Traverso makes a few valuable, if overtly political and, at times, moralising, points about the traditionally liberal conceptions of the period under study. What I found most compelling was the investigation of the terms 'war' and 'peace', terms which, if their meaning and significance to the human being are to be captured, cannot be conceived of in such a narrow and legalistic sense as 'the organised conflict of state actors' and, coversely, the lack thereof. That, if nothing else, is certainly something to chew on. But if we were to situate this work within the discussion of whether history-writing ought to be a Rankean exercise in empiricism or, instead, the pursuit of a literary art form, we might leave both sides uncomfortable, for Traverso's engagement with primary sources is cursory and his writing is dry and boring. To be fair to him as an author, that latter may well be the fault of the translator. Traverso seems to have envisioned a grand synthesis with a generational approach to an otherwise familiar period, but the final product is really more provocative than it is compelling. These shortfalls might explain the choice of publisher in Verso Books. ( )

An absolutely sobering read as the US moves into the age of Trump. The discussion of fear and violence by Hobbes, interpreted by Schmidt, is chilling. All these years later, the song remains the same. Nothing is certain, every victory temporary. ( )

Érudit, terriblement érudit... Mais les pauvres gars qui se sont fait trouer le paillasson l'étaient moins. Plus une preuve de virtuosité qu'une vraie réflexion. ( )