiction & Fantasy | Subjects | Books

History | Fashion | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 2913621066

Product Description

`History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2` is the second volume of the most explosive and astounding tractate on history ever written - however, every theory it contains, no matter how unorthodox, is backed by rock solid scientific data. The book is easy and pleasant to read; it is well-illustrated, contains hundreds of charts, graphs and illustrations, copies of ancient manuscripts, and countless facts attesting to the falsity of the chronology used nowadays. You will be amazed to discover: - That the chronology universally accepted today and taken for granted is simply wrong; - That ALL methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts known today are erroneous or non-exact; - That there is not a single document that could be reliably dated earlier than the XIth century; The Author refers to the Middle Ages as the Antiquity and proves mutual superimposition of the Second and the Third Roman Empire, both of which become identified as the respective kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Furthermore, he asserts that the famous reform of the Occidental Church in the XI century by Pope Gregory Hildebrand was the reflection of the XII century reforms of Byzantine emperor Andronicus who in his turn identifies with Jesus Christ. The Trojan war counted by Homer happened only as late as of the XIII century A.D. and the great poet actually lived in XIV century A.D. No stone in history of Antiquity is left unturned. Literally. This book is the beginning of a major correction to the chronology we live with.

Customer Reviews:

Check and see.......2007-06-21

I don't care what other people say of this book. Those affirmig it's fake, they hadn't ever read it. Or have some special reasons to do so. "Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see..." This book won't make you feel comfortable. It'll make you feel free. It'll make you feel you're "not the only one" to feel you'd been lied to for centuries.

Suprise! Suprise!.......2007-03-22

Here is a serie of books which turns "the whole world" upside down. I learned a lot of it and I hope that a new book from A.T. Fomenko will follow very quick. A absolute must for everybody who is interested in history or even a little bit from it.

Prescient St Augustine?.......2006-02-05

We can so far divide the New Chronology into the following three parts:

a) The verifiable theory that proves consensual chronology wrong with the aid of astronomy, statistics and mathematics;

b) The new chronology hypothesis based on a new understanding of known historical facts and the most likely logical explanation of the most obvious inconsistencies inherent in the official version of history;

c) The history conjectures, that is experimental historical reconstructions based on assumptions that the authors believe to make sense in the light of their research and linguistic parallels - void of ironclad factual support to date.

Fomenko's theory complies with the most rigid scientific standards as a whole:

It gives a coherent explanation of what we already know.

- It is consistent: independent lines of inquiry all lead to the same conclusion.

- The predictions it makes are confirmed empirically.

Fomenko goes by the following axioms:

- Chronology is the basis of history;

- Human evolution has always been linear, gradual and irreversible;

- The "cyclic" nature of human civilization is a myth, likewise all the gaps, duplicates, "dark ages" and "renaissances" that we know from consensual history;

- The accumulation of geographical knowledge as reflected in cartography is a gradual and irreversible process;

- The chronological distance between a given manuscript and the events described therein is proportional to the amount of distortions it contains;

- There is no "useless" information in authentic ancient sources.

Why the mainstream historians do not shower mathematician Academician Dr.Prof Fomenko with thanks and laurels?

The Russians:

Because Fomenko asserts that there was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by three centuries of slavery, providing a formidable body of documental evidence to prove his assertion. The so-called "Tartars and Mongols" were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Arabic spoken as freely as Russian. The ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities. The hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called "blood tax"). Their "invasions" were punitive operations against the regions that attempted tax evasion. Fomenko proves that Russian history as we know it today is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scientists brought to Russia by the usurper dynasty of the Romanovs, whose ascension to the throne was the result of coup d'état, charged with the mission of making their reign look legitimate. Fomenko proves Ivan the Terrible to be a collation of four rulers, no less. They represented the two rival dynasties - the legitimate rulers and the ambitious upstarts. The winner took it all! Over some 30 years of controversy, Russian historians have made a most remarkable transition - they were initially accusing the young mathematician Fomenko of anticommunist dissident activity and attempts to deface the historical legacy of Soviet Russia; nowadays the middle-aged mathematician is accused of adhering to "pro-communist Russian nationalism" and defacing the proud historical legacy of Great Russia.

The Westerners:

Because Fomenko blows consensual Russian history to smithereens, successfully removing a crucial cornerstone from underneath the otherwise impeccable edifice of World History. Fomenko adds insult to injury, wiping out one by one the Ancient Rome (the foundation of Rome in Italy is dated to the XIV century A. D.), the Ancient Greece and its numerous poleis, which he identifies as the mediaeval crusader settlements on the territory of Greece, and the Ancient Egypt (the pyramids of Giza become dated to the XI-XV century A. D. and identified as the royal cemetery of the Global "Mongolian" Empire, no less). The civilization of the Ancient Egypt is irrefutably dated to the XII-XV century A. D. with the aid of the ancient Egyptian horoscopes cut in stone. He was the first one to decipher and date all such horoscopes, coming up with mediaeval dates in every case. English historians rage at the suggestion that the history of Ancient England was de facto a Byzantine import transplanted to the English soil by the fugitive Byzantine nobility. To reward the English historians who consider themselves the true scribes of World History, the cover of the present book portrays Tintoretto's Jesus Christ crucified on the Big Ben.

The Chinese:

Because Fomenko wipes out the Ancient History of China outright. No such thing. Full point. The compilation of the so-called Ancient Chinese History is reliably datable to the XVII-XVIII century only. It is perfectly recognizable as the Ancient European history, reworked and transcribed in hieroglyphs as yet another historical transplantation, this time performed on the Chinese soil by the loving Jesuit hands. The Chinese are the next in line to go berserk. Chinese history is inevitably bound to get both more ancient and more eventful, proportionally to the growing involvement of China in the world affairs. Chinese historians will keep on finding valid proof of prehistoric Chinese spaceflights until the Politburo orders them to shut up.

The Arabs:

Too bad. Islam with all its key figures is datable to XV-XVI century A. D. Arabic historians may find consolation in the crucial historical role of the Ottoman Empire in the XVI-XVII century. The trouble is that this empire was initially a Christian state, with Hagia Sophia identifiable as Temple of Solomon, according to Fomenko! We can only guess if the acquisition of Alexander the Great (a Macedonian and a Christian) as the founder of the Muslim World Empire will make Fomenko's theories more acceptable to the Arabic mainstream. He certainly does not spare any holy cows at all, claiming The Stone of Qa'Aba in Mecca to contain the lost Arch of the Covenant.

The Divinity:

Despite of reiterated statement that his theory is all about chronology and not Religion, Fomenko stirs up a whole condominium of wasp nests. His collection of anathemas, fatwa, and other condemnations from all parties concerned is already considerable. Little wonder, considering that the history of religions à la Fomenko looks as follows: the pre-Christian period (before the XI century and JC), Bacchic Christianity (XI-XII century, before and after JC), JC Christianity (XII-XVI century) and its subsequent mutations into Orthodox Christianity, the Catholicism, Islam, Buddhism, and so on.

According to Fomenko we know strictly NOTHING about the events that predate the X century A. D.

St Augustin was prescient when he spoke unto us: "be wary of mathematicians, particularly when they speak the truth."

Something of a disappointment.......2005-09-09

After having read the first volume of this expected series of 7 volumes I was triggered by the thesis of these authors that ancient Greek and Roman history did in fact take place in the Middle Ages. So I started studying medieval history of the Middle East - also known as Islamic history - to find out if the opponents of the ancient Greeks and Romans - the Acheamenid Persians, Sassanids, Scythians, Egyptians, etc. - also have their duplicates in medieval history. My search was disappointing: none of the many medieval Islamic dynasties seemed to correspond to the ancient middle eastern rulers.

However, I did find a close correspondence between Herodotus' Persian kings and medieval events:

- the defeat and capture of an Anatolian king - the Lydian Croesus - by the Persian conqueror Cyrus is identical to the defeat and capture of another Anatolian king - sultan Bayezid - by the Asian/Mongol conqueror Tamerlane;
- the Persian conquest of Egypt by the cruel tyrant Cambyses reds almost exactly as the Ottoman conquest of Egypt by Selim the Grim (note the nickname!);
- Darius the Lawgiver of the Persian Empire looks very much alike to Sulayman the Magnificent, the Lawgiver in Islamic history;
- Xerxes, whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by the Greeks at the naval battle of Salamis, looks like Selim II (the Sot) whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by a Spanish-Italian alliance at the naval battle of Lepanto.

I should have expected Fomenko et al. to arrive at similar conclusions, however, they claim that the Persian kings are the alter egos of the Angevin kings of Sicily whose biographies do not contain the exploits of the Persian kings.

The similiarities I indicate lead to the conclusion that Herodotus must have written his Histories at the close of the 16th century. But this is extremely late, given that Herodotus is "the Father of History", so therefore all other "ancient" histories must have been fabricated even later. Yet, the founders of modern chronology - Scaliger and Petavius - laid their foundations also at the close of the 16th century and had the full corpus of ancient histories already at their disposal.

It seems to me that Fomenko has to address these inconsistencies, maybe in the forthcoming 5 volumes?

Another critique of their book is that the correspondencies between different rulers are often based on a superficial comparison of the biographies; upon a more thorough comparison many details appear that do not correspond at all.

Finally, the authors rely heavily on the works of Gregorovius (1821-1891!!) - his medieval histories of Rome and Athens - as the source of medieval history; these works are - at least in the West - hoplessly outdated and have been superceded by more up-to-date works (for instance, Julius Norwich's trilogy on Byzantine history is not even cited).

Romulus courts Helen, Paris founds Rome, Moses goes to Troy.........2005-07-30

If you agree with Fomenko that Roman chronology is basically the foundation of the entire edifice of global chronology; you would also certainly agree that despite its numerous gaps and inconsistencies, Roman history is the best-documented field of ancient history, and thus a reference scale. But how well is the actual date of the Eternal City's foundation known?

Firstly, Rome is supposed to have been founded by the Trojans who had to flee after the fall of Troy. Some claim Rome to have been founded by Aeneas and Ulysses shortly after Troy had fallen; others are of the opinion that there was an entire dynasty that ruled for 500 years between the fall of Troy and the foundation of Rome.

Well, that's just an innocent 500 years long misunderstanding compared with what heretic Fomenko says, asserts, proves in his second volume: Second Roman Empire, Third Roman Empire, Biblical Kingdom of Israel, Biblical Kingdom of Judah, Holy Roman Empire are stories about basically same events, written from different points of view at different times. The underlying events have actually taken place during xii-xv cy. These histories have been written and perfected by multitude of highly talented humanist and clerical writers of xiii-xvi cy disguised as "ancients" with glorious names like Homer, Pluto, Thucydides etc..Chronology 2.0 beta..

Historians are kindly invited to report the bugs.

Average customer rating:

'Never Despair while Brave Men Remain with the Colors'
A Well Written Account with Fresh Insight
Totally X-Rated
Napoleon's fatal march
dont believe the bad press, read this book

Moscow 1812: Napoleon's Fatal March
Adam Zamoyski
Manufacturer: HarperCollins
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

ASIN: 0061075582
Release Date: 2004-08-03

Book Description

Napoleon's invasion of Russia and his ensuing terrible retreat from Moscow played out as military epic and human tragedy on a colossal scale -- history's first example of total war. The story begins in 1811, when Napoleon dominated nearly all of Europe, succeeding in his aim to reign over the civilized world like a modern-day Charlemagne. Part of his bid for supremacy involved destroying Britain through a continental blockade, but the plan was stymied when Russia's Tsar Alexander refused to comply. So he set out to teach the Tsar a lesson by intimidation and force. What followed was a deadly battle that would change the fate of modern Europe.

By invading Russia in 1812, Napoleon was upping the ante as never before. Once he sent his vast army eastward, there was no turning back: he was sucked farther and farther into the one territory he could not conquer. Trudging through a brutal climate in hostile lands, his men marched on toward distant Moscow. But this only galvanized the Russians, who finally made a stand at the gates of the city. The ensuing outbreak was a slaughter the likes of which would not be seen again until the first day of the Somme more than a century later.

What remained of Napoleon's army now had to endure a miserable retreat across the wintry wastes of Russia, while his enemies aligned against him. This turned out to be a momentous turning point: not only the beginning of the end for Napoleon's empire, but the rise of Russia's influence in world affairs. It also gave birth to Napoleon's superhuman legend -- the myth of greatness in failure that would inspire the Romantic poets as well as future leaders to defy fate as he had done.

In this gripping, authoritative account, Adam Zamoyski has drawn on the latest Russian research, as well as a vast pool of firsthand accounts in French, Russian, German, Polish, and Italian, to paint a vivid picture of the experiences of soldiers and civilians on both sides of the conflict. He shows how the relationship between Napoleon and Tsar Alexander came to distort their alliance and bring about a war that neither man wanted. Dramatic, insightful, and enormously absorbing, Moscow 1812 is a masterful work of history.

Customer Reviews:

'Never Despair while Brave Men Remain with the Colors'.......2007-07-24

The Russian campaign is definitely the most difficult to write about. In this volume, the author presents a highly readable account of that great campaign that is an valuable addition to the literature of the campaign, but it isn't a stand-alone account of the Russian campaign, and it isn't without its flaws.

Overall, the author has demonstrated a more-than-adequate grasp of the poltical problems facing the belligerents in 1812. The causes of the war are evenly handled, and the sole blame is not laid at the door of the French, or at Napoleon's. That being said, the author has not painted an accurate picture of either Napoleon or Alexander. Napoleon's character is relegated to the 'traditional' view of him being driven 'by a lust for power and domination over others' as well, among other things 'having no sense of justice' (which is a gratuitous and ludicrous statement, Napoleon formulating and giving France and the Empire the Code Napoleon among other civil reforms). It is only recently that an accurate picture of Napoleon's character has been developed by historians and it is a shame that work wasn't taken advantage of here.

On the other hand it appears that Alexander is given the benefit of the doubt at almost every turn, even though he was a particide, an Asian autocrat, who wielded his unquestioned power in Russia, was a treacherous ally, and one who refused to support the alliance he made with Napoleon in 1807. He was slippery, double-dealing, and a coward who deftly used intrigue, deception, and treason to his benefit. He tried to be a soldier, and was not, interfering rather than helping his generals in the field. His chosen advisors, his 'aides-de-camp' were carpet knights and not soldiers, who helped with this interference. He fought the Turks and the Swedes, as well as the French, and it is probably that his lauded stance of not negotiating with Napoleon in 1812 until there were no French on Russian soil was because he feared being assassinated by those same nobles that murdered his father.

There are other errors in the book. The author labels Tilsit a triumph for the Tsar, whcih is a fantastically inaccurate statement; states that the battle of Aspern-Essling in 1809 were 'twin battles' when they were not (it was one action, which the Austrians won-the first battlefield victory over Napoleon since 1796-it is known as Aspern to the Austrians and Essling to the French, hence the hyphenated use of both names by many historians); and War and Peace is mentioned as a quasi-reference for the period, which is a gross error.

The author inaccurately states that the Russian artillery arm was probably the best in the world in 1812, which cannot be supported by any substantive reference. The French artillery arm had been recognized as Europe's best since 1789 and it had not been eclipsed by any other European artillery system since. The Austrian and British artillery arms were also superior to the Russian artillery. The Russian artillery officers were poorly trained and educated, and the 'new' equipment of the 1805 System were copies of Prussian and Austrian material from the 1740s and 1750s. Further, the manner in which Russian artillery was commanded and employed was inferior to French artillery doctrine and this was remarked upon by various Russian artillerymen, notably Yermelov, Sievers, and Kutusaiv.

The author also stated that the French transport corps was 'le train.' Actually, there were at least two different types of 'train' in the French service. The train des equipages (supply train) is the organization to which he is referring. There was also a train d'artillerie which was responsible for hauling the artillery equipment. there was also a smaller engineer train to boot.

While some of the military sections of the book are substandard and carelessly done, the overall impact of the volume is a credit to the author. While many other authors and historians have misinterpreted or left out key factors of the campaign, this author does not. He correctly labels the Russian generals and high command for what it is-in short a mess. Further, the Battle of the Berezina is analysed correctly in that it was a decisive victory for the French. Further, the crucial Battle of Maloyaroslavets is labeled a French victory. The issue with the most impact, however, is that the author correctly states the heavy losses the Russians incurred during the campaign which many overlook, focusing on the disaster that befell the Grande Armee. Russian losses, for the same causes, the cold and exposure, are clearly brought to the forefront of the narrative.

If used with caution in the areas outlined above this is an excellent narrative of the Russian campaign. It is highly recommended and should be on everyone's bookshelf who is interested in the Napoleonic period in general and the Russian campaign in particular. I am looking very much forward to the author's next effort.

A Well Written Account with Fresh Insight.......2007-07-17

The history of Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812 has been told many times before so readers might be tempted to shrug their shoulders at the sight of another book on this subject. Don't. Adam Zamoyski's Moscow 1812: Napoleon's Fatal March is a well-written and insightful look at the French march to and from Moscow. The value added component of this book derives from the author's research into post-Soviet archives which has yielded some fresh perspectives on Marshal Kutuzov, Tsar Alexander and the other Russian commanders, as well as some Italian and Polish first-person accounts that haven't made it into earlier works. As military history, Zamoyski does a good job putting the events together into a coherent pattern and there are plenty of sketch maps to support tactical descriptions, although strictly speaking the author does not delve into the level of military detail that one might find in other books, particularly about the Battle of Borodino. Overall, this is a fine work and I was impressed by the level of research that went into it and the author's ability to turn it into a page-turning and gripping account.

Moscow 1812 is divided into 25 chapters, which flow chronologically and each of which covers a thematically-driven slice of the campaign, such as Kutuzov's assumption of command. The volume includes a total of 23 sketch maps, a large number of illustrations, lengthy endnotes, a robust bibliography and an efficient index. The author writes this book for a general audience but with the assumption that even general readers will have some knowledge of this campaign, albeit based on sources such as Tolstoy's War and Peace. Zamoyski is also fairly even-handed in establishing his perspective, favoring neither the Napoleon-centric approach or a chauvinistic Russian defense of the Motherland. Instead, the reader is presented with a fairly objective campaign narrative, told partly through first-person accounts, with only the faintest hint of Greek Tragedy.

Unusually, Zamoyski sees the Russians as much to blame for the war as the French. While Napoleon incited Russia by the creation of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, the author notes that Tsar Alexander was clearly preparing for offensive action in conjunction with Prussia prior to the French invasion. Russian aggressiveness and a desire for revenge after the Treaty of Tilsit were major factors in the road to war. Throughout the campaign, Napoleon's Grande Armée had qualitative advantages that enabled its soldiers to persevere under the most adverse conditions. Yet French logistic planning was incredibly poor and collapsed almost immediately upon crossing the border. Other than possessing very good artillery and more secure logistics, the Russian army was outclassed by the French in almost every other category. Clearly the greatest French disadvantage - and one that is difficult for historians to explain - was that Napoleon entered Russia with only a very hazy plan of campaign to defeat the Russian border armies, but little thought beyond that.

Moscow 1812 is a far more frank and blunt account than most others on this subject, with the full misery of the soldier's conditions conveyed in their own words. Due to lack of water, one French soldier recounts drinking horse's urine out of ruts in the road. There are also very graphic descriptions of battle and non-battle conditions (e.g. frostbite) that gives the reader a much better sense of the hardships endured by the common soldier than is often the case. The author describes how, "some [soldiers] became so disoriented by the cold that they would walk drunkenly straight into a fire and stand in it with their bare feet..." There is also considerable swearing and soldier's language in this account, which is refreshingly honest compared to other more sanitized accounts. However, the author is not always adept at relaying the critical elements of tactical combat - in his account of Borodino for example, he fails to appreciate the Russian mistake in leaving so much of their artillery in reserve at the start. When the Russian artillery commander was killed early in the battle, most of his guns sat out the day unused. The author sees Borodino as a French victory with the Russian army rendered combat ineffective, whereas author historians tend to view it as the beginning of the unraveling of the Grande Armée due to debilitating losses.

The author also presents several non-standard perspectives on the campaign, beginning with his description of how Moscow was not totally destroyed by fire and that the French were able to salvage enough food and supplies to partly rebuild their strength - he writes that the Grande Armée was "in fine fettle" at the beginning of the retreat. Nor were all the French units unprepared for winter, since a few French and Polish units did prepare for winter operations and they came through the retreat much better than others. Italian troops also are singled out for their exceptional combat performance in Russia - particularly at the Battle of Maloyaroslavets - while German troops performed poorly.
Napoleon appears in poor form throughout much of this account, unable to fathom the Russian reason for continuing to fight or the danger posed by their climate to his army. Plagued by indecisiveness and periods of torpor, Napoleon seems to drift along to Moscow on inertia and hope, with only occasional bursts of energy displayed during moments of supreme crisis. Yet in the midst of one the greatest crises in military history - the retreat from Moscow - the French troops remained loyal to their emperor. The author notes that, "even when taken prisoner, the soldiers of the Grande Armée refused to say a word against Napoleon." As for `why' this catastrophe occurred, the author does not spend a great deal of effort seeking answers but points to miscalculation and hubris by Napoleon as the likely culprits.

Totally X-Rated.......2007-03-30

Adam Zamoyski truly brings to life the entire campaign of Napoleon's invasion of Russia. The style of writing is so captivating and truly X-Rated in many areas (so vivid and gruesome). Gives very good account of how Napoleon can amass so a huge army only to loose almost 90% of it to war, starvation, summer heat (at first) and to "General Frost" (at last)..... How could a man of Napoleon's talent succumb to so many bad decisions in war? Read on! Such a great read indeed!

Napoleon's fatal march.......2007-03-07

This is a thorough book about Napoleon's invasion of Russia in 1812. The battles of Borodino and other battles are vividly described. Mr Zomoyski also excellently describes the horrible French retreat. It's worth reading!

dont believe the bad press, read this book.......2007-02-02

This is a wonderful book. Contrary to some of the other reviews, Zamoyski's scholarship is sound in every respect. Although this story had been told in English, French, German and Russian many times before, this synthesis adds value. Those who have read other accounts of this disastrous campaign are encouraged not to let their knowledge of the topic keep them from the new insights offered in this book.

Zamoyski does a masterful job of showing the reader how the myths of this campaign came to be--General Winter, the almost mystical celebration of the Russian Spirit, the hubris of Napoleon--and then provides rare insight into the rest of the story. Zamoyski relies on a broad array of previous scholarship, including extensive use of memoirs, as well as new sources. His account of the retreat is perhaps the best that exists in English today.

The collapse of the French army in this account is more the result of a complex of factors whose origin lay not in the brutal and bitter Russian Winter--but rather in serious military and logisitic miscaluculations by Napoleon prior to and during the campaign. In one sense, this campaign reflects Napoleon's generalship at its worst, and in a situation where he needed his best effort most. Nevertheless, from the first pages one feels that one is reading about a doomed army as a litany of errors and mistakes begin their dark parade toward Moscow and then back again.

This book is not for the squeamish. The horrors of the retreat are simply unimaginable. Recent archealogical evidence in Lithuania supports Zamoyski's speculation that the remains of the Grand Armee literally had a sort of group nervous breakdown around Vilna that ensured the death of many thousands who seem to have made it mirculously out of Russia...only to die in the first place they thought themselves at last safe from the cossacks and the winter. A great read and great prose, this book is recommended for the widest possible audience.

Assault on Moscow 1941: The Offensive, the Battle, the Set-Back

Average customer rating:

Propaganda Disguised as History

Assault on Moscow 1941: The Offensive, the Battle, the Set-Back
Werner Haupt
Manufacturer: Schiffer Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books

Russia | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0764301276

Book Description

Detailed unit operations and individual accounts make for absorbing reading, and a rare chance for the reader to examine an early, yet very important, Russian front battle., over 140 b/w and color photographs, 6" x 9"

Customer Reviews:

Propaganda Disguised as History.......2002-04-18

Assault on Moscow 1941 was published in Germany in 1986 and then translated into English ten years later. Superficially, the book is attractive and appears loaded with interesting photographs, maps and appendices. However readers should regard Werner Haupt's account with a large grain of salt, since much of this so-called "history" is little more than re-packaged wartime propaganda. Readers familiar with Paul Carrell's excellent book Hitler Moves East will find Haupt's account far inferior. Furthermore the sterile nature of this account - which concerns itself primarily with the high-level activities of armies, corps and divisions - will not appeal to most readers.

Assault on Moscow 1941 consists of 12 chapters, beginning with two introductory sections that cover operations in the ArmeeGruppe Center sector in June-August 1941. Several more chapters cover the evolving debate over strategic priorities in Berlin and the genesis of the "Typhoon" plan to seize Moscow. The actual German offensive is covered in six chapters totaling about 90 pages. The initial Soviet counterattacks in December 1941 are covered in only one chapter. Although Haupt occasionally refers to Soviet units or commanders, the perspective of this book is unapologetically German. At the end of the book, there are 13 appendices that cover orders of battle, campaign chronology and command structures. However a huge defect in this book that demolishes its historical value is the lack of any footnotes, bibliography or index. While the author integrates eyewitness accounts and chunks of official documents into the text, he fails to cite their source.

The lack of documentation is particularly damaging because so much of the "facts" presented are suspect or outright exaggerations. Haupt claims that the German ArmeeGruppe Center suffered 103,600 casualties in December 1941 when in fact, total German casualties in the USSR in December 1941 were about 77,850. Haupt's claims that the Germans lost 4,241 tanks and 5,100 aircraft in the Moscow offensive are absurd - the actual numbers were about 1,240 tanks in this period and 2,090 aircraft for the first six months of the campaign. Indeed, Haupt's statistics frequently appear to be cut from whole cloth. Haupt also has a tendency to pass along "trench rumors" as fact, such as his assertion that the German 82nd Infantry Regiment had 800 of its men freeze to death in one night! In some cases, Haupt is just plain wrong; he asserts that in January 1942, there was "only one [German general] to die a soldiers death in these turbulent weeks was Major General Berthold [commander of the 31st Infantry Division]." In fact, German records indicate that Berthold survived the winter and was killed on April 14, 1942. In another case, Haupt claims that General von Cochenhausen of the 134th Division committed suicide; German records indicate that it was another commander of the 134th in 1944 who committed suicide - wrong guy, wrong year! Finally, Haupt's photographs - while interesting - appear ripped from the pages of the German wartime propaganda magazine Signal. One photograph shows a German soldier plowing a field with Russian peasants and Haupt's text asserts that "simple" Russians viewed the German soldiers as liberators. No mention of German atrocities or repression measures. Other photographs are used to suggest that Germany was on a "liberating" mission in Russia.

Haupt does use many sketch maps to support his narrative, but most appear to have been drawn by a 3-year old with a broken crayon. As for the campaign narrative, it is a flat summary of high-level operational movements, occasionally sprinkled with eyewitness accounts. Paul Carrell was able to deliver a pro-German account of Operation Typhoon that seemed to cover everything from ArmeeGruppe to company-level actions. Not here. Nor is their much information from the Russian side. Haupt does not even bother to mention the near-catastrophic Soviet losses in defending their capital; almost 52% of the defenders were casualties and Soviet armor was virtually annihilated. On the plus side, Haupt does make somewhat more mention of the German rear-area service troops than other accounts.

On the big issue - why did Typhoon fail - Haupt falls back on the old reliable German excuse: the weather. So it goes: if it hadn't been for the early mud and snow (i.e. bad luck), Germany would have won. Unfortunately, the facts speak otherwise. While bad weather did have a major influence on the operation, it was not the deciding factor. Instead, it was German logistical deficiencies that crippled Typhoon before the bad weather even started, depriving the front-line troops of ammunition, fuel, spare parts and replacements. Other sources mention that most German units had received virtually no replacements prior to Typhoon and started the offensive 35% under strength. Germany was producing tanks and ammunition, but due to fouled-up rail lines very little was reaching the front. As Haupt notes, the German High Command ordered the issuing of cold weather gear in July 1941 but this vital equipment only began to reach the front in December 1941, and then only a trickle. Amazingly, the nation that could build the first jet fighters and ballistic missiles could not deliver adequate quantities of gloves, jackets and warm boots to its front-line troops. Simply put, the German army was very poor at combat sustainment operations, cold weather or not. Tying in with logistical weakness, the Germans attacked Moscow on too broad a front and with too many armies (6). Had the Germans concentrated their meager assets, they might have been able to maintain an advance with three better-supplied armies, while maintaining a sizeable reserve to deal with Soviet counterattacks. The assertion that bad weather stopped the German army conveniently ignores the self-inflicted wounds that led to their first defeat.

Average customer rating:

Pretty detail account of the campaign.

Outstanding

War history

Rich in irrelevent details

An OK book, but draw your own conclusions

Moscow 1941: Hitler's First Defeat (Campaign)
Robert Forczyk
Manufacturer: Osprey Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Japan | Asia | History | Subjects | Books
General | Military | History | Subjects | Books
General | World War II | Military | History | Subjects | Books
Russia | History | Subjects | Books
General | Germany | Europe | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Inch'on 1950: The last great amphibious assault (Campaign)

Iraq 1941: The battles for Basra, Habbaniya, Fallujah and Baghdad (Campaign)

Leyte Gulf 1944 (Campaign)

Stalingrad 1942 (Campaign)

Operation Barbarossa 1941 (2): Army Group North (Campaign)

ASIN: 184603017X
Release Date: 2006-04-25

Book Description

In late September 1941 the war in the east was approaching a climax. Since the beginning of the German invasion on 22 June 1941, Soviet forces had suffered the staggering loss of over 2 million troops. Operation Typhoon began and in the first week of the offensive, the three German panzer armies surrounded virtually the bulk of the Soviet forces barring the way to Moscow. This title details the dramatic battle that took place right up to the suburbs of Moscow itself, and the defeat which altered Hitler's strategic management of the war.

Customer Reviews:

Pretty detail account of the campaign........2007-03-24

Reading Robert Forczyk's Moscow 1941 proves to be quite an adventure. I found the book to be quite detail for an Osprey Campaign series and it proves to be well written and researched. As detail as the book may be, its written clearly enough that it should provide almost anyone a pretty good introduction to this campaign.

The maps, illustrations and photos included in this book proves to be pretty good. There are a lot of details on the maps, perhaps too much although that can be bit subjective. I enjoyed the maps myself but I was told by others that it was too crammed.

The book provides a pretty good understanding of the campaign, the author provides a balance view and do away with many misrepresentations and legends of the campaign. I am pleased that the many of the point of views the author take on the campaign reflects my own.

Only real error I spotted was when the author mistaken a Panzer IVD at Aberdeen Proving Grounds for Panzer IVE, a minor mishap. I also thought maybe he was too hard on General Heinz Gudrian considering the state of his forces prior to Typhoon.

Overall, a pretty good book that should be read by anyone interested in the Russian front of World War II. One of the better Osprey Campaign books written.

Outstanding.......2007-02-23

There are a lot of fascinating What Ifs about World War II -what if Hitler had not pulled up his panzers before Dunkirk, if the Luftwaffe had not switched bombing from airfields to London in the Battle of Britain, if the U.S. carriers had been caught at Pearl Harbor, if the German's had deployed ME-262 jets in 1943, if the Germans had repulsed the allies at Normandy, etc? But it wasn't until I read R.H.S. Stolfi's book, Hitler's Panzer's East, that I realized that the only What If in World War II that matters was on the eastern front in 1941. The great historian Paul Johnson wrote in Modern Times of Barbarossa "Yet it was a gamble that might have succeeded." Had the Germans knocked the Soviet Union out of the war in 1941, and they came frightening close, the world as we know it would have been much different, and not for the better.

I've read Seaton's Battle for Moscow, Glantz's Barbarossa, Erickson's Road to Stalingrad, etc. but while they tell what happened, I wasn't satisfied as far as why it happened. And the maps were inadequate in all of them. It's frustrating when a book says this town was taken or that river crossed and you have no idea where it is. When I saw that Dr. Robert Forczyk - whose numerous book reviews I have greatly enjoyed - had written a book on the Moscow 1941 campaign, I had to have it! The book did not disappoint.

Right off the bat, Dr. Forczyk addresses what I believe is was the turning point of World War II: If in August 1941, had the Germans gone straight for Moscow, could they have taken it and gone on to win the war in the east, thereby assuring domination of the continent? Forczyk says no; the Germans had to clean up their southern flank before they could march on Moscow.

But the majority of the book covers what actually happened in Operation Typhoon, the German offensive on the central front that began in early October and ran until early December. Forczyk has done for Operation Typhoon what the book "Shattered Sword" did for the Battle of Midway; i.e., dispel numerous commonly held beliefs about the campaign. Weather, logistics, force size and readiness on both sides, T-34 tanks, Siberians, the Luftwaffe, performance of the German generals -all are addressed. You will understand why the offensive failed after reading this book.

This is the first Eastern Front book I have ever read that has decent maps showing every town, river and road mentioned in the text. This book is worth buying for the maps alone. It is also extremely well-written. I enjoyed the photos, none of which I had never seen before.

I'd love to see Dr. Forczyk write a full-length book on Barbarossa, with special emphasis on what if the Germans had gone for Moscow in August instead of October. The consensus seems to be they could have taken it, but would that have been decisive? Also, if the Germans had not made the mistakes they did in Typhoon, and captured Moscow, would it have been decisive?

To summarize, this book is a must-have for anyone interested in the WWII Eastern Front.

War history.......2007-01-11

I thought I was getting another book by the same title; an interesting account of life in Moscow during the war. Instead this is a rather pedantic and impersonal account of troop movements. Oops.

Rich in irrelevent details.......2006-10-27

This is not the worst book in millitary history I've read but comes pretty close. It is essentially a mechanical and unimaginative narration of facts in chronological order. It has details such as; a particular German division had this many killed and this many injured during this particular battle or 4 of a particular kind of Russian machine guns was distributed to each infantry divison...etc. All of these trivial facts have probably been painstakingly researched and verified and are accurate. There are many excellent high quality detailed color maps of battle fields.

But the most bizzare aspect of this book is that mixed in with all the minute insignificant details are fantastic startegic observations that flies in the face of convential beliefs (e.g. Hitler's military decisions were superior to his professional commanders; even if it was summer then Hitler would still have been defeated due to logistic problems as weather was just a minor contributing factor to German defeat...etc.). But a careful reading of the text shows that author has no real evidence to support his unorthodox grand observations. One suspects that the mass of detail is produced to hide author's lack of evidence in big observations.

An OK book, but draw your own conclusions.......2006-10-22

I can't fully agree with the glowing reviews which other readers have given this book. Yes, the author does dispel some misconceptions about `Operation Typhoon' and the subsequent Soviet counter-offensive - regards the weather, Soviet reinforcements etc.

However, his description of Hitler's strategy as 'militarily sound' in the introduction coupled with his strong criticism of the operational decisions taken by some of the German generals leads me to question the author's judgement.

There is also one GLEARING OMISSION in the author's account - namely Hitler's strict order that NO GERMAN SOLDIER was to enter the Soviet capital - the city was instead to be besieged and then literally raised to the ground by aerial/artillery bombardment.

I think this is an important (and hardly ever discussed) reason why the Wehrmacht did not take Moscow in 1941!!!

From Moscow to Berlin: Marshall Zhukov's Greatest Battles (War & Warriors Ser.)

Average customer rating:

From Moscow to Berlin: Marshall Zhukov's Greatest Battles (War & Warriors Ser.)
Georgi K. Zhukov
Manufacturer: Noontide Pr
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Lost Victories: The War Memoirs of Hitler's Most Brilliant General

ASIN: 0939482347

Defense of Moscow (Ballantines Illustrated History of World War II, Battle Book No. 13)

Average customer rating:

A concise and short book about Moscow's battle

Defense of Moscow (Ballantines Illustrated History of World War II, Battle Book No. 13)
Geoffrey Jukes
Manufacturer: Ballantine Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
ASIN: B000B6QPQ6

Customer Reviews:

A concise and short book about Moscow's battle.......2007-06-23

I read this book, here in Brazil.This book is short, easy to read , concise, has many photos(all black & white) and is mainly correct.Failures of this book are small.One failure are the weak maps the second failure is the lack of informations released, decades after this book to be published.As an introduction about this subject, this is a good choice.If you want details and new informations, please choose another book, about this same subject.

Average customer rating:

Excellent account from the German pov.
A masterly account
Historically Obsolete
The good and the bad ...
Col. Seaton calls a spade a spade

The Battle for Moscow
Albert Seaton
Manufacturer: Book Sales
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0785814043

Book Description

The course of human civilization has turned on the outcome of a select few climactic battles throughout history, but never more so than when Stalin's enigmatic Soviet Union desperately rallied its resources to stave off Hitler's armies in the Battle for Moscow. From the drama in the command posts to the plight of the infantry and armor in the mud and snow, Seaton illuminates the titanic struggle that was the pivotal battle of WWII.

Customer Reviews:

Excellent account from the German pov........2007-07-28

This is an excellent account of the crucial battle of WW II but mostly, perhaps owing to the time's lack of good Soviet data, from the German pov. A good balance to Seaton is Alexander Werth's terrific "Russia at War 1941-45" which has an equally fine description of the battle mostly from the Russian view by a Russian-born British correspondent/historian who was in Moscow in '41. In any case, it's clear the world owes the brave Russian soldier an incredible debt for stopping one of the world's most evil maniacs while having to survive life under another.

A masterly account.......2004-08-08

In his days Albert Seaton was our finest military historian. He never disappointed the reader. The interested reader could always look forward to his next publication with much eagerness. Sadly, Albert Seaton is unlikely to publish any more books. That is our loss.

"The Battle for Moscow" was first released in 1971, shortly following his masterpiece "The Russo-German War, 1941-45." In this regard "The Battle for Moscow" can be seen as a supplement to the former book. Just by reading "The Russo-German War" it is easy to understand why he would want to devote a whole book to the titanic struggle at the gates of Moscow.
Very readable, written in a very engaging way, exciting as a thriller, this is a riveting story. Even better, the account is also well-researched, well-structured, methodical, and sensitive. Through this book you will get a real understanding of the nature of the battle.

The previous reviewer Dwight gets it all wrong. He has obviously not even read the book. Perhaps he don't like the fact that Albert Seaton doesn't devote 100 % of his attention to the Soviets, but tries to give the to opposite sides as equal attention as the available sources. Mind you, not all readers of eastern front books are Sovietologists.
I will advice the interested reader to disregard his advices about this book. It is a case of very ill-informed and biased criticism. Still, it is simply outragous to state that "the older books should be updated or else be allowed to fall out of print since they are historically obsolete." Any reader with an insight into the historiography would resent such an assertion.

By all means read the books by Colonel Glantz and the late Professor Erickson, but please note that their books are far from definitive. Be aware of the fact that most of their research is based on Russian secondary sources rather than archival research. Most of the material in Russian archives remains out of reach for researchers, contrary to what is popularly believed. Also, their accounts of the battle for Moscow is not of the same standards as those by Albert Seaton. They neglects the German side as well.

Albert Seaton's masterly account still stands firmly on its own feet, 33 years on. It is likely to remain so for decades to come. "The Battle for Moscow" is a must for anyone interested in the war between Germany and the Soviet Union.

If Albert Seatons book should stimulate you to further reading on the Battle for Moscow, I will in particular recommend "Moscow to Stalingrad" by Earl F. Ziemke, "Disaster at Moscow: Von Bock's Campaigns 1941-1942" by Alfred W. Turney, and "Moscow: The Turning Point" by Klaus Reinhardt.

Historically Obsolete.......2004-01-03

This review was written on Jan 2, 2004. I had been given the hardbound "Battle for Moscow" as a 2003 Christmas present, and, upon finshing the book,wished to share my impressions of it with anyone out there who might be considering buying/reading this book. I am a novice to the study of WWII, and am interested particularly in the Eastern Front. I have read several books in the last year on this topic, as well as having skimmed others. I hope sometime to get around to more accounts by other authors (eg. Ziemke, Erickson, Winston Churchill, Clark, Zhukov, Guderian at al).

I have read the following:

David Glantz

"The Battle of Kursk",
"The Soviet Partisan Movement",
"When Titans Clashed",
"Zhukov's Greatest Defeat",
"Barbarossa 1941",
"Stumbling Colossus",

Donald Sommerville

"World War II day by Day"

John Erickson,

"Road to Stalingrad"

I also read what I thought was an excellent 30+ chapter overall account of WWII online, but the site has gone down.

Last summer, from my local library, I signed out Seaton's "The Russo-German War". Unfortunately, I could not bring myself to read past the first few chapters because it was so heavily cast from the Nazi viewpoint. If a historical treatise is one-sided then this bias should be reflected in the title and the promotional descriptions - Seaton's book should be retitled "The Russo-German War From the German Perspective". With an honest title I would have known what to expect when I opened the book. I got the impression from Seaton, however, that he was presenting his version as a balanced, neutral historical document. The disappointing result was that I often found myself in an imaginary argument with the author as I read the book. I had to shield myself from a somewhat one sided viewpoint which could be considered at best from the German viewpoint compiled with German data, and at the worst sympathetic with the German side. Interestingly, just enough material from the Soviet vantage was given so as to give the unsuspecting reader the illusion of balance.
I bore exactly the same reservations about "Battle for Moscow" as I had regarding "The Russo-German War". The book alternated between descriptions of what the Germans were doing, and descriptions of what the Russians were doing. Sounds balanced, right? No, it wasn't, because the quantity and quality of the descriptions were not even, and anyone can see it if they have read the book. This book should have been titled "Operation Typhoon - 70% from the German viewpoint, 30% from the Russian viewpoint".

Seaton's bias was brought into sharp relief by his "what if" conjectoring. I find it irritating that so often we in the West wishfully ask "what if" questions which would have resulted in the Nazi side faring better. Where does this come from? Why ask such questions? One could just as well ask "what if" questions which would have resulted in the Soviet side faring better. For example, if the Soviets had not made certain mistakes, maybe they would have liberated France before June 1944, resulting in a completely Soviet Western Europe. There are many possible "what ifs", but they reveal more about the our own biases than they shed light on what actually happened. By the way, I don't wish the Soviets had taken over France, it was just an example.

I find that David Glantz's books are a very good remedy to the distortion found in books like "Battle For Moscow". Yes, Glantz's accounts are heavily written from the Russian archives, but he is very up front about where he is coming from. If you examine his book titles and the promotional descriptions, you will be given an honest preview of what is in the book.

In defense of Seaton and others, it is true that when "Battle For Moscow" was first published less historical data were available from Russia compared to that from Germany. This problem has been overcome since 1989, however, therefore the older books should be updated or else be allowed to fall out of print since they are historically obsolete.

My advice - don't buy this book - read Erickson and Glantz instead. A good start would be David Glantz's "When Titans Clashed".

The good and the bad ..........2002-06-05

The Good: Concise and accurate one volume account of Operations Barbarossa and Typhoon from their start until the Soviet winter counterattck in February of 42. Seaton, as mentioned in a previous review, minces no words in expressing how he feels about the blunders of both the German and Soviet stratgists.

The Bad: Seaton uses a convoluted grammatical style. The book reads in many parts like a German translation. The book is full of run on sentences. Choice stylistic tidbits like, "Von Bock, overbearing with both superiors and subordinates, was not, however, inhibited from severly restricting the freedom of his own army commanders, even to the extent of meddling with matters which were scarcely his concern (p27)", tax the nerves after a while.

Ugly: One of my pet peeves with military history books is that they should contain at least one good map that permit the reader to follow the action described in the text. All of Seaton's maps are pretty lousy. They seem hand drawn and are devoid of any detail. His operational maps are a mish mash of arrows and dots that somewhat resemble the physical location where the combat occured.

Col. Seaton calls a spade a spade.......2000-01-31

What made this study so enjoyable for me was Col. Seaton's strong opinions about the performances of the commanders and leaders. The man is more than willing to call a spade a spade, and he presents the facts to back up his judgments. Well written and a pleasure to read, it reminds me somewhat of Ziemke's style. Unlike many books on the Russian Front, the few maps are more than adequate and include nearly all the towns mentioned in the text.

Seaton's "Russo-German War" is next on my reading list.

Average customer rating:

unhistoric

An Unlikeyl Alternative with little regard to the facts.

If the books is called "The Moscow Option"...

had trouble suspending disbelief

Set the stage for the star and the sequel.

The Moscow Option
David Downing
Manufacturer: Greenhill Books
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books
Strategy | Military | History | Subjects | Books
General | World War II | Military | History | Subjects | Books
Russia | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Disaster at D-Day: The Germans Defeat the Allies,June 1944 (Greenhill Military Paperbacks)

Invasion: The Alternate History of the German Invasion of England, July 1940

Hitler Options (Greenhill Military Paperbacks.)

1945: A Novel

Hitler Triumphant: Alternate Decisions of World War II

ASIN: 185367463X

Book Description

This provocative alternate history looks at World War II from a new angle - what might have happened had the Germans taken Moscow in 1941. Based on authentic history and real possibilities, this book plays out the dramatic consequences of opportunities taken and examines the grotesque possibilities of a Third Reich triumphant. On September 30th, 1941, the Germans fight their way into the ruins of Moscow, and the Soviet Union collapses. Although Russian resistance continues, German ambition multiplies after this signal victory and offensives are launched in Africa, the Mediterranean and the Middle East. Hitler's armies, assured of success, make their leader's dreams reality, and Allied hopes of victory seem to be hopelessly doomed. David Downing's writing is fluid and eminently believable, as he blends actual events with the intriguing possibilities of alternate history. The Moscow Option is a chilling reminder that the course of World War II might easily have run very differently.

Customer Reviews:

unhistoric.......2005-05-24

my regret with this book is the fact that it doesn't explore really the OKH suggestion of august 1941 : in fact from the beggining ,downing is in the realm of fantasy .
he doesn't explore the real opérationnal okh project and his real consequences ; he write too much about pacific and middle east and too little about russia ( why The moscow option in the case ? ) and he try to write 13 month of alternate history : these book is more a novel and has nothing to do with history.
in my view : a bad investissement.

An Unlikeyl Alternative with little regard to the facts........2005-03-11

This book suggests a reasonable alternate history turning point, however, it expands on the basic idea with some wildly unreasonable conclusions. Supply problems vanish or are ignored.
The Germans get simply impossible airlift support from the German airforce during the winter of 1941-42. The ground movement of supply also apparently disregarded all of their real life problems that were a major reason that the German advance ground to a halt.
The German Army gave it's all to just advance to the gates of Moscow in 1941. 'The Moscow Option' book suddenly ignores the vast distances and the 'supply nightmares' that the real life Germans faced.
The German High Command 'wargamed' the invasion almost a year earlier and they 'knew' from that wargame that the German Army would have to stop about 300 miles into Russia because the needed supplies could not advance as fast as their troops.
A pause was needed about 300 miles from the initial 'jump off' point, the Germans suffered their first major defeat of the war at this '300 mile pause line' simply because they had just about completely run out of both fuel and ammo at the frontlines. Their tank forces were breaking down in frightening numbers. Tanks badly needed replacement engines, artillery rounds were strictly rationed and even small arms ammo was in short supply.
The Germans suddenly became perfect and the Russians become even worse than their real life performance. If you change history, please do not raise the performance level of one side to an impossible high level and also reduce the Russian side without any reasonable regard for the real life facts.

If the books is called "The Moscow Option"..........2004-11-08

...then why do we spend the majority of the book everywhere but the Eastern Front?

I won't deny or disparage the actions in the Pacific and the role of the British, but if a book is supposed to be about the German war in Russia, perhaps it would do well to spend some time in that setting.

Instead, we get exceptional detail regarding British actions in North Africa, followed by hour-by-hour reworkings of American actions in the Pacific - and then we get sweeping generalities regarding the German actions in Russia.

The premise and title of the book are largely sidelined, as if they are of secondary importance. Why?

In this case, don't judge a book neither by its cover, nor by the synopsis printed thereupon.

had trouble suspending disbelief.......2003-01-23

The premise behind The Moscow Option is to change two recorded events in WWII and speculate as to how these changes would have impacted the rest of the war. While I didn't have a problem with these two changes, they were plausible enough, I disagree with the author's speculated consequences on two points.

1. The Red Army had built up significant reserves and launched a counter-attack to throw the Germans back in several areas just as the attack on Moscow was called off. It seems to me that these reserves were ignored. I have made a study of the Eastern Front and cannot accept the casual dismissal of these forces by the author.

2. From what I have read about the Pacific War, including the very interesting speculation by Hector Bywater, the Japanese fleet simply could not have performed the missions proposed by the author in the latter part of the book.

If you are not that read up on either the European or Pacific theatres of WWII, this book may be of interest. For me, the assumptions were too thin for me to suspend disbelief.

Set the stage for the star and the sequel........2003-01-04

This book is incomplete and written to fullfil a minority fantasy. Huge forces and factors are almost ignored to set the stage for the Brit. 8th army,& Gen.M. so they can save the planet. Also it seems edited by a student with a spell checker and little knowledge of the other armies. I couldn't overlook the poor writing.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books