Very thought-provoking and I agree with your argument. If you could only read one book on a historical period would you read a biography of say Washington or a more general history?
A general history, absolutely. Biographies usually - for understandable reasons - focus on the subject himself, omitting a lot of important things he wasn't personally involved with. I've usually found myself needing to fill in a lot of background from my general knowledge of the period.
I'm currently reading a biography of William Pitt which is better than most given that Pitt was personally involved in most of the major events in Britain in the period, but even then everything outside Britain is summarized in a sentence or two at most.
Ya that makes sense. I personally enjoy reading biographies more, particularly presidential. And think a good amount about the limitations of the great man theory of history. Is 1775 the best book you think for understanding the founding period?
Sorry for the delayed response; I was on vacation and then the notification got lost in my inbox!
I'm afraid I haven't found any single good book for understanding the Founding period. "1775" is good, especially in providing an overall impression of the period, but it still relatively deemphasizes what I think are some important parts of the story. I'd recommend it to people who're already familiar with the major events - both for that reason and because I'm afraid you might get lost otherwise.
In GURPS Infinite Worlds, Ken Hite proposes that the three models of history are Great Men (Carlylean heroes, for example), Great Moments (Charles Fort's "It steam engines when it comes steam engine time"), and Great Motherlands (Jared Diamond's geographical theories). It's a handy mnemonic, though I'm not sure that three are sufficient; I can think of others.
Very thought-provoking and I agree with your argument. If you could only read one book on a historical period would you read a biography of say Washington or a more general history?
A general history, absolutely. Biographies usually - for understandable reasons - focus on the subject himself, omitting a lot of important things he wasn't personally involved with. I've usually found myself needing to fill in a lot of background from my general knowledge of the period.
I'm currently reading a biography of William Pitt which is better than most given that Pitt was personally involved in most of the major events in Britain in the period, but even then everything outside Britain is summarized in a sentence or two at most.
Ya that makes sense. I personally enjoy reading biographies more, particularly presidential. And think a good amount about the limitations of the great man theory of history. Is 1775 the best book you think for understanding the founding period?
Sorry for the delayed response; I was on vacation and then the notification got lost in my inbox!
I'm afraid I haven't found any single good book for understanding the Founding period. "1775" is good, especially in providing an overall impression of the period, but it still relatively deemphasizes what I think are some important parts of the story. I'd recommend it to people who're already familiar with the major events - both for that reason and because I'm afraid you might get lost otherwise.
No worries, really appreciate the response! And that's interesting to know
In GURPS Infinite Worlds, Ken Hite proposes that the three models of history are Great Men (Carlylean heroes, for example), Great Moments (Charles Fort's "It steam engines when it comes steam engine time"), and Great Motherlands (Jared Diamond's geographical theories). It's a handy mnemonic, though I'm not sure that three are sufficient; I can think of others.