Stephen Dando-CollinsReviews

⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ for this popular military history of the Legio X Equestris, a Roman legion, that was levied by Julius Caesar in 61 BC during his governance of Hispania Ulterior. Surprisingly, its legionaries were often middle-aged man, even older. Despite, or perhaps because of that, they were able to sustain marathon-sized forced marches day after day, on barely 1500 calories, carrying roughly 80 lbs in armor and weapons and tools, none of it made for comfort like modern equipment is. The legions fighting spirit is best described by the author’s quote:
“It was a great day to die. And before the sun had set, thirty-four thousand men would lose their lives in this valley. The men of the loth Legion would have had no illusions. They knew that some of them would probably perish in the battle that lay ahead. Yet, to Romans, nothing was more glorious than a noble death. And if the men of this legion had to die, there was probably not a better place nor a finer day for it, on home soil, beneath a perfect blue sky.”

The Tenth was the first legion levied personally by Caesar and the instrumental tool to Caesar’s martial success. Acting as his shock troops, it was chiefly responsible for not only his greatest victories but also was able to stave off defeat when all but utter disaster seemed imminent for the greatest of all Roman generals.
Dando-Collins manages to put together a magnificent account of the greatest of all legions from various ancient sources, including citations, comments and the well-known texts by Tacitus. So then what are we waiting for get that book for it is a good day to read.

Bit slow getting into it but then it picked up. Bligh had been cast as the bad man during my schooling but this shed light that this wasn't the case. The story is well set out and I enjoyed. It makes me want to look up Elizabeth MacArthurs story.½

I was disappointed in this work as the author's lack of objectivity compromised his account. More specifically, it's painfully obvious the author has no love for Julius Caesar, and therefore his account overemphasized Caesar's faults while ignoring his significant support leading up to his assassination.

This was a fascinating and complicated period, yet the author's account would leave one believing that Caesar was little more than a tyrant with a small following whose murder was if not inevitable then certainly justifiable. Claims that Caesar was responsible for destroying "democracy” and may have suffered mental illness are surprising from a historian.

The most value of this book comes from the second half which is devoted to the machinations as the anti-Caesareans (styled "liberators"), Octavian and Marc Anthony competed for ultimate superiority.

A far better book on this subject is author Barry Strauss' "The Death of Caesar."

This is a book about the Hawaiian islands and how prior to 1893 they had a monarchy. After January 1893 they became apart of the United States by a small cunning group of white businessmen trying to protect their own interests.No vote of the people of Hawaii ever voted for or against this action. The author also shows how at anytime this action could have been prevented.

From the last days of the Second World War in Europe comes a story of heroic acts and amazing logistical feats. It is the story of a massive air drop of food for the starving people of Holland, which was still under Nazi occupation in the waning days of the war. It goes back to the pre and early-war years and the connections that Dutch royalty had to both the Third Reich and the British Empire. The story goes all the way up to FDR and Winston Churchill and, when FDR dies, Generals Eisenhower and Bedell-Smith step up on their own authority and drive the operation. During the Winter of 1944-45 in Holland (the "Hunger Winter"), as many as 25,000 people died of starvation as the food supplies dried up completely after Nazi occupiers once again took their share. The situation was even more dire in the Spring when the lobbying by Dutch Royal family members accelerated at the tops of British and American government. Once Eisenhower, Bedell-Smith and Geddes (for the British) began the rapid process of planning and executing this massive operation, the war was close to its end. The situation was fluid at the front with Germans still fighting, yet meetings were occurring between them and the allies. It was a shooting war, yet some Americans were driving around German occupied territory in jeeps. We hear the stories of the American and British bomber crews who were being asked to fly at treetop level in unarmed bombers to drop food even though nobody was certain if the German would be shooting at them. I enjoyed this book. It is odd for a war book - a positive story of immense generosity, bravery and preventing death, rather than dealing it out. It is not long and is a fast and enjoyable read...probably a story that most people have never heard.

As the title promises, the true story behind the events "in" 300 shorn of Frank Miller's gore and guts with no presence of semi-clad Spartans running around killing gold-laced Persians.

Rather, 'Rise of an Empire' is more down to earth and is not about Leonidas the Spartan War King of 300 fame. Instead, it focuses on why Leonidas opted to make his last stand. To give the Athenian admiral Themistocles enough time to prepare his armada to cut off the Persian fleet without which Xerces juggernaut army could not be provisioned.

Who was Themistocles and why did he ultimately go over to the Persians after crushing them? Dando-Collins unearths the facts of the matter to present a semi-biography and semi-fill in the gaps narrative. It reads like a work of fiction minus the fiction of course. Quite an ingenious exploration of classic age politics.

Spoiler: Caesar dies about tenth of the way in. That was to be expected, after all it's the legion that's the subject but to be honest, turns out its history wasn't all that interesting. Maybe if the book also included some more background on how legions operated, the technology of the day, tactics etc. it could've been more interesting. As it is it's just barely more than summaries of a few big battles the legion took part in.

The author did a great job keeping a complicated time in history simple and clear to follow. It was a weighted narrative, giving possible alternative reasons for actions. Even if the alternatives were in favor, or against, Caligula. The author also didn't dwell on, amplify, or glorify any of the more salacious details and rumors about Caligula; he also doesn't romanticize him.

I found the parts about what was built that still stands, and in some cases are still used, today interesting. That is part of Caligula's legacy we don't usually hear about.

The last chapters is where I had a couple of concerns: The political comparisons to current politicians I am not even going to address. It was too easy. The diagnosis he offered wasn't as bad as it could be as he compared symptoms but did not actually offer a "this is the mental illness" finality.

Caligula: The Mad Emperor of Rome is a sleek, focused account of events as we’ve been handed, running from the Rhine Revolt of 14 AD up to Caligula’s assassination in 41, followed by quick overviews of what came after with Claudius and Nero. Dando-Collins sets out to question whether the image we’ve been given of the depraved third Emperor of Rome is really a justified one, and whether it is or not, how it continues to shock and inform our lives even today.

My hat’s off to the author for even picking the subject to begin with. This era is one of the most controversial and trying to weed impartial facts out of the biased hyperbole in our late sources is a pretty thankless task. The rare archaeological find can push back small bits of darkness and doubt—and Dando-Collins luckily has some of these to work with like the newly uncovered cryptoporticus where Caligula died—but when it comes to guessing true character and intent? It’s all a matter of subjective interpretation, with little chance of consensus about what the “truth” is.

HANDLING THE SOURCES

Dando-Collins's plan to handle the sources carefully without just dismissing them as completely useless is, I feel, a good one. And with this in mind, he tightly marshals the events and sources, such as they are, into an entertaining, fast-paced narrative. The majority of speculation and analysis is saved for after Caligula becomes emperor, when the more stunning accusations come into play.

This tight focus, however, can sometimes work against the book. While there are some attempts to clear away the decadent mythology around Caligula, the other important people are rarely given the same benefit of the doubt, even when the actions described are from the more sensational sources. Tiberius is one of the major examples here with the sexual depravities assigned to him by Suetonius stated as if they aren’t the subject of heated dispute.

Obviously, to expect Dando-Collins to list each accusation and why he found it believable or not would be madness, to say nothing of tedious. However, this and many other examples throughout the text are areas behind which I'd have been very interested to know the author’s reasoning. What is it about these things claims in particular that strike him as credible? Is there some other record that makes it believable when so much else from the same sources is questioned? Is it just a feeling?

Whatever the conclusion was, I would have liked to know more about his thinking process and without it I felt I was only getting a small fraction of the whole story. Sure, Caligula is the focus, but these are people who impacted him in so many different ways and shaped his life so powerfully. Trying to clarify the possible distortions cast on them would not only add more flesh, but could only help when tackling Caligula himself.

METHOD OR MADNESS?

In the places where there is exploration, Dando-Collins convincingly argues method over madness. The practical explanation given for Caligula’s infamous ride across the Bay of Puteoli, for example, goes against the image of a vanity project undertaken to support the divine delusions of a vain madman. Likewise, his troubled attempts to launch a campaign against Britain culminating in his “war on the sea” are given rational possibilities. I was also fascinated to learn about the projects commonly ascribed to Claudius that were actually begun by Caligula in his effort to leave a legacy of progress and innovation and many other things I hadn’t known.

On the other hand, there are times where allegations from sources that are questioned elsewhere are passed over with little or no explanation, as mentioned above. Again, I don't expect Dando-Collins to give an explanation for each accusation and I don't doubt some of it is true. I just would have liked to know why certain parts of the records struck him as less subject to hyperbole than others.

Mercifully, in all of this there’s no effort to recast Caligula as a maligned champion of the Roman people against the corrupt elite. His paranoia and cruelty are never denied. Dando-Collins does explore more deeply the question of whether he was insane or merely corrupted by power in the second-to-last chapter, and after giving briefly summarizing and dismissing some of the theories, lands conclusively on one in particular. Whether you agree with it or not is obviously going to depend on your point of view.

Overall, I feel I did come out with a better image of Caligula and his foibles.

THE LAST CHAPTER

The chapter tucked away at the very end goes over Caligula's journalistic relationship to Trump, and whether the claims made are fair to either person.

I can't say I was looking forward to this chapter. Every author and text is subject to their own context in time and space, none can truly escape that. While understanding that, however, I'm personally pretty picky about modern references in biographies of the past. Sometimes they're useful and can illuminate the subject for a modern audience. Labeling Germanicus and Agrippina as the JFK & Jackie or Harry & Meghan Markle of their day, for instance, instantly conveys the impact they had on Roman society. Other times, the comparison IS the subject, which can illuminate our present as well as our past.

As it is, this particular example delivers a fast analysis listing point-by-point similarities and differences observed between the two men. Here and there I encountered an interesting tidbit (the on-going symbolism of the handshake into the modern era, for instance), but the chapter inevitably ends in the safe and predictable consignment of the matter to time.

Unfortunately, one of the dangers of tackling a subject like this is also that it’s an ongoing one that's evolving even as we speak, and that tends to speed up the process by which a work becomes dated. With neither subject really earning anything new out of it, it feels to be the case here.

In the end, a chapter that discussed Caligula's enduring legacy on our world and culture overall might have been more interesting, as opposed to a brief, inconclusive summary of the journalistic branding of one particular man. But, if the chapter as it is is of little interest to a reader, at least it can be safely skipped by those who'd rather just focus on the main subject without missing anything of the rest of the book. I don’t know that those who are interested, no matter where you stand on the issue, will be satisfied either.

IS IT RECOMMENDED?

Those who are well-versed in the book’s subject matter and who may be looking for a more thorough treatment of not just Caligula but the times he lived in and the people who surrounded him will probably be impatient with this book. I’m not an expert on Rome’s third emperor, but even for me there were parts that I knew weren’t as simple or decided as they were made to seem.

However, it's a fast-paced digestible account of events that I would recommend to those just beginning to dip their toe into Roman history or Caligula and his conflicted legacy. The many ancient sources are brought together to tell a cohesive and entertaining story. However, I'd throw in a word of caution that there are some errors, a lot of stones remain un-turned, and it can be a bit deceptive about what is considered definite or not.

It was a mixed bag, but still, for being my first biography of Caligula, I learned a lot I hadn’t known before.

FINAL RATING: 3.4 stars½

"Caligula: The Mad Emperor of Rome", by Stephen Dando-Collins, deals with one of most famous (or infamous) emperors of the ancient Rome, Caligula.
The book starts with the achievements of Caligula's father Germanicus in fighting against the Germanic barbarians on the Rhine, and then follows his career from Rome to Syria, where Germanicus died of poisoning. Caligula, of noble birth, returned with family in Rome and became a prominent part of the court of the emperor Tiberius. Years of intrigues on the court, imprisonment of his family members and deaths of some of it, most likely deeply affected Caligula. In 37 AD, Tiberius anointed Caligula as his successor. After he died, Caligula was proclaimed as emperor by the Roman Senate that year.
At first, Romans celebrated his reign, as they expected "the happiest age of mankind". He rescinded censorship of some banned books, extended public holiday of Saturnalia for the fifth day, authorized completion of the Temple of Augustus and the rebuilding of the Pompey's Theatre, etc. But only in the first year of reign, he contracted a "terrible disease", most likely an influenza, which effected his health greatly. Barely surviving, he changed: "He was now changeable, capricious, and cruel." He ordered killings of several men (including senators), divorce and re-marriage of Driscilla, and was convinced, that he is a god. He ordered that he was to be worshipped as Jupiter himself. Author then deals the events of Caligula's life, when he was preparing for a major military campaign. In 40 AD, he moved to the province of Upper Germany to prepare for war with Germanic tribes. That never happened, as he moved his army to the English Channel with intent of crossing it and conquering the British Isles. But his troops refused to cross the channel; Caligula decided to decimate the rebellious legions and returned to Rome. That year, at least three separate plots to kill him emerged. While two stopped just by words, a military coup inside his Pretorian Guard was more dangerous and the planning lasted into the next year. On 24 January 41, Caligula attended Palatine Games on the Palatine Hill, he was stabbed at first by Cassius Chaerea, a tribune of the Praetorian Guard and then by other soldiers. German Guard then installed Caligula's uncle Claudius as the new emperor. Claudius then rescinded many of Caligula's orders and even commanded the removal of Caligula's name from history. Author then quickly continues with following the life of Claudius and then the next emperor, Nero. In one of the last chapters, he deals with the question if "was Caligula truly mad" and comparison of Caligula with Donald Trump, the current president of the United States.
The book is well written and can be read quickly, with ease, and as such is highly recommended for anyone interested in the history of the ancient Rome.

The USP (unique selling point) of this latest biography of Caligula is the final chapter, which compares the ancient Roman emperor to the current U.S. president--it is a bit of a stretch. The author also conjectures about the signs of a possible bipolar disorder that previous historians described. and he dispels/explains some of the wildest tales in the emperor's brief but cruel reign. There is a lot of military detail here. The most interesting thing I learned concerns the Spintrians, male prostitutes who participated in threesome sex, often with an adult man and a boy, like Tiberius and youthful Caligula. Recommended for fans of Roman history.

Caligula was a Roman emperor, descended from Julius Cesar. He was an enigmatic ruler, and Dando-Collins puts the pieces together. While much of Caligula’s life has been typified in various novels and movies, Dando-Collins did his best research, while allowing readers to fill i. The holes. Furthermore, the book reads like a political thriller, even though it’s nonfiction.

We think we know the story of Caligula, but as the author points out - we don’t, well not really.

With the exception of Josephus, none of the extant sources were alive at the time of Caligula’s principate, and some like Dio were writing a couple of hundred years later.

Furthermore, our view is inevitably influenced by Robert Graves’ I Claudius novel (which is after all based largely on the writings of Suetonius and Tacitus) and its nineteen seventies BBC adaptation, and also by some rather lurid Hollywood movies.

There’s also what I call the monk effect. The early medieval copyists copied the texts that they, or their sponsors found interesting or titillating, and so like the story of Theodora and the geese, the material that has survived is the more lurid.

The consequence is that we don’t really know Caligula at all.

Given the lack of contemporary sources, we possibly will never know Caligula, but what the author does is assemble what material is available, and summarising the latest scholarship, to try and produce a more balanced picture of his life, for example, the suggestion that he had an incestuous relationship with his sister is not borne out by any contemporary material and may well be a later calumny.

At the same time the book reads like a political thriller - despite having read and studied Roman history and archaeology for years I found the book compulsive reading, and while impeccably researched it is never overly dry and academic - definitely one worth reading ...

I received an e-copy version of the draft book. It downloaded into “WE”, which was terrible. Whenever I returned to reading the book it forced me to start at the beginning and find my place where I left off. The book was okay and the author did some research, which was evident. His last chapter comparing Trump with Caligula was interesting. I learned some and would mildly recommend this book.½

I received a copy in return for an honest review.
This book is chockablock full of interesting facts and covers Caligula’s life with shorter overviews of his father’s and his successor’s. Dando-Collins is obviously a very versed and through Caligula researcher.
Personally, I would have liked a more dramatic telling of some of these unbelievable tales, but maybe that is why I normally read novelizations more than straight non-fiction.
I am not sure I agree with his conclusions about Caligula’s mental health, but it is hard enough to diagnose someone alive now, near impossible to diagnose someone from 2000 years ago.
Normally I wouldn’t read about a historical character and try to find a modern day equivalent, but Dando-Collins states at the beginning that he wants to compare and contrast the emperor with President Trump. This meant I was comparing and contrast the figures throughout the book. And I have to say, I don’t see them as the same. They may share some narcissist qualities, but Caligula is just an entire order of magnitude worse than our President.
Anyway, it is worth the read if you are interested in a comprehensive biography of the mad emperor at only 277 pages. And you will understand why he was assassinated after only 4 years.

"The Great Fire of Rome" is the name of this book. Nero was the emperor during the Great Fire. Before the Great Fire, Nero participated in singing and lyre contests. It was thought he set or ordered the fire to be lit. After the fire, Nero had a LARGE palace built, covering hundreds of acres. There was also changes to the roads and houses that would to slow the progress of future fires. After the fire, people started a conspiracy. The conspiracy is a group of people that want Nero dead. When Nero found out, he sentenced every member to death. There was exception, if he didn't find out, or was not accused. Nero blamed the fire on Christians or worshipers of Isis, and had them burnt alive, and in a party in his house, he had either illuminate the party as they burned. In the end Nero was killed.

I gave this book 4.5 out of 5 because I like to learn about topics I like, including Rome. My favorite part was when Nero died. My least favorite part was the fire. I recommend this book to those who are learning about Rome.½

Roman empire, military history

As soon as I saw the front cover of this book I knew I had to read it - how could anyone resist such a beautiful face. Caesar is a true Labrador, he's intelligent, curious, loyal, friendly and obedient (unlike Marley who was a disgrace to the breed). At first I thought this was a true story, that Caesar really was an explosives detector dog working for the Australian army, but the book is based on true stories of service dogs. However, this was still an easy and interesting read.

I received a copy from First Reads in return for an honest review.

Actual Rating: 3.5 Stars

"In the end, Chowhound was about hope."

A great read for any WWII history buffs. Operation Chowhound looks at so much more than just this one operation. Dando-Collins examines the lives and actions of all the players involved and also shows the stark reality of how bad Holland's food crisis was during WWII. The back story, along with the tediousness of war, really paints a picture of how desolate Holland was and how cumbersome military planning can be.½

The Great Fire of Rome: The Fall of the Emperor Nero and His City
Dando-Collins aims to fill what he sees as a void of historical compilations of the Great fire of Rome in A.D. 64 and its consequences for Emperor Nero. The book is not greatly detailed, it focuses pretty narrowly on a four-year period.

Despite the record of two non-Christian historians (Tacitus, Suetonius) that Nero persecuted Christians, Dando-Collins maintains that it was likely not Christians who were blamed and persecuted for the fire of Rome, but rather members of the cult of Isis. Burning them in effigy would have added insult to the cult. There is evidence that the cult was suppressed in the years following the fire, even though Dando-Collins writes that Nero had a fascination with the cult and all things Egyptian. While there were Christians in Rome, they were not numerous enough to be blamed widely for events. D-C seems to accept Christian tradition in regards to some aspects of the lives of the Apostles Peter and Paul persecution, but rejects others. Christians could have been treated harshly by Romans for many reasons, as recorded in Luke's Book of Acts, but the biggest persecution was likely after the revolt of the Jews in Palestine in 66 A.D., when Nero reportedly banned Jews from Rome and likely executed those in custody.

The narrative begins in January, 64 A.D. There is some attention given to its geography, how fires were traditionally fought, and how commerce was conducted. There is much information on the politics of the time, including all of the infidelities and corruption of Rome's senators and other officials. The descriptions of Rome make it helpful in order to see what the early Christians would have seen. However, there is not much information given from the perspective of commoners or travelers, though I do not know how much of that type of material survives.

Nero was not exactly "fiddling" while Rome burned, but he was on tour competing in American Idol-like singing competitions-- which he always won. While he was swift to return to the city, dole out aid, and made good, modern plans for the rebuilding of the city, he was always rumored to have been the fire's cause.

Nero liked to compete in chariot races, dress like a gladiator, and competed in the games of 67 A.D., which disgusted the upper-class who looked down on entertainment professions as vulgar and definitely a disgrace for an emperor. Nero was also a bisexual adultering, thieving, lying murderer. His many exploits eventually led those around him to conspire against him in 65 A.D., but the plot fell apart due to a lack of nerve. The conspirators were then all arrested and put to death. (If you've seen the movie Gladiator you can get a visual sense of how plots against crazy emperors were stamped out by those who had much to gain by remaining loyal). In 68 A.D., several regions decided to revolt against Nero's policies and conspiracy overtook Nero's Praetorians and he was finished.

The author shifts perspective to give the views of Flavius Josephus, who was a Pharisee who traveled to Rome in 64 to negotiate the release of several priests and Pharisees who, like Paul, had appealed to Ceasar and were sent by Felix to make their case. (D-C reports that Agrippa had granted citizenship to various Pharisees such that they could make this appeal.) He likely knew Paul, or knew of him. The author does not take Paul at Luke's word that Paul was "born a citizen" of Rome, although it is possible that all citizens of Tarsus were granted citizenship at some point.


Nero was raising an army for a great eastern expedition when he rescheduled various games, which likely would have included public executions of state prisoners by wild animals. This is helpful as it gives an indictation of what Paul might have been expecting when he wrote 2 Timothy from prison. After the Jewish revolt of 66 A.D., as recorded by Josephus, Nero likely ordered the execution of all Jews in Roman custody; this likely included Peter and Paul-- tradition says Peter was executed first (he'd have been crucified as a punishment befitting a non-citizen) and Paul several months later (likely beheaded). The re-scheduling of

Dando-Collins defends Nero as a "visionary," and no more cruel than any other Ceasar or even modern-day rulers who support capital punishment. That is a little rich, but I think the author is basically just trying to push back against commonly repeated myths about Nero.

Critics of the book point out that Dando-Collins makes some major mistakes in his research and his citations, as well as takes liberty with Latin translations of quotes-- including Nero's last words. He also tends to take disputed hypotheses and run with them as facts to fit his narrative, which I find common among modern writers of history.

In all, I give this book 3.5 stars out of 5. I learned a lot of useful information from it. It could have included more detail and an explanation of how history of Rome prior to 64-68 A.D. set precedents for how the fire was dealt with, and how all of Nero's actions set precedents for the later Roman Empire.

A tale of a massive food airdrop in the final days of World War II that is particularly not well-known to anyone. The book itself is interesting to read, and is a fairly quick read. It was also interesting to see all of the negotiations that were involved between various parties (including a comedic turn by Ken Cottam that seemed a bit fit for Catch-22).

However, the book seems to suffer a bit from including filler stories and random cameos of people like Audrey Hepburn and Ian Fleming. It feels to me like they were included to attract people without adding much to the story.

All in all, though, still worth a read if you're interested in history.

A thoroughly interesting look at the eponymous Operation Chowhound, the Allied mission to drop supplies to the starving Dutch in the waning days of the Second World War. I was very glad to read it, because though I know a fair amount about air bombing missions (my grandfather was a navigator on a B-17), and though a family friend was in the Dutch Resistance, I knew next to nothing about this operation. Mr. Dando-Collins traces the complex diplomacy that set the operation in motion, which I found fascinating; readers less interested in detail will be drawn in by the book's cameos (including Audrey Hepburn and Ian Fleming). A mid-length, fast read, and very much worth the time.

A most-interesting and highly readable book about Operations Manna and Chowhound. In the last nine days of the war in Europe, the British and Americans dropped thousands of tons of food from the air to starving Dutch civilians behind German lines. An agreement was reached that the Germans would not fire on the Allied bombers if they stayed within certainly clearly defined parameters. All the air crews knew that a thousand things could go wrong and bring on firing at planes in very vulnerable low altitude positions. But it worked. Hundreds of Dutch elderly and children were dying of malnutrition every day, and this airlift brought them food days before they could have had it otherwise. The airmen involved considered it their most glorious service and the Dutch have not forgotten. General Eisenhower, General Bedell Smith, Prince Bernhard, Nazi civilian governor Seyss-Inquart and others all had their roles to play, although Seyss-Inquart was executed as a war criminal afterward, anyway.
The book can seem a bit padded at times, but World War II buffs should love it.½

Operation Chowhound was the name given by the Americans (the British and Canadians called it Operation Manna) to the Allied humanitarian mission to drop food to the starving citizens of Nazi-occupied Netherlands during the waning days of World War II. In some ways it was a more dangerous mission than the later Berlin Airlift, for which it has been called a practice run: though Hitler was dead and the end of the war was in sight, it was still going on; and despite a written agreement between the Allies and Germans to let the planes fly unmolested, there was no guarantee that over-zealous German troops wouldn't try to blast the low-flying bombers out of the sky (in fact, some planes returned with fresh bullet holes). In a brisk novelistic style, with a cast of characters that includes the famous (Dwight Eisenhower, Bedell Smith), the later-to-be famous (Ian Fleming, Farley Mowat, a teenaged Audrey Hepburn), and the unjustly forgotten (Andrew Geddes, the RAF officer who planned the mission), Dando-Collins brings this little-known but fascinating operation to life.

I received a free advanced reader's ebook (lots of editing yet to do) in return for an honest appraisal.

This is the rather extraordinary story of an operation that saved many lives in Holland following the harsh winter of 1944-1945. The winter was harsh on the Germans as well who had barely enough food for themselves. An appeal from the Dutch government in exile to Franklin Roosevelt--Roosevelt was rather proud of his Dutch ancestry (the British were not particularly helpful)-- resulted in his request to Eisenhower to help the Dutch. He died before anything concrete could be done. Once the operation was approved, the problem became how to deliver the supplies. Eisenhower and his chief of staff Bedell Smith took over the operation and following extensive negotiations, the Nazi governor of Holland ordered the troops not to fire on the low flying bombers who were dropping food from as low as three hundred feet.

But the story is more complicated. It involved Operation Market Garden, a Monty flop mostly due to his failure to trust Prince Bernhard, German born and ex-Nazi, but now married to the heiress to the Dutch throne. Bernhard had become a vigorously loyal Dutch advocate whose contacts with the Dutch resistance provided information that could have prevented the disaster at Arnhem. The result of Market Garden was to leave western Holland in the control of the Germans and isolated. The Germans, by this time, perhaps all but Hitler, realized the war was lost, but Hitler had refused to pull German troops out of Holland and he had issued a "destroy everything" order through Albert Speer. Speer was reluctant to enforce it, as was the German governor, Arthur Seyss-Inquart, who was willing to help the Dutch for his own reasons.

What they accomplished was unprecedented. The Nazis had been unable to supply the German 6th Army, some 285,000 men, encircled at Stalingrad. Eisenhower and Bedell Smith organized a system (good practice for the Berlin Airlift not too long after) to feed 3.5 million.

This book is not for everyone. It's a very detailed look at the negotiations and diplomacy required to pull off a rescue mission that saved many lived in Holland. It's also an interesting view into the lives of Germans who knew the war was lost and the actions they took in response to that knowledge. For historians or those interested in events of the last year of the war, it's a gold mine.

Audrey Hepburn plays a minor role in the author's portrayal of Dutch suffering during the winter.