The Lessons of History

The writing is clear and concise but the surprisingly childish view of history is genuinely insulting.

This is the first thing I've read of theirs so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt in their wider work. I assume they have produced some great bits of writing on specific areas of history where they're safe from making the mistake of naively broad generalisations justified via highly selective cherry picking.

But this book? It's a disgrace to the study of history.

I bought this book because it was on a list of Lewis Lapham's favorite history books and his description of it sounded good to me. https://bookshop.org/lists/lewis-h-lapham-s-favorite-works-of-history/ I didn't read anything else about it or who the authors were, so I was a bit surprised when it arrived to find that it was written in 1968. This leaves you with some dated opinions on the part of the authors from time to time (particularly about sexuality), but generally it is interesting to hear them venture to give their impressions about civilization and history from having spent their entire lives studying it. With the “view from 3,000 feet” that they provide for 3,000 years or so of history, I found I was more interested in reading the book in very small doses (taking breaks between each short chapter), even though the book is a scare 100 pages. They venture to ask extremely broad questions, even as they acknowledge that it's a foolish thing to attempt.

Some incredibly relevant insights on human nature, the aspects that change and the aspects that don't.

More like a 3.5. Had some very interesting insights into the past but also felt sort of old fashioned when comparing to society today.