Grand unified books thread

[Eddie Teach]

Does anybody know of any interesting books on Sumerian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Carthaginian civilizations,

Gilgamesh
The Aeneid

[The Minsky Moment]

Does anybody know of any interesting books on Sumerian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Carthaginian civilizations, particularly their religion and government?

I was looking for something similar recently, but my books still to be read list is already rather daunting without taking on a whole new category.

[Queequeg]

Does anybody know of any interesting books on Sumerian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Carthaginian civilizations, particularly their religion and government?

I was looking for something similar recently, but my books still to be read list is already rather daunting without taking on a whole new category.

If you find anything, be sure to post it.  Heather's The Fall is very interesting.  Actually, I think a pretty large percentage of the books I read now I originally hear of on here.

Anyone read A Farewell To Alms?  It is a bit like a Diamond book, though I don't think the author is as intelligent or, to be honest, as qualified.  A bit too much Slate-style counter-intuitivieness for counter-intuitiveness' sake for my taste, though a lot of the raw information and basic points are very interesting.

[Queequeg]

Currently reading, more or less simultaneously:
A Farewell to Alms, mentioned previously.
The Fall of the Roman Empire, very interesting, author has quite a knowledge of the period and is just talented.   Love the look at barbarian lifestyles, though I'm afraid that at times the book tends towards generality; I know enough of the Hunnic expansion to know that their mastery of the asymmetric Hunnic bow was certainly not enough to kick out all the Indo-European peoples from the steppe as the Saka and Yuezhi used a transitory type of bow closer to the Hunnic than the Scythian.  I'm wondering if the work is full of this and I just don't know it, or if this is just a particularly difficult subject, probably the latter.

On my recently acquired Kindle
Osman's Dream: A bit too much a series of events, I'd vastly prefer a description of some of the infinitely more fascinating Ottoman social structures and practices (the devşirme, the various Sufi orders).  Also, for all her respect for Ottoman and Muslim civilization, her views on the Byzantines are fantastically silly. The Byzantine Church didn't break from Rome, Rome just got uppity. 
The Evolution of God: Very interesting, if occasionally a little shallow or mystical (I generally like my religion and my scholarship to be as separated as possible). A lot of fascinating anecdotes. 

Recently Finished
The Great Arab Conquests. Very military centered, as the title would suggest.  Very interesting; fascinating how skilled, fanatical and clever the early Muslims were.  Undoutably some of the greatest conquerers in history even if they were basically fighting two huge corpses for dominance of most of the world. 

[jimmy olsen]

The library has a learn to read Korean set but it's out.

So I took out Red Phoenix by Larry Bond instead!  

[The Minsky Moment]

The Fall of the Roman Empire, very interesting, author has quite a knowledge of the period and is just talented.   Love the look at barbarian lifestyles, though I'm afraid that at times the book tends towards generality; I know enough of the Hunnic expansion to know that their mastery of the asymmetric Hunnic bow was certainly not enough to kick out all the Indo-European peoples from the steppe as the Saka and Yuezhi used a transitory type of bow closer to the Hunnic than the Scythian.  I'm wondering if the work is full of this and I just don't know it, or if this is just a particularly difficult subject, probably the latter.

Problem with this period is the paucity and lack of reliability of source material.  When you actually start compiling the hard evidence about the Huns or the "Hunnic expansion" it is distressingly light.  We know that a people that the Romans called the Huns show up at a certain point and do things like harass the Goths, exact tribute from Constantinople and periodically raid the West.  We know that their core elite group claimed a steppe nomad ancestry and rode horses.  We know that by the time they become a significant factor in Roman politics, they -- like most of the barbarian gens -- are in fact made up of a polyglot, multi-cultural warrior band, employing a bewildering variety of weapons and tactics (and at least some sources a suggest a primarily infantry force).  We know the basics of their direct impact within the Empire and their spectacular post-Attila collapse.  And we also have at our disposal a variety of supposed oral histories, legends, apochropha and travellers tales about them.   Add it all up and it doesn't come to that much; the usual historical approach is then to try to make various plausible inferences; not surprisingly, historians can't seem to fully agree as to which inferences are plausible. 

[Sheilbh]

Osman's Dream: A bit too much a series of events, I'd vastly prefer a description of some of the infinitely more fascinating Ottoman social structures and practices (the devşirme, the various Sufi orders).  Also, for all her respect for Ottoman and Muslim civilization, her views on the Byzantines are fantastically silly. The Byzantine Church didn't break from Rome, Rome just got uppity. 

The Byzantines left Holy Mother Church.  It was probably for the best because they were a degenerate civilisation.  When they are ready to return (on their knees in sackcloth with ashes on their face) we'll be ready, we'll be where we always have been and where we always have been.  Unlike some

[Queequeg]

The Byzantines left Holy Mother Church.  It was probably for the best because they were a degenerate civilisation.  When they are ready to return (on their knees in sackcloth with ashes on their face) we'll be ready, we'll be where we always have been and where we always have been.  Unlike some

Figured you were above trolling, Sheilbh.  And of course the Orthodox Church's heart had to move; The Whore of Rome made sure of that.

Besides, how can one love the Ottomans without the Byzantines?  The Byzantine tradition was the greater part of the Ottoman; without the Greeks and Armenians, the Turks never would have risen above the status of semi-literate, half-Persianate nomads, living off raids and slavery. 

[Queequeg]

Add it all up and it doesn't come to that much; the usual historical approach is then to try to make various plausible inferences; not surprisingly, historians can't seem to fully agree as to which inferences are plausible.

Completely understand.  But my complaint is that Heather speaks with far more certainty than is appropriate for the field. 

[Razgovory]

I've found Beevor's Stalingrad somewhat disappointing.  He takes alot of the German accounts at face value.  He unquestionably accepts the 22 Panzer division excuse for it's poor performance which amount to "Mice ate our tanks".  That always seemed like a lame excuse.  He also criticizes Gehlen for correctly for failing to spot the soviet mobilization against Army group South.  He makes it seem as if he was concerned by an imaginary offensive against Army Group Center.  He never mention that the Soviets did launch a major offensive in that area.

[Barrister]

Recently Finished
The Great Arab Conquests. Very military centered, as the title would suggest.  Very interesting; fascinating how skilled, fanatical and clever the early Muslims were.  Undoutably some of the greatest conquerers in history even if they were basically fighting two huge corpses for dominance of most of the world.

I've put that one on hold for the moment.  Definitely very interesting period in history, but also interesting how few sources of information we have.  I found it to be a somewhat dry read, which is unusual for all the violence and killing it describes.

[Scipio]

Recently Finished
The Great Arab Conquests. Very military centered, as the title would suggest.  Very interesting; fascinating how skilled, fanatical and clever the early Muslims were.  Undoutably some of the greatest conquerers in history even if they were basically fighting two huge corpses for dominance of most of the world.

I've put that one on hold for the moment.  Definitely very interesting period in history, but also interesting how few sources of information we have.  I found it to be a somewhat dry read, which is unusual for all the violence and killing it describes.

I love it.

[Sheilbh]

Besides, how can one love the Ottomans without the Byzantines?  The Byzantine tradition was the greater part of the Ottoman; without the Greeks and Armenians, the Turks never would have risen above the status of semi-literate, half-Persianate nomads, living off raids and slavery.

I don't love the Ottomans I think their degenerate too.  In that region I love the Turkish Republic, Israel, the Arabs, the Persia of Nader Shah and 20th century Iran.  The rest are degenerate dead weight

[garbon]

Sheilbh prefers the overthrow of legitimate regimes by delusional people of ill repute (re: Cromwell, Nadir Shah, Ataturk...Obama).

[HisMajestyBOB]

Anyone have a good book on Chinese history, particularly the Yuan, Ming, and/or Qing Dynasties? I'm looking for something of a general history, though with a focus on the political and military aspects (i.e., struggles within and without), and cultural/economic aspects (trade, how people made their living). And nothing dry or academic - I don't want to be put to sleep.

Naturally, any recommendations that don't fit all of the above are welcome. I don't expect to find something that fits exactly what I'm looking for.