Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.

Start by marking “The Shortest History of Germany” as Want to Read:

Other editions

Enlarge cover

Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

Open Preview

The Shortest History of Germany

James Hawes

3.77 · Rating details · 3,978 ratings · 464 reviews

READ IN AN AFTERNOON. REMEMBER FOR A LIFETIME.
The West is in full retreat. The Anglo-Saxon powers, great and small, withdraw into fantasies of lost greatness. Populists all over Europe cry out that immigration and globalisation are the work of a nefarious System, run by unseen masters with no national loyalties. From the Kremlin, Tsar Vladimir watches his Great Game line u ...more

Get A Copy

Kindle Edition, 160 pages

Published April 28th 2017 by Old Street Publishing (first published April 2017)

More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about The Shortest History of Germany, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Add this book to your favorite list »

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30

Average rating 3.77 ·

Rating details

· 3,978 ratings · 464 reviews

More filters

Sort order

Start your review of The Shortest History of Germany

May 17, 2017 Cj Dufficy rated it did not like it · review of another edition

A revisionist history at odds with everything else I've read. This is not a history, it is a thesis that boils down to an evil race of East Germans that are hell bent on destroying the world for the last 150 years. It's mainly supported with dog whistle factoids, deliberate misinterpretations and outright falsehoods. Either the author has been paid to deliberately write this argument or he is congenitally dishonest.

It's well written and easily consumed, the first 1500 years are gobbled up and it A revisionist history at odds with everything else I've read. This is not a history, it is a thesis that boils down to an evil race of East Germans that are hell bent on destroying the world for the last 150 years. It's mainly supported with dog whistle factoids, deliberate misinterpretations and outright falsehoods. Either the author has been paid to deliberately write this argument or he is congenitally dishonest.

It's well written and easily consumed, the first 1500 years are gobbled up and its tone and invective change with subtlety and at first for me imperceptibly. My reading list is in my profile so the basis of my objections can be found there. Outrage and doubt arrived when I read the following which is presented prior to the criticism of this (apparently) very poor idea "Schools were to be taken out of church control, civil marriages allowed and priests forbidden from engaging in anything that could be termed political [opposition]" attributed to Bismarcks Prussia about 100 years after the US constitution enshrined church and state separation.

I wondered who on earth writing a history book today would object to this? Before reading on I checked the authors bio to discover he thought in an Irish seminary university and this and the rest of the book came into focus.

He claims the Catholic Church deported itself well during the holocaust because 1 German cardinal was under house arrest despite almost total papal silence excepting even more damning luke warm nuanced protestations made far too late. No mention that Catholic Austrians were disproportionately represented in the SS or that of 18,000,000 who served in the Wehrmacht less that a 100 were cited for bravery after the war for protecting war crimes victims (see The Pianist movie for almost the only case). Ludicrously he declares that Prussians were the first to give a legal basis to antisemitism. A total lie, state legal antisemitism dates back thousands of years before its zenith of Hitler approved death camps operated by an enthusiastic SS and compliant greedy and shameful European populations. Legalised antisemitism continues today in states such as Iran. Lying about the bigotry Jews suffered throughout the world up to and beyond the holocaust to make your ridiculous thesis gain weight is a disgraceful trivialisation of history and insulting to Jewish people all over the world and to tens of millions of Germans that accept the facts and try to atone in their own way for the sins of that generation. Tony Judt's Postwar has I think an unrivalled essay at the end of the book about antisemitism which the author here would do well to read.

His current thoughts (not history in any way) about refugees follow the same racist pattern. No suggestion about what to do for the hopeless only to not allow them here. Hardly a philosophy Jesus Christ would support. Europe spends $75bn on refugees that arrive in Europe each year and $5bn on programs to encourage them to remain close to home, that should change and the problem any way is not A Prussian plot as this ignominious fool would have you believe. I hope a scholarly dissection of this crap takes place before to many buy it. I'll give the author a $1000 for every thing I'm incorrect about if he'll just give me my money back if I categorically show where he is lying, I'll leave out that Eva Hitler poisoned herself and was not shot by Adolf Hitler as stated in his book.

In summary dangerous appalling rubbish, handle with care only read if already in possession of the main facts. ...more

flag 59 likes · Like · see review

Jun 15, 2018 Evelyn Wood rated it did not like it · review of another edition

If anyone is kind enough to read this review I think it only fair to state the following: I am not religious. I speak German. I have lived and worked in Germany and managed German companies in the UK, Africa and Central Asia. I do not claim to be an expert, but do have sufficient knowledge both of history and current affairs to justify this review.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

This is not a history, rather a propaganda exercise and, for anyone who knows anything of German and European h If anyone is kind enough to read this review I think it only fair to state the following: I am not religious. I speak German. I have lived and worked in Germany and managed German companies in the UK, Africa and Central Asia. I do not claim to be an expert, but do have sufficient knowledge both of history and current affairs to justify this review.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

This is not a history, rather a propaganda exercise and, for anyone who knows anything of German and European history, it is dangerously silly. The author James Hawes is a fanatical EU integrationist and that colours this polemic. In a nutshell Hawes idea (one cannot dignify it with the term 'theory') is that Germany is Roman Catholic and good and Prussia is protestant and bad and when the latter took over the former it made the whole atrocious.

According to Hawes the Franks under Karl der Grosse (Charlemagne) inherited the Roman Empire's goodness and unifying vision. He ignores the fact that the Franks were one of many tribes that occupied much of Europe and spoke a number of Indo-Germanic languages. Charlemagne was a Christian and decided everyone in his empire must be too, imposing the death penalty on those (especially Saxons) who refused to convert. On his death, the Carolingian Empire split into three. The west Franks adopted a Latin dialect and became French. Middle Francia included parts of the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, and Switzerland. East Francia included the rest of Germany. Eventually east and middle Francia minus Burgundy, Switzerland and parts of northern Italy became the Holy Roman Empire (HRE). Hawes would have us believe that the HRE was a coherent political unit. Voltaire summed it up rather better when he remarked that, “it was neither holy, nor Roman, nor really an Empire.” Indeed, it was a geographical area consisting, at the end, of some 1,800 states of varying sizes recognising the HRE as their titular head.

Hawes makes much of the HRE being geographically similar to the Roman province 'Germania'. Apparently, all was well in the Carolingian world until efforts were made to expand east of the Elbe river (For this part of Europe and Germany he invents the term East Elbia a dark place inhabited by - shock horror - Slavs and Prussians!) Prussia is named after its original Slavic inhabitants, but following its 13th century conquest by the catholic Teutonic Knights it was 'Germanised' by immigration from central and western Germany.

In order to justify his risible 'Catholic good Protestants bad' idea he ignores the 30 years war started by Ferdinand II, HRE 1619-1637, who decided to force protestant member states to become catholic. The result was a war that cost millions of lives, in some areas a population loss of 50%. Also, at this time, in catholic areas, there were hysterical witch hunts. The worst were those of Trier where the Catholic Archbishop/Prince Elector Johann von Schoenberg was a man with a mission. First he purged Protestants, then Jews and then witches and an estimated 1,000 men, woman and children convicted of witchcraft were burned by his order. In all over 40,000 people died.

We are whizzed through centuries with the same disregard for history although he pauses to blame Britain for giving Prussia the Rhineland in 1815 thus making it stronger. (The Rhineland states were part of the Confederation of the Rhine a grouping of most of the German states allied to France during the Napoleonic wars. Part of the confederation was ceded to Prussia and became the Rhine Province in 1822). Little mention is made of the ‘Zoll Union’ = ‘Customs union’ created by Bismarck to which all the German states, except Austria, belonged. Bismarck saw it as the means to 'Unify' Germany. He engineered a war with France and when that was over the members woke to find themselves members of an Empire with a new boss. Oddly only Luxembourg escaped joining it. The lesson was, however, well learned. In 1952 Jean Monet (a founding father of the EU) wrote, "Europe's nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation."

Lets skip to the Nazis. They were (you guessed) East Elbian protestant monsters who had almost zero support from the good burgers of Germania. Blithely ignoring Buchenwald, Bergen-Belsen and Dachau (to name just three) he claims the Nazis had to wait until they got to Poland before creating concentration camps. They would not be tolerated in Germania. Writing on page 180, "But T4 had shown the Nazis that, even in wartime, they couldn't just start killing people wholesale in Germany." (T4 was a program to 'put down' mentally ill people - mostly Germans).

At the end of WW2, Germania now separated from East Elbia by the Iron curtain could at last take its place as a truly democratic western nation. Except….Konrad Adenauer did not trust the Germans and wanted West Germany integrated with the west to stop them repeating their past. To aid the process two former Nazis advisors, Ludwig Erhard (Later Chancellor of West Germany) and Karl Blessing (Later president of the Bundesbank) dusted off the plan they had developed for Hitler's post victory nation. The plan was simple. Replace the Reichsmark with the Deutsch Mark at a rate of 15 to one for the people (so they all went bust) and 1 to 1 for industry who had benefited from slave labour. Marshal aid poured in and finally all Germany's debts were written off. Erhard was pleased with everything opining that poverty would make the common man work harder!

Post war the EEC, then the EU and the Euro. Like Adenauer, Kohl did not trust Germans and saw tying them into a currency union as an insurance against resurgent bad habits. People who demanded a democratic vote were told they were too dumb to understand the issues. Quite why dumb people are brainy enough to pick people who can decide was never asked. Since the Euro, Germany has powered ahead financially and no one doubts that EU decisions are made in Berlin. Although vehemently denied by the Germans, the IMF, amongst others, have variously put the benefit for Germany of using an undervalued currency at between 10 and 17 %. Most telling, in 2012 the Bundesbank estimated that a return to the DM (proper value) would involve the loss of 5 million jobs and a drop of 10% in GDP.

Many countries have elements in their history that today’s generations regret, Germany more than most. I do not accept that the only way to deal with that is to punish others. If German leaders don't trust their own people it’s time to get new leaders. The idea that other nations should lose industry and face terrible unemployment in order to prevent German resurgence is ridiculous. The EU in particular and the world in general being locked into an unending payment of Dane Geld is surely a certain recipe for bitterness and strife? It may strike Dawes as a brilliant result, but to use a German word, I'm afraid the Untermenschen may not put up with it. Rewarding Flashman with the headmastership of Rugby was never an option and the post war settlement lauded by Hawes is as bizarre as that would have been.

In his other writings Hawes displays the sneering arrogance typical of the self appointed intelligentsia that dislikes Anglo Saxons, especially British ones. In his book Hawes observes that the German word 'Untergang' = ‘Humiliating defeat' has no equivalent in English. He could have more usefully asked why the word 'Fair' has no German equivalent. One can but hope they will find one; in my experience the concept is understood even if it is expressed in English.

This is a squalid little book, but it does raise two interesting questions. 1) Are University degrees useful indicators of intelligence? 2) The book has been review praised in serious journals, one wonders if that was the result of anyone actually reading it? ...more

flag 42 likes · Like · see review

May 10, 2018 Ami rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Shelves: history

Something that should be said from the start: Hawes is not a historian, his work was not endorsed by historians, and it falls behind even the normally low standards of history books written for the general public. It's barely referenced, lacks a bibliography, and omits facts if they don't fit into the author's general argument.

I had one encounter with Hawes before, and it left me intrigued. In September 2017, he wrote an article in the New Statesman in which he explained the then-upcoming Germa Something that should be said from the start: Hawes is not a historian, his work was not endorsed by historians, and it falls behind even the normally low standards of history books written for the general public. It's barely referenced, lacks a bibliography, and omits facts if they don't fit into the author's general argument.

I had one encounter with Hawes before, and it left me intrigued. In September 2017, he wrote an article in the New Statesman in which he explained the then-upcoming German election and the possible rise of the AfD in terms of ancient divisions in Germany. I disagreed with his argument from the start, but it was a bold and well-written article. Maybe this is why I am so disappointed with this book. I expected so much more.

At the very least I expected a proper history book, since it's been branded and sold as such, but what I got instead is a very dubious and confusing demonology manual, complete with fact omissions, logical fallacies, and vague, poor-quality maps that help hide the weakness of the author's argument. Said argument boils down to this: there is something rotten in East Elbia. This apparently doesn't change from Roman times to present, despite the fact that actually many changes happened there, including major population shifts. No, the evilness of East Elbia remains the same across history, and all that has the misfortune to exist there, be it non-Latinized German tribes, Slavs, or Prussians, is equally unworthy of and incapable of assimiliting into Roman/Western culture. Among what I regard as Hawes' most questionable points within this thesis are the following:

- Dismissing the Hussite rebellion in Bohemia as a mere 'Slav pushback' against German domination, and claiming that it was actually just another aspect of the 'ancient' German-Slavic conflict beyond the Elbe. It's safe to say that this is not the point of view of the majority of historiography on the subject

- The whole idea of an ancient, everlasting German-Slav struggle in Eastern Europe, which comes up again and again throughout the book. According to Hawes, Germany lost both world wars because Prussia (or the Prussian elite) were so blinded by this struggle. This is so wrong, so propagandistic and so scary that I can't even comprehend how it got printed in 2018

- Dismissing Luther as a mere populist, and his brand of Protestantism as something that will poison Germany forever. While yes, Luther was something of a populist (this becomes very clear if you look at how different his points of view were from those of liberal contemporaries like Erasmus), dismissing the effect his legitimate criticism of the Catholic Church had on Christinity everywhere is absurd. Dismissing Protestantism as a whole because Protestant areas of Germany voted more heavily for Hitler than Catholic areas is equally absurd. It becomes even more ridiculous when Hawes says nonsense like "Berlin is closer to (Catholic) Warsaw and (Orthodox) Moscow than (virtually Protestant) Washington or (Protestant) London". He clearly means to convey that Prussia is far away from the West therefore barbaric and bad, but his own argument that Catholicism = good / Protestantism = bad makes his point absolutely moot... if all of this sounds confusing, that's because it is. Hawes is so busy dismissing everything to do with 'East Elbia' (from location to religion) that he becomes incoherent

- Painting Otto von Bismarck as a warmongering evil man who manipulated the whole of Europe into believing that his version of Germany is the real one. Bismarck was in fact an able statesman both abroad (he managed to create the first modern Germany that worked) and at home (where he created things like history's first modern welfare state). After he unified his country, he became very dedicated to maintaing the balance of power (hence peace) between powers in Europe, which is why I have no idea why Hawes is convinced Bismarck was particularly intent on war. Hawes even goes so far as to attack Bismarck's decision to support Austria-Hungary against the Russian Empire's ambitions in the Balkans, seeing it not as the balance-of-power-maintaing effort that it was, but as a decision based on the 'ancient' German-Slav conflict, which subconsciously influenced Prussian Bismarck, according to Hawes. He (even more ridiculously) has a go at Bismarck for the secularization campaigns in Germany known as Kulturkampf (these actually happened in several other European states, which Hawes neglects to mention). These were apparently so terrible that they traumatized the country's Catholic politicians forever, to the point where they helped Hitler gain a majority in the Reichstag. I kid you not, here's the quote from pp169-170: "The Centre Party decides, after agonised debate, that if it votes against a 51.9% national mandate, Germany's Catholics will be cast once again as traitors to the will of the people, and suffer a vicious new Kulturkampf. Hitler gets his super-majority, and democracy in Germany ends."

- Claiming that Prussia was a more or less artificial state created and supported by 'Slavs' (created under the Polish crown, supported by Russia at one point etc), hence it's terrible influence on the actual Germany. Hawes never mentions the fact that 'the Slavs' were in most cases very modern by contemporary standards (Hus in what would be today's Czech Republic preceded Luther; the Polish-Lithunian Commonwealth had a constitutional monarchy, high levels of diversity and religious tolerance) and can therefore not take the blame for Prussia's unfortunate character

I could go on forever, but I think I've proven my point. This book is a mess highlighting very little of that bold argument I glimpsed in the New Statesman article, and a lot of the author's prejudices and biases. ...more

flag 27 likes · Like · see review

Dec 16, 2018 Judith Johnson rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Well, I see that there are many very angry one star reviews for this book on Goodreads, from those who are outraged that there is neither bibliography, footnotes nor academic references for it, but surely, written by an author who is also a university lecturer, it’s clear that Hawes is not aiming for it to be taken as an academic work? HG Wells didn’t have references in his Short History of the World, nor did EH Gombrich in his A Little History if the World, albeit written for young readers.

I s ...more

flag 21 likes · Like · see review

Jul 02, 2018 Robert Maisey rated it did not like it · review of another edition

I wrote the review copied below in a fit of pique a few minutes after finishing the book, so its a little heated. On reflection, there's some good stuff here about the German relationship with "roman" Europe - particularly the mixed identity of the areas west of the Rhine - and it complimented some aspects of Prisoners of Geography, which I had read just beforehand.

However, here's the reason I gave it one star:

Understanding how two centuries of revolution and violence have somehow culminated in ...more

flag 18 likes · Like · see review

Jul 23, 2018 All My Friends Are Fictional rated it it was ok · review of another edition

It started off as a very informative read and somehow along the way turned into an anti-Prussian propaganda. Hawes' argument basically comes down to this: everyone and everything east of Elbe is rubbish and to blame for all the disasters of 19th-21st century. Don't waste your time on this. ...more

flag 16 likes · Like · see review

Feb 04, 2019 Maja - BibliophiliaDK ✨ rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: books-i-own, non-fiction

Germany has always been a divided country

I bought this book in the airport on my way home from Berlin because I was interested in German history and this seemed like a good place to start. And I was not wrong about that. It is a great place to start because it is so short and condensed. There were definitely times when I found myself think 'what about this' or 'what about that' and these things were never adressed or answered. But it dind't ruin the book for or my understanding of the subject. ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Nov 02, 2018 Rob rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Problematic to say the least. For half of this book, I was marvelling at the author's skill in boiling down the history of a complex subject in such a limited amount of pages. By clever use of diagrams and illustrations, I learned a lot about the broad sweep of Germany's history and was relishing the narrative. Then, around the time of German unification, the grinding of the author's axe suddenly became ear splitting. The author equates Germany's western and southern reaches to a utopia of good ...more

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Oct 28, 2017 Ioannis Papagiannis rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Finally understood what Prussia was. After all these years of seeing it appearing and disappearing in European history maps. It is safe to say this author is no big fan of it.

flag 15 likes · Like · see review

Dec 02, 2018 Kirsty rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Shelves: december-2018

Whilst in Munich with my boyfriend in February of this year, I mentioned that I'd love to learn more about German history. I have a sound grasp of it from the Weimar Republic up until the fall of the Berlin Wall, and have studied the period between 1914 and 1945 intensively, but I knew very little about earlier eras. James Hawes' The Shortest History of Germany therefore sounded as though it would be perfect to fill in those gaps.

It rings alarm bells for me when history books do not include a bi Whilst in Munich with my boyfriend in February of this year, I mentioned that I'd love to learn more about German history. I have a sound grasp of it from the Weimar Republic up until the fall of the Berlin Wall, and have studied the period between 1914 and 1945 intensively, but I knew very little about earlier eras. James Hawes' The Shortest History of Germany therefore sounded as though it would be perfect to fill in those gaps.

It rings alarm bells for me when history books do not include a bibliography or list of sources, and this omits both entirely. There are no footnotes to denote where a quote has been taken from, and sometimes things are quoted - in italics! - in the main body of text which do not include even the reference of the author's name. Had I noticed this before purchasing The Shortest History of Germany, it would have gone straight back onto the shelf.

The placing of text, maps, and diagrams here is so awkward, and makes for an unpleasant reading experience. Every pictorial source has been placed into the main body of text, sometimes randomly and without commentary, and therefore some of the text has been rendered into a column. I really did not enjoy the format, and think it would been easier to read, and more accessible, had all of the non-textual sources been grouped together on glossy paper, something most other history books include as a matter of course. This is not my only qualm in this respect, because many of these sources were poor in quality, and therefore the text was blurred. Most of them added very little to the book.

The way in which the quotes were not embedded in the main body of text, but appeared randomly in greyscale boxes - again, with barely a source to denote where they had been found - was annoying and unnecessary. I did not enjoy Hawes' writing style at all, and did not appreciate the constant references which he tried to draw between particular elements of German history and the present day. This made it feel even fluffier than a history book with no appendix or bibliography already feels.

Whilst The Shortest History of Germany has a relatively linear structure, the way in which it has been partitioned into sections is odd. Hawes' commentary felt as though it was all over the place due to the way in which what he includes here has both been set out and handled. I did read it all the way through, but only because it is such a short book; on reflection, I wish I hadn't bothered. The book, as one might expect, is incredibly brief, and not at all comprehensive. Far more attention was focused upon the twentieth-century than anything else, and whilst I can understand this to a point, it made the whole feel highly uneven. It also became far more biased as time went on, and his tone felt patronising at points.

I'd like to say that I learnt a lot from this book, but as there is no concrete evidence to show what Hawes had read - if anything! - before compiling it, I found myself mistrustful. If it had been submitted as even an undergraduate thesis, I doubt it would have received a very good mark, with the unnecessary omission of the bibliography, and its quite clumsy writing at times. It feels almost as though Hawes has chosen to include so many charts, graphs, maps, and newspaper clippings - many of which are barely legible - in order to detract from his often skewed perspectives and cursory mentions of really rather important things.

There are many short books which I have read that effectively give the history of a particular topic in succinct and immersive ways, and which also include a comprehensive list of sources for further reading. The omission of such an important thing here was a mistake. In consequence, I will never read anything of Hawes' again, as I am unsure whether I can trust what he includes. ...more

flag 10 likes · Like · see review

Jul 07, 2018 Miguel Pinto rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

if your interest in history or simply curious about German history, this is the book to go.
Clearly written, not boring it focus on fact without putting you to sleep.
for me understanding why world war I started and also discovering a permanent mark on brittish society with German origin made this book fun to read,
totally recommend

flag 9 likes · Like · see review

Apr 22, 2018 Stanislav Stanchev rated it really liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: 21st-century, own-physical, history, eu-politics

I am impressed with how much James Hawes has accomplished in just 226 pages of image-rich and small-format pages. To me, the book has three layers on which it can be appreciated:

First, the reader is served an engaging and accessible tale of 2,000 years of German history. I particularly enjoyed the many maps and the interspersed etymological facts (such as the English pound Sterling being derived from Easterling, referring to the reliable money of the Hansa merchants on the German Baltic Coast).

S ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Mar 24, 2018 Rosie rated it liked it · review of another edition

I had very mixed thoughts on this book. On the one hand, he's drawn the history together very well in that he shows its continuity. This makes a much more readable and compelling history than - as so often happens - it being treated as separate events that are isolated from one another.

However, Hawes clearly has his own biases that crop up throughout the book. In an early map of Europe ('In the Proto-Beginning', xi) he labels northern Germany 'Proto Germans' and the Mediterranean, specifically ...more

flag 8 likes · Like · see review

Oct 14, 2018 Peter Castine rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Was going to give this only one star… but then I reminded myself that Hawes is primarily an author of fiction. As a work of historical fiction, the book gets a nudge upwards. Even then, the strategies used to make the desired point are anything but subtle.

If we are to take the book at the face value of its title, I understand that to keep 2,000 years of history short it's going to be necessary to simplify, smooth over details, and leave things out. But still, the book deliberately skips over eno Was going to give this only one star… but then I reminded myself that Hawes is primarily an author of fiction. As a work of historical fiction, the book gets a nudge upwards. Even then, the strategies used to make the desired point are anything but subtle.

If we are to take the book at the face value of its title, I understand that to keep 2,000 years of history short it's going to be necessary to simplify, smooth over details, and leave things out. But still, the book deliberately skips over enormous bits of important history, and always points that would inconveniently get in the way of Hawes' thesis of two Germanys that don't belong together (in opposition to Willy Brandt's famous comment "that which belongs together will grow [back] together.") Having lived as a foreigner in Germany through the period of reunification, I learned in 1989 (admittedly somewhat to my surprise at the time) that Germans were as unified as a people could be in the conviction that they are "one people" — "ein Volk. Hawes repeatedly confuses the natural boundary of the Elba river as a "fault line," but it is nothing of the sort. Yes, there are nuances between the East and West, but there are also nuances between North and South, as well as many further subtle regional variations, but if anything fewer differences than between north and south of the Tyne in Great Britain (never mind the regional differences in the US). I wonder is Hawes would make analogous claims that Britain north and south of the Tyne should be made into two different countries (at least public opinion in Scotland would be much closer to a toss-up on that than in Germany). Ditto for east and west of the Irish sea, or west of Bristol, or even north of the Trent.

The book's problems start in the first chapter with the claim of Julius Cesar essentially "discovering" Germany, despite the fact that the Germanic tribes already had numerous ties in trade with the Mediterranean (a claim rather like the notion that Columbus "discovered" America). The last chapter (roughly from the 30 Years War to current times) is rife with omissions, and notably anything that would weaken the notion of "good" Catholic Germans in the West and South and "bad" Lutheran Germans in the East is left out: no mention of the schism in the Lutheran church during the 1931–45 period, with one half denouncing Naziism, no mention of Nazi support with the Catholic church (both admittedly difficult topics in need of nuanced handling, but to not mention either while claiming blanket support from the one side is simply bad history). The list could go on and on, but perhaps this gives an idea of just how much spin is used to support a flimsy argument.

Perhaps the one positive point about Hawes' thesis that Germany should have its borders end at the east at the Elbe (without even hinting at what should become of Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, and Thuringia) is that it might serve as a counterbalance to the few voices from the far right calling for a return to pre-war borders. But both ideas are equally delusional in contemporary Europe. ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

May 27, 2018 Alice rated it liked it · review of another edition

This was an impulse buy, and I’m a bit of a sucker for short histories (let alone “the shortest history” - how could I resist?). The Observer calls it “sweeping and confident” and the New European calls it “authoritative.” I’d have to disagree with the New European assessment, although add “overconfident” to the Observer’s characterisation and it’s pretty much spot-on. What Hawes has to say about Hegel and Marx is pure nonsense, and it seems a little too neat that we can simply blame Protestanti ...more

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Oct 29, 2018 Radiantflux rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: europe, history, germany

95th book for 2018.

Interesting polemical essay, arguing that the recent rise of neo-nazism in East Germany is nothing new, and that there are really two Germanys, one east and one west of the Elbe, that have existed since Roman times. I am not sure I buy all the arguments, but an enjoyable and provocative read.

3-stars.

flag 7 likes · Like · see review

Oct 14, 2018 GONZA rated it did not like it · review of another edition

This is not an history book, it is propaganda. It is based on some crazy idea of the author and I am wondering how could a publisher decided that it was worthy. I gave up after a while because there seemed to be no point in keep on reading rubbish,

Thanks Netgalley for the preview

flag 6 likes · Like · see review

Oct 11, 2018 Paul Stevenson rated it it was ok · review of another edition

The Sh**test History of Germany paints with a very broad brush, and presents a particular view that is more of a personal thesis than a history. To some extent, that is really true of all histories, especially pop histories. Especially short ones. It started off promisingly enough, sketching out a picture of the Roman interactions with the peoples of Germania, and proceeding from there, keeping in mind the boundaries at the Roman time as a template through which to remember what passed before. B ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Oct 30, 2018 Belinda Carvalho rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Welllllllllllllllllllllll...where to start with this book. I got off to quite a bad start with this. I bought it as a Kindle edition, I genuinely thought it was going to be a short bite-sized book that I could use to brush up on my Germany history. Unfortunatley this wasn't to be , as this book is compeletely revisionist and falls into an opinion-based view on real events that have been put through James Hawes mind an emerge bearing little resemblance to reality and actual history.
Have you ever ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jul 15, 2018 Kevin Gibbons rated it did not like it · review of another edition

This book is dishonest history. The main argument is based on a distinction between cultural "West Germans" who are descended from those tribes which were under the power of the Roman Empire, and "East Germans" who were never 'civilized'.

This distinction is a fantasy, based on some idealized (and, indeed, sterilized) idea of what the Roman Empire was. Rather than the source of all democratic and liberal thought, the Roman Empire is more accurately characterized by its "state-worship" and "scar- ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Jan 10, 2019 Lori rated it it was ok · review of another edition

When I saw this book, I saw it as an opportunity to learn more about the history of Germany. Disappointment set in almost from the moment I opened the book. Non-existent documentation, an overly familiar writing style, and blatant political bias plagued the account. In a small book such as this, one expects superficial treatment; however, the author's biases seem to drive what he glosses over and what he treats more in-depth. The author needs to return to writing fiction and refrain from non-fic ...more

flag 5 likes · Like · see review

Oct 01, 2018 The Humpo Show [ Richard ] rated it liked it · review of another edition

Covering everything from Charlemagne, Martin Luther, Otto von Bismarck and Adolf Hitler, to the Reformation, Prussia, First World War and the Berlin Wall, The Shortest History of Germany is a breezy visit through German events, monarchies, politics and geography.

Structured in a clear and wide-ranging manner - necessary due to covering a couple of thousand years in less than 300 pages - but Hawes manages it well, and makes good use of text, images, maps and box-outs. This is a good book for intr ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jun 24, 2018 AnnaG rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: favorites, history, non-fiction, travel, mind-expander

This is a swoop over 2,000 years of history that can be read in a couple of hours. It gives an interesting insight into the history of Germany. Some parts are brushed over rather lightly making it hard to understand exactly what is going on, but with the brevity, you don't get bogged down in the detail. The theory advanced that modern Germany is really a fusion of two separate cultures that have kept experiencing different developmental pressures is interesting and not one I'd heard before. Whil ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Apr 29, 2018 Laura rated it really liked it · review of another edition

A great book about a very interesting topic. This is one of the books that show that history, unlike many of us experienced in school, doesn't have to be dry and boring. It's an entertaining read that taught me about the bigger power struggles in Europe over centuries, but also about my own family history.
Does it go in to a lot of detail? No. Is it unbiased? No. Is that an issue? No. This is not a history book in the classical sense of the word. It is not a regurgitation of facts that we have he ...more

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Apr 11, 2018 Ken rated it really liked it · review of another edition

I don’t tend to read much non-fiction, but as this was one of Waterstones ‘books of the month’ and Germany is one of my favourite countries that I’ve visited - this book was an instant purchase.

It’s a fascinating bite size read, the author covers 2000 years in just over 200 pages.

It’s certainly wetted my appetite to read more on the subject.

flag 4 likes · Like · see review

Jan 21, 2019 Nick rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

To the casual observer, today’s Germany is impressive for its economic and political clout. It's a country that gives a strong impression of unity and shared purpose, with its richer western population having poured trillions into the coffers of their eastern neighbours over the past 30 years to pursue an ideal of reunification. Sitting at the heart of the European Union, Germany has shown moral leadership over the refugee crisis, and although its approach to enforcing austerity on weaker eurozo To the casual observer, today’s Germany is impressive for its economic and political clout. It's a country that gives a strong impression of unity and shared purpose, with its richer western population having poured trillions into the coffers of their eastern neighbours over the past 30 years to pursue an ideal of reunification. Sitting at the heart of the European Union, Germany has shown moral leadership over the refugee crisis, and although its approach to enforcing austerity on weaker eurozone members has been criticised, it is increasingly regarded (post-Trump) as the guardian of a liberal, democratic world order.

This short history upsets some of the above preconceptions by demonstrating that for much of its history, Germany has not been united at all. In fact, he argues, there have always been two different Germanys pulling against each other: one west-facing and closer to 'civilisation', the other wilder, east-facing, more rural and more dangerous.

Much of the east of modern Germany was once Prussia, which started off as a kind of ‘Germany outside Germany’ in the days of the crusading Teutonic Knights. The Knights, bolstered by their connections with the powerful Hanseatic League of merchants, chose in 1525 to reject the Catholic Church and embrace the teachings of Luther - though as with Henry VIII, the decision wasn't made entirely on spiritual grounds. Prussia's militaristic streak continued down the centuries. By the mid-18th century, it was dominated by the aristocratic Junkers, who were big fans of going round dressed in military uniform and lording it over their serfs (yes, they were still allowed to have serfs). The most famous of the Junkers is Otto von Bismarck (the Junkers all had ‘von’s in their names) whose military build-up was so instrumental in setting the scene for the First World War, while the Junker-dominated DNVP provided invaluable help to Hitler when he was starting out (though he soon ditched them when he didn’t need them anymore).

By contrast, the western half of Germany was closer to Rome and the Pope. It was the part of Germany that was part of Charlemagne's Frankish Empire, and the heart of the "Holy Roman Empire" of Otto the Great and his successors. However, the glory days didn't last forever. Following the devastating Thirty Years War, it broke into innumerable statelets, and was dominated by the French during the 18th century, leaving Prussia able to present itself as the 'true Germany'. The die was cast when the British, seeking a bulwark against French expansion, gave a chunk of the Rhineland to Prussia in 1814 (seen by Hawes as one of the most fateful miscalculations in history). This industrialised, populous region provided wealth for the Prussian army, but old, East Elbian Prussia still called the shots, crushing a liberal revolution in 1848 and eventually seizing control of all Germany by force. By 1871, Bismarck had created a German Empire encompassing the Rhineland, Prussia, many of the smaller German states, Alsace-Lorraine and considerable chunks of what is now Poland.

The author excels at tracing what he sees as the two Germanys through centuries of history. His argument culminates in the claim that more authoritarian forces in the eastern part of the country are still exerting a malign and disproportionate influence over its politics. Reunification, in his view, created at least as many challenges as it solved, and however valiant the country’s efforts to paper over the cracks, they are still very much in evidence in the growing success of fringe parties on the left and right.

Any book of this length (200-odd pages) that aims to tell the story of an entire nation is making a heroic effort. Hawes devotes over half of the book to the last 500 years, meaning that the earlier sections feel a little compressed in places. Yet the book is unfailingly readable, enlivened by maps and diagrams, and the compelling thesis of 'the impossible double country' ties it together. I found it a very useful corrective to my ignorance, filling in some of the many gaps in my knowledge of Germany and Europe. ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Dec 01, 2019 Fabiola rated it liked it · review of another edition

In my view, the book is a mix of a personal and biased thesis of the author and the bits of history that are most convenient to support it. It’s good to get an overview of German history, but take it all with a grain of salt. Should by no means be considered an objective and professional work. When I bought the book after reading the title and the reviews of reputable institutions, I thought it would be a proper history, and not a divisive and incomplete interpretation.

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Apr 24, 2018 Hristian Trendafilov rated it really liked it · review of another edition

I found this quite interesting. I really liked how history was traced from the beginning (ie Bronze Age, pre Roman encounters) all the way to the Present. It is interesting because then you can see certain themes emerge. I've noticed this when I've traced other region's history in total and I found surprising coincidences.

So the author argues there's an overlapping theme of West Germany vs East Germany. The rich against the powerful. So there is an opinion stated throughout the book. So I canno ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Oct 06, 2018 Supriyo Chaudhuri rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

This short book surprised me. I came to it at a time when I finished a big project and was undecided if I wanted to commit to any serious study. I was looking for informational history books of kings-and-things variety. But this turned out to be that and more: A little book with a big thesis (or two). It helped put Germany in perspective, right up to the present moment in its politics. One can argue with its central assumption - that geography is destiny - but I greatly enjoyed it's brilliant pr ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

Dec 28, 2019 William Ditcham rated it did not like it · review of another edition

Shelves: 2019

Do not read this book. I picked it up as I was hoping to gain a basic understanding of German history and culture however I now greatly regret it. Mr Hawes seems to make grand assumptions about Germany, and more specifically East Germany, without providing any evidence for it. The lack of a bibliography and rigorous referencing is especially concerning considering the fact that the book essentially turns into a 200 page spiel on the evilness of East Germany.
Additionally, Mr Hawes opens the book ...more

flag 3 likes · Like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend It | Stats | Recent Status Updates

Readers also enjoyed

See similar books…

Genres

History

245 users

Nonfiction

144 users

Cultural > Germany

39 users

Politics

17 users

Historical

10 users

European Literature > German Literature

8 users

History > European History

3 users

Literature > 21st Century

2 users

War > World War II

2 users

Education

2 users

See top shelves…

About James Hawes

James Hawes

39 followers

Books by James Hawes

Why You Should Read Kafka Before You Waste Your Life

More…

News & Interviews

Power, Sister! 20 New Books on Women’s History

Happy Women's History Month! One of the undisputedly good things about modern scholarship is that women’s history is finally getting its due....

Trivia About The Shortest Hist...

No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »

Quotes from The Shortest Hist...

“It’s a seminal moment in the history of Germany and Europe. Stopping at the Elbe is not a normal military-political decision; it’s one dictated by higher powers. Crossing the Rhine is fine; but the Elbe marks the end of reasonable ambition.” — 0 likes

More quotes…

See a Problem?

Preview — The Shortest History of Germany by James Hawes

The Shortest History of Germany

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About James Hawes

Books by James Hawes

News & Interviews

Trivia About The Shortest Hist...

Quotes from The Shortest Hist...

See a Problem?

Preview — The Shortest History of Germany by James Hawes

The Shortest History of Germany

Get A Copy

Friend Reviews

Reader Q&A

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topicDiscuss This Book

Readers also enjoyed

Genres

About James Hawes

Books by James Hawes

News & Interviews

Trivia About The Shortest Hist...

Quotes from The Shortest Hist...

new topic
Discuss This Book