Keegan, John (Desmond Patrick) 1934-
KEEGAN, John (Desmond Patrick) 1934-
PERSONAL: Born May 15, 1934, in London, England; son of Francis Joseph (a school inspector) and Eileen (Bridgman) Keegan; married Susanne Everett (a writer), December 10, 1960; children: Lucy, Thomas John Bridgman, Rose, Matthew. Education: Balliol College, Oxford, M.A. (history), 1957. Religion: Roman Catholic.
ADDRESSES: Home—The Manor House, Kilmington, near Warminster, Wiltshire BA12 6RD, England. Office—Daily Telegraph, Peterborough Court at South Quay, 181 Marsh Wall, London E14 9SR, England. Agent—Anthony Sheil, Sheil Associates Ltd., 43 Doughty St., London WC1N 2LF, England.
CAREER: Military historian, lecturer, and journalist. United States Embassy, London, England, political analyst, 1957-59; Royal Military Academy, Sandhurst, England, senior lecturer in history, 1959-86; Daily Telegraph, London, special assignment reporter, 1984, defense and military correspondent, 1986-89, defense editor, 1989—. Cambridge University, Lees Knowles lecturer in military history, 1986; Delmas Professor of History, Vassar College, 1996-98. Director, E. Somerset NHS Trust, 1991-97.
MEMBER: Royal Society of Literature, Royal Historical Society (fellow).
AWARDS, HONORS: Princeton University fellowship, 1984; Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE), 1991; Samuel Eliot Morrison Prize, U.S. Society for Military History, 1996; LL.D., New Brunswick University, 1997.
Waffen SS: The Asphalt Soldiers, Ballantine (New York, NY), 1970.
Barbarossa: Invasion of Russia, 1941, Ballantine (New York, NY), 1971.
Opening Moves: August 1914, Ballantine (New York, NY), 1971.
Guderian (part of the "War Leader" series), Ballantine (New York, NY), 1973.
Rundstedt (part of the "War Leader" series), Ballantine (New York, NY), 1974.
Dien Bien Phu (part of "Battle Book" series), Ballantine (New York, NY), 1974.
The Face of Battle, Viking (New York, NY), 1976, revised as The Illustrated Face of Battle: A Study of Agincourt, Waterloo, and the Somme, 1989.
(With Andrew Wheatcroft) Who's Who in Military History: From 1453 to the Present Day, Weidenfeld & Nicolson (London, England), 1976.
(Editor) World Armies, Facts on File (New York, NY), 1979.
(With Joseph Darracott) The Nature of War, Holt (New York, NY), 1981.
Six Armies in Normandy: From D-Day to the Liberation of Paris, June 6th-August 25th, 1944, Viking (New York, NY), 1982.
(With Richard Holmes and John Gau), Soldiers: AHistory of Men in Battle (also see below), foreword by Frederick Forsyth, Hamish Hamilton (London, England), 1985, Viking (New York, NY), 1986.
(With Andrew Wheatcroft) Zones of Conflict: An Atlas of Future Wars, Simon & Schuster (New York, NY), 1986.
The Mask of Command, Viking (New York, NY), 1987.
The Price of Admiralty: War at Sea from Man of War to Submarine, Hutchinson (London, England), 1988, Viking (New York, NY), 1989.
(Editor) The Times Atlas of the Second World War, Harper (New York, NY), 1989.
The Second World War, Viking (New York, NY), 1990.
(Editor) Churchill's Generals, Quill (New York, NY),1991.
A History of Warfare, Knopf (New York, NY), 1993.
A Brief History of Warfare: Past, Present, Future, University of Southampton Press (Southampton, England), 1994.
Warpaths: Travels of a Military Historian in NorthAmerica, Hodder & Stoughton (London, England), 1995.
The Battle for History: Re-fighting World War II, Vintage (New York, NY), 1996.
Fields of Battle: The Wars for North America, Knopf (New York, NY), 1996.
War and Our World, Hutchinson (London, England), 1998.
(Editor) The Book of War: Great Military Writings, Viking (New York, NY), 1999, published as The Penguin Book of War: Great Military Writings, Viking (London, England), 1999.
(Editor) The Art of War: War and Military Thought, Cassell (London, England), 2000.
An Illustrated History of the First World War, Knopf (New York, NY), 2001.
Winston Churchill, Viking (New York, NY), 2001.
Author of introduction to Atlas of the Twentieth Century, by Richard Natkiel, Donald Sommerville, and John N. Westwood, Facts on File, 1982. Coauthor of script for television series Soldiers: A History of Men in Battle, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBCTV), 1986. Contributing editor, The New Republic, 1980-90, and U.S. News and World Report, 1986—.
Rand McNally Encyclopedia of World War II, Rand McNally (Chicago, IL), 1977.
Encyclopedia of World War II, Hamlyn (London, England), 1977.
Jeremy Black, Warfare in the Eighteenth Century, Cassell (London, England), 1999.
Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson, The First World War, Cassell (London, England), 1999.
H. P. Willmott, The Second World War in the East, Cassell (London, England), 1999.
Victor Davis Hanson, The Wars of the Ancient Greeks:And Their Invention of Western Military Culture, Cassell (London, England), 1999.
Gunther E. Rothenberg, The Napoleonic Wars, Cassell (London, England), 2000.
Adrian Goldsworthy, Roman Warfare, Cassell (London, England), 2000.
World War II: A Visual Encyclopedia, PRC Publishing (London, England), 2000.
Thomas F. Arnold, The Renaissance at War, Cassell (London, England), 2001.
SIDELIGHTS: Hailed by various critics as one of the foremost contemporary military historians, John Keegan has written numerous books about ancient and modern warfare: its origins, implementation, outcome, aftermath, and evolution. Describing commanders and battles ranging from Alexander the Great and his quest to conquer Persia in the fourth century B.C. to American Admiral Chester Nimitz and his role in the Pacific theater of World War II, Keegan has established a solid reputation for providing captivating narratives and astute analyses. His major success as a military historian and writer, however, has emanated from his study of soldiers' attitudes toward war and their perceptions of combat.
Unlike some military historians who provide only strict accounts of battle strategy and evaluations of military tactics, Keegan has afforded a look at some of the lesser-known facets of warfare. For example, in his most critically acclaimed work, The Face of Battle, he documents what battle was like for the common soldier, how and why soldiers have responded to combat the way they have, and how warfare practices have evolved into their current patterns. "Keegan writes about war better than almost any one in our century," asserted Washington Post Book World contributor Reid Beddow, who added that the author was like nineteenth-century French novelist Marcel Proust "in a foxhole." Keegan's ability to capture the horrors of combat, yet maintain a calm perspective, has also won him high praise. Naomi Bliven, in a review of Keegan's Mask of Command for the New Yorker, commended the author for making people "aware of how profoundly war has engaged [their] emotions."
Born in London, England, in 1934, Keegan developed a fascination with battle during his childhood. He became aware of the effects of total war as his country fell victim to frequent aerial bombardments by Germany during World War II. The author's family, in fact, fled their city home, seeking refuge in Taunton, Somerset. Although removed from danger, the young Keegan experienced some minor aspects of the war, such as gas rationing, before he witnessed U.S. forces assembling in western England in 1944 as they prepared to invade Normandy in enemy-occupied France. This occurrence, coupled with the tales of war told him by his father and grandfather, piqued Keegan's interest in battle.
Although he aspired to join the armed forces when he became of age, Keegan never had the opportunity to pursue military service. In his teens he contracted tuberculosis (TB), a contagious disease that affected his hip. His bout with the ailment lasted until his early twenties and left him partially lame. Keegan recalled his illness, as quoted by Garry Abrams in the Los Angeles Times: "I got [TB] just before they invented the drugs....In those days, the only effective cure was to lie in bed for very long stretches. I was in the hospital really from the age of 13 to 17 and did a lot of reading. Yes, I do think it gives you that studious bent, and then you can't play football and you go on being studious."
While tuberculosis kept him from studying the art of soldiering firsthand, Keegan's disability did not keep him from fueling his interest through higher education at Oxford University's Balliol College. After graduation he found employment with the U.S. Embassy in London as a political analyst. Beginning in 1960 he continued to explore the history of warfare as an educator at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst and, ultimately, as the deputy head of the school's department of war studies. During his tenure at Sandhurst, Keegan began to contemplate his effectiveness as a lecturer. The fact that he had never been a soldier himself led him to question the accuracy of his teachings. As each class thirsted to learn what to expect in battle, Keegan wondered if his instruction truly conveyed the essence of combat.
To learn more about ordinary soldiers in war, Keegan began exhaustive research on the subject. The result of his work was the bestselling The Face of Battle. He illuminated his reasons for writing the book in its first chapter: "I have not been in a battle; not near one, nor heard one from afar, nor seen the aftermath....I have questioned people who have been in battle . . . have walked over battlefields . . . have often turned up small relics of the fighting. . . . I have read about battles, of course, have talked about battles, have been lectured about battles and . . . have watched battles in progress, or apparently in progress, on the television screen....ButI have never been in a battle. And I grow increasingly convinced that I have very little idea of what a battle can be like."
In The Face of Battle, Keegan includes a discussion of military history and presents descriptions of three major battles involving British forces—Agincourt, Waterloo, and the Somme. Deviating from other military history accounts, he focuses on the lesser-known aspects of the war experience for the soldier, rather than on tactical analysis and blow-by-blow reports of the fighting. In his section on the 1415 battle at Agincourt, for instance, Keegan discloses how the greatly outnumbered British troops led by King Henry V routed the French on their home soil, the British finding much of their courage to fight through alcohol, shame, and the prospect of looting the dead and ransoming others. His examination of Waterloo, in part, explores the role of confusion and overall noise in the English Duke of Wellington's victory over French emperor Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815. And Keegan's investigation of the horrifying battle of the Somme in 1916—which claimed sixty thousand British lives during the first day of conflict—looks at the problems caused by faulty communications and describes how some soldiers fought out of sheer desperation.
A number of critics lauded Keegan's insight in the book's concluding chapter, "The Future of Battle." Here, the author compares battlefield situations and behaviors, providing his predictions for the course of modern warfare. For example, he likens the use of alcohol by some British soldiers before Agincourt to the use of marijuana by various U.S. soldiers in Vietnam more than five centuries later. He postulates that war in ancient society was less difficult for soldiers to endure because in such uncivilized times war had a "close relationship to everyday life." He also notes that battle grew more difficult for its participants as warfare became more impersonal through advancements in weaponry. Keegan writes: "Medieval soldiers not only saw their opponents at very close hand . . . but fought them face to face. The rhythm of the fighting and its duration were in consequence dictated by human limitations: a man gained ground on his opponent, scored a hit, felt his sword arm tire, knew that he must win in the next five minutes or be done for; . . . And because the power of weapons was not very much greater than the muscle power of those who wielded them, the wounds inflicted were little different from the wounds of everyday life, those suffered in the field or workshop, to be judged at a glance trifling, disabling, or fatal."
Keegan further contends in The Face of Battle that during the World War I campaign at the Somme, troops were greatly unprepared for the harsh brutality of trench warfare. Civilian life offered no parallels to the bloodshed these men encountered via machine guns and heavy artillery. The historian also argues that as civilization and weaponry have advanced, society has offered more resistance to war. As a result of the vast destruction and loss of life experienced in twentieth-century battles, many people doubt the effectiveness of future wars. He points to the attitudes of youth who "are increasingly unwilling to serve as conscripts in armies they see as ornamental." He concludes in The Face of Battle that "the suspicion grows that battle has already abolished itself."
The Face of Battle garnered rapid success, especially among U.S. readers. Some critics deemed the book a military history classic, praising Keegan's narrative as both original and enlightening. A reviewer for the New Yorker called the work "remarkable and absorbing," while New York Times Book Review contributor J. H. Plumb noted that "one learns as much about the nature of man as of battle." New York Review of Books critic Neal Ascherson conceded that the history had "no counterpart in the literature of war," adding that "no one has written more movingly about the Somme than Keegan."
Following his success with The Face of Battle, Keegan edited several volumes on World War II events and personalities. He also delved into world leaders, armies, and the nature of war. Some of his childhood experiences in England during World War II are recalled in his 1982 book, Six Armies in Normandy: From D-Day to the Liberation of Paris, June 6th-August25th, 1944. Delineating the invasion of Normandy by Allied forces and the subsequent battle, Keegan's book was released on the thirty-ninth anniversary of the assault and charts the involvement of U.S., Canadian, British, Polish, French, and German troops. In the history Keegan reveals that each army was "a mirror of its own society and its values, in some places and at some times an agent of national pride or a bulwark against national fears, or perhaps even the last symbol of the nation itself."
Keegan received critical praise for his compelling retelling of the fighting from the soldier's viewpoint in 1982's Six Armies in Normandy. He was also acknowledged for his objective recounting of an event that motion pictures have consistently glamorized. Calling the book "military history without the romance," Newsweek contributor Jim Miller added that the narrative "starkly illustrates the agony and strategy of organized violence." Some critics commended Keegan's use of eyewitness accounts of the fighting from participants on both sides of the conflict. Others noted that although the invasion and battle of Normandy had been well covered in books already, Keegan's Six Armies in Normandy presented the event from a fresh perspective. "He brings into focus matters which, however much one may have read, bring sudden illumination," voiced John Terraine in the Times Literary Supplement. Drew Middleton, in an article for the New York Times Book Review, criticized the work for being too brief but proclaimed it "the best book written on the 1944 Normandy campaign." He added that Keegan's volume clearly explains "why it took the combined might of the United States, the British Empire and the Soviet Union to defeat the Germans."
Keegan further studied the experience of the common soldier in his 1985 book, Soldiers: A History of Men in Battle, written with Richard Holmes and John Gau. Prepared as a companion guide to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC-TV) television series of the same title, the work traces the evolution of warfare from 3000 B.C. to the Falklands War in 1982. A year after the publication of Soldiers Keegan decided, after some twenty-five years of teaching, to resign from his position at the academy and begin a job as defense and military correspondent with the London Daily Telegraph. The author had been on temporary assignment with the Telegraph earlier in the 1980s when he witnessed the horrors of war first-hand in Lebanon, and he felt that a permanent career change would allow him more time for book compilation.
In 1987 Keegan ventured from the tales of ordinary soldiers by exploring important figures in military history in The Mask of Command. The book plots the evolution of warfare through the change in leadership, weaponry, and tactics. Limiting his examination to four prominent officers—Alexander the Great, the Duke of Wellington, Ulysses S. Grant, and Adolf Hitler—Keegan discloses their respective command styles and their impact on world history. He derived the book's name from his belief that a commander must carefully present his image to soldiers, assuming a persona that will encourage troops to follow and fight without regard to the consequences of losing. A commanding officer's weaknesses, the historian asserts, should be totally concealed. "The leader of men in warfare can show himself to his followers only through a mask," writes Keegan, "a mask that he must make for himself, but a mask made in such form as will mark him to men of his time and place as the leader they want and need."
The author further explains the masks worn by his subjects: Alexander—"heroic," Wellington—"antiheroic," Grant—"unheroic," and Hitler—"falseheroic." The book also charts the progression of its subjects' leadership styles, from Alexander who fought at the head of his troops, to Hitler who hid out in safety miles away from the front lines of battle. Keegan attributes this evolution as the result of technological advancements which made it increasingly more dangerous for a leader to fight with his troops on the field. "Each of these four case studies forms a separate entity of its own," remarked Geoffrey Field in Nation. "Combined, they evince a general theme about the reshaping of heroic leadership in response to social and military change." In his concluding chapter, the historian analyzes the present and future course of warfare in what he calls the "post-heroic" period. Keegan notes that the current deployment of nuclear weapons has made "heroic" leadership obsolete. "Mankind needs not new hardware but a change of heart," Keegan relates. "It needs an end to the ethic of heroism in its leadership for good and all." Instead, he argues, leaders must exercise extreme caution and diplomacy, because one emotional display could cost millions of lives.
A companion to The Face of Battle, The Mask of Command was generally well received by most critics. While some reviewers disliked Keegan's final commentary, Newsweek's Miller described it as both "paradoxical and provocative." He lauded Keegan for showing that "in a nuclear war, the innocent would risk annihilation, while their leaders are expected to reach safety—a startling reversal of the traditional ethos of combat." Appraising the work as "fascinating and enlightening," John Gross of the New York Times asserted that the book was "marked by great intellectual liveliness." The Nation's Field echoed this sentiment, pointing out that Keegan presents an "intensely human picture of war as a cultural activity, a picture that is rigorously contextualized but invites wider speculation about the place of warfare in human history."
Keegan followed his discussion of military leaders with The Price of Admiralty: War at Sea from Man of War to Submarine, a book that delves into the naval battles of Trafalgar, Jutland, Midway, and the Atlantic. Again the author outlines the evolution of military leaders, tactics, and weaponry—this time showing how these factors pertained to combat at sea. He begins with the engagement of wooden ships at Trafalgar in 1805 and moves on to the contest between ironclad dreadnoughts at Jutland in 1916. He then explores the effectiveness of aircraft against battlecruisers in the Midway campaign of 1942 and the destructive capabilities of German U-boats in the Atlantic theater during World War II.
As with Keegan's earlier books, The Price of Admiralty offers a concluding analysis on the future role of its subject. Describing the devastation that nuclear submarines can wield, Keegan suggests that surface ships will not survive such a naval arsenal. "In a future war the oceans might appear empty again, swept clear both of merchant traffic and of the navies which have sought so long to protect it against predators," he summarizes. "Yet the oceans' emptiness will be illusory, for in their deeps new navies of submarine warships, great and small, will be exacting from each other the price of admiralty."
While some reviewers of The Price of Admiralty pointed out a number of factual errors, others applauded the volume's vivid and concise style. Although E. B. Potter of Chicago Tribune Books commented on several "minor flaws," he deemed it an "admirable book." The Spectator's John Bayley called the work Keegan's "best so far." The Price of Admiralty "stands alongside Mr. Keegan's earlier works . . . in its power to impart both the big and little pictures of war," declared Christopher Lehmann-Haupt in the New York Times, adding that Keegan's inclusion of numerous "details lend[s] a human dimension to the most abstract of military calculations."
In 1989 Keegan published The Times Atlas of the Second World War to coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of the beginning of the conflict. He also revised his 1976 classic, The Face of Battle, as The Illustrated Face of Battle: A Study of Agincourt, Waterloo, and the Somme. In 1990 he continued his study of World War II with a one-volume history. Simply called The Second World War, the work was labeled controversial by some critics who felt it read more like a thesis than a concrete historical record. Such reviewers claimed the book challenged various myths about the war and omitted a number of aspects of the conflict. Keegan shows "an impressionist picture of the scene," remarked Michael Carver in the Times Literary Supplement. Professing that the book "is immensely readable," Carver added that the work "is well worth reading both as an overall picture of the war and as a dissertation on warfare."
Other critics were more receptive to The Second World War. Paul Fussell praised Keegan's broad approach in Tribune Books, judging the book a "magnificent history and analysis . . . thoroughly researched, solidly conceived and effectively presented." Fussell added that Keegan's book will not be the last one-volume look at the conflict but "may well come to stand first." Newsweek writer Miller described the work as "one of the liveliest and most thought-provoking general histories" written about World War II. The reviewer added that Keegan's "survey stands alone—a testament to the unusual gifts of our greatest living military historian."
While continuing to lecture, Keegan has also continued to work on additional volumes detailing the history of war. An ambitious undertaking, his efforts to chronicle the stages of a war's development, and indeed the development of the practice of warfare, resulted in 1993's A History of Warfare. Praising the work in the Los Angeles Times Book Review for its ability to place concerns of twentieth-century soldiers regarding such matters as women and gays in the military "in the light of thousand of years of history," critic William Broyles, Jr. noted that Keegan "finds a disciplined, effective army to be one of the constant features of successful civilizations." Illustrating the constant presence of battle and violence within all great civilizations, the historian takes issue with the doctrine, set forth by Prussian tactician Carl von Clausewitz, that allies war with politics. "War is wholly unlike diplomacy or politics," asserts Keegan in A History of Warfare, "because it must be fought by men whose values and skills are not those of politicians and diplomats. They are those of a world apart, a very ancient world....The culture of the warrior can never be that of civilization itself. All civilizations owe their origins to the warrior."
Noting that the book presents a challenge to the general reader, Washington Post Book World contributor Clay Blair cited Keegan's work for a "breadth and depth of argumentation" that pose challenges "to anthropologists, social scientists and other specialists" and called it "a tough read—tough but consistently stimulating and enlightening." While hailing the work as "perhaps the most remarkable study of warfare that has yet been written," New York Times Book Review contributor Michael Howard still took issue with Keegan's assertion that Clausewitz's doctrine was the cause of the current totalitarian aspects of dehumanized nuclear warfare and its use as an instrument of foreign policy. "Even if Clausewitz had never written a line, war would have become 'total' in the 20th century for a whole complex of reasons, political, technical and sociological," the critic maintained.
From the vast panorama of the world's wars and from prehistory up to and including the late twentieth century, Keegan then turned his attention specifically to those wars fought on North American soil in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries in 1996's Fields of Battle: The Wars for North America. Opening the book with the statement, "I love America," the British historian describes the French and Indian Wars, the Revolutionary War, and the Civil War, as well as the battles between the young nation and Native American tribes living on the central plains as their lands were taken by a growing Anglo population moving west. His discussion hinges particularly on the geography of the land and how it ultimately impacted each of these conflicts, as significant to the outcome of battle as the decisions of the generals themselves. Responding to the author's praise of the United States for coming to the aid of his native Britain during World War II, Pauline Maier described Keegan's book in the New York Times Book Review as "a gracious book, artful and filled with surprises, that explains to Americans their country and their past and reaffirms in a moment of national self-doubt the enduring strengths of American culture." While noting that Keegan's study contains several errors, T. H. Watkins wrote in his appraisal of Fields of Battle for the Washington Post Book World that his "narrative . . . holds the reader's interest. . . . I was deeply moved more than once by his ability to bring an uncanny sense of reality to a moment from the past—whether his own past or that of the continent's history."
Of war and the world in general, Keegan once remarked, as quoted in the Abrams' article: "I don't think you can run this wicked world without armed force. But I think that you have to take every reasonable and, if necessary, unreasonable measure to prevent the use of armed force. I can think of very few good wars."
BIOGRAPHICAL AND CRITICAL SOURCES:
American Scholar, summer, 1999, John Eisenhower, review of The First World War, p. 137.
American Spectator, July, 1999, Matthew Stevenson, review of The First World War, p. 70.
Atlantic Monthly, December, 1993, p. 142; March, 1996, p. 125.
Book, September, 1999, p. 82.
Booklist, October 1, 1993, Gilbert Taylor, review of AHistory of Warfare, p. 248; January 15, 1994, p. 864; December 15, 1995, Gilbert Taylor, review of The Battle for History: Re-fighting World War II, p. 684; April 1, 1996, Gilbert Taylor, review of Fields of Battle: The Wars for North America,p. 1341; November 1, 1997, p. 495; March 15, 1999, Gilbert Taylor, review of The First World War, p. 1258; October 15, 1999, Gilbert Taylor, review of The Book of War: Great Military Writings, p. 413; January 1, 2000, review of The First World War, p. 814; March 1, 2001, Mary Ellen Quinn, review of World War II: A Visual Encyclopedia, p. 1325; May 15, 2001, Gilbert Taylor, review of War and Our World, p. 1713; October 15, 2001, Margaret Flanagan, review of An Illustrated History of the First World War, p. 377.
Books, September, 1993, p. 25.
Bookwatch, August, 1999, p. 10.
Book World, November 21, 1993, p. 1; July 7, 1996, p. 3; July 4, 1999, p. 1.
Business Week, July 19, 1999, "Broken Armies," p. 18E4; July 16, 2001, "The End of War?," p. 22E4.
Canadian Geographic, March-April, 1996, Dominique Clift, review of Warpaths: Travels of a Military Historian in North America, p. 75.
Canadian Historical Review, March, 1998, David Facey-Crowther, review of Warpaths, p. 167.
Choice, April, 1994, R. Higham, review of A History of Warfare, p. 1343; July-August, 1996, C. R. Jackson, review of The Battle for History, p. 1846; November, 1996, p. 525; November, 1999, R. A. Callahan, review of The First World War, p. 595; March, 2001, E. F. Konerding, review of World War II, p. 1251.
Christian Science Monitor, January 4, 1994, p. 13; January 26, 1995, Kim Campbell, review of A History of Warfare, p. B4; August 5, 1999, p. 21.
Chronicle of Higher Education, January 7, 2000, Michael Sherry, "Probing the Memory of War: The Vitality of Military History," p. B4.
Contemporary Review, January, 1994, p. 49; April, 1999, p. 221; November, 1999, p. 274; May, 1999, p. 276; February, 2000, review of The Penguin Book of War: Great Military Writings, p. 112.
Economist, October 2, 1993, review of A History ofWarfare, p. 109.
English Historical Review, September, 1994, Charles Townshend, review of Churchill's Generals,p. 1035; February, 1998, Brian Bon, review of The Battle for History, p. 241; April, 2000, Jeremy Black, review of The First World War, p. 501.
Forbes, February 26, 1996, Steve Forbes, review of The Battle for History, p. 24.
Foreign Affairs, March-April, 1994, Eliot A. Cohen, review of A History of Warfare, p. 147; March-April, 1996, Eliot A. Cohen, review of The Battle for History, p. 149; September, 1999, p. 168.
Fortune, May 24, 1999, Albert Mobilio, "A Trench-level Take on the Great War," p. 68.
Globe and Mail, May 22, 1999, p. D16.
Guardian Weekly, December 13, 1992, p. 28.
Historian, summer, 1995, John A. Lynn, review of AHistory of Warfare, p. 851.
History, January, 1996, Ian F. W. Beckett, review of AHistory of Warfare, p. 85; October, 1996, Brian Holden Reid, review of Warpaths, p. 574; April, 1997, R. A. C. Parker, review of The Battle for History, p. 376; July, 2000, Ian F. W. Beckett, review of The First World War, p. 535.
History and Theory, February, 1995, Richard Buel, Jr., review of A History of Warfare, p. 90.
History Today, December, 1994, Brian Holden Reid, review of A History of Warfare, p. 52; May, 1999, David Stevenson, review of The First World War,p. 54; May, 2000, Daniel Snowman, "John Keegan," p. 28.
Infantry, September-December, 2000, review of TheBook of War, p. 50.
Insight on the News, June 24, 1996, Stephen E. Ambrose, review of Fields of Battle, p. 32.
Journal of American History, December, 1996, Craig M. Cameron, review of The Battle for History,p. 1063; March, 1997, Don Higginbotham, review of Fields of Battle, p. 1380; June, 2000, Eric T. Dean Jr., review of The First World War, p. 263.
Journal of Contemporary History, April, 2000, Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson, review of The First World War, p. 319.
Journal of Military History, July, 1992, Thomas M. Barker, review of Churchill's Generals, p. 519; October, 1996, Kenneth P. Werrell, review of The Battle for History, p. 798; January, 1997, Jeremy Black, review of Who's Who in Military History from 1453 to the Present Day, p. 150; July, 1997, Phillip S. Meilinger, review of A History of Warfare, p. 598.
Journal of Peace Research, February, 1993, p. 120.
Journal of Social History, winter, 1995, Michael Neiberg, review of A History of Warfare, p. 466.
Journal of Southern History, August, 1997, Matthew Moten, review of Fields of Battle, p. 633.
Kirkus Reviews, September 1, 1993, p. 1121; April 15, 1996, p. 577; May 1, 1999, p. 696.
Kliatt, January, 1995, p. 35; March, 1995, p. 1; September, 1995, p. 39; September, 1996, p. 33; September, 1997, p. 60; November, 1997, p. 26.
Library Journal, October 15, 1993, D. E. Showalter, review of A History of Warfare, p. 76; July, 1994, p. 134; September 1, 1994, Michael T. Fein, review of A History of Warfare, p. 232; January, 1996, Dennis E. Showalter, review of The Battle for History, p. 116; May 15, 1996, Michael Coleman, review of Fields of Battle, p. 72; August, 1997, p. 157; April 15, 1999, Bob Persing, review of The First World War, p. 118; October 15, 1999, Richard S. Nowicki, review of The Book of War,p. 81; February 15, 2001, William D. Bushnell, review of World War II, p. 161; October 15, 2001, Frederic Krome, review of An Illustrated History of the First World War, p. 92.
London Review of Books, January 27, 1994, p. 7.
Los Angeles Times, March 5, 1990, pp. E1-E2.
Los Angeles Times Book Review, August 15, 1982, p. 1; December 27, 1987, pp. 1, 12; December 24, 1989, pp. 1, 8; December 19, 1993, p. 3; June 6, 1999, p. 5.
Maclean's, January 10, 1994, Andrew Phillips, review of A History of Warfare, p. 52; May 8, 1995, John Bemrose, review of The Battle for History, p. 73; November 13, 1995, Brian Bethune, review of Warpaths, p. 70; October 11, 1999, p. 72.
Military History, February, 2000, Michael D. Hull and Jon Guttman, "The Horrors of World War I Exceeded Those of World War II in Terms of the Sheer Futility of Squandered Lives," p. 66.
Military Law Review, fall, 1993, Frederic L. Borch, review of A History of Warfare, pp. 181-185; summer, 1994, Jeffrey G. Meeks, review of A History of Warfare, pp. 198-202.
Nation, December 12, 1987, pp. 722-725.
National Journal, June 2, 2001, Patrick B. Pexton, review of War and Our World, p. 1669.
National Review, April 1, 1990, p. 49; November 29,
1993, George MacDonald Fraser, review of A History of Warfare, p. 62; September 30, 1996, Richard Brookhiser, review of Fields of Battle, p. 64; July 12, 1999, David Gress, "The Second Fall,"p. 50.
New Leader, December 27, 1993, Roger Draper, review of A History of Warfare, p. 3; June 14, 1999, Roger Draper, "The War That Caused All Wars,"p. 3.
New Republic, November 30, 1987, pp. 32-34, 36; June 28, 1999, p. 51.
New Statesman, October 4, 1985, pp. 27-28; September 22, 1990, p. 35.
New Statesman and Society, October 8, 1993, Geoff Dyer, review of A History of Warfare, p. 36.
Newsweek, November 15, 1976, pp. 109, 112; August 2, 1982, pp. 58, 60; December 14, 1987, p. 83; April 3, 1989, p. 72; January 29, 1990, p. 68; November 15, 1993, David Gates, review of A History of Warfare, p. 79; June 14, 1999, p. 74.
New York, September 13, 1993, p. 106.
New Yorker, November 15, 1976, pp. 214-215; January 18, 1988, pp. 89-92; January 24, 1994, review of A History of Warfare, p. 95.
New York Review of Books, December 9, 1976, pp. 38-40; April 28, 1988, pp. 15-18; August 5, 1996, p. 75; August 12, 1999, Paul Kennedy, review of The First World War, p. 36; November 4, 1999, James Epstein, "Always Time to Kill," p. 57.
New York Times, October 27, 1987; December 1, 1987; April 6, 1989; October 25, 1993, p. C17; June 8, 1999, Michiko Kakutani, "Tools for Destruction, But None for Turning Back," p. E7; July 3, 1999, Mel Gussow, "A Child (and an Adult) of War," p. B9.
New York Times Book Review, November 7, 1976, p. 2; August 15, 1982, pp. 7, 16; March 23, 1986, p. 13; April 14, 1989, p. 12; December 31, 1989, p. 10; November 14, 1993, p. 10; November 21, 1993, p. 34; December 5, 1993, p. 67; May 29, 1994, p. 20; December 11, 1994, p. 36; June 11, 1995, p. 60; April 28, 1996, John Glenn, review of The Battle for History, p. 22; July 14, 1996, Pauline Maier, review of Fields of Battle, p. 23; December 8, 1996, p. 87; August 10, 1997, p. 24; July 27, 1999, Tony Judt, "The End of the World: A Military Historian Explains Why World War I Happened, and How It Changed Everything," p. 10; October 31, 1999, David Murray, review of The Book of War, p. 24; December 5, 1999, p. 8.
Observer, September 10, 1989, p. 50; September 19, 1993, p. 56; October 4, 1998, p. 13.
Orbis, summer, 1994, Bruce D. Berkowitz, review of A History of Warfare, p. 515.
Parameters, winter, 1994, p. 126; spring, 1995, p. 146; autumn, 1995, p. 113.
Political Quarterly, July-September, 1994, A. J. A. Morris, review of A History of Warfare, p. 368.
Publishers Weekly, October 4, 1993, review of A History of Warfare, p. 52; January 1, 1996, review of The Battle for History, p. 69; March 11, 1996, review of Fields of Battle, p. 47; May 19, 1997, p. 74; May 17, 1999, review of The First World War, p. 63; October 4, 1999, review of The Book of War, p. 52; November 1, 1999, review of The First World War, p. 50; July 3, 2000, "Far East Conflicts and Beyond," p. 66; April 23, 2001, review of War and Our World, p. 56; September 17, 2001, review of An Illustrated History of the First World War, p. 64.
Rapport, June, 1996, p. 27.
Reference and Research Book News, August, 1992, p. 5.
Reviews in American History, March, 1997, Stephen Saunders Webb, review of Fields of Battle, p. 31.
San Francisco Review of Books, February, 1994, p. 12.
School Library Journal, May, 1994, Susan H. Woodcock, review of A History of Warfare, p. 145.
Sea History, autumn, 1996, p. 44. Sewanee Review, fall, 2000, George Core, review of The Second World War, p. 127.
Spectator, December 24, 1988, pp. 63-64; September 30, 1989, pp. 33-35; October 16, 1993, Philip Warner, review of A History of Warfare, p. 32; November 20, 1993, p. 38; November 29, 1993, p. 76; July 29, 1995, Andro Linklater, review of Warpaths, p. 28; October 10, 1998, p. 44; November 28, 1998, p. 48; November 20, 1999, p. 48.
Time, December 20, 1976, pp. 75, 80; November 9, 1987, p. 105; November 29, 1993, Lance Morrow, review of A History of Warfare, p. 76; January 3, 1994, p.79.
Times (London, England), October 3, 1985; December 17, 1987.
Times Educational Supplement, March 26, 1993, p. 10.
Times Higher Education Supplement, September 24, 1993, Brian Bond, review of A History of Warfare, p. 20.
Times Literary Supplement, February 29, 1980, p. 245; June 25, 1982, p. 684; September 1, 1989, pp. 935-936; October 22, 1993, p. 9; May 15, 1998, Robert Fox, review of War and Our World, p. 15; November 13, Michael Howard, review of The First World War, 1998, p. 3.
Tribune Books (Chicago, IL), November 12, 1987; March 5, 1989, p. 7; January 7, 1990, pp. 1, 4; January 9, 1994, p. 5; December 4, 1994, p. 1.
USA Today, July, 1999, "War & Civilization," p. 81.
Wall Street Journal, December 1, 1993, p. A18; May 16, 1996, John Lehman, review of Fields of Battle, p. A12; June 17, 1999, John Lehman, "Into the Slaughter," p. A24.
Washington Monthly, November, 1993, John Lancaster, review of A History of Warfare, p. 57.
Washington Post, July 7, 1996, T. H. Watkins, "Of Arms and the American Continent," p. X3; August 21, 1996, Ken Ringle, "Fighting Words: Historian John Keegan, Writing into the Heat of Battle," p. D1.
Washington Post Book World, July 11, 1982, pp. 1, 14; November 15, 1987, p. 5; April 16, 1989, pp. 5, 10; December 10, 1989, p. 1; November 21, 1993, pp. 1, 10; July 7, 1996, pp. 3, 12.
World and I, October, 1999, p. 269.
World Today, October, 1998, David Wedgwood Benn, "War and Our World," p. 267.
PIF,http://www.pifmagazine.com/ (June 2, 2003).*