For some unknown reason, I plucked Eisenhower's "Crusade in Europe" from
my library the other day -- it was a first edition my father bought in
1948 while on vacation in 1948 in Durango, Colo. (I was 11) and which I
inherited some 25 years ago. I read it in less than a week.
I found it to be eminently readable and was intrigued by the insight it
gave to decision making at the highest levels in WW II.
Ever the gentleman, Ike was generous with his praise and miserly with
his criticisms, especially with respect to Churchill.
The book certainly gives no feel for the challenges facing the enlisted
man as, for example, Martin Gilbert does in his WW II History. Although
it is clear that Ike had the highest regard and concern for the lowest
infantryman, the book is about Generals, Nations and major strategies.
I am curious, however, about how this work is viewed by contemporary
historians and would like to hear from any on the listserv (amateur or
professional). Is it regarded as an important contribution to WW II
history? Is it regarded as honest or self-serving? Have any critiques of
it ever been published? Are his judgments on Churchill regarded as fair?
--
Gregory B. Smith
154 W. Spain St., Villa T
Sonoma, CA 95476
707 974-9324
Live dangerously, dread naught, all will be well. (W. S. Churchill)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ChurchillChat" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/churchillchat?hl=en.
