Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
I have that one, and it only mentioned demi-lancers in a passing remark. I'd like something a bit more extensive.
Demi-lancers were used extensively in Ireland, so I think the Irish wars book might have something
Now, I recently got a new Osprey purchase (Landsknecht Soldier), and I'm looking for a new one. This time I'd like to know more about the armies of the Ancient Near East. Any suggestions? I've heard that the Assyrian and Egyptian ones are definite recommendations.
Well two good choices on the Osprey poll this month: A Mamluk Warrior title and a Byzantine Cataphract Warrior title, which I voted on. Doesn't mean it'll get made but at least they're considering it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yggdrasill
Or perhaps the Tudor Knight ? I am waiting for the elite Armada so I can't say anything about it ( still one plate does include te Demi Lancer), but I have the Irish wars and there is nothing useful.
I know it was to BKB, but I had something to say anyway. Pardon my intrusion.:juggle2:
Yeah I was thinking Tudor Knight also, might have a look in it if I get a minute.
I have "The Ancient Assyrians" and found it a nice read. Plates by McBride.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
Quote:
Nope, I don't have it yet. It will take a while I am sure, because only when my 18 volume order will be ready I will get the Hussar. I have seen the plates which are a disappointment in my opinion ( nothing from the last 100 years of the Husaria history).
Disappointment in what way - quality or simply the choice of the plates (as you stated no plates from the last 100 years, which I really don't care much about anyway)? My interest is primarily the earlier period, up to the Deluge. If the book and the plates cover that period well, I'll be happy
More Osprey books for next April:
Condottiere 1300-1500: Infamous Medieval Mercenaries (Warrior)
Medieval Russian Fortresses Ad 862-1480 (Fortress)
Granicus 334bc: Alexander's First Persian Victory (Campaign)
Surely the last book makes no sense, what with the Alexander Campaign book covering all his battles?
Thats another book for me, more hundred years war stuff to add to the collect.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
To an extent I will agree with you, it is rater unusual for Osprey to get this deep into something. But then again Granicus is one of the more controversial battles. Seemingly a good deal more confused than either Issus, Gaugamela or Hydaspes.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
So I expect a lot of deeply detailed plates on maneuvers ect. Something that lacks in the Alexander Campaign.
If it goes to explain anything other than the smaller campaigns in Thrace and the likes (which I hope will get more attention as well), then it is definately not worth it. Two books doing the same stuff.
But remember, there are three books more or less that covers the same battles with Hannibal.
I must say that I was somewhat disappointed with The Myceneans. Great plates, but they lacked something, I guess the usual battleplate was what I missed. But also the info was vague at best. It felt a bit hollow, but then again what could I expect? It is after all a relatively unknown period. In any case, if you have a specific interest in the Myceneans, it isn't for you. Only if you think it mgiht be cool to know a little more about something you haven't considered before.
The Bronce Age Warchariots however is great... Lovely plates and plenty of info (better spread out than The Myceneans), so you never really feel 'lonely'.
Can you tell me more about what it touches on?Quote:
Originally Posted by Conqueror
Also, do any of the others here have any more suggestions for Osprey books on the Ancient Near East?
I have also gotten the Assyrians.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
It coveres the entire Assyrian accendancy and fall, from the first notice of the state until the last siege. Naturally it is the later periods that gain the lionshare of attention.
It is fairly wellstructured between tactics, equipment, organization and politics. Well worth the time for me, but then agian I knew not very much about the Assyrians prior to this (just that they were uncommonly brutal and the ones repelled at Jerusalem, both of which were debunked).
There is also a book on even more ancient people. I can't remember what it is called (I just burrowed it from a library), but it is abuot Isralites, Kurds, ancient Arabs, Egyptians, Nubians, Sea People and Hittites. A great little compilation, with a obvious focus on Egypt of course. But the info on the Sea People and their equipment is very much interesting (we have all seen the Egyptian carvings of them, it is very much a different experience to see them 'live')
Kraxis has it summed up well. Getting a good "big picture" on the Assyrians was what I wanted and I think this one delivers it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yggdrasill
Both in a way. I think the lat 75 years of Husaria could get at least one plate.
It is a pity that these new Warrior books have only 8 plates which limits the choice much.
Another thing is lack of action pictures - only one - comparing to other warrior books I have seen or have. I hope the text is better, the extracted page worries my really much, and not only me - my friend who is a historian and actually writes his fourth book about Polish army from this period (one was exclusively about Husaria) right now asked me recently about it - he is waiting for his Osprey book as well.:book:
And the plates - see for yourself -
http://www.totalwar.org.pl/board/vie...5249&start=825
In the middle of the page.:book:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach1
Any of those books in English perhaps? :book:
By the way, I like the plates, all except the first one
I am not sure those are all though, look mre closely at this sample page the top spread on the left, I think there is more...
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/titl...0X~view=spread
Where did you get these plates?
Does anyone have "the moors" or "the saracen faris"? Those are the ones that I really want...
I have both. Saracen faris is great, a lot of info is cramed in one little book, and the plates are OK too, especially the ones detailing armour.
The Moors is OK, nothig special. The problem is that it cover too much ground, some 700 years, so you won+t find a lot of info.
I would love to see the Byzantine Cataphract being made. :book:
Ukrainian and Russian TW forum.:book:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yggdrasill
Well if the problem is the issue of charging pike infantry, then I am not all that against an objective book that debunks some myths. With all due respect to the Husaria, who were probably one of the best cavalry of all times (not to menion the best looking), they weren't all-powerful and charging pikes simply doesn't seem possible unless you have the X factor (pikemen with very short pikes, low quality pkemen, pikemen on the move, pikemen that have sustained losses etc.).Quote:
BTW I have just received e-mail from this guy. He said he read Brzezinski's book and he is shocked... It really isn't good, I asked him for examples what is so bad about that.
It would be a shame if such important military unit is described in a wrong way...
What about the plates, I think there shall be more, see the link I posted, are those on the forum from a book that somebody already has or what?
Everything seems to be a problem...
the guy I mentioned wrote:
'Irresponsible selection of sources, negative examples only - in addition used intentionally in suprising, unprofessional way. Horrible approach towards battle descriptions'
I asked him for more detailed review.
I really am suprised, I really liked the wide range of sources the author was usually using - if now he changes the policy I am curious why. :inquisitive:
The pikemen thing isn't a myth, although it required a lot of effort, training etc to achieve it, but it is not a place to discuss it anyway.
Well... at least nothing can be worse than the Armies of Ivan the Terrible, the only good thing about it is that it was illustrated by McBride - Winged Hussar CANNOT be worse, can it ?:juggle2: :inquisitive:
That sounds strange considering the author - he's not some nobody, but an already established Osprey writer who specializes in the period. On top of that he's a Pole, can't get better than this.
I still have faith that everything will turn out OK, Warrior books are generally good, much better than the Men-at-arms series.
I have to comment on Macedonian Warrior (Warrior 103)...
Oh what a lovely little piece of marvel.
The author uses a very light tone, yet he is firm. He also keeps it interesting all along, no dabbling in rather useless details (as some Osprey authors tend to do). It never gets tedious to read, as he keeps the flow going, without becoming too light and superficial. But most importantly he argues well for he points but in such a way that you feel you are allowed to disagree. Often authors tend to make it so that their POW is 'the one true path', and are so heavyhanded that you get annoyed with their arrogance. Not this one. He is firm in his beliefs and, as mentioned, he argues extremely well, but he doesn't try to pull his beliefs down over your face, you make your own conclusions.
I don't agree with him on several points, but unlike others where that just gets me riled up, this time I felt like smiling for while I disagreed I could see the validity in his points.
Also, he catered to my most precious beliefs of the Macedonian phalangites. That the machaira is indeed a kopis or a version of it (and thus not a dagger), and that the hypaspists were indeed armed with a shorter spear and a larger shield (makes good arguments for it, some of which I myself have argued previously).
While there isn't a chapter about psychology, he makes good use of it, something I liked. It can get too singular when only equipment/archeological finds are used.
Definately worth th read, even if you know a good about it already as it gives you an insight in the scolarly battles ragarding the issues (he keeps mentioning such fights).
No response from Osprey. I sent them a mail with all the details necessary, over 25 days passed, no books.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yggdrasill
I need to wait for some other books in the same package, so Winged Hussar didn't arrive yet...
Anyway, EVERY single review of the book I have read is much the same - the book is TERRIBLE, full of mistakes and generally seems to be written as if with the purpose of trashing Husaria as much as possible.
There are numerous examples of the strange and unexpected (at least by me) attitude of the writer.
One of those:
quote
„and until now, all I've ever seen in Polish works is that the hussars were invincible, unstoppable, superior to everything they ever met...If you take the time to read Swedish, German, Austrian contemporary sources another very different voice comes through, which most patriotic Poles will not trouble to listen to, because they know better...”
Hmm... I might not be a professional, but I have no idea how educated person can claim such nonsense... Actually I can name at least 3 different authors who ctiticised the unit very much, even too much in some cases.
Apparently the author has some idea to become famous as the first unbiased writer or something, but first it is far too late, second he makes terrible mistakes in judgement and about simple facts like Husaria's lance lenght...
Overall I have no idea why he had spawned such a thing. Many people are pretty pissed off about the book and actually I have even some experts challenging Brzezinski for a serious discussion - without no aswer...
I need to chack the yahoo side where he explained what he has written and why, but with so many simple mistakes he would better claim he was temporary insane or something...
I really wish the author had better approach, he dosn't need to like the topic, but he could at least read more and not insult the knowledge of so numerous experts...
I guess I will better be more careful in future when I see a book written by Richard Brzezinski.:wall: :furious3:
Ole ole. My new batch of books has arrived.
The two byzantines Armies books, Gods Warriors, Ninja and Kingtiger Heavy Tank are in the package. :book:
Right some new books for May next year:
Naseby 1645 (Campaign)
The Fall of Constantinople: the Ottoman Conquest of Byzantium (Must be a General Military at 256 pages. Probably the 1453 Campaign book, plus the Janissaries Elite title and the first Ottoman Armies book I presume. Or maybe the Ottoman Empire Essential Histories one thrown in as well)
The Roman Army of the Punic Wars 264-146 BC (The most interesting of all. At 96 pages it seems to be a Campaign or an Essential Histories. I'm presuming its the latter but sounds strange to be honest considering we already have a similar MAA title)
The last 2 look interesting, although the Fall of Constantinople book is basically enough for historical information about the fall for a normal reader.
If you want serious learning, study the Byzantine empire from the beginning. :book:
Just a quick update - the Roman Army in the Punic Wars book is a Battle Orders title, a first for the Ancient/Medieval era.
Only one new good book next June, but FINALLY!
Byzantine Infantryman: Eastern Roman Empire C.900-1204 (Warrior)
I don't know whose illustrating yet, but if its McBride that would be even better.
Next July we're getting The Castles of Edward I in Wales 1277-1307, a fortress title, and not before time it has to be said.
When's the Byzantine Warrior (finally!) title coming out?
I bought my first of the Essential Histories series yesterday (n.62: The Ottoman Empire 1326-1699); I can strongly recommend them. The layout is excellent, a logical portrayal of the period is kept lively with relevant maps and visual sources. They don't contain plates, but then again we don't buy books to look at the pretty pictures.... do we? :stupido3:
I have several pages about Serbian medieval units. They are not good...:thumbsdown:
This is a must buy. Hurray! :book:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
I just got The Hun and was annoyed to find it only had SIX plates. For a Warrior book, which used to have 10, this is pathetic, especially when one considers the price has gone up also.
I didn't expect a lot plate wise with this book, not enough is known about them. There is little archaeological evidence to build a reliable picture; it is not even known whether the Huns maintained their own dress and culture in Europe or whether they adopted that of their Germanic subjects. Most descriptions are the biased ramblings of those who tried to re-write history and vilify those who they failed to understand. Ammianus Marcellinus is one such historian. His work was all hearsay, yet it is this rubbish that fills the history books and opinions of the west.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
About the content (since I was hoping for some new facts) is there much in the way of recently discovered information or is it just a re-hash of already printed material?
For what it's worth I will still order it
........Orda
I should be getting Sassanian Cavalry and Early Russian Armies quite soon. :yes:
Angus' cover work for the Baltic Crusades looks fantastic:
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/osp_...rs/S9886AL.JPG
It does, however, the previous books about Scandinavian armies weren't all too good, neither were the paintings. Incorrect facts and soldiers wearing fur, even during battles that were fought in summertime. It's not all snowy and pines up here ~:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
While I have heard a lot about the inaccuracies of the last Scandinavian books and that the accuracy of the images depicted aren't that great, I thought the actual quality of the plates was excellent.
May be so...Anyway, I'd feel more easy about this book if Nicolle wasn't involved, he's prone to totaly over-estimate the fighting abilities of eastern european people and sometimes simply shapes history so that it'll fit with his idea of it all (Battle on Lake Peipus 1242 anyone?). Also, Graham Turner is a a lot better painter, both when it comes to talent and historical accuracy. But let's no be too negative and hope for a good bok:yes:
Mate I'll let you off on this occassion but if you knew anything about me and my love for Angus you would not say such comments while I was around.:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
Sorry BKB, I have to agree with Innocentius, Turner's work is better IMO, McBride cannot draw bowsQuote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
......Orda
Graham Turner's work for the Armies of the Caliphates book is phenomenal, I might add. And while the work McBride's done for that Baltic Crusades book you showed (subject's also highly interesting), the plates he's made lately seem a bit under par. Sassanian Elite Cavalry, for instance, while chock full of excellent information, is a bit lacking in the artwork department.
Ah well, at least it isn't as bad as Rome's Enemies: The Parthians ~;) Armies of Medieval Russia 750 - 1250 is a good read and even better in the plates department, I might add.
Orda you mean compound bows, and for me that is pretty anal. Turner has a limited range and while I like him there is no life in his work for all the detail, and he just doesn't convey the feel and action that Angus does, no artist can.
And Angus is 75 now, I know he's not as good as he was due to his change in drawing style but he's still brilliant.
Christa Hook's artwork for The Hun for example is terrible, blurred beyond visibility and some of the worst I've seen in a while.
Hmph, I don't agree about McBride being able to portray action and movement very well. He's better for static scenes, or with little fast or major movement. IMO, Embleton's plates for The Sarmatians are the standard for good depiction of movement, although I know you won't agree. ~;)
Sorry you see it as anal but surely he has done some research? Most, if not all of his depictions of Asiatic bows are totally inaccurate and so small as to resemble that of Cupid.
I am not claiming Turner to be above fault either
......Orda
Great news lads, looks like Angus is doing the Byzantine Infantryman book! I'm really hoping for good pics of Dorostolon and Kleidon in there somewhere.
Just got the Scandinavian-Baltic Crusades and Angus really is back to his best - he no longer uses the charcoals he's utilized in recent years but is back to his old methods by the looks of things, and it pays dividends. Some of his best work in a long time, really atmospheric, good plates. Can't wait for his Byzantine Infantryman title now.
My friend bought Men-at-Arms – Hungary and The Fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568.
I am mainly disappointed, especially about Serbian military history :thumbsdown:. Those are only parts of wrong descriptions:
Army was typical for Early Slavs, and influence from Byzantium and Hungary was irrelevant. :book:Quote:
Its small army developed under Byzantine and Hungarian influence…
Ha ha ha. :laugh4: :beam: Composite bows in Serbia :dizzy2:. Even I am greatest Serbian patriot I wouldn’t claim that ever! Also, crossbow and arbalest had never large use in Serbia.Quote:
Swords were rare until late 14th century, by which time composite bows and crossbows were coming into use.
Which is not true. Nobility used leather armor. :book:Quote:
Armour was almost unknown until the 12th century…
This is not proven. Usage is proven for ballistae, catapults and trebuchets.:book:Quote:
Yet the Serbs did use mangonels in siege warfare…
Not true, again :thumbsdown:. In Velbužd, King Stefan Dečanski brought 1 300 German mercenaries hired in Venice. The core was 300 knights.Quote:
While the Bulgars were supported by numerous Mongol and Wallachian horse archers, the Serbian force apparently included 1 000 Spaniards, perhaps Catalan veterans of Byzantine service.
I found more inaccuracies... :no:
Here’s another “brilliant” claims by David Nicolle in Men-at-Arms – Hungary and The Fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568:
David forgot to write what type in mercenaries. King Stefan Milutin (1282-1321) had personal guard of 2 000 Cuman cavalrymen. He massively used Cumans as typical Turkopoles, but he also used Turks, Ossetinians (Alans), and Tatars (Mongols). After him usage of Turkopoles was abandoned.Quote:
From the late 13th century increasing wealth from mining enabled Serbia’s rulers to recruit mercenaries, while the core of their army now consisted of armoured horse-archers equipped in Byzantine or elite Mongol style with composite bows, maces and horse-armour.
But, what I underlined is much more interesting. Well, in late 13th century Serbian nobles fought as typical Western knights. Story about “armoured horse-archers equipped in Byzantine or elite Mongol style with composite bows, maces and horse-armour” is somebody’s imagination :beam:. Mace was popular among nobility, but never as sword. Composite bows :beam: I already commented yesterday.
Crossbow never became the most important infantry weapon in the 14th century. :book: Bow was always and stayed until end of medieval Serbia 1459. Crossbows were used, but never as bows. And here is the reason - in feudal Serbia there was a class of people called vlasi (vlachs) who were cattle breeders. They had obligation to provide certain number of soldiers and they were archers in Serbian armies.Quote:
Nevertheless, many light infantrymen still used javelins, although the crossbow became far the most important infantry weapon in the 14th century.
General history of Serbia I won’t comment, because there are a lot of inaccuracies, but Osprey is mainly about military…
Don't worry Duke !
I have read over 200 Osprey books and almost in every single one which at least mentions Poland there are mistakes in this matter.
Just to name few ones.
The constant mistakes in any descriptions of the war in 1939 with repeated stupidities such as about the Polish airforce destroyed in first few days, or one of most ridiculous in an Elite series book which mentions that SS 'Kempf' division took Modlin fortress with only 15 men lost (in the reality they appeared in last few days and blocked the Polish garrison from the north - the direction noone targeted).
The stubbornly repeated idea that the battle of Raszyn in 1809 was lost by the Poles, the constant fixation on calling Westerplatte position in Danzig in 1939 a fortress, the numerous remarks here and there of various degree of pure nonsense and pure Soviet/Russian propaganda in Russian Men-at-Arms books...:wall:
I still cannot believe that in Man-at-Arms nr. 13 ( Cossacks( Polish-Lithuanian Uprising of 1830-31 ( called often Polish-Russian war of 1831) is described as 'civil unrest' (page 20)...
Lovely, it is like calling battle at Tannenberg in 1410 'a noisy debate'.:laugh4:
The worst thing is that NEW books repeat old mistakes and add new ones.
I guess it is so bloody difficult to read something different than old, 'reliable' sources.:book:
Trebuchets are mangonels, counterweight mangonels to be exact, so it's sort of right.Quote:
This is not proven. Usage is proven for ballistae, catapults and trebuchets.
Anyway there is a thing I've been wondering, is "The cult of the weermacht" widespread in the Osprey books? Because it seems likely if it is, because for a large number of military historian The Nazi German army is surrouned by a shroud of mystical awe and they talk enthusiastically about this and this 2nd Weermacht Panzerschlaffkampfgruppeabteilung mit edelweiss etc. I'm just wondering if this is true here as well.
Granted Men-at-Arms – Hungary and The Fall of Eastern Europe 1000-1568 covers a long and tumultuous period and trys to cover too many areas, which leads to generalizations and minor errors, but I didn't find anything egregious in the book.
Back in September, I wrote a review of Richard Brzezinski's Polish winged hussar: 1576-1775 - http://www.librarything.com/work/1318304
A great book that dispels several myths in a logical manner, backed up with accounts - not for nationalists or romanticists.
_______________________________________________
Expecting Crusader Castles in Cyprus, Greece and the Aegean 1191–1571 early in March. Should be an interesting read, though Nicolle detractors may want to look at something else.
I wonder what happened to the David Murphy's Osprey Warrior:Condottiere 1300-1500?
I am a World War Two buff(still have a longggg ways to go), I am new to the Osprey Publishing, and I am wondering if their reference books about the armies, equipment, formations, etc... is generally very accurate and are good for referencing and using for research? I haven't really read up on these subjects very much(which I should be doing) and I am wondering if Osprey is good to use for this sorta thing or is there another company that has better "info"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condottiere
I disagree. The book has numerous flaws.
The introduction is horrible and offending ( but puts the author in such a good mood and position hard to undermine without accusations for 'romantism and nationalism').He does so purpusefully - I have noticed this from his answers for criticism - below the acceptable level a respected historian should represent.
It is not completelly bad.
It adds something in two parts - the ones about camp servants and 'elear' i.e. 'chosen', volunteer force.
The rest is from good or avarage level to terrible - it represents outdated point of view of Jerzy Teodorczyk which was dominating among Polish historians untill most recent years - actually almost quotes Teodorczyk despite his errors found and criticised in more recent books.
Personally I was supricesed to read those in a work which (according to the author) dispells myths and challenges the beliefs of - who actually ? An avarage reader ? Someone who just heard about the cavalry and read nothing about it ? For sure someone who doesn't read in Polish so cannot compare the 'truths' written by the author with the supposedly flawed works of Polish historians who, ironically are quoted by Brzezinski in the very book.
EVERY SINGLE more detailed book about the same subject doesn't worship the unit as the author tries to claim.
That is unfortunate, because despite its mistakes other books of Mr.Brzezinski were - in my opinion - very good, however here it I can come to only one conclusion the author tries to demolish the legend, challenges the icon which unfortunatelly can only be done with FULL knowledge of the subject and the book shows lack of such.
You might be new to the historical period and clearly know nothing of other works about the Winged Hussars but please avoid Mr.Brzezinski's arrogance when dealing with it, OK ?:no:
I felt disgusted to the extreme when I have read the introduction which can be commented the following way - 'read noone else than me - they are all nationalists and fanatics - besides you don't know Polish so you can never verify if I wrote the truth - so believe me or be damned.'
If you can handle more detailed discussion you can always use PMs, all right ?
P.S. I have bought 5 'Winged Hussars', fortunatelly I was able to withdraw from the deal after getting the first one and realising my mistake.
It would be the worst possible idea to give this to anyone with knowledge about the subject here - other works are cheaper and more datailed - you can get 3 better books for the price of this one, here in Poland.
In a way it could be hard to face such a temptation...
Imagine yourself as the sole source for numerous english-language readers - they cannot challenge you, they have to believe you so half-complete selecton of sources or references will do the job.
People can lose their head with such possibilities open to explore...
Still cannot undersatand why the author wrote such offending introduction - he has open access to even most recent works of polish historians - I know that from his answers in zaglobastavern so why he didn't use them ?:inquisitive:
Osprey are making up for a rather lacklustre year in the Ancient/Medieval genre with some great Nov/Dec titles lads!
First, a long-overdue Thermopylae campaign book. Richard Hook will probably illustrate this one.
Secondly, a 'Pirate of the Far East 941-1644AD' Warrior book. Interesting subject. Turnbull of course is writing it, don't know about the illustrator.
Thirdly, a 'Teutonic Knight 1190-1561' Warrior book. I've been waiting for this one for a while. Turner's illustrating, shame its not Angus.
But Angus is illustrating his third book of the year in the shape of 'The Army of Herod the Great', a MAA title. A bumper year for Angus certainly! Should be an interesting book about an overlooked subject. Unfortunately, a seemingly tie-in title on Fortresses of Judea has been delayed until 2008.
There's also a Japanese Castles in Korea 1592-98AD Fortress book coming out.
Also there's a Soldier of the Pharaoh: Middle Kingdom Egypt Warrior book coming out (probably to tie-in with the Hittite Warrior), a Castles of Henry VIII Fortress title, and a Castles of Edward I on its way.
I'm itching to see Angus' Byzantine Infantryman book - its an area I've learned a ton about and I have some scenes I'd really like to see him depict. Condottiere (Turner) should also be pretty good.
I always say it can be and will be worse! :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach
I completely agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by cegorach
Btw, price of Osprey’s books varies in Serbia (read Belgrade, because you can buy them only in our capital) from ~7 to ~20 euros.
Not minor errors, huge! :thumbsdown: I just posted about Serbia (just military, not touching general history), and I didn’t touch Bulgaria, and other countries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Condottiere
They wrote book in manner “Serbia was between Hungary and Byzantium – conclusion: they had similar warfare to them…” :wall:
Well Since I started collecting last feb, I have a wopping five!
Essential Histories.
The Hundred Years War (really puts everything into perspective)
Thirty Years war (my favourite book at the moment)
Then I have Arthur and the AS wars
Samurai
And Viking Saxons and Normans.
But, I have heard, through my spy network that me ole'man has just orderec for me a wopping ten books! I am salivating at the thought of smelling them, then stroking them, then fibally putting them all in a row on a bookshelf, and showing them off to hot chicks. :2thumbsup: :shame: :sweatdrop: :whip:
Yep I need:help:
Aaaahh, that's the spirit, young man. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar
Not a lot for me over the next few months :no:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orda Khan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
You are losing ground, BKB! :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Baba Ga'on
You know me well enough by now DJ, my opinion is the only one that matters:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke John
This is both good and bad news... as a huge fan of Angus, I'm really happy to see him illustrate another Hellenistic book, especially one on an Eastern subject. However, this will be another crappy-plate-and-pure-speculation-reconstruction book, like the recent Hun one. There is next to no info about the appearance or armament of Herod's army in either literary or archaeological sources. I would expect many a photograph of late Hellenistic Judaean fortification ruins in the text :no:.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
I though the Hun one was pretty terrible, and that's probably why it only had 6 plates.
This was on an e-group I subscribe to, and may be of interest to some on here.
"Gentlemen,
Bad News. I just had a call from Osprey, who told me that Angus McBride
has just passed away. Apparently the 76-year old artist suffered from a
major heart attack. He had recently moved from South Africa to Ireland
to be with his daughter, and was living and working from a cottage in
the grounds.
I worked with him on a series of four pirate books for Osprey, and
found him an extremely charming, witty and fun-loving gentleman. He was
by far the best and most respected military artist of his generation,
and we'll all feel his loss.
Angus Konstam
Edinburgh"
Oh this is very sad news :sad:
Rest in peace, Angus. There is life in your art that will never die :bow:
Terrible news. I'm gutted. The greatest military artist. None come close. I doubt I'll be getting anymore Osprey books.
None of the others come close. Richard hook, turner, no one. Jesus this is horrible. A sad day. Two more of his books to look forward to and maybe some unpublished images that hopefully will see the light of day. For me this is the death of Osprey. The books are shite now anyway.
Of course It's sad news about Angus, and he was indeed a talented artist (RIP), but you are way overestimating him. Embleton, Turner and Hook have always outshone him in both realism and accuracy and especially Turner's artwork is simply amazing. Different from McBride, none of the above have included any historical errors (I must say I was quite dissapointed with the plates in Scandinavian Medieval Armies (2)).Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
Nonetheless, thank you for all the good books, Angus:shame:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
Your entitled to your opinion. Its wrong of course. As soon as you said Embleton I stopped reading.
That's a very mature attitude... I believe you're just kidding me anyway so I'll disregard that and instead ask you to bring up an historical error drawn by Embleton (who is involved in re-enacting for what I know).Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
My "favourite" plate of McBride's is that of the Gotland "militia" in Scandinavian Medieval Armies (2), invluding a "Gotland rural nobleman":laugh4: . Also there is his Halqa-archer in The Mamluk 1250-1517 wearing an insane amount of armour and clothes in the desert...
How awful. RIP Angus. You work will never die. :bow:
Embleton's greatest historical error was picking up a pencil in the first place. Angus may have made the odd historical error but I appreciated the mere quality and scene he captured rather than anal matters. The guy has just died and you're nitpicking his work, I think you're the one who needs to adopt a more mature attitude and show some respect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
And you base that on what? You might prefer Angus's paintings over Embleton's but if you can't bring up a single argument as to why you loath all other Osprey painters but McBride...well...Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
First I think that all of the artists I mentioned draw even better than McBride, but that's very much a personal opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
Second: Anal matters? I guess the fact that he included complete unrealistic "details" and invented a new form of nobility is going anal... Also I have all respect for McBride ans his artwork, but few things get me so upset as people acting truly immature (both "IRL" but even more so on the internet) and that got me into this argumentative frenzy. I'm sorry if I came across as disrespectful in your eyes, but on the other hand you've just discredited some of Osprey Publishing's finest artists.
Hello. Can you please drop this line of debate? :yes:
Oh, I wish you could call this a debate...Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey S
Angus Mcbride may not have been the most accurate historically but he was the best artist for osprey and military art in general. On that point there is no debate needed.
If you can't see that I can't be arsed to carry on anything further with you
Whats really annoyed me here is that you know I like the guy and he has just died. You just came on here to belittle his work and you knew it would annoy me. You couldn't even pay the guy some respect in death. Without him Osprey would have died long ago.
Of course everyone has a right to their opinion but to believe the other artists in question show more life and depth than Mcbride's pieces is complete bollocks. If you asked any of the artists for osprey they would say the same thing.
Yes there are some mistakes in his work. The death of Julian in the Sassanid Cavalryman for example. Its obvious the legionaries are wearing antiquated armour but it doesn't detract from the beauty of the picture. Have we come to the point where we want people standing still with complete accuracy? I want life and depictions of famous scenes when looking at military art.
So what you're basically saying is "If you don't agree with me then I won't discuss with you". That's just great. Besides, this contradicts with this:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
Again, very much a matter of personal opinion. I read Osprey to (hopefully) learn a little, and I prefer everything being clean and displayed in an overlookable manner like in many of Turner's books (like in the English Medieval Knight books). Of course I appreciate the scenery in McBride's plates but if it was scenery I'd wanted I'd probably have bought a book containing artwork meant to be artwork, not artwork meant to display what arms and armour was used hundreds of years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
A pretty much entirely false accusation. Like I've stated several times in this thread I have all respect for McBride and his contributions to Osprey, although my true favourties of his are his depiction of LotR orcs).Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia
Again, I did not come here to belittle his work and I probably would've never brought it up if you hadn't acted so disrespectfully towards other illustrators whom I hold to be better than McBride. Try to see things from a different perspective.