Quote Originally Posted by ray243
I would ignore Goldsworthy, given his analysis of the later era Roman army is pretty weak in my opinion.
For my part I read him because of the high remarks in his peer reviews he gets. He is used as a reference in books that are coming out, such as "Soldiers and Ghosts" and a few others I can't recall off hand. I have read a couple other forum folk say they didn't think much of Goldsworthy, I was wondering why? Is there a historian you have read that completely lambastes Goldsworthy? If so I'm interested to know who, it would be in contrast to the multitude of other historians who claim him to be one of the best in his field. But don't go on my word, look up his peer reviews!