Built - The Hidden Stories Behind Our Structures (Roma Agrawal, 2018)

(271 pages)

I saw several positive reviews so gave it a try.  Interesting but not compelling.

What the author is trying to do:  give non-engineering types enough basic information so that we can look at roads, bridges, buildings and think about some of the foundational principles involved in putting them up.  And it does have that effect, though I don't expect to retain much.

Interesting discussions about the incredible engineering and construction skills of the Romans. 

Didn't realize concrete was such a valuable product (mastered by the Romans, then their methods were lost for hundreds of years).

Pendulums atop tall buildings to offset swaying - who knew?

Interesting discussions of the Pantheon and Brunelleschi's dome.

Elevators can only travel about so far because the steel cables to move them become too heavy. Maybe that's why we had a stop-off on the way to the 80th floor of the Sears Tower back in the day?

The House of the Dead - Siberian Exile under the Tsars (Daniel Beer, 2017)

(378 pages)

While this overlapped with several other books (for example this one on the Decembrists - early exiles; Dosteovsky's exile here; Polish rebels in exile here; Solzenhitsyn here; Chekhov on Sakhalin Island), it was well worth reading - much additional information and perspective.

I hadn't realized the scope of exile in tsarist days.  In the early days - c. 1700 - it was a convenient way to get rid of political opposition - a few folks were sent far, far away.  Then the regime figured out that sending forced labor to Siberia might be a good way to exploit natural resources there (along with rehabilitating the exiles).  Then the regime started expanding the variety of offenses that gave rise to exile - a great way to get rid of undesirables.  But the system had very limited resources, and the numbers sent into exile simply overwhelmed it.  The goals were not achieved and, if anything, Siberian development was retarded.

For a long period, those exiled walked prodigious distances to their final destination -Tobolsk to the Nerchinsk silver mines was 3570 km (like walking from Madrid to St. Petersburg, or from Washington DC to Salt Lake City).  Lots of folks don't make it - limited accountability as exiles are handed off along the route.  (Compare Brits transporting folks to Australia - a single captain with a single medical officer on a single ship - survival rates improved dramatically once rules were put into place.)

Early arrivals sometimes found Siberia refreshing - people less beaten down than the serfs - but the flood of exiles and the constant exposure to doubtful types changed this over time.  Many political exiles who weren't particularly violent or dangerous - but many, many criminals who were.  A bad mix.

Often often no right of return - settle in Siberia after sentence, if survive - difficult.

As the 19th century proceeds and the numbers continue to increase - the Siberian experience produces flashpoints for resistance to absolutism.  This escalates into the early 20th century - many key figures in 1905 and 1917 were here.

Epilogue introduces how 1917 revolutionaries - ardent opponents of the exile system - adapted it for their own purposes after taking power.  With horrific efficiency.

The Forge of Christendom - The End of Days and the Epic Rise of the West (Tom Holland, 2008)

(413 pp)

Had recently read this book by the same author - it focused on what I'm calling "late antiquity".  I don't think the current book is part of a series, but it does pretty much pick up fairly shortly after where the prior book left off.

Something I notice - the titles of these two books are rather sensational; fortunately the content is useful, measured.

Europe as a backward dump compared to Persia, Constantinople, Spain, Baghdad, etc.  Charlemagne (following on the achievements of Charles Martel - Tours 732) - tries to restore a Roman empire - centered in the north but with affirmation in the south (Italy). Doesn't last long.

The papacy as a weak institution - not recognized as having much authority over anything - based in a town that had fallen into disrepair.

But perhaps this helped in the long run - separating religious leadership from civil - compare caliph, Constantine in an earlier era - theocratic structures don't birth innovation or free thinking.

The papacy starts to rise from its weakness.  Pepin/Charlemagne looking for validation - turn to the beleaguered bishop of Rome.  Over a few centuries, the pope takes control over appointment of bishops etc.  Takes a run at interfering in civil authority situations - but not nearly enough power.  But the administrative papacy is on its way (the build-up eventually contributing to the Reformation).

Author reviews various of the European kings in the run up to 1000 AD  and the years thereafter - an atmosphere where the end of the world was considered a live possibility.  Christianity making incredible territorial strides - huge land masses in Poland, Russia (though it apes Constantinople rather than Rome), eastern German areas.

These kings aren't all that powerful in their domains - civil order not in good shape in Europe - power ceded to castle-builders (this was new).  Exploitation of peasants; widespread violence; for all its warts the church does fairly regularly make a stand for the oppressed - the Peace of God is enforced after a fashion.  But states starting to be identifiable. 

I underestimate how important and influential the Norsemen, or Vikings, or whatever were in this era - they were traveling pretty much everywhere in Europe and settled down in some form or fashion in many areas (including southern Italy, Normandy, Russia).

1066 - discussion of Hastings.

1095 - Constantinople under stress; pope calls the First Crusade.