What do you think?
Rate this book
Monty and Rommel: Parallel Lives
Two men came to personify British and German generalship in the Second World War: Bernard Montgomery and Erwin Rommel. They fought a series of extraordinary duels across several theatres of war which established them as two of the greatest captains of their age. Our understanding of leadership in battle was altered for ever by their electrifying personal qualities. Ever since, historians have assessed their outstanding leadership, personalities and skill.
Born four years apart, their lives were remarkably similar. In this groundbreaking study, Peter Caddick-Adams explores Montgomery and Rommel's lives from their provincial upbringing, through to the trench fighting of the First World War, where both nearly died in 1914. Obsessed with fitness and training, the future field marshals emerged highly decorated and with a glowing war record. The pair taught in staff colleges, wrote infantry textbooks and fought each other as divisional commanders in 1940.
The careers of both began on the periphery of the military establishment and represent the first time military commanders proactively and systematically used (and were used by) the media as they came to prominence, first in North Africa, then in Normandy. Dynamic and forward-thinking, their lives also represent a study of pride, propaganda and nostalgia. Caddick-Adams tracks and compares their military talents and personalities in battle. Each brought something special to their commands. Rommel's breathtaking advance in May-June 1940 was nothing less than inspired. Montgomery is a gift for leadership gurus in the way he took over a demoralised Eighth Army in August 1942 and led it to victory just two months later.
This is the first comparative biography written of the two. It explores how each was 'made' by their war leaders, Churchill and Hitler, and how the thoughts of both permeate down to today's armies. Even though Rommel died in 1944, the rivalry between the two carried on after the war through their writings and other memoirs.
This compelling work is both scholarly and entertaining and marks the debut of a major new talent in historical biography.
Born four years apart, their lives were remarkably similar. In this groundbreaking study, Peter Caddick-Adams explores Montgomery and Rommel's lives from their provincial upbringing, through to the trench fighting of the First World War, where both nearly died in 1914. Obsessed with fitness and training, the future field marshals emerged highly decorated and with a glowing war record. The pair taught in staff colleges, wrote infantry textbooks and fought each other as divisional commanders in 1940.
The careers of both began on the periphery of the military establishment and represent the first time military commanders proactively and systematically used (and were used by) the media as they came to prominence, first in North Africa, then in Normandy. Dynamic and forward-thinking, their lives also represent a study of pride, propaganda and nostalgia. Caddick-Adams tracks and compares their military talents and personalities in battle. Each brought something special to their commands. Rommel's breathtaking advance in May-June 1940 was nothing less than inspired. Montgomery is a gift for leadership gurus in the way he took over a demoralised Eighth Army in August 1942 and led it to victory just two months later.
This is the first comparative biography written of the two. It explores how each was 'made' by their war leaders, Churchill and Hitler, and how the thoughts of both permeate down to today's armies. Even though Rommel died in 1944, the rivalry between the two carried on after the war through their writings and other memoirs.
This compelling work is both scholarly and entertaining and marks the debut of a major new talent in historical biography.
640 pages, Hardcover
First published June 8, 2011
29 people are currently reading
327 people want to read
About the author
Peter Caddick-Adams
18 books145 followersPeter Caddick-Adams is a lecturer in military history and current defense issues at the UK Defence Academy. He is the author of Monte Cassino: Ten Armies in Hell and Monty and Rommel: Parallel Lives. He holds the rank of major in the British Territorial Army and has served with U.S. forces in Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
August 17, 2025
Tanks at Dawn
If we step aside from Hitler versus Stalin, then Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery against Field Marshal Erwin Rommel is the true clash of titans during the Second World War. As such they have come to represent British and German military leadership during the war and have become the stuff of legend when thinking about the war. They fought a series of amazing duals across multiple theatres and became brilliant field commanders as a result. They had interweaving and parallel lives and as such Peter Caddick-Adams has written this engaging and fascinating piece as you cannot tell the story of one without the other.
Born in the 19th century to middle class parents in the periphery of their respective empires, both went to war in 1914, fought at the front and were injured. Rommel first against the French and then fighting the Italians. Monty in the Western Front against other German units. Both learnt valuable lessons which would catapult them to the top in the next conflict. After the war both faced different prospects as Rommel’s Germany was very different to the one he went to war for. His King, Wilhelm II of Wurttemberg had been forced to abdicate and the army was ordered by the victorious allies to shrink. For an army man, even if highly decorated such as Rommel was this was potentially career ending. In the end he manages to stay on, even if promotion was now painfully slow. Monty as a victorious and seasoned officer, had no worries about staying on, even if disastrous cuts to military spending were heading his way. But the peace allowed them both the learn from the Great War, test out new training tactics, to not become detached from the fighting like so many First World War generals and to be mindful of the unnecessary waste of men.
When both entered the Second World War, their talent alongside their own thirst to reach the top and support from their political leaders, Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler allows them to create destiny. As Caddick-Adams explains both needed to over achieve, Rommel due to being only five feet six inches in height and Monty due to the loveless upbringing his mother gave him. He was in fact estranged from her for most of his life (I don’t think she realised this either!). When they clashed in the desert, both were confident and were blooded and up for the fight.
Caddick-Adams also explains their differences. He had aggressive tactics, desperate not to get into a stalemate like the Great War, he used violent frontal assault tactics which did cause him men and material. He had done this in 1917 in the Alps, it worked in 1940 in France and also served him well in the North Africa for a time. However, he was told by Hitler that no reinforcements would ever come, so he had to win with what little he had. An impossible task, but his genius served him well enough. Monty’s approach was different. After being seriously wounded in WWI he served as a staff officer and here he learnt the values of generalship; planning and logistics. He also learnt the Clausewitz maxim: deliver the greatest concentration of force at the enemies weakest point and it will be eventually overwhelmed. He did this at the Battle of Al Alamein with decisive effect.
However, it seems it was downhill for both from here. Monty didn’t have a good war after this, in Normandy and his black stain of Operation Market Garden. As Caddick-Adams writes he chose his viscounty to represent his desert victory, even though he had more power and influence in 1944. Rommel’s time after North Africa was limited, he was almost too popular in the paranoid world of the Third Reich. Given another impossible task of defending Normandy against the allied invasion, he missed D-Day, then was seriously injured before being implicated in the July Plot to assassinate Hitler. After which he was forced to comity suicide for the sake of his family. Rommel’s relationship with Germans ever since has been difficult and it appears only in recent years have they accepted the things he did. This is understandable as a time period he has been caught up in. Monty was a difficult man himself, it appears he was ruthless with his staff officers, a religious and tee total man, he hated smoking and seemed to not get along with most. He did respect his king and direct superior Alan Brooke however. The regular soldier however loved him. Post 1945 peace did not suit him, never apologising for any of his mistakes, he seemed to have been lost without a war to fight.
Ultimately both made the best of and learnt from their circumstances and military culture of their respective counties. Both as Caddick-Adams states, neither were politically astute. The higher someone climbs in the army, the more politically literate they have to be. Neither wanted this, they wanted to lead men and fight on the ground, but at the same time be at the top. Carsick-Adam’s brook is brilliant, easy to read and absolutely fascinating. Both are key and central figures of the Second World War and I would have easily read a biography on each. This is a good book that I recommend.
If we step aside from Hitler versus Stalin, then Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery against Field Marshal Erwin Rommel is the true clash of titans during the Second World War. As such they have come to represent British and German military leadership during the war and have become the stuff of legend when thinking about the war. They fought a series of amazing duals across multiple theatres and became brilliant field commanders as a result. They had interweaving and parallel lives and as such Peter Caddick-Adams has written this engaging and fascinating piece as you cannot tell the story of one without the other.
Born in the 19th century to middle class parents in the periphery of their respective empires, both went to war in 1914, fought at the front and were injured. Rommel first against the French and then fighting the Italians. Monty in the Western Front against other German units. Both learnt valuable lessons which would catapult them to the top in the next conflict. After the war both faced different prospects as Rommel’s Germany was very different to the one he went to war for. His King, Wilhelm II of Wurttemberg had been forced to abdicate and the army was ordered by the victorious allies to shrink. For an army man, even if highly decorated such as Rommel was this was potentially career ending. In the end he manages to stay on, even if promotion was now painfully slow. Monty as a victorious and seasoned officer, had no worries about staying on, even if disastrous cuts to military spending were heading his way. But the peace allowed them both the learn from the Great War, test out new training tactics, to not become detached from the fighting like so many First World War generals and to be mindful of the unnecessary waste of men.
When both entered the Second World War, their talent alongside their own thirst to reach the top and support from their political leaders, Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler allows them to create destiny. As Caddick-Adams explains both needed to over achieve, Rommel due to being only five feet six inches in height and Monty due to the loveless upbringing his mother gave him. He was in fact estranged from her for most of his life (I don’t think she realised this either!). When they clashed in the desert, both were confident and were blooded and up for the fight.
Caddick-Adams also explains their differences. He had aggressive tactics, desperate not to get into a stalemate like the Great War, he used violent frontal assault tactics which did cause him men and material. He had done this in 1917 in the Alps, it worked in 1940 in France and also served him well in the North Africa for a time. However, he was told by Hitler that no reinforcements would ever come, so he had to win with what little he had. An impossible task, but his genius served him well enough. Monty’s approach was different. After being seriously wounded in WWI he served as a staff officer and here he learnt the values of generalship; planning and logistics. He also learnt the Clausewitz maxim: deliver the greatest concentration of force at the enemies weakest point and it will be eventually overwhelmed. He did this at the Battle of Al Alamein with decisive effect.
However, it seems it was downhill for both from here. Monty didn’t have a good war after this, in Normandy and his black stain of Operation Market Garden. As Caddick-Adams writes he chose his viscounty to represent his desert victory, even though he had more power and influence in 1944. Rommel’s time after North Africa was limited, he was almost too popular in the paranoid world of the Third Reich. Given another impossible task of defending Normandy against the allied invasion, he missed D-Day, then was seriously injured before being implicated in the July Plot to assassinate Hitler. After which he was forced to comity suicide for the sake of his family. Rommel’s relationship with Germans ever since has been difficult and it appears only in recent years have they accepted the things he did. This is understandable as a time period he has been caught up in. Monty was a difficult man himself, it appears he was ruthless with his staff officers, a religious and tee total man, he hated smoking and seemed to not get along with most. He did respect his king and direct superior Alan Brooke however. The regular soldier however loved him. Post 1945 peace did not suit him, never apologising for any of his mistakes, he seemed to have been lost without a war to fight.
Ultimately both made the best of and learnt from their circumstances and military culture of their respective counties. Both as Caddick-Adams states, neither were politically astute. The higher someone climbs in the army, the more politically literate they have to be. Neither wanted this, they wanted to lead men and fight on the ground, but at the same time be at the top. Carsick-Adam’s brook is brilliant, easy to read and absolutely fascinating. Both are key and central figures of the Second World War and I would have easily read a biography on each. This is a good book that I recommend.
May 17, 2016
The lives of two WWII military leaders are compared in this book.
A few parts of this book were riveting but the writing was too dense and the narrative was confusing in places.
In terms of the central claim that the two leaders were similar there seemed to be some evidence for this, they were both outsiders, were short and were wounded in WWI, but Rommel seems to have been much more of a frontline soldier (rather than a staff officer) and less concerned about his public standing / image (at least according to this book).
A few parts of this book were riveting but the writing was too dense and the narrative was confusing in places.
In terms of the central claim that the two leaders were similar there seemed to be some evidence for this, they were both outsiders, were short and were wounded in WWI, but Rommel seems to have been much more of a frontline soldier (rather than a staff officer) and less concerned about his public standing / image (at least according to this book).
December 19, 2019
Monty the prick, Rommel the putz would be the way to summarize this book.
Too many Brits probably still overrate Monty as a commander. I worried about that when I grokked through the book and saw Caddick-Adams reference the "Monty blitzkrieg" as part of the Falaise area breakout. It seems that, if not tongue in cheek, it was not totally serious, or was talking about others' takes. The author notes' Monty's thoroughness of preparation and skill in set piece battles, but his lack of ardor in pursuit from North Africa on, and adds that Alexander might well have been better, both as a field general and as an Ally, in Normandy. (Plus, Monty's ego would have been fed as a theater commander and watching him and Mark Clark bang heads would have been fantastic.)
Anyway, Monty was prick even worse after the war, primarily but not solely over protecting and turd-polishing his reputation. Caddick-Adams documents this in detail.
Rommel the putz? Too many Americans may overrate him. Caddick-Adams notes that Martin van Crewald and others have shown that Rommel's supply problems before Alamein were NOT mainly due to Ultra; only a couple of the ships sunk because of it were fuel tankers. Rather, it was primarily the Desert Fox's bad management.
C-A also shows how much Rommel's WWII early rise was due to Hitler, which would have made his seeming falling away alarming to the Fuehrer. He also, and here is where the putz part comes, says that Rommel wanted Hitler tried, and avoided any coup. Since Hitler WAS the state, period, he wasn't going to be tried without a coup happening first.
Was that stance part of a "cover" by Rommel? C-A looks at just how much, or how little, he knew about the Stauffenberg plot. His answer? More than Rommel's widow and son later tried to portray, in all likelihood.
The author gets one other ding, and that's for saying unconditional surrender prolonged the war. He seems to imply that this at the Casablanca Conference. Not true. US military leaders used it in early 1942, Churchill approved its use in a pre-conference press release and more. So, it was accepted. Did it prolong the war?
This assumes that, in 1944 or early 1945, Hitler himself would have supported talk of a separate piece. Goebbels murmured about the Allies being about to fall apart, but when he heard Himmler was trying to negotiate a separate piece, he excommunicated Treue Heinrich.
Too many Brits probably still overrate Monty as a commander. I worried about that when I grokked through the book and saw Caddick-Adams reference the "Monty blitzkrieg" as part of the Falaise area breakout. It seems that, if not tongue in cheek, it was not totally serious, or was talking about others' takes. The author notes' Monty's thoroughness of preparation and skill in set piece battles, but his lack of ardor in pursuit from North Africa on, and adds that Alexander might well have been better, both as a field general and as an Ally, in Normandy. (Plus, Monty's ego would have been fed as a theater commander and watching him and Mark Clark bang heads would have been fantastic.)
Anyway, Monty was prick even worse after the war, primarily but not solely over protecting and turd-polishing his reputation. Caddick-Adams documents this in detail.
Rommel the putz? Too many Americans may overrate him. Caddick-Adams notes that Martin van Crewald and others have shown that Rommel's supply problems before Alamein were NOT mainly due to Ultra; only a couple of the ships sunk because of it were fuel tankers. Rather, it was primarily the Desert Fox's bad management.
C-A also shows how much Rommel's WWII early rise was due to Hitler, which would have made his seeming falling away alarming to the Fuehrer. He also, and here is where the putz part comes, says that Rommel wanted Hitler tried, and avoided any coup. Since Hitler WAS the state, period, he wasn't going to be tried without a coup happening first.
Was that stance part of a "cover" by Rommel? C-A looks at just how much, or how little, he knew about the Stauffenberg plot. His answer? More than Rommel's widow and son later tried to portray, in all likelihood.
The author gets one other ding, and that's for saying unconditional surrender prolonged the war. He seems to imply that this at the Casablanca Conference. Not true. US military leaders used it in early 1942, Churchill approved its use in a pre-conference press release and more. So, it was accepted. Did it prolong the war?
This assumes that, in 1944 or early 1945, Hitler himself would have supported talk of a separate piece. Goebbels murmured about the Allies being about to fall apart, but when he heard Himmler was trying to negotiate a separate piece, he excommunicated Treue Heinrich.
January 17, 2012
Anything about Generals Montgomery and Rommel is bound to be of great interest, they were contemporaries and were in the same battle areas for most of their lives. The Western Desert was the apogee of both of them as leaders of the armies fighting against each other from Alamein to Tunis and together against their greatest enemy, the desert. The political environment of each was very different, but both regarded themselves beyond mere politics and primarily leaders of men at war.
The detail of this is fascinating and is well covered by the author. He keeps everything in sequence and enables the reader to contrast and compare the two lives as they progress. At first this feels a little artificial as they never met, but it becomes more relevant as soon as they were directly opposing each other.
The totality of each story is well known, especially by students of WW2, but I think there is extra mileage in Caddick-Williams experienced approach.
The detail of this is fascinating and is well covered by the author. He keeps everything in sequence and enables the reader to contrast and compare the two lives as they progress. At first this feels a little artificial as they never met, but it becomes more relevant as soon as they were directly opposing each other.
The totality of each story is well known, especially by students of WW2, but I think there is extra mileage in Caddick-Williams experienced approach.
February 18, 2019
I loved this book. Very impressed by the detailed research and general knowledge that would be to required to write a book, with this insight. Books by military historians can be quite dry but this one was completely engrossing, through the stories of both men's experiences of WWI, the invasion of France by Germany in 1940, the war in the desert, and the invasion of France by the Allies in 1944. I really feel I understand these two men better as a result of reading this book. Highly recommended.
September 24, 2012
While I am not a big fan of the "parallel lives" theme, I have found the detailed accounts of the WWI experiences to be quite informative.
Overall, this book was much better than I expected. Lots of chapters on the WW2 experiences. There is a chapter for each general on the post war impact on their legends which includes movie reviews. Even the less than historical "Rat Patrol" TV series is mentioned.
I am a fan of the British General Dempsey and there are some nice tidbits about him.
Overall, this book was much better than I expected. Lots of chapters on the WW2 experiences. There is a chapter for each general on the post war impact on their legends which includes movie reviews. Even the less than historical "Rat Patrol" TV series is mentioned.
I am a fan of the British General Dempsey and there are some nice tidbits about him.
March 16, 2019
I do want to be too harsh on this book. It is very well researched and the author goes out of the way to include as many points of view as possible. But I was reading for entertainment and I found the book got bogged down in details unimportant to me. This book would be better suited to a student or historian with a passion for the subject, than someone with a casual interest in the topic.
August 20, 2021
I'm delighted.
Book contains vast amount of facts from Montgomery's and Rommel's lives, which greatly improved picture of those two generals I developed in my head. Some people might chunter, that Caddick Adams bombed us with completely irrelevant things - that's not true. This tome's main purpose was to depict those two soldiers in best possible way, which actually forced author to unearth incredible amount of information. Yes, that was leading idea. To show main characters as humans- with relationships, flaws, concerns and aspirations. Not as supersoldiers, as they are portrayed all the time, all around the world.
Book consists two major parts (maybe three, if we're stubborn in looking after them). World War I and World War II (this one might be split between Africa and Normandy). That's all I think.
Biggest part of the book is description of relationships between title generals and their contemporaries/subordinates/politicians. Yes, it looks that way. We're reading about Monty's relationship with X, Y and Z. Their quarells about military matters, thoughts about the war, plans for the future, more quarells and so on. Same with Rommel, but he has very nice "action-packed" period during WW I which means we're not overloaded with informations about inter-regimental affairs.
I found Rommel chapters slightly more interesting.
We have few maps placed at the beginning pages of the book. They're good enough to cover events depicted by author through the subsequent chapters. I found them very useful.
For me, the biggest flaw was description of Normandy landings. I mean, why Caddick Adams focused on Omaha and Utah? Why do we need this in books about Montgomery and Rommel? Pre-invasion chapter about planning process was great. I swear, there was so much of interesting information, but later they show as Omaha again. No, it was unnecessary.
My rate is 5. Book deserves it and I recommend it for everyone who want expand his/hers knowledge about those two characters.
Book contains vast amount of facts from Montgomery's and Rommel's lives, which greatly improved picture of those two generals I developed in my head. Some people might chunter, that Caddick Adams bombed us with completely irrelevant things - that's not true. This tome's main purpose was to depict those two soldiers in best possible way, which actually forced author to unearth incredible amount of information. Yes, that was leading idea. To show main characters as humans- with relationships, flaws, concerns and aspirations. Not as supersoldiers, as they are portrayed all the time, all around the world.
Book consists two major parts (maybe three, if we're stubborn in looking after them). World War I and World War II (this one might be split between Africa and Normandy). That's all I think.
Biggest part of the book is description of relationships between title generals and their contemporaries/subordinates/politicians. Yes, it looks that way. We're reading about Monty's relationship with X, Y and Z. Their quarells about military matters, thoughts about the war, plans for the future, more quarells and so on. Same with Rommel, but he has very nice "action-packed" period during WW I which means we're not overloaded with informations about inter-regimental affairs.
I found Rommel chapters slightly more interesting.
We have few maps placed at the beginning pages of the book. They're good enough to cover events depicted by author through the subsequent chapters. I found them very useful.
For me, the biggest flaw was description of Normandy landings. I mean, why Caddick Adams focused on Omaha and Utah? Why do we need this in books about Montgomery and Rommel? Pre-invasion chapter about planning process was great. I swear, there was so much of interesting information, but later they show as Omaha again. No, it was unnecessary.
My rate is 5. Book deserves it and I recommend it for everyone who want expand his/hers knowledge about those two characters.
December 26, 2024
Rare are the writers whose command of language and knowledge combine with the ease of communication. Peter Caddick-Adams is one such exceptional historian and writer. Each sentence is packed with information which builds a comprehensive, analytical history in a manner which captivates, informs and develops the mindset of the reader. Caddick-Adams's history of two of the most well-known and controversial military commanders is exceptional. The book is extremely detailed, does not shy away from engaging in the controversy at every level and does so in a manner which is respectful and challenges hagiography. You end up with a complete life picture of two very complicated historical figures. The book develops the life story of both Monty and Rommel from childhood to maturity identifying the key formative experiences which made them the formidable figures they were to become.
Caddick-Adams builds on the historical narrative by including the wider opinions of military generals and historians on strategy and leadership. This addition makes for a fascinating account of military education, strategy, training, planning and implementation in real-time battlefield conditions.
Also included is the development of the post-war story and the ever changing dynamic of the historiography of Bernard Montgomery and Erwin Rommel. This impacted how and why various histories of the subjects were written and at times rejected. Caddick-Adams has drawn on a wealth of material and historical methods in writing his Parallel Lives. Among the star performing sources are personal papers, battle reports, lectures, books, photographs, maps, eyewitness accounts from various periods of war, post-war reflections and also the developing historical literature. This book is a classic for the W.W.I. and W.W.II. historian or the reader who wishes to begin reading history on either conflict. Caddick-Adams has thrown down the gauntlet for those aiming to produce any history but in particular the history of conflict in the twentieth century.
Caddick-Adams builds on the historical narrative by including the wider opinions of military generals and historians on strategy and leadership. This addition makes for a fascinating account of military education, strategy, training, planning and implementation in real-time battlefield conditions.
Also included is the development of the post-war story and the ever changing dynamic of the historiography of Bernard Montgomery and Erwin Rommel. This impacted how and why various histories of the subjects were written and at times rejected. Caddick-Adams has drawn on a wealth of material and historical methods in writing his Parallel Lives. Among the star performing sources are personal papers, battle reports, lectures, books, photographs, maps, eyewitness accounts from various periods of war, post-war reflections and also the developing historical literature. This book is a classic for the W.W.I. and W.W.II. historian or the reader who wishes to begin reading history on either conflict. Caddick-Adams has thrown down the gauntlet for those aiming to produce any history but in particular the history of conflict in the twentieth century.
March 18, 2022
Better than expected from a somewhat cliche topic choice, perhaps the most interesting parts of the book being the WW1 experiences that shaped the generals, as well as an examination of their postwar legacies. Bizarrely, actual battles like El Alamein and much of Sicily and Italy are quickly glossed over in less than a page; perhaps correct given the literature already written on them, but still feeling somewhat like an oversight. The Normandy campaign receives more of a fleshing out, though is bogged down with random stereotypical American accounts that feel out of place in a focused study on a Brit and German. Despite this the writing style is done well and generally advances at a good pace that keeps it interesting.
May 8, 2022
Interesting, first book I’ve come across that performs a comparison of these 2 legendary soldiers and opponent s. The initial chapters lay down a solids foundation for what is to come. No doubt that without their formative experiences, their individual experiences in both wars would have been very different. Throughout the text, extensive footnotes expand key points in the text, you’ll need 2 bookmarks. A great volume bringing together 2 of the 20th century’s greatest adversaries.
March 29, 2019
The book was well researched but too in depth for a casual reader. It's perfect for a student or historian who wants all the facts. But for myself, it was slow dense reading. It bogged down on trivial facts and connections. Not a book l would recommend for the average reader.
September 2, 2019
I really enjoyed this book. Monty and Rommel are two of the most interesting generals of the Second World War. Their lives paralleled each other in many ways. This was a fascinating account of their military careers arranges so we see what each was doing at the same time.
January 20, 2021
Brilliant book very informative on the personal side of these great military gentlemen
April 8, 2021
Excellent read for anyone interested in the military, leadership and how reputations evolve over time. A knowledge of military matters will help enjoyment.
October 12, 2022
The book doesn't do so well at comparing the two generals. But a fairly good history book all the same.
March 2, 2016
Fascinating insight into the 2 characters and they're evolution through 2 wars. Though I was initially more interested in what happened during WWII, their progression during WWI was nevertheless fascinating particularly as you see the natural leader that Rommel became. Additionally, the authors insights into the Normandy landings and the German response are equally of great interest. It was also great to finally get the reasoning behind the naming of the beaches after having read numerous book on the same subject over a good few years..
April 25, 2014
An utterly brilliant work! The massive quantity of detail and the skilled & adroit synthesis is breath-taking. I doubt we will ever again see a historian with this depth of shear knowledge regarding the two protagonists and their times.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews