What do you think?
Rate this book
Great Rivals in History
This title brings to life the drama of history's most vicious political and military feuds, ranging through centuries and across the globe.
368 pages, Paperback
First published August 15, 2008
About the author
Joseph Cummins
57 books32 followersJoseph Cummins is the author of numerous books, including Anything for a Vote: Dirty Tricks, Cheap Shots and October Surprises in U.S. Presidential Elections; A Bloody History of the World, which won the 2010 Our History Project Gold Medal Award; and the forthcoming Ten Tea Parties: Patriotic Protests That History Forgot. He lives in Maplewood, New Jersey, with his wife and daughter.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
May 21, 2010
An excellent book for historian or casual fan. From Alexander the Great/Darisu through Nixon/Kennedy, this book explores the big moments and bigger personalities as they work through their historical struggles.
My personal favorites were Richard I /King John, Villa /Zapata and Chiang Kai-Shek/Mao. Throw in Patton/Montgomery and Disraeli/Gladstone and you've got a full fledged history cocktail party going on!
Very easy to read, and enough detail that just about everyone will find something new. For example, in the chapter about the Earls of Lucan and Cardigan (the Charge of the Light Brigade), we discover the origin of the Cardigan as an article of clothing!
My personal favorites were Richard I /King John, Villa /Zapata and Chiang Kai-Shek/Mao. Throw in Patton/Montgomery and Disraeli/Gladstone and you've got a full fledged history cocktail party going on!
Very easy to read, and enough detail that just about everyone will find something new. For example, in the chapter about the Earls of Lucan and Cardigan (the Charge of the Light Brigade), we discover the origin of the Cardigan as an article of clothing!
September 4, 2017
A good light history which entertains and informs. The chapter on the Hamilton/Burr duel was worth the book itself. Small errors were annoying (Pancho Villa invaded the United States to get money he deposited in two banks not because he was anti=American) as were some omissions (He has a photograph of the US Ninth Army in the chapter on Patton v. Montgomery but fail to mention that the assignment of that Unit to the British 8th Army Group was a source intense friction betwn the Allies). Still a good book.
March 20, 2018
As a history buff, I loved this. This book shared the general lives and conflicts of interesting historical figures through time, as they faced their opponents. This is one of those books where you could pick up randomly and flip to a specific page and person; and learn so much. I was not bored, nor disappointed. I learnt more about specific people and historical events. I really enjoyed this and so is my father, who is currently flicking through it as I write this! This book will join my other historical books on my bookcase. 4.5 stars.
March 5, 2019
I enjoyed this a lot, as it reads as a nice lightning tour of thousands of years of history, including some things I knew little (American War of Indepence, Nixon vs Kennedy) and some things I knew nothing about (Mexican revolution, Crimean War, French in Vietnam).
However, there did appear to be some errors or glossing of details. He claims that Gladstone never frequented ladies of the night, when Richard Aldous (The Lion and the Unicorn: Gladstone vs. Disraeli) argues quite convincingly that he was possibly addicted. A figure is used (3220km, I think) twice in the same chapter for two different distances (length of Amazon and North-South extent of Inca empire). It's very unlikely that both of these are correct (a quick google states that the length of the Amazon
is 6,400 km). This erodes a little confidence in other details.
Another aspect that reduced my enjoyment is that he seems to take a little too much pleasure in war and destruction.
I'd give it four for enjoyment and extensity but three for perceived quality.
However, there did appear to be some errors or glossing of details. He claims that Gladstone never frequented ladies of the night, when Richard Aldous (The Lion and the Unicorn: Gladstone vs. Disraeli) argues quite convincingly that he was possibly addicted. A figure is used (3220km, I think) twice in the same chapter for two different distances (length of Amazon and North-South extent of Inca empire). It's very unlikely that both of these are correct (a quick google states that the length of the Amazon
is 6,400 km). This erodes a little confidence in other details.
Another aspect that reduced my enjoyment is that he seems to take a little too much pleasure in war and destruction.
I'd give it four for enjoyment and extensity but three for perceived quality.
April 25, 2024
Quite enjoyable. Learned a surprising amount. I suppose a lot of that was because some of these pairs are from times and places I don't normally read much about. Covers a long period, it begins with Alexander the Great and Darius, King of Persia, and ends with Nixon and Kennedy.
March 12, 2019
Some really interesting rivalries described here. Sometimes the detail in the history is really sketchy and doesn't always appear well-written, but it is fascinating to get behind the conflicts.
October 11, 2019
As a history buff this book was very interesting and nice.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 5, 2023
A good write on personal rivalries across time that shaped out world. A different angle to refresh memories of events all the while entertaining - well done.
April 8, 2026
Ya me olvidé de muchos detalles de este libro, pero me entretuvo mucho el año que iba y venía al trabajar hasta Santa Fe.
September 5, 2024
BW. This was a fun book. I enjoyed the concise narratives of these famous people. I also enjoyed the author's sense of humor in describing some of these characters.
May 18, 2015
Historical bitch-fights
23 July 2011
I like reading a good book on history, particularly one with an interesting theme. Okay, granted, I have become rather tired of the battlefield mistakes genre that tries to garner some laughs out of other's misfortunes, but that does not mean that all theme orientated history books are just as boring. While this one was not the most engaging, it was interesting nonetheless.
As the title suggests, this book is about rivalry, though the case studies (if that is the best word for it since it is written for the non-academically inclined) don't really suggest rivalry to the same extent as Cummins suggests, though when we have somebody like Alexander the Great, whose only real enemy was Darius of Persia, then no doubt this would create a rivalry. However, the rivalries to take note of would not so much be the empires in collision, but rather the rivalries between two people of the same country, such as Ceaser and Pompey, and Benedict Arnold and Horatio Gates. I wish to look at two of the rivalries that he explores: Henry II and Thomas Becket, and Arnold and Gates.
My favourite line from this book would have to come from Henry II who, after being exasperated once again by his rival, and indeed his good friend, Thomas Beckett, screamed out 'will no one rid me of this turbulent priest!' While he screamed this out in frustration, and it is suspected that he didn't want anybody to actually kill Beckett, some of his knights took him literally and made their way to England where they proceeded to murder the Archbishop in the Canterbury Cathedral. This pretty much turned Beckett into a martyr (not that he was an outstanding character, it is just that his brutal murder on holy ground elicited a lot of sympathy). A lot of the rivals in the book were and stayed enemies, however Beckett and Henry weren't; it is just they were thrust into that position. While not a man of huge ethical morality, Beckett took his position seriously, so when he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by King Henry, he had no choice but to be faithful to his role, and if this involved rebuking the king, then so be it.
This all happened during a very turbulent time in history, namely the power struggle between the church and the state. The Church, centred in Rome, had pretty much dominated European politics for hundreds of years (and at this time still did), but as the nation states began to rise, and the kings began to bring more power and loyalty under them, the church's power was threatened: but they did have excommunication. While to us moderns it seems like an empty threat, to the medieval mind, who believed that the Pope was Christ's representative on Earth, excommunication (that is kicking somebody out of the church and condemning their soul to the fires of hell) was a very power and fear provoking tool. While at this stage of the battle the church won out, it's power was declining, and as people ceased to fear excommunication (particularly since a subsequent Pope could revoke it) the Pope slowly lost his powers over the temporal realm.
The second rivalry I wish to look at is Gates and Arnold. This played out in the American War of independence, and it was simply a story of one man (Gates) stepping all over another man (Arnold) to gain prestige. From my reading of this story, Gates was simply not the type of person that I would want to befriend, and he did seem to mistreat Arnold. Still, this had a lot to do with ambition, and Arnold was a man prone to outbursts. In the end, he gave up on the cause for which he was fighting and changed sides. That did not endear him to history at all as the name Benedict Arnold is now synonymous with traitor.
23 July 2011
I like reading a good book on history, particularly one with an interesting theme. Okay, granted, I have become rather tired of the battlefield mistakes genre that tries to garner some laughs out of other's misfortunes, but that does not mean that all theme orientated history books are just as boring. While this one was not the most engaging, it was interesting nonetheless.
As the title suggests, this book is about rivalry, though the case studies (if that is the best word for it since it is written for the non-academically inclined) don't really suggest rivalry to the same extent as Cummins suggests, though when we have somebody like Alexander the Great, whose only real enemy was Darius of Persia, then no doubt this would create a rivalry. However, the rivalries to take note of would not so much be the empires in collision, but rather the rivalries between two people of the same country, such as Ceaser and Pompey, and Benedict Arnold and Horatio Gates. I wish to look at two of the rivalries that he explores: Henry II and Thomas Becket, and Arnold and Gates.
My favourite line from this book would have to come from Henry II who, after being exasperated once again by his rival, and indeed his good friend, Thomas Beckett, screamed out 'will no one rid me of this turbulent priest!' While he screamed this out in frustration, and it is suspected that he didn't want anybody to actually kill Beckett, some of his knights took him literally and made their way to England where they proceeded to murder the Archbishop in the Canterbury Cathedral. This pretty much turned Beckett into a martyr (not that he was an outstanding character, it is just that his brutal murder on holy ground elicited a lot of sympathy). A lot of the rivals in the book were and stayed enemies, however Beckett and Henry weren't; it is just they were thrust into that position. While not a man of huge ethical morality, Beckett took his position seriously, so when he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury by King Henry, he had no choice but to be faithful to his role, and if this involved rebuking the king, then so be it.
This all happened during a very turbulent time in history, namely the power struggle between the church and the state. The Church, centred in Rome, had pretty much dominated European politics for hundreds of years (and at this time still did), but as the nation states began to rise, and the kings began to bring more power and loyalty under them, the church's power was threatened: but they did have excommunication. While to us moderns it seems like an empty threat, to the medieval mind, who believed that the Pope was Christ's representative on Earth, excommunication (that is kicking somebody out of the church and condemning their soul to the fires of hell) was a very power and fear provoking tool. While at this stage of the battle the church won out, it's power was declining, and as people ceased to fear excommunication (particularly since a subsequent Pope could revoke it) the Pope slowly lost his powers over the temporal realm.
The second rivalry I wish to look at is Gates and Arnold. This played out in the American War of independence, and it was simply a story of one man (Gates) stepping all over another man (Arnold) to gain prestige. From my reading of this story, Gates was simply not the type of person that I would want to befriend, and he did seem to mistreat Arnold. Still, this had a lot to do with ambition, and Arnold was a man prone to outbursts. In the end, he gave up on the cause for which he was fighting and changed sides. That did not endear him to history at all as the name Benedict Arnold is now synonymous with traitor.
August 10, 2011
I rather enjoyed Joseph Cummins “Great Rivals in History: When Politics Gets Personal” as it takes a bit of a different approach to history. Cummins takes on 24 pairs of individuals who were either at cross-purposes or competing for the same goal. Some of them were friends before becoming competitors, some were family, many were natural foes, but quite a few should have been allies but for their own personal ambitions.
Each chapter of this book takes on one pair of historical figures that in some way were rivals, whether for world domination, as is the case with Alexander the Great and King Darius III; political power, as is the case with Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone; or perhaps for History, such as George S. Patton and Bernard Law Montgomery. These rivals may be trying to achieve victory for their countries and themselves, such as Charles XII of Sweden and Peter the Great of Russia, or for power within the same country, such as John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon.
The discussions of these 24 rivalries are arranged pretty much in chronological order, though certainly some of them overlap significantly, especially in those from the 20th century. These discussions are summaries of these contests contain both a brief history of the events for which they are known, but also partial biographies of the two competitors. By no means are these intended to be complete discussions of any of these topics or of the participants. Rather it serves as an introduction which whet’s the appetite for deeper study. One could use this as an overview for those who don’t have the time or interest to delve deeper into these events, but I wouldn’t recommend it as they are a bit sparse for that.
This book is very readable and enjoyable, and I do recommend it. I do wish it were a bit more comprehensive in many areas, and I was a bit disappointed in the bibliography which does not contain as many references as I would like, and in fact there are fewer references than there are rivals under discussion. This book rates near 3½ stars from me, but I am rounding down to 3 stars.
Each chapter of this book takes on one pair of historical figures that in some way were rivals, whether for world domination, as is the case with Alexander the Great and King Darius III; political power, as is the case with Benjamin Disraeli and William Gladstone; or perhaps for History, such as George S. Patton and Bernard Law Montgomery. These rivals may be trying to achieve victory for their countries and themselves, such as Charles XII of Sweden and Peter the Great of Russia, or for power within the same country, such as John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon.
The discussions of these 24 rivalries are arranged pretty much in chronological order, though certainly some of them overlap significantly, especially in those from the 20th century. These discussions are summaries of these contests contain both a brief history of the events for which they are known, but also partial biographies of the two competitors. By no means are these intended to be complete discussions of any of these topics or of the participants. Rather it serves as an introduction which whet’s the appetite for deeper study. One could use this as an overview for those who don’t have the time or interest to delve deeper into these events, but I wouldn’t recommend it as they are a bit sparse for that.
This book is very readable and enjoyable, and I do recommend it. I do wish it were a bit more comprehensive in many areas, and I was a bit disappointed in the bibliography which does not contain as many references as I would like, and in fact there are fewer references than there are rivals under discussion. This book rates near 3½ stars from me, but I am rounding down to 3 stars.
May 12, 2011
This book is filled with short, very gripping accounts of rivalries that changed history from Alexander the Great and Persia's Darius to JFK and Nixon. I used it to research some of the most fascinating competing pairs in European history. I like the great format of this book, so inviting with colorful illustrations and diagrams (of Waterloo, for instance) and with very informative sidebars. I just wish I had a hard cover edition, because I think my students will wear out this softcover.
July 29, 2011
Really good book, that shows that you may be the most intelligent person in your field, but if you meet up with someone who rubs you the wrong way, even you can get petty in your intent.
It amazed me how many times, in some cases the rivals were so simular in final intent, that if only they could see past the rivals methods and way of thinking, by working together they could achieve so much more and changed the path of history.
It amazed me how many times, in some cases the rivals were so simular in final intent, that if only they could see past the rivals methods and way of thinking, by working together they could achieve so much more and changed the path of history.
Currently Reading
January 30, 2009Ok...this book may not sound exciting...but the personalities and stories of the individuals highlighted in the book are intriguing. For me, they make history much more relevant and interesting.
August 17, 2009
There is so much I didn't know about a lot of these people. The only thing I didn't like is that the author sometimes takes sides a bit.
December 28, 2013
More of a popular history book. Ok, not great.
June 26, 2014
Very interesting read. Loved getting a fresh look at some rivalries I knew about and learning about ones I didn't. Would recommend for history lovers.
December 30, 2014
Excellently written with lots of details.
January 10, 2017
Great short but interesting overviews of conflicts between some very interesting people in world history.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews