“The Story of Civilization. Volume 11: The Age of Napoleon”, by Will and Ariel Durant

 

872 pages, Simon & Schuster, ISBN-13: 978-1567310221

The Story of Civilization is an 11-volume set of books by the American writer, historian and philosopher Will Durant that focuses on a philosophical understanding of Western history that was intended for the general reader. Written over a period of more than fifty years, Volume 11: The Age of Napoleon was originally published in 1975, and centers on Napoleon and his times; it would also prove to be the last volume in the series (although a further two volumes were planned at the time of the author’s deaths: Volume 12: The Age of Darwin and Volume 13: The Age of Einstein, which would have taken The Story of Civilization right up to 1945). This volume covers, as compared to other books in the series, a relatively scant number of years in the history of Europe (The Age of Faith spanned almost a thousand years, for instance). But, oh, what momentous years they were, what with the French Revolution and the rise and fall of one Napoleone di Buonaparte (interesting note: I actually started reading The Story of Civilization in junior high with this volume, not knowing at the time that it was the last of an 11-part series; whoops).

The Durants open with a more involved chronicle of the French revolution that concluded Rousseau and Revolution, this one making more obvious that the revolution was a slow but quickening crumbling of royal legitimacy that collapsed into the chaos of revolution after a few sudden shocks. The king’s decision to attempt to escape France in fear of his life was one such shock, demonstrating that he was and remained an actor – not a prop. From here, the Durants follow the Wars of the Coalitions, as the various nations of Eurrope fell in to and out of alliances with or against France, with the enmity between England and France being the only fixed point. In 1807, with Napoleon enjoying one of his greatest triumphs – the subjugation of Prussia, and the pretended friendship of Russia – the Durants pause to cover both French and English culture, including one hundred pages on English poetry alone. They then alternate sections on the culture of Germany, Russia, Italy, Iberia, etc., and sections on the Napoleonic wars as they encompassed these regions.

Related to this volume’s unusual dominance by one person is the unusually heavy amount of military coverage here. The Durants typically dispatch wars in a few sentences, concerned with them only as a background to the social or political events that develop as a consequence. There’s no getting away from battles and Napoleon, though, even considering the energy he poured into the political administration of France and Europe, and the long-term effects that energy would have. The result is not a military history, however; there are no maps of battles. Instead, the Durants treat the readers with their usual balance of literature, science, economics, etc. (there is even a section on Jane Austen. Whoop!) Another prominent author, Germaine de Staël, maintained a long rivalry with Napoleon; she wrote a celebratory survey of German culture that pined for more amity between France and the Germans, and was present in Russia when Napoleon drove towards Moscow. Beethoven, of course, merits a full section of his own.

Napoleon reliably described himself as a Son of the Revolution, even though his policies ended some revolutionary dreams. His concordant with Rome, for instance, re-established the Catholic Church in France, albeit in a corralled form. That was a far cry from the total secularization (or de-Christianization, depending on the revolutionary), dreamed of by many – those who redrew the calendar and butchered France’s artistic legacies, those who in a just heaven will be consigned to war forever with the whitewashing Puritans and the sculpture-smashing Wahhabis, as well as others who would destroy art and heritage for ideology. Napoleon did apply much of the revolutionary, modernizing spirit to those parts of Europe he conquered – overwriting their ancient laws and traditions with constitutions from his own pen. Although Napoleon kept faith with some of the past as convenient – his concordant with Rome, for instance – the Durants observe that in his army and state, merit reigned, allowing even commoners to advance.

Liberty and equality are enemies: the more freedom men enjoy, the freer they are to reap the results of their natural or environmental superiorities; hence inequality multiplies under governments favoring freedom of enterprise and support of property rights. Equality is an unstable equilibrium, which any difference in heredity, health, intelligence, or character will soon end. Most revolutions find that they can check inequality only by limiting liberty, as in authoritarian lands.

Yet, even after his brief exile to Elba (well after he had failed them as Emperor), we read that the revolutionists of Lyons “[m]any of them ardent Jacobins, part of an underground current that now rose to the surface to welcome Napoleon in the hope that he would lead them back to 1789”. Frankly, I find this amazing (rekindling memories of standing in front of the monument in Cannes where his return was immortalized) that this de facto monarch should engender such loyalty, even enough that Marshal Ney would first promise to bring Napoleon back to Paris as a prisoner and then, transfer his loyalty and his men to the former Emperor. Reading descriptions of the Emperor’s death on St. Helena makes me understand even more how the slow poisoning with cyanide theory gained such credibility over the years: all that vomiting, stomach pain, and inability to ingest/digest food. Yet, the Durants do not address this conspiracy theory and judging from recent forensic efforts, it now seems unlikely that Lowe really did poison the Emperor with a slow increase in cyanide.

No individual has ever dominated a single volume in this fashion (even Charles V, in The Reformation, would disappear in chapters chronicling Persia and Arabia). But Napoleon’s story encompasses not just France and England, but Spain, Italy, Germany, Austria, and Russia. The Emperor does move backstage at times – in the chapters on English poetry and novels, for instance – but he is never completely gone. This final volume manages through Napoleon’s person to be just as comprehensive, but more tightly bound. I think that it is obvious that the Durants are unabashed admirers of the Little Corsican, and I have to say that their enthusiasm for their subject is infectious – so much so that I have read countless biographies of the brilliant sonovabitch in no small measure due to having read The Age of Napoleon at such an impressionable age. After having read and reread all eleven volumes of The Story of Civilization, I can only bemoan the fact that these two paradigms of the American intellectual ferment could not complete their Great Work. We must, sadly, make do with what we have, which is as masterful a compilation of Western History as has ever been written.

“American Moonshot: John F. Kennedy and the Great Space Race”, by Douglas Brinkley

 

576 pages, Harper, ISBN-13: 978-0062655066

An important – nay, vital – fact that one must realize when one picks up and reads Douglas Brinkley’s American Moonshot: John F. Kennedy and the Great Space Race is that this is a work of Presidential history and not of technical achievement (although there’s still a lot of that discussed within). Rather, Brinkley has in fact written a chronicle of the founding of NASA, of JFK’s evolving attitudes toward space initiatives, his reasons and motivations for pursuing the space race and how he and his Administration reacted to the many successes and not a few failures of the same. Talk of booster rockets and computer systems and space capsules and Tang are all left for other, different books.

Kennedy saw the space program as both an adventure producing heroes to be admired (the astronauts were his kind of guys) and a way to jump start American technology for the latter half of the 20^th Century (and incidentally, bring high tech to parts of the Democrat-controlled South). By the fall of 1963, Apollo was well on its way, Kennedy would look over the Gemini spacecraft under development in St. Louis, see the firing of an early version of the Saturn engine and check out the Manned Spaceflight Center in Houston. There he got into a long conversation with Gordon Cooper and invited him to accompany him to his next stop, but Cooper had to beg off (after all, he was participating in an important, long-scheduled test the next day).

The much cited Rice University speech – “We choose to go to the moon and do the other things not because they are easy but because they are hard” – is now, perhaps, as familiar as the Inaugural (or indeed any bit of public rhetoric since World War II), and marked the culmination of all of Kennedy’s efforts to get his pet project off the ground (as it were). Even those familiar with Kennedy and the Apollo Program will find fresh threads in Moonshot: for instance, while still in the Navy, Kennedy took private flying lessons, or the expression “Moonshot” itself, which was coined by Dodger announcer Vin Scully to describe not very deep fly balls hit by Wally Moon that nevertheless cleared the forty-foot high screen the Dodgers put up to prevent cheap shot home runs in the L. A. Coliseum, where the left field stands were only 250 feet down the line. FYI.

Brinkley’s central thesis is that the moon landing would have taken place much later without Kennedy’s determination to set a “hard” goal and carry it through, and that even after the initial cheering for a moon landing “before this decade is out”, Congress began to waver. Ike came out of retirement to oppose the Apollo Program, Goldwater wanted the Air Force to take over all space operations, and while LBJ was always strong for manned space flight he perhaps was not willing to go quite as boldly as Kennedy (he would as faithfully carry on Kennedy’s Apollo legacy as he did his civil rights legacy). What American Moonshot ultimately accomplishes is to parallel the progress in rocketry with Kennedy’s political career until they would interact so fatefully in 1961.

“Scarface and the Untouchable: Al Capone, Eliot Ness, and the Battle for Chicago”, by Max Allan Collins & A. Brad Schwartz

 

736 pages, William Morrow, ISBN-13: 978-0062441942

I have been told that there are two kinds of biographies: thumbnails and portraits. The thumbnails are pithy and to the point – think Eminent Victorians by Lytton Strachey – and rarely dig too deeply into the subject at hand; the portraits, meanwhile, delve deeper than the Mponeng gold mine – think The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York by Robert Caro (reviewed on February 18^th, 2013) – and uncover everything imaginable about the subject and bring it all to light.

I bring this up in relation to Scarface and the Untouchable: Al Capone, Eliot Ness, and the Battle for Chicago by Max Allan Collins & A. Brad Schwartz because we get both: a thumbnail biography of Eliot Ness, the agent with the Bureau of Prohibition tasked with enforcing the Volstead Act, and a portrait biography of Alphonse Gabriel “Scarface” Capone, the boss of the Chicago Outfit and Ness’ Enemy Number One. Perhaps it is because there is more information on Capone than on Ness, or that as a criminal Capone’s actions have been documented to such a degree that there is just more information to plum from…ah, hell, we both know it’s because the crook is always more interesting than the hero, which is why I’d say that Capone probably receives maybe 75% of the author’s attention because, ultimately, he is a more interesting character than Ness. Nice guys really do finish last, y’know.

But there is more to it than that, for Capone went out of his way to portray himself as a Robin Hood-type gangster, a kind of super-successful hustler trying to make a buck during difficult times while undermining an unpopular law. Ness, meanwhile, by necessity worked behind the scenes and under the radar to gather information to convict Scarface, keeping out of the public eye as much as possible. Not until Capone was indicted did people even learn of the identity of the investigators who a newspaper reporter dubbed “The Untouchables”. In strictly chronological fashion, Collins and Schwartz detail the Ness/Capone feud as they advance inevitably, so it would seem, towards the showdown in a federal courtroom in Chicago where the gangland overlord – who was responsible for murders, prostitution, racketeering and any other exploitation of other people’s vices – would infamously be put away for…tax evasion.

Collins and Schwartz make the interesting point early on that there were a number of similarities between Scarface and the Untouchable: both were first-generation Americans, the sons of immigrant fathers who were bakers in their respective countries of birth; Capone’s father became a barber while Ness’ remained a baker, both becoming successful businessmen; Capone and Ness sought to modernize their respective professions, with Capone adapting the methods of the corporate world to organized crime and Ness bringing modern technology and scientific techniques to police work; both men were hard-working and successful at young ages, Capone becoming Capo dei capi of a multi-million-dollar crime organization at only 26 while Ness took charge of a taskforce that was formed to bring Capone to justice at 27. History truly does make some strange bedfellows.

The saga of the battle between Ness and Capone has been well-documented in books, movies and television (most of which are caca; indeed, the authors open their book by informing us that much of what we think we know about this particular War on Crime is, in fact, wrong). Collins and Schwartz’s account, at more than 700 pages, is, I think, the definitive work on this battle, one without unnecessary drama or meaningless diversions. They make clear that the effort of law enforcement to bring Capone to justice was more than simply proving that he failed to pay his income taxes; it was a vigorous effort to bring an evil criminal to justice and, in the end, it succeeded brilliantly in that goal.

“Fierce Patriot: The Tangled Lives of William Tecumseh Sherman”, by Robert L. O’Connell

 

432 pages, Random House, ISBN-13: 978-0812982121

Way back in the long long ago (that would be September 28^th, 2016), I reviewed American General: The Life and Times of William Tecumseh Sherman by John S. D. Eisenhower and found it lacking, which prompted me to seek out a better biography of my favorite Civil War general and, lads, I was successful. Fierce Patriot: The Tangled Lives of William Tecumseh Sherman by Robert L. O’Connell is a conversational work that argues that the best way to understand old Cump is to follow him as he traverses three different paths. The First path is that of Sherman the grand strategist of Manifest Destiny and of the generation that saw the United States expand from Atlantic to Pacific. The Second path focuses on Sherman the general and the army he built and used in the west to bring an end to the Civil War. The Third path focuses on Sherman the (very flawed) man and examines his personal life, from his family upbringing and the impact it had on him and his relationships with his wife (and mistresses) and his children through his post-war years and ultimate retirement.

As to why Sherman is my favorite general in Blue, perhaps it is because he has never received a fraction of the attention the Big Three of the Civil War have warranted (y’know, Grant, Lee and Lincoln). While it is hard to get angry at the attention these Belles of the Ball have received – they were the men in charge, after all – they didn’t do everything by themselves. Perhaps it is because he was not as flamboyant as his Southern counterparts? Perhaps it is because for most of the war he operated in lesser-known theaters than the legendary Army of the Potomac and the Army of Northern Virginia? Perhaps it is because that is just how he wanted it: after all, war is hell. But as O’Connell so ably describes, Sherman was the ideal wingman to the more volatile Grant; not that there was no lack of volatility in Sherman; he just did a better job of keeping it in check, and was more than willing to play second fiddle in Lincoln’s orchestra.

But it’s still is a shame, for Sherman was a highly complex, fascinating figure and, it is safe to say, this most brutal of all of America’s wars would have dragged on substantially longer without Sherman’s unglamorous and uncompromising generalship. When given free reign with his own command, Sherman instituted a number of tactical and strategic reforms, unique to his time, that are still studied in military academies. His men loved their “Uncle Billy” as he preferred to maneuver and outflank his opponents to suicidal frontal assaults (starting with the horrors of Shiloh, Sherman had witnessed enough carnage and futility to form his own distinctive command techniques that did not involve useless sacrifice).

But it is in the area of grand strategy that Sherman made the greatest impact. A civil war is just that, a war of one population against another and, in order to win such a war, one population must have war made against it so that their army in the field can be at last defeated. This is what Sherman knew in his very bones, and it is the way in which war has been waged ever since. Fierce Patriot shows Sherman for what he was, warts and all, which is all one can ask of a biography.

“Great Lakes Shipwrecks & Survivals: Edmund Fitzgerald Edition”, by William Ratigan

 

384 pages, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, ISBN-13: 978-0802870104

Great Lakes Shipwrecks & Survivals: Edmund Fitzgerald Edition by William Ratigan is best classified by the world at large as a book with mere “Regional” interest that can probably still be found in museum gift shops anywhere along the coasts of the Great Lakes. Originally published in 1960, the edition I picked up at my local library for a mere 50¢ had been updated to include perhaps the most famous of Great Lakes wrecks, the Edmund Fitzgerald, which sank in Lake Superior with all hands-on November 10^th, 1975. Ratigan, a journalist whose father was a steamboat engineer, wrote a romantic, blood-curdling maritime history of the Great Lakes, starting with Champlain’s canoe as it ventured out onto Lake Huron and ending with the thousand-foot bulk freighters that now churn our waters.

This is a collection of stories about those mariners who met their doom or their greatest moment while sailing the Great Lakes. People from other parts of the country cannot fully appreciate the uniqueness of the Great Lakes and the tales of sailing vessels and storms; for instance, it’s somewhat peculiar (if not darkly funny) that the very first ship ever floated by white men on the lakes, The Griffin, never completed its maiden voyage and sunk after just getting underway. There are certain times of the year when the lakes are more dangerous than others, with November being the worst month for wrecks (“Remember, Remember, the Gales of November” – am I right, Michiganders?). But wrecks can and did happen almost any time of year, even when skies were clear; an explosion, a miscalculation, or any other mistake could prove fatal. Given the tendency of each lake to have its own personality and unique challenges to mariners, there is never such a thing as a guaranteed safe journey. True, ships are more sophisticated today, but it may well be only a matter of time before the next big boat goes down.

In his introduction, the author warns his readers that even the biggest freighter is not guaranteed a safe return to port:

These great ships sail Great Lakes that can swallow them in one black moment without a trace. Storms exploding across hundreds of miles of open water pile up mountainous seas that strike swifter, and more often, than the deadliest waves on any ocean. Before the ship has a chance to recover from the last blow, the next is upon her. The Lakes captain has no sea room in which to maneuver; unlike his salt-water counterpart he must stay on course throughout the storm; he must weather the teeth of the gale.

Would that more people knew the reputation of North America’s great inland waterways.

“The Story of Civilization. Volume 10: Rousseau and Revolution”, by Will and Ariel Durant

 

1091 pages, Simon & Schuster, ISBN-13: 978-1567310214

The Story of Civilization is an 11-volume set of books by the American writers, historians and philosophers Will and Ariel Durant that focuses on a philosophical understanding of Western history that was intended for the general reader. Written over a period of more than fifty years, Volume 10: Rousseau and Revolution was originally published in 1967, and centers on Jean-Jacques Rousseau and his times (it was also the only Pulitzer Prize-winning volume of the whole series). Over the course of these 1000+ pages – one of the fattest books in the series – we learn all about the birth of the British Empire and the reign of George III, the decline of the Habsburgs and the rise of the Hohenzollerns and, consequently, the ongoing disintegration of the Holy Roman Empire, the Seven Years’ War, the history of the papacy for, although the popes had lost a great deal of their political influence, they were still major figures in the Europe of the time, and their decisions had major consequences on the course that the Roman Church would take over the next century, and so much more, besides. Not only is this a work about the European powers during this period, but, true to the title of this volume, the Durants show how the writings of Rousseau and other authors created the intellectual climate that would lead to revolution.

While The Story of Civilization has a full complement of colorful characters and deep thoughts, the persons who populate Rousseau and Revolution is truly distinctive for the broad cast of poor players that strut and fret their hour upon the stage: enlightened despots like Frederick the Great of Prussia, Catherine the Great of Russia and Joseph II of Austria; economists like Adam Smith, historians like Edward Gibbon and political theorists like Edmund Burke (and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, naturally); philosophers like Immanuel Kant, Giambattista Vico and Cesare Beccaria (and, again, Rousseau); writers like Johann Wolfgang von Goethe and Friedrich Schiller (and Rousseau, once again); composers like Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Franz Joseph Haydn and Christoph Willibald Gluck (and, you guessed it, Jean-Jacques); and artists like Canaletto, Francisco Goya, Jean-Antoine Houdon and Giovanni Battista Tiepolo (but not, this time, you-know-who). This is some cast, no doubt, but in spite of all of these geniuses bouncing about, Rousseau and Revolution is a real joy to read, covering such disparate topics with ease and style; it is almost as if the Durants had written a kind of gestalt biography in which all of these great thinkers’ lives were somehow interconnected (in many ways, they were).

But it is Rousseau that is the cement that keeps this work from tumbling over, Rousseau and his hypothetical “State of Nature” in which there must have been a time before organized societies existed and in which Man lived in Peace and Harmony and that people were neither good nor bad, but were born as a Tabula rasa – a blank slate – and that artificial societies and the environment corrupted the purity of Mankind (a kind of secular version of Man’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden and a state of innocence). In Rousseau's state of nature, people did not know each other enough to come into serious conflict and they did have normal values. The modern society, and the ownership it entails, is blamed for the disruption of the state of nature which Rousseau sees as true freedom:

Hence although men had become less forbearing, and although natural pity had already undergone some alteration, this period of the development of human faculties, maintaining a middle position between the indolence of our primitive state and the petulant activity of our egocentrism, must have been the happiest and most durable epoch. The more one reflects on it, the more one finds that this state was the least subject to upheavals and the best for man, and that he must have left it only by virtue of some fatal chance happening that, for the common good, ought never to have happened. The example of savages, almost all of whom have been found in this state, seems to confirm that the human race had been made to remain in it always; that this state is the veritable youth of the world; and that all the subsequent progress has been in appearance so many steps toward the perfection of the individual, and in fact toward the decay of the species.

We have Rousseau to think for the modern-day Environmentalist Crusades and their desire to see Man reduced in his circumstances, who think that more that Man has deviated from the state of nature the worse he has become. Espousing the belief that all degenerates in the hands of Mankind, Rousseau taught that men would be free, wise and good in the state of nature and that instinct and emotion, when not distorted by the unnatural limitations of civilization, are nature’s voices and instructions to the good life; Rousseau’s “Noble Savage” stands in direct opposition to the man of culture. The modern-day Left has run with this idea, seeing the modern world in general – and the West in particular – as inherently bad and in need of correction, if not destruction. In Rousseau’s work one finds the foundations of socialism and can see the mass of contradictions and fallacies underlying this morally bankrupt ideology, unobstructed by the clever rhetorical devices of modern collectivists. The principles espoused by Rousseau haunt us even today and, until they are finally faced, the specter of tyranny will continue to hang like a pall over the Western conscience.

“Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America”, by John Earl and Harvey Klehr

 

504 pages, Yale University Press, ISBN-13: 978-0300084627

The “Venona” referred to in Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America by John Earl and Harvey Klehr refers to the Venona Project, the counterintelligence program initiated during World War II by the United States Army’s Signal Intelligence Service – later absorbed by the National Security Agency – and which was in service from February 1^st, 1943 all the way until October 1^st, 1980. From the start, Venona was meant to spy on our erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union, and decrypt messages transmitted by their ever evolving intelligence agencies – the NKVD, the KGB and the GRU, etc. – from and to the United States.

By all accounts, Venona was brilliantly successful, decrypting and translating upwards of over 3000 such messages over its 37-year lifespan and leading to many successes for the West, from Project Enormous (the Soviet infiltration of the Manhattan Project in the US) to the discovery of the Cambridge Five espionage ring in the UK. Perhaps the best indication of just how brilliant Venona was is the fact that it stayed secret, not only over the course of its operations, but for a full 15 years after it officially ended, with only about some 1% of the decoded Soviet messages not being declassified and published by the United States until 1995.

While fascinating, Venona is also depressing as all hell, as the treachery of supposed Americans in the pay of their Soviet Masters is something to behold, and not in a good way. So many Yanks were converted to the Red Cause, reaching all the way to the naïve Roosevelt White House where they even managed to direct American foreign policy during and immediately after World War II (for all you stubborn Alger Hiss defenders SHUT UP: the man was a traitor and deserved much more than the piddling three years and eight months he served of a pathetic five year sentence – like being fed to rabid dogs, for instance).

All of this leads to the most perplexing question that hangs still over our recent history, one whose aftermath remains with us today. Why? Why did so many Americans so enthusiastically embrace the Communist ideology and then work tirelessly to replace our free form of government with an enslaved one? Moreover, why did they continue to embrace Communism despite all of the available evidence that it was anything but a totalitarian oppressor intent on crushing all beneath its iron heel? Most of these conspirators were considered “Ordinary Americans”, patriotic and civic-minded; indeed, many had fought in WWI and, later, in WWII.

But the blunt truth was that they were NOT patriotic Americans, at least in the sense in which that term is normally understood; for they saw the American Experiment as a flawed and evil oppressor of…everything, while the Soviet Union was the true beacon of freedom in the world. A twisted and demented view of the world in which up is down, right is left, night is day and so on and so forth; in fact, to listen to all of those BLM and Antifa “activists” burning down American cities today, one would hear many of the same complaints and criticisms from the far left today as we did even during the height of the Cold War. The more things change…