Did the evidence or other historical material support the author’s argument, theme or conclusion? What did you learn, or did not learn, from this book that makes it a valuable, or not valuable, contribution to our understanding of the historical topic? Why?

Your scholarly assessment of the book: Did the author convince you about her or his argument, idea, or theme? Why, or why not? This is not mere personal opinion – an historian’s book review is not an expression of simple like or dislike, but a thoughtful assessment of the strength and weakness of the book, and the reviewer must also defend her or his assessments in the review. Did the evidence or other historical material support the author’s argument, theme or conclusion? What did you learn, or did not learn, from this book that makes it a valuable, or not valuable, contribution to our understanding of the historical topic? Why?
Format:
Professional historians who write book reviews, articles for historical journals, and historical monographs must conform to formatting requirements, including word limits and citation styles — editorial boards of historical publications will reject a historian’s work that does not meet formatting requirements. Likewise, your book review should be no longer than 4000 words including properly-formatted end-notes or footnotes. Be careful, complete, thoughtful, and thorough, but also be concise. Papers longer than 4000 word limit will receive no higher than a C grade on the assignment.