History of Pirates Blood and Thunder on the High Seas Book

This book was awful. And yes, I was full of aw (the origin of awful) in how heinous this book was. I cringe at the thought of it being read by others and thought of as a creditable history. I am not saying the information was falsified, but it was not cited, at all. There were no footnotes, annotated bibliography, or any bibliography for that fact. Most historians will cite their work unless they are from the turn of the twentieth century or before, or are extremely established in their specialty and are lazy. This "author" is not established nor is he specialized in anything. A specialized author in Colonial America would not have made the mistake of stating that John Smith took Pocahontas as a lover. We all know that was something he embellished to sell books.

It bugged me that his currency would change as the book progressed. I understood going from Spanish count of eight to pounds. The power shifted towards England, and well, he is British. What I did not understand was him going to the American dollar for the last chapter or two. America was not an economic power, and made for confusing comparisons to the value of the different ships as the conversion rate was not made known. America's currency was so weak in the beginning that the Spanish Dollar was traded more frequently than the American one, hence America adopting the "dollar" as their own.

I read a book on China's only female emperor (of his) in the store once. The only crossover was his odd fascination with sex. The sexual practices and manuals were quoted in chapters establishing her childhood home and upbringing. I don't even think madams of brothels who have girls, sit down their kid and script out how to do it. I'm digressing, my point was that historians pick a field/subject to specialize in and become an expert in he clearly did not as the two books are in North America 1500s-1800s and China 300s.

Side note: judging from the very few books I saw on his massive list, I would venture that he is a sex historian. This book should have been "Love on the High Seas: A Tale of Blood, Sex, and Treachery on Board a Pirate ship." That would have been an interesting twist on what was a rather dull and poorly written book.

I'm so glad I wasted my first book of the year on this. I was tired of having drivel as my first book of the year, and apparently this year was little better. So much for starting the year with something of significance or value. Yes, I learned things in here, but I need to go back and read other books with actual credibility to ensure that what I read was not gibberish.

I learned a valuable lesson with this book; you get what you pay for, even with a book. I got this new hardback for less than $8 on a popular topic. Red flag if I ever saw one. I will be applying this lesson to my further book purchases.

This brings me to my last point. Where was his editor? Did he think he not need one, since he himself is one? Huge mistake! It got so bad that I had to keep a pen nearby and make corrections. As anyone can tell from reading a review or two; I don't do grammar well. I barely understand the basics, and still can't really identify adverbs. If there isn't an "ly," I'm at a loss. It's a shame because it is written so accessibly. A high schooler could pick this up if they wanted to, read it, and understand it. But a high schooler can't read this because it would enforce the further deterioration of proper spelling and grammar. That was truly the biggest irony of this entire experience. He needed an editor so bad it was sad, and he was one.