Harold Nicolson (1886–1968)

Well-written, and still useful, 1924 study of the unromantic circumstances that led to Byron's personal involvement in the Greek Revolt. A beautifully detailed account of the complete failure of this undertaking in the winter of 1823/1824, and of Byron's growing disappointment and uncertainty, and his final illness and death in the marshes and pouring rain of Missolonghi -- an area so wet that "the dykes of Holland when broken down are are deserts for dryness in comparison", as Byron said -- show more surrounded by unruly Souliot mercenaries, European adventurers, parasites, and incompetent doctors. Despite good psychological insight and a remarkably no-nonsense approach to the poet's life, Nicolson's tone is very apologetic regarding British imperialism, while using Orientalist, even racist terminology to describe the Ottoman Empire -- in sharp contrast to Byron's own approach to the wildly complicated political and ethnic situation in the Ottoman Aegean. show less

Published in 1946 that is, at a time when Europe were just waking up from the military ambtions of dictators that had thrown her into total war, drawing parallels with the last days of the napoleonic saga would have been easy and very tempting. Well, hat off to the author because he doesn't! On the contrary, he insists history is a matter of circumstances and, as circumstances differ with various generations it doesn't repeat itself.

Such a view (again, remarkable considering the context) show more makes of this book more than an account of a diplomatic conference in european history. It's a window open on the circumstances that affected its decisions, from the personalities involved to the events (tragic or downright ridiculous) that changed its agendas more than once.

Being himself a diplomat, the portraits Harold Nicolson offers of Talleyrand, Lord Castlereagh, the Tsar Alexander Ist or, between the lines, Napoleon and Louis XVIII are a gem. Replacing it all in the context of a tumultuous period he, in the end, doesn't hide his admiration for such an endeavour. Indeed, it's easy to criticise the shortfalls and failures of such a conference (e.g. the rise of nationalisms, People's Springs...) but, let's not forget we'll have to wait 1914 for Europe to be plunged again into the chaos of a total war. Having laid the foundations for a century of peace is not that bad, is it?

A nice read. show less

The aim of Why Britain is at War was to explain to the British population, in simple terms, why Britain had declared war with Germany in 1939. Being embarrassingly ignorant of the causes of this declaration myself, I thought this would be the ideal book with which to fill that gap in my knowledge. It was a good choice.

This is a very easy read having a straightforward linear narrative, and benefitting greatly from an effective analogy set up in the opening section. This analogy, comparing the show more expansionist activity of Hitler with the murderous activity of George Joseph Smith, is referred to throughout the work.

Although I cannot now claim to have any deep understanding of the lead-up to the Second World War, my ignorance is no longer of such embarrassing proportions. I am sure that this little book will serve as a perfect foundation on which to base further more detailed research on this complex subject, and I would be happy to recommend it as just such a work to others. show less

This book is NOT a gripping read; however, if you want to know about the establishment of modern Europe, and particularly, the British involvement therein, then this is a must read.

Nicolson must have researched extensively for this authoritative and informative book. It is well served by a plethora of notes which would make it ideal for the serious student but, leaving the in depth stuff alone, it acts as an ideal book for the interested amateur too.

Although, I have nothing with which to show more compare this work, to confirm its veracity, I am convinced by its representation of a group of diplomats all fighting in part for their country but equally, for their personal kudos. I was long intrigued by the contempt of Shelly and Byron for Lord Castlereagh: I can see, from this description, why he would not be the sort of man to appeal to their avant-garde outlook on life. show less