In this bold history of the men who directed and determined the outcome of the mid-seventeenth-century British wars—from Cromwell, Fairfax, and Essex to many more lesser-known figures—military historian Malcolm Wanklyn offers the first assessment of leadership and the importance of command in the civil wars.
Written from the sense that there was a tendency to attribute Parliamentary victory to simply having the bigger battalions and more resources, Wanklyn is attempting to put generalship and military art back into the equation. For the period up to and including Naseby, I'd say that Wanklyn achieves his ends, as the careers of the major field commanders seem to be successfully critiqued. From there, matters seem a little more pat, as there was no denying that the Commonwealth had superior resources, and that Oliver Cromwell was the preeminent commander. What this monograph mostly reminds me is that I'm overdue to read a good biography of the rise and acts of the Lord Protector.
Extemely well researched. Author seems to have a thesis that all but 1 Civil War general (George H. Thomas) was bereft of any forsight or skill in command. Once understood, the book is worth reading for a Civil War buff.
Hard to imagine a better single-volume account of the battles and campaigns of the First Civil War in particular from the perspective of military command.