(Part 2) Best historical european biographies according to redditors

Jump to the top 20

We found 2,560 Reddit comments discussing the best historical european biographies. We ranked the 765 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.

Next page

Subcategories:

Historical British biographies
Historical France biographies
Historical Germany biographies
Historical Greece biographies
Historic Italy biographies
Ancient Rome biographies
Historical Russia biographies
Spain & portugal historical biographies

Top Reddit comments about Historical European Biographies:

u/labarge3 · 164 pointsr/AskHistorians

This is a tough question to answer with any degree of specificity because there was a plurality of experiences for peasants across Europe and the Mediterranean during the Middle Ages. However, in general, the economic life of medieval peasants was perilous. Subsistence agriculture provides little job security. A bad harvest could spell devastation for you, your family, and your community. I suggest taking a look at the online English translation of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for evidence of famine/drought/general devastation in the British Isles. Here are a few examples from just the eleventh century - a time when the Commercial Revolution (which brought substantial increases in agricultural production and peasant populations) was beginning to take hold:

A.D. 1005… This year died Archbishop Elfric; and Bishop Elfeah succeeded him in the archbishopric. This year was the great famine in England so severe that no man ere remembered such.

A.D. 1070… There was a great famine this year.

A.D. 1082. This year the king seized Bishop Odo; and this year also was a great famine.

A.D. 1087. After the birth of our Lord and Saviour Christ, one thousand and eighty-seven winters; in the one and twentieth year after William began to govern and direct England, as God granted him, was a very heavy and pestilent season in this land. Such a sickness came on men, that full nigh every other man was in the worst disorder, that is, in the diarrhoea; and that so dreadfully, that many men died in the disorder. Afterwards came, through the badness of the weather as we before mentioned, so great a famine over all England, that many hundreds of men died a miserable death through hunger. Alas! how wretched and how rueful a time was there! When the poor wretches lay full nigh driven to death prematurely, and afterwards came sharp hunger, and dispatched them withall! Who will not be penetrated with grief at such a season? or who is so hardhearted as not to weep at such misfortune? Yet such things happen for folks' sins, that they will not love God and righteousness.

We do not have census data or detailed tax records to corroborate the extent of these famines, but we nonetheless have to assume that they were disruptive to peasants living off the English land. Entries like these from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle are echoed across other Latin chronicles and in Arabic ones as well. I am most familiar with The Complete History of Ibn al-Athir, which mentions numerous famines across the Islamicate World. Take, for example, his account of a long-lasting famine in Ifriqiya (roughly modern Tunisia) in the 1140s:

It had a terrible effect on the population, who even resorted to cannibalism. Because of starvation the nomads sought out the towns and the townspeople closed the gates against them. Plague and great mortality followed. The country was emptied and from whole families not a single person survived. Many people travelled to Sicily in search of food and met with great hardship.

Since medieval sources tend to be written from the perspective of literate men based in cities or monasteries, the perspective of peasants is often only briefly mentioned. It is likewise difficult to make any concrete estimations about lifespan, infant mortality rate, and nutrition for most medieval peasant communities due to lack of sources (although the picture begins to come into focus during the Early Modern Period). When we read about a “great famine” in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle or The Complete History of Ibn al-Athir, we therefore have to imagine that a bad harvest - caused potentially by drought, an early frost, heavy rains, or conflict - brought with it immense human suffering and the displacement of communities from their ancestral homes.

This is not to say that peasant life was only defined by suffering at the hands of subsistence agriculture and overly aggressive landed elites. We know that there were robust and complex communities in rural medieval villages, many of which survived the ordeals brought by mother nature. I recommend Judith Bennett’s biography of Cecilia Penifader as a microhistory of peasant life in the English town of Brigstock during the late-thirteenth through mid-fourteenth centuries.

For those interested in environmental data related to medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, I highly recommend the Old World Drought Atlas, which uses dendrochronological (tree-ring) data to chart annual rainfall across the region. This link shows annual rainfall in Europe in 1315, the first year of The Great Famine in Europe. As the link shows, there was abnormally heavy rainfall across Western Europe. This corroborates written sources, which detail how heavy rains destroyed harvests and had profoundly negative consequences for peasants.

u/gault8121 · 83 pointsr/todayilearned

this is totally not true. Tribes were constantly rebelling against Alexander. Alexander would pacify them, and then move forward, and then they would rebel again. Alexander never had complete control over the lands he conquered.

He also did not exactly embrace cultures - in Anatolia he consistently overthrew the local oligarchy governments to set up democracies that would work in his favor. While this may sound like a nice act, Alexander also over threw democracies in Greece to set up oligarchies - he did whatever was necessary to consolidate his own power.

Third, Alexander the great was never known as the great in his time. The roman's gave Alexander the title the great because they wanted to justify their own imperial conquests. The Romans turned Alexander into a symbol for their own purposes.

Fourth, and the reason why Alexander did embrace Persian culture, was that Alexander was of mixed blood. Alexander's mother, Olympia, was from Epirus, a rival tribe to the Macedonians. Macedonians looked down upon Epirus as being a backward and savage place. Alexander, consequently, was looked down upon for being of mixed blood. In fact, Alexander's father tried to murder Alexander when Alexander was 16 so that his new son, whom his 5th wife had just birthed, and who was of pure Macedonian blood, would take over the throne. After fleeing into exile, two years later Alexander and Olympia plotted together to convince one Phillip's guards to assassinate Philip, and thats how Alexander became king.

Source: http://www.amazon.com/Alexander-Macedon-356-323-B-C-Historical/dp/0520071662

tl:dr; Alexander wasn't a nice guy, but no one can be a nice guy he is playing the game of thrones.

u/DrKarenDempsey · 76 pointsr/AskHistorians

Feminism as it currently exists today was not present in the medieval period. What we can talk about is female agency. In other words how women acted within the constraints of a patriarchal society either as individuals or as a group. Acts of subversion can be seen in a number of ways. I have mentioned a few times on here about how women could not participate fully in the church- they were forbidden to touch the alter. However, many women donated their clothes, or made personalised alter clothes for the church or priests. This meant that clothes that has touched them, that they had owned or made and perhaps worn on their body eventually came to wrap the alter - one of the most sacred parts of the church. Or touched the body of the clergyman they donated it too. While we cannot say that this was a feminist act it was certainly a way of cleverly avoiding the ban on touching (even if by proxy!).

Another, perhaps more obvious way, was that many women who were married once and became widows chose to stay that way. They elected not to remarry. Widows had a special place in society - they almost operated as men, especially in relation to property and wealth.

There are of course unmarried or single women who equally chose to live that way (a wonderful book on Cecila Penifader by Judith Bennettt https://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Life-Penifader-Brigstock-1295-1344/dp/0072903317 shows one such (well off) peasant woman. This is a super book! I return to it again and again. Also, work by Dr Cordelia Beattie discusses single women Beattie, C. (2007) Medieval Single Women: The Politics of Social Classification in Late Medieval England. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dr Beattie has a range of really informative publications on medieval women!

u/eternalkerri · 52 pointsr/AskHistorians

Fair warning, the War of the Roses is a very complex and dense topic to dive into. Any book you pick up worth it's salt, will have (and better have) at least two chapters dedicated to just background before you even begin to get to the foundations of the causes for the War. The WotR is easily the most defining moment in English history between the Norman invasion and the Civil War and covers decades of history, literally.

Having said that, while this is not my subject area, and I'm not terribly well read in the topic, I do have a recommendation for a book that sits astride "popular history" and "academic history". I say that, because again, this is a dense subject and no book that is worth your time would be purely "pop history".

Alison Weir's War of the Roses, does a good job of making the subject accessible to readers of history, though not to fans of "lite history." "Lite History" to me are those pulpy history paperbacks that tend to populate the military history sections of bookstores about Navy Seals, Special Forces, Nazis, and those god awful books about the Merovingians being descendants of Jesus.

While the book only has one footnote that I can recall (giving a rough estimation of price equivalencies between 14th century money and late 20th Century), it does have an extensive bibliography and helpful index. Footnoting would be helpful in knowing the sources and providing additional information (my favorite thing about footnotes!) provided, but since the book is not "academic" its overlooked. The most helpful addition to the book are simplified family trees which I promise will be useful as the overlapping and twisting mixtures of marriages, second cousins, and family offshoots played a major part in being the cause and agitator of the war, and I promise you will refer to it more than once.

While the writing style is very casual and doesn't run down various rabbit hole topics that would fascinate an academic (and confuse the casual), it is still very dense. Keeping track of the names of the players, which Houses they were loyal to, and what role they play requires close attention to be paid or you will find yourself backtracking. I myself restarted the book three or four times before I reached page 100 over the years as I easily became lost and confused. I don't fault the writer at all as this was my first book on the subject and I often found myself lost. You will still need to sit quietly and read alone; this is not a book to read on a busy cross town bus, its by no means is a summer page turner.

Weir has a background in history, but is not a formal academic. She focuses mostly on historical fictions and biographies of England's royalty from the Middle Ages through the Renaissance. You can clearly tell that she has strong familiarity with the subject, knows how to research, and is thorough in covering the topics she tries to tackle (though through out her career some have been better than others). She presents her works in a way that makes complex histories and dense materials accessible to those who want to go beyond a tv documentary familiarity but not ready to delve into the dense undergrowth of an academic book.

For a casual yet informative and quality work, I recommend Alison Weir's War of the Roses.

Just don't use it as a source for your history paper.

u/methshin · 51 pointsr/AskHistorians

One should also consider that Patton and Montgomery were two great Generals, couple that leadership with superior training and equipment, and you have a recipe for one sided battles.

Rommel had been quoted saying the following regarding the Italian infantry in Africa

> The Italian command was, for the most part, not equal to the task of carrying on war in the desert, where the requirement was lightning decision followed by immediate action. The training of the Italian infantryman fell far short of the standard required by modern warfare. … Particularly harmful was the all pervading differentiation between officer and man

Source: The Rommel Papers, Ch. 11: The Initiative Passes
http://www.amazon.ca/Rommel-Papers-B-h-Liddell-Hart/dp/0306801574

While I'm at it, great book. Truly offers insight into the brilliance of Erwin, worth the read for anyone interested.

u/blackcatkarma · 29 pointsr/history

Peter the Great was really into boats and easily offended. He was an indolent young prince not much concerned with his birthright, but as soon as his sister tried to seize power, he went from playing with boats in lakes to making Russia a first-rate power and founding the Russian navy. For more info, I recommend Robert K. Massie's Peter the Great.

u/gshenck · 23 pointsr/AskHistorians

I'd reccommend reading A Medieval Life, which uses both outside research and a very fortunate abundance of local court records to piece together the life of a single villain from England. http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Life-Penifader-Brigstock-1295-1344/dp/0072903317

The book makes it very clear several times that she isn't representative of all peasants simply because they were so diverse across Europe, but one thing I recall it pointing out is that there were indeed a substantial number of 'holidays', all based around the church calendar. Several large feasts around christmas and easter, as well as a long succession in the summer, along with a multitude of single day feasts throughout the year, plus you would have the sabbath.

It makes it clear that while she had hardships, it wasn't as bad as commonly imagined for many, if not most, in the lower class. If you made it past childhood you would likely live a fairly decent life (average lifespans are heavily skewed by the huge infant mortality rate), and the work itself wasn't for many as bad as commonly portrayed in modern fiction.

u/oievp0WCP · 22 pointsr/history

What are the best books on Hannibal (particularly ones that may have been overlooked)?

Personally I like Lazenby's Hannibal's War (for the academically inclined) and Dodge's Hannibal (for a general audience).

EDIT:

For those interested in learning more about Hannibal, here are my top picks from books actually on my book shelf:

  1. Hannibal's War by J. F. Lazenby (little dry, but well documented history)
  2. The First Punic War: A Military History by J. F. Lazenby (can't really understand Hannibal without the prelude)
  3. The Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy (dude knows more about the Roman Army than anyone)
  4. Hannibal by Theodore Ayrault Dodge (Dodge was a Union officer in the Civil War and wrote some great books on Hannibal, Caesar, Alexander, etc. ... probably the best companion to primary source material on a first read through -- and it's out of copyright so you can find free copies online)
  5. Scipio Africanus: Greater Than Napoleon by B. H. Liddell Hart (was Scipio the real, and somewhat overlooked, genius of the Second Punic War?)

    And recommendations and from /u/gevemacd :

  6. Hannibal A Hellenistic Life by Eve MacDonald (/u/gevemacd herself!)
  7. Cannae: The Experience of Battle in the Second Punic War by Gregory Daly (I haven't read this, but the slow trapping and butchery 70,000 men on a hot day seems like a fascinating topic for history as it was actually experienced)
u/Adstrakan · 22 pointsr/worldnews

Technically a ‘spy’, but for most of his career more a low level bureaucrat.


Masha Gessen:

“The Man Without a Face is the chilling account of how a low-level, small-minded KGB operative ascended to the Russian presidency and, in an astonishingly short time, destroyed years of progress and made his country once more a threat to her own people and to the world.”

Book: ‘The man without a face’

u/jaina_jade · 16 pointsr/AskHistorians

In 1460 at the battle of Northampton during England's War of the Roses, Edward the Earl of March, went to battle against forces led by King Henry VI. At the end of the battle Edward's forces captured King Henry VI, and in early 1461 Edward was declared Edward IV the King of England. Also interesting to note that after Henry was captured his wife, Queen Margaret of Anjou, attempted to rally and led his forces against Edward before being forced to flee to France with her son.

Eventually Henry VI was restored to the throne and Edward was forced to flee to Burgundy. In 1471 Edward again led forces against Henry VI, capturing him in London and then engaging in battle at Tewkesbury. In this battle Henry's heir, another Edward, was killed in battle along with Warwick the Kingmaker. At Edward's side were his two brothers, one of whom became King Richard III - who was killed at the Battle of Bosworth Field by the bodyguards of the future Henry VII.

Alison Weir's War of the Roses is a great text if you are interested in the other battles fought during the time, most of which were led by upper nobility. For more on Henry VII, William Penn's Winter King has great information about his early years as King (including Bosworth Field) but the test is rather lacking when it comes to the events leading up to Bosworth Field.

u/genida · 14 pointsr/worldnews

And if someone wants more on Russia in general, this one was excellent, this Putin bio was pretty good and Putin's Kleptocracy is turning out promising.

And here's the Red Notice amazon page too, in case someone wants to read some reviews.

u/SrslyTaken · 14 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

Implications everywhere in your response. Erwin Rommel also fought much of the war in Europe.

Rommel certainly knew the Nazi regime was anti-semitic, he sent a letter to Nazi High Command in 1937 telling them "This business with the Jews has got to stop" and in 1940 he personally asked Hitler to reinstate Jewish soldiers and officers who had been fired a request that went nowhere. Its clear when you read the Rommel Papers (mostly his own papers) and interviews with his trusted allies and family he did not know until quite late in the war that the regime was genocidal.
Rommel also ignored Order 15 which stated no prisoners are to be taken during the North Africa campaign. Many other German Generals made no outward indication of anti-semitism either (Von Stauffenberg, anyone?).
So no, the general consensus is that Rommel was one of the genuine "heros" of WWII, and someone to be admired.

u/Lord_Ciar · 13 pointsr/UkrainianConflict

When it gets warm the snow and ice melt and roads and fields become hard to use. The winter is actually easier to prepare and execute an offensive. The spring is terrible, but great for defending the conquered territory.

Manstein, in his book "lost victories" fought the Soviets in exactly the same weather and in exactly the same places. He talks about it extensively. For anyone interested in the militairy paramaters in this conflict, this is very interesting reading.

Additionally: Leclerc tanks may be one of the best tanks in the world. That's quite a powerful addition to Polish defence. Surely, an expensive one without a doubt.

u/wenchette · 11 pointsr/hillaryclinton

I agree. I've been reading a great deal about that period in the last year or so, both pre-1933 and post. This book, which I've read twice, shows how people didn't think Hitler would last long once he came to power.

The difference between Bevin and a head of state is that a state governor ultimately is limited in his or her power. However, when you put a fascistic narcissistic dissembler in the head of state chair, it's a very different story.

u/hairway2steven · 11 pointsr/MapPorn

I'm reading a really excellent book on Napoleon at the moment. Recommended.

Napoleon: A Life

u/oozles · 11 pointsr/PoliticalHumor

Russia. Check out Red Notice by Bill Browder. If you've ever so much as heard of the Magnitsky Act, you should hear the full story behind it.

When Russia decided to privatize its assets after the fall of the Soviet Union, they did so in a way that let a handful of people accumulate massive amounts of it very quickly, leading to the development of an Oligarchy. Putin eventually maneuvered himself into a position of authority in the government, and after clawing back some power from the oligarchs back to his position, was able to jail and put on a show trial for the richest oligarch in Russia. The oligarch was jailed for years and lost most of his wealth.

What do the other oligarchs do, after seeing their most successful peer utterly demolished by Putin? They go to Putin and ask what it will take to keep them out of jail. Browder guesses that Putin told them "half."

Browder had a bit of experience with one scam that had to be authorized from the very top, a tax rebate scam. His cronies would fraudulently take over companies, gets judgments against said companies for millions of dollars, and then claims against those companies' previously paid taxes and gets those taxes refunded to them by the government.

u/olddoc · 10 pointsr/europe

In Victor Klemperer's diary published in volumes from 1933 to 1941 and from 1942 to 1945, he describes how even in Germany small pockets of the Jewish population remained all the way to the end. Every week a few were picked up from his friends' circle never to return, and as early as 1941 he writes it was generally known that if you went to these camps, you died.

Klemperer himself was a jew who fell between the cracks of subsequent waves of arrests. He a) was married to a German woman, b) had converted to Protestantism before WWI, c) had served in the German army during WWI and most importantly d) they had no children, so hadn't "produced mixed offspring" (families with mixed children were prioritized for the camps). Hitler himself had signed laws giving a special pension to WWI veterans, so Klemperer created a head scratcher for nazi bureaucrats who didn't know how to deal with it, so they always let him go after questioning.

Amazingly enough, he was saved by the Dresden bombing. Klemperer lived in the outskirts of Dresden, and could flee to allied territory when the city was in chaos after the firebombing.

u/paulcon · 9 pointsr/math
u/BritainOpPlsNerf · 9 pointsr/ShitWehraboosSay

Tigers in the Mud written by Otto Carius, a Tiger commander during WWII -- still sells like hotcakes today. Written by a man who described Himmler as his friend. Let it sink in.

Lost Victories Manstein's memoirs, a hot pile of dump that consists of excuse-making and blame-deflecting. Still a hot read, though most know its flaws now.

Franz fucking Halder helped the US Army form its history of WWII.

There's a load more, but I'm not here to shill (today at least AYYY).

The claim that history is written by the victors is especially bullshit in the immediate post-war era; first off the US Army did not want to be 'defeated by victory' and spent an ample amount of time studying the enemy methods and documents - this put a lot of German ideas in the air during the discussions and formation of historiography. More importantly, the 'Iron Curtain' fell across Europe shortly after the end of WWII which meant that for 50-odd years we had minimal to nonexistant exposure to Soviet sources about their own war effort. It meant that, for lack of sources, we had to rely on German primary and secondary studies of their Eastern Front. They had a complete monopoly on how we could view the Russian front of WWII. These effects are only slowly unraveling now, and we're starting to see some real improvements to the historiography on that subject. However, much of Russia's war documents remain classified, unlike the Germans (total defeat means total disclosure) so its going to be a long, uphill battle to get all the facts out.

Never before, to my knowledge, had a defeated enemy been allowed to be so vocal on the events of the war as he saw it.

u/TunerOfTuna · 9 pointsr/OutOfTheLoop

I recommend reading The Plantegents it’s an easy to read book that isn’t that dry most of the time.

u/celsius232 · 7 pointsr/history

Complete novice? Extra Credits.

Seconding the Podcasts from Carlin, "Punic Nightmares" and Duncan's History of Rome and Born Yesterday. Seriously, Duncan is amazing. Major history hard-on.

Also, the History Channel has a pretty fun website, and there aren't any pawnshop aliens American Trucker-Pickers.

And if you want to read something that was written a tad earlier, Appian's histories cover the Second Punic War in several sections: The Spanish Wars, The Hannibalic War in Europe, and The Punic War and Numidian Affairs about Scipio in Africa (he also writes about the First Punic War), Livy deals with the Second Punic War in chapters 21-25 and 26-30, Polybius uses the Punic Wars to extol (and for us, explain) Roman virtues and institutions, and Plutarch gives two Generals treatment in his Parallel Lives, Fabius and Flaminius.

Modern books, I liked Adrian Goldsworthy's [The Punic Wars] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Punic-Wars-Adrian-Goldsworthy/dp/0304352845), and had WAY too much fun reading this book about Scipio and this book about Hannibal in tandem.

Oh... after you're done with all/any of that you might want to go buy Rome Total War and play as the Scipii. Extra points if you download Europa Barbarorum. Rome 2 is out and presumably awesome (and EB2)

u/DarkStar5758 · 7 pointsr/todayilearned

His book from WWI is Infantry Attacks and he never got a chance to edit his journals from WWII into its intended sequel but they were published by his son as The Rommel Papers.

u/Erithal · 7 pointsr/Minecraft

The class ended its reading with the conclusion of the British campaign; but that was the point at which all of Gaul rose up behind him... so I finished it in English. I was never good at getting the right ending of anything in Latin, and all the pronouns and tenses are entirely within the endings. Knowing the Latin roots of words, though, that stuck with me. And the slide shows our classics teacher had of ancient roman archeological sites were incredible. He visited Italy and Greece every summer, and made his own slides. The stories from antiquity he told with the slides made classical history come alive for me in a way that enriched my life.

As for books: I'd recommend reading Caesar's book. It's a cunning piece of pro-ceasar propaganda, but the military details are quite accurate, because one of the primary ways to become a Roman citizen was to serve in the army, and this portion of the citizenry was the memoir's target audience. If you're looking for a more scholarly work on the Roman Army, this is the one I read in college for a War & Ancient Society class. It has a very high level of detail, to match its very high price, but it is also quite good.

u/Hungpowshrimp · 6 pointsr/100yearsago

Of course! Though, disappointingly my French collection is not up to snuff with the rest of my collection, as I primarily reenact a Prussian Riflemen of the Imperial German forces, but I've got some odds and ends.

The pride and joy would be my M1915 Adrian helmet, with original paint still in tact as well as the army badge on the front. The liner had long ago rotted out, so I had a great friend of mine who specializes (and is his sole income) in refurbishing original helmets from The Great War through to The Korean War. I have an affinity for head wear, especially steel helmets, to which I have a Belgium, Russian, Serbian, and even Polish variation of the French Adrian helmet!

I have a French Lebel M1886 rifle, dated 1905, which definitely saw some use in the war. Which, believe it or not is still pretty fun to take out and shoot, ammo isn't too hard to find for it (8mm Lebel, incidentally the first smokeless powder cartridge ever developed and adopted by a nation). Kept clean and lubricated I haven't had any foul ups or breakages. Along with the rifle, came the infamous "Rosalie" bayonet-- a blade of 20 inches or so long, also dated 1905.

Other than that, I have a pipe that was from a collection of some personal effects as well as some trench art on an artillery shell that came from an estate sale many, many years ago.

I do have the Horizon Blue greatcoat, literally just to wear when it gets very cold or I'm up in the mountains someplace because I think it looks awesome. It is however a reproduction that was made when a member of the club sourced some bolts of original fabric while he was in France visiting family. Decent amount of providence!

If you have not yet already read it, you should do yourself a favor and obtain the book "Poilu: The World War I Notebooks of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker" by Louis Barthas. It is hands down one of the best personal accounts of the Great War, and specifically of the French trials and tribulations, the man was in the war from nearly the beginning, through to the end and all the horrible battles the French fought in, 9/10 he was there. Fascinating, horrifying, unbelievably nerve-racking primary sources and documentation of the war from a conscripts point of view.

I could go on, and on, and on, and on... I love this stuff, and the Great War especially is a fascination, hell, an obsession of mine. Enjoy!

u/Gaimar · 6 pointsr/AskHistorians

Peasants were the largest demographic group in Latin Christendom, comprising somewhere around ninety percent of the population or more. Most of these people were tenant farmers who leased a portion of a larger slice of land in return for a rent of service, kind, or money (although the latter is more rare and often only found in the later Middle Ages). These people could theoretically support themselves and their family off their own land. Some of these peasants were not free—serfs—meaning, depending on when and where they lived, they may be bound to the land that they worked and could not seek legal redress outside of their primary lord (the kings justice, for example, would have been beyond the reach of these people). All of this is to say that medieval peasants, even if serfs, were not slaves—a misconception that comes from the continued use in some medieval sources of the Roman word for slave, servus, and should not be taken as a indicator of shared meaning. I've seen documents that use servus, rusticus, and—in the vernacular Old French—vilain. Outside of what they needed to pay as part of their obligation, they were free to sell, trade, or work elsewhere in the hamlet or town for wage or kind.

The details for the sort of trade you are asking about is difficult to trace since the economic lives of most peasants only appear in the records of lords and local courts when they have some sort of legal problem or reach a certain level of wealth. The community in which most medieval peasants would have interacted and traded was the Parish, which—besides the family—is the basic unit for understanding peasant society. The Parish community would have operated as a sort of social nexus for the rural peasantry, through which small transactions would have been negotiated. Work/Trade for wage and work for kind probably occurred simultaneously based on need, although certain economic historians believe quite strongly that the latter wouldn't have occurred at certain points of economic crisis.

Most farming hamlets were largely self sufficient in respect to their daily needs, so the average peasant had no need to access the sort of long distance trade I think you might be imagining. This is easier to understand when you consider what we know about their eating habits. For most, diet was simple and with the exception of certain feast days fish or meat was largely a luxury most peasants could not afford. The bulk of peasant diet probably came from cereals, supplemented by whatever local herbs and vegetables that they grew in their personal garden, of which every farm was sure to have at least one. On the plus side, beer was plentiful, although it was usually not brewed at a high ABV. A quirky and active market in late medieval England was in beer, which often was brewed by women and sold ad-hoc as a means to supplement income.

I should add that the definition of peasantry is something of a thorny topic for medieval economic historians, particularly in England where they have a wealth of sources that give them a wide range of local practice to squabble about. For your purposes, I would recommend avoiding most of these debates and read Judith Bennett's A Medieval Life: Cecilia Penifader of Brigstock, c. 1295-1344, a slender volume that will give you a good general overview of medieval peasant life rich with economic detail. For a contemporary, non-economic view of French peasant life I would recommend Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie's Montaillou: The Promised Land of Error, that chronicles life in a small southern French town through inquisitional records and provides small details about how peasants moved through the world, made friendships, and even weird things like their perception of time. A wonderful view of life peasant life a few centuries later is presented in the first few chapters of Eamon Duffy's The Voices of Morebath: Reformation and Rebellion in an English Village (2003), a book that, although about religious change, gives insight into the everyday.

edit: spelling words.

u/InternetRonin · 5 pointsr/ancientrome

Unfortunately most historical resources seem to have a bias towards Hannibal so Scipio gets shortchanged. I have found Scipio Africanus - Greater Than Napoleon to be a pretty good pro Scipio analysis of his military career.

u/Frodiddly · 5 pointsr/ancientrome

One of the best and most dramatic works I can recommend is The Ghosts of Cannae: Hannibal and the Darkest Hour of the Roman Republic, by Robert L. O'Connell. The battle of Cannae was a turning point for Rome, and O'Connell captures the horror and drama of the battle and surrounding events excellently. I HIGHLY recommend it.

In terms of Roman historians... It really depends on what period you're looking at. Want an awesome insight into the military? Go with Caesar's Commentaries of the Conquest of Gaul. Punic Wars? Check out Livy. Definitely check out Plutarch's Parallel Lives as well.

Of course, the quintessential book on the Roman Empire is Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. One can hardly consider themselves a Roman scholar without reading it, and nearly every historian will refer to it at some point.

Oh! And there's an interesting one I came across, for a bit more of a lower-look. By a Roman no less!
Cookery and Dining in Imperial Rome*, by Apicius is very interesting. Might not be worth it to put on your list, but definitely check it out.

TL;DR: If I have to pick two to add, take the Ghosts of Cannae and Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. By a Roman, pick from what's relevant.

u/cinepro · 5 pointsr/politics

For the entire story of Browder and the Magnitsky act, I highly recommend Browder's book "Red Notice". I read it last year and it was shocking and infuriating, but I didn't expect it to be so topical this year.

u/jasnie · 5 pointsr/poland

That sounds amazing. You might be too humble, so I just put a link to Amazon here. Do you plan to release Polish translation?

u/[deleted] · 5 pointsr/history

The Rommel Papers is the first thing that comes to mind, a diary of Erwin Rommel. He was the leading commander of the North Africa campaign, among many other things.

>Rommel is considered to have been a chivalrous and humane military officer, in contrast with many other figures of Nazi Germany. His famous Afrikakorps was not accused of any war crimes. Indeed, soldiers captured during his Africa campaign were reported to have been largely treated humanely. Furthermore, orders to kill captured Jewish soldiers and civilians out of hand in all theatres of his command were defiantly ignored.

http://www.amazon.com/Rommel-Papers-Da-Capo-Paperback/dp/0306801574/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246901510&sr=8-1

Limited preview on google: http://books.google.com/books?id=JE8VFsdxNGgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=rommel+papers&ei=KDVSSsHgMarYygS1vNjSAg

u/meathorse1 · 4 pointsr/todayilearned

"Napoleon: A Life" and "Napoleon the Great" are the same book. The US release has a different name for some reason. This should help with price shopping. Life is a cheaper hardcover. Great is a cheaper paperback.

https://www.amazon.com/Napoleon-Great-Andrew-Roberts/dp/0141032014

https://www.amazon.com/Napoleon-Life-Andrew-Roberts/dp/0143127853

u/RingoQuasarr · 4 pointsr/todayilearned

Go beyond wikipedia. You won't regret it.

http://www.amazon.com/Scipio-Africanus-Greater-Than-Napoleon/dp/0306813637

Probably the best book on the Second Punic War despite having a terrible title.

u/proppycopter · 4 pointsr/AskHistorians

While I certainly agree that Hannibal was great, I'm not so sure that the answer is as simple as his campaign's difficulty. I'm sourcing most of my knowledge from Liddell Hart's Scipio Africanus: Greater than Napoleon, and will definitely read Hannibal's War next.

In summary, Scipio's accomplishments:

  • At the age of 24, received command of Roman forces in Spain after his father and uncle's armies were both crushed separately (and both killed) in Spain. The reason he was able to do this at his age was because nobody else volunteered to do so. He proceeded to defeat 4 Carthaginian armies which outnumbered him roughly 8-1 in aggregate, and that includes his Spanish allies, which he did not trust to actually fight.
  • Due to Senate politics he had to completely rebuild and retrain his army in Sicily prior to his African campaign. So the claim that his army was superior is dubious, imho. He was better equipped, but that was only because he raided and looted one of the largest Carthaginian stockpiles. In the earlier stages of his Africa campaign he was outnumbered over 5-1, yet shattered the Carthaginian army so completely that they had to recall Hannibal, who he then defeated at the Battle of Zama.

    He also had a very advanced understanding of strategy and tactics, and most of his battles are actually really interesting to read about. While Hannibal was a great general, most of his tactics were very simplistic, relying on the timidity of Roman generals, and the odds were much more even.

    The rest of what you said makes a lot of sense though. I guess knowledge of that era among people who aren't otherwise interested has waned considerably.
u/You_R_Dum · 3 pointsr/booksuggestions

I'm sure you do...Comrade...o_O

The KGB was far and away better than CIA in human intelligence. Two books I read and enjoyed. Spymaster and Spy Handler

u/vmsmith · 3 pointsr/mathematics

The book that really hooked me on math (I was an undergraduate math major) was G. H. Hardy's, "A Mathematician's Apology". You can find free versions online, because over 50 years have passed since publication. But the free versions I saw don't contain the introduction by C.P. Snow that the book has. So you might consider getting the book, either out of the library or from Amazon.

Two other recommendations would be:

u/I-am-Gizmoduck · 3 pointsr/PropagandaPosters

> opposing sides over Christmas.

That happened once, only in 1914, sporadically in 1915 and completely forgotten by 1916 with the Somme/Verdun & use of poison gas erasing any sense of civility.

>Can't let humanity get in the way of your war!

I've read a first account book, Poilu: The World War I Notebooks of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker, 1914-1918, that describes a lot of "live & let live" moments on the Western Front. For instance, heavy raining causing the trenches to flood & both sides realize they need to get the hell out of there, but can't shoot at each other because they're in the same situation. So they just sort of stood out of their trenches, shrugged at each other & retreated.

However, the author describes what we know now as false propaganda. He describes the Germans consistently using "explosive bullets" & "reversed bullets" which we know now is entirely false: but shows how such rumors existed & were encouraged in order to spark a greater hatred. (While such things existed "explosive bullets" were early tracer rounds, mostly used to take out balloons & "reversed bullets" were early anti-tank rounds: precursors to the K-Bullet.)

The Barthas book is also interesting, because he's in his 30's when the War breaks out, and he's was a Socialist. A lot of his writing comes from a "I'm too old for this shit" & writes from a very socialist perspective of the war.

u/admorobo · 3 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Spy Handler: Memoir of a KGB Officer is a fascinating read by the man who was the case handler for some of America's most notorious spies including Robert Hannsen and Aldrich Ames.

u/Feuersturm-CA · 3 pointsr/history

Most of my knowledge regarding the matter is European, so I'm going to give a list of my favorites regarding the European / African front.

To get the German perspective of the war, I'd recommend:

  • Panzer Commander - Hans von Luck - One of my favorites

  • Panzer Leader - Heinz Guderian - He developed Blitzkrieg tactics

  • The Rommel Papers - Erwin Rommel - Written by my favorite German Field Marshal up until his forced suicide by Hitler. Good read of the Western and African theaters of war. Also a good book to read if you're interested in what German command was doing on the lead up to D-Day.

    I have a few battle-specific books I enjoy too:

  • Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege 1942-1943 - You really don't know the brutality of Stalingrad till you've read this book. You'll see it in a whole new light I think.

  • Berlin: Downfall 1945 - Battle of Berlin at the end of the war, another good book.

    Now if you want to play games, Hearts of Iron series is great (someone recommended the Darkest Hour release of the game. Allows you to play historical missions based on historical troop layouts, or play the entire war as a nation. Historical events are incorporated into the game. While you'll rarely get a 100% accurate game as it is abstracted, it is an excellent way to see what challenges faced the nations of the time. You could play as Russia from 1936 and prepare yourself for the eventual German invasion. Or maybe you decide to play as Germany, and not invade Russia. But will Russia invade you when they are stronger? Will warn you: It does not have a learning curve. As with almost all Paradox Interactive games, it is a learning cliff.
u/Vairminator · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

I read a really good book on this subject called Spy Handler: Memoir of a KGB Officer, and I certainly recommend it. It was written by the KGB officer who ran Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, two of the most important spies the soviets ever had in the US.

For those unfamiliar, Aldrich Ames was a CIA officer who sold the identity of western sources (spies for the US) to the KGB for cash.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence said:
>Ames admitted that he had compromised "virtually all Soviet agents of the CIA and other American and foreign services known to me" and had provided the USSR and Russia with a "huge quantity of information on United States foreign, defense and security policies". It is estimated that information Ames provided to the Soviets led to the compromise of at least a hundred U.S. intelligence operations and to the execution of at least ten U.S. sources.

Robert Hanssen is the FBI agent who spent 22 years feeding secrets to the KGB. The investigation leading to his arrest is dramatized in the 2007 movie Breach.

Of particular interest in this book is the way Cherkashin talks about the recruiting game. His best spies were motivated by money (Ames) or ego (Hanssen), but he also talks about the use of sexual blackmail. At one point he uses the services of a female agent to collect incriminating photography that he then uses to blackmail the man into providing information. What I love is the way he talks about how these different sources had to be managed, requiring an understanding of human motivations and what people were willing to do. Someone you were blackmailing could only be pushed so far, after all. While he did not operate far outside of Human Intelligence (HumInt) gathering, he does talk a lot about several operations that caught US spies. A very good read!

u/SetPhasersToStupid · 3 pointsr/worldnews

This is not the case. We have a very good documentation about peasants' lives. It's not as plentiful as other periods, but we still have many accounts.

E.g.,

https://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Life-Penifader-Brigstock-1295-1344/dp/0072903317

u/23dayseu · 3 pointsr/poland

My grandad was Polish. He was born in Nova Mysh near Baranovichi in 1923. He was 16 when ww2 started. He fought against the invading Russian army and joined a partisan group fighting against the Russians. He had lots of bloody encounters with the Red army before he was finally captured during a shootout in a potato field.

Rather than being killed on the spot like some of his friends he was taken to a local prison and interrogated. He then went through various prisons. Each move from one prison to another he was sent further east. He was always interrogated at each prison and he was tortured by being hung by his arms until his joints dislocated.

The worst prison for him was in a town called Orsha where her spent 23 days in a condemned cell waiting to be shot.
For some reason his sentence was changed to 25 years hard labour in an Arctic Gulag.
He and a group of prisoners escaped the transport train and he was the only one to survive the journey across Russia and in to Finland.

After a long time recovering and being debriefed in England he returned to Europe as a member of the SOE. After the Germans attacked Russia he headed east and ended up in the middle east before joining up with the RAF to become a Mustang pilot for the last two years of the war.

That was a quick sum up of what he did. We self published his memoirs.

My mum, dad and brother will be attending the Krakow book fare next month. Hopefully a Polish publisher might be interested in printing the story in Poland.

Www.23days.eu

They are also on Amazon as a kindle.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LD8207E

u/jahboots · 2 pointsr/RussiaDenies

I've been reading Putin's biography: The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin

If you're interested in how Putin rose to power and what drives him, I recommend you get a copy.

u/tailleferre · 2 pointsr/battlefield_one

To anyone who really wants a true and visceral account of some of the worst fighting of the First World War, I highly recommend getting a copy of Louis’ Barthas’ Poilu: The Wartime Diaries of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker 1914-1918 . Barthas as French army infantry, served in Verdun, at the Somme and in many other famed locations and lived to tell the tale of the lowly foot soldier*.

A shorter read: Battle of Verdun

Fort de Vaux is one of my favorite maps, and the story of the actual fighting that occurred within is even more stellar. Forts Vaux and Douamount weathered an intense assault, and showed men at the very limit of their ability. It’s an enthralling read, and exemplifies the true brutality of the first mechanized war.

u/Signals91 · 2 pointsr/AbandonedPorn

I always found WWI to be highly interesting, so I've devoured my fair share of literature. I'll list a few of my favorites. All of these are biographical non-fiction books.

Poilu! - The World War I Notebooks of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker, 1914-1918.

This guy lived through the entire war, spending most of it at the front. It details their daily life, but also the poor leadership and his hatred for the war. This one changed my perspective on war itself. A great read! If you're only picking up one, get this one.

Somme Mud - Edward P.F Lynch

Australian private lives through the fighting at Somme Mud, somehow. This one is very captivating, and I might have to re-read it.

Storm of Steel - Ernst Junger

A German account of the war, most of it spent at the front. Apparently there's a 1929 version in which Junger's patriotism and nationalism is conveyed, so I might want to try to get a hold of this edition myself. The newer edition is still a great read.

Sniper on the Eastern Front - Josef "Sepp" Allerberger

Another German account, but this one stands out because of it's focus on the snipers of the war.


These are all I can think of at the moment. I hope I've been able to spark some interest in the subject! If these do not ticke your fancy, there are tons of books covering different aspects of the war. All Quiet on the Western Front is fictional, but still a great read.

u/joepyeweed · 2 pointsr/asoiaf

https://www.amazon.com/Plantagenets-Warrior-Kings-Queens-England/dp/0143124927

https://www.amazon.com/Wars-Roses-Fall-Plantagenets-Tudors/dp/0143127888?ie=UTF8&ref_=asap_bc

Knights, kings, clashing houses, evil queens, battles, betrayals, bastards, marriage pacts, etc...

These may be non-fiction, but they positively reek of ASOIAF and are a good read besides.

u/idre · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

I'd like to add that apart from having factual history lessons (down to details of some operations), we visited many sites and watched all documentaries (it was important for our teachers that we connect faces and personalities with the names, to understand that they were humans, to see how lovely Hitler treated his dog, what a family man Goebbels was etc. To see how propaganda and charm were used..). It involved many projects, visits (to bunkers, concentration camps, memorials etc.), discussions with contemporary witnesses.


Then, we analyzed the famous speeches for rhetorics, and in German classes, we read war literature (either from that time or about the time). It basically accompanied us throughout secondary school, not just in history classes but also German, arts, social sciences, everywhere! We had started reading war literature at the age of 10-12, though there it was mostly youth literature (still very descriptive and shocking, but with protagonists in our age, so it was easier to identify yourself with). Later, literature got more factual or encrypted.


I remember having to read the autobiography of the Kommandant in Auschwitz (Rudolf Höss) at the age of 16 and how truly shocking this was.

u/HiccupMachine · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

This is a great opportunity (when is it not!) to discuss the holding of territory and the pacifying of locals during conquests from the perspective of the Romans, who did quite the conquering.

> Long-term

>Much more boring (in my opinion), but a lot of Roman generals gave land to their legionaries either after a conquest or once a legion - who had proven its self-worth - had expired it's length of service, which depended on the time period. Augustinian reforms raised the length to sixteen years, with four more in reserve. Depends really on the time period. Besides that, Roman's definitely had colonies in its territories, as often the governship of a far region was given to a particularly prominent man. For instance, before he became the man we know and love, Caesar was the governor of Spain.
>

>
Short-term

>Now this is the cool stuff. Plutarch tells of a great quotation by Pyrrhus of Epirus who saw the Roman nightly fort for the first time and said, "The discipline of these barbarians is not barbarous." The Roman army built a nightly fort no matter where it was while on the march. A day of marching would lead to a night of digging and entrenching. Not only did this ensure the safety of the army at night, it also played heavily into the psychological warfare that we often overlook by the Romans. Now, these forts were legit - tall wooden walls, outlook towers, and trenches, and they made a new fort every damn day. With the battle over but the war far from won, the Romans continued to make their forts and block their flanks. This along with a decent idea of army logistics (insert joke about Crassus at Carrhae) allowed for the Romans to pick their battles and progress over unknown territory without fear of a counter-attack. They also used many local scouts (insert joke about Varus at the Teutoburg Forest) to help map the territory and play the locals off of one another. These jokes are sarcasm, Crassus and Varus were dumb.

>Another great tactic by the Romans after a successful campaign was to take hostages! Oh blimy. Imagine you just lost your army and your kingdom, and now the victors are willing to: A. not kill everyone, B. assimilate you into their empire, and C. let you keep most of your power, and all you had to do was send them your sons. This was a great way to keep the newly-conquered in check. In his conquest of Gaul, which was filled with many revolts, Caesar took hostages consistently. Oh, looks like the Helvetti have started a rebellion, let's kill one of their King's sons to send a message. Oh look they stopped rebelling.

Basically, the act of invading is a logistical nightmare. One must take into account a supply line, counter-attacks, local demeanor, and about 50 other things that I cannot even fathom from this spot in front of my computer. Unsuccessful invasions lead to the annihilation of armies, and this is why we hold successful invasions as archetype military stratagems. While I am not your high school history teacher, I would suggest reading about Hannibal, Scipio Africanus, and Caesar for a more thorough understanding of military invasions. Personally, Scipio is a boss, but there is more information on the other two.

Sources - Plutarch's Parallel Lives, Caesar's Conquest of Gaul

*edited for grammar and format

u/Whoosier · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

I’m recommending books meant for general readers here. If you want something more in-depth, I’ll be happy to supply it.

For military matters, a very approachable overview by a historian of medieval military matters is Michael Prestwich’s [Knight: The Medieval Warrior’s (Unofficial) Manual] (http://www.amazon.com/Knight-Medieval-Warriors-Unofficial-Manual/dp/0500251606) (2010).

For urban life, there is a heavily illustrated survey by Chiara Frigoni, [A Day in a Medieval City] (http://www.amazon.com/Day-Medieval-City-Chiara-Frugoni/dp/0226266354) (2005).

For the life of common people, a brief but very informative look is Judith Bennett’s [A Medieval Life: Cecilia Penifader of Brigstock, c. 1295-1344] (http://www.amazon.com/Medieval-Life-Penifader-Brigstock-1295-1344/dp/0072903317) (1998), which explains what life in an English village would be like. Much older (1937), outdated in many respects, but still very readable is H. S. Bennett’s (no relation) [Life on an English Manor] (http://archive.org/details/lifeontheenglish020976mbp) here in a free e-book link but also available second hand.

u/frozentedwilliams · 2 pointsr/asoiaf

This may seem dry, but after ASOIAF, I found myself digging into the Wars of the Roses and the conflict between the Lancasters and the Yorks. There's a TON of great books out there detailing the history between the two houses and how it shaped England. (I'd recommend this one to start with.) It fit right into my mindset following those books, and it added some historical perspective to Martin's fictional world.

u/thescottwolford · 2 pointsr/wwi

Louis Barthas' account (a French conscript, also on the social-democratic left if I recall correctly) is pretty popular. http://www.amazon.com/Poilu-Notebooks-Corporal-Barrelmaker-1914-1918/dp/0300212488

u/Gargilius · 2 pointsr/politics

Read Rudolph Hoess' memoirs when you have a minute. Concentration camps were meant, or so he says in the beginning, as a tool to rehabilitate the enemies of the state, really, it was all for their own good, to bring them back as productive members of society.

Then, there was a kind of feature creep that took place. (...and the guy keeps whining about incompetent subordinates, logistics issues, and inconsistent directive from upper management; yep, more training would have helped, that's for sure.)

u/schnitzi · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

I've learned so much more by reading personal diaries and accounts pertaining to history than any other book that tries to provide a summary. Some specific ones:

I Shall Bear Witness, the diary of a Jewish professor who barely survived WWII thanks to being married to an Aryan woman. That's the first of three volumes. Maybe the most amazing thing I've ever read.

Mary Chestnut's Civil War - the diary of a well-connected society woman living in the South during the American civil war.

Eyewitness To History - First person accounts of many historical events.

I'm in the middle of the new Mark Twain autobiography which is great too.

Anyone else have recommendations along these lines?

u/bunnylover726 · 2 pointsr/politics

Bill Browder's book, Red Notice, is an excellent background on the Magnitsky Act. Browder's writing is super easy to read, and the topic is fascinating. I found the copy I read at a local library.

u/OgreMagoo · 2 pointsr/worldnews

> As for Putin, the short answer to your question is - he's competent. Competent at his job. He's clever, determined, well-spoken and actually does stuff rather than just talk about it.

If anyone wants to learn what Putin is actually like -- and how thoroughly ignorant he is, in all endeavors aside from running a gangster state -- check out Masha Gessen's The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin or Fiona Hill's Mr. Putin: Operative in the Kremlin.

u/DevilSaintDevil · 2 pointsr/truebooks

You don't need to know Russian history to love and learn from Dostoevsky.

I agree that the Pevear and Volokhonsky translations are the best.

If you do want to read Russian history I recommend:

The Icon and the Axe is truly foundational, you have to read this book if you want to understand Russia and join the conversation about Russian history

Massie's biography of Peter the Great is one of the best books I've ever read. Reads like a novel, amazing story of Russia's move from a medieval/dark ages mentality to an enlightenment/scientific mindset. His bio of Catherine is also good--but his Peter is a classic across disciplines.

This is the best recent biography of Stalin.

Happy reading. Russian history is a hole you go into and don't easily come out. So much there, so interesting, so horrifying, so engrossing. American history is all about optimism (from the the non-native perspective). Russian history is all about suffering--from every perspective.

u/imsurly · 2 pointsr/politics

I believe he learned some english as an adult, but he's not fluent. (I'm reading a biography about him).

u/jonewer · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

Reading his own works would be a good place to start

Start with Infantry Attacks and The Rommel Papers

You can also read With Rommel in the Desert which was written by one of his batmen.

From the other side The Desert War Is a good account by what we would now call an imbedded journalist with the British Empire's 8th Army.

There have been quite a few threads about Rommel both here and on r/badhistory where there's generally a "Good guy Rommel" anti-circlejerk attitude. This thread being but one of many. I'll copy over my comment from that thread

> The Good Guy Rommel thing goes back to ww2 itself. It suited both the Nazis and the western allies to create a myth about Rommel. For the Nazis, it was an obvious propaganda op and the western allies saw in him a reason to explain their failings. Sure, it nothing to do with your rubbish commanders and bad tanks, its all because of GGR!

> After the war its necessary to rehabilitate Germany as an ally of the west, so we create the Clean Heer myth with GGR as its poster boy and dump all the bad stuff on the SS.

Overall, its important to remember that Rommel was a Nazi General. He was very fortunate to have earned his reputation fighting in theatres in which military law and civilisation were not completely abandoned (France) or in North Africa, where there were no untermensch or juden to be persecuted and exterminated.

If he had been sent to the east, there is no reason to suppose that he would not have become involved in war crimes to same extent as other generals such as Manstein.

u/TheColostomizer · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

I love getting the opportunity to plug my absolute favorite book

http://www.amazon.com/Scipio-Africanus-Greater-Than-Napoleon/dp/0306813637

Scipio Africanus was the man that beat Hannibal in the second Punic War. If you want a more Hannibal-centric text then I would recommend The War with Hannibal by Titus Livy, though that one was written in antiquity so you'll have to keep that in mind while reading it.

u/BitPoet · 2 pointsr/rpg
u/robo2na · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

"Death Dealer: The Memoirs of the SS Kommandant at Auschwitz" by, Rudolf Höss
https://www.amazon.com/Death-Dealer-Memoirs-Kommandant-Auschwitz/dp/0306806983

u/cassander · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

I don't remember the page, but Robert Massie talks about it in his biography of Peter the Great. Apparently he started bear hunting with a pike and sword, but decided that it wasn't fair to hunt with steel, so he switched to a wooden pitchfork like implement. Fantastic book actually, a must read if you have any interest in Russia or the late 18th century.

http://www.amazon.com/Peter-Great-Robert-K-Massie/dp/0345298063

u/Rogue-Journalist · 2 pointsr/history

This is a great book for the mid to later medevil period that came out recently, that I enjoyed. It ties together a lot of history that you know with what you don't.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Plantagenets-Warrior-Queens-England/dp/0143124927

u/mythoplokos · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

Ahaha, right - well, for Alexander the Great you'll of course be spoilt for choices on secondary reading. There will be newer books than Peter Green's biography on Alexander but Green's a veteran on the subject and absolutely solid classical scholar. I think those Blackwell and Brill companions will still be good sources for secondary reading.

The Wikipedia page on historiography of Alexander the Great is a good place to start for ancient sources, if you haven't seen it yet. Life of Alexander by Plutarch will be on the same book that I recommended for you above.

u/Deacalum · 2 pointsr/CFBOffTopic

My first master's degree was in Intelligence Studies with a concentration in Intelligence Operations.

My two favorite books are supplemental to each other but talk about the the US v. the USSR during the mid 80s to late 90s. One is from the perspective a former CIA case officer and the other is from the perspective of a former KGB case officer.

The Main Enemy: The Inside Story of the CIA's Final Showdown with the KGB by Milt Bearden
Spy Handler: Memoir of a KGB Officer

A great overview of intelligence history is A Century of Spies: Intelligence in the Twentieth Century by Jeffery T. Richelson. Richelson is very knowledgeable about intelligence history and well respected as one of the premiere historians in the field. He has written a ton of other books and I imagine they're pretty good and worthwhile.

Finally, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis is a great book not only about the Cuban Missile Crisis but examining how national security decisions are made.

u/Fifthwiel · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

This is a good read if you're interested mate:

www.amazon.co.uk/Conquest-Gaul-Classics-Julius-Caesar/dp/0140444335

u/mrBenDog · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

For one personal view, take a look at the diaries of Victor Klemperer. One volume, I Will Bear Witness, covers the years 1933-1941. Another volume covers the years 1942-1945. (I think there are four volumes in the English translation.)

Klemperer was a professor in Dresden when the Nazis came to power. He lost his position at the university due to Nazi edicts, eventually worked in a factory, was moved (with his wife, who was not classified as a Jew) to a Judenhaus, and was about to be sent to a concentration camp when Dresden was bombed by the allies. He and his wife fled in the confusion of the bombing and made their way to allied forces.

His diary gives interesting insight not only into his thought processes about the changes around him, but also some glimpse of the society around him. It's been several years since I read this, but I recall reading of his trip on a street car and his comments on the reactions of various people seeing someone wearing the yellow star (I'm sorry, but I don't remember the details of this exchange to recount it here). Another interesting detail is to read his thoughts on conversations that he had with friends who either planned to leave Germany themselves or tried to encourage him to leave. His diaries also raise questions about the identity of one's self versus the identity placed on a person by others.

u/Tascar · 2 pointsr/WWII

For a well paced German perspective on the battle for Poland, France and Russia, check out Von Mamstein's memoirs. http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0760320543?pc_redir=1404151296&robot_redir=1

u/reelmonkey · 2 pointsr/pics

Sounds like you are having some good luck with reddit.

I have had lots of interest in my book, when i get away with a post about it, but not many people from reddit have bought it. But the people that have read it have given it great reviews.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LD8207E

www.23days.eu

u/Port-Cochere · 1 pointr/The_Donald

Commentarii de Bello Gallico is Caesar's first hand, at times braggadocious and totally awesome account of the conquest of Gaul. Highly suggested reading I have read it several times.

Here is a link to the most widely used translation, the Conquest of Gaul by penguin classics. It's 8 bucks folks https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Gaul-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140444335

u/progressivemoron · 1 pointr/politics

>in the same way as the Bolsheviks were undeniably a leftist authoritarian movement.

Right, so the individual belonged to the state under both the Bolsheviks and the Nazis. Both controlled the means of production to a very high degree, and both were authoritarian.

Victor Klemperer lived under both and claimed that if there was a difference between the Nazis and the Bolsheviks, he sure as hell couldn't see it.

u/Lhopital_rules · 1 pointr/math

To answer your second question, KhanAcademy is always good for algebra/trig/basic calc stuff. Another good resource is Paul's online Math Notes, especially if you prefer reading to watching videos.

To answer your second question, here are some classic texts you could try (keep in mind that parts of them may not make all that much sense without knowing any calculus or abstract algebra):

Men of Mathematics by E.T. Bell

The History of Calculus by Carl Boyer

Some other well-received math history books:

An Intro to the History of Math by Howard Eves, Journey Through Genius by William Dunham, Morris Kline's monumental 3-part series (1, 2, 3) (best left until later), and another brilliant book by Dunham.

And the MacTutor History of Math site is a great resource.

Finally, some really great historical thrillers that deal with some really exciting stuff in number theory:

Fermat's Enigma by Simon Sigh

The Music of the Primes by Marcus DuSautoy

Also (I know this is a lot), this is a widely-renowned and cheap book for learning about modern/university-level math: Concepts of Modern Math by Ian Stewart.

u/aquietmidnightaffair · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Sorry to arrive late to the party, but there is another book regarding the resident KGB officer at the USSR embassy in Washington D.C.

u/unprintableCharacter · 1 pointr/compsci
u/FrontpageWatch · 1 pointr/undelete

>At the start of WW2 my Grandad lived on the boarder of Poland and Russia. Shortly after the war started in 1939 the Russians invaded Poland to protect Russian interests.
>He fought against the invading Russians and was eventually captured and put in prison. He survived prison gangs, lack of food and illness. He escaped with two other men across Siberia to Finland and on to England, he was the only one to make it to Finald.
>
>He became a SOE member and returned to occupied Europe via submarine as a spy. He ended up in the middle east after the Nazis attacked Russia and was also torpedoed on the way back to England just off the coast of Africa.
>For the last couple of years of the War he became a fighter pilot and flew Mustangs.
>He dictated his memoirs in the 1980s and he died in 1999.
>AMA!
>
>www.23days.eu
>
>http://www.amazon.co.uk/23-Days-A-Memoir-1939/dp/0992933102
>
>http://www.amazon.com/23-Days-Antoni-Joe-Podolski-ebook/dp/B00LD8207E
>
>
>Proof: https://www.facebook.com/23days
>

u/SaintSorryass · 1 pointr/booksuggestions

How about Alison Weir's War of the Roses. She does a great job of making a hugely complicated bit of history (the bit of history that much of A Song of Ice and Fire is modeled after) at least somewhat easy to follow.

u/muncher_of_nachos · 1 pointr/history

Since I haven’t seen anyone recommend it: Poilu by Corporal Louis Barthas it only got translated to English somewhat recently. Basically a series of notebooks from a French corporal who fought through most of the war. I haven’t read it yet but I mean to.

u/boetzie · 1 pointr/AskEurope

Read this: https://www.amazon.com/New-Tsar-Reign-Vladimir-Putin/dp/0345802799

Really, read it. The sheer amount of money this man has stolen from the Russian people is beyond anything.

u/drmctesticles · 1 pointr/history

https://www.amazon.com/Plantagenets-Warrior-Kings-Queens-England/dp/0143124927

Pretty good book about the Plantagenets who ruled England (and at times parts of Ireland, Scotland and Wales) during the time period you're talking about.

u/icepick62 · 1 pointr/MilitaryHistory

https://www.amazon.com/Lost-Victories-Memoirs-Hitlers-Brilliant/dp/0760320543
Very good book in my opinion, FM Erich von Manstein was Hitler's greatest strategist

u/Braves3333 · 1 pointr/history

https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Magic-Ancient-Egypt-Rosalie/dp/0140262520 This book i found to be very interesting when talking about old egyptian history. It gives a look into early society and how they went from scattered communities to a kingdom, but it focuses on the religious aspect.

I would think a book on Napolean would be a good start, and also a book on the French Revolution.
https://www.amazon.com/Napoleon-Life-Andrew-Roberts/dp/0143127853

https://www.amazon.com/Citizens-Chronicle-Revolution-Simon-Schama/dp/0679726101/ref=pd_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=TS49J5H345TC8T3XXSS5

u/henrysmith78730 · 1 pointr/motorcycles

I haven't but I will. Check out The Long Walk. https://www.amazon.com/Long-Walk-Story-Freedom-Tie/dp/1599219751

There are a number of true life adventure stories, especially about escapes from Russia, that are well worth the read. I have read most of these and they are amazing. https://www.amazon.com/gp/buy/thankyou/handlers/display.html?ie=UTF8&asins=1633230473&isRefresh=1&orderId=113-2199401-5946649&purchaseId=106-0134021-8976259&viewId=ThankYouCart

In about 1908 my grandfather and his brother drove from Boston across the States, the the Philippines, Japan, China, Russia and on to Europe. We have the picture album of it but unfortunately his hag of a second wife burned his diaries about the trip shortly after he died.

u/globalism_sux · 1 pointr/conspiracy

>The basis for a lack of re litigation at the time of the trial could also be put on the fact that many allied commanders had been to and liberated camps- to claim those camps where "staged" was unlikely to sway them since they had personally viewed them and seen many victims
>
>Additionally there was the thousands of hours of film, the medical and scientific research records found at many camps, the money trail connected to people and organizations supplying the camps- there was simply a great deal of evidence that the camps existed and where not a hoax

I don't know anyone. ANYONE who claims that the camps were "staged" or "a hoax." Whose claims are you attempting to refute?

>https://www.amazon.com/Death-Dealer-Memoirs-Kommandant-Auschwitz/dp/0306806983
>
>I assume you are claiming these memoirs by hoess when you bring up his confession and it's lack of veracity

Not specifically, he did sign a confession that was delivered as part of the evidence at the IMT at Nuremberg. It stated that he had personally overseen the gas chamber executions of 2.5 million Jews. He was the first of the commandants of Auschwitz, and therefore this number confessed to was used to validate the original number claimed to have been murdered, around 4 million at Auschwitz alone.

The only problem... he got it wrong. Way wrong. The museum curators at Auschwitz even had a plaque changed when the story of 4 million gassings at Auschwitz was rubbished by historians in favor of something close to 1 million. Yet Hoess's confession is held out to this day by Holocaust promoters as definitive evidence of what the Nazis were involved in.

>Much of these memoirs are made from before and during the war and was corroborated by other Nazis, physical evidence, photographs and films
>
>Again, I feel that memoirsike these, and belonging to others in the high command show that it is likely a holocaust occurred similar to the narrative put forth, there was a simply not as compelling evidence on the denial side

Memoirs are papers compiled after the fact, in this case Hoess's memoirs were compiled while he was in jail.

>This goes to the heart of the issue, it requires so many Nazis lieing, in addition to a Jewish and European conspiracy for a "holohoax" to work as opposed to the available evidence of the camps
>
>Example: David Irving claimed that he viewed arial photos of ausheitz that do not show any crematorium, however in court he could not produce these photos and changed his story to that he was informed of those photos- this was a major issue in his narrative was having physical evidence in contravene of the narrative, but he did not actually posses them

Source? Again, I'm not aware of any skeptic who's taken seriously that denies there having been crematoria at Auschwitz.

>I don't purport to be a perfect historian, I just and very well read on the topic, I encourage you to read more of the available history

Oh, gosh, I don't know how, in my utter ignorance on this matter, that I'd ever keep up with you, O exalted one among amateur historians!

u/throwaway5544556622 · 1 pointr/conspiracy

The basis for a lack of re litigation at the time of the trial could also be put on the fact that many allied commanders had been to and liberated camps- to claim those camps where "staged" was unlikely to sway them since they had personally viewed them and seen many victims

Additionally there was the thousands of hours of film, the medical and scientific research records found at many camps, the money trail connected to people and organizations supplying the camps- there was simply a great deal of evidence that the camps existed and where not a hoax

https://www.amazon.com/Death-Dealer-Memoirs-Kommandant-Auschwitz/dp/0306806983

I assume you are claiming these memoirs by hoess when you bring up his confession and it's lack of veracity

Much of these memoirs are made from before and during the war and was corroborated by other Nazis, physical evidence, photographs and films

Again, I feel that memoirsike these, and belonging to others in the high command show that it is likely a holocaust occurred similar to the narrative put forth, there was a simply not as compelling evidence on the denial side

This goes to the heart of the issue, it requires so many Nazis lieing, in addition to a Jewish and European conspiracy for a "holohoax" to work as opposed to the available evidence of the camps

Example: David Irving claimed that he viewed arial photos of ausheitz that do not show any crematorium, however in court he could not produce these photos and changed his story to that he was informed of those photos- this was a major issue in his narrative was having physical evidence in contravene of the narrative, but he did not actually posses them

I don't purport to be a perfect historian, I just and very well read on the topic, I encourage you to read more of the available history

Edit: eichman did not really put forward any defense to his actions in the war, he maintained that he simply did not commit a crime based on the fact that genocide was not a crime

u/ChildoftheRoth · 1 pointr/history

You should definitely read about Alexander the Great. He was one of the most amazing characters in any history of the world. The things he accomplished were greater than some mythological tales. He was viewed as a god by many. His teacher was Aristotle. He conquered the known world and beyond at the time. And he died at 33.
This is a good very historical version.
Alexander of Macedon 356-323 B.C.: A Historical Biography https://www.amazon.com/dp/0520071662/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_O.0vzbKZ5PRVF

u/Holkr · 1 pointr/AnarchoPacifism

>Had his wisdom and that of numerous war resisters in the U.S. prevailed, the U.S. would not have entered W.W. I. The author of War Against War, Michael Kazin, conjectures about how W.W. I would have ended if the U.S. had not intervened. “The carnage might have continued for another year or two,” Kazin writes, “until citizens in the warring nations, who were already protesting the endless sacrifices required, forced their leaders to reach a settlement. If the Allies, led by France and Britain, had not won a total victory, there would have been no punitive peace treaty like that completed at Versailles, no stab-in-the back allegations by resentful Germans, and thus no rise, much less triumph, of Hitler and the Nazis. The next world war, with its 50 million deaths, would probably not have occurred.”

This kind of conjecture really irks me. Anti-semitism was widespread in Europe at this time, even if the outcome had been the opposite you'd just as likely see a Naziesque movement in France (see the Dreyfus Affair). The only way to prevent a stab in the back legend would have been a complete destruction of either losing side, which of course happened to Germany in WW2.

For an account of a pacifist, socialist Christian involved in WW1 I'd recommend reading Poilu: The World War I Notebooks of Corporal Louis Barthas, Barrelmaker, 1914-1918. Particularly interesting are parts where the author tells a fellow soldier to wait to see what a German approaching their trench is up to, lest any needless aggression trigger a violent response, or where he draws his Lebel rifle on a murderous officer wanting to makes an example of a careless artilleryman.

u/qwteruw11 · 1 pointr/history

Alexander of Macedon 356-323 B.C.: A Historical Biography

https://www.amazon.com/Alexander-Macedon-356-323-B-C-Historical/dp/0520071662

Lost to the West: The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization

https://www.amazon.com/Lost-West-Forgotten-Byzantine-Civilization/dp/0307407969

Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War (General Military)

https://www.amazon.com/Shadows-Desert-Ancient-General-Military/dp/1846031087

u/Nibble_on_this · 1 pointr/politics

Masha Gessen's book The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin is an excellent (if slightly dry) read.

As is the article she wrote at the very beginning of Trump's tenure: Autocracy: Rules For Survival

u/j0be · 1 pointr/ImaginedLife

This episode recommended two books for additional information about Vladimir Putin.

u/jefuchs · 1 pointr/books

FYI: There's another book with the same title. I love first-person non fiction like this. I read it a few years ago, and was enthralled.


I haven't read Stephen King's book, but you guys make it sound tempting.

u/cheese0muncher · 1 pointr/booksuggestions
u/Esmerelda-Weatherwax · 1 pointr/Fantasy

hmmmm... well, not much that Ive read fall under that price range. Do you like in the USA, can you use Amazon?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0786884517/ref=mp_s_a_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1495585796&sr=8-6&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=pirate+biography&dpPl=1&dpID=51-foWCviEL&ref=plSrch

That one is 9-10 dollars, the story of Captain Kidd. If you dont mind used editions some of the stuff by Robert K Massie is under 5 dollars for print.

Dreadnought is about Britain and Germany gearing up do WW1

Peter the Great was one of the most famous Tsars of Russia

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/ol/0345298063/ref=mw_dp_olp?ie=UTF8&condition=all

Ghenghis Khan and The Making of The Modern world was fascinating

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/ol/0609809644/ref=mw_dp_olp?ie=UTF8&condition=all

The republic of Pirates was pretty interesting too

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/ol/015603462X/ref=mw_dp_olp?ie=UTF8&condition=all

i linked to used books, so be aware of that - i buy almost all of my books used in "good" or "great" condition and have no complaints so far.

u/IronCena · 1 pointr/history

Scipio , he face HANNIBAL and defeated him and Carthage. Also, I recommend book by B.H Liddell Hart http://amzn.to/2l4sw1S which goes to an in-depth analysis of the tactics and strategies of Scipio. IMHO, Scipio is better.

u/themaskedproducer · 0 pointsr/AskHistorians

I don't think I'd be able to really stay updated, I never do with that sort of stuff. But, I have a reading list that you should add- that is if you are doing payed books:

For full on historians looking for depth in medieval subjects:

-Asbridge's The Crusades is a far better Crusades history that goes into good depth than any other I've read

-Morris' The Norman Conquest oncemore just a great book for depth and detail

-Jones' The Plantagenets this one I would avoid if you hate sensationalism in history, Dan Jones is a real historian and he writes it as a real historian but he's on the edge of being more entertainer level than educator level

-Moore's 2008 edition of The Formation of a Persecuting Society is definitely the best analysis of medieval heresy I've read

(+ for more details into his actual thought process and the full counter argument to his critics that came out against him later on )

For casual historians looking for analysis and shorter reads:

-Phillip's Holy Warriors is probably an overall better analysis than Asbridge but far less deep, if you like battles go for Asbridge but this is a far shorter read

-Asbridge's The Greatest Knight good book on the Plantagenets through the eyes of the knights

-Golding's Conquest and Colonisation a slightly more boring read, maybe go with the "A short introduction to" book isntead

-Pegg's A Most Holy War for lighter reading on medieval heresy

u/sylkworm · 0 pointsr/QuotesPorn

Why are you guys acting like I'm the first one to come up with the idea that Alexander the Great wasn't so great? There's been many authors that have taken a skeptical look at the historical dick-riding that Alexander has gotten.

u/sorenindespair · -2 pointsr/conspiracy

They violated another state's sovereignty, that's illegal and it doesn't matter if a rigged election said that - maybe - some slim majority of Crimean's wanted that. You seem to have a very naive perception of Russia's activity in that region, you should read some history and I recommend this one. We fought a civil war when the south wanted to secede and thank god we managed to keep the union together since then, what are you defending exactly?

u/unruly_mattress · -6 pointsr/conspiracy

I'm sorry, you seem to be mixing up Hoess and Wisliceny. Anyway, if you enjoy so much material written by Hoess, I can recommend his memoirs:

http://www.amazon.com/Death-Dealer-Memoirs-Kommandant-Auschwitz/dp/0306806983