Whats wrong with Osprey?

[Ghostmojo]

What seems thin to a knowledgeable reader is probably just right for someone looking for an introduction to the subject. Don't forget that Osprey publications are aimed at a very broad audience.

I once wrote a harsh review of N. Sekunda's Spartan Army book, but having written three books for Osprey, I take it all back. For wee books, they take a lot of time and effort.

Cheers,

R

Well yes, I take your point, and I think that Osprey books actually try to bridge a difficult divide between casual and serious student. That is clearly going to be a thankless task. In the case of Sekunda - where he fails is not even so much the absence of anorakist detail - but just a basic failure to consider that Sparta continued to wage war after Leuktra. In that sense he doesn't even inform the beginner with a developing interest the basics, that studying Spartan warfare can take you right down to Roman Republican encounters, even allowing for the fact we don't know so much about the armies of those later times (under Nabis for example). But we do know a fair bit about Kleomenes III and his conversion from hoplite to phalangite units. I actually find Sekunda's work on Sparta to be ill-considered in many respects. He jumps to conclusions without any obvious back-up - something to be found in other works of his and for other publishers like Montvert. IMHO Osprey need to find another author to rewrite that particular book.

Oh how I long for Lazenby's book to be republished - and perhaps with Osprey's better illustrators involved this time around 8) .