REVIEWS 221

For historical geographers Fairhall’s observations on historiography and fiction are

PAUL ROBERT MAGOCSI, Historical Atlas of East Central Europe (Seattle: University of
Washington Press, 1993. Pp. xiii + 218. $75.00)

This atlas introduces a ten-volume series on the history of East Central Europe, edited
by Peter F. Sugar and Donald W. Treadgold. Immensely important for generalists in
European history, the undertaking is greatly enhanced by having such a superb atlas
as an integral part of the project.
Devising an atlas for such an amorphous area as East Central Europe is no simple
task. Boundaries are often elusive and open to question; place name selection may
evoke suspicion of national bias. Under such circumstances it is not surprising that
Magocsi operates within strict geographical and chronological parameters. Dividing
Europe into thirds, he focuses on what is essentially the middle third-bounded by
Italy and Germany in the west, the old Soviet Union in the east, and the Baltic and
Mediterranean in the north and south. Exceptions include portions of eastern Germany,
Austria, Bavaria, northeastern Italy, western Anatolia in Turkey, today’s Belarus,
Moldova, and segments of Ukraine. The chronological limits extend from circa 400
c.e. (common era) to the present.
Adhering to the constraints imposed by the costs of full-color maps, the author
envisions fifty problems encapsulating the history of East Central Europe. These
problems are incorporated in 50 well-written and concise chapters, 89 maps, and two
tables.
The maps, designed by cartographer Geoffrey J. Matthews, follow essentially a
chronological sequence. Thirty-five are full-page political-administrative ones depicting
East Central Europe at critical periods of its history, i.e. No. 5, Early medieval kingdoms,
cu. 1050; No. 18. East Central Europe, 1648; No. 38, East Central Europe, 1918-1923;
No. 50, East Central Europe, 1992. Typical of the 28 half-page maps are No. 22a, The
Partitions of Poland, 1772-1795 and No. 26a and No. 26b, The Balkan Peninsula,
18 17-1877 and The Balkan Peninsula, 1878-1912, respectively. Others speak to the
economy (No. 11, Economic patterns, ca. 1450 and No. 28, Canal and railway
development before 1914), demography and ethnicity (No. 20d, Resettlement of the
Danubian basin, 16th-17th centuries and No. 30, Ethnolinguistic distribution, ca. 1990),
military (No. 37, World War I, 1914-1918) ecclesiastical (No. 34, The Catholic Church,
1900), and cultural and educational matters (No. 17, Education and culture through
the 18th century). A chapter on the medieval city is illustrated with maps of Wroclaw,
Cracow, Vienna, Prague, and Dubrovnik and an extremely valuable map and table
of the German law cities (No. 12f). Other tables (Hungarian counties, p. 81 and
Ethnolinguistic-national composition of Yugoslavia, p. 141) are also nicely coordinated
with maps.
Magocsi issues a usual disclaimer for place names. Following Webster5 New Geo-
graphical Dictionary (1980) and opting for consistency whenever possible, he employs
the spelling of the official language of the country in which the particular city or county
is situated. Even so, there are exceptions. For example, Prague instead of Prdha and
Cracow instead of Krakow. Some cities receive a second name in parentheses, but these
vary with the times i.e. L’viv is only occasionally accompanied by Lwow; Vilnius c.
222 REVIEWS

1480 is the sole designation, but, understandably, has Wilno in the map for 1930 and
Wilna for 1939-42 and 1943-45. In the 1992 map Vilnius carries no other label.
The work contains an excellent multilingual bibliography subdivided into historical,
geographical, and thematic atlases, and other sources. A detailed index, extensively
cross-referenced and also multilingual, articulates three distinctive name categories by
roman, italic, and bold typeface.
Like the series of which it is a part, this atlas is an excellent production in concept;
in its cartographical clarity, artistry, and substance; in its well-written and scholarly
text; and in the coordination of this text with the maps and tables. The atlas is especially
valuable, even essential, as an adjunct to the other volumes in the series.
After all the praise above, I do have a single complaint. The author uses in his
introduction the term “facing-page maps”. Because I was unsure of his intent, I called
authorities at the Library of Congress and the Rand McNally Company. None was
acquainted with the term, I do believe that it is incumbent upon the author to avoid
burdening his readership with technical or invented terms that puzzle even experts in
the field.
The George Washington University ALBERT J. SCHMIDT

The Americas
RICHARD LEE MARKS, Cortex The Great Adventurer and the Fate of Aztec Mesico (New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1993. Pp. xii+347. $27.50)

As the title suggests, this book deals with two themes, the primary one of which is a
biography of an individual whose character has been unjustly maligned and whose
achievements have been unduly minimized due, the author feels, to the distortions of
contemporary detractors such as Las Casas and later ones such as the Mexican
nationalists. To rectify this situation, Marks has produced a highly sympathetic portrait
of a man who we are given to understand was both extremely devout and eminently
just, as well as being strong, courageous, shrewd, and decisive.
In a prefatory note, the author sets out his credentials for the task he has undertaken:
long-time residence among American Indians and a “Spanish heart”. It is definitely the
latter which dominates his narrative, for in his “attempts to sense the spirit and fathom
the psyche of . . . (the) Indians” he either inadvertently overlooks such an important
source as Leon-Portilla or purposefully discounts such authorities as Sahagun. The
resultant characterization of the Aztecs is at best fragmentary, judgmental, and in-
sensitive.
As the author fleshes out his subject, he puts thoughts into Cortes’ head and words
into Cortes’ mouth about whose accuracy we can only speculate; in any case, his
reconstructions are credible and help to move his narrative along in a coherent manner.
More difficult to understand, however, are the author’s numerous errors of fact and
his naive re-interpretations of history. Marks pointedly comes down on the side of
“decency” by sharing the Spanish conquerors’ abomination of such Aztec practices as
human sacrifice, cannibalism, and sodomy, but five centuries of subsequent ethnographic
research have contributed little to his understanding of why these activities attained
the prominence that they did. For instance, no mention is made of their creation myth
and the “blood debt” which the Aztecs felt they owed to the gods; nor is the malevolent
sense of mission bequeathed to them by the diabolical Tlacelel touched upon even
tangentially. In respect to sexual mores, he totally inverts the facts, stating that “no