The Killing Age

The Killing Age

Errata and Corrigendum

No book is perfect. Mistakes happen, especially in large books of global history.  Indeed, global histories are uniquely prone to errors. Historians are trained about one part of the world and one time period; the more they venture into another region or time, or into entirely new scholarly fields, the greater likelihood mistakes will be made.

The Killing Age is no different.  I employed a fact-checker, but even with the best person errors have a way of finding their way into the finished text. Usually these are small; sometimes that are not. What is perhaps different is this website, which allows me to address errors as I discover them, similar to what one sees in scientific publications or the New York Times.  My commitment throughout is maximum transparency. If you, the reader, discover a mistake and would like to share it with me, please do so!

Issues where there are divergent or noisy data are addressed in other parts of “Resources and Reflections.”

This section is divided into Errata and Corrigendum, using the classic Latin words. The former usually fall under mistakes like typos, missing words, and so on. Corrigendum refer to errors of fact or mistakes that produce misrepresentations. These are far more serious than the usual typo or misspelling. 

Errata 

  1. p. 397, where there is a duplication of the word “of”.
  2. p. 120, where “iterant” should be “itinerant”.
  3. p. 48. “by yet” should read “but yet…”.
  4. p. 13. “of 0.1C” is missing the degree symbol.
  5. p. 653, note 6 is in error. This note should reference material located on p. 51, note 30 (p. 576-7).
  6. p. 523. “MI5” should be “MI6”.
  7. p. 403, the word “he” is missing in the sentence beginning “He died peacefully in 1912 even though [he] was….”
  8. p. 445, sentence should read “was producing [a] million…]
  9. p. 457, sentence should read “It is little wonder that one tea came [to] be called…..”
  10. p. 660, Index, Beckert should reference note #20, not note #21.

Corrigendum

  1. p. 214. There is a missing word. The sentence should read “11 percent of manufacturing GDP…” This mistake obviously misrepresents the issue, though it has no impact on the overarching argument about how the profits of killing whales was reinvested in various enterprises. Nonetheless, my apologies.
  2. Note #31, p. 616, refers to the 2022 version of the paper “Slavery and the British Industrial Revolution.” As I note earlier, there are multiple versions or revisions of the same paper.
  3. There are significant confusions in my estimations of CO2 emissions, especially at pp. xx, 12, and 562. The 99% figure relates to emissions per capita. In other words, on a per-capita basis, the UK–USA  accounted for nearly 99  percent of cumulative emissions relative to the rest of the world between 1750 and 1900. See my posting on CO2 for more details.