This gigantic book - 1350 pages! - reminds me in an odd way of Roger Penrose's almost equally massive The Road to Reality, which I read last year. In both cases, we have an unusually gifted person, who sets out to present an integrated overview of an entire field. For Penrose, it's modern physics; for Quigley, it's world history during the period from 1895 to 1960. In both cases, we soon discover that the author has a highly non-standard but strangely persuasive view of their respective subject, which involves juxtaposition of elements normally considered in isolation.
Penrose spends much of his book setting the scene for his unorthodox ideas about the connections between General Relativity, quantum theory, thermodynamics and the origins of the universe; right or wrong, there are many points in the argument where it is impossible not to wonder why other authors so resolutely refuse to put things together and ask certain questions. What is the actual relationship between the evolution of the quantum mechanical wavefunction and its apparent collapse when an observation is made? Does gravity have anything to do it? Why was the universe created in an extremely low-entropy state? Is there any real reason to think that there could be more dimensions than the four we can see? Even if Penrose is completely out to lunch (a distinct possibility), he is reminding us that these issues are far more interesting and fundamental than the theory-tweaking that most physicists spend their time on. If you don't think big, you're never going to win big.
And similarly with Quigley, who resolutely refuses to let himself be limited by a single perspective or narrow conceptions of political correctness. His account of recent history combines at least five main strands: macro-economic theory, power relationships, weapons technology, psychology and religion. It is quite startling to see how much he knows about all of them. He moves smoothly from explaining how deflationary policies caused the post-World War I German depression, to describing the way investment in arms manufacturing can redistribute wealth and kick-start an economy, to a discussion of Douhet's 1922 theory of strategic bombing and how it influenced Britain's policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany, to an account of the development of radar and how it assured the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain. The level of detail is breathtaking; there's a reason why the book is so long, and indeed you often feel that he's reluctantly cutting a lot out to save space.
Behind it all, he has an overarching vision of how all historical events are influenced by deep philosophical, religious and cultural perspectives going back to the beginnings of recorded history. This stuff is amazingly bold. For example, he sees the basic division between the American Left and Right as ultimately emanating from counter-currents in Christian thought. The Left is following standard Christian doctrine (man is essentially good, and only needs help and guidance), while the Right follows the Manichaean doctrine imported into Christianity by Saint Augustine (evil is a positive force, and man needs strong external discipline to protect him from it). I am sure that not everyone will like this, but I thought it was perceptive. An even more controversial aspect of the book, which I can see nearly everyone hates, is his analysis of national character. For example, he claims that there is a unifying pattern of behavior connecting the Arab and Latin American countries, with Moorish Spain as the link; this is typified by a tribal government based on interpersonal relations rather than laws, endemic corruption, and contempt for women. Yes, too simplistic, as he admits himself; but is it really worse than the currently fashionable alternative, which is to pretend that people are the same everywhere and there are no truly important cultural differences?
I have to say something about conspiracy theories: thanks to a short section around p. 950, Tragedy and Hope has become a kind of bible for conspiracy theorists world-wide, who in many cases appear not to have read any other part of the book. Quigley identifies an influential English clique centered on Oxford University, the "Round Table Group", who, he says, played a major role in shaping British policy during this period, often operating behind the scenes. They were closely connected to some of the American East Coast financial establishment, in particular to J.P. Morgan and his powerful associates, and at some points were able to exert great influence on the US government as well. Quigley in no way tries to sensationalize the idea, or portray these people as unscrupulous or evil. On the contrary, his admiration for them is obvious: he feels that they did a great deal to try to make the world a better place, even if their plans did not always lead to the results they intended.
And yet... it is so easy to see why conspiracy theorists love the book. There is a constant feeling that there is more, which he cannot reveal. He talks at length about the brilliant scientists who worked on the Allied side during World War II and the Cold War, much of whose work is still not at all well-known, but who made a huge contribution to saving Western Civilization from the twin evils of Nazism and Stalinism. He is particularly indignant about the treatment Oppenheimer received at the hands of McCarthy and his stooges. And I think the conspiracy theorists are mistaken when they try to use Quigley to demonstrate the continued importance of the Round Table Group and its claimed successors. He writes of them with love and nostalgia, of the Great Ones who have now departed.
If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I am not, I would expand this idea further, and note that Tolkien was also a professor at Oxford University around this time. I have checked, and at least one member of the Inklings had a connection to the Round Table Group. I would argue that The Lord of the Rings, despite Tolkien's protestations to the contrary, tells the story of our times in a disguised form; how the Valar sent their emissaries to guide us in our fight against the great evil of Sauron, and how, when he had been defeated, they returned into the Ultimate West, leaving us bereft of their wisdom and power. But that is just a fantasy.