Monday, December 10, 2018

“The Ambassador Chronicles”, by Graham McNeill


416 pages, Games Workshop, ISBN-13: 978-1844161997

The Ambassador Chronicles is a two-part omnibus that contains the novels The Ambassador and Ursun’s Teeth, both set in the cold, eastern land of Kislev, full of intrigue, scheming, blackmail and, of course, battles…well, maybe I should just let Mr. McNeill speak for himself:

In the icy Northern Wastes, a mighty army of darkness prepares to sweep southward and lay waste to the civilized lands of the Empire. In this dangerous time, retired Imperial general Kaspar von Velten is sent to Kislev as ambassador to the court of Tsarina Katarin. Unused to the power struggles and politics at court, Kaspar is forced to use all the skills and resources at his command in order to survive in this cold and hostile land. As winter draws in, can Kaspar re-forge the fragile alliance between the Empire and Kislev and prepare its troops for war before the hordes of Chaos are unleashed on the land?

Good stuff, no? What was remarkable about this book is that, unlike other Warhammer books that attempt to detail areas outside of the Empire but which fail to portray the subtle and obvious cultural differences between areas, this book really convinces the reader that they are experiencing life in Kislev. These books deal more with intrigue and politics than some other books by the Black Library (or rather Games Workshop, at the time), and offer a range of excellent and well-developed characters to build the story around. The protagonist is compelling, and the whole book has a gritty realism which I was sucked into. This is amongst my favorite Warhammer books.

Tuesday, December 4, 2018

“Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths”, by Karen Armstrong


471 pages, Alfred A. Knopf, ISBN-13: 978-0679435969

According to Karen Armstrong, there are three contenders for whose city Jerusalem is. No mystery here, really, but we must needs go through the list anyway. Shall we, then? Should Jerusalem be awarded to those evil Christians, who killed the Jews and pagans before going back on the noble idea of refusing to consider mere terrain sacred? Obviously not; Christians just make a hash out of everything, don’t they, what with their faith and inability to see just how noble and just all secularists are. Well, then, how about to the Jews? I mean, Jerusalem belonged to them the longest, right? Hell, it was even the capitol of their nation in eons past…but, no, them thar Jews are just interlopers who had to invent arbitrary myths to pretend that they cared at all about the place, much less had a right to be there. That can only mean that the winners of the “Jerusalem Belongs To Us Says We” sweepstakes are – *envelope please* – the Muslims! Yes, that’s right, the City of Peace belongs to the new kids on the block ‘cause Muslims had no need to invent any myths to “fuel their struggle”, for Jerusalem was theirs like a spouse (I wonder if Karen will award Paris to the Germans next…)

Karen Armstrong’s book Jerusalem: One City, Three Faiths could have been a great book if only her bias against Israel, the Jewish people, Christians and Christianity weren’t so obvious. “But Donald”, I hear you cry out in shock, “how can a former Catholic Nun be biased towards Christians?! Well?! Huh?!” Calm down there, sparky; former Nun though she may be, Armstrong has long since joined the elite legions of the sophisticated world in having nothing but disdain for two of the three Abrahamic religions (the third, Islam, comes out smelling of fresh jasmine in her telling). There are several examples of this, but perhaps Armstrong’s trying to mislead her readers into thinking that Jerusalem is Arab by right and is in the process of being wickedly Judaized is the most pernicious; after all, as she even states, Jerusalem was over 60% Jewish by 1900, and this percentage changed much since then, even as the surrounding area has become far more Jewish. This sort of blatant bias makes Armstrong look more like a Hamas gun moll than a serious scholar.

Armstrong writes as the apologist for Islam that she is, a shill for the relatively recently established Palestinian grievances voiced through the PLO. And if you disagree with my assessment, well then you can take my review with a grain of Dead Sea salt.

Saturday, December 1, 2018

“The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914”, by Margaret MacMillan


784 pages, Random House Trade Paperbacks, ISBN-13: 978-0812980660

With the centennial of the outbreak of World War I come and gone, we should pause to reflect on the terrible loss that conflict brought. Oh, the cost in lives was grotesque, make no mistake, but consider, too, the loss in terms of western culture: 1914 was truly a watershed year that ended one way of life and introduced another; it also did much to kill the confidence that Europeans had in themselves and their culture(s), an event the West is still living with today as Europe is filled with leaders who have not the courage or the wherewithal to defend their nations, their history or their accomplishments (indeed, like Leftists on this side of the Atlantic, they seem determined to degrade all of the above at every opportunity). In The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914, author Margaret MacMillan attempts to show how the war came about primarily because too many people either wanted war or did not do enough to prevent it from happening, and the result is, perhaps, the most thorough analysis of the pre-1914 world available to the modern reader.

MacMillan begins her book with an account of the major players – that is, Deutsches Kaiserreich; Österreichisch-Ungarische Monarchie…and, okay fine, Osztrák-Magyar Monarchia; République française; Rossiyskaya Imperiya; and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland – to illustrate how each of their national hopes and dreams (and honor; mustn’t forget honor, must we?) were pitted against their fears and suspicions, and introduces the reader to the primary individuals who helped shape national policy. But MacMillan doesn’t end there, as she then looks at the psychology of war and the peace efforts in the various nations and around the world and compares them to the militarism that each nation was espousing; she describes how the new concept of public opinion helped drive the leaders towards certain decisions, whether for war or for peace (a wonderful revelation in this work is just how important the publics of the powers forced their master’s hands; they weren’t all powerless lambs being led to the slaughter, y’know). Next she looks at the series of dress rehearsals that led to the Great War’s outbreak: Morocco, Bosnia, the Balkan Wars and even the assassination of the Austrian archduke and his wife. None of these events meant that war was ultimately inevitable, for so long as there were at least some key players willing to negotiate and work through differences war could have been avoided.

MacMillan concludes that war came about because the forces that sought it outnumbered and outmaneuvered those who did not, but she also works to debunk myths that have evolved over the years, the most important being that Germany and Kaiser Bill were solely responsible for war in 1914, despite what Article 231 of the Treaty of Versailles – the notorious “War Guilt Clause” – says. Germany had repeatedly backed down in the face of international pressure during the Morocco crises of 1905 and 1911. The Kaiser, that peculiar admixture of obnoxious blowhard and sensitive egoist, had a way of standing down at the last minute; granted, he was fascinated with all things military and he was the inheritor of the long and proud Prussian military tradition (and the uniforms; scads and scads of uniforms), but he did not set out to bring war upon the world as he has often been blamed for doing. MacMillan also critiques the other powers of the time: the Anglo-French entente that developed after 1904 was not all that it could have been, as Britain and France were not a unified front for British leaders continually looked for ways to be non-committal (while also backing France on international affairs); the relationship between France and Russia – the republic of free men and women and the most despotic empire in Europe; the challenges facing Austria-Hungary and its ramshackle and illogical organization; and, of course, upstart Serbia, the little bastard nation that began the whole mess. All of these have had myths develop around them, and MacMillan works through the hyperbole to understand the root causes of national decisions (in fact, MacMillan ultimately blames no one and everyone for the war; The Great War – and she uses this term throughout the book – was the sum total of each government’s unwillingness to resort to diplomacy, just when the world needed diplomacy the most). MacMillan’s writing style is crisp and lively; seriously, there is never a dull moment in this book, and if only my college history classes had books like this I would have kept more of them.