Ambrose knew how to put together a 'can't put down' kind of read, but sometimes his "facts" are questionable. Some say it's him taking veteran accounts and lending them 100% accuracy instead of following through and verifying the facts. I don't think I've read a history book yet where everyone agreed the facts were all completely accurate and somebody didn't dispute something or other so I don't know. Some others say it's people jealous of his success/notoriety. I'd guess it's probably somewhere in the middle, a little bit of both?
As for the plagiarism I've heard/read about it too and the Wikipedia entry on the subject sums up what I recall pretty well...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen...sm_controversy
On the same wiki page you can see he was pretty roundly blasted for his book "Nothing Like It in the World: The Men Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad, 1863–1869" too and read about the Eisenhower controversy as well.
I've read and liked 'Band of Brothers', 'Pegasus Bridge', 'D-Day' & 'Citizen Soldiers' and also own a few others, but I read them all years ago and honestly can't say if I like them more in memory than I did at the time and can't really state to their accuracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fum
Beevor's Berlin book is also worth a read. (A little time after D-Day though)
|
Thanks. I've heard good things about all of his books. A friend keeps bugging me to read his Stalingrad book, but I haven't yet.