Reading Chinese history can be difficult for a Westerner due to the names, locations, time frames, etc. Dr. Platt has done an excellent job of bringing to the reader an important segment of China’s more recent history (1850s) when somewhere between 20-50,000,000 (that is million) people lost their lives in a civil war. Consider that our Civil War cost about 750,000 lives and you will get an idea of the scope of the war and the misery it caused in China.

The Taiping leadership took many Christian dogmas as their rules and felt that the Western powers would help them in their struggle to overthrow the hated Ming dynasty. The Western powers (mostly Great Britain) did not understand the politics of China however as well as they thought so they decided to back the Ming dynasty with whom they knew they were able to get valuable trading concessions and who were weak and corrupt.

The book is an excellent read and will give the reader a bit of an insight into the history that continues to shape China today. A definite well done to the author.

Herodotus according to Cicero is the Father of History. Does that mean that before Herodotus no Greek or Persian did not write history? Hardly, but Herodotus brought discipline to the subject by going out and speaking with locals, comparing their stories, examining the area of which he was writing and then drawing a conclusion as to the validity of any given narrative. This may not sound terribly new or exciting, but remember that he was writing history of the Greek and Persian wars around 460 B.C.
The book itself can be a hard read; imagine reading a novel by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, only instead of Russian names you have ancient Greek names (with no modern equivalent) and the story is in an area of the world where the locations have entirely different names than the areas are called today. Added to that, there are numerous “tribes” and “nations” that are long gone and that you have never heard of before in your life. Yet, in this translation (by Tom Holland), there are traces of wit and even sarcasm sprinkled throughout the six hundred plus pages. One learns from practices and a view of the world that sound strange and often silly, yet they are no sillier than the fears that the sailors of Christopher Columbus’ time had as they embarked on those voyages.

To be sure, historians after Herodotus have taken him to task. An example is provided by the German military historian, Hans Delbruck when he questions if Xeres could really field and army of 4,200,000 men. In volume one of his History of the Art of War, Delbruck points out that a German army corps of 30,000 men covers about fourteen miles even without its supply train. Given that modern fact, Xeres army would have a column of march of about two thousand miles! Additionally, Delbruck uses other historical records to shoe that certainly the numbers on the Greek side could not be realistic due to the known population of various cities at that time. Further, Delbruck questions the battle tactics as described by Herodotus, especially on the Greek side given the distances and the weight of their armor. Yet even with his numbers and logic, the detailed description of the Persian and Greek forces is excellent and believable.

To his credit, Herodotus presents an entirely different picture of the Persian king, Xeres. Contrary to popular history, Xeres is presented to be a brave, loyal and wise ruler, willing to take counsel and suggestions from those trusted individuals around him. He certainly must have been an interesting individual in an age of petty lords and tyrants.

I found that the best way to read this enjoyable history was to take it in small doses; a few pages so that the names and locations do not overwhelm the enjoyable writing. There are age old lessons to be learned from this book; nations and peoples come and go as other peoples move due to famine, drought, or pressure from other peoples; bravery in battle is honored as is loyalty and honesty, and war is and shall always be with us. This is the perfect book to read while one has a good cigar, a fine beverage, a comfortable seat, and the time to savor what one learns.

First published in 1942 in Italy, Luigi Albertini’s The Origins of the War of 1914 (three volumes, about 2200 pages) traces the political, diplomatic, and military causes of the war, going as far back to the compromise between Austria and Hungary in 1867 and its impact which would ripple through Europe for decades. He takes the reader step by step along a path that ends in war. The way he lays out the events in Europe, one can see with the advantage of hindsight how so many European decisions naturally led to war.
The work itself is recognized as one of the two or three most important books on the subject and Albertini provides the reader military and diplomatic dispatches, notes on policy meetings held by France, Germany, Russia, and other nations. We are exposed to the lies, corruption, political back biting and conflicting interests of the leaders of nations and those who serve them. Just as today we face what is known as the “deep state,” in nineteenth and early twentieth century nations, generals, bureaucrats, industrialist, and others followed their individual interests, often at the expense of their own nations.
Humanity with all of its weaknesses and faults parades before the reader who is left shaking his or her head at the sheer number of foolish decisions. There is little nobility to be seen as:
• We see the stupidity of the Russian Czar who did not realize that he could not mobilize only a portion of his forces and the generals who lied to him.
• We see the Italian leaders who dreamt of expansion in the Balkans with the result that they sold their nation to the highest bidders.
• We see the German Kaiser, known for his bluff and bluster who pales as he realizes what is about to be unleashed thanks to his overweening ego.
• There is the Kaiser Franz Joseph, an old, tired man used by his Chief of the General Staff into issuing an ultimatum which no nation could accept.
• The assassin, Gavrilo Princip never regrets unleashing a war that would lead to millions of deaths and would open the door to a second war with tens of millions of dead, all in the name of a “Greater Serbia.”
• Britian’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Edward Grey did not realize the danger Europe faced even though his nation had been in a naval race with the strongest land power in Europe.
• France fueled the rearmament of Russia in order to encircle Germany in a war of revenge using tactics that had cost them the last war with Germany.
There is no end to the players who each did their part to bring on the war. The list of long forgotten European foreign ministers, generals and officials can be daunting to keep straight precisely because none of them acted in a responsible manner, one which would slow down the slide to war.
Nations and their leaders have long memories. A quick decision by one nation can lead to a grievance of another that will last for decades. Yesterday’s allies are tomorrow’s foe for as Charles de Gaulle said decides later, “Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.” Unfortunately for Europe, the treaties of both sides were honored and paid for with the blood of millions.

It used to be that you could look to the future and see a never-ending landscape of progress for humanity. Medical care will be better, technology will make our lives better, famine and warfare will gradually disappear as increased wealth will eliminate the need for people to struggle. This history is about the building of the nation we know as France, a nation facing fundamental questions and challenges. As I was reading this history, I was struck by an almost mirror image of the building of France and the decline of modern-day France.
The area we know as France in the late tenth century was a patchwork of little more than warlords, robber barons and petty “nobility,” each vying for advantage over each other. Alliances were made and broken, religious persecution was widespread, and government was a concept that could only be viewed as an idea. It was a time, as Hobbs would say, when life was, “solitary, poor nasty, brutish and short.” Yes, there was the concept of the Holy Roman Empire, but true government in most of Europe was a dream for philosophers.
Out of this time however, through a series of wars and marriages, one family, the Capetians, became the most powerful monarch in Europe for nearly three-hundred and fifty years. From an area centered around Paris but dwarfed by more powerful lords in Burgundy, Aquitaine and several others, the Capetians managed to not only survive but came to master those other lords and create a more centralized, feudal state. It was no easy task as with each success came not only more power and responsibility, but also more demands. The Pope wants a crusade, a powerful baron has ambitions of his own, the cost of a state requires enormous amounts of money on a consistent basis, and more. Those demands must be met but there was no blueprint on how to manage those demands and thus there were times when the growing Capetian kingdom was close to failure time and time again. Yet the men and powerful women who headed the growing kingdom managed to keep forging ahead.
This book brings together a number of figures from the past that helps to give us an image of the times. Edward I of England, also known as “Longshanks” and the “Hammer of the Scots” (think of the movie “Brave Heart”), Eleanor of Aquitaine (the movie “The Lion in Winter”) and others. They all lived, fought, created, and ruled during a common time of political and economic consolidation. Yet despite such a prolonged period of power and the ability to deal with the challenges of time, the Capetians fell from power. They were not defeated by a stronger military challenger, but rather by the great weakness of a dynastic power; they died out. While there were still individuals who could lay claim to the Capetian throne, the one direct descendent of a Capetian king was fathered by a Valois which was the next dynasty to claim the throne.
The period involved in this history is not exactly a topic for everyday conversation, so the numerous and overlapping names may be a bit confusing for the average reader. But the book is well written, full of interesting historical tidbits and humor. Not exactly a “I can’t put it down” but a history that will bring you back simply to see how it all ends up.

George Kennan (not to be confused with George F. Kennan, remembered for his famous “Long Telegram”) was a journalist and explorer. He wrote a number of books, including Tent Life in Siberia where he wrote about living with a number of Siberian tribes such as the Koraks, Yakoots, Gakouts and others. It was this experience that opened the door for him to return to Czarist Russia to author a book about the exile system in Siberia.

He initially was positive about the exile system as he felt it was a positive way to bring settlers to Siberia who would be able to repay society for their various crimes. Because he authored several positive articles on that system, he was granted almost unlimited access to the camps and officials despite the skepticism of various Czarist officials. 

Daniel Beer’s book, The House of the Dead: Siberian Exile Under the Czars reviewed here on 4/21/2023) wrote of an earlier version of the system and although he did not have firsthand experience, it outlines a terrible blot on the face of Czarism. Kennan’s book goes further as he spent months travelling across Siberia, visiting way stations, camps, and work sites as well as speaking to many Czarist officials himself.

Kennan very quickly changes his mind about the system as he immediately comes across suspicious officials who only put up with him due to his letters of introduction and directives signed by high officials from the capital. He describes the towns and villages of Siberia, mostly small, dirty, and rudimentary with only a thin veil of civilization and little culture. The European Russian inhabitants attempt to build some sort of livable community life, but they are the end of an exceptionally long and thin line, far from the capital and of no significant importance to the national concerns.

In visiting the actual camps themselves, he does find some dedicated officials (normally having served a shorter time in the system) as the system is simply overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of prisoners. There are more prisoners than camp buildings so the weaker prisoners sleep outside which is not that bad during the milder months as the interiors of the camp buildings are dark, poorly ventilated, and filthy due to the lack of proper sanitation. He writes that at times he is choaking from the stench of the buildings. Some officials show him stacks of letters they sent to their superiors asking for additional funds to construct new facilities, for more manpower to manage the prisoners, all to no avail. Most letters are never even acknowledged.

A massive biography which covers the first half of Wellington’s life. Not being the first son, he was relegated to joining the military (under British custom, the first son inherited the title, the second went to the military and the third son entered the Church of England).

As was common at the time, Wellington had an unhappy childhood and like many men of that time, he made his mark and fortune in India. His military victories and diplomatic skill in India allowed him to assume command in the Peninsula during the Napoleonic wars where he reorganized the army of Portugal and created the famous defensive lines which the French under a number of Napoleon’s generals refused to attack. In a series of brilliant maneuvers, he out generaled every force sent against him as he slowly pushed the French out of the entire peninsula. That does not mean that he had an easy time as Napoleon poured men and material into the fight, but his real struggle was with various politicians and powers in London who were jealous of his successes and who kept Wellington’s forces on a strict leash.

Unlike other Wellington biographies, Muir provides excellent insight into Wellington’s excellent political skills not only in India, but also in Europe where he moved with ease. He was recognized as skillful, even tempered, and able to bring various factions together after the defeat of Napoleon.

He was a man of his age but also a man of a different age. Unlike most commanders of that time, he took great care for his men, ensuring that they had adequate food and logistical support. He may have been arrogant and superior in his manner to his men, but unlike Napoleon, he was careful with their lives and tried to avoid the typical frontal attacks which so wasted his opponent’s armies.

This is a long read, incredibly detailed, but for a serious scholar, an excellent biography on a complex individual.

In January 1901. Queen Victoria died at the age of 81 after being Queen for 64 years.  Her reign experienced the revolutions of 1848, the formation of the Second French Empire, Crimea War, and the unification of Germany.  A small woman, she hid herself from the public and to a certain extent, politics for decades after the death of her husband, Prince Albert.  The unintended result was a diminution of power of the Crown as strong Prime Ministers stepped into the role she abdicated. 

When she died, most citizens knew no other monarch and although her health had been slipping, many of her closest advisors were unaware of the seriousness of her illness.  This meant that her death came as a shock to the nation and the private secretaries, etc. scrambled to find the proper procedure for her internment. Fortunately, Captain (later Sir) Frederick Ponsonby took charge, often stepping on bureaucratic toes to make the arrangements.  Fate seemed to work against a smooth ceremony as the funeral cortege was too long for the route march, the casket almost fell off the caisson, the casket (there were several, each within the others), was so heavy that the troops carrying it had to be relieved after taking it off the caisson, and finally the traces broke and the caisson with the casket had to be pulled by the troops (in fact it was considered a great honor and a rival troop demanded the honor of pulling everything during the next stage).

The United States suffered shocks to its system by the death of FDR and the assassination of JFK but imagine if either of them had governed for over 60 years.  And, given the level of communications at the time, her death must have come like a bolt from the blue.  It seemed to be taken for granted that her reign would never end.  Her children ruled or were married to rulers of most of the European states which was thought to assure stability for the future but in the end, her death signaled the beginning days of the end for the old world which would be smashed in World War I.

If you are not familiar with this area, this book gives a glimpse into a simpler time, one filled with hope and dreams for a future.  A time when Europe still believed in itself and looked positively to scientific and economic advances which would benefit humanity.     

Many years ago, just out of University my parents and I travelled to Spain.  We took a side trip to Morocco and joined a group which was sheparded around by a local Muslim guide, complete with robe and soft slippers that curled upward at the toes.  As we progressed, the guide pointed out mosques, libraries, beautiful plazas, etc. always noting that when they were built during the tenth or eleventh century, Europe was in a Dark Age.  After several such episodes, my father, always the diplomat raised his hand and asked the guide if the Muslims had done anything in the last thousand years.  There was much laughter and the guide stopped making references to Europe’s Dark Age.

My story about my father’s comment strikes at the very heart of the problem around Islam today; massive hurt feelings that a once proud and conquering force is today among the most backward in the world.  Many Muslims in the Middle East resent the failures of their leaders and governments since Islam was turned back in 1683 at the gates of Vienna.  A society which, when the first printing press was introduced into Ottoman territories in 1450 banned it as a tool of the devil, simply failed to move with the world as created by the Europeans.  Piece by piece, the Islamic world was picked apart and subjugated by the West and the feeling of anger and frustration grew until it was believed by even some of the educated that radicalism and terrorism was the only answer.  Instead of looking forward, the radicals looked backwards trying to lead the Muslim world bravely backward into the 8th century.

Ed Husain, a former radical Islamist who has rejected extremism and is now a noted fellow at several excellent Western think tanks.  He has an excellent understanding not only of Islamic history, but also a solid foundation in the beliefs of the various factions that exist within Islam today.  He carefully outlines the Sunni-Shi’a schism, what is Sharia, who is a Sufi, the foundations of Wahhabism as well as in depth discussions on the various views on women, sex, education, Jews, etc.  Overall, you can feel him objective about the factions within Islam and this book is an excellent primer on Islam.

As a former radical, he knows and understands the rationale of the radicals in their view of where Islam has gone wrong and what they believe justifies their actions.  His discussion on the difference between the Quran and supposed comments and guidelines from Mohammed is very interesting.  As Muslims believe that the Quran is sacred as created by Mohammed, they are a perfect way to live life.  The supposed saying and guidelines from Mohammed are open to interpretation; were they in fact made by Mohammed or by others many years after his life.  Are these saying supported by the Quran or in violation of the Quran?  According to Husain, such injunctions as the veiling of women, not allowing women to be highly educated, and the rules by the likes of ISIS come from these supposed comments and have no basis in the Quran.  Due however, to the low level of education of many Imams, arguments against the likes of ISIS are weak or not capable of convincing Muslims to move away from such practices.

The author loves Islam, but he also has a rather distorted history of Islam.  According to his view, the warriors of Islam spared women and children as they swept across the land, but if they did, it was only to save them for the slave market.  Or, he mentions that the natives of India converted to Islam because they loved Islamic poetry and not because literally tens of millions were slaughtered by various Islamic rulers.  Yet, aside from these examples of glossing over of history (there are others), the book remains an excellent one that Westerners would do well to read.  Unlike other books on Islam, he does offer concrete suggestions on what can be done to reverse the trend towards radicalism and to move Islam forward in the real world.  He pushes hard for the Islamic world to accept Israel and to see what can be done with education, unity and hard work.  Would the Islamic world be willing to learn from Israel?  Can the Arab countries put aside their tribalism and move against (especially in Saudi Arabia) against Wahhabism?  Would the West be willing to create a Marshall Plan for the Islamic world in conjunction with the oil rich Arab world who would contribute to the development of lands outside of their own?  If not, then the path away from radicalism will be longer and harder than necessary.

We seem to be living in a time when a goodly portion of humanity, the white portion, should be, according to many on the Left, walking around with ashes on our heads while we practice self-flagellation for the sins which our race has done to most of humanity. This is especially true of the ignorant and those who seek to make a name-and money, from this narrative. Unfortunately for them, there are those who question if these ignorant and self-righteous have any idea about what they are talking about. One such person is Nigel Biggar, the Regius Professor Emeritus of Moral and Pastoral Theology at the University of Oxford. His excellent book, Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning looks openly and honestly at the charges of those who claim that colonialism, specifically that practiced by the British Empire have a grounding in fact. He looks at various questions such as, what was the driving force behind the Empire? Was it greed? Was the Empire basically racist? Was the Empire violent in that it imposed terrible conditions on its colonial subjects?

Although not a professional historian-he holds a BA in Modern History from Oxford while his Ph.Ds. are in Christian Theology and Ethics in Christian Theology and Ethics from the University of Chicago, his knowledge and research is excellent and he brings a balanced view of history as he includes the ethical component which in this case adds more depth to the book.

He initially raises the question of the concept of colonialism in that colonialism is as old as humanity. The empires of the Assyrians over four thousand years ago practiced colonialism. They were followed by the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Persians. The Athenians, Romans, Muslims, Asantes, etc. all were colonial powers. Some brought value with their overlordship, some only brought suffering, so how and where did the British Empire stand in relationship to all those who had gone before them? How did they stand against their contemporaries, such as the French, Russians, Dutch, Moguls, etc.? The problem and challenge are to not only read those who attack colonialism, but to look at their research to see if their writings are based on facts.

One such example is a famous quote which is attributed to Cecil Rhodes, when he is reported to have said, “I prefer land to the n—ers..the natives are like children. They are just emerging from barbarism…one should kill as many n—ers as possible.”  A terrible statement, often quoted by eminent historians as an example of the mindset of the British Empire. There is a problem however, for there is no evidence that Rhodes ever made that statement. Much of the statement was written by a former Rhodes scholar who is a director of a major Pan-African university in Johannesburg while more of it was “made up from three different elements drawn from three different sources” including a novel. Hardly scholastic proof. In fact, Rhodes supported the franchise in the Cape Colony that gave blacks the vote on the same term as whites, he funded a black newspaper, and his scholarship was color-blind from the first. Such minor details escape those who use Rhodes as an example of the British mindset.

His book is chapter after chapter of not whitewash, but a review of the times, norms, attitudes, and actions of both the British and the people’s they ruled. He discusses the abuses of colonialism as well as the benefits which provided the locals to better their lives and futures. The Empire stopped abuses such as the burning of widows, instituted a legal system where for the first time, the poorest of the poor could confront those who had previously exercised power as they wished. More rail mileage was built in India than existed in Great Britain with the result that freedom of movement, increased trade and food was more readily available than before their arrival.

And yes, there were abuses. Most abuses came at the local level, by the soldiers, local traders, etc. rather than from the governors, magistrates, and administrators. He quotes the proclamation of governors and provides details on their actual achievements. Those governors who exercised a great deal of freedom in their area seldom abused the great power they had and there are instances quoted when the locals feared a return to the old days where power was used arbitrarily when the governors were withdrawn. There was racism in many instances, especially in India after the Sepoy Rebellion when old loyalties and trusts were torn apart.

Because the author has a background in ethics, he broaches the question of compensation, one which is heard as a drumbeat. On one hand, were the natives justly compensated for their goods and land? Did they suffer to a greater or lesser extent from racism? How many locals were killed when they demanded independence or during times of famine? On the other hand, what was the value of immunization against disease which saved millions of lives? What was the value of freedom from slavery as practiced by local rulers? What was the value of instituting an educational system and the values of that system which allowed the locals to be able to step into power once independence was achieved?

This book may not convince the rabid anti-colonialist that the British empire experience had any positive worth. The author did however achieve one of his goals in that any reader who approaches the subject with even an inkling of an open mind will realize that the pros and cons, the costs vs. benefits, of colonialism as practiced by the British require a serious weighing on the scales of if not justice, at least intellect.

Covering the period between 1450-1620, Hale brings into play all the forces around which everyday life evolved in Europe.  He traces the slow development of the roads, art, economics, religion, how the old warrior class took on new leadership roles and the slow gradual realization of national identities.  The concept of national identities could not have been achieved without the constant warfare of the age so while the time was often bloody for a small percentage of the overall population, the development of industries necessary for the wars themselves create economic opportunities and the build up of wider areas of cross trade.

Aside from the usual topics one would expect in a book like this, he also spends time looking at the daily lives of ordinary people and how they lived.   How did they dress, where did they shop, how were rules of civility created and enforced? What and how did a common language develop in any geographical area and how did that common language unite the people in becoming what we know as France or Germany, etc.  How were the average people able to live during the upheavals in Christianity which were driven not only by religious differences, but also by the various local rulers who saw the time as an opportunity to enrich themselves by pillaging monasteries, churches, etc. 

The book is not an especially easy read; not because it is not well written, for it is, but the amount of information available is extraordinary.  This is due not only to the usual method of using a wide brush, but also because he delves into the ordinary and discusses how movements, ideas, etc. could impact the people of Europe down to the poorest peasant.  It falls into the category of books that if one were ever asked to read one book on a subject, would the one recommended.