v. Manstein, "Lost Victories"

[Sgt AA]

A really good book, but in my copy the original chapter about Kursk is reduced to only a few pages. Anyone who has read the full chapter and was it interesting enough to go looking for another edition/publisher?

[Bannon DC]

Coincidentally, I just finished that chapter on the train tonight. You're right, there is virtually nothing there. The end notes mention it was replaced by an article that ran in the US Marines Gazette. They really made it as simple as possible for those leathernecks... 'this battle took place as far from the salt water as possible, it probably won't interest you.'

[Sgt AA]

I guess we both feel a little cheated then. Do we have to learn German and go to the original script then.

To me, it seems a bit unethical. Kursk is a central thing in the war in east and Mansteins perspectiv is interesting.

I do like the reading about the Crimean kampanj and about the fighting on the northern front in the early war.

[Andreas]

Can't help you with the Kursk chapter, but some general advice on the book.

Whatever you do, just don't take it as gospel. It is one man's perspective on the events, and that man happened to have strong opinions on them as they unfolded, which means that he is likely to be quite biased in many cases.

E.g. his version of the fighting on the Leningrad approaches is heavily criticised by the then 1a of Panzergruppe 4, von Beaulieu, in his book on those battles.

All the best

Andreas

[Redwolf]

You might want to start by saying how many chapters you have for anyone to be able to help you.

[Bannon DC]

Originally posted by Andreas:

...

Whatever you do, just don't take it as gospel. It is one man's perspective on the events, and that man happened to have strong opinions on them as they unfolded, which means that he is likely to be quite biased in many cases.

Bah! I know how to read a book!

But, this is one of those "must reads." All-in-all, I'm not really sitting on the edge of my seat though. I though Guderian's "Panzer Leader" was much better. The detail of the unit movements was much better. Guderian discussed his reasoning for the orders he gave. Manstein seems to focus more on his reasoning why his strategy would have been better if it had actually been followed in many case. He has a big ax to grind (and for good reason!).

It seems to be an odd job of editing for the American/English version to replace a chapter of a book (the one mentioned above) with a magazine article. It reads like a magazine article and feels like it was shorted for space considerations. But, that can't be blamed on the author.

Any first person historical account needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially, an account from the losing side.

[Hammer-n-Sickle]

Can't help you with the Kursk chapter, but some general advice on the book.

Whatever you do, just don't take it as gospel. It is one man's perspective on the events, and that man happened to have strong opinions on them as they unfolded, which means that he is likely to be quite biased in many cases.

E.g. his version of the fighting on the Leningrad approaches is heavily criticised by the then 1a of Panzergruppe 4, von Beaulieu, in his book on those battles.

All the best

Andreas

I second that. You might some challenges on Manstein's attempt to bail out six army at stallingrad in "Stallingrad the faitful seige" as well