Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pielorinho" data-source="post: 298079" data-attributes="member: 259">Shark, of course he can choose not to have a bibliography.  But given the number of books in the world, I'm not likely to read 1,200 pages of a book whose first fact I research turns out to be incorrect.The point of having a bibliography is precisely this, so that we can check up on the author's claims.  Frankly, his argument that the space limitations in a 1,200 page book prevented him from having a bibliography sounds sloppy at best, and disingenuous at worst.  It prevents people from having a serious discussion of his interpretation of historical fact:  when confronted with seeming inaccuracies, we're left to imagine how he came up with his "facts."Yes, he may get the bulk of the facts straight.  But if I'm gonna read a 1,200 page book, that's not good enough.  I want the book to be carefully and transparently researched.(Incidentally, as a matter of personal taste, I find his writing style as represented in the snippets here to be laughably purple, simplistic, and pulpy.    I've read history books in a similar style before, and they filled me with disgust and loathing.  But were that my only problem with the book, I woulda kept silent:  it's the inaccuracies, not the writing, that I find really objectionable).If I read the book, it'll be for ideas on how to represent mythically bloodthirsty savages in a fantasy world. It won't be for real-world history.Daniel</blockquote>

Verification