What do you think?
Rate this book
A Concise History of the Middle East
A Concise History of the Middle East provides a comprehensive introduction to the history of this turbulent region. Spanning from pre-Islam to the present day, it explores the evolution of Islamic institutions and culture, the influence of the West, modernization efforts in the Middle East, the struggle of various peoples for political independence, the Arab-Israel conflict, the reassertion of Islamic values and power, the issues surrounding the Palestinian Question, and the Middle East post-9/11 and post-Arab uprisings.
The twelfth edition has been fully revised to reflect the most recent events in, and concerns of, the region, including the presence of ISIS and other non-state actors, the civil wars in Syria and Yemen, and the refugee crisis. New parts and part timelines will help students grasp and contextualize the long and complicated history of the region.
With updated biographical sketches and glossary, and a new concluding chapter, this book remains the quintessential text for students of Middle East history.
The twelfth edition has been fully revised to reflect the most recent events in, and concerns of, the region, including the presence of ISIS and other non-state actors, the civil wars in Syria and Yemen, and the refugee crisis. New parts and part timelines will help students grasp and contextualize the long and complicated history of the region.
With updated biographical sketches and glossary, and a new concluding chapter, this book remains the quintessential text for students of Middle East history.
502 pages, ebook
First published January 1, 1979
120 people are currently reading
945 people want to read
About the author
Arthur Goldschmidt Jr.
18 books8 followersArthur Goldschmidt is Professor Emeritus of Middle East History at Penn State University, where he taught from 1965 to 2000. He is best known for writing an introductory textbook, A Concise History of the Middle East, first published by Westview Press in 1979 and now being revised for its ninth edition. Other books he has written include Modern Egypt: the Formation of a Nation State (second edition published by Westview in 2004), the second and third editions of the Historical Dictionary of Egypt, and A Biographical Dictionary of Modern Egypt. His latest book is A Brief History of Egypt, published by Facts on File in 2008 and he is editing for that publisher the Creation of the Modern Middle East Series. He has also edited a book of specialized articles about aspects of Egypt’s history from 1919 to 1952 and written the introduction to a collection of book chapters published by Westview Press. He chairs a committee to write the history of the International Association of Torch Clubs. In addition, he has written many articles, chapters in edited volumes, and book reviews. For his intensive work with both graduate and undergraduate teaching assistants at Penn State, as well as his textbook, Dr. Goldschmidt received the Middle East Studies Association’s Mentoring Award in 2000. He has lived and conducted research in Egypt and several other Middle Eastern countries, with grants from the American Research Center in Egypt, the Social Science Research Council, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the Fulbright Commission. He was a visiting fellow at Durham University in 1989 and 1990. He earned his B.A. from Colby College and his advanced degrees from Harvard University. In retirement he teaches courses for the Osher Lifelong Learning Institute, Penn State’s Elderhostel, and the Chautauqua Institution’s Special Studies Program.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews
October 5, 2013
This is a great place to start if you want to become acquainted with currents and issues in the history of the Middle East. The first third of the book is a sprint through 1300 years of history. At times it was hard to keep everything straight and I had to consult wikipedia, but I did finally understand the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and what Sufism is. I also gained some understanding of the marginalized forms of Eastern Christianity. Half of the book is concerned with the rise of Middle Eastern nations that occurred with the decline of the Ottoman Empire, and how the practice of religion and nationalism often get intertwined in practice or confused by outside observers. Of equal importance during this section is the meddling by more modernized nations who seek to control, or at least ensure access to, ports, straits, and canals with which to transport commercial goods and ultimately oil. The author appear to me as fairly balanced in discussing the failures of France, Russia, and particularly Britain and finally the U.S. in securing stability for the region due to their own interests. On a personal note: I finally understand what the Crimean War was about! For further study elsewhere, the Suez affair, the Six Days War, and the Yom Kippur War.
January 10, 2017
Having not read any other full Middle Eastern histories, it’s hard for me to compare this book to others from a content perspective. It’s clear that, while the author laments the focus of history on wars and conflicts, it is still an extremely traditional text. The people that matter to the author are the world leaders and their actions, especially their actions in expanding their territory and consolidating their reign. It would be interesting to go from beginning to end of the book and count the # of names mentioned who were not political or military leaders…aside from a few poets and a rare religious leader who didn’t also lead a political movement, the total numbers would be few indeed. And even leaders, if they didn’t lead a national government or independent political movement, tend to get shafted. I don’t remember if a single Kurd or Awasi (persecuted Iraqi people) is mentioned by name in the entire book. Sudan and Afghanistan are mentioned, but not any Sudanese or Afghanis that I can remember. Nor a single Copt, not even a Coptic pope or, amazingly, UN Secretary General Boutrous-Boutrous Ghali.
On the positive side, the book is very readable. It attempts to give a fair hearing to the major events within all regions of the Middle East from the time shortly before Islam until the book’s publication in the mid-1990s. Getting to simultaneously see how the extremely different spheres of influence of Egypt, Persia/Iran, the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, Syria/Palestine/Israel, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia each grew and exerted different types of influence in their own unique situations at different times was helpful. But it was not just a juggling of regions – the intertwined nation as the different regions profoundly influenced each other was striking as well, especially as often as non-Egyptians ruled Egypt, non-Persians ruled Persia, non-Turks ruled Turkey, and so on.
The author stated from the beginning that he wanted to produce a non-biased account, by which I assume he meant a non-Western biased account. I don’t feel he was particularly successful. He takes enormous, sometimes ridiculous pains to justify actions that are difficult to justify. While these justifications are usually at the service of religiously Muslim rulers, it’s almost counterproductive, for the stretching he does to justify traditional religious rule is so pained that it only emphasizes its shortcomings. It is very true that Westerners fail to see the other side and are often hypocritical in attacking other cultural practices simply for being different than their own, or attacking other military practices which are not even different from their own, but simply practiced in the same way by a different side. However, I felt the author was a bit incompetent in getting this message across well – if you already felt that way before the book you probably still will, and if you didn’t, you’ll probably be further entrenched.
I have to admit that I learned a lot from the book. But if I was writing it, there would be a lot of changes, most of all to limit the over-editorializing of morality, and to place far more emphasis on the actions and lives of people beyond the political leaders and life beyond the wars and political intrigue.
On the positive side, the book is very readable. It attempts to give a fair hearing to the major events within all regions of the Middle East from the time shortly before Islam until the book’s publication in the mid-1990s. Getting to simultaneously see how the extremely different spheres of influence of Egypt, Persia/Iran, the Ottoman Empire/Turkey, Syria/Palestine/Israel, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia each grew and exerted different types of influence in their own unique situations at different times was helpful. But it was not just a juggling of regions – the intertwined nation as the different regions profoundly influenced each other was striking as well, especially as often as non-Egyptians ruled Egypt, non-Persians ruled Persia, non-Turks ruled Turkey, and so on.
The author stated from the beginning that he wanted to produce a non-biased account, by which I assume he meant a non-Western biased account. I don’t feel he was particularly successful. He takes enormous, sometimes ridiculous pains to justify actions that are difficult to justify. While these justifications are usually at the service of religiously Muslim rulers, it’s almost counterproductive, for the stretching he does to justify traditional religious rule is so pained that it only emphasizes its shortcomings. It is very true that Westerners fail to see the other side and are often hypocritical in attacking other cultural practices simply for being different than their own, or attacking other military practices which are not even different from their own, but simply practiced in the same way by a different side. However, I felt the author was a bit incompetent in getting this message across well – if you already felt that way before the book you probably still will, and if you didn’t, you’ll probably be further entrenched.
I have to admit that I learned a lot from the book. But if I was writing it, there would be a lot of changes, most of all to limit the over-editorializing of morality, and to place far more emphasis on the actions and lives of people beyond the political leaders and life beyond the wars and political intrigue.
May 20, 2008
I was very dissappointed in this book. It is billed as the best history of the middle east, but in fact it is the typical liberal politically correct history of the middle east. What is sad is that this is apparently the most used book on college campuses which shows why so many college students have no clue of reality. The only reason I gave it two stars instead of just one is that it's only redeeming factor is it does give a great timeline of all the events in the region, but the authors are not even handed when dealing with all sides of the picture, especially against Christians and Jews.
August 11, 2013
It is a brilliant book! It starts from the very beginning and goes all the way up to 2009. I think anyone who likes to discuss the people, countries and the problems of Middle East should read this history first. This book is very brave and quite honest. It is a good comprehensive overview. At times I found this book quite distressing, but that is because my personal distaste for any kind of war/conflict. I am amazed how much bias, unfairness, greed and also stupidity exist in our world. And how ignorant we are of these things.
Only one thing about the book bothered me a bit which is that the authors left out a big chunk of information of 1400-1700's times. They did cover a lot of wars during this time but I think there was some other information that should have been added. And I think that was left out on purpose.
The second half of the book was the most fascinating part. The final analysis is absolutely clear and daring. Their definition of terrorism is something I totally agree with. The authors encourage readers to think critically about the historical narrative the book presents. Hope many people will first learn about the history before they point fingers at anyone.
Only one thing about the book bothered me a bit which is that the authors left out a big chunk of information of 1400-1700's times. They did cover a lot of wars during this time but I think there was some other information that should have been added. And I think that was left out on purpose.
The second half of the book was the most fascinating part. The final analysis is absolutely clear and daring. Their definition of terrorism is something I totally agree with. The authors encourage readers to think critically about the historical narrative the book presents. Hope many people will first learn about the history before they point fingers at anyone.
September 28, 2011
Arab Propaganda
While the authors don't lie about the facts, they take every opportunity to shade their comments to paint Muslims in general and Arabs in particular as victims with valid grievances. This is most glaring in their coverage of the Arab Israeli conflict but also extends to other Arab enemies of the West. They are without exception given positive coverage and their behavior is always excused.
Bin Ladin's description makes a point of mentioning that he personally participated in fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan, so that we can appreciate that he had courage and thus admire him. When discussing Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, a lengthy list of grievances he had against Kuwait is listed so that a reader can almost believe that invading Kuwait was the reasonable thing to do. On the other hand, Saddam's poison gassing the Kurds in the 80's is mentioned in a passing in a single sentence, "Meanwhile,
Saddam's regime was condemned by the Americans and some Europeans as a military dictatorship that invaded its neighbors, murdered politic dissidents by the thousands, killed some of its Kurdish citizens with poison gas, and hoped to retain or to develop weapons of mass destruction." The authors seem to imply that his atrocities were not really facts but only rumors spread by his American enemies.
On the other hand, Israel and its leaders, if they are commented upon, are given negative press. Ben-Gurion, Israel's first leader, is described as having a combative manner, called "amoral" and quoted "If I were an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel." "Amoral" is used nowhere else in the book, which perforce describes numerous Arab dictators and terrorists, who, as it turns out, were much more moral than Ben-Gurion. When discussing the Six Day War, the authors find somebody on the Israeli side to quote to the effect that Israel didn't *really* have proof that Egypt and Syria were going to attack it when it launched its preemptive strike. On the other hand, when discussing Yom Kippur War, the book makes excuses for the Arabs sneak attacked Israel on the holiest day of the year for Jews. We are told that they didn't really mean to attack on that day and, anyway, it only helped Israel, because it made it easier to call up reservists. These kind of excuses might be laughable when trotted out by a child in trouble for getting into a fight, but are infuriating when read in a textbook. American leaders and diplomats are mentioned neutrally and in passing until we get to Bush and the neo-cons, who we are told were "spreading American influence and dominance, which they called freedom and democracy." The book uncritically reports the exaggerated claims of a million civilian victims of Bush's Iraq war, and even claims that Clinton's blockade of Iraq also caused a million deaths. The authors don't even try to hide their biases.
The choice of material included in the book also clearly shows that its intended as pro-Arab & pro-Muslim propaganda. This history of the Middle East starts with the prophet Muhammad, briefly reviews everything that happened until around the 19th century, and only starts going into detail once the dominant theme of the events becomes Muslim struggle against Western civilization. The Muslim countries from Egypt eastward up to Iran are then covered extensively through the last century and a half, with one obvious exception. Israel is only mentioned when it acts as an enemy of the Arabs. Whatever Israelis were doing when not fighting their enemies, their culture, their politics, their technological achievements are apparently not worthy of mention. The authors see Israel strictly through the Arab perspective of Jew equals boogeyman.
What is most ironic is that, judging by their names, the book is written by two Jews. I guess the best Arab propagandist is a guilt-ridden Jew.
While the authors don't lie about the facts, they take every opportunity to shade their comments to paint Muslims in general and Arabs in particular as victims with valid grievances. This is most glaring in their coverage of the Arab Israeli conflict but also extends to other Arab enemies of the West. They are without exception given positive coverage and their behavior is always excused.
Bin Ladin's description makes a point of mentioning that he personally participated in fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan, so that we can appreciate that he had courage and thus admire him. When discussing Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, a lengthy list of grievances he had against Kuwait is listed so that a reader can almost believe that invading Kuwait was the reasonable thing to do. On the other hand, Saddam's poison gassing the Kurds in the 80's is mentioned in a passing in a single sentence, "Meanwhile,
Saddam's regime was condemned by the Americans and some Europeans as a military dictatorship that invaded its neighbors, murdered politic dissidents by the thousands, killed some of its Kurdish citizens with poison gas, and hoped to retain or to develop weapons of mass destruction." The authors seem to imply that his atrocities were not really facts but only rumors spread by his American enemies.
On the other hand, Israel and its leaders, if they are commented upon, are given negative press. Ben-Gurion, Israel's first leader, is described as having a combative manner, called "amoral" and quoted "If I were an Arab leader, I would never make terms with Israel." "Amoral" is used nowhere else in the book, which perforce describes numerous Arab dictators and terrorists, who, as it turns out, were much more moral than Ben-Gurion. When discussing the Six Day War, the authors find somebody on the Israeli side to quote to the effect that Israel didn't *really* have proof that Egypt and Syria were going to attack it when it launched its preemptive strike. On the other hand, when discussing Yom Kippur War, the book makes excuses for the Arabs sneak attacked Israel on the holiest day of the year for Jews. We are told that they didn't really mean to attack on that day and, anyway, it only helped Israel, because it made it easier to call up reservists. These kind of excuses might be laughable when trotted out by a child in trouble for getting into a fight, but are infuriating when read in a textbook. American leaders and diplomats are mentioned neutrally and in passing until we get to Bush and the neo-cons, who we are told were "spreading American influence and dominance, which they called freedom and democracy." The book uncritically reports the exaggerated claims of a million civilian victims of Bush's Iraq war, and even claims that Clinton's blockade of Iraq also caused a million deaths. The authors don't even try to hide their biases.
The choice of material included in the book also clearly shows that its intended as pro-Arab & pro-Muslim propaganda. This history of the Middle East starts with the prophet Muhammad, briefly reviews everything that happened until around the 19th century, and only starts going into detail once the dominant theme of the events becomes Muslim struggle against Western civilization. The Muslim countries from Egypt eastward up to Iran are then covered extensively through the last century and a half, with one obvious exception. Israel is only mentioned when it acts as an enemy of the Arabs. Whatever Israelis were doing when not fighting their enemies, their culture, their politics, their technological achievements are apparently not worthy of mention. The authors see Israel strictly through the Arab perspective of Jew equals boogeyman.
What is most ironic is that, judging by their names, the book is written by two Jews. I guess the best Arab propagandist is a guilt-ridden Jew.
August 1, 2015
Painfully boring and very condescending towards the reader. Could it be cultural?
The book was basically a description of the battles fought and which ruling family oppressed who. I wish the authors would add an explanation about the current group fighting, ISIS. I am more depressed about peace in the Middle East having read this book.
The positives I got out of this read was the permission the authors gave me to not focus on names and dates, but to focus on the whys.
The book was basically a description of the battles fought and which ruling family oppressed who. I wish the authors would add an explanation about the current group fighting, ISIS. I am more depressed about peace in the Middle East having read this book.
The positives I got out of this read was the permission the authors gave me to not focus on names and dates, but to focus on the whys.
May 10, 2024
كتاب التاريخ المختصر للشرق الأوسط للمؤلفين آرثر جولدشميت وآرثر ديفيدسون. مرجع علمي شامل للمهتمين بدراسة هذا الموضوع. يمتاز بالموضوعية والوضوح.
July 21, 2018
I value trying to cultivate information from which to derive an informed opinion greater than securing information to confirm your initial assumptions. This book contains quite a bit of information and I cannot feign to be any kind of an expert from one reading of one book.
I read several Goodreads reviews of the book before trying to write my own. I hope my effort will be useful.
The book has been accused of an Islamic bias. It may have a slight bias. Only a slight one. If your beliefs less you to feeling offended by this book, please consider the possibility that information challenging your preconceived notions might be uncomfortable due to cognitive dissonance without, actually, entailing a degree of bias which compromised this history.
Anyone studying Islamic History will be exposed to arguments from the viewpoint of those people. These authors would not be expected to make a long and deep study of a historical perspective which they despised. Furthermore, a book on such a subject will be read by people also interested in that history and, similarly, likely to have some capacity for empathy with the Islamic perspective.
I believe that reading the book with a sympathetic ear could be profitable. It seems unlikely that vilifying any perspective will be assistive in securing peace with people sympathetic to that perspective.
Or, to quote another Middle East book, "Blessed are the peacemakers."
I read several Goodreads reviews of the book before trying to write my own. I hope my effort will be useful.
The book has been accused of an Islamic bias. It may have a slight bias. Only a slight one. If your beliefs less you to feeling offended by this book, please consider the possibility that information challenging your preconceived notions might be uncomfortable due to cognitive dissonance without, actually, entailing a degree of bias which compromised this history.
Anyone studying Islamic History will be exposed to arguments from the viewpoint of those people. These authors would not be expected to make a long and deep study of a historical perspective which they despised. Furthermore, a book on such a subject will be read by people also interested in that history and, similarly, likely to have some capacity for empathy with the Islamic perspective.
I believe that reading the book with a sympathetic ear could be profitable. It seems unlikely that vilifying any perspective will be assistive in securing peace with people sympathetic to that perspective.
Or, to quote another Middle East book, "Blessed are the peacemakers."
June 15, 2018
Of most of the Middle Eastern history, this was rated more or less the highest. I now have a much better understanding of the situation. Each country there was a bit different; Iran was from Persia. Turkey was the country of Turks from middle Asia. Arabs were in Arabia. Egypt has Egyptians. Iraq and Israel did not exist before the twentieth century. The Ottoman Empire was great until it broke apart after the second world war. The Great Powers invaded Middle Eastern countries when they wanted to protect their trade route at the Suez and their oil supply. That caused problems during the World Wars and Cold War. America put the Shah in power in Iran in replace of a democratically elected government. Bush invaded Iraq believing it had weapons of mass destruction. Currently there was still a war in Syria. The last part was about the endless Arab-Israel and the. Palestinian-Israel. There tit-for-tat terrorism and missile strikes and bombings ensure that each side see the other as the bad one and I think peace is going to be impossible.
A great summary of the Middle East for anyone.
A great summary of the Middle East for anyone.
June 24, 2015
I was only able to read about 1/3 of this book before I had to return it to the library. It's a very concise history, structured like a textbook, stripped of much of the detail that makes history interesting. Nevertheless, you get a good overview of the basics, like the difference between Sunni, Shiite, and Karijite muslims, and the nature of Sharia law and the different types, etc.
May 12, 2020
This edition was much needed considering that the previous did not include anything about the Arab Spring or thereafter. The author continues to avoid the term genocide when discussing the Armenian Genocide which is interesting to say the least. Still, this is a solid introduction to Middle Eastern history for anyone looking for a starting point.
March 22, 2021
Too much history. Should have been shorter.
September 17, 2024
Well, I learned a lot.
July 25, 2025
mid as hell writing but i learned a lot
August 6, 2018
Review of the 11th edition.
Don’t get it twisted: This book is a Concise History of the Middle East. It is a history of the Middle East as a region, and therefore focuses on the regional powers of the Middle East. So if you are reading this book expecting lots of Comoros content or all the juicy details on Djibouti, you will be disappointed.*
For what it is—again, an introductory textbook covering a concise history of the Middle East—the authors do a great job. One of the strengths of this book is its coverage of the more thematic elements of history in MENA. It gives good insight into why things happen, and not just the names/dates/places.
*You will also be disappointed if you (mistakenly) believe that Afghanistan is part of the Middle East and expect this book to cover it in detail. If you come to Goodreads to whine about it, rest assured that I am shaking my head and chuckling indulgently on the other side of my keyboard.
Don’t get it twisted: This book is a Concise History of the Middle East. It is a history of the Middle East as a region, and therefore focuses on the regional powers of the Middle East. So if you are reading this book expecting lots of Comoros content or all the juicy details on Djibouti, you will be disappointed.*
For what it is—again, an introductory textbook covering a concise history of the Middle East—the authors do a great job. One of the strengths of this book is its coverage of the more thematic elements of history in MENA. It gives good insight into why things happen, and not just the names/dates/places.
*You will also be disappointed if you (mistakenly) believe that Afghanistan is part of the Middle East and expect this book to cover it in detail. If you come to Goodreads to whine about it, rest assured that I am shaking my head and chuckling indulgently on the other side of my keyboard.
April 30, 2020
This book covers a vast amount of information about the often misrepresented and misunderstood Middle East region and after consuming this, I feel as if I learned an enormous amount of information as well as laid a relatively unbiased foundation for my further exploration into Middle Eastern.
One thing I would say, though, is it's also better to read a book about a particular place, religion, peoples, etc. that is written by someone within that group and I think this is especially true when referencing an entire region, worlds away from the Pennsylvania that professor Goldschmidt Jr. was constructing this textbook from. Nevertheless, this is a good book and a good foundational read for those interested in the history of the Middle East and, most specifically, for those interested in the Palestine-Israel conflict!
One thing I would say, though, is it's also better to read a book about a particular place, religion, peoples, etc. that is written by someone within that group and I think this is especially true when referencing an entire region, worlds away from the Pennsylvania that professor Goldschmidt Jr. was constructing this textbook from. Nevertheless, this is a good book and a good foundational read for those interested in the history of the Middle East and, most specifically, for those interested in the Palestine-Israel conflict!
September 25, 2021
Solid book.
I dont know what more to say, I usually dont read much non-fiction but I got really interested inthis topic recently and the book really got me even more immersed in the realities we live in today. I think it was beautifully written and kept me entertained throughout, but what I wish was performed a bit better was the pacing. The first third of the book discussed around a 1500 years of history, it didnt give much room for more meaningful analysis and explanations, which was a real downer since we skipped over the literal "golden age" of its history. The book frequently dedicates a singular page to a certain person in history, that was entertaining and a well-needed but light pause to the action thats being presented in between the pages
Overall really good book, got me hooked on getting to know more about how the region got to where it is now.
I dont know what more to say, I usually dont read much non-fiction but I got really interested inthis topic recently and the book really got me even more immersed in the realities we live in today. I think it was beautifully written and kept me entertained throughout, but what I wish was performed a bit better was the pacing. The first third of the book discussed around a 1500 years of history, it didnt give much room for more meaningful analysis and explanations, which was a real downer since we skipped over the literal "golden age" of its history. The book frequently dedicates a singular page to a certain person in history, that was entertaining and a well-needed but light pause to the action thats being presented in between the pages
Overall really good book, got me hooked on getting to know more about how the region got to where it is now.
January 12, 2022
If you're looking for an introductory history of the Middle East, this book will deliver. It is a concise history, which means it has limited depth on many subjects. Nonetheless, it paints a thorough overview of Middle Eastern history from pre-Islam to about 2018.
The book introduces the major players along the way, including some dynasties from the Middle Ages that are not often treated in other foci of history. The importance of Persia is examined alongside the Ottoman Empire.
The Crusades and the Mongol Invasion are mentioned, but not examined in depth. A full chapter on each of these aspects of Middle Eastern history would be welcomed by many readers.
A Concise History of the Middle East is an accessible, readable introduction to the subject. If you're interested in an overview of this region, grab a copy and enjoy!
The book introduces the major players along the way, including some dynasties from the Middle Ages that are not often treated in other foci of history. The importance of Persia is examined alongside the Ottoman Empire.
The Crusades and the Mongol Invasion are mentioned, but not examined in depth. A full chapter on each of these aspects of Middle Eastern history would be welcomed by many readers.
A Concise History of the Middle East is an accessible, readable introduction to the subject. If you're interested in an overview of this region, grab a copy and enjoy!
January 2, 2022
I liked this book a fair amount. I learned quite a bit, and I felt like the portrayals of politics and conflict in the 20 and 21st century were reasonably balanced. A book like this is bound to have shortcomings, since it cannot cover every important thing across more than 3000 years of history and many different cultures. I'm not sure I would really fault the writers, since I did want to read this, but ultimately a broad overview like this struggles to connect things from past to present, since it reads more like a series of events unrelated to each other and happening one after another. Still, it did deepen my understanding of an area I always want to know more about.
June 24, 2017
An informative book. After listening to the 18 hour long audiobook, I feel like I'm more informed about the Middle East than most people I know. I will say that the authors seem to be less than objective when it comes to religion, showing harsher judgement to medieval Christians for acts such as the crusades than towards Muslims at different points in history committing similar acts. Biases aside, I think this is a good jumping of point for beginning to understand what is going on in the Middle East.
September 8, 2021
Im giving it three stars since it tries to pack so much into one volume, almost merely giving events and dates at time without much else. It also heavily focuses on the modern era.
On the other hand I actually thought it balances bias very well and lays out mistakes both sides made. It really saddens me that so many reviews here claim its “arab propoganda” for really just trying to provide an unbiased history of the region. I suppose so many in the West want the Middle East to be an evil place they refuse to read history with an open mind.
On the other hand I actually thought it balances bias very well and lays out mistakes both sides made. It really saddens me that so many reviews here claim its “arab propoganda” for really just trying to provide an unbiased history of the region. I suppose so many in the West want the Middle East to be an evil place they refuse to read history with an open mind.
July 16, 2022
A decent introduction to history in the Middle East. A reasonable presentation of early Islamic history, though it is comparatively light before the modern era. The handling of modern issues and the creation of the modern state of the Middle East will probably be helpful for anyone who does not understand how much Western interference has harmed the area. The authors get a little preachy towards the end, and, given that this work is a number of years old now, some of their expectations for the Middle East now seem rather naive.
July 16, 2022
Simply outstanding. Very comprehensive and well balanced.
I have found that not many Western writers have treated the Arabs fairly, or can begin to understand the sometimes complex separate subdivisions. Not many can simply explain the teachings of Islam.
This author does so well in all of these areas.
Warning, the tit for tat between the Palestinians and Israel is of course tiring, but this book is well worth reading
I have found that not many Western writers have treated the Arabs fairly, or can begin to understand the sometimes complex separate subdivisions. Not many can simply explain the teachings of Islam.
This author does so well in all of these areas.
Warning, the tit for tat between the Palestinians and Israel is of course tiring, but this book is well worth reading
April 8, 2023
This book is very informative and I would highly recommend it if someone is interested in learning about the Middle East and it’s history in a very honest way. As it is a long, comprehensive history book, it can definitely drag at times and get slow and hard to read, so I’d recommend reading it alongside other, more exciting books and to read it at a slower pace. Otherwise, it is well-written, generally easy to follow, and an accurate and (mostly) unbiased history (or stated otherwise).
May 19, 2018
As a survey, this text covers quite a bit of ground but has little room for depth which is understandable. I am, however, disappointed that the Kurds barely merit a mention given their rich history in the region. As far as balanced viewpoints are concerned, I'm not convinced that this book is as bad as some of the reviews make it out to be.
Read
December 21, 2019Not sure how "concise" a 570 page book is. Kind of a weird book - the introduction is pretty inviting, the beginning of the book goes very, very quickly through 600 CE. This is essentially a book on understanding current conflict in the Middle East - does an alright job at it. Surprisingly dry, especially considering how lively the beginning was.
August 11, 2020
This was a good overview into the world of Middle East and provided a somewhat impartial background to how Middle East came to be the way it is today by explaining cultural, geographical, political and social influences
I think some parts were a little slow paced for me but it did fulfil the ultimate goal of leaving me interested delving deeper into the subject matter
I think some parts were a little slow paced for me but it did fulfil the ultimate goal of leaving me interested delving deeper into the subject matter
December 1, 2011
First 3/4 of the book are only interesting if you like the history of Islam or medieval history. Best part was it's coverage of 19th and 20th century history in the region. Unfortunately did not cover the Arab Spring of 2011.
April 12, 2008
Fascinating!! And well-written. Thanks Ehrman!
September 14, 2009
I know it's a textbook, but if you want a (relatively) quick rundown of the Middle East, this is a good place to start.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 104 reviews