Reprint of the original, first published in 1874. The publishing house Anatiposi publishes historical books as reprints. Due to their age, these books may have missing pages or inferior quality. Our aim is to preserve these books and make them available to the public so that they do not get lost.

Whether any advantage or benefit will be drawn from the suspension or effective abolition of the rank of Field Marshal is debatable. What is certain, however, is that Dr. Tony Heathcotes idea of compiling a definitive biographical dictionary of holders of this illustrious rank since its introduction by George II in 1736, is opportune and inspired.Those readers who anticipate a dry recitation of bare facts and statistics are in for a disappointment. A reference work this may be but the author, by dint of his depth of knowledge, has created a shrewd and highly readable commentary as well.As General Sir Charles Guthrie (the first soldier to be denied promotion to Field Marshal on appointment to Chief of Defense Staff) observes in his Foreword, this book embraces the history of the British Army over the last 250-300 years. It covers not only the careers of key individuals but provides an understanding of their contribution to the successes and failures of our military past. The diversity of personalities, who have only the honor of wearing the coveted crossed batons in common, is fascinating. Alongside the household names of the great strategists and distinguished leaders lie little known and forgotten figures, who gained their exalted rank by either luck, accident of birth or diplomatic gesture.The British Field Marshals merits a place on the bookshelf of any military historian but is likely to be found on his or her bedside table. Whether or not the rank is ever resurrected, as it has been in the past and as many will hope it will be again, this delightful and useful book will remain the authoritative guide to all those who have held the highest military rank in the British Army.

As the snow fell on the face it froze, and my hair was matted with ice, and icicles formed on my eyelashes. So intense was the cold that whenever I was compelled in visiting the sentries or otherwise to face the blast, my nose burst out bleeding, which with the exposure exhausted one so much, that it was only the certainty of never rising again that prevented me throwing myself down in the snow.' This is just one of many lurid passages from the letters of William John Rous, who arrived in the Crimea in December 1854 with his regiment, the 90th (Perthshire) Regiment. Throughout the following months Rous wrote a series of letters describing the ordeal of life in the trenches before Sevastopol in graphic detail. These letters have remained unpublished ever since. Now though Ian Fletcher, one of the leading authorities on the Crimean War, has edited and illustrated Rous’s work for republication. The letters were written during what was the most controversial period of the Crimean War for the British army, for it was during this period that the shortcomings in the army were cruelly exposed during a bitter winter which saw more British soldiers die of cold, disease and overwork than were killed through enemy action. Rous’s words bring home the terrible conditions in the trenches, the lack of sleep, the endless overwork, the constant fear and threat of a Russian sortie, not to mention the ever-present dangers posed by the Russian guns inside the city. Rous’s experience sheds new light on one of the most famous but tragic campaigns ever fought by the British army.