Wow! What a ride!
Hanlon clearly dedicated a significant amount of time to writing this masterwork, and created something truly special! It was the perfect blend of historical narrative and analogical discovery, and it brought the otherwise abstract laws of thermodynamics to life.
History tends to get tedious, fast! You either end up with speculative anecdotes or a dumping ground of dates and facts. It takes a dedicated historian's eye to dig through all the available material to reverse-engineer the process of scientific discovery to build a cohesive narrative through historical fact. This does, admittedly, take some speculation, but Hanlon grounded any speculations in available fact and made it clear where the analogical leaps were. It was masterfully done.
The real question is, however, how does this work as a textbook?
In answering this question we must first ask at whom this textbook is aimed. He alluded in various places that it is aimed at the engineering student or practitioner that has already acquired a theoretical understanding of the laws of thermodynamics yet lacks a clear analogical grounding for the laws. That is not me. I am new to the field and used this textbook to acquire my knowledge about thermodynamics.
This matters, as every textbook must be grounded upon the expected scaffolding of its target reader. In other words, the writer must assume how much the reader already knows and build their analogies on from that point. As I am not the target reader, it would not be ethically valid for me to judge the book for my lack of foundational scaffolding.
This assumption comes out in various ways. For example, Hanlon refers to concepts before he discusses them, as he assumes you already know them; he will refer to things you would have learned in the engineering classroom; and he will mention ideas at a depth he assumes you would have already acquired. This does limit the generalisability of the textbook beyond the target reader, although not completely, as it is generally quite understandable. I would suggest it as an intermediate resource for the learner for that reason. Learn the laws in an introductory textbook and then read this to truly understand them.
Another goal of a textbook is to deliver the knowledge in a cohesive mental model. It is all too easy to make a textbook a categorical set of lists, which is tedious to read and an ineffective way to learn (although perhaps an effective reference for once you have learned it). Hanlon uses the discovery of the laws of thermodynamics in as a chronologically linear timeframe as possible. This is a particularly interesting mental framework as it delivers a narrative through which discovery is possible, which stimulates procedural learning circuits and develops a deeper, more intuitive understanding.
Finally, a textbook should consider its purpose. Is it a reference guide or is it aimed at educating the reader on the concepts themselves? Most textbooks aim for the latter and fail at it completely! They suffer from a problem of theory completeness, which involves such high-level analogies and mathematical proofs that it becomes all but incomprehensible for anyone that has not already learned it. I have read many textbooks that I could only acquire the information once I had learned to understand it. Yet, from where do I learn to understand it? It creates a circular problem!
Luckily, Hanlon does not suffer this problem. He perfectly blends a discovery-based narrative, analogical completeness (as opposed to mathematical proofs) and mathematical support. He explains the equations he presents with a zeal that engages you, rather than assuming they will be immediately self-evident to the reader (the curse of expertise is one that has doomed many a textbook!). He also, blessedly, introduced all the calculus in Leibnitz notation (rather than Newton's), while keeping most equations to their simplest, most condensed form.
That said, the first two sections on the big bang and the atom were strangely out of place. They felt as though they were bolted on after the fact to create a more general theory. It was a little overwhelming reading them as all that beautiful structure and mental framework delivered through the rest of the book just isn't there to the same degree. It also wasn't immediately clear why they were there until the later chapters explained their connection to thermodynamics. After re-reading them the second time around, it was much clearer, although still very condensed! For a later edition, it may be worth considering putting these at the end of the book and rephrasing them in a way that clearly demonstrates their relevance to the concepts already introduced. For now, the reader can re-read (or initially skip) them once they have finished the rest of the book.
Minor pet peeve: "in and of itself/himself/themselves" was used 37 times!! It did become somewhat of an annoying verbal tick that permeated Hanlon's otherwise excellent writing style.