What do you think?
Rate this book
Europe in Flames: The Crisis of the Thirty Years War
`War,' wrote Cardinal Richelieu, `is one of the scourges with which it has pleased God to afflict men'. Yet the prelate's mournful observation scarcely begins to encapsulate the full complexity and unspeakable horror of the greatest man-made calamity to befall Europe before the twentieth century. Claiming far more lives proportionately than either the First or Second World Wars, it was a contest involving all the major powers of Europe, in which vast mercenary armies extracted an incalculable toll upon helpless civilian populations as their commanders and the men who equipped them frequently grew rich on the profits. Swedish troops alone are said to have destroyed some 2,000 German castles, 18,000 villages and 1,500 towns, while other vast armies in the pay of Spain, France, the Holy Roman Emperor and a host of pettier princelings brought death to as many as 8 million souls. Rarely has such a perplexing tale been more in need of a new account that is both compelling and informed, and no less comprehensible than comprehensive.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published December 1, 2018
39 people are currently reading
783 people want to read
About the author
John Matusiak
21 books9 followersJohn Matusiak studied at the universities of London and Sussex before embarking upon a teaching career that eventually spanned more than thirty years. For over a third of that time, he was Head of the History Department at Colchester Royal Grammar School.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
October 16, 2019
How style can destroy substance
This is masterpiece of research, erudition and analysis.
Unfortunately, the style almost destroys its good points. The Thirty Years War was probably the most confusing series of events in the history of human conflict. To be well understood it needs short, concise, clear paragraphs not five or longer line sentences. It needs people and places to be described by one name, not adjectives. Even less by allusions.
Elegant writing when offered into large doses becomes unclear and inelegant.
Pity.
It could have been one of the best History books I had ever read.
This is masterpiece of research, erudition and analysis.
Unfortunately, the style almost destroys its good points. The Thirty Years War was probably the most confusing series of events in the history of human conflict. To be well understood it needs short, concise, clear paragraphs not five or longer line sentences. It needs people and places to be described by one name, not adjectives. Even less by allusions.
Elegant writing when offered into large doses becomes unclear and inelegant.
Pity.
It could have been one of the best History books I had ever read.
February 2, 2022
I have mixed feelings about this book.
It seems to be well researched and contains a lot of information about the Thirty Years War. Overall the book gives you a very detailed overview of the Thirty Years War.
However, there are quite a few issues I have with it:
1. the lack of maps: The Holy Roman Empire was a complete mess of small states, free cities etc. There is just one map that gives a very crude outline of the empire. I think a book like this should at least give a map of the empire with its most important states since they are very frequently mentioned in the text. Maps of the most important troop movements and battles would be helpfull too.
2. A seperate list of the most important protagonists with a short biography would have been very helpfull as well.
3. The writing style is quite confusing. The author insists on using very long and needlessly complex sentences. The use of words like 'moreover' becomes quite tiring after a while. I read quite a lot of 19th century works, both fiction and non-fiction. In the 19th century writers used a lot of long and complex sentences but they are never as tedious to read as the ones in this book. Especially with a complex topic as this the sentences and chapters should be well structured and clear.
4. The best part of the book is the lengthy introduction which explains in great detail how and why the war happened. Unfortunately the later chapters jump around too much and are not that well structured. In some chapters the author jumps from military topics to economics to military once again without clear reason. This ties in with the previous point I made.
5. The most important issue I have with this book. At the beginning of this review I wrote that it seems to be a well researched book. I could not be more specific because of the distinct lack of sources. There are no footnotes, no endnotes, no references, no bibliography. Not for primary sources (although there are frequent quotes) nor for secundary sources. I have never seen a historical work that lacks any sources and if you are very skeptical you could dismiss the entire book as rubbish on this fact alone...
I myself would not go as far, the book contains lots of information and despite its shortcomings I think it gives a reasonably good overview of a very complex period in history.
It seems to be well researched and contains a lot of information about the Thirty Years War. Overall the book gives you a very detailed overview of the Thirty Years War.
However, there are quite a few issues I have with it:
1. the lack of maps: The Holy Roman Empire was a complete mess of small states, free cities etc. There is just one map that gives a very crude outline of the empire. I think a book like this should at least give a map of the empire with its most important states since they are very frequently mentioned in the text. Maps of the most important troop movements and battles would be helpfull too.
2. A seperate list of the most important protagonists with a short biography would have been very helpfull as well.
3. The writing style is quite confusing. The author insists on using very long and needlessly complex sentences. The use of words like 'moreover' becomes quite tiring after a while. I read quite a lot of 19th century works, both fiction and non-fiction. In the 19th century writers used a lot of long and complex sentences but they are never as tedious to read as the ones in this book. Especially with a complex topic as this the sentences and chapters should be well structured and clear.
4. The best part of the book is the lengthy introduction which explains in great detail how and why the war happened. Unfortunately the later chapters jump around too much and are not that well structured. In some chapters the author jumps from military topics to economics to military once again without clear reason. This ties in with the previous point I made.
5. The most important issue I have with this book. At the beginning of this review I wrote that it seems to be a well researched book. I could not be more specific because of the distinct lack of sources. There are no footnotes, no endnotes, no references, no bibliography. Not for primary sources (although there are frequent quotes) nor for secundary sources. I have never seen a historical work that lacks any sources and if you are very skeptical you could dismiss the entire book as rubbish on this fact alone...
I myself would not go as far, the book contains lots of information and despite its shortcomings I think it gives a reasonably good overview of a very complex period in history.
June 11, 2019
The Thirty Years War: Lessons were not learned
The Thirty Years War is a tangled tale of alliance, deception and grinding destruction. This history is so well explained here that I now have some clear idea of how and why Europe endured such pitiless slaughter, famine and horror.
Some parts of what is today Germany lost as much as 80% of its population. But to speak of "Germany" is entirely wrong. There was no such place. Instead it was a complicated patchwork of small kingdoms, each dominated by proud, intransigent, warlike men, some allied, some in conflict.
Now add the Holy Roman Empire, the Habsburg Empire, the Vatican, Spain, France, Sweden and the Nederlands (also then non-existent) all vying for dominance through further complicated religious differences of Catholicism, Lutherism and Calvinism. The result could only be a cataclysmic disaster. And it was.
After thirty years, the combatants didn't make a proper peace as they collapsed from exhaustion into an unreconciled truce. They still proved far more adept at killing each other than talking to each other.
The author suggests that the seeds of war blossomed again in 1870 and again in 1914 as a result. It's impossible to disagree. This history is still as depressingly relevant in 2019 as it was in 1618. Will we learn the lessons this time?
The Thirty Years War is a tangled tale of alliance, deception and grinding destruction. This history is so well explained here that I now have some clear idea of how and why Europe endured such pitiless slaughter, famine and horror.
Some parts of what is today Germany lost as much as 80% of its population. But to speak of "Germany" is entirely wrong. There was no such place. Instead it was a complicated patchwork of small kingdoms, each dominated by proud, intransigent, warlike men, some allied, some in conflict.
Now add the Holy Roman Empire, the Habsburg Empire, the Vatican, Spain, France, Sweden and the Nederlands (also then non-existent) all vying for dominance through further complicated religious differences of Catholicism, Lutherism and Calvinism. The result could only be a cataclysmic disaster. And it was.
After thirty years, the combatants didn't make a proper peace as they collapsed from exhaustion into an unreconciled truce. They still proved far more adept at killing each other than talking to each other.
The author suggests that the seeds of war blossomed again in 1870 and again in 1914 as a result. It's impossible to disagree. This history is still as depressingly relevant in 2019 as it was in 1618. Will we learn the lessons this time?
July 22, 2020
In the hands of a scholar.
The problem being that with the exception of English kings and Cardinal Richelue? I have never have never come across and of the many main characters. I also have almost no knowledge of the whereabouts of the countries or indeed rivers. A few maps would help access to the materual. Actually lots of maps. Anyway I know much more than I did so when the 30 years war is mentioned in English history I won't have to guess what that was about. Full of surprises and interest. Isn't war a filthy business! Many thanks.
The problem being that with the exception of English kings and Cardinal Richelue? I have never have never come across and of the many main characters. I also have almost no knowledge of the whereabouts of the countries or indeed rivers. A few maps would help access to the materual. Actually lots of maps. Anyway I know much more than I did so when the 30 years war is mentioned in English history I won't have to guess what that was about. Full of surprises and interest. Isn't war a filthy business! Many thanks.
July 31, 2023
Dreadfully confusing start, compounded by lack of maps.
I decided to pick this up after reading Tyll by Daniel Kehlmann, my favourite book of 2023 thus far. I looked at ‘Europe’s Tragedy’ by Peter Wilson but baulked at its 1000+ pages. This tome seemed like a snip at 314 pages.
Unfortunately, this book started extremely poorly. The first three chapters are attempting to summarise over 100 years of political machinations across the entire European continent and establish the positions of each of the major players in the Thirty Years War.
While this is obviously the right way to go about things, Matusiak struggles to communicate succinctly. We jump backwards and forwards through decades and across 1000s of miles of Europe from paragraph to paragraph and even sentence to sentence.
Dozens of people are introduced and then forgotten, and you have to have the mind of a mandarin to keep track of who is who. Often, a person is introduced with their full name, title, position, and nickname; Matusiak will then later refer to that person using any combination of the above. Using some unscientific random-ish sampling, I calculated the average paragraph has 10 names for people. The quantity and complexity of these names makes it incredibly difficult to mentally pin people down. Something this book could have benefited from is a ‘cast of characters’ in an appendix, divided where relevant by political and/or religious affiliation.
The confusion caused by the abundance of characters is not helped by Matusiak’s prose, and he often uses extremely long and convoluted sentences, like the following:
“The western mountain passes, on one hand, were controlled by the hostile Duke of Savoy, the central ones by the neutral but powerful Swiss Cantons, while the most convenient Alpine crossings of all for the Spanish access to Austria and northern Europe were controlled by the Protestant Grisons or ‘Grey Leagues’ – apart from, that is, the Catholic corridor of the Valtelline which had revolted against its Protestant masters in both 1572 and 1607, and stood ready to raise the rebel standard once again at the slightest prompting.” (pg76).
To emphasise, this is ONE SENTENCE. Every paragraph on every page is like this, requiring a great deal of mental effort and, often, repeated readings of each paragraph to extract the full meaning of the text.
Once you are through the first three chapters and the main characters are more firmly established, reading does become easier as the characters start acting contemporaneously. This means battles, campaigns and territory won and lost, in addition to the politicking. This should be the meat and bones of any text analysing a historical war and best practice, in my opinion, should be that such things are accompanied by quite a lot of maps.
Instead, we get one map. One. With only one border (the Empire), unlabelled rivers and no more than two dozen cities.
While I understand the borders of the Empire were extremely complex and ever-changing, it is obviously a good idea to include a map outlining the major areas of the Empire, such as Austria, Saxony, Bavaria, the Palatine and so on. Considering the significant and relevant events that happened in the United Provinces, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Poland, and Hungary, I would consider it wise to include those as well. As it is, you need either a map with you as you read or superb preexisting knowledge of European and German geography in the 16th and 17th centuries. If the latter is true for you, why are you even reading this book?
One map is simply not good enough. Why is there no map showing the outcomes of the Treaty of Westphalia? Where are the campaign and battle maps? Although the battles Nordlingen, Lubeck and Breitenfeld are described competently enough, it is baffling that there are no battle maps showing the positions of troops and phases of battle, a commonplace in better war books.
Perhaps I sound like a whiny millennial with no attention span. While yes, I am both whiny and a millennial, I have read and enjoyed many dense texts. I loved Gravity’s Rainbow and the Brothers Karamazov, and Diarmaid MacCulloch’s 1000+ page ‘A History of Christianity: the first 3000 years’ is one of my favourite history books. The nature of Matusiak’s prose and the complete absence of quality maps, however, was incredibly off-putting. Only by committing to reading one 25-page chapter a day was I able to slog through those first three chapters to get to the better material.
I would not recommend this book. Sadly, apart from Wilson’s well-reviewed monster of a book on the same topic, it seems the Thirty Years War is fairly poorly served in the niche of English-language narrative history below 1000 pages.
Good luck fellow traveller, I hope you find what you seek elsewhere.
I decided to pick this up after reading Tyll by Daniel Kehlmann, my favourite book of 2023 thus far. I looked at ‘Europe’s Tragedy’ by Peter Wilson but baulked at its 1000+ pages. This tome seemed like a snip at 314 pages.
Unfortunately, this book started extremely poorly. The first three chapters are attempting to summarise over 100 years of political machinations across the entire European continent and establish the positions of each of the major players in the Thirty Years War.
While this is obviously the right way to go about things, Matusiak struggles to communicate succinctly. We jump backwards and forwards through decades and across 1000s of miles of Europe from paragraph to paragraph and even sentence to sentence.
Dozens of people are introduced and then forgotten, and you have to have the mind of a mandarin to keep track of who is who. Often, a person is introduced with their full name, title, position, and nickname; Matusiak will then later refer to that person using any combination of the above. Using some unscientific random-ish sampling, I calculated the average paragraph has 10 names for people. The quantity and complexity of these names makes it incredibly difficult to mentally pin people down. Something this book could have benefited from is a ‘cast of characters’ in an appendix, divided where relevant by political and/or religious affiliation.
The confusion caused by the abundance of characters is not helped by Matusiak’s prose, and he often uses extremely long and convoluted sentences, like the following:
“The western mountain passes, on one hand, were controlled by the hostile Duke of Savoy, the central ones by the neutral but powerful Swiss Cantons, while the most convenient Alpine crossings of all for the Spanish access to Austria and northern Europe were controlled by the Protestant Grisons or ‘Grey Leagues’ – apart from, that is, the Catholic corridor of the Valtelline which had revolted against its Protestant masters in both 1572 and 1607, and stood ready to raise the rebel standard once again at the slightest prompting.” (pg76).
To emphasise, this is ONE SENTENCE. Every paragraph on every page is like this, requiring a great deal of mental effort and, often, repeated readings of each paragraph to extract the full meaning of the text.
Once you are through the first three chapters and the main characters are more firmly established, reading does become easier as the characters start acting contemporaneously. This means battles, campaigns and territory won and lost, in addition to the politicking. This should be the meat and bones of any text analysing a historical war and best practice, in my opinion, should be that such things are accompanied by quite a lot of maps.
Instead, we get one map. One. With only one border (the Empire), unlabelled rivers and no more than two dozen cities.
While I understand the borders of the Empire were extremely complex and ever-changing, it is obviously a good idea to include a map outlining the major areas of the Empire, such as Austria, Saxony, Bavaria, the Palatine and so on. Considering the significant and relevant events that happened in the United Provinces, Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Poland, and Hungary, I would consider it wise to include those as well. As it is, you need either a map with you as you read or superb preexisting knowledge of European and German geography in the 16th and 17th centuries. If the latter is true for you, why are you even reading this book?
One map is simply not good enough. Why is there no map showing the outcomes of the Treaty of Westphalia? Where are the campaign and battle maps? Although the battles Nordlingen, Lubeck and Breitenfeld are described competently enough, it is baffling that there are no battle maps showing the positions of troops and phases of battle, a commonplace in better war books.
Perhaps I sound like a whiny millennial with no attention span. While yes, I am both whiny and a millennial, I have read and enjoyed many dense texts. I loved Gravity’s Rainbow and the Brothers Karamazov, and Diarmaid MacCulloch’s 1000+ page ‘A History of Christianity: the first 3000 years’ is one of my favourite history books. The nature of Matusiak’s prose and the complete absence of quality maps, however, was incredibly off-putting. Only by committing to reading one 25-page chapter a day was I able to slog through those first three chapters to get to the better material.
I would not recommend this book. Sadly, apart from Wilson’s well-reviewed monster of a book on the same topic, it seems the Thirty Years War is fairly poorly served in the niche of English-language narrative history below 1000 pages.
Good luck fellow traveller, I hope you find what you seek elsewhere.
Want to read
October 17, 2025Hey! I just wanted to drop by and say that your story was an incredible read. The way you build emotion and tension feels almost cinematic, like a storyboard that’s already ready to be drawn. It was easy to picture, which says a lot about your writing skill.
I’m a professional comic/webtoon artist, and I couldn’t help but imagine how well your story would work in that format. It’s rare to find something that feels so naturally suited for visual storytelling.
If you'd like to see some of my work or if you’d like to see what your story could look like as a comic, you can reach me on Discord (ava_crafts) anytime, and I’d be thrilled to chat about it.
I’m a professional comic/webtoon artist, and I couldn’t help but imagine how well your story would work in that format. It’s rare to find something that feels so naturally suited for visual storytelling.
If you'd like to see some of my work or if you’d like to see what your story could look like as a comic, you can reach me on Discord (ava_crafts) anytime, and I’d be thrilled to chat about it.
February 10, 2022
Fine book on a subject with a very limited English language shelf. Yes, you will need a historical atlas. I used the Cambridge.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews