Brent Nosworthy
Auteur de The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War
A propos de l'auteur
Œuvres de Brent Nosworthy
The Bloody Crucible of Courage: Fighting Methods and Combat Experience of the Civil War (2003) — Auteur — 169 exemplaires
Nosworthy's Tactical Studies EXCERPTS FROM THE BRITISH MILITARY LIBRARY ON PRACTICAL TACTICS. Vol. I and II. 2 exemplaires
Nosworthy's Tactical Studies Troupes Legeres 1680-1763 2 exemplaires
Oeuvres associées
MHQ: The Quarterly Journal of Military History — Summer 1999 (1999) — Author "Tactical Exercises: Cavalry versus Infantry" — 11 exemplaires
MHQ: The Quarterly Journal of Military History — Spring 2006 (2006) — Author "Arms and Men: Breechloaders Level the Playing Field" — 7 exemplaires
Étiqueté
Partage des connaissances
- Date de naissance
- 20th c.
- Sexe
- male
- Nationalité
- USA
- Lieux de résidence
- Providence, Rhode Island, USA
Brooklyn, New York, USA - Professions
- military historian
boardgame designer
Membres
Critiques
Vous aimerez peut-être aussi
Auteurs associés
Statistiques
- Œuvres
- 11
- Aussi par
- 2
- Membres
- 427
- Popularité
- #57,179
- Évaluation
- 4.1
- Critiques
- 4
- ISBN
- 10
- Favoris
- 2
A major point he makes is that grand tactics - the movement of bodies of troops across the across the battlefield - cannot be analyzed separately from the low-level tactics of how troops formed up in those bodies and how they used their weapons, because an army's abilities on the latter level determined what it can do on the former. Napoleonic grand tactics could only supplant their Linear predecessors because of low-level improvements.
The book quite readable and broadly convincing, although I lack the background in Napoleonics to judge the plausibility of many of Nosworthy's detailed arguments, and sometimes I could have used explanations in more depth. At a few points - notably regarding the utility of cuirass and lance for the cavalry - he seems to disagree wtih himself from chapter to chapter, which suggests the book could have been more tightly edited, but I noted few if any typographical errors.… (plus d'informations)