Last Book Read (History)?

[scirefaciat]

I really loved RW Southern -- he writes beautifully (which I suppose is beside the point, but love his phrasing and word choices) and The Making of the Middle Ages is a great read.

Norman Cantor's Inventing the Middle Ages really is a good introduction to the last hundred years or so of historiography, and I thought it was absolutely hilarious. Whether he meant to or not, and I honestly haven't decided, in some places he seems like he's gossiping, other places he's incredibly snarky, and I just loved that about the book. If you're looking for a few chuckles with your historiography, this ones for you.

As for what I last read, it was Robert the Bruce's Rivals: The Comyns, 1212-1314 It's a very good discussion of baronial politics in high medieval Scotland, from a perspective other than that of Robert Bruce or William Wallace, which I appreciate. If you're into Scottish politics, its a good one to have.

[synthla]

I really loved RW Southern -- he writes beautifully (which I suppose is beside the point, but love his phrasing and word choices) and The Making of the Middle Ages is a great read.

Norman Cantor's Inventing the Middle Ages really is a good introduction to the last hundred years or so of historiography, and I thought it was absolutely hilarious. Whether he meant to or not, and I honestly haven't decided, in some places he seems like he's gossiping, other places he's incredibly snarky, and I just loved that about the book. If you're looking for a few chuckles with your historiography, this ones for you.

As for what I last read, it was Robert the Bruce's Rivals: The Comyns, 1212-1314 It's a very good discussion of baronial politics in high medieval Scotland, from a perspective other than that of Robert Bruce or William Wallace, which I appreciate. If you're into Scottish politics, its a good one to have.

Great perspective and your latest reading sounds quite interesting; I haven't explored Scottish history much, but some day (I would read the history of all the world, if there was but time enough). And I don't think beautiful writing is beside the point - there's no mandate that scholarly/learned writing must also be dreadfully boring and without decent turns of phrase, so we should give preference to it all other things being equal. Unfortunately, being a great scholar doesn't always mean being a great writer and those individuals still have a lot to add to the historical conversation, so we have to put up with it.

You have me quite excited about Cantor now. I love books where the author's personality peeks through, especially when it's one evidencing a preference for dry wit.

[hooleeya]

I just ordered the Cantor book from Amazon - thanks for the recommendation! I absolutely think that good writing is essential to good scholarship. After all, who wants to read something that's dreadfully boring. Some of the best scholars in my field (medieval religious/gender history) such as Bynum, Newman, and Kieckhefer, are all excellent writers. The first paragraph of Bynum's introduction to her newest book, Wonderful Blood, is a perfect example of how introductions should be written.

[hooleeya]

Also, for Scottish history, Steve Murdoch has written a lot on Early Modern Scottish history, particularly the relations between Scotland and the Scandinavian regions and the Dutch. I worked with him when I studied at St. Andrews and was very impressed by how he employed some of the more underused sources in Scottish history.

[humblemumblings]

Anyone have a must read in recent Russian history?

[slawkenbergius]

Anyone have a must read in recent Russian history?

Jeffrey Brooks's Thank You, Comrade Stalin! is pretty damn great.

But really, all the Russian history you need can be found in Saltykov-Shchedrin :wink: !

[misterpat]

Anyone have a must read in recent Russian history?

Is it your field, or no? Because if you are looking for a good introduction, I would suggest reading Richard Pipes A Concise History of the Russian Revolution. I enjoyed it, anyway.

Otherwise, I read much of Part 3 of Leszek Kolakowski's Main Currents of Marxism for a seminar paper. Seemed like pretty essential reading for someone in that field. I think all all 3 parts combined are like 1200+ pages though.

[humblemumblings]

It is my field... now. I was much more of a western Europe and US anthro (it made sense then, somehow) person in college and feel the need to brush up. Plus my current gig gives me ample time to read...

[redwine]

Humblemumblings - a few Russian history recommendations

Soviet:

Stephen Kotkin, 'Magnetic Mountain: Stalinism as Civilization'

Terry Martin, 'The Affirmative Action Empire'

Catriona Kelly, 'Children's World' (this is HUGE but very entertaining! A cultural history of Soviet childhood )

Sheila Fitzpatrick, 'Everyday Stalinism'

Pre-Revolutionary

Jeffrey Brooks 'When Russia Learned to Read'

Laura Engelstein 'The Keys to Happiness: Sex and the search for modernity in fin-de-siecle Russia'

Richard Wortman, 'Scenarios of Power'

David Ransel has a new book out that I haven't read yet called 'A Merchant's Tale' which looks really good, a micro-historical study of the diary of one C18-C19 Moscow merchant. He is a great historian so hopefully it will be interesting.

I notice you status says you are in Moldova! I am not sure what the bookshop/library situation is there, but having had the experience of searching the Russian National Library for english language history books such as the ones above I can say its not always easy but you can find them, so hopefully you can locate some in your current hometown

[synthla]

Just started a book completely outside of my field, The Fall of the Roman Empire by Peter Heather; it's a relatively recent work and obviously is tackling a large topic (given my general unfamiliarity with the area, so much the better for me), but given the recent discussion of a preference for combining readability with good scholarship, I have to give it a real thumbs up so far. Heather represents his work as an attempt to construct a synthetic narrative from the multitude of new and revolutionary, but very focused historical work that has been done in the late-Imperial, early-antiquity period over the last 40 years or so. I'm sure it would present nothing new to the student of the field, but it's a very engaging read for someone who wants to read history but needs a break from their own area. His general thesis is that the conventional wisdom, which has prevailed from at least Gibbon and places the ultimate blame for the empire's demise on its own internal weaknesses is wrong, and that the empire was still filled with vitality and resilience in the fourth century; rather, it really was the "barbarians" who did it in.

The only downside for me, and this happens a lot when reading secondary classical history, are all the references to lost texts - the fact that so many did not survive to today always makes me profoundly sad.

[psychomachia]

Just started a book completely outside of my field, The Fall of the Roman Empire by Peter Heather; it's a relatively recent work and obviously is tackling a large topic (given my general unfamiliarity with the area, so much the better for me), but given the recent discussion of a preference for combining readability with good scholarship, I have to give it a real thumbs up so far. Heather represents his work as an attempt to construct a synthetic narrative from the multitude of new and revolutionary, but very focused historical work that has been done in the late-Imperial, early-antiquity period over the last 40 years or so. I'm sure it would present nothing new to the student of the field, but it's a very engaging read for someone who wants to read history but needs a break from their own area. His general thesis is that the conventional wisdom, which has prevailed from at least Gibbon and places the ultimate blame for the empire's demise on its own internal weaknesses is wrong, and that the empire was still filled with vitality and resilience in the fourth century; rather, it really was the "barbarians" who did it in.

The only downside for me, and this happens a lot when reading secondary classical history, are all the references to lost texts - the fact that so many did not survive to today always makes me profoundly sad.

If you liked this book, another one you might enjoy is Bryan Ward-Perkins' The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization (another recent book.) It makes a similar argument to Heather's book, that the end of the Roman empire was in fact a brutal period characterized by violence and a decline in living standards; it's a point of view which he argues has tended to be ignored or denied in more recent scholarship (I can neither confirm nor deny this as I'm not a student of the period.) It was a wonderful read, and he uses a lot of archaeological evidence to support his argument, which I found particularly interesting. His prose is lovely, a bit in-your-face but not obnoxious. It was one of the assigned texts for a Late Antiquity course I took -- hated the course, but this book was a little glimmer of joy.

[humblemumblings]

redwine -

Thanks for the recommendations. I am in Moldova, where the bookstore situation... isn't, at least where the English language is concerned. So my all-suffering parents mule me books from the states. AndI'm going back to visit schools, so I should be in contact with a real live English bookstore again...and half.com. Without JSTOR, I never would have been able to apply .

[StrangeLight]

re-reading larry goodwyn's classic, the populist moment.

makes all the stress of applying for grad school and waiting for admissions worth it.