Negative Positive
Title: Error rules here. A factual and typographical mess.
Review: This book wins in two dubious categories. It has more factual errors than any book I can recall and more typos than seem possible. This book could not possibly have ever met an editor. Did the Times reviewer actually read it? Could Keegan have really written it? No. He must have been compelled to sign the manuscript under duress. How else could the name of the world's foremost military historian become associated with this mess? The battle of Barrington? Come now
Is the review positive or negative? 