Celtic warfare, 1595-1763 /
James Michael Hill.
Edinburgh : J. Donald, c1986.
xi, 203 p. : ill. ; 24 cm.
0859761517 (pbk.) :
More Details
Edinburgh : J. Donald, c1986.
0859761517 (pbk.) :
catalogue key
Includes bibliographical references and index.
A Look Inside
Full Text Reviews
Appeared in Choice on 1986-11:
This well-researched work concentrates upon the confrontations between the unsophisticated Celtic system and the modernizing English army. Using both original sources and secondary works, Hill (University of Alabama) has done a masterful job of showing how the clan chiefs could only achieve victory when on the offensive, and only when they led from the front in the heroic manner. Their approach worked best when they fought a guerrilla war against poorly trained and ill-led English troops whose generals sought to garrison advanced posts in Gaelic territory. When the English were better armed with quick-firing muskets and ring bayonets and subject to the steadiness of discipline in the 18th century, the advantage of the Highland charge was dissipated, especially if the Scots could be encouraged to carry the offensive to their enemy's territories where they no longer held the advantage of local knowledge. The Celts traveled light and ignored logistics, a legacy they left to the American Southern Confederacy in 1861, and it, too, led to defeat. General and academic readerships, upper-division undergraduates and above.-R. Higham, Kansas State University
This item was reviewed in:
Choice, November 1986
To find out how to look for other reviews, please see our guides to finding book reviews in the Sciences or Social Sciences and Humanities.
Bowker Data Service Summary
Since earliest times the strategy and tactics of the Celts in battle has exhibited a surprising continuity over the centuries. This text provides a study of the way in which the Celtic peoples fought and the weapons that they used.

This information is provided by a service that aggregates data from review sources and other sources that are often consulted by libraries, and readers. The University does not edit this information and merely includes it as a convenience for users. It does not warrant that reviews are accurate. As with any review users should approach reviews critically and where deemed necessary should consult multiple review sources. Any concerns or questions about particular reviews should be directed to the reviewer and/or publisher.

  link to old catalogue

Report a problem