In 2022, 16 opposing forces will face off on the battlefield in eight new books. Read the descriptions below and let us know which head-to-heads you are interested in.
CBT: ANZAC Soldier vs Ottoman Soldier
The Gallipoli campaign of 1915–16 pitched the Australian and New Zealand volunteers known as the ANZACs into a series of desperate battles with the Ottoman soldiers defending their homeland. In August 1915, the bitter struggle for the high ground known as Chunuk Bair saw the peak change hands as the Allies sought to overcome the stalemate that set in following the landings in April. The ANZACs also played a key part in the battle of Lone Pine, intended to divert Ottoman attention away from the bid to seize Chunuk Bair.
The Gallipoli campaign ended in Allied evacuation in the opening days of 1916. Thereafter, many ANZAC units remained in the Middle East and played a decisive role in the Allies’ hard-fought advance through Palestine that finally forced the Turks to the peace table. The fateful battle of Beersheba in October 1917 pitted Australian mounted infantry against Ottoman foot soldiers as the Allies moved on Jerusalem.
Though divided by language, faith and culture, the men of both sides would find common ground in mutual respect, and the confrontations between them remain burned into the collective national identity of their respective countries. Featuring specially commissioned artwork and mapping, this fully illustrated study examines the fighting men on both sides who fought at Chunuk Bair, Lone Pine and Beersheba.
CBT: British Cavalryman vs German Cavalryman
In the early months of World War I, before the fighting degenerated into static trench warfare, there was a brief period of mobile combat as the German Army advanced through Belgium and northern France, forcing the French and British forces facing them to retreat. Both sides in the escalating conflict deployed substantial numbers of cavalry units to screen their infantry forces, conduct reconnaissance and harness their superior mobility to undertake aggressive combat operations. In the summer of 1914, the British cavalry had the difficult task of covering the withdrawal of the British Expeditionary Force and the German cavalry, the equally demanding task, after weeks of combat and forced marches, of maintaining contact with a rapidly retiring enemy. In this study a comparative assessment is made of each side’s doctrine, organization, equipment and training, followed by a detailed analysis of their actual performance in three key encounter actions: Casteau/Soignies (22 August), Cérizy/Moÿ (28 August) and Montcel/Frétoy (7 September). This analysis is supported by carefully chosen photographs and specially commissioned full-colour artwork and maps.
CBT: Celtic British Warrior vs Roman Soldier
Following the Roman invasion of Britain in AD 43, the tribes of the west and north resisted the establishment of a ‘Roman peace’, and slowed Roman expansion through many years of guerrilla conflict, led in particular by the chieftain Caratacus. Even in the south-east, resentment of Roman occupation remained, exploding into the revolt of Boudicca’s Iceni in AD 60. Though the uprising was decisively suppressed, the initial British success demonstrated the effectiveness of the indigenous warriors.
The citizen foot soldiers of the Roman legions were supported by an array of other troops from across the empire including: the Tungrians, from what is now Belgium, and the Batavians, from the modern Netherlands. From the late 80s AD, units of both the Batavians and the Tungrians were garrisoned at a fort at Vindolanda in northern Britain. The so called ‘Vindolanda tablets’ provide an unparalleled body of material with which to reconstruct the lives of these auxiliary soldiers in Britain.
This book examines how both the British warriors and the Roman auxiliaries experienced the decades of conflict that followed the invasion, and compares their recruitment, training, leadership, motivation, culture and beliefs through an analysis of three particular battles: the final defeat of Caratacus in the hills of Wales in AD 50; the Roman assault on the island of Mona (Anglesey) in AD 61; and the battle of Mons Graupius in Scotland in AD 83.
CBT: Hunnic Warrior vs Late Roman Cavalryman
The Huns burst on to the page of western European history in the 4th century AD. Highly skilled, lightly armed warriors who fought for the most part on horseback, the Huns employed sophisticated tactics that harnessed the formidable power of their bows; they also gained a reputation for their fighting prowess at close quarters, using nooses as well as swords in hand-to-hand combat. Facing the Huns, the Roman Army fielded a variety of cavalry types, from heavily armed and armoured clibanarii and cataphractii to horse archers and missile cavalry. Many of these troops were recruited from client peoples or cultures; in this vein, the Romans soon employed Hunnic mercenaries and bodyguard troops, with an entire Hunnic army being recruited to aid one would-be usurper, Joannes.
The Huns quickly carved out a polyglot empire in eastern and central Europe. After the terms of a treaty expired in 440, the Huns repeatedly invaded Roman territory, forcing the Romans to take action. In this study, the origins, fighting methods and reputation of the two sides’ cavalry forces are examined, with particular reference to the siege of Naissus, the battle of the Utus and the climactic encounter at the Catalaunian Plains.
CBT: Patriot vs Loyalist
The American Revolutionary War was America’s first civil war. As the conflict raged from Canada to the Caribbean and from India to Gibraltar, it was in American communities that the war was the most intimate, the most personal, and – accordingly – the most vicious.
In 1775, the inhabitants of British America included those born in North America and newly arrived immigrants; the established landed aristocracy and the indigent; the diverse nations of the Native Americans; and people of African descent, both slave and free. The coming of war forced every person to make the choice of whether to side with the Patriots or remain loyal to the British Crown. With so many cross-cutting imperatives, the individual decisions made splintered communities, sometimes even households, turning neighbour against neighbour in an escalating spiral of ostracism, embargo, exile, raid, reprisal and counter-reprisal. Accordingly, the war on the frontiers and on the margins of conflict was as underhanded and ugly as any of the 21st century’s insurgencies. In this study, the origins, fighting methods and combat effectiveness of the combatants fighting on both sides are assessed, notably in three significant clashes of the American Revolutionary War.
CBT: Seminole Warrior vs US Soldier
During the 19th century, US forces confronted the Seminole people in a series of bitter wars over the fate of Florida. After the refusal of the Seminoles to move west to the Creek Reservation in Mississippi, the US government sent troops to bring Florida under federal control, marking the beginning of the Second Seminole War. On December 23, 1835, troops led by Major Francis Langhorne Dade were ambushed and massacred en route to Fort King. Two years of guerrilla warfare ensued, as the Seminoles evaded the US forces sent to defeat them. Ordered to hunt down the Seminoles, a US force led by Colonel Zachary Taylor incurred heavy losses at the battle of Lake Okeechobee (December 25, 1837), but the Seminoles were forced to withdraw. At the battle of the Loxahatchee River (January 24, 1838), forces led by Major General Thomas S. Jesup encountered a large group of Seminoles and met them with overwhelming numbers and greater firepower. Despite their stubborn efforts to resist the US military, the Seminoles were defeated and Florida became a state of the Union in 1845. This fully illustrated study assesses the forces fighting on both sides, casting light on the tactics, weaponry, and combat record of the Seminole warriors and their US opponents during the Second Seminole War.
CBT: US Marine vs North Korean Soldier
Equipped with Soviet tanks and bolstered by a cadre of combat veterans returning from the Chinese Civil War, North Korea’s army launched its surprise offensive against the Republic of Korea on 25 June 1950; within days Seoul had fallen and the majority of South Korea’s divisions had been shattered. American ground troops rushed to Korea also seemed incapable of stopping the rapidly advancing North Koreans. By August, the remnants of the South Korean and US Army divisions had been pushed into a small corner around the port of Pusan. Although the North Korean People’s Army had enjoyed an impressive string of victories, its losses were no longer being replaced in the needed quantity or quality. It was truly a do-or-die moment for both sides.
In the wake of World War II, the United States Marine Corps had shrunk in terms of budget and manpower. Despite this, the Corps responded swiftly and decisively in 1950. Using first-hand accounts and specially commissioned artwork, this study assesses the KPA and US Marine Corps troops participating in three crucial battles – Hill 342, the Obong-Ni Ridge and the Second Battle of Seoul – to reveal the tactics, weapons and combat effectiveness of both sides’ fighting men in Korea in 1950.
CBT: Viking Warrior vs Frankish Warrior
On the eve of the 9th century, Vikings first raided the Frankish Empire on the coast of what is now western France. Although this attack ended in disaster for the Scandinavians, Charlemagne reportedly wept, not in fear of his own life, but for the ensuing bloodshed brought upon his successors. Mobile parties of highly skilled Viking warriors would continue to raid Francia for decades; as these attacking contingents grew more numerous they began to assail powerful centres, besieging Paris in 845 and again in 885. To combat the Viking threat, Frankish kings mustered scores of infantrymen, then subsequently transitioned to cavalry-based forces in the 9th century.The dynamic nature of Viking activity in Francia meant that numbers and mobility would determine the fate of Charlemagne’s Holy Roman Empire.
This study documents the evolving trial of strength between the Vikings and the Franks under Charlemagne and his successors. Through a careful synthesis of primary sources, expert analysis and the archaeological record, the author invites the reader to visualize the fighting men who fought one another in Francia, and offers a balanced assessment of their successes and failures over decades of warfare during the Viking Age.