This is an interesting and very well written history, originally published in 1926. As Van Loon tells us very early on, "This is not a handbook of anthropology. It is a volume dedicated to the subject of 'tolerance.' But 'tolerance' is a very broad theme. The temptation to wander will be great. And once we leave the beaten track Heaven along knows where we shall land." It should be noted that, as it turns out, by "mankind," Van Loon means, essentially, Europeans. Also, as per the book's publication date, we are not surprised to find that basically every single person of influence or note was male.

Hendrick Willem Van Loon was clearly a fascinating fellow. For one thing, he was the recipient, in 1922, of the first Newbery Medal for his book [The Story of Mankind]. The Newbery Medal is, of course, an award for children's literature. I haven't read The Story of Mankind, but The Liberation of Mankind is described on its dust jacket as more or less a sequel: " . . . these {a series of historical figures} have been re-created in the simple and direct style of The Story of Mankind, of which it has been said, 'The words are for children, but the meanings are for men.'" I bring all this up as context for my observation that I perceive thereby that the standards for what is considered children's writing sure have changed. I don't know that very many current-day educators (at least in the U.S.) would hand this book even to a teenager with any confidence that that person would have the knowledge necessary to make heads or tales out of most of this history or the desire to work through the book's 307 pages. That's not meant as a criticism of Van Loon or of this book. I loved it, in fact. But here is a longish example of the sort of thing I mean. As Van Loon is describing the rise of the early Christian Church and one Roman emperor's reaction, he tells us:

The first elementary missionary work among the heathen of Europe had already been done. But lest the good accomplished by the apostles come to naught, the labours of the individual preachers must be followed up by the organized effort of permanent settlers and administrators. The monks now carried their spade and their axe and their prayer-book into the wilderness of Germany and Scandinavia and Russia and far-away Iceland. They ploughed and they harvested and they preached and they taught school and brought unto those distant lands the first rudimentary elements of a civilization which most people only knew by hearsay.

In this way did the Papacy, the executive head of the entire Church, make use of all manifold forces of the human spirit.

The practical man of affairs was given quite as much of an opportunity to distinguish himself as the dreamer who found happiness in the silence of the woods. There was no lost motion. Nothing was allowed to go to waste. And the result was such an increase of power that soon neither emperor nor king could afford to rule his realm without paying humble attention to the wishes of those of his subjects who confessed themselves the followers of the Christ.

The way in which the final victory was gained is not without interest. For it shows that the triumph of Christianity was due to practical causes and was not (as is sometimes believed) the result of a sudden and overwhelming outburst of religious ardour.

The last great persecution of the Christians took place under the Emperor Diocletian.

Curiously enough, Diocletian was by no means one of the worst among those many potentates who ruled Europe by the grace of their bodyguards. But he suffered from a complaint which, alas! is quite common among those who are called upon to govern the human race. He was densely ignorant upon the subject of elementary economics.

That last paragraph provides an example of Van Loon's sense of humor (in deference to him I should probably say "humour"), with which this book is laced to great effect. And the writing is certainly not dense, but I'm not sure how many "kids these days" would hang with it for too long. I'm not sure I would have tried it with the college freshmen I taught for a couple of semesters back in 1992.

Anyway, as to the book itself, Van Loon starts with the Greeks and then moves through the Roman era and then through European history up through the French Revolution, describing the movements, institutions and individuals who have the most to do with, in turn, enhancing or curtailing the cause of tolerance in society. (In a way, it works as a more entertainingly written companion piece to a book I finished earlier this year, [The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That Have Shaped Our World View] by Richard Tarnas.) Despite Van Loon's relative enthusiasm for the early Christian Church as described above, Van Loon is especially critical of the Church as it evolved into the Middle Ages, and then the murderous leaders among both Catholics and Protestants once the Reformation is launched. The book's second half is composed of short biographies of influential individuals, either via politics or philosophical writing, over the ebb and flow of the idea of tolerance in Western society. Erasmus, Spinoza and Montaigne get particularly interesting treatments, as do the figures of the French Revolution. Van Loon describes the repression in the Puritan settlements, but, disappointingly, misses the admirable Roger Williams. The final chapter, "The Last Hundred Years," is only a few pages long, and Van Loon concludes with a hopeful passages that beg for patience and perseverance in the struggle for overall societal tolerance. He writes with an uneasy eye backwards toward recent history (World War One and the Russian Revolution). But as he was writing in 1926, he could not be expected to be able to see what was coming.

Jeepers, I've written a lot about this book! I found it very interesting and a lot of fun to read. It never would have occurred to me, if I hadn't read it on the book's flyleaf, that Van Loon wrote in with an eye toward young adults. I had a lot of Van Loon's books scattered in various sections of my used bookstore (which I sold a year ago), but I don't recall ever selling one. I don't know how historically accurate all of his descriptions and observations are. Nevertheless, I think he's well worth reading even given, or possibly because of, the book's vintage of close to 100 years old. Van Loon's sense of humor, as already noted, is enjoyable and quite dark. For example the cover of the book itself, a book, remember, about tolerance and liberation, depicts a guiilotine! ( )

Usually I love Van Loon, especially his Van Loon's Lives, but I found this book sloppy and biased. One error I recall is that he made the Emperor Justinian who one who could not sign his name without a stencil, instead of his uncle Justin. Van Loon plays to the old myth that bigots are ignorant, whereas in fact bigots (being people who care fiercely about ideas) are often highly intellectual. ( )

I really liked the way this was done. Discussions of this type that explore the progress of thought can be as boring as watching a stone grow. This one was presented in a nice, light way. If tolerance can only exist through enlightenment, then best we all get enlightened but quick.
I first read this as the George G. Harrap and Company Ltd version titled "The Liberation of Mankind". ( )