The Face of Battle

By: John Keegan

Narrated by: Simon Vance

Length: 11 hrs and 45 mins

Publisher's summary

In this major and wholly original contribution to military history, John Keegan reverses the usual convention of writing about war in terms of generals and nations in conflict, which tends to leave the common soldier as cipher. Instead, he focuses on what a set battle is like for the man in the thick of it—his fears, his wounds and their treatment, the mechanics of being taken prisoner, the nature of leadership at the most junior level, the role of compulsion in getting men to stand their ground, the intrusions of cruelty and compassion, the din and blood.

Set battles, with their unities of time and place, may be a thing of the past, but this anatomy of what they were like for the men who fought them is an unforgettable mirror held up to human nature.

©1976 John Keegan (P)2001 Blackstone Audio, Inc.

Critic reviews

“The most brilliant evocation of military experience in our time.” (C. P. Snow, British novelist and scientist)

Brilliant.

This is one of the finest military history books by one of the greatest military historians in the history of warfare. Read it or listen to it.

Amazing! But probably better in print.

This is one of those books that you instantly recognize as a classic whether you knew it had that status or not, and then resent the world for not previously introducing you to it. The book is an exploration of the human dimension of war told through the experience of three reasonably well-documented battles: Agincourt, Waterloo, and the Somme. But it's not some namby-pamby celebration of the common soldier or anything obnoxious like that. Rather it's an erudite analysis of the cold reality: just how close were the soldiers together and in how many lines deep, and what happened when a cavalry charge actually crashed into the lines? How did the soldiers get to the front lines and how did they spend the night before, and so were they tired, cold, hungry, damp? The overarching strategic narrative of each battle is presented briefly, but for the most part each chapter focuses on the narrow tactical dimension: what happened, for example, at Waterloo when cavalry met cavalry, infantry met infantry, infantry met cavalry, or when artillery sprayed infantry or infantry or cavalry overran artillery. Some of the broader context is also discussed: how did the role of leadership evolve, how important was religion, and were the soldiers drunk?

Keegan is forthright about the limitations of his book. He focuses on three Western European battles fought by English troops. Near the end of his work, published in 1976, he discusses how tanks changed the role of individual battles--many of which were truly sieges he concludes--in WWII, and speculates about the future face of battle, clearly having WWIII against the Soviets foremost in mind. He doesn't anticipate, although it seems unreasonable to expect him to have, the increasing significance of counterinsurgency warfare. Perhaps the age of the true battle really is past and this book is of mere historical significance. Let's hope so. But if so, that makes the experience of reading about this lost world and imagining oneself in it all the more remarkable.

I highly recommend this book, but I will note that it's a little hard to follow on audio. It might work better on a long car-ride, but if you'd really interested, I think I'd suggest getting the print version.

Yawn

This reads like a thesis for a doctorate which I guess it might be since the author has been a lecturer at Sandhurst - but maybe not. The first 3 hours seem to be the author explaining in pretty tortuous prose how he has never personally experienced a battle, and then explaining how he has never personally experienced a battle, and then in case you didn't get that amid the overwrought verbiage explaining how this book about battles is being written by an author who has never experienced a battle himself. At that point I fell out of the headphones and have yet to climb back into them. The reviews seemed to promise something interesting so I'll probably try again since this is a free listen and not something I should return, but in the interests of giving an honest report I am so far discouraged enough to wonder about all the rave reviews...

Not what I expected.....

A scholarly examination of warfare as told by a British scholar who has never been to war.....Also, the book was written in the 1970's. Thus, the author relies on WWII much too heavily for his examination.

Gritty and broad viewed

Keegan manages to explain the grand strategy of why a battle is important, what happened in said battle, and (most importantly) focuses on the experience of the individual soldiers.
Details like "the men suffered from diarrhoea but where in formation, so not allowed to move, had to relieve themselves where they stood"; this puts things into perspective.

Very good not super beginner friendly

Excellent. First two chapters dense and less accessible. Beginning w chapter 3, fascinating. Worth a second listen of actual read.

A fascinating deep dive

One thing I do a lot of these days is listen to audiobooks on subjects that will broaden my horizons as an author. And not only that, since I edit the professionally where military situations often crop up, so it's important that I Know All The Things when it comes to the smaller details – like battle. The Face of Battle by John Keegan was included in my Audible subscription, and it was a no-brainer for me to pick it up. It helps, also, that the narrator, Simon Vance, has a wonderful voice. I'm now putting more works that he's read on my TBR list purely because I like him so much.

Keegan's writing takes a little time to get into, but once I got past the introduction, I was accustomed to his diction and the subject matter. The Face of Battle looks primarily at how the experience of battle was for the average soldier – a reality often overlooked or glossed over in historical accounts that tend to glomp together combatants' experiences as if the armies were singular entities rather than units made up of individuals.

How we, as human beings, face the trauma and tribulations of battle and extended warfare, is an undeniably complex subject. How we do battle, too, has changed profoundly over the years, as Keegan explains. While the topic of warfare over the centuries is certainly broad, Keegan picked three famous battles in which he showcased the changes: that being Agincourt (1415 CE); Waterloo (1815 CE); and the Somme (1916 CE).

Once thing that is clear, is that our ways of killing our fellow humans have gone from the personal – featuring one-on-one conflict using blades – to the impersonal, involving ranged artillery bombardment that often lasts for months. How we write about these battles and history matters, for if we lose sight of how things are for the man on the ground, it's far too easy to embellish and gloss over the sheer weight of human misery. Issues such as supply lines, lack of communication, and dealing with injuries are just as important to consider as strategy and final outcomes. We see how commanders were once hands on, moving from site to site in order to maintain efforts, to the fact that those in charge often never set foot at the front – directing troop movements remotely.

Keegan does well to illustrate the often fraught situations combatants find themselves in, giving a deep dive into the conditions in which many brave and often terrified men perished. I'd recommend this classic to anyone who is fascinated by military history or who wishes to gain a broad idea of how battles are enacted – and this is an important resource, I feel, for those who are looking at writing historical or military fiction.

Classic Military History that Mostly Holds Up

John Keegan, one of the leading military historians of recent decades, helped to deepen the approach of military history in this early, classic work. Breaking from what he saw as the sketchy "battle piece" he sees as derived from Ceasar's Gallic War narrative, he is at his best in the three lengthy and (for the time) often revolutionary analyses of the major battles of Agincourt (100 Years War), Waterloo (Napoleonic War), and the Somme (World War 1). After providing a narrative of each, he proceeds to a deeper analysis of the soldiers themselves, the weapons they used, the wounds they experienced, the conditions of combat, and the impact of each battle on survivors and military tactics. If the work seems less revolutionary now than when published in 1974, it is a tribute to the success of the new approach Keegan and others brought into military history in recent decades.

Keegan also impresses by his inquisitive approach, full of questions he hopes to, but cannot always, answer, giving non-historians an insider's view of how the best historians think. If his predictions for the future are sometimes off (his prediction that America's Vietnam experience would probably have little impact on American military policy and strategic thought comes to mind) and his writing in the introduction a bit stilted, these are relatively minor flaws that detract little from his three main case studies. Still well worth a read for military historians and for anyone seeking to understand the continuities and changes in the face of battle over the centuries.

sucked could not finish

What disappointed you about The Face of Battle?

dry! Dry! Dry1

Any additional comments?

don't waste your time. I see why the book was only $5.00

Very British very dull

This book wasn’t for you, but who do you think might enjoy it more?

This book requires a person who is obsessed by detail and cares deeply about small distinction. Maybe it is better read than heard

What was most disappointing about John Keegan’s story?

Dull, detailed and verbose

You didn’t love this book... but did it have any redeeming qualities?

The author is very very smart but listen was a chore

Any additional comments?

Probably better as a book to read than hear