Israel: A History

by Anita Shapira

Written by one of Israel’s most notable scholars, this volume provides a breathtaking history of Israel from the origins of the Zionist movement in the late nineteenth century to the present day. Organized chronologically, the volume explores the emergence of Zionism in Europe against the backdrop of relations among Jews, Arabs, and Turks, and the earliest pioneer settlements in Palestine under Ottoman rule. Weaving together political, social, and cultural developments in Palestine under the British mandate, Shapira creates a tapestry through which to understand the challenges of Israeli nation building, including mass immigration, shifting cultural norms, the politics of war and world diplomacy, and the creation of democratic institutions and a civil society. References to contemporary diaries, memoirs, and literature bring a human dimension to this narrative history of Israel from its declaration of independence in 1948 through successive decades of waging war, negotiating peace, and building a modern state with a vibrant society and culture. Based on archival sources and the most up-to-date scholarly research, this authoritative history is a must-read for anyone with a passionate interest in Israel. Israel: A History will be the gold standard in the field for years to come.

Genres: History, Israel, Nonfiction, Middle East, Judaism, Jewish, Politics

528 pages, Hardcover

First published December 11, 2012

About the author

Anita Shapira (Hebrew: אניטה שפירא‎‎, born 1940) is an Israeli historian. She is the founder of the Yitzhak Rabin Center for Israel Studies, Emerita Professor of Jewish History at Tel Aviv University and former head of the Weizmann Institute for the Study of Zionism at Tel Aviv University. She received the Israel Prize for History in 2008.

אניטה שפירא (נולדה ב-1940) היא פרופסור אמריטה להיסטוריה של עם ישראל באוניברסיטת תל אביב, עמדה בראש המכון לחקר הציונות וישראל שם וכלת פרס ישראל לשנת תשס"ח 2008 בחקר ההיסטוריה של עם ישראל.

Reviews

[David Crumm · Rating 5 out of 5]

One Introduction to the Founding and Development of Israel

As a journalist who specializes in covering cultural and religious diversity around the world, I am well aware that, in 2024, the subject of Israel-Palestine is red-hot and debates about the war can become trigger points in an instant. However, as a journalist, I am getting lots of questions about background reading. "Since you recommend books online almost every week, what's your short-list of books people could read to understand more about Israel and Palestine?" says one email I opened last week.

So I am recommending two background books by internationally esteemed scholars. Both books hold about the same star-ranking on Amazon, 4.5 or 4.6. Both have many glowing reviews from critics and other scholars; both also have critics who point out that there are blind sides in their accounts.

This is the first of those two by Anita Shapira, an award-winning scholar whose book provides a solid overview of how people from many parts of the world converged to establish Israel. She looks at their conflicting motives, the many challenges they faced, the difficulty of including an enormous range of immigrants from both impoverished and well-to-do backgrounds—and of course the wars that have defined the region. While her work is solidly researched (and a host of citations provide options for further reading for those readers who want to go beyond this overview), this is a book intended to cover an extremely complex history in a concise way.

As a journalist who has reported from that region more than once, I not only read this book but I also looked for more than a dozen tell-tale milestones in this history to see how Shapira handled those episodes. And, my broad conclusion is: She has tried to achieve a balance and the overall accuracy of her reporting key details seems solid.

That's not to say all readers will celebrate her version of this history as "complete." There are many moments throughout her book when I sighed wearily and said to myself: "Oh, I wish she'd gone further here." Or: "Oh, I know my Palestinian friends would object to the way she summarizes this."

That's why I will also be lifting up in Goodreads a second book: Rashid Khalidi's The Hundred Years War on Palestine. These books are not exactly parallel, but there is enough similarity in what these scholars cover in these two books that, reading them together, readers will come away with a deeper understanding of the region.

I am posting this review with some hesitancy because I'm hoping friends on Goodreads will find these two reviews as helpful as I intend these reviews to be. I do not want to engage in a public debate about the current war in Goodreads. By posting these 2 reviews, I simply want to respond to the many friends who have asked me, given my background and my experience in reporting on related issues, to suggest a couple of solid books to read.

In that spirit, my friends, I hope you will find these two reviews to be helpful.

[Karen Mead · Rating 4 out of 5]

I keep seeing arguments about Israel online, and realized that I don't really know the facts-- I think I used to, but time passed and I forgot all the finer details. I read this book to remedy that problem and was largely satisfied-- although, keep in mind I have no plan to ENTER these online arguments now that I'm suitably informed; that way lies madness.

I did find the book a little hard to follow at times, since there are lot of named groups that recur throughout the book-- organizations, social movements, political parties, etc.-- which Shapira often mentions, but doesn't always define very clearly. I only figured out what Histadrut was about 2/3s of the way through the book, although that could have been sloppiness on my part. I probably should have been googling the terms as I was going along and was just too lazy to do so.

Still, this tome is full of fascinating information on the pre-Israel period, as well as enlightening explanations of the many factors that make modern Israeli culture and politics so complex. The copious sources and suggestions for further reading leave little doubt as to Shapira's scholarly credentials, and while the book is not entirely without bias, I believe the facts presented here are accurate. Shapira does make a real effort to be fair and highlight legitimate Palestinian concerns, however, a few statements of pure opinion on the conflict do get through, which is okay; I'll read a book that covers the Palestinian experience next to get that point of view.

[Jonathan · Rating 5 out of 5]

A well-written, even-handed, objective and history of the Zionist movement, the pre-State Jewish settlement and the State of Israel, both from the perspective of its encounters with the Arabs and the outside world, as well as internal economic, developmental and cultural aspects of Israel. Zionism has turned out to be one of the great successful nationalist movements of history - with all of the drawbacks and controversies - and Anita Shapira tells the story with grace and an eagle-eye. A very good introduction to the ideological underpinnings, establishment and rise of Israel.

[Rachel · Rating 4 out of 5]

I get why my synagogue’s Israel book club decided one meeting wasn’t enough to tackle this. :P Talk about comprehensive!

In this 500-page book, Shapira takes us through pre-state Israel to the early 2000s, complete with so many movements, and sub-movements of movements, that ebbed and flowed to create Israel’s past and present. I’m sure most people, myself included, would benefit to take down names of people and organizations, even when they’re not wholly unfamiliar to us.

There’s so much to latch onto, like the Victorian Protestant interest in emerging Zionism, which was already on my mind after reading DANIEL DERONDA and REUBEN SACHS recently. This ties into the reality that the national is always influenced by the international, especially as world wars wage, empires fall, and populations migrate with the preponderance of ethnic nationality tied to land.

Broadly speaking, the philosophy of early Zionism was often socialist, fashioned by an influx of Jews from Russia looking to escape persecution, and that played into a centralized state in the beginning. I was taken by such lines as “Statism was a guiding principle” and that “The balance between individual and society tilted toward society.” This might mean that the earliest waves of Ashkenazim were heavily involved in public life, and didn’t feel “individual alienation, which is part of liberal democracy,” but things surely shifted with the waves of Mizrahim arriving, who had very different cultural and religious norms. Their experience of the “leftist” statism led them rightward, embodied in the overall political shifts Shapira talked about in the book.

There’s politics, there’s cultural groups (including Arabs), there’s economics, there’s the effects of war and terrorism. (The person who owned my copy before me was mostly interested in that part, at least going off of the heaviest amount of highlights. :P) For something with so many details, it is still very much an eagle-eyed look at the events in play, and sometimes I do think Shapira’s made statements about “group” opinions that were a little too sweeping. There were quotes (and a nice dose of literature nods) in here, but generally this book stayed away from anything too close to an individual sort of opinion, be it from Jewish or Arab groups.

But through such a particular accounting of political events, it was also more difficult to be a “Monday night quarterback” of a sort and pass extreme judgment on past actors. It was apparent that many leaders were doing the best they could with limited information, and that most people weren’t acting in bad faith.

It is strange to think how much has changed even since the last chapter, which essentially covers the Second Intifada and failed peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians. What addendum would Anita Shapira, a respected Israeli historian, who was apparently criticized by both “the left” and “the right,” look like? In a conversation with Haaretz, published just a week before October 7, she criticized the messianic turn in Zionist thought and the Israeli government, which is broadly on par with how she ended the book. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2...

Another writer, perhaps with sensibilities I’m more used to as an American, would eschew any lasting “statist,” “polity first” attitudes and speak much more candidly about emotional realities for different cultural groups. Shapira is much more analytical on these points, and maybe that leads to less bias, if perhaps a dulling of human realities. But honestly, this book is a tour de force of the facts that shaped a nation; certainly this text alone could stand as the backbone for any history class. It’s even-keeled when discussing the complexities at play, and great for future reference long after reading the final page.

[Tamim Diaa · Rating 2 out of 5]

I embarked on reading this book with the objective of acquainting myself with the Israeli "academic rational" perspective and it did just that. It was particularly helpful in introducing the main themes of internal Israeli politics and social culture and getting to know more about the early periods of the Zionist movement in the 19th and early 20th centuries. For this I gave it the second star.

However, the book's narrative and information -especially in parts addressing the conflict with Arabs- are flawed, contradictory, selective and full of half-truths and in some cases outright lies. The writer's ability to massage facts and historical events, skim through some events and delve deep into others and to totally ignore other incidents (especially those in which Israel was involved in war crimes and atrocities) was astonishing. Her attempts to be apologetic and to justify the many dark areas in the Zionist history were sickening. She tried to frame Israeli history in a fairy tale style but it wasn't. It was a history of colonization, oppression, aggression, ethnic cleansing, religious fanaticism and racism. But that's typical!

[SheReaders Book Club · Rating 5 out of 5]

A great overview of the history of Israel. For obvious reasons, we need an update but this book will get you up to the year 2000.

[Mel · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good book - just very long and dry. It gives SO much information though. I feel much more well-informed now and the book has given me a lot to think on as a Jewish person. I'm glad I stuck with it and read it to the end. It's great if you're looking for an in-depth history of Israel that tells both sides of the story (as much as one source can).

[Erika · Rating 5 out of 5]

This a thorough, well written, and well researched book. Israel's history is fascinating and complex, and Shapira does an excellent job telling a complicated and fair history of the modern state of Israel.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clear, concise, well-written, if a bit partisan.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN EXCELLENT AND COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY OF ISRAEL AND ZIONISM

Anita Shapira (born 1940) is an Israeli historian who is professor emerita of Jewish history at Tel Aviv University, and former head of the Weizmann Institute for the Study of Zionism.

She wrote in the first chapter of this 2014 book, “the fundamental question did not change from the earliest days of the Zionist idea: would Jewish salvation come about as a result of a universal realignment---through either the triumph of liberalism and democracy or the victory of the communist revolution that would redeem the world---or would it require a specific Jewish initiative, separate from the great global one? One element … involved questioning the feasibility of the Zionist enterprise, since the Ottoman regime opposed the immigration of Jews and their settlement in Palestine. Palestine was not an empty country; some half a million Arabs lived there. What would the Zionists do with them? Force them out, or allow them to remain? Would they be declared aliens in their own homeland? And if the Zionists did not discriminate between them and the new immigrants, who could guarantee that in time the Jes would not become a minority in their own country and find themselves once again in the situation they had sought to escape?” (Pg. 4)

She observes, “The appearance of nationalism laid down a dual challenge to the Jews: First, should they become nationalists of the countries where they lived, or should they remain loyal to the great empires? Second, while the peoples of Europe were taking on national identities, the Jews were required to relinquish their collective identity as a prerequisite for obtaining equal rights. The borderlines of the Jewish collective… became blurred… The Jews in the Western countries enthusiastically accepted equal rights, which they saw as the key to acculturating into non-Jewish society. Many did not intend to relinquish their Jewish identity, but simply defined it differently. Thus a paradox was created whereby in an era of increasing secularization, the Jews’ self-definition began to lean heavily on religion… This self-definition created for the first time a distinction between Jewish religion and nationality.” (Pg. 7)

She explains, “the Balfour Declaration belongs to an era in which a handful of statesmen in smoke-filled rooms decided the fates of peoples and states and how to divide up declining empires, with no participation by the media or the masses. From Zionism’s standpoint this was a unique opportunity. In the final days of globe-spanning imperialism, these few statesmen not only dared to act in accordance with political common sense but were also driven by a spiritual vision… the idea of the Jews returning to their country seemed a lofty enterprise worthy of their support, even though it ran counter to the Powers’ declarations on the right of nations to self-determination that had been one of the objectives of the war. The opposition of the Arab inhabitants of Palestine seemed to them of secondary importance when compared with compensating the Jews for thousands of years of persecution and debasement.” (Pg. 73)

She recounts, “April 1936 saw the outbreak of the Arab Revolt. Like its predecessors it began with a wave of random violence against Jews, but within a few days the Arab Higher Committee took command and made political demands: cessation of immigration and land sales, and representational governance that would place power in the hands of the Arab majority… Arab gangs sowed terror throughout the country, but the high commissioner avoided using military force to suppress them… the Arabs demanded an end to immigration and assurances of independence, demands the British rejected.” (Pg. 84)

She summarizes, “The immigration and settlement processes in the thirty years of the British Mandate laid the groundwork for creation of a durable Jewish society in Palestine. The growth of the Jewish population from 56,000 to 650,000, the establishment of a productive agricultural and industrial economy, and the distribution of Jewish settlements throughout the country were the foundations on which the Jewish state was built.” (Pg. 117)

She acknowledges, “Pro-Palestinian researchers present Plan D as … a preplanned, total population transfer of the Arabs of Palestine. But… while it did order commanders to destroy villages and expel the inhabitants if they resisted, it also instructed commanders to leave them where they were if they did not resist, while ensuring Jewish control of the village. There is a great difference between an order for total expulsion and a selective order, which assumes that Arab villages will be able to live in peace in the Jewish state… the Arab residents [of Haifa] chose to leave the city and not remain under Jewish rule. Attempts by their Jewish neighbors to persuade them to stay failed… The British … did not oppose the Jews’ taking control of the city and perhaps even assisted them. According to the partition plan, Tiberias and Haifa were within the borders of the Jewish state.” (Pg. 161)

She continues, “How could an entire population just get up and leave? Various contemporary explanations have been proposed. They include fear of the war and fear of the Jews, particularly after the Deir Yassin massacre… in which Jewish fighters attacked an Arab village. Propaganda disseminated … by the Palestinians magnified this even to dimensions of terror and atrocity far beyond what actually happened, which was bad enough… Other explanations for the Arabs’ wholesale departure include the assumption that the evacuation was only temporary and they would return to their homes when the Arab states’ armies were victorious. Another explanation ... [was] that the Palestinians were ordered to leave Palestine by their leaders in order to facilitate Arab military operations against the Jews. This explanation based on isolated Arab sources, is baseless.” (Pg. 162)

She notes, “The war’s biggest losers were the Palestinians. By the war’s end about 700,000 Palestinians had been exiled from their homeland… Although acts of massacred and brutality were perpetuated by both sides, in Palestine there were no acts of mass slaughter like those witnessed elsewhere in the twentieth century… But this was small compensation for the hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees gathered in the Gaza Strip, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon.” (Pg. 174)

She states, “the Palestinians … became a permanent problem in the Middle East. The demand that they return to their previous homes was impractical from the outset, for the war had erased the reality to which they wanted to return… The Arabs were not ready to recognize the Jewish state. the shock of defeat and refugeeism did not create a desire for conciliation; it further inflamed the myth of the return, perpetuating the refugee problem and preventing the refugee from integrating into the countries where they lived… The 1948 war was perceived as an accident that would be swiftly rectified, since the demographic balance of power favored the Arab states… This perception not only perpetuated the refugee problem but also was behind the refusal to make peace with Israel. It was therefore not reality but rhetoric that shaped the Palestinian national memory and consciousness.” (Pg. 175-176)

She points out, “Of all the states created after 1945, Israel is one of the few that has maintained a democratic regime… there is something miraculous in the speed with which the new state established proper governance, and made that governance democratic.” (Pg. 179)

She admits, “Immigrants from Islamic countries … perceived the demand that they accept the values of the society that took them in… as an insult and a refusal to accept them as they were… The State of Israel accepted overall responsibility for absorption. Could it have avoided the paternalism and bureaucracy that made the system so hated by immigrants?...It would not have been possible to transfer so many different populations … in such assort time… without direction from above, in a process that did seem semi-military. Nor could such a process have been accomplished without destroying existing patriarchal, religious, and cultural traditions…” (Pg. 243-244)

After the Six-Day War of 1967, “What the Israelis saw as a victory of the weak and beleaguered over belligerent adversaries was to the Arabs an appalling humiliation… The Khartoum Conference held in September 1967 … declare three ‘Nos’: no recognition of Israel, no negotiations, and no peace. “ (Pg, 304)

She records that in the 1970s, “another new movement appeared.: Gush Emunim… Fully aware of the despair and pain prevailing among the Israeli public in the aftermath of the war, they discerned that the government was willing to make territorial concessions in Sinai and the Golan Heights and feared that the bitter war with its numerous casualties would lead the government to yield to American pressure for an Israeli withdrawal… The right, especially the founders of Gush Emunim, saw the [Yom Kippur] war as proof of the Arabs’ resolve to destroy Israel and concluded that there should be no concessions or policy that might be construed as submitting to pressure, since that would only invite further, unending pressure.” (Pg. 342)

After Egyptian President Sadat announced his willingness to go to Israel for peace, “There followed days of intoxication. The Israelis could not believe their eyes. The man [Begin] who symbolized ‘not one inch,’ absolute refusal to compromise, had invited Sadat to Jerusalem… Begin’s popularity soared… Sadat’s plane landed in Israel. The entire nation was glued to its television sets… The citizens of Israel were ecstatic. If Sadat wanted to persuade them of his peaceful intentions, he had won them over in a single dramatic gesture.” (Pg. 368-369)

She notes, “The Lebanon War was a watershed in the history of Israeli society. It was the first was to be prosecuted without a consensus… As initially presented to the public, the operation had almost wall-to-wall support. Once it emerged that the operation was exceeding its predetermined limits, public and military support eroded. The right was infuriated by criticism of the war in the media. It contended that a government at war should not be criticized.” (Pg. 383)

She recounts, “toward the end of the 1980s… [came] the appearance of post-Zionism and the ‘new historians’ … these scholars … challenged the Zionist narrative of the War of Independence… emphasizing the catastrophe that had befallen the Arabs of Israel… The translators of postmodernism into Israeli terms were the post-Zionists… Some post-Zionists wanted Israel to discard its ‘Zionist’ character… to stop given preferential treatment to Jews… and to stop discriminating against its Arab citizens… Other post-Zionists asserted that the whole idea of a Jewish nation-state… was obsolete, given the … trends toward globalization throughout the world… Feminists asserted that Zionism suppressed women’s contribution to the national culture… ‘Zionism’ became the universal punching bag for all the injustices against individuals and groups…” (Pg. 408-409)

She concludes, “Israel is a success story of global proportions; it is a vital, vibrant society with a dynamic economy and an academy that has gained international recognition… a critical democracy with extreme freedom of speech and … media that never hesitate to expose all the government’s weaknesses… Yet Israel still faces world criticism to a degree hard to discover elsewhere… There is great empathy for the Palestinian issue, while the other side of the coin is ignored… the great Zionist adventure was and is one of the most astonishing attempts ever made at building a nation… during an incessant war, and with no loss of the moral principles that guided it.” (Pg. 474-475)

This is an excellent, comprehensive, and detailed history, that will be of great interest to anyone studying Israeli history.

[Jake · Rating 4 out of 5]

Israel is a country like no other: an indigenous people returned to their homeland after centuries of exile, who secured their independence against vastly stronger opponents, and built a prosperous economy and flourishing democracy almost entirely ex nihilo. At the same time, Israeli society is riddled with bitter, complex cultural divides that mystify outsiders, and is surrounded by the omnipresent, vicious and seemingly endless Arab-Israeli conflict. Writing a history that untangles this mess is no easy feat, and Shapira does a pretty good job.

Her analysis of Israel's social and political development is especially strong, although a discussion of the Druze community was strangely absent from her sections on the Arab-Israelis. The analysis of the Arab-Israeli conflict left a little more to be desired (especially in the British Mandate Period, where the British and Arab perspectives were not discussed nearly enough), but I accept that this is a history of Israel, not of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

[Fred Kohn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best history of Israel I have read to date. This is due in part to the fact that the author makes a conscious decision to deemphasize the Israeli/Palestinian conflict so prevalent in other histories of the modern state of Israel so that one gets a more even-handed view of Israeli history. I admit that in reading Israeli history my interest has been more in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict (and this is reflected in my book reading choices) so I was unable to follow those bits that were not about that conflict, such as details about the various Israeli political parties, with as much attention as I was the other bits. I was also somewhat disappointed with the relative lack of attention to the Israel/Arab wars, especially the lack of attention to the Six Day War.

I have found this review somewhat difficult to write, in large part because I wrote down a lot of good information in my notes and I can’t include it all in a short review. The book is somewhat biased in favor of the Israelis, and I want to point out some of these biases, yet at the same time I want to stress that the author does not shy away from confronting the "sins" of Israel. She also confronts some of the baseless myths that have entered into the Zionist narrative, noting, for example, that "The idea that the Arabs were ordered to evacuate by the Arab states [in 1948], which has become part of the Zionist narrative, is baseless."

The author’s bias is most evident in covering the riots from the period of the 1920s and '30s. For example, speaking of the 1936 riots, Shapira writes, "Like its predecessors it began with a wave of random violence against Jews." Now, the riots of 1936 were the most unprovoked of the riots in question, but the riots of the '20 were certainly not random. For example, in 1929 which Shapira tersely describes as "Arab violence," Wikipedia describes as "On 15 August 1929, the Haganah and Revisionist Zionists inspired by Jabotinski staged demonstrations by the Wall, leading Muslims to mobilize for counter protests the next day Amid rumors and deliberate incitement, violent incidents between Muslims and Jews occurred throughout the week."

Shapira's statement that, "The Palestinian flight in the first stage of the [1948] war left the Israelis aghast. They were unable to comprehend this phenomenon of an entire population fleeing its home and leaving ghost towns behind." may reveal some bias. Google AI responds, "While some Israelis might have been surprised or focused on their own survival, the question of whether they *couldn't comprehend* the Palestinian flight in 1948 is complex, as Jewish forces actively caused much of it through expulsions, psychological warfare (whispers, radio), and attacks." In fact, Shapira never mentions psychological warfare in her book. Shapira also fails to mention psychological warfare in the taking of Haifa, where she writes disingenuously that "Arab residents chose to leave the city and not remain under Jewish rule." Google AI: "Jewish forces used mortar bombardments, infantry assaults, and psychological tactics, including loudspeaker broadcasts with sounds of gunfire and explosions, to cause panic among the civilian population."

Despite being biased in some respects, Shapira's book provides a necessary corrective to the narratives of some of the revisionist historians, such as Ilan Pappé. For example, Shapira notes that after the Kafr Kassem massacre, Israel responded by ethical norms for military conduct (something which Pappé, of course, with is anti-Israeli bias fails to mention). Eleven officers and men were tried, with eight being sentenced to long prison terms, (though within two years all were pardoned).

When I was reading Pappé's book A Very Short History of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, I compared it to the one book I have in my personal library on the history of Israel, A History of the Jewish People, edited by H. H. Ben Sasson, to compare different perspectives. However, the Ben Sasson book was published in 1975 and therefore does not cover the whole period covered by the Shapira book, which was published in 2012. So I found it interesting to compare the Shapira book to the Pappé book for the period from 1975-2012. In some cases, Shapira offers a moderating perspective to Pappé's very blatant anti-Israeli stance. For example, in discussing the First Intifada, Pappé writes, "The Israeli army reacted with full force." While Shapira notes that the Israelis sometimes reacted brutally with clubs, she notes that there were orders against firearms, and that the Israelis were "Frustrated by incessant chasing after Molotov cocktail, stone-throwing Palestinians" (Pappé claims the demonstrations were mostly peaceful). On the Madrid conference, Pappé claims that the U.S. forced Israel to the Madrid conference. Shapira has a different view, noting that it was decided that the Madrid conference would be totally ceremonial.

I thought Shapira handled the question of how Israel handled the question of non -European immigrants differently, although she said nothing about the bombing of Iraqi synagogues in 1950-1951, which is widely seen as a false flag operation on the part of Zionists. She is honest, though, about how Israelis viewed the resulting immigration, saying "Israelis love immigration but not the immigrants." She states that Israel was supposed to be a modern state oriented towards Europe and the West, yet now it was stuck in the mire of the immigrant camps. She speaks of the difficulties of integrating the immigrants into the moshavim, speaking of a "well oiled bureaucratic process that left the immigrants no choice of avoiding the path laid out for them."

A very nice feature of this book that is not as evident in Pappé's books is the many reading recommendations that Shapira gives. She mentions important documents for early Zionism, including Yehuda Leib Pinsker's Auto-Emancipation, Theodor Herzl's The State of the Jews, and essays by Ahad Ha'am (all of which are available online). Also, she mentions many important novels by Israeli authors, such as Primo Levi's If This is a Man, David Grossman's A Woman Flees Tidings, and Meir Shalev's The Blue Mountain (I’m reading this now).

This is a nice reference book and would make a nice addition to my Kindle library, I think, where I could highlight stuff and write notes into it. I’m not allowed to buy any books until after Christmas, though.

[Gerry Shoshensky · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probing, scholarly work

I read this as a recommendation from Daniel Gordis after reading his introductory history. Shapira is more academic in her approach, focusing on socio-economic changes, national zeitgeist, and the philosophical maturation of the state. There was less focus on the wars except how they affected the Israeli outlook on its existence. Also very helpful were the suggestions for further reading after each chapter that allows one to read further on a topic of interest. Thought Shapira did a good job discussing the disparate viewpoints on Zionism, the state's creation and the secular/religious divide. Highly recommended.

[Mark Reece · Rating 4 out of 5]

Shapira's book starts as a history of Zionism, detailing the growth of Jewish nationalism, although the focus of her work changes to the state of Israel following its founding after the second world war. She is sympathetic to Zionism (and, I think, to nationalist doctrine in general), although she is careful to avoid replicating the myths that all forms of nationalism rely upon.

For example, in her discussion of the Israeli war of independence, Shapira describes that despite the numerical superiority of the Arab population, and their most established economies at that time, the balance of power between the emergent Zionist state and the Arab peoples was much more equal than appearances would suggest, as demonstrated, for example, by the disorganization of the Arab armies, and their relatively small size when compared with the size of the Arab populations. Shapira also disputes whether the intention of the invading armies was the wholesale destruction of the Jewish communities in the emerging state. This gives much of the book, certainly the sections that describe the relations between Israel and the surrounding Arab states, an even handed feel.

Shapira also gives interesting discussions of how the doctrines developed by Zionist theorists were translated into the practices of the new society, such as the emphasis placed on the importance of agriculture, and also the ethnic tensions in the country that were exacerbated by the gathering of people from widely different societies and the mass immigration that occurred at various points in Israel's history, such as the break-up of the Soviet Union.

In my view, Shapira is much less strong when describing intellectual currents and their relations to social change. She is prone to make bland, sweeping statements, such as when at one point she claims that 'post-modernism' 'came to Israel', making life seem meaningless. I wonder whether this is accurate in any country, outside a tiny minority in academia. The author seems to have a naively philosophical idealist conception that 'people have ideas- they implement ideas- society changes'. The worldwide shift to Neo-liberalism in the 1980s was accompanied by significant violence that is barely mentioned here. The lightness that these topics are dealt with seems out of place in comparison with the depth of scholarship displayed elsewhere throughout the book.

Furthermore, the author's description of the Palestinian conflict seems less even-handed than her description of Israel's relationships with the other Arab powers. Several early leaders of Israel are quoted as being concerned that a long-standing occupation would change the nature of the state- to my mind, Shapira did not fully explore the extent to which this happened, and this omission is demonstrated in small ways throughout, for example, in the way that Palestinian attacks on Jewish population centres are described as terrorism, whereas the term is avoided for apparently similar actions by Jews in the mandate period, or else given scare quotes. It might also have been worth exploring whether there is a connection between Israeli governments' fears about the 'Arab street', and whether this may explain Israel's friendly relations with autocratic regimes in the middle east and elsewhere.

However, this is an interesting and well written book that seems to be designed with the general reader in mind, with little foreknowledge assumed and Jewish terms described throughout so as to aid comprehension. This makes the book both enjoyable to read and educational, in the best sense.

[Jurij Fedorov · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read quite a few country history books and a few about Israel. It's always hard to remember a single thing. But I actually think I do recall the full history somewhat despite not recalling where in the book I read it. She's a good writer who goes to the point and she is a very critical historian. In controversial topics she knows how to get to the truth and uncover what really happened pretty much each time so you can't get a less biased book than this.

Yet her analysis does go too far. At times we get into interpretations of movements, emotions, and ideas and it's not always clear what happened day to day. So people felt some way, fine. But if you show me a terrorist attack I'll feel this myself you don't need to explain it. It's actually not possible to understand a country unless I see all events unfold. Yet the events are found here step by step and I don't recall anything she overlooked. It's maybe a tad dull as it's overly academic and factual. Yet this is a plus too. If you want the pure facts it's the book for you.

[Jacob · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this to be a great primer on the history of a Nation, one that includes as much about culture as about war. It is a great jumping off point for further understanding of Israel, with plenty of references to what to read if you want to explore any aspect of this history in more depth.

This was a fantastic thing to read before my first trip to Israel and greatly heightened my understanding of the region.

[Jap Hengky · Rating 4 out of 5]

Shapira, a professor at Tel Aviv University, sets out to provide a full history of the country. “Most histories of Israel focus on the Arab-Jewish conflict,” she notes in her opening pages. However, she wants to provide a broader history, focusing on “internal Jewish politics, immigrant and national building, the economy and social landscape.”

[Roei · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful attempt at the most difficult of tasks: crafting a concise retelling of Israel’s history, from its first practical conception through its first six decades.

Highly recommend for those interested in learning about Israel. Particularly because of Shapira’s thoroughness and her excellent recommendations for further reading.

[Denise Blumenfeld · Rating 4 out of 5]

La autora presenta la historia de Israel desde la perspectiva de los Jalutzim, las Aliot y la formación del Estado de Israel previo a la Shoá.
Es un poco denso en la lectura y redundante pero en bien informativo.

[Oren Mizrahi · Rating 5 out of 5]

a beauriful book that sets itself apart by focusing on cultural and political trends in israel instead of the military history, which is so deep and complex that it entices many historians into its trap.

[viy · Rating 1 out of 5]

yeah read it if you want a canned zionist labor historical recitation. it offers very little insight of its own, and is best used to scry the thoughts of a dying Israeli intellectual, cultural, and political class.

[Autumn Kearney · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was very enlightening and educational. I did not realize when I checked it out of the library that it started in the 1800's. Since Israel is such an ancient place, I mistakenly expected a more comprehensive coverage of the region.

[Makki · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative in terms of Jewish culture, but biased and extremely vague when it comes to military tactics, especially in its chapters about The Yom Kippur and Six Days War.

[Colin Thorson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative, great class I took that went with it as well.

[فؤاد · Rating 4 out of 5]

کتابی جامع در مورد تاریخ اسرائیل از ابتدای شکل‌گیری ایدهٔ صهیونیسم تا سال ۲۰۰۰ و انتفاضهٔ دوم.

[Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good reading. Detailed and dizzying at times. Solid history writing.

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Finally came around to finishing this tome of a history after a four year hiatus.

Anita Shapira's history of Israel is great. This book really attempts to distill the essence of Israel's short history by focusing on the implications of its ideas, circumstances, and actions.

While Israel: A History is not as exhaustive as other histories, such as Walter Laqueur's A History of Zionism, it is more engaging and neutral.

That said, the book does drag on at points and tends to focus on seemingly arbitrary moments of Israeli history. The book also stops around the 2000's, making it about twenty years out of date.

Israel: A History is a great introduction to Israel, and perhaps even a great addition to Israel studies, but it is far from definitive.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Anita Shapira writes a remarkable history of Israel that I flew through. Recently acquiring a heart for Israel, I found this newly book on Amazon.com, and boy am I glad I did. There were parts that were harder to read for me, such as media and political parties. However, the pages on Israel's founding aliya, the history swirling around UN Res 194 & 242, and the wars, flew by. I wanted to understand the history of Israel, and after a couple of months I do! Thank you Anita for writing such a wonderful history about an amazing country. Shalom.

[Eli · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating look at the history of Israel from the birth of zionism to about the year 2000. Manages to convey a reasonable amount of detail even across all that scope. A little bit biased towards the Labor view, but not too badly, and not a big fan of air conditioning. No real representation of an Arab or Palestinian viewpoint, but that would probably be too much to ask for.

[Jared Collette · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoroughly researched; leans pro-Israel

Thoroughly researched; leans pro-Israel. I didn't find it always fairly balanced, but so many scholarly works are so anti Israel and blindly Palestinian that it is really helpful today read this perspective. This is an essential read for anyone trying understand the Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.