The Enemy at the Gate: Habsburgs, Ottomans, and the Battle for Europe

Occasionally I go exploring book-wise. I used to do the same with records back in my rock `n' roll days, and most of the time I found pearls among the commercial swine. So it is with books, I find - some pearls, a few zircons, an occasional lump of coal, a rare bucket of mud. Wheatcroft's book, a recent subject of such mental wanderlust, seems to fit in the zircon-plus category. I was drawn to this book because of my rather persistent interest in the history of Eastern Europe, a history and geographic locale I knew very little about prior to my recent MLA days at UNC-Asheville. I knew, for instance, that a prince of the Austro-Hungarian Empire died at the hands of a Serb, precipitating WWI . But why an Austro-Hungarian Empire in the first place? And why kill the heir apparent? Wheatcroft treats both questions, but in the manner of a historian--by digging deeply into the area's history. Essentially,The Enemy At The Gate treats the eons-old conflict between Islam and Christianity by focusing on an Islamic invasion of western Europe in the late 1600s. Here, in a nutshell, is how the story goes: The unobtainable pearl of Eastern Europe had been, for the Ottoman Empire, the conquest of Vienna. Following the Crusades, the Turks and Ottomans had tried several times for this prize, but came away empty-handed. But this time, the Ottoman sultan handed his armies over to one Kara Mustafa. Many of history's warlords have been successful because of their impulsiveness, and Mustafa was of this humor. He had little regard for previous Ottoman failures, and soon his bands swept through Hungary with little resistance to lay a nearly successful siege to Vienna. So nearly successful, in fact, that had not Polish armies come to Vienna's rescue when they did, Vienna would have fallen--and with it western Europe. All history is laden with irony. In this case, the Ottoman siege had so weakened Mustafa's armies that the Poles chased them east with ease, re-took Buda and Pest, and very nearly sent the Turks scampering across the Carpathians with their tails between their legs. Wheatcroft's prose is often rather dry, stuck between academic writing and the best non-fiction, making the book a somewhat dry read. But he's clearly mastered his subject. His depictions of the Turkish janissaries, of the Ottoman sappers, the tactics of their fleet-footed cavalries, is occasionally spell-binding. Less so are his depictions of the plodding Western Europeans, their tactics and leadership. But what comes through to this reader is the brutality of this war. It reminds me all too much of WWII's German Wehrmacht and its brutal fights over the same real estate with equally brutal Soviet masses. But what compelled Wheatcroft to write this book, other than his passion for the subject? Two things come clearly to the fore: First, in pointing out the manner in which both sides were compelled to such brutality by religious zeal, he places his story's import into today's "war on terror," which

I must say that when I first bought this book, I didn't know what to expect. The reviews weren't the best and this time in history wasn't one of my favorites. However, when I opened the book and started reading it, I was impressed. The pictures that it painted of this period of time, where very good. The Ottoman Empire of that period was a very dictatorial environment with the Sultan running everything and disobedience resulting in death. And, when they attacked a Christian city, the inhabitants were provided two options prior to the start of the siege - either surrendur or die. At the end of the battles, if the inhabitants did not surrender, the results were truly barbaric. This was the lead in to the campaign that resulted in a near run affair of the siege of a major European city in 1683 - the siege of Vienna. The city was under siege for 2 months - and the book shares the specifics of the bombardment, the Ottoman mining (which they were very good at), the assaults of Ottomans (after mines were exploded taking down some of the city walls), the defense and the potential loss of the city. As the book continued through this section describing these events, I couldn't put it down. I kept wondering what it must have been like to experience this. And, what would have happened to the thousands of people in the city, if the city was taken. The highlight of the book is the arrival of the "cavalry". A joint army of units from Poland, Saxony and other locations arrives in the nick of time, fights a battle with the Ottomans that ends with a successful heroic attack of the Polish Winged Hussars. You can just picture the result as you are reading the book - the hussars attacking with their lances, chasing the Ottomans and routing them. The end of the book is somewhat anti-climatic relating how the Christian armies then attacked and threw the Ottomans out of Buda (Pest), Belgrade and other Balkan cities and states resulting in the elimination of a future threat. As you read this, you can get a sense of why, to this date, there are animosities in that region between the Christians and Muslims what with the barbarism that occurred - beheadings, flayings, impalings, etc. for the poor losers. There was very little mercy towards civilians and prisoners. This is a great book on a fairly unknown period of history that also provides some perspective on why the Christian and Muslim animosities exist. For this reason, I highly recommend this book.

This reviewer had largely ignored late European history in the 17th Century. After the mad fighting in the 30 years war this arm chair reader turned his attendion to the New World. However, I could not be more wrong in my assessment of Europe in the late 1600s by reading this book. This book makes it very clear that the seige of Vienna was a close run affair. Indeed, if the relieving Christian forces had just been a few week later then to this day Vienna would be an Islamic capital. It's doubtful that Christianity would have survived on mainland Europe if Vienna had fallen. The heart of Europe would have been ripe for conquest. I will have to admit that the battle described in this book is a little confusing. But that is one of the few debits. Largely, one can look at this seige as the equal of Grant at Vicksburg. The Ottomans had larger field guns and did a fantastic amount of mining the defenses of Vienna. The books says that at the height of the seige the Ottomans fired off more than one mine a day. Grant did the total of one mine attack at Petersburg and fumbled the excellent results of that explosion. I was also surprised at the Ottoman war machine. "Yours is to command and ours is to obey" is what envelopes the Ottoman empire. Armies, supplies and draft animals are drawn up in perfect harmony. The seige camps are kept clean in accordance with dictates of the Koran. I was impressed. Generally the Ottomans keep a cleaner camp than any Western Army up until the 20th Century. Since the Ottomans keep a cleancamp it means they are spared the disease that rips through any western army. Weirdly, if it had not been for the 30 years war then the Europeans would not have been able to defeat the Ottomans. The Field Artillery arm had been invented. Indeed, the typical Western field gun was not much different than the American Civil War gun of about 180 years later. The musket line had been perfected by the Western armies. So, a strange paradox happens on the battlefield. The western armies are far more fluid in battle but initially slow. The Ottomans are far quicker to strike but far slower after commitment. This allows the Austrian Prince Eugene to break the Ottoman seige with a smaller attacking force. The coda of the book is what is of great interest. By the early 19th Century the Ottomans and Austrians come to a somewhat peaceful coexistence. They are alternately attacked by outside forces. The Ottomans have to tolerate the constant attacks by Russia. The Austrians alternate between the problems with Prussia and later Napoleon. A USA historian observes that the Austrians only won large battles with Prince Eugene over the 300 years of its government. The Ottoman Empire had more constant fighting with its Arab charges and that changed after World War One when Attaturk took the defeated Ottoman Empire and changed it into Turkey, the most wealthy, peaceful, and successful of present Islamic nations. I highly recomm

Andrew Wheatcroft does an excellent job of narrating the dramatic struggle between the Hapsburg Empire and it's allies and the Ottoman Empire and their allies for control of Central Europe. He describes not only the military events but also the political and cultural aspects of this struggle. I enjoyed the entire book but being retired military the descriptions of the various military forces involved were most interesting to me. The Janissaries and Sipahis were aggressive, fierce and highly courageous but they were facing opponents who learned their trade in the Thirty Years War and understood the value of dicipline and massed firepower. Wheatcroft makes a good argument that,"Nothing until the battle for Stalingrad in 1942 equalled the relentless struggle in the ditch before Vienna." I disagree with the other reviewer who questioned the need for Wheatcroft's continuing the story to include the campaigns to liberate Hungary. I thought it was facinating to read about the heroic old Pasha of Buda and his doomed stand against Lorraine, and I'll read about Pringe Eugene any day. There's a reason why Napoleon called Eugene one of the greatest generals of all time. If you have any interest in the history of Central Europe or just want to read a great story you owe it to yourself to read "Enemy at the Gate."

This was a very readable book, written like an adventure with excellent detail and analysis.