Review: The Twelve Caesars - Michael Grant

www.eveningstarbooks.info

Michael Grant was a noted twentieth century historian who focused predominantly upon the early Roman empire.  He published several well-regarded works on that culture in that period, including perhaps his seminal piece The Twelve Caesars.

This narrative, which leans heavily upon the usual suspects (Suetonius, Pliny and Tacitus) is a conversational textbook - a popular version of a book of learning, much like I, Claudius - very much in vogue throughout the latter half of last century.  It delivers a potted biography of Julius Caesar and his eleven direct replacements - from Augustus to Domitian.

As a work, it delivers simply what it suggests on the packet: small bios, pieced together from influential - but hardly neutral - sources.  Grant time and again points out that Suetonius tended to highlight the sexual depravities of his subjects, while Tactitus' words showed contempt for each of the three Caesars who rose to their position via civil war (Galba, Otho and Vitellius).  

He delivers simple, effective portraits of highly complex men - figures simplified by period literature through rumour and suggestions being made out as fact.  He is even-handed and resists editorialising, except for during the last chapter where he tries unsuccessfully to "sum up" and only manages to confuse himself and his readers.

Unfortunately, there really is very little else to say.  Grant writes as an academic, with economy of emotion, as if just putting words down on paper for future generations.  If you're interested in the period or a history buff, then it's certainly worth a look - otherwise the source material may prove a little dry.  Tennis balls.

Review: More Than a Game - John Major

I really do need to admit that although being a born and bred Australian I am spending more and more time putting my head above the neighbouring fence and enjoying the delights of sport as enjoyed by the English. This is quite the admission, and flies in the face of everything I learned from the likes of Dean Jones, Allan Border, and Steve Waugh. English cricket to them was defined by failure and therefore very much the lesser when compared to Australia's ruthless winning culture (even when losing), but I am no longer of the same opinion and not just because Australia has lost the past two Ashes series.

The real sticking point that for my mind that Australian cricket falls short of is its cultural impact. While we cannot deny that cricket remains a strong part of Australian culture, for the English over the past 250 years it is clear that cricket has has gone beyond merely being a part of and driven culture. Australian cricket has not shifted society as English cricket did. While Australians often pointed to the archaic distinction between amateurs and professionals (upper and lower classes) as being disgraceful, the reality is that such distinctions were well established in English society at large. While cricket did indeed choose to accept and incorporate them into it's play, it became a microcosm for the observation of social distinctions highlighting their hypocritical nature and ultimately doing away with them.

Without becoming a screaming Anglophile let us not forget that there are plenty of parts of Australian cricketing history that one may choose to let lie when all is said and done. Cricket historians may eventually afford the words 'mental disintegration' the same level of disgust and horror as has already been attributed 'bodyline'.

Cricket became for England a pastime upon which a nations leisure revolved, as John Major title's his book it is 'More Than a Game' with many famous cricketing names being non-players. How many sports or leisure activities honour journalists and administrators to the same degree as cricket does? Not to mention those who were patrons of the game. How many sports have entire wings of literature (fiction and non-fiction) devoted to them, not to mention certain religious understandings being exemplified as was 'Muscular Christianity' – although a nod must go to Rugby for its theological input as well.

Major brings all of this together in a tremendous work of historical review. His purpose is to describe what he believes are the lost centuries of cricket. Crickets actual beginnings likely will never be known but positive evidence for it existing in 17^th century England exists. Major takes the reader on a journey to understand these earliest moments of the game he loves, and how the gradual shift in English society was mirrored by the growth that became an empires favourite pastime.

This is not a book for the casual cricket lover so be wary. It is as full of detail as any book I have ever read. Major profiles at length the characters and teams that made up the game in each moment through history. It would be hard pressed to accept this as a good read based on that description but honestly I could not put this book down and wished it would never end.

Cricket tradition is not what it is often made out to be in 21^st century Australia. Modified versions of the game did not originate with 50 over cricket or receive an injection of charisma upon the 'revolution' that is T20. Afford yourself a peruse at the very least of Wikipedia and you will find men of the like of Billy Beldham entering into one on one contests of gladiatorial nature in the late 18^th and early 19^th centuries, or the entrepreneurial William Clarke leading his 'All-England XI' around for invitational games often against the odds. You see cricket has always evolved, tradition did not originate with Chappell brothers or even Sir Donald Bradman, cricket history runs much, much deeper.

The flow of the work is exceptional by Major. For chapter upon chapter he builds a chronologically based picture of the games history. But just at the right moment when the reader needs a rest he pauses to reflect on specific persons or positions in the game of cricket. Although counter to the rhetoric of most latter day Australian players, cricket is not limited to those privileged enough to be blessed with the skill to play. Major honours with specific chapters the patrons and administrators, scorers and journalists who do not play but their involvement requires no less admiration. They like Major, loved it unconditionally even though they may not have been able to bowl with the fire of Fred Spofforth.

Of course Major is a former British Prime Minister, and a small litter of political gibing can be found in this books pages. But we will forgive him this as politics has been his life. (Major may still wake every night trying to explain to the long gone British public that 'New Labour' is not what you think it was, before cuddling up to his soft Mrs Thatcher doll and going back to sleep).

English cricket is a cultural phenomenon, not just a sport. Cricketers all over the world today are treading well worn paths and carrying a beacon for a culture that has a long history. They are by far not the first, nor will be the last to enjoy this great game. Basketballs.

Cover image thanks to thebookpeople.co.uk

Review: Killing Rommel, by Steven Pressfield

Steven Pressfield has built an impressive folio of historical fiction works: The Legend of Bagger Vance achieved him notoriety in the movie world, while his novel The Gates of Fire has become almost required reading for the US Marine Corps.  To paraphrase former Doctor Who script editor Terrance Dicks  - "Selling out storyline for a pot of historical reality" is not what Pressfield's about.

His novel Killing Rommel is, much like the war in the desert, gritty, realistic and slightly overglorified.

Of all the Generals of World War Two, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was probably the most respected by both sides.  He was close to the Fuhrer, displayed bravery and leadership beyond that of many other generals and a respect for the rules of war that others in his position failed to emulate.  He was also, alongside Patton, the most awe-inspiring General, manning a staff car alongside the advance ranks of his men rather than being secreted far behind.

He was also a Nazi.

Given Pressfield's willingness to sacrifice some plot aspects for storyline, he pitches the Long Range Desert Group - a group of British and New Zealanders in trucks - in a series of long-range missions aimed at demotivating their German and Italian opponents by assassinating their inspiring leader.  Who, in this universe, isn't a Nazi and displays a code of honour that even Judge Judy couldn't match.

courtesy: tower.com

Occasional historical dalliances aside, the greatest failing of the book is in the mechanism of the narrative.  It is pitched in the time-honoured style of  "a manuscript discovered"; in this case an American who's adapted a memoir bequeathed to to him by a mentor who was an English member of the LRDG.  Pressfield's talent is for describing real-life battles and their consequences, not for understanding "Britishness", resulting in overuse of phrases and hackneyed British stereotypes.

However, he more than almost any other historical fiction author, fully allows the reader to grasp the combination of the vital importance of the North African campaign, the gravity of dying comrades and the incredible comradeship found amongst men on the battlefield.  Pressfield attempts to take his readers of a journey of what it meant to be part of a force comprised of individuals but larger than the the sum of those people.  It is unfortunate that he doesn't completely succeed.

While not an exciting, compelling read, Killing Rommel is enjoyable and can be ploughed through quickly.  It also has it's share of poignant moments strewn amongst intimate descriptions of battle.  Tennis balls.

Review: The Willow Wand – Derek Birley

The Willow Wand's aim is to explore some of the many myths of cricket. However, for the most part it is somewhat difficult to identify truly what myth is at any one point that being investigated. One must have an in-depth knowledge of cricket and indeed English cricket to truly take in what most of Birley has to say. Despite the significant amount of historical research put into this work, it does not provide a systematic presentation of cricketing history.

But this is not meant to be a negative opinion, just a reduction in the expectations with which I approached this work. What you do get from The Willow Wand is a mosaic of characters and time from throughout the long and rich history of the sport.

The book drives constantly that cricket is a medium in which persons sought to prove distinguishable features. Gentlemen from Players (Amateurs from Professionals), Wealth from Poverty, light skin from dark – none ever proved to be successful and in hindsight all actions of the sort proving petty and hypocritical. Such is the ridiculous extent of sociology that cricket has been pushed and pulled. Birley took time to sum up his beliefs in the final chapter titled 'Fun and Games' whereupon as you might expect from the title he concludes that one cannot see cricket through any other lens.

Refreshingly honest about the figures of the past, Birley does not airbrush over the faults of the game and its traditions. He questions long held views of the cricketing figures of the past such as Lord's Harris & Hawke as well as P.F. (Plum) Warner; opinion on the latter he makes reference to in his updated edition as drawing criticism from some parts upon the books initial print run in 1979.

Of particular enjoyment personally were his descriptions of West Indian crickets background, a topic not often broached, as well as his discussion on whether cricket and art can be stated as being one and the same. For the modern cricket enthusiast stung by the increased commercialism and descent into the abyss of gambling-driven corruption it may hurt to read that the prominent driver of many of the earliest recorded matches was commercialism and gambling. Matches were often fixed not for monetary gain but as an act of patronage to the amateur dignitary!

Being a cricketing nerd, I enjoyed the book as I became immersed in the nostalgia and dreamed of being involved during golden times in cricket history. But it is only a book for those like myself who bring a certain level of background knowledge to it and can enjoy it to the full. Others will become confused and frustrated as it constantly switches back and forth between stories, eras and personalities. The high English used by Birley remains difficult for the modern reader (criticism at this point can be leveled in both directions) - Birley is clearly a man of an age where cricketers of the right ilk never had names, only initials. Somewhere between tennis balls and footballs.

Cover Image thanks to bookdepository.co.uk

Review: Mere Christianity - C.S. Lewis

This volume of work, by one of the 20^th century's most noted authors, certainly sits among the modern fathers of Christian apologetic literature. As purely an apologetic piece it certainly has been superseded, and to continue rely solely upon it for justifications of faith would be erroneous in the least, however it does remain valuable. Nigh on 70 years post the development of its content and original broadcast, and 60 since its original publication, I believe that the value of this work extends beyond the boundaries of apologetics. It is useful for discussions on topics ranging from history, sociology, morality and ethics, and probably has always been so.

C.S. Lewis is most famed for his fictional yet powerful Narnia series. Influencing Mere Christianity (a work of non-fiction) is Lewis' background of a Northern Irish immigrant to England, a serviceman during the Great War, and his scholarly career as an English professor with a specialisation in Medieval and Renaissance English. Probably the most telling fact of Lewis' life that would lead him to produce a work of Christian apologetics was that he was from his own admission an atheist until age 29, and not accepting of Christian faith until 32. The famous group of writers and scholars that Lewis belonged to was the 'Inklings'. Included in this group was Lord of the Rings author J.R.R. Tolkien, a Roman Catholic, who is credited as playing a significant part of Lewis' return to faith.

The work began life as a series of radio lectures broadcast by Lewis to Britain during the depths of the Second World War. He was engaged by the religious arm of the BBC to give hope and education to Britains during a period of such pain and grief. Owing to his own wartime experiences as a young man perhaps Lewis had heightened interest in serving his nation in such a way. Probably because the words began life as orations (later also a series of brief pamphlets) before being edited and compiled into one volume, none are wasted in explanation. I struggled to get more than one or two sentences along before needing to stop, think and extrapolate his thoughts out. This led to the feeling of being immersed in the work at one point, yet I had only completed 40 pages with the best part of 200 to go!

The term 'mere' was not being used by Lewis as a descriptive term for Christianity as a religion, but is part of the name of the topic that he aims to discuss. Lewis is not trying to carry denominational or theological doctrine. What is aimed is to get as close to the core of all Christian beliefs as possible, what Lewis believes all have in common. Neither does Lewis seek to pass judgement on the practices of society. Writing to wartime Britain, Lewis is trying to raise faith among a nation scarred by war and even promote this as a means of reconciliation. He is asking wartime Britain to go beyond the view that the actions of Nazi Germany are bad, and instead identify what the reason behind all Britain agreeing on this view is.

The reason identified for the common attitude is begun by Lewis as some central moral guide. This guide appears common to all – all believe the Nazi actions are wrong – but it cannot be something that comes from humanity and thus begins his exploration of generic faith, followed by the Christian faith. Faith to Lewis, was something in the natural order of life. He calls upon readers natural responses to situations in both thought and action to act as justification for the forgiving God as promulgated by the Christian faith. There is no 'getting of religion' to Lewis, rather you out live out life more honestly and recognise the inherent faith that is there.

From the position of recognising a common morality then that this morality justifies the Christian faith, Lewis moves on to how faith is worked out in life. Chapter by chapter Lewis paints the picture of what the Christian life looks like. These words need not be accepted in full as truth for every reader, but at the very least they are detailed enough to provide adequate base for reflection. Simply brilliant is his chapter on what he believes is “the great sin” of pride. In Lewis' opinion all sin stems from the prideful condition of humanity who seek to rebel against God. Despite his belief that the Christian faith will promote the best of the human condition, Lewis is sure to not place those already of faith as being of higher standing – they are just repentant.

Let me now defend Lewis from criticism he has and continues to receive from theologians on this work as an apologetic. Initially one must first make the distinction between who Lewis was and who such critics are. Lewis by his own admission is not a theologian, he was not an ordained minister, and despite clearly being of high intellect remained as laity in the eyes of the church and theological academia. Furthermore, Lewis is reflecting I believe some of his own path toward faith. While with the benefit of hindsight it may have flaws, one cannot criticise honest reflection. Lewis' justification for Christ's divinity, called the 'Lewis Trilemma', is the most heavily criticised of all his contentions and justifiably so, but I advise using it as a great base for exploring the central contention of the Christian faith.

The language of Lewis and examples used are rooted in the time, and in the experience of his life. Lewis' descriptions include his idea of the Christian battle with sin being a civil war and to read the word of God is somewhat of a battle plan. A life lived throughout the time of great bloodshed no doubt would come through any person's expression and to read such a work permits us a window as to what it must have been like. This in mind, Lewis' reconciliatory request of wartime Britain to worship an omnipotent and loving God is revolutionary given common mindsets rooted in witnessing constant horror.

There are hints of the man Lewis was as well. He seemingly was incredibly pragmatic about faith and how one should behave when accepting of it. Lewis's particular views on marriage, war, capital punishment all come from his own experience. We will certainly have different views but we understand more of the human condition by reading such musings.

His thoughts on marriage I both agree with wholeheartedly in some instances (opinions on divorce) but likewise disagree to the same extent when he describes headship. Despite disagreement, my own understanding is heightened and ultimately I have continued to grow as a person. You need to give grace to Lewis' tone as it is not of this age. He uses the bygone phrase of 'men' when referring to all, and speaks in masculine tones and examples that will be foreign and potentially off-putting. Don't let it be so, trust that he meant well and read through this for the learnings.

Unlike dictators, politicians, even military leaders who write a manifesto there is still an understanding that this work is incomplete and needs more. Lewis draws conclusions but does not draw them as complete, they are his to be expanded upon. This work that began life as an apologetic or promotion of faith, still serves such a purpose, but it can be seen as more across many topics. Let his musings challenge you and drive you toward greater understanding. Do not see this as a work of doctrine, but as a heartfelt musing of a journeying man. Basketballs.

Cover Image thanks to bookdepository.co.uk

Review: Encounters that Changed the World, by Rodney Castleden

In Encounters that Changed the World, Rodney Castleden has constructed a highly informative summary of some of the most influential meetings of the past without also getting too "history-heavy". Arranged neither by significance, date or location, he allows for easy passage through a sizeable tome by categorizing each encounter by the type of meeting: the book begins with nine "Encounters with God" and concludes with "Great Creative Encounters of the 20th Century". Each encounter ranges between four and eight pages which allows for plenty of context and relevance yet is succinct enough to allow the reader to decide the importance of each encounter.

Another enjoyable aspect is the global perspective the author's attempted to capture. This book isn't America-, England or Christian-centric, but takes in a wide variety of people, places, religions and races and none is given any more weight than another. It stands to reason that fleeting encounters - say, Newton and Leibnitz - are given fewer words, as are those comings together about which history has recorded little, as in the case of Marco Polo and Kublai Khan. I can understand how frustrating it may be to print undeniable, recorded fact at the expense of mountains of hearsay, but it is this restraint which makes this book so educational.

Though it runs to 500-plus pages, Encounters is a surprisingly easy read, broken up into bite-size chunks of the past and larger, meal-size portions which one is easily able to read in one sitting. It provides just enough detail to satisfy the curiosity without overloading one with weighty background. Recommended - tennis balls.

Image courtesy www.amazon.co.uk

Review: Masters of Battle - Monty, Patton and Rommel at War, by Terry Brighton

Growing up, I was taught about the two World War II Generals most respected by my father, General Bernard "Monty" Montgomery and The Desert Fox, Field Marshal Erwin Rommel. As someone who had served in the Australian Army and who has taken an interest in military history, he was someone to whom I listened about such things. Dad knew about this stuff. When I was 15 I became friends with an Aussie Digger who had fought at Tobruk and at El Alamein in the North African campaign alongside other Commonwealth forces. He took orders from Monty to try and defeat the Fox. The ANZACs achieved one of their greatest victories in North Africa against one of their greatest opponents, so I was raised with an appreciation for the exploits of the two combating leaders. Dad never told me much about General George S. Patton though. What I picked up was mainly from my favourite TV show, Red Dwarf; which was chiefly that because the insufferable Arnold Rimmer worshipped him, Patton was likely to be an arrogant, warmongering prat. It's strange how you pick up stuff as a sixteen year-old.

In his excellent book Masters of Battle: Monty, Patton and Rommel at War, British historian Terry Brighton counterpoints the period's most famous generals, one each from England, the US and Germany. He does so in such a way that each man's abilities and failures are obvious and connected in so strongly that it's apparent their individual achievements - good or bad - were not so much a product of the system, but of their own strength of personality. The case for comparison - or contrast - is easier with this trio as all were born within five years of one another and had different paths to their exalted ranks. They all were heavily involved in armoured warfare (ie. tanks) and each had, though starting from the same tactical basis, evolved their own theories about how best war was to be fought in the four battlefields they shared. Each was a soldier first, but all were very proud, egotistical leaders who enjoyed major victories and suffered dispiriting losses as a result of their shortcomings.

That's not to suggest Brighton focuses mainly on the trio's negative aspects. He elegantly suggests that the strengths which generated each man's success were also weaknesses when unchecked and therefore key contributors in any failures. Patton's ability to inspire his men came from the same seeds that led him to be short-tempered and occasionally impulsive. Monty, as a self-styled master tactician, planned battles immaculately but found victories harder to marshal when the other side didn't proceed according to his forward planning. Rommel, so long the favourite of the Fuhrer, found skirmishes increasingly harder to win as his reputation grew to the point where his superiors thought his mere presence guaranteed victory, no matter how few resources he received. Each man's ability to lead Armoured divisions is analysed and compared - to each other and to the tactics from which their methods derived. That Patton and Montgomery had to mesh together their vastly differing methods for the sake of victory - and simply keeping the peace - adds another wrinkle which Brighton also explores in depth.

More than a comparison but an insight into how connected the trio were, Masters of Battle describes major conflicts in a very easy-to-read manner and deftly captures the personality traits of three men in a way which has you respecting one marshal at the expense of the others; then only to describe further actions which tips the balance another way.

Masters of Battle: Monty, Patton and Rommel at war scores basketballs - a first class read.

Image courtesy: http://www.angusrobertson.com.au