Bookclub and Sources Wednesday!

Submitted by AutoModerator t3_10kx0m5 in history

Hi everybody,

Welcome to our weekly book recommendation thread!

We have found that a lot of people come to this sub to ask for books about history or sources on certain topics. Others make posts about a book they themselves have read and want to share their thoughts about it with the rest of the sub.

We thought it would be a good idea to try and bundle these posts together a bit. One big weekly post where everybody can ask for books or (re)sources on any historic subject or timeperiod, or to share books they recently discovered or read. Giving opinions or asking about their factuality is encouraged!

Of course it’s not limited to *just* books; podcasts, videos, etc. are also welcome. As a reminder, r/history also has a recommended list of things to [read, listen to or watch](https://www.reddit.com/r/history/wiki/recommendedlist)

74

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

elmonoenano t1_j5udov8 wrote

I finally was able to get back to Jon Meacham's new Lincoln biography, And There Was Light. It's a little late, but this is a good "dad" book if you're looking for a gift. I've probably read about 10ish Lincoln biographies and a decent chunk of other period relevant books and papers. This probably isn't my favorite biography ever but it's good and it does a couple things that I think are important that other biographies didn't address or at least didn't do so as clearly.

Because of the whole "Actually, Lincoln was a racist" stuff that goes around, this book did a lot to contextualize it. It tries to put statements that are usually pulled out of any context to paint Lincoln one way or another, into context. Lincoln isn't absolved from racist sentiment or feelings, but is contextualized to show that he was progressive on the issue in a way that was practical. So you get these quotes about colonization or his statements to Horace Greely about freeing only as many slaves as needed, within the context of recent votes or elections or anticipation of the Emancipation Proclamation. It's all important context. It makes it clear that Lincoln wasn't the kind of autocrat who could dictate policy and have it followed. Lincoln was a politic player and bound by public opinion. He said some terrible stuff, but also did so to manage that opinion to reach highly commendable goals.

He also addressed the election of 1864 and its importance. It's hard not to read that section of the book as a rebuke on the modern GOP. But Lincoln made it clear that there would be elections, they would be on time, and he would step aside for McClellan (Who probably had a lock on the election up until Sherman took Atlanta). He also talked about the strides Lincoln took to make sure soldiers in the field could vote. Democratic states took pains to prevent troops in the field from voting and Lincoln used his powers to grant them furloughs and arrange transportation. It was to his advantage, but there's also an anecdote that Lincoln made sure a democrat that was being blocked was allowed on his train. And you can poo poo anecdotes like that, but you also have to remember how Lincoln used these things to his advantage with the press and I think it could just as easily be seen as a way for Lincoln to press his point about the importance of participatory democracy.

Overall I think it was a great biography and probably a good one if you're looking for a first biography of the man.

Edit: I'll add that this is also a really good example of how a work of history can indirectly address current issues without being didactic.

8

No-Strength-6805 t1_j5uo6bm wrote

I've read a lot of books on Lincoln both full biographies and more individualized books about individual events speeches,military commander etc.,and I think the optimum biography to start with is David Herbert Donald's biography it's exact perfect length and faces upto all the major issues you need to face in biography.

3

McGillis_is_a_Char t1_j5tz3a3 wrote

Can anybody recommend a book that covers Arabic literature in the Levant during the Ottoman Empire? The anthology I found in the local library washed its hands of Ottoman Arabic literature completely.

6

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j5uid7o wrote

Hoping you're able to get a source on this! Your best bet may end up being an academic paper?

2

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j5uk8yj wrote

Hey everyone!

Just finished Bruno Mugnai's The Ottoman Army of the Napoleonic Wars, 1784-1815 and found it to be quite brilliant. It covers the challenges faced, and reforms undertaken, by the Ottoman military during the Napoleonic Wars. I quite enjoyed the analysis of the Ottoman Empire's most notable institution, second only to the High Porte.

5

Irichcrusader t1_j655slh wrote

Sounds really interesting. I haven't touched Napoleonic history in a long time but that's definitely something that would add a lot of detail that isn't normally covered. If you're interested in the Egyptian campaign then I would highly recommend Napoleon in Egypt by Paul Strathem.

3

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j65dum9 wrote

Thanks for the recommendation. If you wanted insight into the Egyptian PoVof the campaign, read Al Jabarti's account of Napoleon in Egypt. I'll make sure to check out Strathem!

3

dropbear123 t1_j5uoiib wrote

I've decided to try and clear out some of my spy history books as I've had some for years now.

Finished Hitler's Secret War: The Nazi Espionage Campaigns Against the Allies by Charles Whiting which was only £1 but I'm still annoyed about it.

>2/5 not worth reading due to poor sourcing. Feel like I've wasted my time. Writing style is ok I guess. The main problem is the sources, there is only a 1 page bibliography mostly of books from the 1960s and 70s (the book came out in 2000). The author relies a lot on interviews with the people involved but there is no proper notes or anything so it would be hard to verify. There is quite a few mentions of Canaris being homosexual but I can't seem to find anything about this online, which alone makes me doubt a lot of this book.

Yesterday I finished Agent Sonya: The True Story of WWII's Most Extraordinary Spy by Ben Macinytre Not a copy and paste review for once.

4.5/5 stars I really liked it and would recommend it. About a Jewish German woman who became a communist spy in the 1930s+40s and operated in China, Poland, Switzerland and the UK. Her biggest achievement was transmitting/transferring the British nuclear secrets stolen by Klaus Fuchs to the Soviets during WWII. In the end she got away with it but had to flee to East Germany where she became a children's author and survived the Cold War. The book is very well written and enjoyable to read.

This is just my opinion but the book was better than Double Cross and Agent Zigag, as good as The Spy and The Traitor but not as good as Operation Mincemeat or A Spy Among Friends all by the same author.

I've started but I think I'm going to give up on Trinity: The Treachery and Pursuit of the Most Dangerous Spy in History by Frank Close about Klaus Fuchs. It's just a bit too in-depth for me, especially on physics and how nuclear science works.

5

WithAnAxe t1_j65ez8d wrote

I also enjoyed Agent Sonya! All of Macintyre’s books are, IMO, fantastic but to me this one told the most interesting story.

4

Kyfighter11 t1_j5v79oa wrote

Can someone recommend me something like a world history series on YouTube or in a podcast?

5

Kyfighter11 t1_j5v91xx wrote

I have always had a certain interest in history but I have only really been semi-seriously reading up on history this past week. And as you all may know there is quite a lot of history so I’ve been struggling to find some sort of beginning for me. I have listened to Dan Carlin’s king of kings and the first few episodes of the rest is history.

3

Irichcrusader t1_j6554tr wrote

There's a lot of great history YouTube channels out there but, in my experience, the best ones are those who niche down and can really get into the meat of a topic or era. What historical periods are you interested in?

For instance, I really like early modern Europe history (16th to 17th century) and SandRhoman History is really great for that. The Historian's Craft is also great if you love classical (Greek & Roman history).

2

Kyfighter11 t1_j6my32y wrote

Thanks, my interests lie mainly in Europe but range from Ancient Greece to things the present day.

2

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j6mq3zu wrote

Check out Kings and Generals, Crash Course History, Invicta, the Great War, and Historia Civilis on Youtube.

1

CanadianNacho t1_j6id0lk wrote

Any good historical sources for the extent the nuclear bombing of Japan causes its surrender? I’m not looking for modern day articles per say, but more so speeches or documents from the 40s-50s that show the opinion at the time.

5

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j6mpghy wrote

Great ask! Hoping to find something on this as well. Maybe post this on tomorrow's thread? Goes up around 7 AM EST.

2

sundayscome t1_j644v6n wrote

Can someone pls recommend a book on India before British imperialism? Quick google searches have shown me books that quickly set up the context but focus more on British rule.

4

geokek t1_j6hc60h wrote

I’m reading ‘The Shortest History of India’ now by John Zubrzycki. It covers India’s entire history so only the first half or so takes place before Britain arrives, but I’ve found it to be a good introduction which covers a lot of ground.

2

RandomChungus69420 t1_j65b0j6 wrote

Guy Sajer’s “Forgotten Soldier” - Truth, Fiction, or a mix of both?

After reading this one for the first time, it left a deep effect on me. It became one of my top 5 war memoirs. I was surprised to learn, after the fact, that the book is surrounded by a lot of controversy about minor details in his recollection or in the presentation of Sajer’s comrade’s names.

It is never fully stated to what degree certain recollections are fact or fiction (e.g., changing of names to protect identities).

It seems as though there are vocal swaths of people who claim it is totally fabricated, while others say it is intentionally a blend of fact and fiction, and still others say it’s simply a result of failed memory recall on the part of the author in some instances mixed with deliberate alteration of names/identities.

I haven’t located much in the way of the author addressing these allegations. Thoughts?

4

Lopsided-Potato-1973 t1_j5th9nw wrote

I Like this Idea

The First time i Made contact with historical fiction were the "waringham" books by Rebecca gable They are all Set around the fictional House of waringham an Take place around the 100 years war and the war of the Roses (there are some Set later and earlier now)

They are Kind of popular in Germany but not so commonly known abroad.

I recommend them! Especialy the German audio books

3

No-Strength-6805 t1_j5vd18z wrote

There is a reddit for historical fiction also,not discouraging from contining this reddit also though.

3

Larielia t1_j5w6q2k wrote

What are some good books about ancient Egypt during the Middle Kingdom or any of the Intermediate Periods?

3

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j5x6qzx wrote

Hey there! Although not period specific, I really liked Joanne Fletcher's "The Story of Egypt."

5

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j5x6yms wrote

Oh, forgot to note "Ancient Egypt Transformed: The Middle Kingdom" by Adela Oppenheim. Fantastic book!

3

Remote_Doughnut_5261 t1_j65791j wrote

Hi I am looking for books or pieces about or pertaining to the history of academia and maybe also of the students’ movement.

I read Kant’s “Conflict between the Philosophy and the Theology Faculty,” as well as Blanqui’s “Declaration of the Provisional Committee for Schools.” I found both pieces supremely interesting and I want more.

3

YeyeDumpling t1_j65vvij wrote

Books about the Chinese Civil War? In particular the evacuation of Palace Museum artifacts to Taiwan

3

throwawayphaccount t1_j6d6g9k wrote

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I would like to ask if there are any pop history books like Diamond's Gun, Germs, and Steel or Tuchman's The Guns of August or maybe something like Kissinger's On China. These were entertaining as well as informative. I think something good for the lay reader.

3

AutoModerator OP t1_j6d6gch wrote

Hi!

It looks like you are talking about the book Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond.

The book over the past years has become rather popular, which is hardly surprising since it is a good and entertaining read. It has reached the point that for some people it has sort of reached the status of gospel. On /r/history we noticed a trend where every time a question was asked that has even the slightest relation to the book a dozen or so people would jump in and recommend the book. Which in the context of history is a bit problematic and the reason this reply was written.

Why it is problematic can be broken down into two reasons:

  1. In academic history there isn't such thing as one definitive authority or work on things. There are often others who research the same subjects and people that dive into work of others to build on it or to see if it indeed holds up. This being critical of your sources and not relying on one source is actually a very important skill in studying history often lacking when dozens of people just spam the same work over and over again as a definite guide and answer to "everything".
  2. There are a good amount of modern historians and anthropologists who are quite critical of Guns, Germs, and Steel and there are some very real issues with Diamond's work. These issues are often overlooked or not noticed by the people reading his book. Which is understandable, given the fact that for many it will be their first exposure to the subject. Considering the popularity of the book it is also the reason that we felt it was needed to create this response.

In an ideal world, every time the book was posted in /r/history, it would be accompanied by critical notes and other works covering the same subject. Lacking that a dozen other people would quickly respond and do the same. But simply put, that isn't always going to happen and as a result, we have created this response so people can be made aware of these things. Does this mean that the /r/history mods hate the book or Diamond himself? No, if that was the case, we would simply instruct the bot to remove every mention of it. This is just an attempt to bring some balance to a conversation that in popular history had become a bit unbalanced. It should also be noted that being critical of someone's work isn't the same as outright dismissing it. Historians are always critical of any work they examine, that is part of their core skill set and key in doing good research.

Below you'll find a list of other works covering much of the same subject. Further below you'll find an explanation of why many historians and anthropologists are critical of Diamonds work.

Other works covering the same and similar subjects.

Criticism of Guns, Germs, and Steel

Many historians and anthropologists believe Diamond plays fast and loose with history by generalizing highly complex topics to provide an ecological/geographical determinist view of human history. There is a reason historians avoid grand theories of human history: those "just so stories" don't adequately explain human history. It's true however that it is an entertaining introductory text that forces people to look at world history from a different vantage point. That being said, Diamond writes a rather oversimplified narrative that seemingly ignores the human element of history.

Cherry-picked data while ignoring the complexity of issues

In his chapter "Lethal Gift of Livestock" on the origin of human crowd infections he picks 5 pathogens that best support his idea of domestic origins. However, when diving into the genetic and historic data, only two pathogens (maybe influenza and most likely measles) could possibly have jumped to humans through domestication. The majority were already a part of the human disease load before the origin of agriculture, domestication, and sedentary population centers. This is an example of Diamond ignoring the evidence that didn't support his theory to explain conquest via disease spread to immunologically naive Native Americas.

A similar case of cherry-picking history is seen when discussing the conquest of the Inca.

> Pizarro's military advantages lay in the Spaniards' steel swords and other weapons, steel armor, guns, and horses... Such imbalances of equipment were decisive in innumerable other confrontations of Europeans with Native Americans and other peoples. The sole Native Americans able to resist European conquest for many centuries were those tribes that reduced the military disparity by acquiring and mastering both guns and horses.

This is a very broad generalization that effectively makes it false. Conquest was not a simple matter of conquering a people, raising a Spanish flag, and calling "game over." Conquest was a constant process of negotiation, accommodation, and rebellion played out through the ebbs and flows of power over the course of centuries. Some Yucatan Maya city-states maintained independence for two hundred years after contact, were "conquered", and then immediately rebelled again. The Pueblos along the Rio Grande revolted in 1680, dislodged the Spanish for a decade, and instigated unrest that threatened the survival of the entire northern edge of the empire for decades to come. Technological "advantage", in this case guns and steel, did not automatically equate to battlefield success in the face of resistance, rough terrain and vastly superior numbers. The story was far more nuanced, and conquest was never a cut and dry issue, which in the book is not really touched upon. In the book it seems to be case of the Inka being conquered when Pizarro says they were conquered.

Uncritical examining of the historical record surrounding conquest

Being critical of the sources you come across and being aware of their context, biases and agendas is a core skill of any historian.

Pizarro, Cortez and other conquistadores were biased authors who wrote for the sole purpose of supporting/justifying their claim on the territory, riches and peoples they subdued. To do so they elaborated their own sufferings, bravery, and outstanding deeds, while minimizing the work of native allies, pure dumb luck, and good timing. If you only read their accounts you walk away thinking a handful of adventurers conquered an empire thanks to guns and steel and a smattering of germs. No historian in the last half century would be so naive to argue this generalized view of conquest, but European technological supremacy is one keystone to Diamond's thesis so he presents conquest at the hands of a handful of adventurers.

The construction of the arguments for GG&S paints Native Americans specifically, and the colonized world in general, as categorically one step behind.

To believe the narrative you need to view Native Americans as somehow naive, unable to understand Spanish motivations and desires, unable react to new weapons/military tactics, unwilling to accommodate to a changing political landscape, incapable of mounting resistance once conquered, too stupid to invent the key technological advances used against them, and doomed to die because they failed to build cities, domesticate animals and thereby acquire infectious organisms. This while they often did fare much better as suggested in the book (and the sources it tends to cite). They often did mount successful resistance, were quick to adapt to new military technologies, build sprawling citiest and much more. When viewed through this lens, we hope you can see why so many historians and anthropologists are livid that a popular writer is perpetuating a false interpretation of history while minimizing the agency of entire continents full of people.

Further reading

If you are interested in reading more about what others think of Diamon's book you can give these resources a go:

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

4

LegionXIX t1_j6el1ky wrote

Recently came across a world map from 1491 (when Columbus set off from Spain) and wanted to look at more world maps or maps in general from historical time periods

Does anyone know a good book or resource for this? Thanks!

3

lappy482 t1_j6hevch wrote

The [David Rumsey Map Collection] (https://www.davidrumsey.com/) is superb for looking up specific maps from specific time periods - hopefully you should be able to find what you're looking for there!

Also - it's a bit more modern, but one map that absolutely fascinates me is the National Library of Scotland's digitalised [Ordnance Survey map of London from the 1890s] (https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=10.0&lat=51.53214&lon=-0.12000&layers=188&b=1). It's incredibly detailed and shows you on a street-to-street level what London looked like 130 years ago. Plus, they also have a similarly detailed OS map of the city from the 1950s/60s, which lets you see how much the city changed over 60-70 years.

6

LegionXIX t1_j6iphji wrote

That is what I was looking for thank you.

That Map of London is amazing and a lot less has changed than I was expecting.

5

lappy482 t1_j6iqjfp wrote

Might be one of my favourite little-known resources online - I could quite honestly sit and stare at it for hours.

2

Stalins_Moustachio t1_j6mpv5w wrote

Hey there! I HIGHLY recommend A History of the World Map by Map and a WWII Map by Map. You will absolutely love them!

1

Kitahara_Kazusa1 t1_j66bg9i wrote

Do any of you have any books about the Japanese age of exploration?

2