I find three books of this author, Richard Carvel, The Crossing and The Crisis loosly in a series. Carvel during the Revolution, The Crossing about the time Louisanna Putchas and the Crisis during the Civil War. These are three very good books and I believe I have all three but cannot locate The Crossing.

This book was not written by Sir Winston Churchill but a different author with the same name. I read this book as it was mentioned in my family history as a good description of the frontier in Kentucky around the Revolution. I rarely read novels but this book captured my attention and was a great read. It transported me back to a much tougher time in American history and in the area where my ancestors were located. It gave life and meaning to the hardships of my ancestors lives.

My dad was born in 1921 in the farmlands of Edgar County, Illinois, and the Crossing by Winston Churchill (not the British leader) was his favorite book as a young boy. It is a tale of US western expansion, especially the crossing over the mountains into Kentucky, and much of the story is told through the eyes of a rather wide-eyed young man. I would recommend this book to parents who want to develop a love of history in their children and who want to spend time reading books together -- the rhythm of the author's writing is especially wonderful when read out loud. I would imagine boys would especially love this tale; however, I loved it, also, and I'm about as girlie a girl as you can get!

Naturally, a detailed history of the English speaking peoples would take a great many volumes, more than the 4 in Churchill's work. Not surprisingly, it's a little sparse in detail in some places. This is not generally a problem, since details about politics and battles from the 12th century are not well documented anyways. This work does an admirable job hitting the highlights, and it is very easy to read. It is logically set out, with some maps (I would have liked more) to help clarify certain situations.

I especially liked the earliest two volumes. While they cover the most ground in terms of years (and are therefore the least detailed), they cover the time that most people know the least about. Thus, it was almost like hearing the stories for the first time (or, at least, unfiltered through the words of Shakespeare).

There are some questionable choices of material, however. For instance, the French revolution is covered in detail. While an important event, it did not happen to English people directly - a statement of the results and the reaction in England would have sufficed. Contrast this with the very sparse (2 pages, I think) coverage of the Jacobite Rebellion of 1746 - this was a major event for the Scottish nation (at least, for the Highlands), and does not receive appropriate consideration. There are numerous other instances of questionable emphasis - virtually nothing is said of the colonisation of America until the American Revolution, and Ireland, Scotland, and Wales are only mentioned when in conflict with England. Are they not also "English Speaking People"?

These are minor flaws, however. All in all, I recommend picking it up if you see it in a used bookstore somewhere. It doesn't have the personal feel of Churchill's "Second World War" set, but it is a fascinating and enjoyable romp through the ages.

This is an EXCELLENT book. With his fine writing skills, Churchill teaches nearly 1,000 years of history in an educated, interesting, moving, suspenseful, and even entertaining manner. He also offers beautiful photographs of certain historical figures. One thing he does very well is that he gives a scholarly view of historical figures (like King Henry VIII) who are subjected to harsh and inaccurate views. My only complaint about this book is that he speeds over some things that should have been given more attention. (Just make sure this is not your only book on the subject.) If I was teaching history, I would most probably have my students buy this. Letting this book go out of print (in my opinion) was a MAJOR MISTAKE!

I have read and interviewed 86 authors (of every genre possible) for our Library radio station WYPL here in Memphis since the inception of our 'Book Talk' program in 1993. Unfortunately it was never my good fortune to know or talk to Prime Minister Churchill. I first read "The History of The English Speaking Peoples" as a young man shortly after WWII. The physical reading of this monumental work is an excercise in sheer pleasure as you are dealing with not only a word merchant without peer but one of the greatest intellects of the twentieth century. If you want to see your English Language used at its most agreeable consonance, but straight to the point like a rapier, then understand that Churchill is probably the best example we have had since the Bard. Churchill hadn't the time to do the background research for the four volumes so his staff did it for him. They gave him their notes daily and this amazing man dictated every word to his secretary. If you write, as I do, you understand this MO as a nearly impossible feat -- and in view of the quality of his thougthts and his writing -- a stupendous task. Originally a set of four (and very expensive now if you were fortunate enough to find them) they have now been combined into one large book which you still have trouble finding. I bought this one for my nephew as a result of a conversation he and I had had about the 'package' of 'rights' that each of us here in the United States enjoys as (we think) our entitlement. In the first three hundred pages alone Mr. Churchill traces back, in lucid, electric prose, the history of British Common law for nearly two thousand years and shows us how that protective mantel was drawn over us thread by thread, piece by piece and step by step. The rest of the book is full of the cultural protein of the politics of time -- but I warn you, you must be careful reading this work. Mr. Churchill is addictive and he has about twenty thousand other pages out there just as meaty. Rus Morgan author of "Blackberries Got No Thorns", "The Voodoo Vortex" and "Luci".

As with the other volumes in his monumental history, Churchill's language is sparkling and, from a literary standpoint, practically genius. The man really knows how to turn a phrase, to use the English language to its best advantage. As literature, this book is wonderful, and I recommend it highly. As history, it may be less important. Everyone acknowledges the work's idiosyncracies; it's Churchill's view, not a balanced attempt to cover the whole war. To be fair to WSC, he knew what it was, and made no pretense about it. But, after the USA came on to the European scene in mid-1943, Britain's position of authority declined, so there's less for Churchill to describe or represent. He's reduced to saying innumberable times "We were forced to accept our Ally's view." The reader, especially one who has read the first four books, can tell that he's no longer so engaged by the magnitude of events. He covers a year here in only 2/3 the space it took him in any previous volume. Maybe he's just exhausted, but whatever the reason, *Closing the Ring* lacks the grandiose-ness of the previous entries.

It is fortunate for us as readers that Winston Churchill not only had the qualities of a writer, but that he also found the time to put them to such good effect. Many a retired politician has written his personal memoirs-few of them have ever done so quite as completely. In the war, Churchill used secretaries to help him cover the multitude of daily tasks he needed to get through and afterwards, when living at Chartwell, his home in Kent, he kept up the practise of using an amanuensis instead of writing himself. This allowed him to get far more work done, since he could literally do it with his eyes closed. Nevertheless, we may feel sure that the text is his own. Proud man that he surely was, there is little chance that he indulged anyone in much editing. When we see his virtually unedited copy sent from the field from India, the Sudan and South Africa at the end of the last century, we can feel sure that by the 1950s, he was a competent composer of text indeed.

"Closing the Ring" is the story of the climax of the Second World War. Although he refused to admit it, Hitler probably knew deep down what everybody else could see very clearly after Stalingrad. The once mighty armies of the Third Reich were being forced to withdraw; some of the best divisions had by then been so savaged that little remained. Berlin was being mercilessly ground down to rubble by legions of British and American heavy bombers that ended up attacking their targets almost unopposed. It was the time when madness reigned in the Fuhrerbunker and when the Allies could see the fruit of their careful planning starting to ripen. Churchill was at once rewarded by the knowledge that he had been right in thinking America invincible, and at the same time he was sadly aware that an era was passing and the British Empire was fading away in front of his eyes.

This is a long sustained narrative, written by a man in full command of his enormous personal resources. In addition, Churchill had access to a vast quantity of documentation concerning the period, because he had written much of that too! Frankly, this is an admirable work of history, told with a writer's gift for spinning a yarn and I enjoyed every word of it.

I was given this book by someone who knows I have read Churchill with satisfaction before. This book was captivating, fascinating, and left me acutely aware of the author's deeply thoughtful reflections on Christianity as a viable way of life. The fact that many of the hurdles faced by today's church are the same as those facing the characters of the book struck me, as did the fact that some of the problems addressed have taken turns unanticipated by the author. At times I deeply agreed and at other times was astounded and saddenened at the direction taken and conclusions drawn. God is still in control, regardless. This book made me reflect on aspects of my own life which need to be re-evaluated.

I was given this book as a gift, finding the title interesting and intriguing. What I found was an insight into the mind of a man who understood Christianity more than most people I know. His depth of the true meaning of Christ and the Holy Spirit were fascinatingly real. His arguments were not completely compelling. There was one point, I didn't find myself agreeing with but that was beside the point. This man fashioned a deeply personal and compelling story that carried all the way through. Not many fiction writers can write a good story about faith without being preachy, but Churchill did it 80 years ago. Read it if you can find it.

In "Forged In War," Warren Kimball seeks to shed light on the relationship between Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill that was, well, forged in World War II. For those who are interested in what happens away from the battlefield, this book provides an intriguing behind-the-scenes look at cooperation between two Great Powers. After a brief discussion of the two major players and their characters, the book plunges into the meat of its subject, namely the political and military cooperation between America and Great Britain during and after the war. Essentially, the narrative is divided into three (somewhat overlapping) parts. The first segment covers the events leading up to the war and FDR's decision to enter it; the second, the struggles to defeat Germany and Japan; the third, the diplomatic maneuvering over postwar arrangements once the defeat of Germany had been assured. It's the third part that's most prominent, and also most interesting, as Kimball delves into a discussion of how the prosecution of the war effected, and was effected by, competing visions of the postwar world. The upheavals caused by wars tend to have a dramatic impact on the way the world looks after they're over, and "Forged In War" is a comprehensive examination of how Roosevelt and Churchill (and Stalin for that matter) attempted to exert their control over these upheavals. Although Kimball obviously has a certain level of admiration for Churchill and Roosevelt, he makes it clear that for both men practicality overrode principal; as Roosevelt said, he was not a Wilsonian idealist, and the same held true for Churchill. At the same time that the two Western leaders were finishing off Germany militarily, they were also positioning themselves to prevent Soviet domination of Europe at war's end. A central focus of the book is the massive series of formal and informal discussions that eventually culminated in the acceptance of Stalin's axiom: whoever liberated a conquered country got to impose on it their own political system. In this sense, probably the most impressive aspect of the book is the extent to which Kimball captures the intermingling of political and military considerations that can occur during wartime. Kimball has a straightforward and sometimes entertaining writing style that prevents his narrative from getting too bogged down in detail, so most should find reading this book pretty easy. For history buffs, "Forged In War" gets a high recommendation.

Forged in War is a well researched although often quirky history of Churchill and Roosevelt during World War II. As diplomatic history, this book is a good review of the key events during the war years, including the many conferences and meetings between Churchill, Roosevelt, and sometimes Stalin. Kimball reminds the reader that during the war Britain and the United States were allies with the Soviet Union. He correctly discourages the reader from using the Cold War as a prism for viewing the decisions of high strategy made during the war, while at the same time he reviews those key wartime decisions that were so important in shaping the postwar world.

Kimball uses various unnamed sources throughout his otherwise meticulously researched book. For example on page 10 at the end of a paragraph about how postwar leaders "exploited the Churchill legend" Kimball states: "Even one of those convicted in the Watergate affair during the Nixon years adopted as his public motto a Churchill admonition not to give way "in things great or small, large or petty." On the next page he refers to: "One student of international affairs, who by 1990 had become a regular contributor to the op-ed page of the New York Times . . . ." Such references to unnamed sources leaves the reader wondering why Kimball uses such sources at all, if he can't or won't name his source.

Kimball is a talented writer although he too often inserts comments that remind the reader when he is writing-in the 1990s-and by doing so he cheapens his narrative. One example is in reference to the Yalta Conference and its influence on postwar popular culture. "Fifty years after the Big Three met in the Crimea, a supermodel, appearing in a motion picture depicting her vacuous, if remunerative, occupation, specified the place of the conference in historical memory. Searching for a stark contrast between what she did and what was truly important, she quipped: 'I mean, the worst thing that can happen to me is I break a heel and fall down. This is not Yalta, right?'" (pp. 310-311) He then refers to this broken heel later in his text. The name of the supermodel is supplied in an endnote, however the reference is a strain on the narrative. Kimball would have done much better not to include such references at all, however they are laced throughout the book.

Despite such quirks in his narrative, Kimball still manages to deliver a good review of the leaders and their strategies for winning World War II. Churchill is depicted as loveable, immature, brilliant, drunk, determined, and loyal to his country and empire. Roosevelt is shown to be shrewd, duplicitous, patrician, informal, irreverent, and equally committed to his nation's interests. FDR constantly urges Churchill to abandon his colonies in favor of self-determination for those under British rule. Churchill is adamant in his desire to maintain the empire. Kimball completed a three-volume study titled Churchill and Roosevelt: The Complete Correspondence. He draws heavily on this research and includes choice quotes from the correspondence between the two wartime leaders. Kimball looks far beyond the Churchill-Roosevelt correspondence however, and gives the reader a comprehensive summary of both the Churchill-Roosevelt relationship and their independent actions as they led the world to victory over the Nazis. The book focuses on the war in Europe with fewer references to the war in Asia. Stalin is also prominent in this narrative as befits the leader of the nation who took the brunt of what Hitler's armies had to offer.

Kimball reviews all of the summit meetings of the war from the Atlantic Conference through Yalta. Churchill met with Roosevelt eleven times, with Stalin twice, and all three met on two occasions. The travel logistics and risks were enormous in these meetings, especially for the handicapped Roosevelt. Churchill too was not a young and strong man. Included among Churchill's many serious health problems is the story of when he nearly died of pneumonia after the Tehran Conference.

Kimball argues against putting excessive blame to "losing eastern Europe" at Yalta, reminding the reader that most of the postwar agreements, including the fate of eastern Europe, were already agreed to prior to Yalta. Those agreements were made with the Soviet Union when they were a desperately needed ally in the fight against Hitler. Churchill was especially worried about Stalin negotiating a separate peace with Hitler.

Even with his quirky writing style, Kimball managed to write an excellent history of Churchill, Roosevelt, and their wartime leadership that led to the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany and set the foundation for the postwar world.

Warren Kimball once again, with an adeptness uncommon among documentary-based historical narratives, weaves his way through the complexities of the Roosevelt-Churchill wartime partnership. As suggested by the title, Kimball frames for the reader a political and personal relationship that, although rife with an undercurrent of conflict, ultimately is hammered into the finest weapon of war. A picture immerges of two leaders, who despite the immense internal political and external military pressures of the war, never lost their edge in dealing with one another, let alone their common foes. Many internal skirmishes over the conduct of war policy are revealed in the author's apt analysis of the documents. The correspondence reveals that the duo often disagreed quite intensly about the conduct of the war and the way to win the peace at war's end. The careful reader will appreciate the pains professor Kimball undertook to reveal the many shades of the relationsip. The two statesmen did not always see eye to eye and frequently utilized subtle, to not-so-subtle methods of deception in order to force the other's hand or coax the other slowly but surely to eventually concurr. However, a final balance in the narrative is achieved by a paralleling focus on Roosevelt's and Churchill's shared mutual objectives. In the end it was Roosevelt's and Churchill's compatible visions of future that transended their differences in style, personal judgement and even national self-interest.

This is a remarkable book that Robert Kaplan's Warrior Politics (reviewed earlier) led me to read. Kaplan begins his book with a glowing description of the River War and argues that those of us trying to deal with 21st century Afghanistan, Africa, Bosnia, etc., would do well to study the lessons in Churchill's report.

Churchill was a British officer who wrangled his way into Kitchener's campaign up the Nile through connections in high places and against Kitchener's wishes. Kitchener was angry that a journalist-officer of Churchill's age (early 20s) would even presume to render judgment on the Generals and the government.

Churchill recounts the rise of the Mahdi, the defeat of Gordon at Khartoum, the decision of the government to retake the Sudan, and the careful preparations by Kitchener (in some ways a forerunner to Schwarzkopf's massing overwhelming force against Iraq in 1991).

There are a number of lessons in this book. Churchill talks constantly of "scientific warfare" and the inability of the Mahdist forces to cope with it. By "scientific warfare" he meant the telegraph, the railroad, the armored steamboat with cannon, the Maxim gun (an early machine gun), and the disciplined infantry squares. It is helpful to be reminded that predators, B-2s, and Special Forces on horseback with laser designators are simply our generation's version of the "scientific war".

Churchill also points out how few British troops were engaged in the campaign. The majority of the battalions were Egyptian and Sudanese with British officers. Only a minority was British. On the other hand, it was British communications, British logistics, British gunboats, and British firepower that made them dominant. These were Egyptian and Sudanese troops officered by the British and trained to British standards, a lesson for Afghanistan and elsewhere. In one expedition there were 1,300 men of whom only 7 were British.

This is a very useful book as we think about the complexities of the 21st century third world and its problems of poverty, violence, disorganization, and ruthless petty tyrants.

This is the Churchill book with the account of the last war charge of British cavalry in the field. In which Churchill, always a little different, uses a pistol rather than a sword, due to his dislocated shoulder problem from way back in Bangalore days (prelude to his first War Book, The Malakand Field Force).

For such a young writer, there are surprisingly mature observations on the topic of war, to the effect that everyone on both sides is all for it before it starts, then generally eager to be done with it once it's underway. The tone of this book, though, mostly reflects eagerness.

This book is a good resource to better understand the events faithfully portrayed in the video "My Early Life" and this book can itself be better understood as a follow-on to watching Charleton Heston in the role of General "Chinese" Gordon getting killed at the end of the movie "Khartoum," which is the event that actuated the punitive expedition which forms the subject of The River War.

You won't find a better blend of action and theory, than this book written by a participant who at least lopped off the interesting parts of this campaign to form a part of his own, far more wide ranging life story.

Winston Churchill is one of the greatest figures of world history; this book, written when Churchill was in his twenties, is a wonderful book that considers the reconquest of the Sudan both from a first person point of view (because Churchill was there), and from a broader historical perspective.

Churchill begins the work some 13 years before the war, with the killing of the legendary General Gordon in Khartoum at the hands of the fanatical Dervishes. Churchill lays out in detail the reaction in Britain, the political reasons for why no action was taken at the time, and then goes into a wonderful segue about the intervening years of the wars of the Mahdi and his successor, the Khalifa.

The book is painstakingly researched; and the young Churchill is obviously trying to "get it right"; interjecting his opinions where it is relevant and introducing facts and tables where it is necessary to make his case.

The military buildup, the logistical and technical feat of the railroad built to support the army, the manufacture and employment of river gunboats, and the precise orders of battle and description of equipment -- these are details that show Churchill's immense grasp not only of the broad strategic picture but also a consummate mastery of the details of nineteenth century soldiering. One can see at work the mind that made Churchill a valuable cabinet member in the following thirty years, and an invaluable Prime Minister in wartime.

The prose style is a bit heavy, and Churchill's writing is not at the same level that won him the Nobel Prize, but it is a fine early work about an interesting, if little known, war.

The book itself also caused a rift between Kitchener and Churchill that was never really mended; as a result, Churchill's fall from the Admiralty and the failure of Gallipoli may have had this book as a very small cause. But this is not the book's fault!

A very good work of military history, and an excellent insight into the incredible mind of Winston Churchill.

As Stafford says that Churchill appreciated the value of good intelligence and how it could influence the outcome of any struggle .But on the whole I must express my profound disagreement on some of the information contained in this book. The LUSITANIA episode: Fortuitously-Magdeburg incident 26th August 1914- the Room no.40 of the British Admiralty cracked German Navy's tactical codes .Bulk of naval traffic related to the movements of U-boats and German High Seas Fleet it was able to read .Churchill as the First Lord of Admiralty was privy to this fact .What now follows is difficult to digest for a rational mind .If one were to believe the author the movement of U-20(which sank the American ship)was detected and all ships in the immediate vicinity warned of its presence.Message received by LUSITANIA but ship's captain instead of changing course continued with the voyage thus courting disaster. In other words author has implied the American ship was commanded by a mad man who sent her to the watery grave, a chain of reasoning difficult to follow.It looks as though Stafford wanted to defend the British leader from accusations of his detractors who have claimed the latter staged the incident to bring America on a collision course with Germany. It is very hard to accept Churchill's innocence in certain matters because I know him as a shrewd practitioner of Realpolitik .Desmond Morton ( an influential figure in the Whitehall corridors of power and later SIS officer )connived with Churchill to forge Zinoviev's letter which damaged Labour Party's electoral prospects in the early 20's. Coming to the Second World War, soon after the captitulation of France there came invasion hysteria . Now it must be said when it came to invading Britain the Nazi dictator was strangely reluctant . Early July 1940 Hitler disclosed his intention of invading Soviet Union to Schmundt his chief-adjutant and Von Brauchitsch the Army Commander-in-Chief .Churchill via ULTRA decrypts knew that much of German troop deployments along Channel coast was sham. Yet he kept up the invasion bogey because this was bringing public support. Later in January 1941U.S.Presidential envoy Harry Hopkins visit to war-torn Britain was stage-managed to draw American support for Britains' war effort. Author has demolished claims that Churchill sacrificed Coventry (heavily bombed by Luftwaffe on 14 November 1940) for protecting ULTRA. The target was identified very late but the argument that it was not brought to PM's attention sounds skeptical. Instead Crete was sacrificed .However I am of the view that Britsh Commonwealth forces could have defended the island without blowing ULTRA.The battle for Crete hinged upon the possession of Maleme airfield . A spotter aircraft could have been sent to show it had detected the approach of German aerial armada carrying elite paratroops instead of denuding Maleme defences for masking ULTRA.The exercise is cleverly contrived attempt to cover up British Middle East Command's lack of resolve in defending Crete.I endorse Stafford's view that British leader was not knowing Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbor.However it is difficult to accept the naivete of US political establishment in this matter . Suffice to say the US intelligence had broken codes used by Tokyo to exchange information with Consul -General Kita in Honolulu.String of messages showing Japan taking unusual interest in Pearl Harbor were intercepted . One such message intercepted divided the place into five areas asked for exact location of Pacific Fleet warships and carriers . Washington correctly guessed this could be a grid system for a bombing attack.Had Roosevelt and his men been shrewd ,vigilant, the ensuing tragedy could have been averted The author has misinterpreted the train of events that led to the German intervention in the Balkans April-May 1941. It was Mussolini who dragged Hitler into the Balkan mess .On 28 October 1940 Italian troopsinvaded Greece . Invaders were soon bogged down which gave British the pretext to land troops in that country .Besides RAF bombers started operating from bases in Crete.They had the range to strike Ploesti in Rumania from where Wehrmacht drew bulk of its oil..British deployment also menaced the southern flank of German armies slated to take part in Barbarossa :invasion of Soviet Union .Germany intervened to neutralise the flank threat . Churchill's role in fomenting guerilla warfare in Nazi-occupied Europe forms underlying theme of this book. British leader's brush with partisans in the far reaches of the Empire during heydays of his youth made him advocate this mode of fighting. It must be said , however , in the final analysis the role of the guerillas in the victory over Nazi Germany appears minimal.Owing to reasons of geography guerilla warfare never struck roots in Europe,much of the continent lay inert under the Nazi jackboot.Exceptions being Greece , Yugoslavia where mountainous terrain favoured large -scale guerilla operations .Finally a few things I like about this book: Churchill during prewar years exaggerated the capabilities of Luftwaffe,failed to appreciate the role tanks would play in the coming war ,underestimated the threat posed by Japan . Information such as that he bought Spain's neutrality in the war through bribes , came very close to compromising ULTRA during the speech marking German invasion of Soviet Union , approved a plan to assassinate Hitler , 'Operation Foxley', came close to carrying it out. Upon reading this book I gained the impression that Stafford has condoned the British leader's misdemeanours ,author no doubt is a Churchill apologist. To me Churchill was the most reactionary politician thrown up by the Western World. He stroved to ensure the Britains' domination of the post war world .He resisted Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy not because they were fascist regimes rather to their interference with Britains' imperial interests. Neverthless a remarkable man ,patriot who presided his country's fortune at a critical time of her existence .To his credit it must also be said Churchill realised, unlike other leaders of the Conservative party, the threat posed by Nazi Germany could only be contained by entering into a defence alliance with the Soviet union .In June1940 he took the decisive step in his career by deciding to continue the war against Germany.

"Churchill and Secret Service" documents the life long connection between him and secret intelligence. The author traces this back to Churchill's experience as a journalist in the Cuban revolt against Spain. His romantic nature, combined with the undisputed effectiveness of the guerillas, instilled in him a faith in guerilla warfare and its requirement of good intelligence. The book continues through Churchill's association with "room 40" during WWI, and his continued receipt of intelligence reports during the years "in the wilderness". Naturally the bulk of the work concerns itself with the Second World War, the creation of SOE and the secret armies. The author delves into the "special relationship" between the UK and US and reveals in detail the serious conflicts between SIS/SOE and the OSS-an area that often does not receive much attention by historians. Churchill's second term as prime minister,and subsequent retirement conclude the work. What it shows is that Churchill, probably more than any other political leader, understood the value and the dangers of secret intelligence, and knew how to employ it (most of the time). His experience provides excellent lessons to those who collect or use strategic/operational intelligence,"intelligence was not an end in itself and did not belong to those who produced it." Would that our current intelligence structure followed this advice...

This is an excellent work from an author that thoroughly researches every detail of the subject before it is put to print. As all of Staffords work, the factual basis is unquestionable. Anyone that reads this work will have a deep understanding of the time period and the personalities involved.

This time last year, appropriately enough, I was reading this book of Churchill's epic escape from the States Model School in Pretoria, an event that had happened 100 years earlier to the very day.The 12 December 1999 was also a day in which I lost a friend in a road accident, thus, the centennial anniversary date becomes etched with the personal. Churchill was clearly a larger-than-life figure all of his life as his grandaughter and author Celia Sandys clearly shows in this historical work in which she followed in his footsteps, visiting campsites, battlefields etc and speaking to descendants of friends and foes alike. Contrary to the assertions of some other reviewers it is a well written and enjoyable book. Some of the interesting vignettes include the detective work the author did on tracking down the gold watches that Churchill had sent to various people for their assistance in his escape from the Boers (or Afrikaners as they are known today). At the time of publication Mrs Sandys had located 6 of the 8 watches. Mrs Sandys is not afraid to challenge Churchill's assertions that he was captured by Gen. Louis Botha himself (later the Union's first Prime Minister, 1910-19)and she rightly dismisses talk that there was ever a romantic entanglement with Helen Botha , the General's daughter. The author is partly correct when she records that Churchill's "huge political ambitions demanded a wife who would be a political asset..." However, that would cut both ways, something Helen Botha alluded to 60 years later when she said it was unlikely that she could fall for him as she was "a Transvaaler." Her father and Churchill may have "got along famously" but it is the author who is disingenous, not Helen Botha, in considering that a personal political rapport could see the leader of the Afrikaner volk, or a member of his family, contemplate such a marriage -particularly after the deaths of some 26,000 Boer women and children in the world's first concentration camps - British concentration camps. Nevertheless, this is a good read about a remarkable soldier-stateman in his younger days. Enjoy.

In an era when many of our political leaders are intellectually challenged, it is wonderful to learn more about the most challenging intellect of the last several centuries.

Winston S. Churchill is one of the finest statesmen, writers, and historians of our age. He was also a skilled and brave soldier, a perceptive analyst of human nature and world affairs, and a talented painter. His granddaughter's marvelous book about a brief but exciting period of Churchill's early life gives us a fascinating glimpse into this great man.

A correspondent sent to cover the Boer War, he also fought in it. Captured, he escaped. Ms. Sandys takes us on a personal tour through Churchill's route, talks with the relatives of those who helped Churchill escape, and gives us intimate insights into a man who seems to have, like Minerva, come into this world fully armed with wisdom and valor.

The World-War-II Churchill who most of us know is a mere coda to the sixty some-odd years that preceded it. Celia Sandys makes her grandfather come alive for us ... it is a remarkable book.

The author, Celia Sandys, is the subject's granddaughter. As such, she had access to papers, people, and places that few individuals have. She presents a view of the early Churchill (age 20-25) that gives one an objective glimpse of his early life, ambitions, and personality. She has done much field research by access to original papers, actual locations, and descendants of those who knew Churchill in his early 20s. Much of her research is centered in South Africa where the young Churchill had a yen for being where the action was in the Boer War, and having an inordinate amount of luck escaping death and danger. Additionally, she gives detailed maps of his movements, and tries to bridle some of his self-sustaining writings that could not be independently verified. This work should give any reader an understanding that Churchill's early years were a prelude to his more famous leadership role during the dark days of World War II. An excellent read.

The last review is title "the best book I've read" - could this possibly be the author himself or at least a relative? Evidence

1) From Nashville TN, which as another read points out is where the author is from.
2) "Best book I've read" is a little too strong even if you did like it. I mean its not exactly Catch 22 or Hamlet.
3) The author advises people to read "other books by Mansfield".
4) Knows a few too many facts about prizes "Amway book of the month" - wow what a recommendation. Amway, not exactly Nobel Prize in Literature (which actually Churchill won, so I think there are is a least one book on Churchill that is better written i.e. anything by the man himself).

Anyway, onto the review itself. I am an avid Churchill fan and have read almost everything on the man - I was therefore initially pleased to see an potentially interesting book on his leadership style. Unfortunately this is the first book in my entire life I have actually thrown in the garbage. It was that bad. Forget about the authors "intrusive voice" as one other reviewer puts it (quite rightly) - it is just poorly written and poorly researched. I urge you to read almost any other book on the great man apart from this.

This book can be divided into two main parts. The first half is comprised of short summaries of key events in Winston Churchill's life and political career. These include his adventures during the British/Boer war of South Africa to his more famous role as head of England during WWII.

The second half of the book is a group of short (most being 4 pages long) stories and descriptions of Churchill's perspectives on elements of human life and character. These chapters have titles such as: the Bible, family, loyalty, marriage, death, etc.

For an in-depth biography of this amazing leader, you will need to find another book. But for a short, interesting background on the mind and beliefs of Winston Churchill, this is the perfect buy.

Before I read this book, I knew Winston Churchill only as the great man who played a key role in saving Western civilization during WWII. What Mansfield's book unveils is his brutal, heartrending childhood and hideous treatment at the hands of his father, the physical frailties that plagued him his whole life, the multiple depressive episodes throughout his life, his struggle to overcome his speech deficiency (a lisp), his incredible escape from prison camp in South Africa, his getting rolled by a cab in NY City, etc. etc. etc. I challenge anyone to read this book and not conclude that God had a special plan for this man (and, by extension, for Him to have him grace the world with his incredible inner strength, convictions, and courage). Basically, Churchill had every reason to end up a loser, or at least a chronic underachiever, in life. That he didn't is testimony to, as the title states, his incredible character. This is an incredibly inspiring reading.