- Also check our best rated Biography reviews
Bloody Red Tabs Hardcover – 17 Oct 1995
Customers who bought this item also bought
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
This book examines the origin and perpetuati on of the myth that British generals of World War 1 kept saf ely away from fighting areas. In an attempt to put the recor d straight, it contains over 200 brief biographies of genera ls killed in action. '
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
As you may gather, I'm not a fan of the slant the authors take. However, most of the book is the so-called biographies, split into two chapters, those killed, and those gassed, wounded, or taken prisoner. Unfortunately, the biographies are more or less "Born, schooled, service record, died...", some also including citations for DSOs or VCs, which makes for rather dull reading. When originally published, this would have been a useful niche-filler, but nowadays, with the universality of the internet? It's still useful, but only because it lists together all the Generals who were killed, wounded or taken prisoner. A simple google will give you far fuller & more interesting biographies of many of the officers herein.
The rest of the book is an alphabetical resume of each general casualty and is a useful reference point, which was researched before the internet made such publications less marketable. Apart from the sheer number of generals who were included in that 4 year bloodbath, I found it interesting to note they were mainly in their 40s (one was only 25) - younger than their popular image - and well seasoned in campaigns in which they had earned their promotion.
One small criticism is that officers in our Indian Army, who tended to have seen more action than their British Army counterparts until 1914, had to spend their first year in a British regiment before moving to their Indian regiments. So, to duly note their first British regiment but ignore the Indian regiments in which they spent their main formative years, strikes me as a disservice to that essential part of our wider regimental history.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?