The name John Churchill, the First Duke of Marlborough (correctly pronounced: "MO-bra"), may not ring a bell among many of my American friends - except for those interested in history. It is true that he never achieved the worldwide fame enjoyed by his descendant and worshipper, Sir Winston Churchill, who is the author of this book and his unofficially official biographer. Neverthless Marlborough it was who gave the British lion its first roar - while Sir Winston gave it its very last.

It's not difficult to see why Sir Winston admired John. In his own day Marlborough was the greatest Englishman, the best general, and the finest diplomat of Europe. His spectacular victory at Blenheim was one of the world's most significant. He fought many battles; invincible, he won them all. For this he was granted a magnificent home named the Blenheim Palace (for its size to call it anything else would be a misnomer) - in which Sir Winston himself was later born. Like his younger contemporary Frederick the Great (one of my heroes), Marlborough was truly impressive in all aspects of warmaking: strategy, tactics, field command, logistics, diplomacy, personnel, intelligence. Like Frederick he was personally and physically brave (if a little LESS reckless). And like Frederick he had to run a country at the same time. In one way though Marlborough was even greater than Frederick - he never lost a battle.

It is true that without Prince Eugene, Marlborough would not have succeeded the way he did. But his prowess on the battlefield should rank him among the greatest commanders in history.

Striking was Marlborough's dependence on several women in his life, to whom he owed his entire career: his own sister, who got him his first job (as a lowly page to the Prince of Wales); the Duchess of Cleveland, who lavished money on him for his exceptional "services"; Sarah Jennings, his wife, who rose from equally humble background to be politically important; and Queen Anne, who made him Duke and head of the English army. A genius in war, he was also lucky in love. Stunningly handsome, he matched his looks with flawless manners plus sparkling intelligence; not surprisingly his charm was irresistible to women (and, as has been pointed out, men too). Yet he had a happy marriage. (His wife, a tremendous beauty in her own right, lived in constant if unfounded fear of his infidelity. Though the youthful Marlborough had a bastard daughter with Cleveland, he was no Casanova in married life.)

That Marlborough was a genius and his life a phenomenal success story, no one can deny. But in the interests of family loyalty as well as personal devotion Sir Winston was willing to turn a blind eye to some of Marlborough's faults: his insatiable financial greed, his manipulativeness, his tightfistedness with money, his suspect honesty, his all-consuming ambitions, his inability to write in literate English. But as I am a fan of Marlborough's myself, I do not blame Sir Winston. I only wish to add that his one-sided account, though the best, does not provide a complete picture.

It's puzzling to me how with increasing age, fame and fortune Marlborough's thick skin, which had served him well in his youth, got thinner and thinner, until he was almost destroyed by his sensitivity to criticisms. Too bad, because his political enemies were so unworthy compared to him. A ruthless man (though not necessarily a Stalin) would have been aggressive and hounded his enemies to THEIR death, but Marlborough lacked this killer instinct......all the stranger for a soldier! Instead he gave himself a stroke and that was the end of his career.

No admirer of Sir Winston's - I dislike him - I nonetheless recommend this book very highly. It is extremely well-written. Be sure to get both volumes. And pay particular attention to the military campaigns - these are true masterpieces of historical writing. If you must choose, however, get vol.1 - it has the best actions, including the high points of his career: marriage to Sarah, the meteoric rise, the Garter, Blenheim, the Dukedom. The chapter entitled "Avarice and Charm" - two aspects of his personality - is particularly interesting.

Not for nothing did Sir Winston win the Nobel Prize for Literature, and by common consent "Marlborough" was his best work.

This volume is the finest hour in the massive "official" biography which was started in the mid 1960's by Winston's son Randolf and continues to this day with the relese of the "document" volumes of the later years of Churchill's life.

Most of the narritive volumes in the biography (there are eight) nessasarily cover a long period of time; after all, Churchill lived into his ninth decade. But Finest Hour covers only a little over two years, from September of 1939 to Pear Harbour in 1941. They were, however, two of the most important years in Churchill's life. There were also two of the most important years for the free world.

This volume, like the others in the series, is magnificently written and reproduces the drama and fear of living in those deadly times. From the begining of the second world war to the entry of the United States in the conflict, every action of Churchill is closely examined. Particular attention is paid to the spring, summer and fall of 1940, as Churchill readied his nation for invasion even as he inspired his people to never surrender. Churchill would say that that that summer would be his nations finest hour, when the tiny Island stood up alone againsed the most deadlly power in the world, and won. Gilbert's message is clear: yes, it was the nation's finest hour, but it was also Churchill's. Only he could lead the nation, not only because of his moral position (he had opposed Hitler from the begining) and oratical skills but also because, after appeasement, his nation wanted to beleive in him. He gave them something to believe in.

The book is highly detailed, at times going to an actual day by day description of Churchill's life. The casual reader who simply wants to learn more about Churchill would do well to read Gilberts one volume Churchill: a life or William Manchester's biography. But for anyone truly interested in World War Two and how the allies won, this book is a must read. More importantly, if anyone wonders why Churchill will soon be named man of the century, reading this bok will provide all the answers.

It is without question the finest biography of its kind that I have ever read.

Oftentimes in recorded history a leader emerges as literally the "right man at the right time", a godsend for a country desperately in need of leadership after being led to the brink of disaster. Churchill was such a leader, and Britain desperately needed him in 1939 as Hitler's armies blitzed into Poland while Chamberlain stood by powerless to stop him.

This abridged memoir of the conflict by Churchill, one of the most dynamic personalities of the last century, is a fascinating profile of leadership, offering a unique glimpse into the problems faced by the Allies as the war destroyed the shaky peace of Versailles.

Here is Churchill in all his bravado, bemoaning Britain's woefull lack of preparation, and discussing in shocking detail the problems faced by the Allies as Britain joined the conflict and tried without success to keep the Nazis out of France. You are there as Churchill finds out, to his amazement, that the French have no reserves after the Maginot Line is pierced and the Germans head, unopposed, toward Paris. You understand the tremendous burden faced by Britain as Churchill explains the efficiency of the german war machine, churning out tanks and u-boats on a daily basis at the outbreak of the war while pacifist Britain's military industry had literally ground to a halt.

This is not a battle by battle narrative of every major conflict, and the Pacific theater is in particular given short attention as Britain played a relatively minor role there. Readers interested in the specifics of troop movements, maps, etc. should look elsewhere. However Churchill provides fascinating glimpses into the leaders of the Allied powers, recounting Stalin's relentless demand that Britain and the U.S. open a second front to divert attention away from Hitler's armies. And every American's heart will swell as Churchill expresses the pride and confidence he felt as the Americans entered the war: "Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder. All the rest was merely the proper application of overwhelming force." Churchill's words here, and the exerpts of his speeches to Parliament, are as stirring now as they were 58 years ago when he pumped courage into the British as they endured countless bombing raids.

The book has its lapses. It seems like Churchill at times seems a little too interested in presenting his arguments for or against certain operations, (and of course as the author he is usually right), and the abridgement here seems to devote more attention to relatively minor battles like Tobruk than to the Normandy invasion and the liberation of France. However any history buff will want to consider this book required reading for a fuller understanding of WWII.

He said of this work, "This is not history, this is my case." That is, it's his viewpoint on events, and to some degree, his justification for the actions he took during the war. He was too modest. This is also great history from the pen of a man who was not only a great statesman and war leader, but a gifted writer. To read it is a pleasure--and a bit sad since it underlines the decline in letters since Churchill's generation. Only his speeches are more inspiring. For the few remaining purists among us, I would recommend the full six volume set, but much is captured in this condensed version. Get it and learn not only history, but the proper use of English.

Winston Churchill's 'Memoirs of the Second World War,' is one of the most illuminating works on the subject ever written. Churchill tells the story of the war from the massive rearmament of Germany in the thirties to the final victory over the forces of fascism. As a general history of the war it is understandably one-sided, but as a wartime memoir it succeeds on many levels. The feelings of the British Prime Minister on the strategies, soldiers, enemies, and allies of the war are brought to the foreground with an amazing command of language. Churchill justifies many of the more controversial decsions of the war including his stand on British rearmament before the war, the terror bombing of German cities, the 'unconditional surrender' policy of the allies, and the use of the Atomic bomb. This is a finely crafted work that is a tribute to a man who could make history as well as write it.

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.

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.

Having read the first five volumes of Churchill's magnificent history of the war that he was so instrumental in winning, I looked forward somberly to the last volume, fully expecting the "tragedy" in the title to refer to the fate of the Jews in Germany and throughout Europe. But as I worked my way through that volume, I found almost no references to this true tragedy of humanity. The tragedy in question was Churchill's ouster at the end of the war. I finished the volume in disbelief. Checking the index to see if somehow I'd slept through this portion of his tome, I found no reference to holocaust, none to concentration camps, none to the Final Solution, and the only references to Jews are their organizing of a fighting force, their mistreatment in Hungary and an escape in Greece. I have long wondered at this terrible omission, and long to read what the New York Times had to say about this book when it was first published.

Winston Churchill found himself with a lot of time on his hands at the end of the war. Part of his personal tragedy was to suddenly discover, not long after the fall of Berlin but before the bombs fell on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that he was no longer wanted by the British electorate. That is how "Triumph and Tragedy" ends, with a personal note of sourness, although with little explanation as to the why and wherefore of his own political demise. The truth lay perhaps in the real nature of the man. Recognised as the bulldog who could do a lot more than bark in a War Cabinet, he was called for at once when it was clear that Britain was in danger. Yet so well-known were his qualities as a fighter of men that, once peace was about to return, he was despatched back to political oblivion as being obviously the wrong man to continue. Such is democracy. I've no doubt he felt a little twinge, as many a soldier at the front also paradoxically felt, that his war was over.

Churchill was probably without equal during his own lifetime and, by the curious twists of fate which manage men, was one of the most extraordinary players on the world stage, throughout recorded history. The last sentence in the book nevertheless shows the true heart of a man who, whatever else may be said about him, gave so much:

"It only remains for me to express to the British people, for whom I have acted in these perilous years, my profound gratitude for the unflinching, unswerving support which they have given me during my task, and for the many expressions of kindness which they have shown towards their servant."

My comments refer not only to this penultimate volume but the entire series, and not to the currently advertised edition, but the first edition. Churchill remains one of my favourite authors, and this historic work is arguably his literary masterpiece. Speaking only for myself, I found the weight and style of English to be ideal, not too light or scholarly. His point of view of course is from the winning side, which is his right and privilege. For those willing to put in the time, without tiring of the war, it is well worth the effort. Somehow the narrative never seems to drag, in spite of the considerable length. Enthusiastically recommended.

Churchill was a superb writer, a man whose style I find inspiring. The way he conveys the information in this volume is most engaging. However, this is not really a good history book, as Churchill's focus is much too narrow. He focuses on military and political matters to the near exclusion of everything else. He gives little discussion to things that have had profound effects on history, like disease and plagues (the Black Plague receives brief, cursorary treatment), and if you read through this volume, you will find little if any discussion of music, dress, art, architecture, language, agriculture, sport, religion, literature, or daily life among the English speaking peoples. Science and inventions are only mentioned if they contribute something to the art of war. His work is accurately described by a quote from J. Henri Fabre, "History pays but little attention to these details: it celebrates the battle-fields whereon we meet our death, it scorns to speak of the ploughed fields whereby we thrive; it knows the names of the King' bastards, it cannot tell us the origin of wheat. That is the way of human folly." While Churchill's style is excellent, his chronicling is myopic and therefore unsatisfactory. This volume does not give much "history" of the "peoples" (as the book's title would suggest), but it does tell about an island's wars and her kings.

Churchill has written a wonderfully readable history of early Britain. This effort is broken into three books: 1) The Island Race (i.e., Roman Province, Vikings, Saxons, Alfred the Great); 2) The Making of a Nation (i.e., Norman Invasion, William the Conqueror, Henry Plantagenet, English Common Law, Magna Carta); and 3) The End of the Feudal Age (i.e., Henry V, Joan of Arc, York and Lancaster, Richard III).

As you can tell from this brief sketch of the table of contents, the book is primarily a political and military history of Britain. Although some of Churchill's commentary on the issue of religious faith in Britain was of interest, this effort lacks in its sparse coverage of such matters. The same may be said of Churchill's treatment of Britain's social history.

Churchill does not appear to have broached any new areas in the history of Britain. I'm left with the impression that he is merely passing on the ideas of other historians which he personally believes to be true. Yet, there is nothing wrong with coming to conclusions, and there is great worth in passing on excellent and interesting information to the readers.

Frankly, I enjoyed this book very much. It is an excellent survey of Britain up until the time of the Reformation. I recommend it highly to all who are interested.

When you consider the conditions under which Churchill wrote these books, they are even more amazing. Churchill writes history the way I like to read it. History is about people, ideas and concepts. As the German metaphysical philosophers are so fond of suggesting, perhaps history is the outworking of God's Mind. When I read this book I began to understand not just the evolution of the island race, which I have read about before -- the migration of the tribes across Europe -- but more importantly I began to understand the evolution of the English Parliamentary system. This book describes the painfully slow and difficult process of hewing out those rights which we in America consider our "entitlement" and so often take foolishly for granted. Furthermore, I grew to understand, as the great lawyer, Ray Garrett, Jr., once said, "It is the law that makes organized life possible." Winston Churchill had one of the greatest minds in history. It is a thrill to share his intelligent reflections on history and culture. This book is a must for your personal library.

This is a good book for anyone interested in WWII history. His speeches give Great Britain's point of view durning WWII, even before the war begins. America is mentioned several times in the book, but does this book does not give a very detailed description of what is going on in America durning this time. The book focuses on the war in Europe and Africa only. Japan is rarely mentioned. Overall this is a good book, comprised of Churchill's speeches.

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.