Reviews for War and Progress: Britain 1914-1945 (Longman Economic and Social History of Britain)

The average rating for War and Progress: Britain 1914-1945 (Longman Economic and Social History of Britain) based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2019-09-16 00:00:00 Matthew Salch [ or possibly it was 55 or 54 BC, as the authors say - insufficiently memorable in any case (hide spoiler)]

Review # 2 was written on 2014-12-07 00:00:00 Kazuhito Nakamura I really cannot describe the delightful depth of wit. One wouldn’t think that their roving narrative is morally probing, but I detected great commentary on religious intolerance (24-25, 43-44, 66, 87), as well as socially. William and Mary’s “Toleration Act, which said they would tolerate anything, though afterwards it went back on this and decided that they could not tolerate the Scots” (87). Insights on the Southsea Bubble (89, 91-92) are particularly applicable in light of present economically straitened circumstances in America. I will only include one large excerpt, from 27-28, telling in its style: By congregating there, armed to the teeth, the Barons compelled John to sign the Magna Charter, which said: 1. That no one was to be put to death, save for some reason - (except the Common People). 2. That everyone should be free - (except the Common People). 3. That everything should be of the same weight and measure throughout the Realm - (except the Common People). 4. That the Courts should be stationary, instead of following a very tiresome medieval official known as the King's Person all over the country. 5. That 'no person should be fined to his utter ruin' - (except the King's Person). 6. That the Barons should not be tried except by a special jury of other Barons who would understand. Magna Charter was therefore the chief cause of Democracy in England, and thus a Good Thing for everyone (except the Common People). They subsequently define baronial duties, among other things, as “to hasten the King’s death, deposition, insanity, etc., and make quite sure that there were always at least three false claimants to the throne,” and “to keep up the Middle Ages” (31). The authors employ a strong offsetting method to make history laughable, such as a definition of the Monroe Doctrine as “prov[ing:] that it is wrong for anyone to have wars in North or South America (except the United States Marines)” (106). I love the way they depict causes of war (such as on 111, 115, 120, 123) or conduct in declaring peace (92-93, 124). “The important International Law called the Rule Brittannia, technically known as the Freedom of the Seas” (11)—they later mention that the Dutch dared to challenge this, but they’re really not big enough to ever hold top nation status (83-84). The English “Civil War” is summarized as “The utterly memorable Struggle between the Cavaliers (Wrong but Wromantic) and the Roundheads (Right but Repulsive)” (75; see 78). 1066 and All That is loaded to the hilt (embedded or otherwise) with sophisticated humor that could well be lost on many without the “benefit” of an extensive historical and literary background. Only in passing, for a few examples, I might say that the conversion by a sparrow (7) has reference to Coifi’s tale as related by Bede, Canute’s sitting on the sea (14) has reference to the tale whereby he showed his advisors that his authority was limited where the waves were concerned, the ditty about Adam and Eve (47) has reference to an egalitarian chant during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, the egg standing on its end (59) has reference to an apocryphal tale (a favorite of George Q. Cannon’s) about Christopher Columbus demonstrating how easy something is only when one has already done it, ‘Paris is rather a Mess’ (71) should read ‘Paris is worth a Mass,’ and “1 New Presbyter = 1 OLD PRIEST” and ‘No Bishop, No King’ (74) had cryptic reference to Milton’s definition of new presbyters as “old priest writ large” and King James’ reiteration of royal authority. As you can see, having to inform the reader of these facts (perhaps even by way of footnote) would defeat the purpose, so I’m afraid that it will remain a sealed book for most. Still, anyone should feel free to explore it and feel the power of its irregularly recurring themes, like conquest by fire and the sword (as to method, one or both, or its failure); death by a surfeit of something or other; “top nation”; Gray’s Elegy; and the Irish Question (later transmuted into the Eastern Question). Nevertheless, a quick glance through certain of its features should prove amusing for nearly all. I call your attention to the “rationalized” genealogical table on 33, and the sketch of the Battle of Bannockburn on 37, to say nothing of the hilarious tests interspersed throughout. I think my favorite test question was, 16, “How angry would you be if it was suggested (1) That the XIth Chap. of the Consolations of Boethius was an interpolated palimpsest? (2) That an eisteddfod was an agricultural implement?” Having just concluded a study of the Wars of the Roses, I found the test on 54 astoundingly cutting in its humor (see also 57-59 and 60, #8)! Who wouldn’t laugh at this statement about Henry VIII? “He also invented a game called ‘Bluff King Hal’ which he invited his ministers to play with him. The players were blindfolded and knelt down with their heads on a block of wood; they then guessed whom the King would marry next” (62).