Scan barcode
bulwerka's review against another edition
2.0
Obviously well researched and knowledgeable on the subject, was not a fan of the structure of the book. It was simultaneously too dense and too dry for me to want to pick it up for longer than a couple minutes. Didn’t really retain much from it either, honestly only picked up bits and pieces here and there. Wouldn’t recommend as a leisure read but I do think there is value in retaining it for research purposes.
bemolas's review against another edition
3.0
A well researched and written book. A trove of fascinating information. The only thing that took away slightly was the presentation. This book opts for a thematic presentation which sometimes makes it feel as if you are covering the same ground more than once. This is only a minor quibble and does not take away from the overall majesty of this book.
nelsta's review against another edition
I didn’t finish this book. It was enormously interesting, but not interesting enough to prevent my interest wandering to other books.
siria's review against another edition
4.0
Heart of Europe is one of those books which can rightfully be called a tome: a sprawling history of the Holy Roman Empire from its beginnings with Charlemagne to its dismantling by Napoleon to the ways in which the Empire has been used and abused by modern historians and politicians. I'm giving it a four stars out of five largely out of sheer respect for the mastery of such a wide range of sources and scholarship that are needed to write such a work. Peter Wilson is clearly steeped in knowledge about central Europe, and I think his central argument—that the HRE shouldn't be dismissed as a ramshackle, inefficient failure because it doesn't look like a modern nation state, but rather assessed on its own terms as a decentralised system that embraced consensus, diverse identities, and local variation—is broadly persuasive.
However, Wilson's writing perhaps mimics the HRE a little too much. By eschewing the Grand Narrative/Big Man view of history (again, something I'm broadly sympathetic to), Wilson must fall back on exploring the HRE through the development of ideas and institutions. That could have worked, but Wilson's tendency to mention every name, date, battle, or other event that relates to the matter at hand means that it's sometimes hard to see the wood for the trees. I found it a bit of a slog at times, and I'm a historian; I'm pretty sure Heart of Europe would be very tedious for the general reader, particularly if they have no prior knowledge of the history of the HRE. Still, as an encyclopaedic guide to the HRE and its historiography, it's sure to become the standard reference work on the topic.
However, Wilson's writing perhaps mimics the HRE a little too much. By eschewing the Grand Narrative/Big Man view of history (again, something I'm broadly sympathetic to), Wilson must fall back on exploring the HRE through the development of ideas and institutions. That could have worked, but Wilson's tendency to mention every name, date, battle, or other event that relates to the matter at hand means that it's sometimes hard to see the wood for the trees. I found it a bit of a slog at times, and I'm a historian; I'm pretty sure Heart of Europe would be very tedious for the general reader, particularly if they have no prior knowledge of the history of the HRE. Still, as an encyclopaedic guide to the HRE and its historiography, it's sure to become the standard reference work on the topic.
historicus's review
4.0
Very good diachronic focus. Tried bit too hard to see continuities from 800 to 1800. Wouldve preferred division of book into parts on early medieval, medieval, renaissance, early modern
mzwhitle's review
2.0
Oh dear. This book is dense as hell and loaded with information. Wilson has great command over the subject matter but this is the kind of history I don't like reading: lots of minor details that aren't interesting. I prefer big picture history; details should be interesting. This book is more like bullet points.
sardonic_writer's review against another edition
1.0
Truly one of the least-readable books I've attempted to complete. I understand why you might choose to cover the history thematically rather than chronologically, but when there are about 1000 years to explore? Impossible to follow, boring, and unworkable in every aspect. Apparently he gets around to finally describing the geographical reaches of the empire in the second part of the book, which is insane considering the complexity.
neilcoombs's review against another edition
3.0
A tough book to read unless you already have a good overview of the topic.