The Thin Red Line: The Eyewitness History Of The Crimean War

by Julian Spilsbury

'Home in time for the pheasant season' was the cheerful assumption of most British officers when the Army was shipped off to fight the Russians in 1854. But it was not to be. After landing in the Crimea and beating the Russians in open battle, the redcoats found themselves laying siege to the great naval base of Sebastopol. There, they endured a bitter winter in improvised positions, desperately short of supplies and with next to no medical care. Published to mark the 150th anniversary of the Crimean War, Julian Spilsbury's narrative is drawn from the diaries and letters of soldiers of this most famous Victorian army. From the initial landings in an exotic land to the battles, the long months of siege and the final victorious assault, the story unfolds through the words of the men - and women - who were there.
We follow a cast of extraordinary characters who, one after another, fall, some to bounce back with almost superhuman resilience, others to die at the incompetent hands of the Army's surgeons. The Army's leading personalities are a collection of eccentrics; some were short-sighted, some downright criminal. But not one of them doubted the British would win, no matter how dire the odds - and this is why they ultimately prevailed.

Genres: History, Military History, Nonfiction

340 pages, Hardcover

First published June 1, 2005

Reviews

[Christopher Saunders · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very entertaining narrative history of the Crimean War. Spilsbury culls from both familiar accounts - William Howard Russell's reportage, memoirs by Fanny Duberly and George Paget - and private soldiers' letters and diaries, to give viewers a vivid boots on the ground account of this messy conflict. To Spilsbury's credit, he makes familiar battles and events seem fresh again: his detailed accounts of military actions, particularly the Battle of Inkerman (often inscrutable in other accounts), rival any other volume. Certainly these perspectives allow a clear understanding of the privations caused by disease, bad weather and insufficient supplies during the winter of 1854-1855. Yet his book's also flawed in its narrow scope and questionable analyses: the Turks are portrayed as cowardly, Anglo-French tensions played up more than most other histories, and his bald assertion that the Crimea represented a "just war" rings hollow without further elaboration. An enjoyable introduction.

[Benjamin L. · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Thin Red Line by Julian Spilsbury is an excellent account of the Crimean War from the British point of view, but it is far from a ‘decisive account’ as some reviewers like to call it. The book draws from letters and personal accounts of a number of British soldiers, sailors, and officers to tell the story of the Crimean War through the eyes of those who fought it, and Spilsbury does a masterful job of weaving these accounts together into a coherent narrative and filling in the gaps – This book is very well written, and is one of those books that are simply a pleasure to read.


Read the rest of this review on the Chronosphere!

[Adam Chandler · Rating 4 out of 5]

A historical account of the Crimean War told through narrative interconnecting eyewitness sources such as diaries. It is a good way of presenting history to people who have difficulty following historian's accounts since it switches the presentation to personal stories. Spilsbury connects these stories incredibly well by weaving them into a cohesive narrative. However, there are some drawbacks to the book. The first is that Spilsbury primarily presents the history through the British troops, being somewhat neglectful of the French, Russians, and especially the Ottomans. The reason for this is that the British have more accounts in English and the others require translation. Another drawback is this is not a comprehensive history of the Crimean War because it is limited to the primary sources that compose the main narrative. Lastly, this is an infuriating book if you are looking at it from an academic perspective because the hundreds of quotations are not sourced (aside from the mention of whose story it is and sometimes if it is a diary, journal, etc.) and Spilsbury only provides a select bibliography.