europe
| » a people and a nati... |
| « a history of russia |
| SERCountTM Ratings | |
|---|---|
| Popularity | 22 |
A History of the Modern World with Powerweb MP
The following report compares books using the SERCount Rating (base on the result count from the search engine).
Rating: 4.18/5 from 55 reviews An interesting look at history.Ok. I read this for my AP European History class. The book goes in to detail good about topics, but can be lengthy and at times boring. But for a course like I am taking, it's a good book to read if you're studying for a college class or to advance your knowledge. It goes into depth so that readers can really understand the history it covers. Overall it's a good history book, but not a good one for leisurely reading. An excellent book, but too high-level for many studentsThe Palmer & Colton text is an excellent book. I (an AP European History teacher) found it to be extremely well-written, authoritative, and interesting. Many textbooks are written in such a manner as to put even a history teacher to sleep, or, if they are written in an interesting manner, suffer from shoddy scholarship. "A History of the Modern World" suffers from neither of these flaws. It does, however, have a few weakenesses. As mentioned in other reviews, it has fewer illustrations than most secondary texts, and none of the illustrations are in color, making maps somewhat difficult to read and greatly reducing the value of putting art in the book. Palmer & Colton also spend a bit less time on social history. Finally, though extremely well-written and interesting for the accomplished reader, it is quite heavy reading for even a high-level high school reader. Hence, while some students love "A History of the Modern World," many others dread having to read it. All that said, I believe for sheer volume and quality presentation of information, this is the best AP European Hisory textbook I have read. Interesting, but WRONGI am a scholar of Hungarian history, and almost every single mention of the Hungarians or "Magyars" is linked with information that is either plain wrong or shows an immense bias and at the very least a very superficial understanding of the subject material. This is how Kossuth Lajos becomes a racist, there is no mention of Petofi Sandor or Ferenc Deak who were integral in the 1848 revolution and Ausgleich, and a sharp distinction drawn between "Hungarians" and "Magyars." If the author is this wrong about so many subjects that I noticed, how many of his supposed "facts" can really be trusted? | ||||||||||||||||||
