Kegley and Raymond flunk European History 101: Mistakes in the book

Ms Katya Kalandadze, former TA in this course, offers the following corrections:

I had no time till today to send you my remarks on the
mistakes I have found in Kegley and Raymond. I believe
Marx was right when saying history is not all about
kings and queens. Nevertheless, there are many
examples in history than certain persons, in most
cases absolute rulers or prime ministers like
Richelieu would take decisions without referring to
anyone else, decisions which were to shape the fates
of Europe. In the middle ages and even in the
so-called New Time (17th century on) it was true to
say about many rulers, as Louis XIV said it, that "the
state was he/her, etc". This is why it is especially
important to be careful with the names and biographies
of people who made the Thirty Years' War what it
became and who, as in the case of Richelieu, were one
of the most influential (in terms of historical
development) politicians ever. Like Russia of the
early 18th century is nothing without Peter the Great,
France of the 17th century is not what it was without
Richelieu. This is my point.

Page 42: "King Philip II, the son of the
Hapsburg Holy Roman Emperor Charles V, obtained
possession of the Spanish throne when in a strategic
maneuver he married the only surviving descendant of
the Spanish King, Catherine "the Loco"".

This is terrible! First of all, they are in a
contradiction with themselves, because on the very
next page they say: "Philip (the same Philip II)
married Maria of Portugal, Mary Tudor of England,
Elizabeth of Valois and his own niece, Anna of
Austria". And this is correct. These are the four
wives of Philip II.

Coming back to their mistake. It is not Philip II, but
his grandfather known in the Spanish history as Philip
I, the Archduke of Austria, who married Juana "la
Loca", the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella the
Catholics and, thus, secured the Spanish throne for
his son, Charles V. I wonder, why did they call her
Catherine? They probably confused Juana with her
sister Catherine who was the first wife of Henry VIII
of England. Besides, I do not understand why they need
to use the half Spanish, half English saying "the
Loco". If you want to use English, say Juana "the
Mad". If you want to use Spanish, say Juana "la Loca"
(and not Loco, by the way). In short, it is terrific,
do not you think?

Also, I know for sure that the initial German version
of spelling the name Habsburg is as I did it, namely
through "b". So, I am wondering why do they always say
"Hapsburgs" through "p". Is that an American way? I
also noticed that they said duke of Alva (page 44),
though I always knew him as Duke of Alba and no other
way round.

Next, page 71. They say that Richelieu was Italian by
birth and not highly fluent in French. This is
unbelievable! Richelieu was born in the French noble
family, his French was perfect as he was French! I
believe they were thinking, somehow, about cardinal
Mazarin (or Mazarini, two ways of spelling, one
Italian and another one French), the prime minister of
the early years of the reign of Louis XIV.

On the same page (box 2.2) they managed to say that
"the new age of statecraft that was born in 1648,
three years after his death". They mean Richelieu's
death. However, Richelieu died in 1642, six years
before 1648.

These are the major causes of my disappointment with
this book, which is not bad at all in terms of the
logical construction of the text, etc. But I just
refuse to trust people who make these terrible
mistakes! Okay, they are not specialists when it comes
to the royal houses, but we are all not specialists in
every possible field. So, this is why we have
encyclopedias.

Best,
Katya