The History Book Club discussion

Jerome, here is your new thread in 2016. Happy reading in the new year.

Our Required Format:

JANUARY

1. by Winston S. Churchill
Finish date: January 2016
Genre: (whatever genre the book happens to be)
Rating: A
Review: You can add text from a review you have written but no links to any review elsewhere even goodreads. And that is about it. Just make sure to number consecutively and just add the months.

JANUARY

1. by Tim McGrath (no photo)
Finish date: January 4, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A+
Review: A thorough and lively history of the Continental Navy. McGrath’s book is smoothly written, with a dry humor and an eye for detail that will make it appeal to a wide audience. McGrath gives us vivid portraits of all the major engagements and the characters involved, as well as all the relevant political, economic and diplomatic issues and how they related to the European and international situation at the time.

2. by Brett James
Finish date: January 4, 2016
Genre: Thriller
Rating: B+
Review: A traditional but gritty and well-paced thriller, with a fresh, reluctant protagonist and subtle plot twists, great character development, and good pacing. An engaging, humorous and vivid thriller, although there’s no real sense of urgency and the ending leaves some loose ends.

3. by Jerome Tuccille (no photo)
Finish date: January 4, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: In this volume, Tuccille covers the black soldiers of the Spanish-American War. He describes how the Reconstruction era dashed the hopes of emancipated blacks and how many turned to military service in an effort to prove themselves. The first part of the book is a little weak, but it eventually gets better. There are only three maps, and they’re not particularly helpful. The exclamation points are annoying and footnotes are missing, and there are some odd prose here and there. Still, an interesting and graphic history.

4. by Adam Makos
Finish date: January 5, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: C-
Review: A well-researched and engrossing volume, telling the story of the first black carrier pilot and his white friend. Makos’ style is immersive and aimed at a broad audience. The prose is choppy and rapid-fire, and seems a bit too “stream-of-consciousness” at times. In the introduction Makos writes that he loves dialogue. This is only too true, and the writing almost always feels too “novelized”---short sentences, short chapters, and a style that reminds you of a junior-high reading level. Much of the dialogue seems invented, and some of it barely seems credible, almost like Makos was trying to pitch a movie script.

5. by Matthew Dunn
Finish date: January 5, 2016
Genre: Thriller
Rating: C-
Review: The novel does seem authentic, given Dunn’s background, although the gunfights seem a bit embellished, like most spy novels. He does do a fine job capturing the action and setting, and there’s more than one twist to keep you engaged, although the Thales plotline seems a little weak. An intriguing, nuanced novel that keeps you guessing, although the development of the plot is a little slow, and overall it seems like a pretty routine addition to a crowded genre.

6. by John R. Elting
Finish date: Janaury 7, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: This book is almost entirely a military history, as the title indicates. There is little discussion of policy or politics, except to the extent that their incompetence affected military operations, especially in regards to the selection of commanders on the American side. Elting tells the story from both sides, and the narrative is pretty vivid, especially the Washington-Baltimore campaign and the battle of New Orleans.Interesting, vivid, and fairly well written, despite some generalizations here and there.

7. by Joseph Wheelan (no photo)
Finish date: January 8, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A well-paced, well-researched history of the final campaigns of the Civil War. Wheelan emphasizes that, while these campaigns would be the last of the war, they still saw of the war’s hardest fighting. Wheelan does a great job describing in what poor shape the Confederacy’s forces were at this point, and he vividly describes how food shortages made them more and more desperate. Wheelan’s style is engaging but the narrative is a little uneven, with the prose usually never bogs down until one gets to the battles, which are quite detailed and feel like a different author wrote them. Still, a readable, powerful and absorbing volume.

Holy moley you read a lot! And interesting books, too.

8. by Walter R. Borneman (no photo)
Finish date: January 9, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A readable, broad, and well-paced if almost overwhelmingly detailed history of the Battles of Lexington and Concord in particular and the beginning of Revolution in Boston in general. Accordingly, Borneman gives us fine portraits of the Adamses, Hancock, Revere, and Joseph Warren, as well as Thomas Gage, Lord Percy and William Howe. Borneman gives the reader a full picture of these events by including the experiences of such lesser-known figures such as various women and blacks, although the rest of the rebellious colonists remain faceless. A few statements seem unsupported by fact, and Borneman's treatment of the British seems a bit one-sided. Also, the writing can be a bit too breezy or conversational (typical Borneman).

You are a reading machine Jerome. So glad you are with us again for 2016.

9. by Michael B. Ballard (no photo)
Finish date: January 13, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A dense, informative history of the Vicksburg campaign. Ballard emphasizes the advantages the Union had in leadership, teamwork and naval power. He points out all the disadvantages the Confederates operated under; he is sympathetic towards Pemberton, less so of Johnston (unsurprisingly). His treatment of McClernand is more sympathetic than usual. He also argues that Vicksburg's importance was more psychological than tangible. I'm not sure Ballard reveals anything new though, and the writing is often quite dry.

10. by Peter Snow (no photo)
Finish date: January 19, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A well-written and well-researched history of the Washington-Baltimore campaign, told in an engaging blow-by-blow style. While dramatic, Snow concludes that the campaign's conclusion was quite anticlimactic, and how it eventually turned into an abortive standoff that the British decided to simply terminate. A vivid, human history, although it doesn't add anything new and there are a few minor errors here and there.

11. by Holger H. Herwig (no photo)
Finish date: January 20, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A thorough, engaging, and vivid history of the the first Battle of the Marne, mostly from the German perspective. Herwig does a great job explaining how the commanders of 1914 fought a war with outdated tactics and with more courage than innovation, and Herwig brings the brutality of war home to the reader. His treatment of Joffre is largely favorable; Moltke comes off as irresolute and out of touch. There are plenty of maps of varying quality. Questions of organization, doctrine and tactics don't get as much ink, and a few statements are left unexplained. A clearly written but sometimes dry and meandering history.

12. by David Curtis Skaggs (no photo)
Finish date: January 22, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: An interesting, balanced, and well-written history of Harrison’s northwestern campaign as well as Harrison’s military career up to that point. Skaggs argues that Harrison is a perfect example of American generalship during the war; “the last American war in which the senior generals would be prominent citizens rather than professional soldiers.”

Excellent progress, Jerome. but I expected it of you. :0)

Some really great sounding military reading here. Adding several to my tbr.

Thanks, guys, the year has started off well so far :)

13. by Robert V. Remini (no photo)
Finish date: January 26, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: B-
Review: A well-written history of the Battle of New Orleans. Remini argues that the battle was one America's turning points as well as its "first military victory," a claim that he makes against all the evidence. His treatment of the battle is vivid and his portraits of all the major figures is great (although his treatment of Jackson verges on hero worship). There are also a few claims Remini makes that aren't backed up by evidence. Still a sufficient history of the battle overall, though.

14. by Winston Groom
Finish date: January 31, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: B-
Review: An interesting, accessible, and mostly well-written history of the Battle of New Orleans. Groom shows how the British should have won the battle but lost due to bad luck and an inability to adapt. There are, however, a few minor errors, the writing is often too breezy, and some statements are unsupported.

Jerome wrote: "11. by Holger H. Herwig (no photo)
..."
Glad to hear our most trusted reviewer confirms the overall positive online opinion about this. We would all also really like to know what you have for breakfast to keep up the pace :)

Lol, thanks Dimitri. I guess I have too much free time on my hands for now.

FEBRUARY

15. by William M. Fowler Jr. (no photo)
Finish date: February 2, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A well-researched and well-written history of the Seven Years’ War in North America. Fowler covers a vast subject in a way that is easy to comprehend, and does a fine job putting the war into its global and European contexts. Fowler demonstrates an easy command of the subject matter, his writing is gripping and his rendition of the key battles is vivid. He clearly explains each side’s objectives and war effort. Fowler tells this history well, but his book is basically fact-based, with little memorable or compelling about it, especially if you’ve read about the war elsewhere.

Jerome wrote: "FEBRUARY

15. by William M. Fowler Jr. (no photo)
Finish date: February ..."

How does it compare to Fred Anderson's Crucible of War ?

I like Anderson's book better just because it's more thorough, but Fowler's is still pretty good. Here's another book I recommend, Dimitri, but it's a bit pricey:

by Daniel A. Baugh (no photo)

Jerome wrote: "I like Anderson's book better just because it's more thorough, but Fowler's is still pretty good. Here's another book I recommend, Dimitri, but it's a bit pricey:
The Global Seven Years War, 1754-1763: Britain and France in a Great Power Contest
A global companion to Anderson's North American dimension would be nice. Ah, you've already shelved The Seven Years War in Europe, 1756-1763 so you're fully equipped on 1756-63.

Dimitri, please make the proper citations for the books you are mentioning, at the end of your post.

by Daniel A. Baugh (no photo)

by Franz A.J. Szabo (no photo)

16. by Anthony Everitt
Finish date: February 5, 2016
Genre: Biography
Rating: A-
Review: A clear, readable biography of Octavian, with a focus on his rise to power. Everitt's writing is smooth and readable and his rendition of Rome's politics is clear and thorough. He does a fine job showing how Augustus concentrated power in is own hands while maintaining the illusion of the old republic. Everitt also does a great job bringing the era to life (although his account of the civil war is a bit dry). A few points, however, seem underdeveloped or unsupported.

17. by Erik Larson
Finish date: February 5, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A smoothly written, compelling and well-researched history of the Lusitania's last crossing. While it doesn't add anything new and sometimes feels unorganized, Larson does a fine job telling the story of the voyage and often emphasizes the various possible scenarios through which the ship and the U-20 could have avoided their fateful rendezvous, and how lucky the U-20 really was in even hitting its target. Riveting and very readable, if a bit tedious, dull, padded, and detached in parts.

18. by David J. Eicher (no photo)
Finish date: February 7, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A broad, straightforward and well-researched if choppy military history of the Civil War. Eicher's book is very comprehensive, and he covers every major campaign and battle, as well as various minor skirmishes in painstaking detail. However, the writing can get a bit dry, the book often reads like a reference work, and it doesn't always seem particularly well organized.

Jerome wrote: "18. by David J. Eicher (no photo)
Finish date: February 7, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A broad, s..."
Jerome, how does it compare to this doorstop from the late 1980's ? The content is solid but the editor should've been put on latrine duty for the chaotically inserted maps.
by Herman Hattaway (no photo)

Jerome what the hell :) do you read in your sleep? :D

LOL, Michal. I have often thought that as well. He is a reading machine.

Ha, like I said; too much free time.

Dimitri wrote: "Jerome wrote: "18. by David J. Eicher (no photo)
Finish date: February 7, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Rev..."

I haven't read Hattaway yet, but it's on my never-ending list.

19. by Roger Ford (no photo)
Finish date: February 16, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: B-
Review: A thorough and interesting history of the Middle Eastern campaigns of the First World War. The writing is dull and dry for the most part, but Ford does a reasonably good job describing the origins and course of the war with the Ottomans. Still, the narrative is not particularly cohesive or engaging.

20. by Charles Neimeyer (no photo)
Finish date: February 19, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A+
Review: A vivid, well-researched history of the Chesapeake campaigns. Along with a general outline of the course of the wider war, he also covers the conditions in the Chesapeake area, where there was much popular unrest, an active privateering community, and a weak effort to defend the Bay against the British.The main focuses of Neimeyer’s study is the defense of Craney Island and Norfolk, the raids of 1813, US naval activity, and the Washington-Baltimore campaign. He also discusses the British efforts to liberate and arm the plantation slaves of the region, as well as Cockburn’s later raids in the South, all of it in a thorough, vivid fashion. A great, readable book on an interesting topic. Some more maps would have helped, though.

21. by Stanley L. Quick (no photo)
Finish date: February 19, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A+
Rating: Another solid and thorough history of the War of 1812 in the Chesapeake. The authors do a fine job explaining the war's origins and outbreak, the unpreparedness of the US, the British blockade, and all of the British raids in the Chesapeake, culminating in the campaigns for Washington and Baltimore (the most vivid part of the book) The only real quibble is the poor maps.

Jerome wrote: "19. by Roger Ford (no photo)

A thorough and interesting history of the Middle Eastern campaigns of the First World War. The writing is dull and dry for the most part, but Ford does a reasonably good job describing the origins and course of the war with the Ottomans. Still, the narrative is not particularly cohesive or engaging."

Engaging writing is what separates the great from the good, such as:
by Eugene Rogan
vs
by Kristian Coates Ulrichsen (no photo)

Dimitri wrote: "Jerome wrote: "19. by Roger Ford (no photo)

A thorough and interesting history of the Middle Eastern campaigns..."

I hope so, Dmitri, Rogan's book is on my short list :)

22. by Serhii Plokhy
Finish date: February 20, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A clear, well-written and well-researched history of the Soviet Union's collapse. Plokhy stresses the role played by pure chance, Gorbachev's policies, and the interaction between Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Leonid Kravchuk. Plokhy convincingly debunks the idea that the fall of the Soviet Union was somehow the result of deliberate US actions, emphasizing the simple fact that preserving the Soviet Union's integrity was official US policy at the time. A nuanced and insightful volume, if a bit plodding in parts.

23. by Peter Hart
Finish date: February 23, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A rich, accessible, engaging and unsentimental history of the BEF. Hart's style is evenhanded and readable,and he challenges some assumptions about the BEF and concludes that its contribution to the 1914 campaigns was token, and how it repeatedly escaped disaster due to luck, sheer French manpower and German fumbling. In Hart's version, battles like Mons and Le Cateau come off as nothing more than lucky escapes from near-certain defeat. He also argues that the famous Christmas truce was nothing more than the result of bad weather and static trench warfare and emphasizes that both sides kept on raiding, ambushing, and reconnoitering each other throughout that particular Christmas season. A clear, fair, and balanced work.

Into The Silence by Wade Davis documents the lives of the Englishmen who fought in the BEF and then went on to try to conquer Everest. Mallory is the central character. Great book, but echos what you said. Worst generals ever unless you count the Boer War. And many of them were the same generals.

Hello, Stephen! When mentioning a book, please make a citation at the end of your post, in accordance with the rules of the group. Thank you! :)

by Wade Davis

Stephen wrote: "Into The Silence by Wade Davis documents the lives of the Englishmen who fought in the BEF and then went on to try to conquer Everest. Mallory is the central character. Great book, but echos what y..."

Interesting, Stephen I think I'll take a look at Davis. Thanks.

24. by William R. Nester (no photo)
Finish date: February 25, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A detailed and well-organized military history of the 1758 battles for Ticonderoga. The narrative is straightforward, dramatic and well-paced. Nester's analysis is thoughtful and he does a fine job putting the campaign into its strategic and political context. He gives us great portraits of the people involved and the challenges faced by both sides. The only real gripes are Nester's constant "what-if" speculations. But, in all, an engaging and well-written volume.

25. by Ben Hughes (no photo)
Finish date: February 27, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A clear, balanced and readable history of the 1757 siege of Fort William Henry. Hughes does a great job telling the story of the siege from the British, French and Indian perspectives as well as the wider context of the war, and does a great job describing how much of a disadvantage the British and the colonists were at these early stages of the war.

MARCH

26. by Robert Dallek
Finish date: March 4, 2016
Genre: History/Biography
Rating: A-
Review: A readable, insightful and well-researched history of the Nixon-Kissinger partnership. Dallek does a great job showing how dependent the two were on each other despite their differences, and how they shared a distrust of others, a desire for power and prestige, and a vengeful streak. It does not seem like they were personally close, and Dallek also shows how they used each other and how they both seemed to view their image and legacy as a priority. An evenhanded work, although the writing can get a bit dull, the narrative seems a bit disjointed, and some issues aren't covered thoroughly.

27. by Paul Andrew Hutton (no photo)
Finish date: March 5, 2016
Genre: History
Rating: A-
Review: A graphic and well-researched history of the 25-year conflict between the US and the Apache nation, mostly from the American perspective. Hutton introduces many figures, such as Cochise, Geronimo, Mickey Free, and many others (although none of them really come to life), and Hutton ably describes the Apache nations’ struggle against all kinds of underhandedness and ruthlessness from both the US and the Mexicans, as well as the many conflicts among the Apache tribes themselves. Well-written and readable but very dense at times.

One more book to go and then you get a second 50 book topic for 2016, or how does it work ?