When the Romans occupied the southern half of Britain in AD 43; the Iceni tribe quickly allied themselves with the invaders. Having paid tribute to Rome; they continued to be ruled by their own kings. But 17 years later; when Prasutagus; the king of the Iceni; died; the Romans decided to incorporate his kingdom into the new province. When his widow Boudicca protested; she "was flogged and their daughters raped"; sparking one of the most famous rebellions in history. This book tells how Boudicca raised her people and other tribes in revolt; overran the provincial towns of Camulodunum (Colchester); Londinium (London) and Verulamium (St Albans); destroyed the IX Legion; and nearly took control of the fledgling Roman province; before being finally brought to heel in a pitched battle at Mancetter.
#894379 in Books Frontline Books 2013-03-19 2013-04-02Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.20 x 1.10 x 6.50l; 1.30 #File Name: 1848326637256 pages
Review
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. Thumbs up to Peter Tsouras for his "Disaster at Stalingrad."By Jay D. ZollitschA big thumbs up to Peter Tsouras for his book; “Disaster at Stalingradâ€. In the forward section of thisbook; a fellow author very conveniently gives us an excellent 5 point criteria to judge an alternate historybook: a compelling vision; historical and technical knowledge; a grasp of character; writing ability; andfinally storytelling ability. Peter then proceeds to do all of the above in spades. He interweaves selectiveplausible changes in the German naval and land strategies in 1942; that result in cumulative tacticalchanges during the German “Case Blue†summer offensive in Russia. With a small realistic reallocation ofGerman air and naval forces; Peter has the Anglo Artic convoy PQ17; which is taking war supplies toRussia; completely destroyed by a combined German air and naval attack; which puts a realistic halt onArtic supply convoys to Russia. In reality; PQ17 did lose 24 of 35 merchant vessels; resulting in thesuspension of Artic supply convoys to Russia from July to September 1942. With the Germans advancingdeeper into the Caucus; to capture 90% of Russia’s oil and cut off the Anglo supply route thru Persia; thestrategic situation is altered. In reality the Germans did briefly capture the Caucus oil areas and cut off theCaucus; but could not completely conquer and occupy all of the Caucus up to the border with Turkey.The net strategic effect is that Russia is slowly running out of critical war supplies; then a few Germangenerals find enough of a backbone to fight a mobile battle to defeat the Russians on the Don; insteadof an attrition war in the rubble of Stalingrad. Could history have changed? Peter answers that questionby offering up extensive research on the quantities of war supplies used and shipped; the major land unitsinvolved; the overall strategies of each side; and interweaves the personalities of the major historicalcharacters involved to yield a vision of plausible changes that lead to different plausible results. Peteroffers an alternate vision; an alternate education; within the confines of the realistic conditions of 1942.Peter does throw in a few things that could be called poetic justice [the final sniper scene] that add to theflavor of the story; but for anyone who is willing to ‘think out of the box’ the story ride is well worth it. My compliments.Ltc. Jay D. Zollitsch1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. A Fine if Somewhat Dry Alternate HistoryBy Steven WoodcockThis is a FASCINATING alternate history hypothesizing Hitler and Stalin both made various different choices leading up to the Battle of Stalingrad. Because of those choices; history unfolds VERY differently by the end of 1942; and one wonders how it would have unfolded from THERE.This book had been out for a couple of years and always seems to bounce around in my Wish List without ever quite making the jump up to the Cart; but I finally pulled the trigger a month or so back. Turns out I REALLY liked the subject matter -- I at least haven't seen many books on this particular subject -- but it's not quite the book I'd expected. The scope is much broader; with Tsouras building up the events that would lead to the different decisions culminating in the Battle of Stalingrad . A decision by Hitler to concentrate on the Murmansk convoys indirectly leads to Turkey deciding to join the war on the side of the Axis; and Stalin's reaction in turn provokes Hitler's reaction which likewise triggers Stalin's reaction which in turn.....the dominoes begin to fall.Having said that; the book felt a bit "dry". It's not told from the point of view of the individual men fighting the battle (virtually never; anyway) but more at the higher scope of decisions and counter-decisions and (I thought) relatively dry descriptions of battles and their outcomes. The last chapter felt a bit rushed and I found myself often turning back a page or two to re-read a paragraph that rapidly changed a given situation. The ending; however; was IMMENSELY satisfying and I rather hope Tsouras plans to do a followup from there at some point.VERY recommended for any fans of alternative history; though it's a bit dry -- be warned.24 of 26 people found the following review helpful. Alternate Stalingrad.By Stone DogGood alternate history takes a historical event; makes a plausible change and explores what effects that plausible change could have wrought. Good alternate history is true to the times; the personalities and the technologies (time travelers giving Robert E. Lee laser rifles at Gettysburg wouldn't count!). It's a "what if" experiment where an author says "If this changed; what might have happened next? Then what? Then how could that have affected this other event?"Peter Tsouras writes good alternate history (most of the time) and shows a clear and expert grasp of military history; military technology and the personalities that set the course of history. He does exacting research on the units; commanders and weapons as well as their capabilities so he has a very good understanding on what is possible and what is not. Often the "what if's" are backed up by plans that were actually suggested at the time; but rejected.This particular work revolves around "Case Blue" and the German summer offensive in the south of the USSR in 1942 which culminated in the battle of Stalingrad which was; in reality; a disaster for the Germans. What causes the changes rolling in this book? A transport aircraft carrying CinC of the German navy (Kriegsmarine) Erich Raeder crashes; killing the admiral. Sounds pretty remote an event to Stalingrad; doesn't it? Tsouras ties it in beautifully and shows he understands the vital dimension of logistics in war to an extent most people who read about WWII don't realize. There are naval battles; massive land campaigns; guerrilla and mountain warfare; changed alliances and more!I don't do spoilers so I can't give you a synopsis of the alternate campaign. I will say that the changed world is indeed plausible and shows history could indeed have followed a very different path than the one we know. While a few of his "what if's" are a stretch; most are spot-on given what we know about the personalities; units; weapons etc. I don't want to give anything away; but I was disappointed by the ending because it's exactly the same as the ending of another one of his excellent books.Another thing I didn't like about this book is that you don't get the same grunt-level stories that you got in "Disaster At D-Day" for example and I miss that. The Eastern Front was simply so geographically large and units smaller than the Corps or Army-level are simply irrelevant to the story and you miss some of the tactical-level stories found in his other books.Still and all; this is a very good book that most military history readers will like even if just for the sake of argument and debate! It's not as good as Tsouras's "Disaster At D-Day" but it's still a good; well-written book and I recommend it with four stars.
