Ok, I'm out.

Finished off Orlando Patterson's Slavery and Social Death Friday night. Started up on Harriet Jacobs' slave narrative the next day. I knew what I was getting into; it's written in the form of a sentimental novel. That's fine and I'm not going to pass judgment on Jacobs for doing so. The genre just happens to be one I find damned near intolerable as a reader. I got about fifteen pages in and realized I just didn't have it in me to continue. It's a knock on me, not the book. I needed something much less dry to read after Patterson and I ended up with a book that was much more dry.

It'll be Ar'n't I a Woman? instead.

My readings have been all over the place the past few weeks. Been reading on Slave Hiring in Antebellum South, 18th Century British Warfare in North America, and local history on an exhibit proposal project that my group is working on.

I really enjoyed reading Matthew H. Spring's With Zeal and Bayonets Only: The British Army on Campaign in North America, 1775-1783 a lot. Previous historians like Stephen Brumwell already tore apart the notion of a static British army that only used linear warfare but Spring really threw it out the window. His detail and analysis is really impressive here, going down to the company level of independent orders and how NCOs had to take their own initiative in battle. He of course does talk about tactics and the changes that the British army implemented from their experiences of the French and Indian War. Flank maneuvers, use of Light Infantry, shock tactics versus pure fire power, etc.. I really enjoyed this book and as a disclaimer, I am not in any way a military historian. I did wish he talked a bit more about the historiography though, would have been nice to compare and see the change more in depth from his view point.

To help with the exhibit proposal I've been re-reading some of the books I had earlier this semester. I honestly found Exhibit Labels by Beverly Serrell the most useful. Theoretical and practical all in one. I don't know what it was with the other interpretive books but I found them too...introspective if that makes any sense. I admired Tilden but it was rather dry and whimsical at the same time.

With finals this week, I'll likely be taking a break from history and move to fantasy (Sanderson has been on my shelf for months)

Currently reading "Ungrateful Daughters" by Maureen Waller, which is about Engald's Queen Mary II and Queen Anne. Feeling a bit ambivalent towards it at the moment as the author is heavily hinting she's on the side of King James II through the first few chapters. But she's done her best to bring a bit of balance to the characters of both women, and I like that she's including the other female influences in their lives as well. I often find such books include a lot about fathers/husbands/brothers, often to the point of neglecting the fact that such women were raised by and communicated with large circles of women.

So far there's been quite a lot included about their mother and stepmother, and the women of the court are increasing in prominence as the book progresses.

Finished several books recently, just haven't written about it here until now:

• Alderney, Fortress Island: The Germans in Alderney, 1940-1945 by T.X.F. Pantcheff (1982): A very comprehensive book on the Nazi occupation of Alderney during the Second World War. However it reads less like a book and more a report, in that it is very dry and factual, with no real narrative or flow. It makes for a very boring read, though it is thorough in its scope, and based on interviews with some of the German soldiers stationed on the island. I got this when I was on the island in July, thought it would be worth learning a bit about the Nazi occupation of the Channel islands (Alderney still has a lot of the bunkers and stuff around, it's really quite neat).

• The Making of the Georgian Nation, Second Edition by Ronald Grigor Suny (1994): This is the definitive book on Georgian history in English, and its really embarrassing that I haven't read it until recently. Suny looks not at the history of Georgia, but of the formation of the Georgian people, how they acquired the Georgian identity. His argument is largely that they adapted it in response to foreign incursions (everyone has invaded the region), and rather than be assimilated it has only strengthened their resolve. It is limited in that he originally published it in 1988, so doesn't have access to the Russian or Georgian archives, which I think would really help. But it is a good book, and required reading for studying the history of Georgia.

• Russian Azerbaijan, 1905-1920: The Shaping of a National Identity in a Muslim Community by Tadeusz Swietochowski (1985): This is a short concise book on, as Swietochowski states, the evolution of Azerbaijan from being a simple geographic term in 1905 to a national identity in 1920 when the country was invaded and annexed by the Bolsheviks. His main argument was that as Azerbaijan had been annexed by Russia initially, it was allowed to develop a unique identity that while closely related to the Turks and (to a lesser extent) the Muslim world, it was definitely unique. However it was also only really developed amongst the Azerbaijani intelligentsia, which was small and only existed because of the conditions put in place by the Russians. This is one of the foundation texts on nationality policy of the Caucasus in the twentieth century, and Swietochowski was a leading scholar on Azerbaijan in this era. There are also two major selling points for this book: one is that it covers Azerbaijan at all, especially the earlier era like this. Most books, especially nowadays, look at Azerbaijan through the prism of the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute, which is not the only thing relevant for the country. And two, that it was written by a scholar who isn't from the region or related ethnically to it. This is something that impacts nearly every book on Armenia (I struggle to think of a book not written by someone who's ethnically Armenian), and while Georgia is less biased this way, there are still some Georgians who have books as well. Azerbaijan is less published for a couple factors, so its refreshing to see a rather even account of the topic, and one that doesn't explicitly attack Armenia. It has certainly lived up to its reputation as a major work on the region.

• "They Can Live in the Desert but Nowhere Else": A History of the Armenian Genocide by Ronald Grigor Suny (2015): Suny looks at the background to the Armenian Genocide in this book. He argues that it was a combination of several factors that led to the decision to eliminate the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, all exasperated by the outbreak of the First World War. While the Genocide does play a prominent role in the book, as it has to, the background and origins of it are the main features here, with the Genocide itself not being mentioned until about halfway through. Though he does have a direct relation to the Genocide (Suny's grandmother lived through it, as he notes several times), Suny does stay as neutral as possible for such a topic, which is refreshing to see, but not unexpected from one of the leading scholars on the Caucasus. That he also includes a very thorough overview of the historiography of the Genocide, noting that it has only been in recent decades that serious study of it has started, is also refreshing to have, and allows for further reading if one wants. It is definitely a valuable book for anyone interested in the Genocide, especially if one is unfamiliar with it and interested in learning.

• Transcaucasian Boundaries edited by John F. R. Wright, Suzanne Goldenberg, and Richard N. Schofield (1994): This collection of essays came out in the early 1990s, when the post-Soviet conflicts were still winding down. Thus it is somewhat dated in its views and opinions of how to solve them (some articles do offer means to end the conflicts, which in hindsight were not feasible). It does add a more regionalised dimension, looking at (in turn) Russia, Turkey, and Iran, and how they saw the region and its impact on them. It also provides both an Azeri and Armenian history of the Nagorno-Karabakh region, which is interesting in its stark contrast regarding the same area. Further chapters on South Ossetia and Abkhazia complement it. Overall it is not really relevant to the modern reader, but is more valuable as a piece of historiographical research, providing an academic insight of the region so soon after the wars.

Also read a couple biographies of Vladimir Putin, which because that is largely within 20 years, I'll keep short:

• The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin by Masha Gessen (2010) is a more popular work, by one of his more vocal critics. She was friends with a lot of people who opposed him, so it's very biased against him, crediting Putin with almost everything bad that's happened in Russia. An interesting look at his early life and how his time in Dresden shaped him though.

• *The New Tsar: The Rise and Reign of Vladimir Putin * by Steven Lee Myers (2014) is a lot more academic-based, and far more comprehensive. Myers isn't as critical of Putin, and gives a far more complete picture, as well as a lot more depth to the story. While not exonerating Putin by any means, he doesn't outright blame him for every bad thing either. A really interesting book.

Finally, one book on contemporary Central Asia: Great Games, Local Rules: The New Great Power Contest in Central Asia by Alexander Cooley (2014): Only brief, because it's mainly post-9/11 stuff. But Cooley, who's written extensively on the region, looks at how the three major global powers (the US, Russia, and China) have interacted with Central Asia in the 21st century, and how the Central Asian states have utilised competing interests to bolster their own standing. For the most part it doesn't contain much new for anyone who has followed the region, though it is nice to have all this information in one easily accessible source, and the addition of China is an added bonus. It doesn't provide a lot of new revelations, but does offer some interesting insight.

I'm looking for resources for prehistoric and historic Native Americans of the southeastern U.S. in general, but more specifically concerning the slave trade, gender and sexuality, and music. I've been looking through some of the previous posts in this sub about Native Americans and have already found a few that interest me. If anyone can help, it would be much appreciated!

Gallay, in Indian Slave Trade: The Rise of the English Empire in the American South, 1670-1717

"How the Indians Lost their Land" Banner.

Cherokee Women by Theda Perdue.