darkemeralds. (Reply)

Posted by

I appreciate the warning, but even Niall Ferguson is probably more accurate than my only prior source on the subject of the American Revolution; to wit, the near-religious catechism in elementary school about The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere and the Boston Tea Party. That was the beginning and end of my education in that part of US history.

(To be perfectly fair, Sleepy Hollow is probably more accurate than my elementary school education.)

I almost didn't get past Ferguson's bizarre introduction where the Empire was a fine, fine thing complete with zebra-skin souvenirs. But then he goes on to pile up facts that say, to any right-thinking person, that the British empire was abhorrent, so I kept listening, and sure enough, he seems to refute his core idea in every chapter. If he's assuming that the reader will arrive at the "Empire=Good/White Men=Best" conclusion that he thinks his facts point to, he's nuts, and very likely a horrible human being.

But I don't have any reason to think he's invented the facts themselves--the names, dates, places, numerical data, and written documents he cites--out of the whole cloth. (Based on your comment, I went looking for refutations of fact in this specific book and am not easily finding any--though they may be buried under more recent accusations of fact-manipulation in a Newsweek article about Obama in 2012.)

As a first exposure to things like various uprisings in India, the acreage granted by the crown to William Penn, enumeration of the African slave trade, the actual money figure of the tax on tea in the American colonies, etc., the book is pretty interesting.

If I'd been considering it as a purchase, I'd certainly have read reviews first and not bought it. But it was free from the public library, so I went ahead. Hopefully I'm not in too much danger of being deeply misinformed or swayed.