... short but fascinating ... As an anthology, Leadership in War offers a fine, if not overly in-depth sampling of wartime leadership to show that successful wartime leadership is a rare commodity. All of these chosen individuals, good and malevolent, show that determination, vision, and a single-mindedness bordering on ruthlessness is needed in trying times. Of course, both Napoleon and Hitler show that ends and means must also be carefully weighed and measured in order to secure a successful conclusion to wars. As a quick introduction to this topic, it is thought-provoking without being overwhelming.
Roberts briefly distills conservative views on what it takes to be a leader, producing an extremely readable, if sometimes simplified, summation of this aspect of military history. For public libraries and larger academic collections.
Lincoln’s inclusion would have added welcome depth to this miscellany ... I was often lost as to Roberts’s criteria for a 'great' military leader ... enthusiasm is not enough: [Roberts'] lectures have not translated easily into print. He flits over the surface of history and leaves much unnoticed or unexplained. One would have expected something less subjective and more substantial from the author of the outstanding biographies of Lord Salisbury and Churchill. Anyone seeking to understand the complex alchemy of leadership in war should obtain John Keegan’s brilliant 1987 book The Mask of Command.
Roberts is no stranger to many of his subjects—he’s written multiple books about both Napoleon and Churchill—and holds strong opinions on all, although there are few surprises ... Brief, painless biographies and reasonable, if traditional, appraisals of the qualities required to make war.
... underdeveloped ... The book closes with a synthesizing chapter that presents wide-ranging conclusions about qualities important for leadership, ranging from the typical to the odd. This survey is probably too cursory and superficial to reward readers who want to know more about these leaders.
