This is undoubtedly the best of general world history atlases and a valuable supplement for almost any study of history. The maps are generally quite good in both accuracy and clarity. There is some regrettable sloppiness in the editing, however -- as when a table of dates has Muhammad entering Mecca rather than Medina in 622 (page 99)! There is a useful glossary and a good index. The balance is, as some have noted, tilted toward Europe, but this no doubt merely reflects the fact that serious historical research is essentially a European invention. For the most part the editors have done very well in terms of both spatial and temporal distribution. It is regrettable that there are no indications of sources, however, beyond a general bibliography.

To my mind, the strongest competition to this volume is offered by the Penguin history atlas series authored by Colin McEvedy. McEvedy is much better on historical narrative and generally stronger on facts, but his books do not extend to every place and era, his coverage being strongest in Europe and especially weak in Asia. I wouldn't give up either this volume or the McEvedy books.

One thing which may confuse people in Amazon's listing of this book is that Geoffrey Parker is given as the lead editor. In fact, he edited the fourth edition and seems to have had nothing specifically to do with this fifth edition. The title page lists Geoffrey Barraclough and Richard Overy, and makes clear that the revision of this edition was Overy's work.

I've been on an ancient history kick lately, and since it's been about 20 years since I've done a lot of reading in this area, I thought I would check out what's available in the way of good historical atlases of the ancient world, or of world history in general.

This book is one of the five or so big historical atlases out there that are available. Since I've been looking in detail at all of the current ones, I'll give brief comparisons and you can go from there and decide which one might be best for you.

These alases are great for looking up those events, both momentous and not-so-momentous, to get a quick grasp and overview of the situation without getting bogged down in some more detailed and ponderous history. All the current ones do a decent job of that, but they very in terms of readability, the number of, and detail of, the maps included, and the degree to which they integrate the visual maps and materials with the text. Here's the scoop on all of these.

1. The Hammond Atlas is the traditional "big gun" in the field, being literally the physically biggest and probably most comprehensive of the 5 discussed here. It's also the highest priced, and more expensive than the cheapest one I discuss here by a factor of five. It's still a fine atlas despite the cost, and if I couldn't get any one of the others here, I'd still be happy with this one as it's certainly a beautifully done atlas. The book has over 600 maps and illustrations, many of which show such nice details (which not all the other atlases do) as mountain ranges, and in general are beautifully colored with a variety of symbols showing movements and other important historical and cultural details.

2. The Oxford Atlas of World History is also well written, and has lots of maps just like the Haywood volume. I found the writing style somewhat less interesting than the Haywood atlas, who has a nice, deft touch with the material. These two books are otherwise very close, except that the Haywood volume is less than half the price of this one.

3. The Nat'l Geographic offering has some of the most entertaining writing by Noel Grove and Daniel Boorstin I've found in any history text. Some of the tidbits are really great, such as Grove's comment that "Russia's...Peter the Great died at the age of 53 after diving into the Neva River in winter to rescue drowning sailors." Well, I'd read about him liking to cut off citizens' beards as he walked around town, trying to westernize and modernize Russia, too, so apparently Peter was quite a character in more ways than one.

Also, there was "Vikings were not just ruthless killers; they traded as often as they raided, and their wives knew rights that other medieval women could scarcely imagine." This statement also fits in with a similar description I read in another history, that the Viking and Scandinavian free peasants as a class enjoyed rights and priviledges unparalleled in most of Europe and even England.

However, ironically, this atlas contains the least number of maps and illustrations of all the books here, and oddly enough for an atlas, it actually has very few maps. Most of the graphical illustrations are arts or crafts-related, in fact.

4. The John Haywood Atlas of World History represents a great combination of quality and price. The book consists of articles on a particular period or topic which are closely integrated with the accompanying maps. This makes it very convenient to use. The book was written with a team of geographers and graphic illustrators skilled at combining the written word with graphics, and it shows. Also, this book is one of the more reasonably priced. My only complaint about this history is the index could have been more detailed.

5. The last atlas I wanted to discuss is the Times Atlas of World History. Although now a little dated, having come out almost 10 years ago in 1993, it still counts as one of the most scholarly, well-written, and well-illustrated of these works, and it's also intermediate in terms of price.

Hope my little "Consumer Reports" guide to the major atlas offerings helps. Good luck and happy book buying and reading!

The 4th edition of the Times Atlas of World History was published by Hammond, Inc. With the 5th edition, it has been published in the U.S. as the Hammond Atlas of World History and in the U.K. as The Times History of the World. Both have 375 pages and are edited by Richard Overy.

Aside from being updated to include recent events and the inclusion of a few more pages, the index is more comprehensive than in the previous 4th edition.

The binding is sturdy and should last many years.

I would estimate that there are over 650 maps in this book, typically three or four maps to each two-page spread. A variety of projections is used and the maps tend to be rich in detail without being overly cluttered. A striking variety of colors are used to display everything from empires, ethnic populations, migrations, nation-states, etc., using arrows prolifically to show movement. The larger maps often display mountain ranges. Most of the smaller maps show close-ups of regions or highlight cultural/demographic/economic matters using a variety of colors and symbols.

Each two-page spread has a basic theme or subject which is discussed in an essay that fits in the spaces not occupied by maps. Each map on a spread has a numbered accompanying blurb briefly describing its contents.

This is the best single volume world history atlas that I know of, surpassing the excellent but less comprehensive Oxford Atlas of World History. It's one major flaw is its Eurocentrism, but some students of history might find this a plus.

For balance, I recommend the MacMillan Continental History Atlas series:

The History Atlas of Africa by Samuel Kasule

The History Atlas of Asia by Ian Barnes

The History Atlas of South America by Edwin Early

The History Atlas of North America by Philip Davies

Less worthwhile is:

The History Atlas of Europe by Ian Barnes

because of its redundancy with the Hammond.

I originally picked this up at the library, just to browse through, but I stayed up late several nights running, absorbed in the essays and following the cross-references from topic to topic. My wife took pity on me and bought it for my birthday.

You needn't be a military historian to understand it and you needn't be an academic to enjoy it. The editors have done a wonderful job of unifying the submissions of a large number of specialists and of controlling the jargon level. The articles also discuss art, philosophy, and other theoretically non-military subjects, as well as weapons and tactics. And the scattered lists -- the 10 best battlefields to visit, etc. -- will get your attention.

Very highly recommended.

This is one of the better reference books I've purchased, for all the wrong reasons. Instead of trying to produce a completely comprehensive encyclopedia of military history (there are already several available) the authors wisely went a different path, aiming the book at an audience that doesn't just want dry facts.

Cowley used to edit Military History Quarterly, and Parker is a professor in Ohio. Together they collected essays from 150 historians on a range of topics, many of them more vague than descriptions of battles or campaigns. There are also lists of Top Tens, like best commanders, most underrated, decisive battles, etc. The authors said once that the book was intended to be browsed through rather than used as a reference exclusively, and it's very good for either.

A fine book, and a good addition to any library owned by a military history buff, enthusiast, or academic.

Reader's Companion To Military History provides an encyclopedia of warfare from the early Persian Wars to modern times, providing almost six hundred articles detailing major battles, commanders, theories, weapons and strategies. Articles come from military historians, biographers and journalists and provide an excellent set of insights.

The book is full of history and appears balanced in view but has far too many references to things not documented. For someone who knows nothing about British royalty, Scots history and geography this is not the place to start.

There are many confusing references. I had trouble understanding what and who Argyle is, why you spell Stewart/Stuart two ways with seemingly interchangable spellings, and many many royalty/title related terms that are confusing (duke/earl/baron etc. what's the difference?). A glossary would help. Otherwise, keep a dictionary and a good map handy.

Also the successions and following who murdered whom needs more diagrams and what diagrams and maps there are should all be redrawn for clarity.

This is simply put one of the best places to start an inquiry into Scottish history.

Allowing the comments of one of the other reviewers, this book might not answer EVERY question that one might have regarding all of the specifics of Scots history. As in any book that sets out to tell the whole history of a people in under five hundred pages, there are omissions and a little of opaquenesses. Setting this aside, both the original author and the updaters of this book have done a remarkable job putting together a history that is equally entertaining and enlightening. This book DOES do an adequate job illustrating all of the changes of power and intricacies that are necessary to understand the interrelation between England and Scotland and the Highland and Lowland populations. It is fair which is important. And it is just a fun read.....

Beyond this, obviously, this book raises additional questions regarding the history of Scotland that must be answered by additional reading. But, then again, this is a book that as an intitiation, makes one want to read more.

I highly recommend this book....

This book is written as more of a story of Scotland than a history. It is well developed, interesting, captivating and exciting. Probably the finest history book I've ever read. Gives an incredible overview of Scotland, and explains why those Scots who have become expats love their country despite all of the problems they have had (Highland clearances). For anyone who has been to Scotland this is a great way to learn so much about the country, and their courageous and proud people. I recommend this very highly. An enthralling book to read.

Geoffrey Parker argues that during the 16th Century a "military revolution" occurred that profoundly changed the way Europeans conducted warfare. This revolution involved four distinct changes in the art of war: a change in tactics; a marked growth in the size of armies; more ambitious and complex military/political strategies; and an acute impact on society as a whole. Parker further contends that the initial imperial gains and conquests by European nations (before the full impact of the Industrial Revolution was felt) would not have been possible had it not been for these revolutionary changes. Not all historians of early modern European military history agree with Parker's argument. In the Second Edition, Parker answers his critics in an updated addendum (for those who enjoy conversational footnotes, Parker does seem to have a particular axe to grind with the historian John A. Lynn and vice-versa)..Parker incorporates a thread of cause and effect to illustrate his claims. For example: the technological advancements in firepower in the form of larger canons, prompted the wide spread development of the bastion fortifications system known as trace italienne. These improved fortifications required larger garrisons as well as larger siege armies of the opposing enemy. Infantry became the core of these new and expanded armies of Europe. Larger armies created the need for revised tactics as well as improved logistical, supply, medical, and financial solutions. All of these factors had a direct upon the societies that depended upon these armies for protection. Parker applies similar cause and effect methodology in a discussion of sea power. Though Parker is a known scholar of early modern Europe, he turns his analysis into a global study by comparing and contrasting the European art of war with various non-western armies and empires. Parker discusses the reactions, adaptations, successes or failures of Near Eastern (Muslim, Ottoman, Indian, and African) and Far Eastern (China, Japan, Southeast Asia) armies in their contacts with the west.Parker consults a vast array of archival material. From Machiavelli to an assortment of 16th Century French, Spanish, Dutch, German and British documents in varying native languages, Parkers research is truly impressive. Absent, however, are non-western sources turning this "global" analysis into one from a western perspective. European colonial contacts with the east are seen only through western eyes in Parker's study. Sprinkled throughout the book are period etchings and engravings that Parker utilizes to support his premises. As an art history lover, however, I would have liked to have seen a description of the art work itself in the caption.Parker writes well. The author blends a well developed scholarly argument with historical narrative with great effect. For the most part, Parker maintained a set literary style throughout that held the reader's interest. One flaw, however, is the author's tendency to make a point early in a paragraph, then support his claim with a "list" of obscure little known European battles. One would have to be well versed in European military history to be on the same page with Parker on these rare instances. A solution would be to "list" fewer examples and explain "why" this particular battle supports the point he is illustrating.This is a must read for the serious student of military history though not for the faint of heart.

The purist may not appreciate the title of this excellent survey of the rise of Western European military and eventually cultural dominance. Any revolution that takes 300 years to accomplish begs the question. The subtitle is more revealing, and more accurately portrays the content of the book. The years of 1500 to 1800 indeed saw a series of military innovations that directly contributed to Western military hegemony.

What the author has done, which is truly unique, is to survey the innovations and to document how they affected events in Europe and elsewhere. A good part of the book accounts for developments in sail and guns and global exploration and confrontation. Also discussed is how other societies such as the Ottomans, Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, and others reacted or failed to react to these developments. In this course, Parker proves his thesis of how the West gained its "35%" toehold on the globe by 1800, which set the course for the century of rabid imperialism.

There is more detail to be found in other sources, but the synthesis of analysis is what marks this contribution as one of the best in the history of early modern Europe.

This relatively short work is an insightful description and analysis of changes in Military and Naval technology in Early Modern Europe. The fundamental idea is that a constellation of changes in military and naval technologies and tactics produced a qualitative change in the coercive powers of nascent European states. These innovations had major consequences including major expansion in the size of armed forces and increases in the fiscal and bureaucratic powers of states in order to support larger and complex armies. This toolkit of military and naval technology provided the crucial advantages that made possible successful European imperialism and colonialism in the pre-industrial period. Parker details changes in artillery capability, the development of new fortification technology, new infantry tactics, the emergence of ships as effective weapons platforms, the organization of armies, and the life of soldiers. A particularly interesting section deals with the reception of European military technology by sophisticated non-Western states such as China and Japan. Strongly recommended for those interested in Early Modern Europe.

This book provides an excellent chronicle of the actual engagement between the English and Spanish fleets. All the details of war (like the number of ships, men, even the quality of food carried on board) are here.
The book does provide an account of the geopolitical events sorrounding battle, but I have the impression that the authors were more concerned with describing the battle itself. For a more detailed picture of the diplomatic and political causes and consequences of the Armada, I would refer you to yet another book by Geoffrey Parker: "The Grand Stategy of Philip II").

I picked up this book with a great deal of enthusiasm. I wasn't too familiar with the personalities and issues surrounding the conflict and it was one of the few books on the subject I could find in english. The author did his best to drain anything of interest from his book. Mr. Parker spends almost no time or effort explaining the major players or their motives resulting in a confusing jumble of names and places that are difficult to distinguish from each other. Analysis is sparse and desperately needed. In frustration I consulted a 50 year old Cambridge Modern History and the 52 page essay on the Thirty Year War gave me more information and analysis (in a much better style) than the entire book by Parker. Leave this one alone!

Geoffrey Parker is quite simply one of the most thoughtful and talented military historians out there. His works are always profound and thought-provoking. However, in this instance, he may have bitten off more than he can chew.

The ugly fact is that the Thirty Years' War is a conflict of incredible complexity. No one book can capture all elements of this war. It is quite simply the historian's Gordian Knot, and even Parker cannot do it all in one book.

The bottom line? If you are a military historian, this is a very good book. However, Parker's own "The Military Revolution" and Dodge's classic biography of Gustavus Adolphus (really a history of European military tactics from 1600-1712) do the job better, especially as compliments to one another. For a political history, Ronald Asch does a better job in his history of the Thirty Years' War from the Hapsburg perspective(especially when combined with the Dodge book on Gustavus). In contrast, Parker's political history gets buried beneath too much detail (thereby running the risk of missing the forest for the trees).

Folks, don't let the complexity of the Thirty Years' War scare you. It is a fascinating conflict, one that is essential to understanding European history, military evolution and the emergence of the modern state. If you've got the stomach to read two or more books on the subject, you will be richly rewarded. Taken in conjunction with other works, Parker's book can add enormously to one's understanding of a seminal event in world history.

Geoffrey Parker is excellent as usual, providing in-depth insight and an engaging style. Novices to the topic might also wish to consult his "Europe in Crisis" or "Dutch Revolt" texts. It's difficult to find a good and unbiased investigation into the Catholic/Habsburg side elsewhere. The "one star" review is a gross misjudgement - it goes without saying that a book of this type may be too complex for someone with no experience at all with the seventeenth century, but a history can't spend all of its time on explanatory hand-holding. As for stylistic criticism, it's difficult to find history as good as Parker's written as well, let alone better.

If Parker is too "complex," "boring" or "complicated," it is likely that the topic simply will not be of interest to you no matter who writes it. A 50 page chapter in a textbook is only a meaningless gloss.

This book is a collection of essays on the historical theory of the 'Crisis of the Seventeenth Century'. The basis of this theory is that do to a number of reasons, European counries jointly experainced national crisises during the Seventeenth Century. As the Seventeenth Century includes the Thirty Years War and the English Revelution this sounds like an plaudible theory. Some modern historians theorize that the poor weather was the cause of this general Crisis. Taking this train of logic to its natural conclusion, the book includes a number of essays on whether there was a General Crisis in the entire world or not. In my opinion, this book is intended for the serious History student and is certainly not good for someone who doesn't already know the History of the Seventeenth Century.