Kaiser Wilhelm II: A Life in Power

Profiles in Power

by Christopher Clark

King of Prussia, German Emperor, war leader and defeated exile, Kaiser Wilhelm II was one of the most important - and most controversial - figures in the history of twentieth-century Europe. But how much power did he really have?

Christopher Clark, winner of the Wolfson prize for his history of Prussia, Iron Kingdom, follows Kaiser Wilhelm's political career from his youth at the Hohenzollern court through the turbulent decades of the Wilhelmine era into global war and the collapse of Germany in 1918, to his last days. He asks: what was his true role in the events that led to the outbreak of the First World War? What was the nature and extent of his control? What were his political goals and his success in achieving them? How did he project authority and exercise influence? And how did his people really view him?

Through original research, Clark presents a fresh new interpretation of this contentious figure, focusing on how his thirty-year reign from 1888 to 1918 affected Germany, and the rest of Europe, for years to come.

Genres: History, Biography, Germany, Nonfiction, World War I, European History, Biography Memoir

464 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

About the author

Sir Christopher Munro Clark FBA is an Australian historian living in the United Kingdom and Germany. He is the twenty-second Regius Professor of History at the University of Cambridge. In 2015, he was knighted for his services to Anglo-German relations.

Reviews

[Anthony · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Brash Young Man.

Christopher Clark provides an analysis of the political power and influence of Kaiser Wilhelm II and as such this should not be considered a full biography. Clark here intends not to try and rejuvenate Wilhelm, but to show a more fair and balanced view. Clark has recently said in an interview that he ‘neither adores or despises the Hohenzollerns’ and this is reflected in his writing, which is fairly coherent but at times difficult to follow. My reason for giving Clark’s book four stars is because of this. He does not have the fair or command of language as, for example Roy Jenkins.

Clark shows that the Kaiser in actual fact had less power and influence than traditionally thought and at the same time, if his grandfather or father were still on the throne in 1917-18, the monarchy would have probably survived. Wilhelm tried to wield more power and become more involved in politics than his forebears, was overconfident, sporadic and relatively ineffective. However, he was not the warmongering criminal he has often been made out to be. In recent years public opinion on this and the Germans in the First World War as a whole have changed. Clark shows he was a man who wanted peace and tried to secure it in the face of the July crisis of 1914. He did not provide a ‘blank cheque’ to the Austrians and was against the submarine tactics imposed by the high command. He was a national symbol and a father of his people, which he developed into as he became more mature. However he did commit one critical mistake, to leave Berlin in 1918 for Spa which alienated him from the German Public.

In my opinion German was better off with him than without as he was the central unifying figure who genuinely loved his country and the people in it. If he did not abdicate it would have almost certainly prevented the need for another central figure a ‘Furher’ and the horrific rise of Adolf Hitler. This is a good, balanced book. Important for understanding the First World War and German History. Clark is a master of German history and the Hohenzollerns and is providing himself to be one of the authorities on the subject.

[Boudewijn · Rating 3 out of 5]

How powerful was the Kaiser?

This is not a biography - it rather deals with how influential (or not) The Kaiser was in shaping the course of German policy, both internal as foreign policy. It shows the often strained relationship he had with the chancellors, who tried to neutralise Wilhelm's faux pas or erratic behaviour, some with success, others not. The chapters each deal with a different aspect, from the start of his reign under Bismarck until the end of his life in Amerongen, the Netherlands.

Wilhelm comes across as a man without a clear and coherent political vision or programme, easily manipulated and terrified of public opinion. The Kaiser picked up ideas, became excited about them, got bored and dropped them, sometimes all in one day. In the end, the tragedy is clear: perhaps with a more neutral, self-assured Kaiser Germany could have prevented World War I, although in what extent will remain unclear forever.

Read in Dutch

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Of all the books I have read about the First World War, none have changed my mind about an aspect of it more than this.

I used to buy into the popular idea of Kaiser Wilhelm II as an unstable militarist who was largely responsible for the First World War. But, as this book demonstrates, the Kaiser was not much of a militarist. He tried to be, but was never at ease and the soldiers looked on him with contempt. And, as the war approached, he was, as often as not, a moderating influence on German policy. As Clark makes clear, there were many individuals and institutions pushing Germany to war prior to 1914, not least of which was the army.

Wilhelm was certainly an incompetent monarch, but the constitutional of the newly formed German Empire would have put any monarch in a difficult position. It placed both great responsibility and little real power in the hands of one man. The Kaiser was not up to this challenge, but it is doubtful that anyone else would have been.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have enormous respect for Christopher Clark since he not only writes clearly but demonstrates in his books that he has consulted as many sources as he can and makes use of the evidence. Sometimes this leads him to draw conclusions that are at odds with the popular view of certain characters in history, or indeed events, but also incurs some obloquy from fellow historians who have taken a different and usually less nuanced approach. This book is a good example. Most people who know Kaiser Wilhelm II from their history lessons and books think he was a loose cannon in Germany in the run-up to the First World War and indeed was a prime reason the war occurred in the first place. Not so, according to Christopher Clark. Yes, he could be unstable and veer from pessimism to optimism in a worryingly short period, but often this did not matter because he did not exercise absolute power in the German Reich. Clark demonstrates that several forces had a hand on the tiller in governing Germany at this period and various characters influenced Wilhelm one way or the other. The trouble was the Reich as set up by Bismarck was sometimes unclear and at times downright contradictory over the powers ascribed to the position of emperor, and this left Wilhelm both frustrated and sometimes completely powerless. Life is always more nuanced than we like to think! An excellent read.

[Corinna · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very well researched and balanced book on the reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II. It centers around the question of how much power the last monarch really had and how big his influence on german politics between 1888 and 1918 was. Don't go into this expecting a biography. It is an essay about the german monarchy and constitution of 1871 and how Wilhelm shaped the role of the German Kaiser. Clark paints a well balanced picture of Wilhelm II., which goes much deeper than the ususal demonization of Wilhelm. I especially liked the part about Wilhelm's foreign politics and his part in the outbreak of WWI - while Clark is far from taking the blame away from Wilhelm altogether, he suceeds in painting a larger picture that cannot just be seen in black and white. It's always easy to measure history by its outcomes. Clark takes the more difficult route by trying to shift contemporary statements into a broader context and not taking a few ill-considered declarations (which, to be fair, Wilhelm made very easy) to reinforce an already set view on the matter.

[Liam Ostermann · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is difficult to criticise the Riegus Professor of History at Cambridge, it almost seems like a form of Lèse-majesté - who am I to have reservations with his work? Well I do because there is an element of slaying imaginary dragons and 'overturning' shibboleths that have long been toppled and forgotten. Maybe all I am saying is that Clark is helped by a sophisticated publicity department in his publisher who knows how to provide the sort easy 'factoid' rich rich press pack that reviewers in the classy book publications rely on.

I must admit that my views on Clark are influenced by his complicated involvement with the current head of the Hohenzollern family to get back, or compensation for, properties and artworks seized WWII in what was the DDR (see for example: https://www.spiegel.de/international/...) although he eventually changed his mind there has always been in his writings on Prussia and the Hohenzollerns a tendency towards sympathy and contrarian support. Of course that is the stuff of history but I would be wary of taking Clark's view of Wilhelm II over that of the likes of John Rohl.

Clark doesn't see the Kaiser as powerful or effective, Rohl does. The problem is the Kaiser talked tough and warlike and left ample 'proof' of warlike intentions. But it has long been known that Kaiser's bark was worse than his bite. Clark reveals nothing new there. Rohl (whose relevant monumental volumes Wilhelm II came out long after Clark's) book held him more to account and responsible for the outbreak of WWI. I am less forgiving of Wilhelm II then Clark and while Rohl may overstate things I follow his thoughts.

The problem with Wilhelm was the posturing, war mongering, persona he projected. That he might have been less directly warlike doesn't change that he was trapped by that 'persona' and despite his desire for peace when push came to shove he wanted to be seen as a warlord.

The uniform wearing medal bedecked popinjays who held power in the various empires and kingdoms before WWI were of mediocrity that is astounding. That they were used by politicians and others doesn't reduce their responsibility for the calamity of WWI. They had the power, that men like Wilhelm II did really know how to use it doesn't excuse him.

It is a splendid 'political' biography but I remain unconvinced by its arguments.

[Yannic · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ein sehr übersichtlicher und beeindruckend fundierter Einblick in das Leben des letzten Kaisers. Ich schätze Clark sehr, aber ich befürchte, er geht mit Wilhelm sehr sanft ins Gericht. Das Buch liest sich, besonders ab der zweiten Hälfte, wie eine Apologie. Es ist sicherlich ein anregender Perspektivenwechsel, den Kaiser nicht als kriegslüsternen Preussen zu sehen (wie ich es aus dem Geschichtsunterricht erinnere), aber das "er hat manchmal mit reichen Juden gegessen, da kann er wohl kein Antisemit sein" war dann noch ein bisschen viel (obwohl Clark sich alle Mühe gibt, um nicht zu bagatellisieren).

[Luis Sanz · Rating 3 out of 5]

El libro merece cuatro estrellas por el contenido, Clark escribe de forma clara y entendible, haciendo amena la lectura.
¿Por qué tres estrellas entonces? Las notas y la bibliografía, aparecen juntas, no habiendo una lista de libros ordenados, sino que están todos entremezclados en las notas al final del libro.

[Dropbear123 · Rating 4 out of 5]

4/5

The book isn't really a biography, it focuses specifically on the theme of power. Where Kaiser Wilhelm II had influence and the power to make decisions and where he didn't, for a variety of reasons, lacked real power. Clark pretty strongly argues that for a mix of reasons that Wilhelm didn't really have much power, especially after 1900, or that much influence over events. The basic narrative is of the Kaiser having some influence over domestic policy and an ambition to change it in the 1890s as he could manipulate the chancellors of the period fairly well, but after Bulow became chancellor Wilhelm's domestic policy influence collapsed. In foreign policy Clark basically says the Kaiser had very little influence because his advisors effectively 'managed' him, sometimes even witholding information from him, and also because Wilhelm couldn't commit to anything, one week he hated the Tsar next week he loved the Tsar (also that the dynastic connections didn't mean that much so that area didn't really matter). There was sort of a revival of the Kaiser's power in the first half of the First World War, in particular his ability to appoint key officials kept Falkenhayn in the job as Chief of the German General Staff for quite a while despite him having lots of rivals. And in the Kaiser's opposition to unrestricted submarine warfare which delayed its implementation to early 1917 rather than 1916 despite public and military opinion. But that's before his final loss of power to Hindenburg and Ludendorff.

A big theme is that in theory Wilhelm had a lot of power, but he failed to use it effectively. He could appoint key figures like chancellors, but once they were in office they went in their own direction. He had the potential to influence foreign policy, but couldn't commit to anything. He had the potential to positively influence public opinion but couldnt control how he was depicted (which Clark attributes to there being so many distinct groups, parties, regions etc in Imperial Germany that anything the Kaiser said could be interpreted in dozens of ways).

There is also quite a bit on the historiographic side of things, the views of various other historians and whether Clark agrees with them or not.

Overall if you have any interest in pre-World War One Europe or in Imperial Germany I'd say it's worth a read. Because it is not a biography I'd say a little bit of knowledge of the time period or of Imperial Germany in general would be a help but not essential.

[Jael · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this historical analysis, or investigation, if you will (not a biography!), Cristopher Clark delivers fantastic work in answering the question 'how influential was the last Kaiser in shaping policy during his reign?'

With the help of a vast number of sources, Clark concludes that it is Wilhelm's personality and character that prevented him from showing strong leadership, but that this same personality and his mere presence influenced decision-making in the German reich in significant ways.

[Mika · Rating 4 out of 5]

kommt raus aus der dämonisierung ohne zu verherrlichen. nur zu sehr auf seine rolle vor dem ersten weltkrieg fokussiert (völkermord in deutsch südwest afrika kommt garnicht vor).

[Jon · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not a biography, but an interesting and well-reasoned essay on Kaiser Wilhelm's often fraught relationship with political power. I agree with most of the reasoning and conclusions, but I think some emphasis should also have been placed on his chronic laziness. He would only work at anything if it enthused him, and his enthusiasms never lasted long. He wanted (especially in the 1890s) to take up the reins of power and become the actual ruler of the German Empire, but he was entirely unwilling to put in the time or the effort to achieve his aim. This, plus his inability to stick to any sort of consistent view or programme, pretty much excluded him from the exercise of real power; he was unable to steer the ship of state.

(If he we add in Wilhelm's bluster, bragging, insecurity, cowardice, indiscreet relations with the media and peculiar grooming habits - the famous moustache - it does remind me very much of a more recent statesman ... but Wilhelm was more intelligent, always played by the rules, and never tried to abuse the system for his own personal benefit).

[Colin · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is not a biography of the Kaiser and avoids to a large extent the personal and psychological aspects that often attract interest in this character. Instead Clark provides a relatively short piece which concentrates on Wilhelm's role in politics and government and the extent to which he made or influenced key decisions. The case is well argued and one gets a clear sense of the Kaiser's limited authority, in spite of the bombast and posturing. One major complaint from me is the lack of a bibliography to accompany the endnotes.

[Nick · Rating 4 out of 5]

At one point in this book, the author questions whether Kaiser Wilhelm II merits a place in the series "Profiles in Power". Despite his starring role in Allied propaganda, Wilhelm comes off as an erratic and fairly powerless monarch, a picker of generals rather than a military leader himself. Thanks Bismarck's handiwork, the Kaiser's role was largely limited to the military. He intermittently injected himself into foreign policy, trying to keep his cousions Tsar Nicholas II and King George V--especially George V--from allying against Germany, but he seems to have believed in the great man theory of history-making, down to the last desperate effort to rally the troops, rather in the boring daily tasks of crafting implementable policy, working to create capacity, logistics, little things like that were the purview of ordinary unroyal people, many of them bureaucrats.

As for the major error of his life, kindling World War I, Clark's Wilhelm doesn't even come off as one of the major fools. Those positions of disgrace are left open to the Habsburgs, for their policy of aggression toward the Balkans and the alliances of the Russians with the Serbs and the French with the Russians. Certainly, there was a component of the German military that was looking forward to another quick victory like 1871; one gets the impression that, everyone who remembered Napoleon being dead, the Europeans thought of war as brushfires that wouldn't get out of hand. While Wilhelm had military sympathies--he was especially keen on building the German navy to compete with the British--he doesn't seem to be one of the major factors in the rush to war, not following through on efforts to restrain the Austrians and Russians, efforts that would likely have failed anyway. The fault may have been in his stars, but he was too proud and undisciplined to affect them in any way.

[Carlos Wang · Rating 4 out of 5]

威廉二世是頗具爭議性的德國君主，許多學者、專家把大戰的罪責加諸於其身，將他描述成一個“非正常”的政治領袖，其負面形象恐怕只略遜於納粹諸公。但這恐怕也是過時的見解，至少爆發戰爭的原因只怪罪於他一人未免太可笑。一戰百年已過，對它的研究著作多如過江之鯽，恐非個人窮究其生可以閱畢。在華文圈內，相關作品也是相當的豐富，廣場出版社曾推出英國學者尼爾‧佛格森(Niall Ferguson) 關於一戰的研究大作，裡面網羅了各色解釋大戰爆發的學說，極具參考性。關於戰史部分，李德‧哈特的作品也仍未過時。本書作者克里斯多夫‧克拉克(Christopher Clark)撰寫的《夢遊者》，幾年前也曾被引進推出，其中的見解讓人印象深刻。這次他關於威廉二世的個人小傳記簡體版一問世，就立刻買來拜讀了。



克拉克在這本《沉重的皇冠》裡，並非單純的想要描述威廉二世的一生。他把重心放在探討這位皇帝，在由那位政治巨人俾斯麥打造出的德意志帝國政治體系中，究竟承擔了什麼樣的角色，發揮了多少影響，是否真如一般所指控的那樣“帶著德國朝大戰之路邁進”。





首先，克拉克拒絕了那些常被慣用的“心理分析，精神鑑定”，他並非否定這種手法的價值，只對於這些“診斷”有多大程度的可靠性感到疑慮，作者寧願用“理性”的精神去解讀具體的史料，而非採取先入為主的價值判斷。個人對此頗感認同。但克拉克也承認，威廉二世的個性中有許多不安定的因子，這些對一個領導人來說，“並不合適”。他常常興致沖沖的對某件事情熱衷，但又很快的動搖，變的舉棋不定；貌似有主見，但其實容易為人左右；而且沒什麼遠見，甚至帶著某種程度的幼稚。克拉克認為他這種個性，多少跟青少年時代的成長環境有關，他早早的就捲入了政治鬥爭之中，夾在保守派祖父跟自由派父母之間，加上那位鐵血宰相俾斯麥，每個人都對他產生了影響，而各方勢力的對立，也讓這位年輕人很早就得學會站位。特別是俾斯麥，作者認為，雖然威廉二世最終逼走了這位老宰相，但很明顯的，他是試圖仿效巨人在複雜的德意志帝國政治體系中操弄政治平衡，然後玩弄國際外交權謀。不過他拙劣的手法，讓自己往往在國內政局中只能和稀泥，有時候反而是成為政客手中的棋子。在外交上，按照塔奇曼‧芭芭拉在她的經典《八月砲火》中的說法，則是：常常搞的(德國)駐各國大使精神耗弱。由此可見，威廉二世或許在帝國的影響力，究竟有多少程度，值得懷疑。



當然，克拉克也不是一力的“洗白”威廉二世。十九世紀末是“維多利亞黃金歲月”的尾聲，其實也是風起雲湧的年代，德意志帝國在中歐做為一股難以忽略的勢力“大國崛起”，為歐洲的國際政治帶來變數，本來，如果在一位有遠見跟擔當、魄力的執政者領導下，或許會有不同的面貌。(就像許多學者為了如果威廉二世的父親沒有英年早逝會有怎樣的結果爭論不休) 但威廉二世的個性中的弱點，讓他無法如英國國王般的一個協調角色去控制俾斯麥留下的複雜政治體系，也無心力去改革修正它；於是德國就像是一艘表面威力強大，但內部充滿缺陷的戰艦，卻在汪洋中沒有航行的方向，然後最終觸礁。當然，威廉二世做為君主自然是要為此負擔起責任，但他感覺就像是明末的崇禎，一位心有餘而力不足，錯在不該於其位上的君王。

對於克拉克的評論認不認同是一回事，但他的觀點都其來有自，推理脈絡清晰，在《夢遊者》中已讓人印象深刻，本書篇幅雖短，但威廉二世的政治生涯算是給了一個充份的解釋。只是可惜，中國的中信出版社引進了作者三本作品：《夢遊者》、《鋼鐵帝國》跟《沉重的皇冠》，但翻譯都不如人意，本書算是之中“最好”的吧。有心人士還是努力讀原文吧。



至於，對戰前帝王平民的眾生相描述的最活靈活現的當屬塔奇曼‧芭芭拉的《八月砲火》跟《驕傲之塔》，看本書之前不妨先翻翻。

[Alexander Velasquez · Rating 4 out of 5]

In my undergraduate world history course, I was taught that Kaiser Wilhelm II's arrogance and swagger was what helped plunge Europe into the First World War. But after reading this book, I almost feel sorry for Wilhelm because Christopher Clark argues that, in reality, Wilhelm wanted to keep the peace—but the peace was beyond his control. As a matter of fact, most of the decision-making was outside of Wilhelm's control. The only real power Wilhelm had was in appointing people to positions of power. But once they were in their respective positions of power, Wilhelm had no control over the direction they went in or in their policymaking; and this was true both in domestic politics and in foreign policy. However, the one exception was the navy where Wilhelm was a decisive influence in embarking on a naval arms race with Britain. In sum, this is not so much a biography of Wilhelm as much as it is a defense of Wilhelm; but it's a good one, and I have nothing but respect for Christopher Clark's eye-opening scholarship on the subject.

[Filip · Rating 4 out of 5]

Oh Wilhelm. Man oh man were you a character.

Despite being an academic piece of writing, some passages feel like fiction and Wilhelm is the protagonist – duh! The guy simply could not keep his mouth shut. Very dangerous for a man in his position.

Christopher Clark convincingly argues that Wilhelm’s horrendous standing in historiography is largely unjustified. Firstly, Wilhelm’s extent of power within a rather ambigious constitutional setting, was vastly curtailed. Secondly, Wilhelm in many decisive moments Wilhelm seems to have been outmaneuvered by more aggressive warmongers like Hindenburg and Ludendorff as well as more machiavellian chancelors like Bülow and Bethmann. Lastly, Wilhelm himself had zilch consistency of principle an direction. All in all, he was more a misshapen statesman than a vile lunatic. (On that note, his statements about Jews in latter years are horrendous. I had no idea. Here too, Christopher Clark convincingly discredits their potency and meaning)
Thanks P for the recommendation.

[Daniel Schotman · Rating 4 out of 5]

As stated below. Not so much a biography but rather a book about the emperor's political involvements in the period and events leading up to the start of WO1. I think Clark can be classified as a revisionist as many pages are used to revise the rather radical interpretations on both sides. Though Clark does stay more in the middle, there can be no doubt about the incompetence that is displayed throughout and throughout. Especially the last 2 chapters, dealing with his involvement (or lach thereof) in the outbreak of Wo1 and the day to day decision making during the war were particularly interesting. WII never wanted war, so much is sure but as so often he was betrayed, used, misled and abused by his surrounding advisors, who really seem to have wanted war.

As such the book serves as a perfect statement against a monarchic rule :-)

[GuyBanff · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fantastic book by Fantastic Historian

Mr. Clark sets out to describe Kaiser Wilhelm's exercise of power. He focuses on overtly political institutions, especially the office of chancellor, navy command, army command, and less so parliamentary politics.

Mentioned only in passing is the cultural role Wilhelm played as monarch, Wilhelm's cultivation of "friends" or at least courtiers in the fields of technology, science, and self made industrialists would have added to the book. Wilhelms exercise of ceremonial power such as the Jews and other notables he enobled by an author as deft as Christopher Clark would be fascinating. Alas, probably we must seek out a less proficient author for such a work,

[Florian Lorenzen · Rating 3 out of 5]

Im Unterschied zu seinem exzellenten Preußen-Buch sowie "Die Schlafwandler" hat mich Christopher Clarks Porträt über Wilhelm II. am Ende nicht so wirklich überzeugt. Es hat mich in Teilen etwas gelangweilt und im Hinblick auf seine NS-Kontakte ist es wohl auch nicht mehr auf Höhe des aktuellen Forschungsstandes. Für mich ein insgesamt durchwachsenes Werk.

Vollständige Review hier: https://www.instagram.com/p/CnB2gOZrCgR

[Stephen Selbst · Rating 4 out of 5]

Christopher Clark wrote a balanced and well-researched book on the reign of Kaiser Wilhelm II. Clark's view is that Wilhelm was weak, disorganized and impetuous, but not the militaristic warmonger he has been accused of being. In particular he argues that Wilhelm was not responsible for starting World War I, a charge that has been laid at his feet. A well-written analysis.

[Ferdy Smelt · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interessant boek die mij een nieuwe kijk op de laatste keizer van Duitsland en koning van Pruisen heeft gegeven. In zijn boek geeft Clark een heldere en objectief overkomende analyse over de macht die de keizer daadwerkelijk had tijdens zijn regeerperiode en of hij inderdaad zo verantwoordelijk is voor het uitbreken van WWI zoals veelal wordt verondersteld.

[Jacqueline · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have read several books about Wilhelm II and it is always a sad read. He was a very troubled man who made a mess of his role as a leader and is blamed for the start of the Great war. This book was well organized into sections and brought to life this troubled and difficult man who ruled Germany for 30 yrs.

[Kathleen Van Lierop · Rating 4 out of 5]

Christopher Clark wrote a splendid book about Emperor Wilhelm (William) II
of Germany. More review on this link:
https://allaboutroyalfamilies.blogspo...

[Hans Keukens · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a good book. But the chapter about German internal politics is a bit much for me. The chapters about the run-up to the great war and the chapter during the war were very interesting.

Overall a good book, but not a great book

[Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Insightful and nuanced.
A good companion piece to Iron Kingdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600–1947.

[Luis Belisario · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book depicted a man of his era. His ego-driven personality and ingenuity avoided him to listen to the great genius of his time, Bismarck. Who cherised and carefully curated alliances he destroid in a way destroying the German Empire along with it.

[Jimbo · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author is skilled in writing histories that are both comprehensive and accessible to the non-specialist.

[Martinus Eleets · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent and very much an appendage to 'The Iron Kingdom'.

[Shane Hill · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a bad read but quite dry in many places.