Book Description

From the 1770s through the 1820s the French scientific community predominated in the world to a degree that no other scientific establishment did in any period prior to the Second World War. In his classic Science and Polity in France: The End of the Old Regime, Charles Gillispie analyzed the cultural, political, and technical factors that encouraged scientific productivity on the eve of the Revolution. In the present monumental and elegantly written sequel to that work, which Princeton is reissuing concurrently, he examines how the revolutionary and Napoleonic context contributed to modernization both of politics and science.

In politics, argues Gillispie, the central feature of this modernization was conversion of subjects of a monarchy into citizens of a republic in direct contact with a state enormously augmented in power. To the scientific community, attainment of professional status was what citizenship was to all Frenchmen in the republic proper, namely the license to self-governance and dignity within the respective contexts. Revolutionary circumstances set up a resonance between politics and science since practitioners of both were future oriented in their outlook and scornful of the past.

Among the creations of the First French Republic were institutions providing the earliest higher education in science. From them emerged rigorously trained people who constituted the founding generation in the disciplines of mathematical physics, positivistic biology, and clinical medicine. That scientists were able to achieve their ends was owing to the expertise they provided the revolutionary and imperial authorities in education, medicine, warfare, empire building, and industrial technology.

... Read more

Book Description

A strikingly fresh and revisionist explanation for the rise of Anglo-America as the dominant cultural and political force in the world today by the bestselling author of The Politics of Rich and Poor.

The question at the heart of The Cousins' Wars is this: How did Anglo-America evolve over a mere three hundred years from a small Tudor kingdom into a global community with such a hegemonic grip on the world today, while no other European power-Spain, France, Germany, or Russia-did? The answer to this, according to Phillips, lies in a close examination of three internecine English-speaking civil wars-the English Civil War, the American Revolution, and the American Civil War. These wars between cousins functioned as crucial anvils on which various religious, ethnic, and political alliances were hammered out between the English-speaking cousin-nations, setting them on a unique two-track path toward world leadership-one aristocratic and aloof to dominate the imperial nineteenth century and the other more egalitarian and democratic to take over in the twentieth century. They also functioned as unfortunate and deadly cultural crucibles for African Americans, Native Americans, and the Irish.

Phillips's analysis shows exactly how these conflicts are inextricably linked and how they seeded each other. He offers often surprising interpretations that cut across the political spectrum-for instance, that the Constitution of the United States, while brilliant in many respects, was also a fatally flawed political compromise that contributed mightily in setting the stage for the final-and the bloodiest-cousins' war: the American Civil War.

With the new millennium upon us and triggering widespread assessment of our nation's place in world history, The Cousins' Wars provides just the kind of magisterial sweep and revisionist spark to ignite widespread interest and debate. This grand religious, military, and political epic is the multi-dimensional story of the triumph of Anglo-America. ... Read more

Reviews (22)

Interesting but....
If you are fairly well versed in the American Revolution and Civil War, this is a good book because it views those conflicts from an entirely new angle. Do not read this book if you know little about those conflicts because there is no narrative of the events here; Phillips assumes you know the basics.

I have two criticims. First, there is too much information here. Phillips candidly acknowledges that there are many differences between the three wars he is looking at, and he throws so much information, and it is not very well organized, that the book is not an easy read; you have to stick with it to get his ideas. Those ideas, however, are quite interesting.

My other criticism is that the book does not attempt to explain why various religious groups tended to take certain sides. For example, one of his key points is that the Puritans in England and the Congregationalists in New England were similar and took similar positions in different conflicts. What Phillips never does, however, is examine the beliefs of those religions. Why do they tend to take certain positions? You see the ethnic religious links, but there is no theory of why this happened.

Summing up, this book is tough to get through, but if you are interested in the American Revolution and Civil War, this book presents and unique and fascinating look at those conflicts.

Wonderful Thesis
Phillips make a compelling argument that the three wars, English Civil War of 1640, American Revolution of 1776, and American Civil War of 1861, all carry the same dynamics between combatants. Those dynamics, Catholic vs. Protestant, Reformer vs. Conservative, Land Holder vs. Artisan, tumble down from one war to the next, and Phillips does a thorough job of explaining them. However, my only complaint with the book is that he was too thorough. I am an avid reader of history as a hobby, so I am a stranger neither to details in demographics nor dealing with person and place names unfamiliar to me. But I read history because it is fascinating stuff with outrageous personalities and remarkable coincidences, things that fiction simply cannot create and call "plausible". This book was more of a thesis--dry and heavy going.

I recommend the book to those who want to look at these wars, and the relationship between the USA and the UK, in a new light. The conclusions are eye-opening and thought provoking. But the path to getting to those conclusions is a tough one, so I do not recommend this book to those who read history as a happy diversion from daily routine.

Phillips usual garbage
If you have read evene a few pages of any book by thix Nixonite, then you hve tapped into the best that he has to offer (not much!)

Pass on this one.

A comprehensive account of the growth of two empires....
This book details the amazing parallels between British and American history as no other history book I have ever read has done. With a broad net that includes ethnic politics and religion, Kevin Phillips writes a great account of over 200 years of history on both sides of the Atlantic, detailing how the successive uprisings, the three "Cousins' Wars", were caused in large part by uprisings of Puritanism. A convincing and amazing book.

This book is muddled
In this book, Phillips, as he usually does on his radio commentaries, make broad generalizations and conclusions based on little more than his gut feelings. A historical book should be based on a comprehensive overview of data and facts, and the conclusions should follow. Phillips like to draw his conclusions first and then look for selective data to support them. Often he doesn't find any so he has to rely on nebulous unsubstantiated "common knowledge" to support his arguements.

The biggest drawback to this book is not that everything in the book is wrong (which is probably the case) but that Phillips doesn't give enough evidence or rational arguments to allow us to tell whether things he says are right or not. That is a worst indictment a book like this can have. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (4)

A very accessible book
Regan's book writes in a style that is easy to understand and even fun to read. This was the first book I read dealing with the Byzantine Empire, it was good enough to warrant a topic switch in my major from Medieval studies, to Byzantine studies. Regan's book makes a clear cut and convincing case for emperor Heraclius of Byzantium, as the First Crusader. Though the book does not contain enough detail for my taste, it was still a captivating and informative read. This should be considered an informative introductory to the study of the Byzantine Empire.

A little more detail would have made it a good one
Geoffrey Regan's books are entertaining. Read his Military blunders 1&2, which by the way were much better books than this one. He wishes to elaborate on the first true crusader, Heraclius but starts off with his typical satire, related to the times of Constantine's father and the birth of Byzantium. The early history of Byzantium was unnecessary. He could have written more on Heraclius himself. The lack of description of key battles and undertakings do not do justice to a man who deserves more. There are a couple of interesting pictures. On the good aspect of the book. One gets to read a bit of interesting history and legends. The author uses good judgement to question the authenticity of the True Cross and the Holy Sepulchre. Overall i'd say its a good book to keep but i wont recommend buying the hardback version.

A fresh look at some little-known history
This book reminds us that Christian crusades to liberate Jerusalem's holy places long predate the so-called First Crusade of the eleventh century. More than four hundred years earlier, the Byzantine Empire used Christian themes in its struggles against threats from the East. Regan is particularly effective in describing the campaigns of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius, who regained Jerusalem from the Persians. Regan follows the story through the era of Islamic expansion, the Turkish conquests, and the first Western Crusade. Among other things, readers will discover the original Church of the Holy Sepulcher built by Constantine, much more impressive than the current version. Like the Jewish Temple, it was destroyed by invaders. The book, written in an accessible style, includes black and white photographs and some basic maps.

Wars of Heraclitus against the Persians
REVIEWED BY SMITH HEMPSTONE ...

When it comes to warrior-kings, the Byzantine emperor Heraclitus, who ruled Constantinople from 610 to 641 A.D., was in a league by himself. Few have risen so fast, and achieved so much in such a short time, only to lose all at the end.
Indeed, in "First Crusader: Byzantium's Holy Wars," the British historian Geoffrey Regan makes a convincing case that the wars of Heraclitus against the Sasanian Persians (622-628 A.D.) should rank as the first crusade rather than that from the West called by Pope Urban in 1095. Heraclitus smashed the Persian empire, recovering the flags and standards lost by 100 Byzantine armies over the centuries, regained the lost colonies of Syria, Palestine and Egypt, sacked a dozen great cities, brought back the True Cross from Persia and rebuilt the shrine of the Holy Sepulchre.
Whether you call the wars of the Christian Byzantines against the fire-worshipping Zoroastrian Persians crusades, or something else, the heroics of Heraclitus, who personally led his troops in battle and fought in single combat the champions of many enemy armies, had the effect of prolonging the life of the Eastern Roman empire for several centuries, delaying the Moslem advance into the Balkans by hundreds of years.
Both his personal life and his military successes combined to weaken Heraclitus toward the end of his reign. His popular first wife, Fabia-Eudokia, died in 612 A.D., leaving the emperor with only one male heir, not nearly enough to guarantee the succession. So Heraclitus married his beautiful and able niece, Martina, daughter of his sister, Maria. Although incestuous unions were not that unusual in those days, they were forbidden. But a significant group of the Byzantine establishment regarded the deaths of four of her disabled children as God's judgement on Martina, blaming her for defeats at the hands of the Moslem Arabs.
When Heraclitus died horribly of "dropsy" (cancer) this was taken as yet another sign of divine displeasure. The fates of Martina and her surviving sons: Martina's tongue was split and she was exiled to Rhodes with her eldest son, who had his nose cut off. Of her three other sons, two had their noses cut off and the youngest was castrated.
Like many another political leader, Heraclitus wanted to have both chariots and wine, and his wars proved ruinously expensive. Syria and Palestine had been regained but were denuded of their populations, their fields lay fallow and returned little revenue. Egypt was about to fall to Mohammed's desert Bedouin breaking out from Arabia.
The Orthodox Church, through the influence of Heraclitus' great friend and supporter, the Patriarch Sergius of Constantinople, had floated huge loans to pay for the wars. But now, except in distant Egypt, the wars were over and the church wanted its money back.
Heraclitus paid up, but only at the cost of his planned reform of the army and the civil service. Alexandria soon fell to the Moslems and much of Syria followed. By 674 A.D. the Moslem jihad had carried them to the gates of Constantinople. In desperation, the Byzantines fell back on their secret weapon: "Greek fire," a highly flammable mixture of tar, resin, sandarac and powdered sulphur mixed with dolphin and goat fat. It was ignited after passing through a hose and could not be put out with water. The Byzantine garrison of Constantinople used this primitive napalm to great effect against the Arab fleet and the wooden siege machines of the Moslems.
Their effective use of "Greek fire" and the arrival of Bulgar reinforcements and their King Tervel, resulted in over 20,000 Moslems killed. The Arabs abandoned the siege in 718 A.D., and the city was to block the Moslem invasion of Eastern Europe for another 700 years.
The millennium of Christ's death in 1033 A.D. triggered a wave of religious fervor that engulfed all Western Europe. What had been mere acts of faith evolved into a series of crusades whose objective was nothing less than the conquest of the Holy Land and its restoration to Christian rule.
What distinguished the Western crusaders from the earlier pilgrims was that by their acts they earned indulgences from the pope. These guaranteed protection of his family, lands and assets during his absence and granted the remission of sins should the crusader die in battle, with immediate entry into Paradise. In an age of faith, this was of no little consequence.
Jerusalem had been destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. and by the Persians in 614 A.D. The Moslem Arabs had captured it in 638 A.D. In 1099 A.D. it was invested by the Western Crusaders and fell in a bloody massacre. After all the Moslems were dead and most of the Crusaders had sailed back to Europe, just 300 Christian knights and 2,000 infantry remained in the smoking ruins.
While Byzantium remained, it did so only as a shadow of its former days of greatness under Hiraclitus. Christian communities in the Near East could no longer expect help from Constantinople, which was to fall to the Ottoman Turks. As the gap grew greater between Latin Christianity and the Orthodox Church, Islam was rent by the division between Sunni and Shia and defeated in France and Hungary. It was not a time for greatness. ... Read more

Book Description

Acclaim for Lafayette

"I found Mr. Unger’s book exceptionally well done. It’s an admirable account of the marquis’s two revolutions–one might even say his two lives–the French and the American. It also captures the private Lafayette and his remarkable wife, Adrienne, in often moving detail." –Thomas Fleming, author, Liberty!: The American Revolution

"Harlow Unger’s Lafayette is a remarkable and dramatic account of a life as fully lived as it is possible to imagine, that of Gilbert de Motier, marquis de Lafayette. To American readers Unger’s biography will provide a stark reminder of just how near run a thing was our War of Independence and the degree to which our forefathers’ victory hinged on the help of our French allies, marshalled for George Washington by his ‘adopted’ son, Lafayette. But even more absorbing and much less well known to the general reader will be Unger’s account of Lafayette’s idealistic but naive efforts to plant the fruits of the American democracy he so admired in the unreceptive soil of his homeland. His inspired oratory produced not the constitutional democracy he sought but the bloody Jacobin excesses of the French Revolution."–Larry Collins, coauthor, Is Paris Burning? and O Jerusalem!

"A lively and entertaining portrait of one of the most important supporting actors in the two revolutions that transformed the modern world."–Susan Dunn, author, Sister Revolutions: French Lightning, American Light

"Harlow Unger has cornered the market on muses to emerge as America’s most readable historian. His new biography of the marquis de Lafayette combines a thoroughgoing account of the age of revolution, a probing psychological study of a complex man, and a literary style that goes down like cream. A worthy successor to his splendid biography of Noah Webster."–Florence King, Contributing Editor, National Review

"Enlightening! The picture of Lafayette’s life is a window to eighteenth- and nineteenth-century history."–Michel Aubert La Fayette ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Superb, compelling, & should be 'required reading'
This book is wonderful! It is very readable, fast-paced, and, unlike other 'dry' books about long dead historical figures, it keeps the reader turning pages, wondering "why didn't I learn about this great man - this Founding Father - in high school history class?" Well, in this time of cynicism where we all decry the lack of bona fide heros (outside of sports and entertainment), here he is - the Marquis de Lafayette! This book not only clearly outlines Lafayette's life and unbelieveable accomplishments, but also his ideals. He was a man who believed in liberty, equality, honesty, friendship, and honor. Without his brilliant military and political leadership, the 13 colonies would not have won independence from Great Britain. Without Lafayette - and France - the United States would not be, certainly not as we are today. The book also continues to describe Lafayette's impact on Europe, and his role in formenting republican revolution in France and elsewhere on the European continent. But always, he is true to his undying and immutable convictions about the rights of man. Even when threatened with horrid imprisonment and death, Lafayette did not waver in his ideals. He risked his life, his fortune, and his sacred honor for those rights. What a great man - a hero for the ages! A must read.....

Bravo!!!!
This is an excellent book!!!!! It reads like a novel and provides a wealth of knowledge about this great man. I'm only 13 years old, and I've read this book twice! If I could give it 6 stars, I would. I'd give it 10 stars!! Anyway, I definitely reccomend this book to anyone who wants to know about the Marquis de Lafayette.

Of Pulitzer Caliber
Unger's Lafayette is a brilliantly written biography. It is of Pulitzer caliber, and the most informative, revealing, and entertaining recount of Lafayette's extradoridany life published to date. It is not only a masterful biography but a valuable text on the American and French Revolutions and beyond.

Captivating story
Unger's Lafayette is one of the best written revolutionary period biographies. Most of us know Lafayette only for his American Revolution contributions. Unger's book takes us to the French revolution as well and Lafayette's key role in it. Here he tried to prevent the massacres that took place and personally paid dearly for his role. One can not help have strong admiration for Lafayette as a man of ideals, honesty and courage. Unger has written a highly readable and entertaining biography. I read his book on Hancock and was also imnpressed with Unger's ability to tell a story with an always interestimg prose.

The Marquis de Lafayette
Harlow Unger's book covers a biography that is stranger than fiction, starting with LaFayette's unique marriage and continuing with his fanatical dedication to the remote American struggle for freedom; his close relationships with Washington, Franklin, Jefferson and other world leaders; his exceptional military leadership; his continuing voluntary work for independence in his own country (including 13 months in a horrific prison) all the way until he died at the age of 77. Throughout the story, the mutual, unabated love between the Marquis and his very capable wife, Adrienne, provided even more dramatic episodes. Nearly every event was more amazing the the one before.
This is a detailed and eye-opening history of both the American and French revolutions and their great contrast. If the reader has trouble believing it is truly factual, he will be convinced with the frequent, verbatim letters and voluminous, documented historical references. This is absolutely a must read for anyone with an ounce of interest in western civilization. ... Read more

Book Description

The definitive work on Stalin's purges, Robert Conquest's The Great Terror was universally acclaimed when it first appeared in 1968. Edmund Wilson hailed it as "the only scrupulous, non-partisan, and adequate book on the subject." George F. Kennan, writing in The New York Times Book Review, noted that "one comes away filled with a sense of the relevance and immediacy of old questions." And Harrison Salisbury called it "brilliant...not only an odyssey of madness, tragedy, and sadism, but a work of scholarship and literary craftsmanship."And in recent years it has received equally high praise in the Soviet Union, where it is now considered the authority on the period, and has been serialized in Neva, one of their leading periodicals.

Of course, when Conquest wrote the original volume two decades ago, he relied heavily on unofficial sources. Now, with the advent of glasnost, an avalanche of new material is available, and Conquest has mined this enormous cache to write a substantially new edition of his classic work. It is remarkable how many of Conquest's most disturbing conclusions have born up under the light of fresh evidence. But Conquest has added enormously to the detail, including hitherto secret information on the three great "Moscow Trials," on the fate of the executed generals, on the methods of obtaining confessions, on the purge of writers and other members of the intelligentsia, on life in the labor camps, and many other key matters.

Both a leading Sovietologist and a highly respected poet, Conquest here blends profound research with evocative prose, providing not only an authoritative account of Stalin's purges, but also a compelling and eloquent chronicle of one of this century's most tragic events. A timely revision of a book long out of print, this updated version of Conquest's classic work will interest both readers of the earlier volume and an entirely new generation of readers for whom it has not been readily available. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

HISTORY AS SURREALISM
When I read the first edition of this book back during the Cold War, it was difficult to believe the quality of scholarship and research effort that Conquest demonstrated throughout this book, written while the KGB was still running amok. What most general histories dismissed with a few sentences or paragraphs as "millions died or were imprisoned", Conquest gave us the names, the chronology, and the results of Stalin's paranoid Reign of Terror. Now that the archives have become more accessible, Conquest is able to update his work and further illuminate this darkest period of Russian (and perhaps world) history. ANYTHING written by Conquest is worth reading if you want to understand the workings of 20th century Soviet politics and society.

Definitive work on one of history's darkest episodes...
Robert Conquest's The Great Terror, a Reassessment, is they definitive English language work on Stalin's purges. The book has had some criticism from the far left, but Conquest has been largely vindicated by the now open Soviet archives.
This book is largely dispassionate. Conquest resists the urge to excessively moralize. Instead, he treats his subject matter in largely chronological order, with a few diversions for background. The result is a detailed catalog of the horrors of the purges. The text relies on excerpts from the trail transcripts, and these are absolutely chilling taken in context of the result. Each trial is worse than the other. In fact, to some extent the trials are worse because of the sheer routine the purges degenerated intoforced confessions, self-betrayals, they all became commonplace. Society turned against itself, until you were not considered a responsible citizen unless you denounced somebody; turning on your neighbors, friends, even relatives became a method of insuring personal security and survival. This book is 'must' reading for anybody who wants to understand Stalinism and this period of the Soviet Union. The lessons learned should never be forgotten...

Never Mind, They'll Swallow It
Reading The Great Terror is an awakening awareness of mind-boggling inhumanity. To say that in the 1930s Stalin snuffed out twenty million of his citizens hardly begins to describe the essential evil of his rule, which caused indescribable suffering for countless millions more, not to mention plunged the world into war for decades.

It's easily forgotten that the October 1917 coup by which the Bolshevik intellegentsia came to power lacked popular support and by 1921 had lost any semblance of representing the proletariat. From its inception, the party of Lenin and Trotsky embraced deceit, violence, and willingness to sacrifice others as a means to power, bringing Hitler later to say that unlike Social Democrats "he could always turn a Communist into a Nazi." Stalin merely took the context of intolerance to its logical extreme, plotting the decimation of his opposition into ever smaller groups, assisted by the very ones that would themselves successively be destroyed by it: Trotskyites, then Rightists, Bukharinites, Zinovievites, and finally the Stalinists themselves. The 1937 Plenum already marked the complete transformation into autocracy.

Key to Stalin's success were his patience and that he never revealed (or tested) the limits of his ruthlessness. Rivals continually underestimated him: Trotskyites supported the disastrous 1930 agricultural collectivisation, miscalculating that he wouldn't dare another repression and the peasants would revolt-- but Stalin did impose an even worse famine two years later, starving an unimaginable 10 million Russians and Ukrainians. Supporters and opponents alike never held him personally responsible: even the Terror itself was called the Yezhovschina. Victims could be persuaded that the Terror was in the interest of Communism not Stalin, and it is to this day unknown whether Stalin himself believed it. His capriciousness and promises of leniency induced even high officials to produce confessions and denunciations, hoping that perhaps one more obscenity committed in his service might restore them to favour.

At first, at least an actual crime and the formality of a show trial were needed. The fringe benefit of Stalin's assassination of Kirov was that other opponents could be executed for it. Convictions relied solely on confessions that were rather blatantly inconsistent and sometimes bizarre. Though brave individuals sometimes recanted at trial, they fell back into line after a short 'recess'. The rare evidence introduced that was actually verifiable was knowingly false: for example, the Copenhagen Hotel Bristol where Sedov had allegedly met had actually been demolished at the time. But full show trials were a luxury reserved for the Party elite. One court report simply read: "No prosecutor. No witnesses. No co-accused. No defender."

The crimes themselves were soon completely fatuous. Article 58 of the Criminal Code outlawed "flight abroad," "lack of faith in the Socialist state," and fascinatingly "suspicion of espionage." Insufficient loyalty to Stalin was fatal. Workers or managers who failed to meet their quotas were convicted of sabotage, as indeed were NKVD investigators for failing to meet their 'arrest quotas'. Doctors were convicted for assassinating Gorky by smoke from bonfires, Jews for spying for Nazi Germany, and clergy for praying. Purges soon reached to the citizenry, and the mere misfortune of being denounced practically guaranteed guilt.

Confessions were wrought by horrible torture. Wives and children of accused were held hostage and often shared their fate. Children under the age of 17 were despatched to NKVD settlements. Overflowing cells built for twelve held a hundred, so that prisoners had to pack down sideways like sardines-- and only in shifts. Most could not withstand round-the-clock beatings for more than a few months and succumbed, although a few exceptional individuals held out.

The horror of the gulag is beyond comprehension. Camps were brutal, soul-destroying, ruled on behalf of guards by hard-core criminals. The journey to the camps was deadly and could last months. Outside work was compulsory until temperatures dropped below -50 *C. Inmates were starved and savaged by epidemics. Perhaps the best thing about them was that one would not be expected to survive more than two years. In Kolymev only three out of every hundred survived. From Novaya Zembla, nobody returned at all.

It's unknown whether the Purges stopped because the courts were overstretched or because the geometric rate of denunciations would soon have implicated the entire population. Fully 5% of the population had been arrested, while 7 million people languished in camps. Of the original partisans and Bolsheviks no-one at all remained. The Terror machinery nonetheless continued at a more controlled pitch, and the gulag population would grow to 12 million at Stalin's death in 1953. Soviet science, technology, and the military were robbed of their best people. The cumulative psychological effect of the Terror nightmare on generations of Soviets is unimaginable.

Unfortunately, the West generally left these citizens to their fate. Driven by Communist idealism, foreign correspondents ignored, glossed over, or simply flat-out lied about the show trials. Jean-Paul Sartre and other intellectuals still denied the existence of the gulag long after its evidence was undeniable. A French literary journal called Victor Kravchenko's account of the camps a lie. The New York Times' Walter Duranty received a Pulitzer prize for his Stalin apologia.

The Left never let facts get in the way of an attractive ideology, and never understood that "not even high intelligence and a sensitive spirit are of any help once the facts of a situation are deduced from a political theory, rather than vice versa." That neither Stalin, nor his ideology, have ever been fully held accountable is maddening and a disgrace to the memory of his victims.

Worthless
The book was written by a former British intelligence agent during the cold war, what can one expect? It is full of distortions and lies from Russian and Ukrainian emigres, same with his 'harvest of sorrow' book. Sources are non-existant of anything else. Do yourselves a favor and read J. Arch Getty and Thurston, as well as Reese's "Stalin's Reluctant Soldiers" for some real historical work.

"Plus ca change plus la meme chose"
I happened to mention to a few colleagues the other day that I was reading Robert Conquest's "The Great Terror". This drew blank looks. I amplified somewhat, referencing Stalin, Yeshov, Molotov. More blank looks.

I grew up in a cold war household. My father was a something of a rarity, he was a right wing journalist who travelled widely in Russia bringing back a story which, in the 60s and 70s, was largely ignored by the media and everyone else. He knew then what we all know now, that Russian communism was rotten to the core and was a house of cards teetering on abject collapse. Alas, but that house took decades to come down and so condemned a further generation or two to lives of quiet and unrelieved desperation and hopelessness.

What does our society know of this? A society that, in the case of America, can be convulsed with paroxysms of despair when a few thousand people died in a single tragic incident -- genuinely convinced that something without precedent has happened. The most common formulation we hear of this, is the common reference to September 11th as "the day our world changed". For heaven's sake -- there is now a Jenny Craig television advertisement in which a formerly fat person testifies that September 11th changed her world such that she decided to lose wait. Ye Gods.

But what exactly is it that changed? History, as my high school history teacher used to say, tailgates. Conquest tells us that Stalin and Molotov, during a "typical day at the office", would sign liquidation orders for THOUSANDS of innocent people by simply putting their signatures together with the word "liquidate" at the bottom of a sheaf of papers that contained the names. And then they would head for the cinema, a solid day's work done. All that appears to have changed is that moderns have forgotten the nightmares of yesterday. Each fresh outrage is treated as something unique, something personal, something without precedent. "The Great Terror" is an effective antidote to this type of thinking.

"The Great Terror" is a book that was available in the late sixties. It was, like my father, largely ignored. I had school chums who were Marxists. Teachers as well. They either denied the facts or more often, accepted what had happened on the principle that it was necessary to "break a few eggs to make an omelette". And so the regime which was to be responsible for murdering tens of millions of its own citizens, on a scale and in a cold blooded manner that rivals and even surpasses the more famous Hitlerian Holocaust, is ignored or forgotten.

In 1990, communism collapsed. My father, am embittered old cold warrior by then, took little pleasure from having been proven right. Conquest, however, took the opportunity to revise and expand his monumental book. Virtually everything he had written about was confirmed by the glasnost revelations - as he takes pains to demonstrate.

It is true that many of those who died in the execution cellars or the death camps deserved their fate. But the vast majority were innocent wives children, peasants teachers workers and writers. It is estimated that "every other family in the USSR had one of its members in jail". Stalin's purges gave rise to the unthinkable. A slave labour economy. Want to know why they beat us to space or how they got the Bomb so quickly? Well, among other things, they stole virtually all of our secrets and the had slave labour. On the theft of the West's secrets another must read is David Holloway's "Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy 1939-1956".

Conquest writes quite well - he is also an accomplished poet. But the book is also something of a catalogue of horrors and he writes in what is at times a dismayingly dispassionate manner. He is somewhat relentless. As fact piles upon fact, outrage upon outrage we are led to say with each turn of the page, "Dear God in heaven, what fresh hell is this". But the horror is NOT lost on Conquest and he stands, almost alone, as our witness to those terrible times. If not in the pages of this book, then where will we learn the names of those who perished so many years ago. Virtually no one under the age of 40 really understands what went on.

Conquest's book needs to be read by all of us. And in particular those who think that the suicide attack on the WTC was something new; an event that "changed our world". Because it wasn't. ... ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Great Introduction to the French Revolution
I easily concur with the previous reviews: this is an outstanding introductory text on the French Revolution. Of particular interest beyond the mere historical facts surrounding the revolution is Doyle's presentation on how the event has been interpreted over the past two centuries. The study of this book can easily result in derivative studies of Furet, Schama, and others. Not only a bargain pricewise, but a great presentation of a critical historic event in an exceptionally interesting and accessible structure. I have to say that I immensely enjoyed it.

Brillant and concise
Doyle's condensed version of the French Revolution is an excellent source for revisiting this period in history. Having majored in French Language 20 years ago, I am embarassed to admit both of how much I had forgotten and did not know of this event. Doyle's book is a wonderful work outlining the chronolgy, revealing the hows and whys, and most importantly discussing its value today. Its 135 pages are worth their weight in gold.

Wonderful introduction to a complex subject.
The French Revolution is one of the most significant events in world history. So much has been written about it that it can be difficult to find a good place to start exploring the subject. Well, look no more. William Doyle has written a terrific introduction to the topic that is wonderful in its scope and yet concise. In this book he is more concerned with why the French Revolution mattered and has continued to matter, that with a retelling of what happened.

Rather than a strict chronological approach, the six chapters of this book give the reader six different perspectives on the same event. Each adds depth to our understanding of the event and its place in history.

Chapter one is called "Echoes" and it relates how this great upheaval was perceived by the rest of the world not only in the newspapers of the day but in fiction and drama. The Importance of Being Earnest, A Tale of Two Cities, and The Scarlet Pimpernel are discussed. The complete text of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens is included in this chapter as well.

"Why It Happened" is the second chapter. Here the author discusses the causes of the Revolution. This is mainly a description of the Ancien Regime's government and society during the reign of Louis XVI.

The third chapter is called "How It Happened." In this chapter Doyle discusses the Revolution as a series of events that stretched over a number of years. He does an excellent job of showing how each event led to the next. The violent excesses of the guillotine are much more understandable in context.

"What It Ended" is the name of the fourth chapter and my personal favorite. It is here that we see the impact that the Revolution had, not only in France, but throughout the world. Before the Revolution there is a world of Divine Right, religious authority, slavery, peasants, and aristocracy. While this doesn't change overnight, the fact that the people can revolt and change the social order becomes established beyond a doubt. Once changed, society seems unwilling to go back and is changed forever.

The next to the last chapter is called "What It Started," and it deals with the effects the Revolution has had on the world. It also discusses the reaction to the Revolution and the dynamic tension of radical and conservative forces in modern history.

"Where It Stands" is the last chapter. This is devoted to the schools of academic thought on the Revolution. The "classic" interpretation of the Revolution and its critics are outlined with a brief history. The chapter ends with an outline of contemporary thinking about the Revolution.

The book ends with a Timeline, The Revolutionary Calendar, a list of Further Readings, and an Index. The Calendar of twelve 30-day months and five complimentary days that began on September 22, 1793 is especially interesting.

This is a great introduction into the events and meaning of the French Revolution. It will satisfy the reader who wants just one book on the topic as well as the beginning scholar who is looking for a place to start his or her research.

Extraordinarily successful for what it sets out to do
Many relatively recent books on the French Revolution, such as Simon Schama's excellent CITIZENS, seem to presuppose a basic knowledge of the highlights and terms of the Revolution itself (the Tennis Court Oath, the Jacobins, Thermidor, etc.) but also of its aftermath (Louis XVIII and Charles X, Napoleon;s Egypt campaign, etc.). Doyle's book presupposes almost nothing, and lays out for the common reader not only a very clear and concise of the Revolution itself but also the ancien regime that preceded, and the restorations, republics, and empires that succeeded it. Best of all, it makes interesting claims in its introduction and conclusion as to why the Revolution mattered to the nineteenth and twentieth centuries as an intellectual and political event, and even (for good measure) a coherent account of the battles raging among the Annales schools of historians in France up to the present day. Fine work, and a great introduction. ... Read more

Book Description

Published for the first time in the U.S.—one of the two diaries on which the movie The Motorcycle Diaries is based—the moving and at times hilarious account of Che Guevara and Alberto Granado's eight-month tour of South America in 1952.

In 1952 Alberto Granado, a young doctor, and his friend Ernesto Guevara, a 23-year-old medical student from a distinguished Buenos Aires family, decided to explore their continent. They set off from Cordoba in Argentina on a Norton 500cc motorbike and traveled through Chile, Peru, Colombia, and Venezuela. The duo's adventures vary from the suspenseful (stowing away on a cargo ship, exploring Incan ruins) to the comedic (falling in love, drinking, fighting...) to the serious (volunteering as firemen and at a leper colony). They worked as day laborers along the way—as soccer coaches, medical assistants, and furniture movers. The poverty and exploitation of the native population started the process that was to turn Ernesto—the debonair, fun-loving student—into Che, the revolutionary who had a profound impact on the history of several nations.

Originally published in Spanish in Cuba in 1978, the first English translation was published by Random House UK in 2003. The movie, based on Granado's and Che's diaries, directed by Walter Salles (Central Station, Behind the Sun), was produced by Robert Redford and others. Shown at the Sundance Film Festival, it generated great reviews and a frenzied auction for distribution rights, which was won by Focus Features. Granado, now 82, was a consultant to Salles during the production. 10 b/w photos. ... Read more

Book Description

America's Declaration of Of Independence, while endeavouring to justify a break with Great Britain, simultaneously proclaimed that the colonists had not been `wanting in attention to our British brethren', but that they had `been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguinity'. This overstatement has since been modified in comprehensive histories of the American Revolution. Gradually a more balanced portrait of British attitudes towards the conflict has emerged. In particular, studies of pro-American Britons have exemplified this fact by concentrating on only a small upper-class minority.In contrast, this work focuses on five unrenowned men of Britain's `middling orders'. These individuals actively endeavoured to aid the American cause. Their efforts, often unlawful, brought them into contact with Benjamin Franklin, for whom they befriended rebel seamen confined in British gaols. Their stories - rendered here - open up new areas for study of the American War on this middling segment of Britain's social structure. ... Read more

Book Description

The decade 1910–1920 was the bloodiest in the controversial history of one of the most famous law enforcement agencies in the world—the Texas Rangers. Much of the bloodshed was along the thousand-mile Texas/Mexico border because these were the years of the Mexican Revolution.

Charles Harris III and Louis Sadler shed new light on this turbulent period by uncovering the clandestine role of Mexican President Venustiano Carranza in the border violence. They document two virtually unknown invasions of Texas by Mexican Army troops acting under Carranza’s orders. Harris and Sadler suggest the notorious "Plan de San Diego," usually portrayed by historians as a plot hatched in South Texas, was actually spawned in Mexico by Carranza. This irredentist conspiracy, which called for the execution of all Anglo males sixteen and older and the establishment of a Hispanic republic, was designed to cause a race war between Hispanics and Anglos. One of Carranza’s goals was to end the support being given by border residents to his rival Pancho Villa.

The "Plan de San Diego" caused the governor of Texas to order the Texas Rangers to wipe out the insurgency along the border. This resulted in an estimated 300 Hispanics being killed by the Rangers and others without benefit of judge and jury.

The Texas Rangers and the Mexican Revolution is the first Ranger history to utilize Mexican government archives and the voluminous declassified FBI records on the Mexican Revolution. ... Read more

Book Description

A groundbreaking work of colonial history in the tradition of King Leopold's Ghost and The Boer War.

A riveting account of Britain's final bloody decade in Kenya, this book tells the story of the brutal war between the colonial government and the insurrectionist Mau Mau between 1952 and 1960. New findings cast the Gikuyu rebels—hardly the terrorists they were thought to be—in a new light and reveal the British to be brutal aggressors in a "dirty war" that involved, among others, Winston Churchill and Harold MacMillan. This astonishing piece of scholarship portrays a teetering colonial empire in its final phase—employing whatever military and propaganda methods were necessary to preserve an order that could no longer hold. 18 photographs, 2 maps. ... Read more

Book Description

From the American Revolution to the conflicts in Afghanistan, revolutions have played a critical role in the course of history. Insight into the causes of revolutions and the factors that shape their outcomes is critical to understanding politics and world history--and REVOLUTIONS is a reader designed to address this need. Part One offers a combination of classic treatises and late-breaking scholarship that develops students' theoretical understanding of revolutionary movements. Part Two shows students how these theories play out in real life through rich, accessible accounts of major revolutionary episodes in modern history. ... Read more

Book Description

Book Description

This classic work on the French Revolution and Napoleonic era has been thoroughly updated to reflect the most recent scholarship on a magnificently complex epoch. Appropriate for upper-level French Revolution and Napoleonic era courses, this text's primary purpose is to give students the generally accepted "story" of the era and to furnish them with the basic knowledge to put in context the more sophisticated works listed in the bibliography. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

It's all here
I completely agree with the previous review in every respect except I feel the book deserves more stars, given the "rating inflation" prevalent with so many of the titles reviewed. I wouldn't want anyone to be put off getting this book. Connelly has squeezed an incredible amount of information into a small amount of space. As usual, he is clear and entertaining. People interested in the period should check out his other titles.

Just Enough
Ideal for those starting out on their study of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Era (as one would expect from a university history text), Owen Connelly's modest volume has much to recommend it: fresh, readable style; decent maps, a comprehensive bibliography (pointing the way for future purchases!) and quite a few interesting little kernels that one seldom comes across. I particularly enjoyed his insights into the siblings of Napoleon; Jerome's sponsorship of Gauss, Louis' campaign for breast-feeding, Joseph's conversion of El Prado into an art museum. I heartily recommend this book as an excellent staging ground for future operations into the hinterlands of Napoleonic literature. I also recommend Connelly's BLUNDERING TO GLORY as a vey good next step on your journey. ... Read more

Book Description

Reviews (19)

Coogan takes on "The Big Fella"
Tim Pat Coogan's book "The IRA" is on the bookshelf of practically everyone with an interest in modern Irish politics. His biography of Michael Collins seems destined to join it. It is not an easy read, and contains a mass of detail of Collins' life from childhood to the ambush in which he died. The detail can be overwhelmingly dense at times, and often harrowing, and sometimes Coogan makes too many assumptions about the level of background knowledge of the reader. But if you've seen Neil Jordan's recent film, this biography will fill in the political and personal background of the man who made modern Ireland. Coogan's biography left me a lot wiser about the history of modern Ireland - and also served as a sad reminder of the importance of the gun in Irish politics

A difficult but engrossing history
The book is difficult but not tedious. It's a pity that Tim Coogan didn't supply a little background on Irish History, just to put the events he describes in context. Without that, it becomes a little difficult if you have no idea who or what he is referring to. When he gets into the main subject of this history, one tends to get lost in a maze of characters, and their various alliegences. Nevertheless it offers a very complete treatment of the Anglo-Irish War, the negotiation of the Treaty, and the subsequent Irish Civil War. The ugliness and brutality of the war with the British is upsetting, and may well leave you feeling very angry. Finally let me say that Michael Collins emerges from this story as an extrordinary young man of enormous ability in so many ways, who with a little help from his friends did manage to get the British out of Ireland, or at least out of the twenty-six counties. The absurdity of it all, is that he was killed by his own people when he was little more than thirty years old.

The Big Fellow,indeed!
One cannot understand modern Ireland with no knowledge of Michael Collins. Known as the "Big Fellow" Collins was the brains and driving force behind Ireland's triumphal revolution of 1916-1921. That struggle led directly to the formation of the Irish Free State and eventually the Irish Republic of today. One has to be careful how he phrases that statement, for Ireland has a long list of her heroes and martyrs. Collins is but one of them but Collins was different! So many others died in vain and became legends in song and story. The Big Fellow was icily prevailing. There are 4 main elements to MC: The first was Collins stunning use of intelligence to thwart the British at their own game. He was always a step ahead of the Brits. He was the most wanted man in Ireland but continually slipped through the hands of his foe. He literally hid in plain sight. The British had no picture of him and didn't know what he looked like! The second was his fearless use of selected assassination. In one night in 1920, his men (the aptly named 12 Apostles) took out 19 British agents! The demised were known as "the Cairo Gang'. The third is his uncomfortable role in the thorny peace negotiations with Lloyd George and Winston Churchill. The fourth is the most tragic: The Big Fellow, a "Free Stater", wanted to accept England's peace offer of a partitioned Ireland as a stepping stone to full independence. The so- called "Republicans"; led by the devious Eamon de Valera wanted immediate full independence. A Civil War ensued and the Big Fellow was assassinated. One could argue that author Coogan has a pro-Collins bias. Has Ireland been the same since? MC is a long story, rich in detail. This review has NOT done it justice. This is only a thumbnail's sketch! MC must be patiently read to be fully appreciated. The discipline the reader invests will be rewarded at the conclusion. Most Irish Americans, it is safe to write, have little or no knowledge of their country. If the curious learn of nothing else, they should learn of the one man who made their homeland independent. There have been so many well- intentioned statesmen, poets and martyrs who fell victim to England's treachery and gallows. The curious should read about the one man who really did get the "Brits Out" of 26/32 of that troubled island.

Great book, but a very large meal
This is a long, detailed book, printed in what I find to be a particularly unattractive typeface. It's absolutely worth reading, but unless you're already fascinated by Collins you may find it pretty offputting.

A better starting place may be Ulick O'Connor's "Michael Collins and the Troubles: The Struggle for Irish Freedom 1912-1922," which is far shorter and breezier. Despite its title, it's not so much a bio of Collins as a survey of Irish politics and political personalities before and during his era. Be warned, though, that only the last half of so of the book discusses Collins himself.

Detailed and thorough history of a fascinating life
Tim Pat Coogan brings Michael Collins alive in this thoroughly researched and thoroughly enjoyable biography. Coogan details the life of Collins with painstaking research and plenty of first-hand accounts of those who knew him. In a new, and controversial, addition to previous Collins biographies, Coogan details the evidence as to Collins's assasination and names the likely culprit in the Irish leader's murder. A must read. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

post-Bard Arendtian
Vassar Students can always be depended upon to do mediocre work cribbed from unattributed sources.

Revolution and Revulsion
The guy/girl who wrote the 'I'm doing an essay...' review needs a slap

Brilliant
This book is yet another deep, original and controversial contribution of Hannah Arendt to twentieth century political theory. In this book, Arendt analyzes the phenomenon of revolution by focusing almost exclusively on the great XVIIIth century revolutions, the American and the French. Arendt's deep insights allow her to compare, both on a theoretical and a practical level, the similarities and differences between the two and on how and why the American Revolution allowed the foundation of freedom while the French failed miserably in this attempt almost from the beginning. The great themes in this book are the social question (necessity) in its relation to politics (the realm of freedom) and the ever-present distinction between liberation and freedom properly speaking. Thus, constitutions and their significance, the problem of secular law in relation to its need for an Absolute with which to provide a foundation for it, the problem of hypocrisy and Robespierre's Terror, and insightful interpretations of some of the Founding Fathers' political thought (though in my opinion a bit too far reaching in her inferences thereof), are all issues with which she deals with in this book and which are rounded up in a great closing chapter. Deep, powerful, perceptive, intense: like most of Arendt's writings, a must read for anyone interested in political thought and theory.

Ugh!
I have to write a paper on this book, and there are no customer reviews for it? Bleh, that is not very helpful at all. I'm disappointed in all of you. ... Read more

Book Description

First published in 1980, this book rapidly established itself as the indispensable guide to what brought about the French Revolution, and to the debates of historians about the issue. The new edition brings the subject up to date with an extensisively rewritten survey of the historiography up to the present day, and a revised interpretation modified in the light of research by a new generation of scholars. It will thus remain the starting point for any serious study of the greatest of all revolutions. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Brisk, analytical and direct
There is of course a daunting amount of literature on the French Revoloution which often means that first-time students are often faced with a lottery concerning the book they choose. This book has no pretentions whatsoever to being all encompassing or a psycho-sociological analysis of the revoloution itself. Dealing with the pre 1789 period it is an admirably clear re-examination of the fall of the ancient regime. Comprehensively written and free of academic snobbery it charts the relaxation of rigid absoloutism and the development both of coherent political opposition and a relevant public opinion, both concepts that were unheard of in the archetypal monarchy of Loius XIV. Seditious pamphlets that had traditionally been confined to exile in the Netherlands found their way back into France and criticism of the establishment grew in a crescendo: the street and the parlements echoing one another and feeding in confidence off of one another. Doyle thus lands us in the years immediately prior to 1789 and guides us through the domino series of economic ministers, victims of the sustained, and now infamous financial crisis that so relentlessly exposed the dire infrastructure of French government. Finally we are presented with a synopsis of events that led to the walls of the Bastille and a conclusion: all in all less than 200 pages. This is a very businesslike book with no room for sentiment, philosophy or lyricism but in its digestible form, leaves the reader clear on the major points, a task many other histories have failed in. Reccomended for anyone looking for a clear explanation for the end of the ancien regime.

Origins of the French Revolution
Origins of the French Revolution is a comprehensive review of the corrupted and doomed Bourbon regime. It is rich in detail and facts about the reigns of Louis XIV through Louis XVI. The book is divided into three parts: Writings on Revolutionary Origins Since 1939, The Breakdown of the Old Regime, and The Struggle for Power. And in each of these sections important chapters are introduced for discussion. Doyle takes the three sectors of society during that time--the nobility, clergy, and bourgeoise--and analyzes their individual roles in bringing the revolution about. Both the good and bad sides of these sectors of society is clearly revealed and their strengths and weaknesses also. Doyle covers the posiiton of the nobility especially well. He offers an interesting view on the nobility that is usually not seen in other books discussing the French Revolution. The other sections of this book is great in detail also, such as the chapters discussing the government organization and the ministers who tried to implement reform. The book is somewhat difficult to understand because of the wealth of detail within it, but one can clearly say that without drastic reform the French government was hopeless. Overall it was a dry read but for people who are interested in the details of the revolution this will be a great read. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The situation in St. Petersburg was growing more and more tense.The People's Revolution had begun by overthrowing the corrupt Tsarist regime in March 1917, but the workers and the peasants felt the revolution had much farther to go. Tired of fighting a war that meant little to them, the soldiers also grew restless: "When the land belongs to the peasants, and the factories to the workers, and the power to the Soviets, then we'll know we have something to fight for, and we'll fight for it!"

Lenin pressed the Bolsheviks to seize power. On the night of October 24, an organized mass of workers, soldiers, peasants, and sailors stormed the Winter Palace. On the following day, at the opening of the second Congress of Soviets, Trotsky announced the overthrow of the provisional government. Counterrevolutionary forces marched on the capital, but the Revolutionary Army triumphed. After all, "[t]his was their battle, for their world; the officers in command were elected by them.For the moment that incoherent multiple will was one will."

In Ten Days That Shook the World John Reed tells the story of Red October and the Russian revolution from a unique, firsthand perspective. Reed, an American journalist, was on assignment in Russia for The Masses--then the principal radical journal in the United States--and spent his days walking the streets, reading and collecting handbills, newspapers, and posters, and talking to people. As a result, Ten Days crackles with energetic immediacy. At its best moments it reads like a novel: Reed recounts conversations and arguments, details political machinations, and speculates on personal motives. Though this is no mere piece of propaganda, Reed's enthusiasm for the revolution infuses the text (some readers may be put off by Reed's florid prose), casting each counterrevolutionary act in a negative light. Helpful notes flesh out the background for those less familiar with the preceding events and render this a solid work of history. Ten Days That Shook the World is a stirring account of a stirring event. --Sunny Delaney ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Biased but still interesting...
Although Ten Days That Shook the World is clearly totally biased towards the Bolsheviks, it is still an interesting read. It does an excellent job of revealing the dramatic side of the Russian Revolution, and it gives the events of the revolution the sort of immediacy that can only be achieved by on-the-spot reporting. There are also many facinating quotes and interviews with leaders, like Trotsky. It is an engaging and exciting book, and it is very well written.

However, it is not really ideal (never mind ideal, it is pretty useless) for a research project or for real information. Unless you are pretty familiar with the events of the revolution, it would probably be confusing (he uses many terms without really explaining them and is VERY detailed). Furthermore, the book was written by a dedicated believer in the regime right after the event occured. Reed did not have the benefit of hindsight in writing his book - and he was blinded by his faith in socialism. Some of the events in the book are somewhat inaccurate, and Lenin and Trotsky are totally idealized! One thing that shows how biased Reed was towards the Bolsheviks is that Lenin himself states that the book is an accurate depiction of the revolution. This would seem like a good thing, but actually, when the revolution is depicted in way that is favorable to Lenin, one thing is for sure: it is completely inaccurate! For instance, the book leaves the reader with the impression that the Bolsheviks had planned the revolution much more carefully than they did in reality (it was more a lucky break than anything else).

Nevertheless, this book is irreplaceable as a first-hand illustration of what the revolution was like. Even though some of the information cannot be trusted completely, it is still a facinating book!

Compelling Eyewitness Account of The Russian Revolution
This is a most powerfully written American radical journalist's eyewitness account of the Bolshevik seizure of power--recording the excitement of the October days and the beginnings of John Reed's own revolutionary disillusionment.

Ten Days That Shook the World is the classic account of the Russian Revolution of November 1917 by a western journalist and has been admired worldwide since its first publication in 1919. Lenin endorsed it as "a truthful and most vivid exposition of the events so significant to the comprehension of what really is the Proletarian Revolution."

Already based in Europe and sympathetic to the cause of the Russian Revolution, Reed was able to observe dispassionately exactly what was going on and to find out not only what the Bolshevik leaders were doing, but to move among those on the streets and note experiences of the masses of ordinary people. Witnessing first-hand the day-to-day events of the Revolution, he captures in vivid and graphic detail the atmosphere of that time.

An extraordinary document of history in the making, this newer edition is the first with contemporary photographs, while a new introduction by Harold Shukman, University Lecturer in Modern Russian History at Oxford University, sets the work in context. Published to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, this illustrated edition will appeal to anyone interested in modern history. And quite possibly re-ignite a political polemic.

Warren Beatty dared to make the film Reds, which gives us a poignantly epic visual view of John Reed, his life, his loves and his fierce beliefs as read in Ten Days That Shook The World.

REED WAS EITHER DUPED OR PLAYED ALONG
EXCERPTED FROM "GOD'S COUNTRY" BY STEVEN TRAVERS...

The 1920s were a strange time. John Reed's "Ten Days That Shook the World" reached a large audience in the United States and internationally. Many wanted to know why an entire planet could be thrust into war. In an attempt to address that issue, some decided that nationalism, governmental agendas, realpolitik, racism, class warfare, capitalism, Democracy, and corporations in bed with politicians and militarists were to blame.

Nationalism was part of it. German unification and Balkan nationalism played a role. Governmental agendas and realpolitik always have played a role in conflict. Since Communism addressed the concept of "one world government" and a "world without borders," some concluded that Communism offered the answer to these problems.
Racism was never an original part of the war, but would emerge as an ugly by-product. The Turks unleashed an open can of worms resulting in "ethnic cleansing" and genocide pitting Christians against Muslims, Turks against Arabs, secular vs. religious. In Germany, an easy scapegoat began to emerge: The Jews. Lies began to spread that Jewish banking interests profited from the war. In the American South Jewish influence was an affront to their sensibilities. The Ku Klux Klan rose again after a period of dormancy. The KKK's "mandate" pitted them against a "worldwide Jewish conspiracy" somehow in league with Papal domination. They said Catholics pledge allegiance not to the U.S., but to the Vatican. But few Catholics and fewer Jews lived in the South. Many blacks did. They were becoming a more prominent segment of society. Blacks were emerging as professional athletes in the Negro baseball leagues, and as musicians in the jazz world. As they asserted themselves, this infuriated the white underclass.
But the most pernicious thing that emerged out of World War I were Westerners who believed that the war had occurred because of the failure of capitalism, Democracy, and corporations who were in bed with politicians and militarists. When Reed's book came out, a segment of society allowed themselves to believe that the new political system in Russia should be given a chance. Communism became "the answer" to society's many problems, including racism and poverty. The failure of Communism, already evident by 1920, was not exposed to the world. Reed either chose not to write about the thousands and thousands of famine victims, the secret police, the crackdowns and forced marches, the banishments, assassinations and disappearances, or he was controlled by the hierarchy, and not allowed to see it. He probably did not want to see it. He had found his story and he was going to stick to it. The great failure of the free press, of governments and political figures, of humanists and truth-seekers, was the failure to pin Russia - Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and the rest of them - down before they became too powerful. To expose them for what they were.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
...

Great in its own right, but read Bryant's work as well
Reed's work definitely evokes the heady atmosphere of the Bolshevik Revolution, when it actually seemed as if the working class might rise up as one and seize the reins of power and therefore of its destiny. It is the classic account of Red October as told from the viewpoint of an "outsider" who identified with the Revolution as a member of the universal working class. However, it should not be forgotten that Louise Bryant was not only present as well but also wrote an account of her experiences. Six Red Months in Russia is the indispensable companion to Reed's work; the two should be read in tandem. As of the date of this posting (05.23.03) it is in print from Powell's Press. Get it while you can. It is a neglected gem of reporting from the Revolutionary frontlines which should command an equal amount of respect as does Reed's Ten Days that Shook the World.

An Up Close View of The Russian Revolution
"Ten Days That Shook The World" is the account by John Reed of what he saw during the Russian Revolution. Reed was an American Communist and journalist who is the only American known to be buried in the Kremlin. Throughout this book we read a series of observations and dialogues reported by Reed, virtually without comment, although his bias is apparent. We read his reports of political meetings, encounters with minor officials and his observations of events occurring during those turbulent revolutionary days in Petrograd.

This book is a classic case of missing the forest for the trees. The view is too up close to permit the reader to see the big picture. One does not look here for the history of the Revolution. We look here for its spirit. Here we see the swirling chaos, hear the repeated buzz words and get a feeling for the competing factions which fashioned the Communist tyranny which emerged from the Revolution.

In writing this book, Reed gives the reader a view of himself and other American Communists who saw in the Revolution the future that worked. His view can best be summarized in his comment that, while watching a funeral, he realized that the Russian people no longer needed priests to pray them into heaven because they were building a world brighter than any which heaven promised. This hope is in stark contrast to the now known Communist record.

Overall I enjoyed this book as it taught me some more about the Russian Revolution than I had learned from other books which I had read. (See my Amazon review of "The Russian Revolution" by Alan Moorehead.) For that it was worth reading. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

An essential reference work on WWII Yugoslavia
Tomasevich did a phenomenal job on a daunting subject: the political and economic history of Yugoslavia during the Second World War, focusing on Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina. This massive book will be especially valuable for the chapters on economic activity in the Axis-occupied Independent State of Croatia from 1941 to 1945, material that has rarely been presented in English in such detail (over a hundred pages in the two chapters on this subject). The sections on the many religious groups of Yugoslavia are likewise comprehensive, with a great deal of new information. The bibliography is in itself a triumph of thoroughness.

What makes the book not only useful but remarkable is the author's story of how he conducted his research, interviewing contentious sources and wading through the conflicting evidence on controversial topics such as the numbers of people murdered by the several parties to the conflict (Nazis, Italian Fascists, Ustase, Chetniks, Partisans). His analysis is masterful and sensible.

My only complaint is the book's high price. I can only hope that there will be a paperback edition, as this work is too significant to go out of print. ... Read more

Book Description

The electrifying effect the Zapatista peasant rebellion has had on leading figures in the intellectual, political, and literary world since the Zapatistas woke them up on New Year's Day, 1994, has provided inspiration for activists all over the world. A remarkable synergy has also developed between leading writers, novelists, and journalists and Subcomandante Marcos, the enigmatic, pipe-smoking and balaclavered leader of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation, who seems like a character out of a magical realism novel. This reader includes a wide sampling of the best of the writing to emerge on the subject. The book is a journey through an insurgent and magical world of culture and politics, where celebrants and critics debate what Carlos Fuentes has described as the world's first ‘post-communist rebellion.' Included are essays by Paco Taibo II, Octavio Paz, Carlos Fuentes, Elena Poniatowska, Ilan Stavans, Carlos Monsivais, Jorge Castenada, Jose Saramago, John Berger, Marc Cooper, Andrew Kopkind, Bill Weinberg, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Alma Guillermoprieto and Eduardo Galeano. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Insightful and Educational
This is a nice collection put together by Tom Hayden that serves to give one a broad overview of the Zapatista movement. There are many books out there written on the subject, none of which I have had the opportunity as of yet to read. I think the strength of the Zapatista Reader is the multi-faceted perspective it offers the reader on Marcos, the Zapatistas, the state of Chiapas, etc. Much of the well-known and respected Latin America media, as well as from around the world, weighs in with a different take on the history, culture, politics, economic theory and more. To some the book might be repetitive, as most of the authors recount a lot of the same details. However, I also believe that to be one of the book's strengths, that by the end of the reader one is well versed in the goings-on. As each author hails from a different educational and professional background, each provides different insights, pearls of wisdom if you will, just when you think there couldn't be anymore to learn. One comes away with knowing the Zapatista movement more as Mexico's version of the Civil Rights era than the next Cuban Revolution, an understanding of Mexican history, particularly as it concerns national and agrarian politics and much, much more.

Though there is plenty of Marcos speak, those looking for strictly Marcos, or Marcos' words, still might be able to find better, perhaps in something like Our Word Is Our Weapon. However, if one appreciates excellent, insightful and detailed journalism, the Zapatista Reader is like reading a special edition Time, mutiplied by ten, the Zapatistas from all sides, uncensored, exposed. I recommend it. ... Read more

Book Description

In The Headless Republic, Jesse Goldhammer explores how the French revolutionaries retrieved a set of ideas about founding violence from the classical Romans and early Christians and incorporated it into postrevolutionary debates that echoed into the twentieth century. By linking sacrifice as expressed in revolutionary practices to modern French theory, Goldhammer shows how ancient ideas of violent political renewal made their way into the contemporary age.

Goldhammer elucidates the theoretical and practical significance of sacrificial violence during the Revolution, and then turns his attention to postrevolutionary intellectuals whose work is inspired by the founding sacrifices of the French Republic. Showing how Georges Bataille, Joseph de Maistre, and Georges Sorel adapted concepts of sacrifice to their own particular political agendas—whether reactionary or revolutionary—Goldhammer challenges conventional readings of these three thinkers as "bloodthirsty intellectuals." Instead, he argues, their work reveals the limits of violence as an agent of political change and attacks the forms of violence later adopted by fascist regimes. More broadly, Goldhammer makes the case for including ancient concepts of collective bloodshed in the modern lexicon of political violence. ... Read more