These invaluable references employ remarkable computer technology that generates stunning graphics to bring to life memorable battles.

"Twenty famous victories, won by some of the most outstanding field commanders in history, are ... portrayed in this ... book. Selected because of their vital contribution to the development of battlefield tactics, the commanders in this book span more than two thousand years of warfare ... The battles chosen reveal the vital links between the manner in which victory was achieved and the military skill and leadership of each great commander"--Jacket

"This volume is not a study of the 'greatest' commanders; rather, it is an examination of commanders who should be considered great. The seven leaders examined, in various domains of ground, sea, and air, each in their own way successfully addressed the challenges of military endeavor in their time and changed the world in which they lived"--Foreword.

Time Commanders, the TV game show from the BBC and Lion Television, features teams of contestants battling against a computer loaded with the tactics of the greatest military minds of all time. With famous battles from history and contestants from all walks of life - while members of the public try to control one army through a computer simulation, the other army acts as we know from the sources that it did - the show has proved popular. the Ancient World: from Caesar to Spartacus; from the Hittites to the Carthaginians; from Boudicca to Attila the Hun; from Alexander the Great to Rameses II. The book also includes information on the main protagonists, the weapons of war, improving technology and the sources. With graphics from the show and a timeline showing the worldwide background to each battle, relevant websites and a good bibliography, this is much more than a TV tie-in - it is a truly accessible history reference book for adults and children alike.

This in-depth survey of the greatest generals of the Napoleonic wars offers biographical information of twelve oustanding military commanders including Napoleon, Wellington, Blucher, Kutusov and Archduke Charles; with analysis of each general and and their battles.

History has tended to measure war's winners and losers in terms of its major engagements, battles in which the result was so clear-cut that they could be considered "decisive." Cannae, Konigsberg, Austerlitz, Midway, Agincourt-all resonate in the literature of war and in our imaginations as tide-turning. But these legendary battles may or may not have determined the final outcome of the wars in which they were fought. Nor has the "genius" of the so-called Great Captains - from Alexander the Great to Frederick the Great and Napoleon - play a major role. Wars are decided in other ways. Cathal J. Nolan's The Allure of Battle systematically and engrossingly examines the great battles, tracing what he calls "short-war thinking," the hope that victory might be swift and wars brief. As he proves persuasively, however, such has almost never been the case. Even the major engagements have mainly contributed to victory or defeat by accelerating the erosion of the other side's defences. Massive conflicts, the so-called "people's wars," beginning with Napoleon and continuing until 1945, have consisted of and been determined by prolonged stalemate and attrition, industrial wars in which the determining factor has been not military but matériel. Nolan's masterful book places battles squarely and mercilessly within the context of the wider conflict in which they took place. In the process it help corrects a distorted view of battle's role in war, replacing popular images of the "battles of annihilation" with somber appreciation of the commitments and human sacrifices made throughout centuries of war particularly among the Great Powers. Accessible, provocative, exhaustive, and illuminating, The Allure of Battle will spark fresh debate about the history and conduct of warfare.

A dual biography of the greatest opposing generals of their age who ultimately became fixated on one another, by a bestselling historian. 'Thoroughly enjoyable, beautifully written and meticulously researched' Observer On the morning of the battle of Waterloo, the Emperor Napoleon declared that the Duke of Wellington was a bad general, the British were bad soldiers and that France could not fail to win an easy victory. Forever afterwards historians have accused him of gross overconfidence, and massively underestimating the calibre of the British commander opposed to him. Andrew Roberts presents an original, highly revisionist view of the relationship between the two greatest captains of their age. Napoleon, who was born in the same year as Wellington - 1769 - fought Wellington by proxy years earlier in the Peninsula War, praising his ruthlessness in private while publicly deriding him as a mere 'sepoy general'. In contrast, Wellington publicly lauded Napoleon, saying that his presence on a battlefield was worth forty thousand men, but privately wrote long memoranda lambasting Napoleon's campaigning techniques. Although Wellington saved Napoleon from execution after Waterloo, Napoleon left money in his will to the man who had tried to assassinate Wellington. Wellington in turn amassed a series of Napoleonic trophies of his great victory, even sleeping with two of the Emperor's mistresses.