What do you think?
Rate this book
A Brief History of the Middle East: From Abraham to Arafat
In The Brief History of the Middle East author Christopher Catherwood attempts to show how our entire world is ultimately shaped by events that have unfolded or have their origin in the Middle East. Catherwood insists that, unless we allow ignorance to blind us—which to a certain extent it already has—the Middle East must not be viewed as "some strange place over there." Three of the world's major organized religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—all stem from the area, as do defining civilizations from Ancient Egypt to Babylonia. Catherwood examines this storied region through the lens of the present by asking these questions. How did the Palestinian issue arise? Why does Osama bin Laden harp on the glories of Moorish Spain? Why did Islamic extremism come to be a substitute for Arab socialist nationalism for so many? Today's headlines have clear historical explanations, and The Brief History of the Middle East will bring that concept into focus.
309 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
45 people are currently reading
401 people want to read
About the author
Christopher Catherwood
64 books15 followersChristopher Catherwood is a writer and historian based in Cambridge. He has taught at the University of Cambridge and the University of Richmond, Virginia. An expert on Winston Churchill, his previous books include the bestseller Winston’s Folly.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews
December 8, 2020
This is not A Brief History of the Middle East. It is 13 chapters presenting historical events from the Middle East in chronological order in which the author gives his opinions on the chapter's subject. Opinions such as his are not necessarily uninteresting but should not be part of the generally very good “A Brief History” series that Robinson publishes. I get that the Middle East is a difficult subject but as a primer this is fairly useless to anyone new to the subject.
July 23, 2021
I learned things I did not know before
He spent a lot of words criticizing other historians instead of just giving history as the book title implies. He could have given more detail if he hadn’t spent so much energy on which other author said what and how their position was tenable or not.
Anglo-centric to a fault
He spent a lot of words criticizing other historians instead of just giving history as the book title implies. He could have given more detail if he hadn’t spent so much energy on which other author said what and how their position was tenable or not.
Anglo-centric to a fault
July 21, 2020
One of the perks of self-education compared to formalized schooling is that we don't have to finish a book.
This title suffers from severe editorial problems, and I don't mean the typos or missing commas sort. I mean the sort that take a writer's interesting albeit muddled ideas and help him craft lucid sentences and structure.
Also, on page 48 of a book called A Brief History of the Middle East is a lengthy quote from an interview with Bono (yes, that Bono) on the question of whether Jesus was madman or Messiah.
Bono. Really?
This title suffers from severe editorial problems, and I don't mean the typos or missing commas sort. I mean the sort that take a writer's interesting albeit muddled ideas and help him craft lucid sentences and structure.
Also, on page 48 of a book called A Brief History of the Middle East is a lengthy quote from an interview with Bono (yes, that Bono) on the question of whether Jesus was madman or Messiah.
Bono. Really?
December 14, 2021
Really good introduction to the history of the Middle East
July 30, 2011
Not recommended. The basic facts are there but there has to be a book that gives a good overview of the Middle East that's better written and more clearly laid out. The author and his copyeditor (if there was one--I would never let a manuscript go to press looking like this) need lessons in such basic matters as concision, dangling modifers, and comma usage. He spends three pages debating under which pharaoh exactly Moses led the Israelites from slavery, a pointless and unanswerable question and surely not worth this much space in this sort of book, where there is so much ground to be covered. And there's no excuse for sentences like this: "He [Kissinger] was able to prevent Israel from wreaking even more damage on the Egyptians, correctly realizing, as Arthur Goldschmidt has written, that this would render Egypt more rather than less likely to want eventually to agree on a more lasting peace" (221). No matter how matter times I read that sentence, I can't be sure what "this" is supposed to be, and the lack of clear pronoun reference renders the meaning opaque and ambiguous. Or this one: "Writing more than twelve years later, the great hopes of 1993 remain tragically unfulfilled" (245). That sentence I understand, at least, but that dangling participle at the beginning annoys the hell out of me.
November 7, 2020
Absolute garbage. One comes here under the impression that this is an unbiased "brief history of the middle east", but the author definitely has an American-christian tone to all of what needs to be said.
The Bible is used heavily as a source of historical fact. And, when talking about the people who lived thousands of years ago, insist of referring to the old scripts as "the Hebrew Bible". Completely Christian centric.
Also had sections titled "A godly people: from the kingdom of Judah to the USA". Who gives a f** about America in this context?!
Could I trust the later sections? No! It is a hard topic to address because history seems to be very influenced by the west, there is no way I can trust the author to portray an unbiased account.
The Bible is used heavily as a source of historical fact. And, when talking about the people who lived thousands of years ago, insist of referring to the old scripts as "the Hebrew Bible". Completely Christian centric.
Also had sections titled "A godly people: from the kingdom of Judah to the USA". Who gives a f** about America in this context?!
Could I trust the later sections? No! It is a hard topic to address because history seems to be very influenced by the west, there is no way I can trust the author to portray an unbiased account.
Want to read
August 12, 2009So far this is well written, but it is hard to stay focused and involved in it. I bought this to educate myself a little more on that region, it is just difficult to pick it up with more entertaining choices on my bookshelf.
October 24, 2018
What a genuine piece of trash. Lost me when he quoted Bono as a source of evidence for the divinity of Jesus Christ. I came here for a succinct and impartial insight into the Middle East from past to present, instead receiving sloppily written Christian propaganda.
September 15, 2018
Interesting read but the author assumed the reader had knowledge that not everyone has.
July 25, 2024
I would like to start by saying it is never easy to tackle a subject such as the Middle East; let alone, take on such a task as an individual who is of Western heritage and evidently in high association with Western institutions. As such, a level of forgiveness can be given to the author if some of his terminology and narrative slant seem focused heavily on Eurocentric and American vision of this quite broad topic that is the Middle East. Nevertheless, as a reader, I couldn’t help but feel that many subjects that could or should have had more detail were very quickly discussed, while others seemed almost beaten to death.
While religion, and the political connections to it, seem to be the subject of almost 90% of the writing of most chapters, there is little explanation on them. Every section of this book dealing with antiquity is almost anecdotal. Yet when delving into more modern times, there are pages and pages, in some cases even chapters, focused on specific events and leaders. I won’t go as far to say that the author had bias or a message, nor a comfort on certain subjects than others, rather it seemed that his flow went out when it came to particular events and subjects, and would return in abundance at random points. This was quite evident in his final chapter which more or less didn’t really end but rather was a random musing on clashing identities in the Middle East.
Overall, an easy read. Moderately informative to Westerners who need to learn a little bit of history. However, I encourage readers to further their education on the subject and take much of the information introduced here as starting points and nothing more.
While religion, and the political connections to it, seem to be the subject of almost 90% of the writing of most chapters, there is little explanation on them. Every section of this book dealing with antiquity is almost anecdotal. Yet when delving into more modern times, there are pages and pages, in some cases even chapters, focused on specific events and leaders. I won’t go as far to say that the author had bias or a message, nor a comfort on certain subjects than others, rather it seemed that his flow went out when it came to particular events and subjects, and would return in abundance at random points. This was quite evident in his final chapter which more or less didn’t really end but rather was a random musing on clashing identities in the Middle East.
Overall, an easy read. Moderately informative to Westerners who need to learn a little bit of history. However, I encourage readers to further their education on the subject and take much of the information introduced here as starting points and nothing more.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 29, 2020
In pace, tone, and subject matter this book feels very much like a university lecture series. The tone is casual, the organization topical, and the focus academic. Overall, the author does an incredible job of presenting issues fairly (I have only very minor complaints), but it does feel a little bit unbalanced. The beginning of the book is systematic in its approach, and the author constantly refers to his thesis, but as the book goes on the subject matter becomes more and more topical. The fall of the Ottaman Empire gets two long chapters, where as Iran gets very little treatment at all.
Overall, I feel the biggest problem with the book is its inconsistency with the level of knowledge it attributes to the reader. The chapters on ancient history are written on a level appropriate for someone with almost know knowledge of the Middle East, whereas the later chapters tend to assume a much greater level of familiarity.
Thus, while it suffers from a few stylistic and organizational issues, it still is a great book which I would recommend to anyone who follows current events and wants to gain a greater understanding of the Modern Middle East and how it came to be.
Overall, I feel the biggest problem with the book is its inconsistency with the level of knowledge it attributes to the reader. The chapters on ancient history are written on a level appropriate for someone with almost know knowledge of the Middle East, whereas the later chapters tend to assume a much greater level of familiarity.
Thus, while it suffers from a few stylistic and organizational issues, it still is a great book which I would recommend to anyone who follows current events and wants to gain a greater understanding of the Modern Middle East and how it came to be.
October 29, 2014
As good as it gets in this category! (brief, non-fiction, history.)
Especially the 'brief' - in that it covers a region with so much history over a period of time not less than 2,000 years....
The exceptional quality is in the viewpoint. It is not possible to document history without some measure of bias - both perceived and actual. History varies not by fact but by version.
As he states in the introduction:
“Middle Eastern history is filled with minefields, not because of what actually happened in the past, but because of how people read back the present into the past.”
― Christopher Catherwood, A Brief History of the Middle East
Having noted the challenge, he proceeds with an approach of full disclosure. When he references another work, he typically summarizes the generally accepted perceptions of the author's bias. He typically includes alternative written perspectives and he continually reminds the reader of the inherent difference in perceptions based on world view. When he has an opinion - he is clear to make it an opinion statement: " I agree with..." He certainly endeavors to be 'fair and balanced'. Rembering that it is not possible. Even if it were possible to be unerring in facts, it would certainly not be 'brief' and it could not be possible in perspectives. No one can change their personal history, experiences, education, knowledge, affilations etc. and it is by such singular perspective that one observes and records the world around them
Catherwood is astute and forthright in recognizing bias and particularly when history is told by "reading the present into the past". He continually notes areas of contention - of his own or among others.
While worthy reading for ademics - it is written for a general audience - but accessible to all. One need not have studied history, religion, politics or the region. While not a primary source, it is a 'brief' (as possible) cohesive, comprehensive amalgamation of the many volumes of history and commentary on the region - significantly abridged of course.
I highly recommend this as a summary perspective on the Middle East to anyone wishing they could understand what-in-the-world is going on 'over there' (i.e. the civil wars, the Arab Spring, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the Sunni/Shia divides, Terrorism, etc.) This is a great primer for those of us who simply 'weren't paying attention' in the second half of the 20th century. (To be fair - it is unlikely that this region was given much attention in our history classes, nor were events here given much news coverage. The "Middle East' was relatively unimportant - news was of the cold war, the economy and local politics filled the news.) This book provides an excellent foundation to understand the current events that dominate front page news today.
I put this number one as the 'best' book for any Western ex-pats living in the area. The more I learn of our collective ignorance - the more I wish it (or some such equivalent) were required reading! This brief history provides a foundation to understanding the many and complex factors, history, politics, geography, tradition, relgion and most important - the very different worldview. Westerners (myself first) tend to look at everything thriough the glasses of our own understanding - and thus it is easy to disparage and difficult to appreciate the strong culture, traditions, values and way of life that is so different from our own. (I restrain myself from launching into the different world views of Western 'individualism and freedom' from the Mideastern "family/tribe and responsibility.)
Regarding Catherwood's style, I find two things particularly refreshing:
1) He does not play the 'name game'. His history does not claim to be accurate by appeals to authority, nor does it dispute opinions ad hominem. He explores research critically based on merit rather than personal agreement or contention with the author. At the same time, he is ever mindful of politics and personality and notes where personal perspective may be influencing results.
More than once - he agrees with a source on one matter and disagrees on another. (I.e. Everything Bernard Lewis has to say is not gospel, nor is it all rejected as biased.)
2) He does not dispute the validity of belief in God nor the disparage the claims of the 'founding' prophets of the three monotheistic world relgions (i.e. Abraham, Jesus and Muhammed). This is not only refreshing - but particularly relevent in telling the history of the area that birthed the three religions. He objectively reports the history as detailed in religious books (i.e. The Torah, The Bible, The Quran) He notes where, when and if there are outside sources or evidence to support the people or events documented in the religious books. He does not try to prove or disprove the beliefs.
(As an admittedly provoking note to secular readers. Don't allow the open mind of the author to disuade you. The book is entirely academic. The author, is a well respected historian, a Fellow of the Royal Historical society among other honors. Check out his bio. for yourself. Perhaps Catherwood would question the ignorance of secularists rejecting belief systems without proof to the same degree as many secularists reject theories that allow for the existance of God - without disproof. But, it is MY note that I am refreshed to see the belief systems of billions of people unquestioned and their intellect unassailed.)
Especially the 'brief' - in that it covers a region with so much history over a period of time not less than 2,000 years....
The exceptional quality is in the viewpoint. It is not possible to document history without some measure of bias - both perceived and actual. History varies not by fact but by version.
As he states in the introduction:
“Middle Eastern history is filled with minefields, not because of what actually happened in the past, but because of how people read back the present into the past.”
― Christopher Catherwood, A Brief History of the Middle East
Having noted the challenge, he proceeds with an approach of full disclosure. When he references another work, he typically summarizes the generally accepted perceptions of the author's bias. He typically includes alternative written perspectives and he continually reminds the reader of the inherent difference in perceptions based on world view. When he has an opinion - he is clear to make it an opinion statement: " I agree with..." He certainly endeavors to be 'fair and balanced'. Rembering that it is not possible. Even if it were possible to be unerring in facts, it would certainly not be 'brief' and it could not be possible in perspectives. No one can change their personal history, experiences, education, knowledge, affilations etc. and it is by such singular perspective that one observes and records the world around them
Catherwood is astute and forthright in recognizing bias and particularly when history is told by "reading the present into the past". He continually notes areas of contention - of his own or among others.
While worthy reading for ademics - it is written for a general audience - but accessible to all. One need not have studied history, religion, politics or the region. While not a primary source, it is a 'brief' (as possible) cohesive, comprehensive amalgamation of the many volumes of history and commentary on the region - significantly abridged of course.
I highly recommend this as a summary perspective on the Middle East to anyone wishing they could understand what-in-the-world is going on 'over there' (i.e. the civil wars, the Arab Spring, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, the Sunni/Shia divides, Terrorism, etc.) This is a great primer for those of us who simply 'weren't paying attention' in the second half of the 20th century. (To be fair - it is unlikely that this region was given much attention in our history classes, nor were events here given much news coverage. The "Middle East' was relatively unimportant - news was of the cold war, the economy and local politics filled the news.) This book provides an excellent foundation to understand the current events that dominate front page news today.
I put this number one as the 'best' book for any Western ex-pats living in the area. The more I learn of our collective ignorance - the more I wish it (or some such equivalent) were required reading! This brief history provides a foundation to understanding the many and complex factors, history, politics, geography, tradition, relgion and most important - the very different worldview. Westerners (myself first) tend to look at everything thriough the glasses of our own understanding - and thus it is easy to disparage and difficult to appreciate the strong culture, traditions, values and way of life that is so different from our own. (I restrain myself from launching into the different world views of Western 'individualism and freedom' from the Mideastern "family/tribe and responsibility.)
Regarding Catherwood's style, I find two things particularly refreshing:
1) He does not play the 'name game'. His history does not claim to be accurate by appeals to authority, nor does it dispute opinions ad hominem. He explores research critically based on merit rather than personal agreement or contention with the author. At the same time, he is ever mindful of politics and personality and notes where personal perspective may be influencing results.
More than once - he agrees with a source on one matter and disagrees on another. (I.e. Everything Bernard Lewis has to say is not gospel, nor is it all rejected as biased.)
2) He does not dispute the validity of belief in God nor the disparage the claims of the 'founding' prophets of the three monotheistic world relgions (i.e. Abraham, Jesus and Muhammed). This is not only refreshing - but particularly relevent in telling the history of the area that birthed the three religions. He objectively reports the history as detailed in religious books (i.e. The Torah, The Bible, The Quran) He notes where, when and if there are outside sources or evidence to support the people or events documented in the religious books. He does not try to prove or disprove the beliefs.
(As an admittedly provoking note to secular readers. Don't allow the open mind of the author to disuade you. The book is entirely academic. The author, is a well respected historian, a Fellow of the Royal Historical society among other honors. Check out his bio. for yourself. Perhaps Catherwood would question the ignorance of secularists rejecting belief systems without proof to the same degree as many secularists reject theories that allow for the existance of God - without disproof. But, it is MY note that I am refreshed to see the belief systems of billions of people unquestioned and their intellect unassailed.)
Read
February 19, 2020Interesting read, notwithstanding the dated nature (2006); ie, pre ISIS and so on.
The background detail on the origins of the current discontent is enlightening.
Catherwood seems fairly balanced in his assessments of who ought to be accountable for the current state of affairs. A slow read between other books, but never boring.
The background detail on the origins of the current discontent is enlightening.
Catherwood seems fairly balanced in his assessments of who ought to be accountable for the current state of affairs. A slow read between other books, but never boring.
November 10, 2023
I have to agree with other reviewers of this book that it is very badly written and should not have left the publishers without a more thorough editing .Parts are incomprehensible.
I find myself reading and rereading sentences ,trying to work out exactly what the author means .The grammar in some of the sentences is appalling .
I am now just skimming through the book quickly to finish it .
I find myself reading and rereading sentences ,trying to work out exactly what the author means .The grammar in some of the sentences is appalling .
I am now just skimming through the book quickly to finish it .
March 13, 2019
Well-researched, comprehensive, and informative. I did not feel that the author interjected his own opinions to too great a degree. I would like to see an updated version including the last 14 years as well.
November 28, 2021
The best book to understand the history of Middle East.
Read
December 18, 2022If you're looking for a primer on the Middle East this isn't it.
July 16, 2024
I have always been fascinated by the Israeli/Palestinian conflict ever since college; I went from a town with exactly one Jewish family to having many Jewish friends at Penn which had such a vibrant community, and a friend's boyfriend went to serve in the Israeli army while we still in college. But I have had trouble keeping all the rest of the Middle East straight; this book was excellent in giving an overview of the history of the area and how it relates to present day events. It is so easy to forget that although there have been many conflicts in the region, Christians, Muslims, and Jews have lived there peacefully for many years than not until more recent history. And with all the hatred towards the US, some legitimate due to our imperialist actions, I didn't realize how Britain was the most powerful factor in creating the Jewish state. It was really chilling to read bin Laden's Hitler-esque fatwa (or call to war for Muslims all over the world) to kill any and all Americans. I knew he had issued them again and again, but it is so sad that there are so many followers. I believe so much in separation of church and state that it is hard to understand that so many people in the world do not believe that...
December 4, 2024
I found this a very interesting read but at the same time found that the author had a bit of an irritating style and could be a bit long winded with respect to the way he quoted his references. As for it being "garbage" as one goodreads review stated, I disagree completely. That critique seems to have a politically biased tone. The topic is a difficult one to summarize in a readable way in 273 pages and I think the author has done a reasonable job. I give it 4 stars for content. Is it written from a Jewish / Christian historical perspective? ......possibly! but all books contain the impressions, conclusions and sometimes rank political views of the writer. It is our challenge to read between the lines to get past the opinions and bias to get to what we feel are the facts and the truth. It is probably the best and most succinct book on the history of the Middle East I have read so far! and for want of anything better ...I recommend it. Few of the reviews I read suggested anything better. But be prepared for a bit of a dry read.
August 5, 2016
This is a decent book that tries to bite off more than it can chew. The beginning and ending chapters are better than the middle, where the names of Caliphs and theologians start to run together after awhile. But the discussions of the origins of the three monotheistic religions are balanced and fair, especially to the Christian and Jewish Scriptures. Towards the end it feels dated as events that loomed large in 2011 have slipped off the radar, which made me wish he had focused on more solidified history, such as the Ottoman Empire. The author tries to be as non-partisan as possible in his presentation, which I appreciated.
September 13, 2014
Well this book left me feeling depressed as hell.
I like that Catherwood didn't focus exclusively on the Islam-centric history of the Middle East, though it was basically the main one. Though I wish more older civilizations had been featured/talked about more, I get why he didn't (Catherwood explained his decision well).
I also like how he mentions a number of academic views on subjects, even ones you can tell he doesn't agree with. When he dissects those views, he still does so as respectfully as you can when you're telling someone they're wrong. It was quite refreshing.
I like that Catherwood didn't focus exclusively on the Islam-centric history of the Middle East, though it was basically the main one. Though I wish more older civilizations had been featured/talked about more, I get why he didn't (Catherwood explained his decision well).
I also like how he mentions a number of academic views on subjects, even ones you can tell he doesn't agree with. When he dissects those views, he still does so as respectfully as you can when you're telling someone they're wrong. It was quite refreshing.
May 29, 2012
As everyone else has said, this is a really good introduction to the history and issues in this region. The first half which covers the establishments of the different religions eminating from the middle east takes some wading through but is very important and informative. The second half looks at some of the issues in the 20th century and through to September 11. It was written before the Arab Spring but is nonetheless an interesting read when keeping the current happenings in mind.
July 19, 2010
This is a good book in theory, but the editing is horrendous. I kept running across repeated sentences, spelling and grammar errors, etc. The sequencing is a little choppy too, although it's difficult to fault the author for that since he attempts to cover a few thousand years in a very short book. Would benefit from a re-written, better edited edition.
November 26, 2011
Concise overview of Middle Eastern history from ancient times to the present day.
Useful as a launchpad for wider reading.
Irritating style: rejects footnotes in favour of citing sources in the text ("as X reminds us ... ") then overuses the device ("Expert writers such as the scholar R T France estimate that Jesus was born for years ahead of his 'official' birth.)
Useful as a launchpad for wider reading.
Irritating style: rejects footnotes in favour of citing sources in the text ("as X reminds us ... ") then overuses the device ("Expert writers such as the scholar R T France estimate that Jesus was born for years ahead of his 'official' birth.)
June 26, 2008
Very interesting book. It is loaded with facts and history that basically explain why the Middle East is the powder keg it is. I just wish I could keep all the facts straight in my head now. Truthfully, the book probably needs to be read a couple of times to get everything out of it.
January 25, 2011
From the "A Brief History of..." series of books. This one is particularly fine, and shines a much more concise and enjoyable light on the history of the Middle East and the rise of Islam...compared to the more recent, slightly long-winded volume by Bernard Lewis.
March 14, 2012
Really brief but insightful book--good analysis and thought provoking considerations on the middle east and some helpful explanations on the seminal issues at stake in both politics and religion. Accessible read as well, especially for someone not familiar with the history of the middle east.
March 4, 2017
A good introduction to the complexities of this part of the world. It takes a very broad brush approach, but the brevity is one of its strong points. My only criticism is it takes and overly Christian-based angle at times to matters that probably require a less theocratic approach.
October 31, 2014
Definitely takes the "brief" in "brief history" seriously (it spans a couple of thousand years in 200-odd pages). Very succinct and solid piece of work, which, from my humble point of view, appears to try to look at issues from various angles. Useful as either a primer or a refresher.
August 19, 2014
A good introductory text for anyone with a general interest or curiosity about the Middle East and its history, why it's so often at the centre of our news reports and why it generates such impassioned opinions in people across the world.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 41 reviews