Landships II

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: New WWI Book by Gary Sheffield


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3885
Date:
New WWI Book by Gary Sheffield
Permalink   


Came across this today in a well-known bookshop: "The First World War in 100 Objects; the Story of the Great War Told Through the Objects that Shaped It." Author: Professor Gary Sheffield.

Quite by chance, I heard on the radio earlier that today is "Super Thursday" - the day when publishers release all the books that they hope or expect will be big sellers at Christmas. It gives people time to become aware of them and buy them in time for Xmas. Let us say that Prof. Sheffield is unlikely to be unaware that next year is 2014, the centenary of the Great War.

This idea should not be confused with "A History of the World in 100 Objects," a joint venture between the British Museum and BBC Radio which was broadcast in 2010. Let us assume it was "inspired by" the earlier exercise.

Why this way of approaching the Great War is desirable, I cannot say. I expect someone at a meeting said, "Hey! I've got a great idea." Anyway, I had a browse through and checked what the Prof has to say on the subject of Tanks. You'll notice there's one on the cover. I was gratified to see that two of the 100 objects are Tanks: the Mk V and the Renault FT.

The Mk V article describes in reasonable detail the Mk V and V*, although it does seem to think that the room in the V* for a machine-gun crew was the reason for the lengthening rather than a side-effect. The article also shows "a Mk V tank that took part in the Lord Mayor's Show." It is a Mk V*.

The article on the Renault reminds those of us who might have forgotten that the FT stands for faible tonnage . . . .

Prof. Sheffield and his book feature on Facebook and Twitter, if anyone wants to have a word.



Attachments
__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.



Major

Status: Offline
Posts: 146
Date:
Permalink   

James H wrote:
The article on the Renault reminds those of us who might have forgotten that the FT stands for faible tonnage . . . .

 Ghluk hlllll ghhhhhhhhhhnr AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!



__________________
...


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 2318
Date:
Permalink   

James H wrote:

The article on the Renault reminds those of us who might have forgotten that the FT stands for faible tonnage . . . .

Prof. Sheffield and his book feature on Facebook and Twitter, if anyone wants to have a word.


Perhaps he should be sentenced to indefinite detention in the French Army archive at Vincennes until he repents of his error or finds proof of his canard.

In older times "transportation to the colony of New South Wales" would be appropriate but Australians have become fussy in recent years.

Regards,

Charlie



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1416
Date:
Permalink   

Transportation to old south Wales could be the new punishment. (I'm allowed to say that, being Welsh...)

Gwyn

__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 1062
Date:
Permalink   

Are you by any chance, Gwyn, from north Wales?



__________________


Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 3885
Date:
Permalink   

Update. Had a further sneaky "browse" today.

The Mk V* that is wrongly captioned as a Mk V is 9949, and the text says that the Mk V was lengthened in order to make room for an mg crew. It's also stated that the Mk I Male had 4 Hotchkiss mgs.

The Renault FT article is extraordinary. It claims that "Jean-Baptiste" Estienne was "convinced of the value of light tanks," which he wasn't. There's a modern picture of "a replica of the FT-17," which is actually the Saumur FT with the M31 Reibel. But the strangest thing is that a good three-quarters of the article is about Patton and the use of the FT by the AEF, in remarkable detail. The French scarcely get a mention.

Rather depressing that you can dumb something down this much and still get it wrong.

Flicking through the rest of it, I came across an article entitled "Winston Churchill's Cigar." It just goes on to talk about Churchill, so what is the point of this half-witted exercise? It also claims that Churchill wore his Adrian helmet in action, which I'm certain didn't happen.

I'm afraid this is a coffee-table book of a not very high standard. The format and style are matters of preference, I suppose, but that's not the same as being inaccurate and lazy.



-- Edited by James H on Wednesday 16th of October 2013 04:42:24 PM

__________________

"Sometimes things that are not true are included in Wikipedia. While at first glance that may appear like a very great problem for Wikipedia, in reality is it not. In fact, it's a good thing." - Wikipedia.

RCD


Lieutenant-Colonel

Status: Offline
Posts: 185
Date:
Permalink   

CharlieC wrote:
James H wrote:

The article on the Renault reminds those of us who might have forgotten that the FT stands for faible tonnage . . . .

Prof. Sheffield and his book feature on Facebook and Twitter, if anyone wants to have a word.


Perhaps he should be sentenced to indefinite detention in the French Army archive at Vincennes until he repents of his error or finds proof of his canard.

In older times "transportation to the colony of New South Wales" would be appropriate but Australians have become fussy in recent years.

Regards,

Charlie

 

Judging by the number of Australians in the UK it looks like transportation to Britain (terrible punishment - the cold , rain and proper cask beer!) is the norm for young Australians. I assume they play the same role as missionaries did to the 'dark continent' during the Victorian period smile


 



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard