Almost the moment I
finished The Wonder Book of Aircraft and was contemplating which book
to read next, Spies, Sadists and Sorcerers was delivered.
It’s a collection of
little chapters (some only a few pages but most a bit longer)
focusing on individuals or events through history which are either
little-known, or well-known but the author believes a contrary view
to that of the general perception.
Took me a little while
to get the angle, which is of provocative polemic. On that score, the
book works very well as it’s never dull. Some chapters I strongly
agreed with (the Elgin Marbles), and some I strongly disagreed with
(Richard the Lionheart). I read the book much more rapidly than I
anticipated, testament to the writing quality, but also disagreed
quite strongly with certain aspects.
To take the Lionheart
example, he’s largely condemned (with lip service to positives) and
the reverse approach taken with Saladin. Both were men of their time.
Richard spent most of his time warring in France, for which he was
criticised, because we were at war with France. The only reason John
didn’t spend more time there was because he couldn’t persuade the
English to follow him very often. Likewise, Richard did kill 3,000 or
so prisoners at Acre. But that does neglect the context of Saladin
stringing out negotiations so Richard would struggle with food, water
and guarding so many men. Not to mention Saladin killing Templar
prisoners was mentioned but not that Saladin had only received their
surrender after promising not to kill them. I’m not condemning
Saladin for that, merely pointing out 12th century warfare
wasn’t renowned for its loveliness, and mostly criticising Richard
whilst praising Saladin is not consistent.
There was also a
factual error in the statement Arthur of Brittany was 12 at the time
of his murder, whereas he was 15 or 16.
Similarly, the Magna
Carta section, whilst accurately stating the barons’ interests were
first and foremost, does neglect some important provisions that
applied to everyone. Clause 40, for example, reads “To no one will
we sell, to no one will we deny or delay right or justice.” [From
the version at the back of Marc Morris’ biography of King John].
Likewise, the religious
persecution/executions under Henry VIII and Elizabeth I are laboured
at length, yet the comparable acts of Mary are glossed over quickly.
However, I did find
some of the chapters very interesting, particularly around the World
Wars (not an era with which I’m overly familiar).
I think it’s the
first history of this nature I’ve read, but I did enjoy it quite a
lot. Some chapters were interesting and new, and I must admit to
rather liking argument over history (would you believe some jesters
insist Julius Caesar was a better general than Hannibal Barca?) so I
didn’t mind disagreeing with the author’s perspective. There does
seem to have been finger trouble here and there, not only with Arthur
of Brittany’s age but also that of Ada Lovelace (it confused me at
first because the dates given indicated she was 67 at her death, but
it’s actually 37).
Assessing this is quite
difficult, and makes me glad I don’t habitually score/rate the
books I review here. I found it interesting throughout and read it
far faster than I expected, given my limited reading time. On the
other hand, the more I knew of a period of history the likelier I was
to disagree with the author.
It’s definitely
interesting and provocative.
For those after books
related to the sections I’ve highlighted, I’ve reviewed the
following:
Thaddeus
No comments:
Post a Comment