What do you think?
Rate this book
Churchill's Generals
Essays discuss the lives and careers of twenty of the leading British generals of the Second World War
368 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 1991
28 people are currently reading
223 people want to read
About the author
John Keegan
130 books788 followersSir John Desmond Patrick Keegan, OBE, FRSL was a British military historian, lecturer and journalist. He published many works on the nature of combat between the 14th and 21st centuries concerning land, air, maritime and intelligence warfare as well as the psychology of battle.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
June 5, 2025
Much like the men themselves, the essays in this collection are of variable quality. The big takeaway for me is that Britain produced very few generals of note in the Second World War (Brooke, Alexander, Montgomery and Slim stand out in this regard). The rest vary from steady and competent to disastrous.
Brooke is a particular standout figure, and personifies the firm diplomacy that was essential to ensuring the smooth functioning of the Allied war effort. He was also particularly well suited to acting as a brake and complement to Churchill:
“As head of the British Army, Brooke commanded the admiration - and often induced the fear of all. He was quick in mind, speech and temper, master of his profession, uncompromising in upholding what he believed right and intolerant of pettiness, procrastination or incompetence. But, although formidable, Brooke was at heart a kind and sensitive human being, one loved by his few intimates, one for the gentle and understanding gesture where it was appropriate, one who took infinite trouble with ostensibly unimportant people, one who could talk directly and as one man to another with anybody of whatever degree, one totally without pomposity…Brooke - Field-Marshal Viscount Alanbrooke in the aftermath of the War - was the greatest Chief of the Imperial General Staff ever produced by the British Army. It was his destiny to come to authority at exactly the right hour; an hour when the country was in fearful peril, and was being certainly sustained but sometimes endangered by the mercurial genius of Churchill. Alanbrooke was the perfect complement to that genius. He and Churchill formed an incomparable partnership in the higher direction of the Second World War.”
Lord Carver’s essay on Montgomery is another standout, and is a very stimulating summary of the factors that contributed to his success.. Carver pinpoints the suitability of Monty to the Allied philosophy of war when commenting that he “made caution and calculation the bedrock of his military art. The essence of it was that one should not commit oneself to a battle until one has assembled the forces, land and air, and the logistic resources to support them, which will make it possible to penetrate a vital point of the enemy's defence, and then to keep up the pressure by feeding in more forces, so that one retains the initiative.” For the Western Allies, liberal democracies with huge material superiority and a policy of ‘steel not flesh,’ this was the approach most likely to deliver success.
Timing also favoured Monty, both in his Second World War service (“except for the brief interlude of his command of the 3rd Division in the British Expeditionary Force in France and Belgium in 1940, circumstances favoured the application of his principles. From the time that he assumed command of Eighth Army in Egypt in August 1942 until the end of the war, he enjoyed an overwhelming superiority of resources over the enemy, and was hardly ever liable to have his plans or operations seriously disturbed by a counter-thrust.”) and in his earlier service in the First World War (“He was lucky not only to survive at the time, but because a severe wound at that early stage of the war led to his service on the staff for the rest of it. Had he returned to a battalion in the front line, his chances of survival would have been small, and his experience in succession as a brigade-major, GSO2, first at a divisional then at a corps headquarters, and finally, in 1918, as GSO1, virtually chief of staff, of a division, provided him with an experience at different levels of command of planning and executing operations involving all arms, which was the foundation of his military expertise.”).
Carver points to Monty’s experience in 1918 as “especially formative. In a series of successful offensive operations, from August until the armistice, he proved what meticulous planning and carefully controlled execution could achieve, in contrast to his experience on the Somme and at Passchendaele. Ingrained in his attitude to war, henceforward, was that soldiers' lives must not be squandered in ill-planned, sloppily executed operations, based on failure to take all relevant factors into account; but that results could not be achieved without casualties, from which he would not flinch if they promised results. To send men to their death for no gain, or through failure to think the problem through, or as a result of inefficiency in execution, was unforgivable.”
These experiences were distilled after the war and applied to great effect from 1942 onwards. Montgomery was undoubtedly prickly, vain, even odd, but this essay hasn’t changed my opinion that he was still the single most effective British general of the Second World War.
Much of the rest of the book feels a little dated, but there is still enough of value here to interest the afflicted!
Brooke is a particular standout figure, and personifies the firm diplomacy that was essential to ensuring the smooth functioning of the Allied war effort. He was also particularly well suited to acting as a brake and complement to Churchill:
“As head of the British Army, Brooke commanded the admiration - and often induced the fear of all. He was quick in mind, speech and temper, master of his profession, uncompromising in upholding what he believed right and intolerant of pettiness, procrastination or incompetence. But, although formidable, Brooke was at heart a kind and sensitive human being, one loved by his few intimates, one for the gentle and understanding gesture where it was appropriate, one who took infinite trouble with ostensibly unimportant people, one who could talk directly and as one man to another with anybody of whatever degree, one totally without pomposity…Brooke - Field-Marshal Viscount Alanbrooke in the aftermath of the War - was the greatest Chief of the Imperial General Staff ever produced by the British Army. It was his destiny to come to authority at exactly the right hour; an hour when the country was in fearful peril, and was being certainly sustained but sometimes endangered by the mercurial genius of Churchill. Alanbrooke was the perfect complement to that genius. He and Churchill formed an incomparable partnership in the higher direction of the Second World War.”
Lord Carver’s essay on Montgomery is another standout, and is a very stimulating summary of the factors that contributed to his success.. Carver pinpoints the suitability of Monty to the Allied philosophy of war when commenting that he “made caution and calculation the bedrock of his military art. The essence of it was that one should not commit oneself to a battle until one has assembled the forces, land and air, and the logistic resources to support them, which will make it possible to penetrate a vital point of the enemy's defence, and then to keep up the pressure by feeding in more forces, so that one retains the initiative.” For the Western Allies, liberal democracies with huge material superiority and a policy of ‘steel not flesh,’ this was the approach most likely to deliver success.
Timing also favoured Monty, both in his Second World War service (“except for the brief interlude of his command of the 3rd Division in the British Expeditionary Force in France and Belgium in 1940, circumstances favoured the application of his principles. From the time that he assumed command of Eighth Army in Egypt in August 1942 until the end of the war, he enjoyed an overwhelming superiority of resources over the enemy, and was hardly ever liable to have his plans or operations seriously disturbed by a counter-thrust.”) and in his earlier service in the First World War (“He was lucky not only to survive at the time, but because a severe wound at that early stage of the war led to his service on the staff for the rest of it. Had he returned to a battalion in the front line, his chances of survival would have been small, and his experience in succession as a brigade-major, GSO2, first at a divisional then at a corps headquarters, and finally, in 1918, as GSO1, virtually chief of staff, of a division, provided him with an experience at different levels of command of planning and executing operations involving all arms, which was the foundation of his military expertise.”).
Carver points to Monty’s experience in 1918 as “especially formative. In a series of successful offensive operations, from August until the armistice, he proved what meticulous planning and carefully controlled execution could achieve, in contrast to his experience on the Somme and at Passchendaele. Ingrained in his attitude to war, henceforward, was that soldiers' lives must not be squandered in ill-planned, sloppily executed operations, based on failure to take all relevant factors into account; but that results could not be achieved without casualties, from which he would not flinch if they promised results. To send men to their death for no gain, or through failure to think the problem through, or as a result of inefficiency in execution, was unforgivable.”
These experiences were distilled after the war and applied to great effect from 1942 onwards. Montgomery was undoubtedly prickly, vain, even odd, but this essay hasn’t changed my opinion that he was still the single most effective British general of the Second World War.
Much of the rest of the book feels a little dated, but there is still enough of value here to interest the afflicted!
July 10, 2015
This book is an always interesting series of portraits of twenty of the British generals who carried out Churchill's war policies during World War II. Churchill, as both the Premier and the Minister of Defense, was probably more responsible than any other single individual for the strategic conduct of the war. Much has been written (much of it by Churchill himself - see his six volume history of the conflict) about the part he played in the formulation of this war policy. But this book isn't about Churchill.
John Keegan is the editor, and contributed the Introduction. The twenty mini-bios are written by seventeen different military biographers. The generals covered are Ironside, Gort, Dill, Wavell, Alanbrooke, Alexander, Auchinleck, Montgomery, Wilson, O'Connor, Cunningham, Ritchie, Leese, Horrocks, Hobart, Percival, Wingate, Slim, De Wiart, and Spears. There are photos of all the generals included, which thankfully put a face on each of the subjects.
Though the book can be read from front to back enjoyably, it is also an excellent reference book for anyone interested in WW II, particularly those whose interest is centered on the British contribution to the Allied victory.
John Keegan is the editor, and contributed the Introduction. The twenty mini-bios are written by seventeen different military biographers. The generals covered are Ironside, Gort, Dill, Wavell, Alanbrooke, Alexander, Auchinleck, Montgomery, Wilson, O'Connor, Cunningham, Ritchie, Leese, Horrocks, Hobart, Percival, Wingate, Slim, De Wiart, and Spears. There are photos of all the generals included, which thankfully put a face on each of the subjects.
Though the book can be read from front to back enjoyably, it is also an excellent reference book for anyone interested in WW II, particularly those whose interest is centered on the British contribution to the Allied victory.
September 29, 2020
A good read with a couple of curious additions - Carton & Spears
This is no hagiography of the generals, with the sole exception of Alanbrooke they are all shown to have their faults, some far more than others. Disappointing that the source of Rommel's prescience in the Desert War is not revealed - The Italians had broken the US cypher and the US observer in the Campaign given untrammeled access to the British plans was effectively giving the information direct to Rommel from his reports to Washington. This eventually stopped when investigations prompted by Ultra intercepts detected the source and the victory in the First battle of Alamein was the result when the Desert Fox was effectively blinded.
This is no hagiography of the generals, with the sole exception of Alanbrooke they are all shown to have their faults, some far more than others. Disappointing that the source of Rommel's prescience in the Desert War is not revealed - The Italians had broken the US cypher and the US observer in the Campaign given untrammeled access to the British plans was effectively giving the information direct to Rommel from his reports to Washington. This eventually stopped when investigations prompted by Ultra intercepts detected the source and the victory in the First battle of Alamein was the result when the Desert Fox was effectively blinded.
December 18, 2019
Churchill’s Generals, edited by the superb military historian, John Keegan, is an interesting, informative, and fun book to read. The book consists of a series of well-written essays by different military historians that serve as short biographical studies on those key individuals who, during World War II, made up Winston Churchill’s successful military commanders. Among the essays that I found most interesting, were those on General Wavell, by Ian Beckett, Field Marshall, Sir John Dill, by Alex Danchev, On Lord Alan Brooke, by David Fraser, Field Marshall, Sir Claude Auchinclek, by Philip Warner, General Sir Richard O’Connor, by Barrie Pitt, Lt. General Sir Brian Horrochs, by Alan Shepherd, and Field Marshall Lord Slim, by Duncan Anderson.
All of the biographical essays by these outstanding military historians are well-written, and carry within them, compelling lessons on leadership and the importance of an individual’s character. Most of the essays have excellent short bibliographies included within them, as well as an capsulated chronology of key moments in the individual general’s life and career. I found this to be a compelling collection of essays, and urge anyone who is interested in military history, and the bigger challenge of why an individual is successful, what goes into the makeup of their experience and wisdom. It is well worth reading.
All of the biographical essays by these outstanding military historians are well-written, and carry within them, compelling lessons on leadership and the importance of an individual’s character. Most of the essays have excellent short bibliographies included within them, as well as an capsulated chronology of key moments in the individual general’s life and career. I found this to be a compelling collection of essays, and urge anyone who is interested in military history, and the bigger challenge of why an individual is successful, what goes into the makeup of their experience and wisdom. It is well worth reading.
May 20, 2023
Seventeen essays by various historians on all the major generals of the British army during World War II. The big names get a chapter each - Alanbrooke, Montgomery, Auchinleck, some smaller names share a chapter with fellow generals. Although never straying into hagiography, some of the essays come perilously close and almost all are too indulgent of their subjects. The book overall reeks of imperial nostalgia. The generals are invariable brilliant and, if they aren't, it's because of circumstances outside their control or those dastardly Americans. I mean, dash it all, but those Americans really are the most vulgar creatures and if this war is the end of our empire and the birth of theirs, then it was a bally good way to go down old boy.
March 28, 2021
A good collection of short essays on many of the more important British generals of the Second World War. Most I knew about but there were several that I had never heard of, it was interesting to see how some of the lesser known played important roles where credit is normally given to the more famous. The book could have greatly benefited from some maps, especially as some of the earlier development of these officers referenced First World War campaigns that readers may not be overly familiar with.
June 25, 2020
Interesting snapshots of Churchill's Generals.
Worth a read to gain insight into these senior players in WW2, perhaps prior to reading full biographies of some.
As an aside there are more typo errors in this book than any I have read before.
Worth a read to gain insight into these senior players in WW2, perhaps prior to reading full biographies of some.
As an aside there are more typo errors in this book than any I have read before.
April 18, 2020
This is a great collection of essays on some of the top British generals in the Second World War. Some were more successful than others but we can all benefit from their lessons.
February 17, 2017
A very enjoyable book - and an almost perfect book for the loo, as each chapter covers a new topic. Edited by John Keegan, every chapter is written by a good historian, so one never get tired of any style. Everyone from Gort and Ironside in the early war to Horrocks and Slim at the end, with nice efficient articles about Alexander and Monty. Everywhere the difference between solid staffers and inspired tacticians is laid out. My only complaint is the lack of maps, as there are NONE, which hurts the book. But this book relies on the reader having already made themselves at least a little with each soldier's oeuvre. A solid recommendation although younger readers may want to have an atlas and a military history site available when perusing...
June 14, 2020
Having recently read the first volume of Nigel Hamilton’s biography on Field Marshall Bernard Montgomery, I was intrigued by the other names that kept cropping up within the chapters. Figures such as Sir Brian Horrocks and Sir Archibald Wavell were ever influential in the progress of the Second World War and yet I still barely knew anything about them besides their names and theatres of war as mentioned by Hamilton.
This is where John Keegan’s ‘Churchills Generals’ becomes ever more important. Through each chapter detailing the life and achievements of other equally fascinating men, one begins to further understand the trademark characteristics adopted by them and begins to make them more than just names and things. From the eccentricities of Major General Orde Wingate to the ingenuity of the similarly ranked Percy Hobart it becomes clear that there was much more to the British contribution to the Second World War than Bernard Montgomery and Winston Churchill.
‘Churchills Generals’ is a superb introduction to the other characters involved in the general staff and overall decision making throughout World War II. Each chapter is well organised and contains an easy to understand analysis of each man, and an analysis of their strengths and weakness as leaders of men. The historians who contributed to this piece show dignity and balance in their biographies and I am impressed by Michael Carver’s contribution to the chapter on Montgomery which shows tact and restraint to create a more balanced view of him contrary to the very egotistical an arrogant accounts given by other authors and biographers.
My only reservation with this book is the lack of maps which would have been very useful in giving more context to the theatres in which these men served within and while this is a very minor point it would have been nice all the same.
In conclusion, John Keegan’s compilation of essays in ‘Churchills Generals’ is a very readable book that contains much more information than I could have hoped for in understanding the roles and responsibilities of the general staff within the British Army in the Second World War. While a book could have dedicated to each person mentioned it was nice to see a brief account of these men and their overall impact during this period.
This is where John Keegan’s ‘Churchills Generals’ becomes ever more important. Through each chapter detailing the life and achievements of other equally fascinating men, one begins to further understand the trademark characteristics adopted by them and begins to make them more than just names and things. From the eccentricities of Major General Orde Wingate to the ingenuity of the similarly ranked Percy Hobart it becomes clear that there was much more to the British contribution to the Second World War than Bernard Montgomery and Winston Churchill.
‘Churchills Generals’ is a superb introduction to the other characters involved in the general staff and overall decision making throughout World War II. Each chapter is well organised and contains an easy to understand analysis of each man, and an analysis of their strengths and weakness as leaders of men. The historians who contributed to this piece show dignity and balance in their biographies and I am impressed by Michael Carver’s contribution to the chapter on Montgomery which shows tact and restraint to create a more balanced view of him contrary to the very egotistical an arrogant accounts given by other authors and biographers.
My only reservation with this book is the lack of maps which would have been very useful in giving more context to the theatres in which these men served within and while this is a very minor point it would have been nice all the same.
In conclusion, John Keegan’s compilation of essays in ‘Churchills Generals’ is a very readable book that contains much more information than I could have hoped for in understanding the roles and responsibilities of the general staff within the British Army in the Second World War. While a book could have dedicated to each person mentioned it was nice to see a brief account of these men and their overall impact during this period.
December 2, 2010
Winston Churchill had to pick his generals, like any other national leader during the Second World War. Not every pick was a winner.
"Churchill's Generals", edited by John Keegan, is a useful adjunct to serious WWII reading. The collection of wartime biographies runs from the expected winners (Slim, Montgomery, Alanbrooke) to the ornery (Hobart, Wingate), all the way down to conventional failure (Percival). These chapters add up to an institutional profile of the British Army's high command--the milieu that produced these flag officers and how well they were prepared for the challenges of world war.
The cast of characters can appear lackluster to the American reader. Yet this is a topic that cannot be ignored. The British were major allies, and had to make far less go further in their war effort. American readers familiar with Patton, Eisenhower and Marshall can find interesting counterparts in this thin volume, a commendably fast read that offers the reader a basic overview of Britain's high command, its office politics, battlefield wins and agonizing failures. There are deeper and thicker volumes examining generals like Slim and Montgomery for those who hunger for comprehensive, detailed biography. Save those for later. "Churchill's Generals" does yeoman's work as a good, fast starting point.
"Churchill's Generals", edited by John Keegan, is a useful adjunct to serious WWII reading. The collection of wartime biographies runs from the expected winners (Slim, Montgomery, Alanbrooke) to the ornery (Hobart, Wingate), all the way down to conventional failure (Percival). These chapters add up to an institutional profile of the British Army's high command--the milieu that produced these flag officers and how well they were prepared for the challenges of world war.
The cast of characters can appear lackluster to the American reader. Yet this is a topic that cannot be ignored. The British were major allies, and had to make far less go further in their war effort. American readers familiar with Patton, Eisenhower and Marshall can find interesting counterparts in this thin volume, a commendably fast read that offers the reader a basic overview of Britain's high command, its office politics, battlefield wins and agonizing failures. There are deeper and thicker volumes examining generals like Slim and Montgomery for those who hunger for comprehensive, detailed biography. Save those for later. "Churchill's Generals" does yeoman's work as a good, fast starting point.
March 3, 2016
Churchill’s Generals is a collection of seventeen essays, written by authors known for their expertise, covering the WWII careers of twenty British generals who experienced defeat and triumph in unequal measure fighting a capable enemy. This book will serve as a good introduction to readers unfamiliar with the British side of the Allies. There are no great reversals of popular opinion here. Those who were unsuccessful or unfortunate in history are the same here, and their writers explain why (to paraphrase General Pickett, the enemy had something to do with it). Most interesting to me was the chapter on Field Marshal Alexander, who earns praise from his writer (Brian Holden Reid), but not so from the writer on General Slim (Duncan Anderson). I also enjoyed the chapter on Field Marshal Wilson, much of it fresh knowledge to me. Several essays show that working for Churchill, who demanded actions and victories, was not easy. Each essay is footnoted, usually with references to known works on the men and campaigns. The same publisher has put out books on Hitler’s and Stalin’s generals, but, sadly, not on Roosevelt’s or Hirohito’s.
December 1, 2019
Excellent! One of the best reads I've had in a long time! Very well researched, appears to be thorough and not influenced by national orgin. Very well written. I highly recommend this to anyone wanting to learn more in depth knowledge on WW2 with out getting overburdened with too much info.
April 17, 2012
Keegan is a great military historian. This book focuses on how Churchill worked (or failed to work) with his battle commanders across the course of WWII. The history is well known and much is written on Churchill. What is rewarding about this is the examination of have strong and different personalities worked together until and after Briitain started winning. These are excellent studies of hoe talented people learn to worked with each other in conditions of high stress. On top of that, Keegan is an expert writer.
May 1, 2021
This is an OK book. It's not as interesting as Hitler's Generals in part I guess because the British generals didn't quite reach the heights their German counterparts did. Among the items I did not like were the lack of maps. I understand these men served all over the world so having a lot of maps may seem impractical but given that the biographies mention specific locations, they should have been included.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews