Was the 'Band of Brothers' really THAT outstanding fighting unit?

by Ohnoes_in_distress

Most of us interested in WWII history have most likely read the book and/or seen the TV show. There is no reason to deny that Easy Company did very well during the war, but was it really that outstanding and exceptional company-level unit that the book/show make us think?

I personally believe that the weakest point of Ambrose's book is his explaining why he chose this particular unit. Didn't most US rifle companies consist of men from various backgrounds who became 'brothers' during the course of war? Ambrose himself in his another book, Citizen Soldiers, describes a 'stock company' (not sure about the term, I haven't read it in English) consisting of eager to fight young men from various backgrounds, with varying education, etc.

I also recall reading somewhere that during the Siege of Bastogne (highly dramatized in the book/show) Easy Company was in fact in reserve for the other two companies of its battalion.

Thank you for addressing my doubts.

ChristianMunich

There were several thread discussions about this topic. Consense seems to be that Ambrose as "historian" is questionable.

Maybe check this thread and the answer of u/Georgy_K_Zhukov

For me the Battle of Bulge comes to mind where Ambroses account differs from reality especially when it comes to numbers.