Archive for May, 2010

Four vital factors in the Rise of Empire
Britain developed through a combination of dynastic shifts, strategic trade outposts and aggressive nationalistic policies, expressed through its navy, into a position of world-wide authority (if not supremacy) between the years 1660 and 1760. It is tempting to consider the words of Horace Seeley, writing in 1870, that Britain acquired an empire “in a fit of absent-mindedness.” That is to say, there was no devious strategy for world-domination, only a series of small-scale largely trade-based decisions. The concept of “Empire” is a much later ideological construct. In this article we’ll consider four vital factors: the Anglo-Dutch Trade Wars; the role of the Americas; the role of Asia and the role of France. (more…)

(more…)

Reflecting on a recent post, High Heeled Historian commented that though Stalin may have been responsible for 35 million deaths (which someone computed at about 18% of the entire population) at least he saved the USSR from Nazi Germany.

There seems quite a trend about modern historians to reinvent Stalin; to move him from “Monsters of History” category to “Flawed Messiah.” Why is that? (more…)


It can be argued that Charles II was the real architect of the British Empire. Though perhaps, he wasn’t an intentional one (more…)

As we approach the centennial anniversary of the murder of Tsar Nicholas II and his family, it was interesting –a little while back- to notice that Nicholas II was leading in an internet poll, in which millions voted, for the title Greatest Russian of All Time, narrowly ahead of Stalin! What does that tell us about the conflicting mentalities of Russians today? (more…)

Reference Books (more…)