"Europe" is kinda big. What about Europe?

Hello.

One book that came out fairly recently and appears to have been well received is The Pursuit of Power: Europe 1815-1914 by Richard J. Evans, but I haven't had a chance to read my copy just yet.

The classic trilogy by Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Revolution, The Age of Capital, and The Age of Empire, deals with the 'long' 19th century, from 1789 to 1914, and is still widely used in universities. The prose is also pretty accessible, but presumes that you already know the basic narrative story of 'what happened'. The books instead focusing on analyzing what happened than just giving you a simple political and military narrative. I'd recommend it.

Emmanuel Wallerstein's books on the 18th and 19th centuries are pretty good, but the prose is really not accessible.

I've seen books in Oxford's 'Short History of Europe', including the one on the 19th century; The Nineteenth Century: Europe 1789-1914 by T.W.C. Blanning, but haven't had a chance to dig into them myself.

Perry Anderson's Lineages of the Absolutist State could be useful to you in pieces, since it follows the formation of Absolutist States on a country by country basis. The chapters on theory are really dense, but once you go to the specific country you're interested in (Russia, for example), it'll take you through the 18th and 19th century in really clear and brilliant prose. Some chapters will be of limited use, since the absolutist state in England, for example, stalled in the 17th century, but where the Absolutist State did last (France, Russia, etc.) it will be pretty useful to you.

Also, a word on bias. All historians have bias. To interpret the past means to, at some level analyze past events through some kind of ideological lens. Liberalism, Conservatism, Marxism; all are different perspectives. That doesn't mean that any one is 'right', but it does mean that no author is 100% unbiased. The key is to keep in mind what those biases are, learn the facts for yourself, and come to your own conclusions.

Often times what seems 'objective and unbiased' to one person is simply the agreement between the reader and the writer on the underlying way they understand reality. So the author's bias is understood as neutral.

Hope it helps.