This work's most redeeming quality may very well be its service as an example of what good historical writing should not be. A scholar such as Van Doren should not be so negligible in his endeavors. Perhaps Van Doren feels that he has proven his scholarly mettle on enough occasions to exempt himself from the ardors of research, for one finds no footnotes or bibliographical information whatsoever in the entire work. Other factual errors can be found in several other passages of the work. Actually it was the Japanese who attacked the Russian fleet at Port Arthur. One key example should illustrate my point: in his discussion of the 1904-05 Russo-Japanese War, Van Doren mistakenly leads us to believe that the Russians attacked the Japanese, thus initiating the war in which the Russians were beaten and humiliated.
Even more shocking is Van Doren's factual inaccuracy. Emanuel Wallerstein, Peter Stearns, and other world systems historians who have done much to bring the West out of its exclusionary ego. Van Doren would have benefited himself and his work by examining the works of such scholars as L.S. To begin, his work is Western biased, leaving very little space devoted to the remarkable achievements of non-Western civilizations and cultures. Indeed, how anyone with the intellect of Van Doren could write such a flawed and careless piece is almost incomprehensible.
