What do you think?
Rate this book
Cambridge Concise Histories
A Concise History of Portugal
In recent years, Portugal has experienced great social and economic change. This concise, illustrated history of the country offers an introduction to its people and culture, to its role as an imperial power in America and Africa, and to its search for economic modernization, political stability and international partnership. This account of Portugal's history will provide the ideal introduction for anyone wanting a comprehensive survey of how Portugal came to be the country it is today.
223 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1993
91 people are currently reading
392 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
December 12, 2018
The 2018 release of the third edition of David Birmingham's Concise History of Portugal is well-timed for me, as I'd been curious to try Cambridge's Concise Histories series and had also been wanting an accessible overview history of the country and its empire before ploughing into something more detailed or involved (such as A. R. Disney's two volume set 'A History of Portugal and the Portuguese Empire', for example).
It's generally fit for purpose, though arguably too heavy on economic matters. This is perhaps understandable given that attempting to cover two millennia of history in a little over two hundred pages for a country that, while small, established an empire spanning four continents, is a necessarily reductive exercise. Birmingham is also something of a Lusophone African specialist, so there is a focus - one might even say a disproportionate one - on Angola and Mozambique compared to Goa, Macau, and East Timor.
He often discusses political forces and the development of and interactions between the different classes and groups - such as the poor literacy of rural peasantry and their incentives to emigrate, the state antagonism towards the clergy, or the semi-colonial wealthy class of British capitalists, but always approached from an economic angle. One could be left with the impression that everything in the nation's history was the natural consequence of economic forces, so it would be nice to round it out a little more.
The entry in this series for the comparable nation and empire of the Netherlands, for example, is twice as long, so more content could reasonably be added even in a 'concise' history. Birmingham is not unaware of such criticism of earlier editions however, and does recommend Angela Delaforce's 'Art and Patronage in Eighteenth-Century Portugal' which he says 'makes good some of the serious deficiencies in cultural history which readers noted in the present concise study'. He also recommends Marion Kaplan's 'The Portuguese' as a companion piece for this reason.
As a function of this limited focus we are left without basic information one would think useful - such as an outline of the differences between the roles of President and Prime Minister. Or the way he talks of the name Fátima and could really do a better job of introducing what is meant by it; namely, that it is a town associated with alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary, leading to a cult-like offshoot of Christianity. This may be the audience's first encounter with the name so he could have written about it more clearly.
Nevertheless, it's nice to be given an introductory glimpse of aspects one wouldn't necessarily be familiar with from other history reading, such as the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake of 1755, the period of union with the Spanish crown and subsequent striving for independence, the points of difference between the authoritarian Salazar dictatorship and its fascist contemporaries, or the stunning extent of British economic dominance within their long-term strategic alliance.
To nitpick further, there are moments where one wonders if a firm editor would have caused the wording to be reconsidered. For example:
Am I being dense, or is that a fragmentary sentence that needs more words and context to make sense?
I'm dubious about blatantly speculative statements such as this in history books. What does it add? By what sources is it supported? Is this really the best possible standard of academic rigour?
Why did this sentence continue after the word 'Iraq'? The 'disintegration' observation tells us nothing of Portuguese history and is too simplistic to tell us anything of Middle Eastern or world history. It suggests a lack of editorial discipline. And would it not have been better to specify George W. Bush rather than George Bush for the benefit of clarity? Then, in the very next sentence:
Why did Britain have cause to 'retaliate' here? Who was this candidate? A Northern Irishman and hence a British citizen, or a Republican Irishman and therefore not a British Citizen, in which case what was Britain's relationship with him? This may not be an important point but it lacks clarity, and if it isn't clear it should be re-written or not included.
The notes provide a number of sources for further reading, though most of these are decades old and one wonders what other options are available incorporating more recent scholarship.
All in all, this is not the book it could be but it gets the job done.
It's generally fit for purpose, though arguably too heavy on economic matters. This is perhaps understandable given that attempting to cover two millennia of history in a little over two hundred pages for a country that, while small, established an empire spanning four continents, is a necessarily reductive exercise. Birmingham is also something of a Lusophone African specialist, so there is a focus - one might even say a disproportionate one - on Angola and Mozambique compared to Goa, Macau, and East Timor.
He often discusses political forces and the development of and interactions between the different classes and groups - such as the poor literacy of rural peasantry and their incentives to emigrate, the state antagonism towards the clergy, or the semi-colonial wealthy class of British capitalists, but always approached from an economic angle. One could be left with the impression that everything in the nation's history was the natural consequence of economic forces, so it would be nice to round it out a little more.
The entry in this series for the comparable nation and empire of the Netherlands, for example, is twice as long, so more content could reasonably be added even in a 'concise' history. Birmingham is not unaware of such criticism of earlier editions however, and does recommend Angela Delaforce's 'Art and Patronage in Eighteenth-Century Portugal' which he says 'makes good some of the serious deficiencies in cultural history which readers noted in the present concise study'. He also recommends Marion Kaplan's 'The Portuguese' as a companion piece for this reason.
As a function of this limited focus we are left without basic information one would think useful - such as an outline of the differences between the roles of President and Prime Minister. Or the way he talks of the name Fátima and could really do a better job of introducing what is meant by it; namely, that it is a town associated with alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary, leading to a cult-like offshoot of Christianity. This may be the audience's first encounter with the name so he could have written about it more clearly.
Nevertheless, it's nice to be given an introductory glimpse of aspects one wouldn't necessarily be familiar with from other history reading, such as the catastrophic Lisbon earthquake of 1755, the period of union with the Spanish crown and subsequent striving for independence, the points of difference between the authoritarian Salazar dictatorship and its fascist contemporaries, or the stunning extent of British economic dominance within their long-term strategic alliance.
To nitpick further, there are moments where one wonders if a firm editor would have caused the wording to be reconsidered. For example:
The fundamentalists even rejected the constitutionalism of the exiled Manuel II and proposed a Miguelite absolutist as candidate for the vacant throne. The anti-semitism of the 1920s into Portuguese politics.
Am I being dense, or is that a fragmentary sentence that needs more words and context to make sense?
He was Salazar's most tenacious political rival and had the Catholic-led politicians failed to sustain the conservative consensus Norton de Matos would probably have been the focus for a masonic-led coalition of military and civilian interests.
I'm dubious about blatantly speculative statements such as this in history books. What does it add? By what sources is it supported? Is this really the best possible standard of academic rigour?
Barroso came to world attention when Portugal hosted a meeting on the Azores Islands in the mid-Atlantic at which George Bush and Tony Blair agreed to invade Iraq, thereby precipitating a catastrophic disintegration in the Middle East.
Why did this sentence continue after the word 'Iraq'? The 'disintegration' observation tells us nothing of Portuguese history and is too simplistic to tell us anything of Middle Eastern or world history. It suggests a lack of editorial discipline. And would it not have been better to specify George W. Bush rather than George Bush for the benefit of clarity? Then, in the very next sentence:
In Europe Barroso became a compromise candidate for the presidency when France vetoed an Irishman and Britain retaliated by barring any French nominee.
Why did Britain have cause to 'retaliate' here? Who was this candidate? A Northern Irishman and hence a British citizen, or a Republican Irishman and therefore not a British Citizen, in which case what was Britain's relationship with him? This may not be an important point but it lacks clarity, and if it isn't clear it should be re-written or not included.
The notes provide a number of sources for further reading, though most of these are decades old and one wonders what other options are available incorporating more recent scholarship.
All in all, this is not the book it could be but it gets the job done.
April 9, 2022
Um livro com um foco sócio-económico da História de Portugal. É interessante na medida da narração ser composta por uma autor estrangeiro, ficamos com uma visão de como alguém de fora nos vê. O livro aborda os principais momentos da história portuguesa mas peca em alguns aspectos que gostaria de mencionar: a escassez de conteúdo artístico e cultural do país; um andar para trás e para a frente dos factos históricos (sendo de difícil compreensão para um leitor sem conhecimento na temática); e por fim, a meu ver o que mais me incomodou, o cariz opinativo da história onde por vezes a imparcialidade pareceu não estar a ser respeitada.
Tratando-se do dito anteriormente a minha opinião, não pretendo desencorajar a leitura desta obra, mas sim como português dar o meu parecer do conteúdo desta.
Tratando-se do dito anteriormente a minha opinião, não pretendo desencorajar a leitura desta obra, mas sim como português dar o meu parecer do conteúdo desta.
August 29, 2025
Competent, very dry overview of the history. Not engaging but provides the key facts. Birmingham is evidently a poor writer whom no one has bothered to edit; he has a pathological aversion to commas.
August 4, 2024
Not very well-written, though this gets better in the more recent parts of the book. A heavy focus on 18th century and later (especially economic) history, while almost entirely skipping the Middle Ages, the Age of Discoveries and completely avoiding cultural history.
April 23, 2022
Concisa demais, precisa de menos. Nada linear, dificulta a leitura fluida.
October 28, 2024
Probably one of the best historical narratives. Such brevity and allegory!
April 7, 2023
Dry as Lucy's australopithecine bones. The first, 25-ish-page chapter covers everything from the Stone Age (in a sentence) to the 1600s, all but sweeping them under the rug--including Roman and Moorish presence in the region. Major personalities are flattened. No women or anyone outside the nobility of potential interest is even mentioned. And, just like with my history book about Puerto Rico, the text feels amazingly dismissive of Portugal's presence/importance in the global economy and politics. With all the continuing emphasis on its trade deficits, particularly with England, one could get the impression that Portugal was always a struggling backwater, an impression at odds with the colonial-powered displays of wealth seen in Portugal itself.
Anyway, I managed to finish the book before my trip to Portugal, and my knowledge of Pombal and Salazar did indeed come in handy, but I'm not used to having so few factoids and personalities of interest to share. Should have read "Queen of the Sea," a popular book about the history of Lisbon, but I made the mistake of going for an academic book about the entirety of Portugal.
Quote/Fact Roundup because there were plenty of interesting things, just not the kind of facts that interest your average fellow tourists.
p. 22) I would have loved more details about the 1383 revolution of the peasants against the barons and the burghers against the crown. A king was elected! A bishop was lynched! All of this was over in less than a page.
p. 27) Also wanted more info about three royal Avis brothers who seemed to perfectly represent different facets of Portuguese society: Edward/Duarte, Peter/Pedro, and Henry/Henrique.
p. 27) Fascinated to learn that up to 10% of the population of a major city was black thanks to the African slave trade. As an USian, I think of that kind of proportion as an Americas phenomenon. A lack of protection from rape meant that this population blended into the general Portuguese population over the years.
p. 57) I had no idea the Inquisition went on so long (1600s), in part because it became a tool with which landowners opposed industrialization, in part because they thought the crown might use industry as an independent source of income--which led to/exacerbated that trade deficit.
p. 86) By the time of the earthquake in 1755, Pombal used the Inquisition to target anyone he considered an enemy of the state. He also ended persecution of Jews and Portugese slavery--not out of benevolence, of course, but to keep black slaves working in Brazil and permit everyone to contribute to economic growth, regardless of their religious background.
p. 99) I only just learned about the astounding evacuation of the entire Portuguese court to Brazil...and it's over in less than a paragraph. Still, it was interesting to hear of the Portuguese rebelling not only against French occupation but, eventually, against their British allies who filled the vacuum left by the royal court while kicking Napoleon out.
p. 128) "In many respects the revolutionary era had been an unstable one. In thirty-one yars there had been forty governments." Good lord.
p. 152-153) Apparently the 1910 October revolution was barely acknowledged. From how Birmingham makes it sound, the government quietly changed overnight from monarchy to republic. "A trade union newspaper barely mentioned the event."
p. 166) "While priests, monarchists and soldiers were shrewdly incorporated into the elite which underpinned Salazar's authority, the illiterate majority were kept firmly in ignorance, not only as a policy of monetarist saving, but also as a form of social control." Always uncomfortable to find parallels with fascist countries and the present moment in the U.S.
p. 171) Classic colonial emphasis in the 1940s on cash crops (empire-domestic cotton) over needed food led to two famines and subsequent revolts, which eventually led to the rebellion that ended colonial rule. I was interested to hear how long the empire lasted. As other colonial empires were crumbling, Portugal gave one last (very unsuccessful) push toward revitalizing it. An interesting "what if" to think about, if they'd done it responsibly.
p. 209) Sadly, the 2008 economic crisis ended socialist rule and ushered in conservatives "determined to shrink the state and adopt neo-liberal fiscal retrenchment according to Brussels rules. The budgetary policies dictated by Brussels used terms such as 'flexibility' to allow enterprises to enhance profits by reducing labour protection, and 'reform' to cut the proportion of national wealth used for welfare. From being a country with one of Europe's better social and health systems, allowing 50 per cent of its national wealth to be spent on the public rather than the private sector, Portugal, in common with other nations, was driven down the rocky path to austerity." Ugh.
p. 212) I was really fascinated by the paragraph about Portugal's relationship with post-revolution Angola. As Angolan oil grew and the Portuguese economy waned, almost as many Portuguese returned to the former colony for jobs as had worked there in colonial days. Angola had oil money to invest, Portugal was in debt, and Angola started investing in its former colonial overlords. Fascinating.
Anyway, I managed to finish the book before my trip to Portugal, and my knowledge of Pombal and Salazar did indeed come in handy, but I'm not used to having so few factoids and personalities of interest to share. Should have read "Queen of the Sea," a popular book about the history of Lisbon, but I made the mistake of going for an academic book about the entirety of Portugal.
Quote/Fact Roundup because there were plenty of interesting things, just not the kind of facts that interest your average fellow tourists.
p. 22) I would have loved more details about the 1383 revolution of the peasants against the barons and the burghers against the crown. A king was elected! A bishop was lynched! All of this was over in less than a page.
p. 27) Also wanted more info about three royal Avis brothers who seemed to perfectly represent different facets of Portuguese society: Edward/Duarte, Peter/Pedro, and Henry/Henrique.
p. 27) Fascinated to learn that up to 10% of the population of a major city was black thanks to the African slave trade. As an USian, I think of that kind of proportion as an Americas phenomenon. A lack of protection from rape meant that this population blended into the general Portuguese population over the years.
p. 57) I had no idea the Inquisition went on so long (1600s), in part because it became a tool with which landowners opposed industrialization, in part because they thought the crown might use industry as an independent source of income--which led to/exacerbated that trade deficit.
p. 86) By the time of the earthquake in 1755, Pombal used the Inquisition to target anyone he considered an enemy of the state. He also ended persecution of Jews and Portugese slavery--not out of benevolence, of course, but to keep black slaves working in Brazil and permit everyone to contribute to economic growth, regardless of their religious background.
p. 99) I only just learned about the astounding evacuation of the entire Portuguese court to Brazil...and it's over in less than a paragraph. Still, it was interesting to hear of the Portuguese rebelling not only against French occupation but, eventually, against their British allies who filled the vacuum left by the royal court while kicking Napoleon out.
p. 128) "In many respects the revolutionary era had been an unstable one. In thirty-one yars there had been forty governments." Good lord.
p. 152-153) Apparently the 1910 October revolution was barely acknowledged. From how Birmingham makes it sound, the government quietly changed overnight from monarchy to republic. "A trade union newspaper barely mentioned the event."
p. 166) "While priests, monarchists and soldiers were shrewdly incorporated into the elite which underpinned Salazar's authority, the illiterate majority were kept firmly in ignorance, not only as a policy of monetarist saving, but also as a form of social control." Always uncomfortable to find parallels with fascist countries and the present moment in the U.S.
p. 171) Classic colonial emphasis in the 1940s on cash crops (empire-domestic cotton) over needed food led to two famines and subsequent revolts, which eventually led to the rebellion that ended colonial rule. I was interested to hear how long the empire lasted. As other colonial empires were crumbling, Portugal gave one last (very unsuccessful) push toward revitalizing it. An interesting "what if" to think about, if they'd done it responsibly.
p. 209) Sadly, the 2008 economic crisis ended socialist rule and ushered in conservatives "determined to shrink the state and adopt neo-liberal fiscal retrenchment according to Brussels rules. The budgetary policies dictated by Brussels used terms such as 'flexibility' to allow enterprises to enhance profits by reducing labour protection, and 'reform' to cut the proportion of national wealth used for welfare. From being a country with one of Europe's better social and health systems, allowing 50 per cent of its national wealth to be spent on the public rather than the private sector, Portugal, in common with other nations, was driven down the rocky path to austerity." Ugh.
p. 212) I was really fascinated by the paragraph about Portugal's relationship with post-revolution Angola. As Angolan oil grew and the Portuguese economy waned, almost as many Portuguese returned to the former colony for jobs as had worked there in colonial days. Angola had oil money to invest, Portugal was in debt, and Angola started investing in its former colonial overlords. Fascinating.
February 26, 2018
Economic - not enough about culture or people
May 22, 2024
Fun and easy read, albeit written in a bit convoluted way which makes it harder to track the order of the events.
While you won't become a thorough expert on Portugese history after this short and meandering book, you'll definitely find lots of insightful bits that will make visiting Portugal feel like a rediscovering adventure. The big themes also become transparent: close ties with England, sovereignty struggles with Spain, religious devotion, colonial economies larger than domestic ones, lack of public education which makes domestic industries hard and cheap labor that emigrates to other countries (especially to the colonies). That signs of these themes are still clearly present in the modern day Portugal, and after reading the book you'd have a context for why things the way they are.
I also really enjoyed the historical analyses and contrast in this book. It didn't really matter that it was Portugal - could have been any other country - but Birmingham did an excellent job presenting multiple sides and points of views on the major reforms and the counter-reforms. It was fascinating to read how and why the reformers succeeded or failed to achieve their goals while maintaining the power. For example, Pompal had lots of progressive and enlightened ideas, but to implement them, he ruthlessly murdered the opposition and consolidated the power. Same with the 20th century dictator Salazar - who used a secret police - the instrument of fear that was so successful in Soviets - though his policies were on the ultra conservative end. Some other reformers failed to achieve quick wins because they needed support of the power holders, who very much preferred the status quo. The book did a great job highlighting how complicated the real world reforming is - it's not as easy and obvious as a typical school history book makes people believe.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book, and would recommend to anyone even vaguely interested in Portugal or European history.
While you won't become a thorough expert on Portugese history after this short and meandering book, you'll definitely find lots of insightful bits that will make visiting Portugal feel like a rediscovering adventure. The big themes also become transparent: close ties with England, sovereignty struggles with Spain, religious devotion, colonial economies larger than domestic ones, lack of public education which makes domestic industries hard and cheap labor that emigrates to other countries (especially to the colonies). That signs of these themes are still clearly present in the modern day Portugal, and after reading the book you'd have a context for why things the way they are.
I also really enjoyed the historical analyses and contrast in this book. It didn't really matter that it was Portugal - could have been any other country - but Birmingham did an excellent job presenting multiple sides and points of views on the major reforms and the counter-reforms. It was fascinating to read how and why the reformers succeeded or failed to achieve their goals while maintaining the power. For example, Pompal had lots of progressive and enlightened ideas, but to implement them, he ruthlessly murdered the opposition and consolidated the power. Same with the 20th century dictator Salazar - who used a secret police - the instrument of fear that was so successful in Soviets - though his policies were on the ultra conservative end. Some other reformers failed to achieve quick wins because they needed support of the power holders, who very much preferred the status quo. The book did a great job highlighting how complicated the real world reforming is - it's not as easy and obvious as a typical school history book makes people believe.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book, and would recommend to anyone even vaguely interested in Portugal or European history.
July 25, 2021
This book hits the sweet spot between Wikipedia entries and and the giant bricks like Chernow's Alexander Hamilton, its only flaw that I see is that it's a bit dry in spots. It has what appears to be a decent bibliography with suggested further readings. Since I'm unfamiliar with Portugal's history, I can't comment on accuracy, but it is fascinating, starting out in the early 1600s, the Thirty Years war is a giant catalyst for change in Europe. Waning Spanish wealth and power allowed Portugal to become a nation and its evolution from a monarchy to a free and prosperous country in the 21st century.
While I won't recap the entire book, I found some surprising facts. In a couple of revolutions, women played important leadership roles, mostly because many of the men had immigrated elsewhere. It's a bit like Ireland, there's a huge Portugese expat community overseas, without looking for it, I have stumbled upon some enclaves in California.
Gold has its normal effect on the country, too much allows rulers to ignore basic industrialism which when combined with slavery, is a long term detriment to culture and economy. Portugal remained as a backwards country because of the inability of the rulers to provide basic infrastructure like roads.
In the 20th century, various dictatorial governments controlled the country, most are similar to fascist regimes elsewhere, but the transfer of power was a peaceful one, they didn't have a civil war. I'm sure that helped make the transition stick.
A great little book, I recommend it to writers looking for a different culture to read up on or people interested in living there.
While I won't recap the entire book, I found some surprising facts. In a couple of revolutions, women played important leadership roles, mostly because many of the men had immigrated elsewhere. It's a bit like Ireland, there's a huge Portugese expat community overseas, without looking for it, I have stumbled upon some enclaves in California.
Gold has its normal effect on the country, too much allows rulers to ignore basic industrialism which when combined with slavery, is a long term detriment to culture and economy. Portugal remained as a backwards country because of the inability of the rulers to provide basic infrastructure like roads.
In the 20th century, various dictatorial governments controlled the country, most are similar to fascist regimes elsewhere, but the transfer of power was a peaceful one, they didn't have a civil war. I'm sure that helped make the transition stick.
A great little book, I recommend it to writers looking for a different culture to read up on or people interested in living there.
June 23, 2025
During a recent trip to Portugal, I was trying to understand why Portugal felt very different from other European countries I have visited. In particular, not to send too patronizing, but I was wondering why there wasn't more "high" culture, e.g., famous paintings and architecture. I was also surprised that the countryside seemed relatively undeveloped. This book fit the bill. Probably not the best history I have read--it felt like an extended Wikipedia entry that might have been written by ChatGPT--but it seemed to summarize the relevant facts and was mercifully short. It turns out that Portugal, at least until recently, has been a lot poorer than the rest of Europe, even Spain, and it has had a particularly chaotic history, including endless wars with Spain and internal civil wars, especially in the last 200 years. Also, hard to know what is cause and effect, but it seems to have suffered from very unequal distribution of land and wealth and poor agricultural productivity. In addition, it was slow to industrialize, perhaps because it lacked scale to launch major industries or it was simply more attractive to invest in its colonies, such as Brazil and Angola, which ultimately was not sustainable. Going back even further, the Inquisition may have been worse and lasted longer in Portugal than in Spain. (As a result, a lot of the Jewish merchant class left for Amsterdam.). All the more amazing that Portugal is so pleasant now!
February 17, 2020
A good, if traditional, fist at the topic that is heavily economic in its coverage. Personally, I think that’s an antidote to many histories - and arguably the whole History profession’s tendency to underplay such factors. Where the book does particularly well is in its evocation of Portugal at the centre of its empire; first in Brazil; later in Africa – although Goa and Macau don’t get too many mentions. The sections on the Salazar dictatorship underplay the role of Fascism and tend to argue for Portugal as a stuffy, old fashioned, hierarchical society during those years, rather than a violent and oppressive one. This may be accurate or it may not.
The book is also largely a history of Portugal as a political entity so the medieval period is given short shrift and I was left wondering how Portugal came to be distinct from the rest of the Iberian peninsula (integration was in fact just as likely as it became for Catalonia and the Basque Region at times). A good primer before a visit to Lisbon (read alongside a viewing of Richard Ayoade’s trip in his Travel Man series and not one that makes any apologies for empire thankfully.
The book is also largely a history of Portugal as a political entity so the medieval period is given short shrift and I was left wondering how Portugal came to be distinct from the rest of the Iberian peninsula (integration was in fact just as likely as it became for Catalonia and the Basque Region at times). A good primer before a visit to Lisbon (read alongside a viewing of Richard Ayoade’s trip in his Travel Man series and not one that makes any apologies for empire thankfully.
March 30, 2022
I was always fascinated by Portugal and Portugese people, nation devoted to the sea and catholicism that created one of the biggest colonial empires that lasted for centauries that is overshadowed by bigger Spain. They deserve to be known more. Concise History of Portugal is good little book that can be great starting point for further reading but on its own it doesn't stand. Very little information is given on middle ages and islamic rule, very little is said about how christianization of Portugal happened (I find this very important information), how did cultural and etnical changes happened that caused split with Spanish people? That and many more questions remain unanswered or barely mentioned. Also very little is said about Goa and Maccau and Portugese conection with feudal Japan and Nagasaki, fascinating subjects but not according to the author. But on the other hand to much of the book is about economy and trade, witch is not bad thing but sometimes it is boring.
I recommend this book to all of people who don't know anything about Portugal but those who do should skip this one.
I recommend this book to all of people who don't know anything about Portugal but those who do should skip this one.
April 10, 2024
A little too concise, and a little too much of a political history for my liking but if you had to read a book on Portugal I guess this might be it, though you would probably be better off reading A.R. Disney's two volume history.
Pays a reasonable amount of attention, though not enough, to the living conditions of the Portuguese and how they lived their lives in response to broader external factors such as the overbearing English economic market's impact on Portugal's stifled development and the earthquake. It often skirts over key events with little information, and I found the single sentence devoted to 1147 particularly irksome as a Medievalist, but it made up for it with some interesting analysis on the long process of industrialisation.
Occasionally Birmingham quotes a source at length and this is very exciting, but happens altogether too infrequently in the book and very often is an English source rather than a Portuguese one. More sources, more focus on arts and culture, more pictures, and more attention to skantly analysed details would have improved the book considerably.
Pays a reasonable amount of attention, though not enough, to the living conditions of the Portuguese and how they lived their lives in response to broader external factors such as the overbearing English economic market's impact on Portugal's stifled development and the earthquake. It often skirts over key events with little information, and I found the single sentence devoted to 1147 particularly irksome as a Medievalist, but it made up for it with some interesting analysis on the long process of industrialisation.
Occasionally Birmingham quotes a source at length and this is very exciting, but happens altogether too infrequently in the book and very often is an English source rather than a Portuguese one. More sources, more focus on arts and culture, more pictures, and more attention to skantly analysed details would have improved the book considerably.
February 18, 2022
Outdated and old fashioned. Birmingham’s book is a limited overview of the political and economic history of Portugal that lacks so much in national character or culture that it could be written about anywhere. In fact his whiggish framework of progress and development and his use of ‘Victorian’ to describe the same era in Portuguese history shows that he is fitting Portugal into an assumed historical model rather than taking its history in its own terms. Having been impressed with a ‘Concise History of Greece’, I was sorely dissapointed by this book. The book is considerably more concise in both length (just over 200 pages) and in content. Not to be recommended for those who want a sense of the country. It often reads like a Wikipedia article rather than a serious introduction. It is badly written, oddly paced and often confusing. Long overdue an update, I am highly surprised that a third edition has recently been published!
October 11, 2023
Achei interessante o livro pela sua proposta de trazer uma perspectiva abrangente da história portuguesa, o que é desafiador. Como algo introdutório para quem.pouci conhecia a história portuguesa acredito que tenha sido útil. Achei a forma de escrever um pouco confusa em alguns momentos, pela narrativa não linear, que me levaram a me confundir em alguns momentos, principalmente nos capítulos finais que tratam do período Salazar e das guerras coloniais.
Para um brasileiro, acostumado a ver a história do Brasil pela ótica brasileira, achei bem interessante o foco dos temas brasileiros pela ótica portuguesa.
No geral acho que livro atende o seu propósito, mas vejo como um livro introdutório para outros que aprofundem alguns determinados períodos.
Para um brasileiro, acostumado a ver a história do Brasil pela ótica brasileira, achei bem interessante o foco dos temas brasileiros pela ótica portuguesa.
No geral acho que livro atende o seu propósito, mas vejo como um livro introdutório para outros que aprofundem alguns determinados períodos.
September 18, 2025
It’s a good overview of Portuguese history but I would skip the last chapter as it’s filled with a lot of unnecessary quips about events having nothing to do with Portugal and treats all things 21st Century Portuguese as perfect. My other fault with the book is that while it addresses the empire in Angola and Mozambique, it barely mentions Cape Verde, São Tomé, or Guinea Bissau; it devotes one sentence to East Timor, and less than a half-dozen to Macau and Goa; and worst of all, barely touches Brazil. Given that Brazil was the seat of the Portuguese Empire, it should have at least gotten a chapter.
If you are wanting a good overview of mainland Portugal through the year 2000, ignoring the impact of its colonial empire, this is it and I recommend it.
If you are wanting a good overview of mainland Portugal through the year 2000, ignoring the impact of its colonial empire, this is it and I recommend it.
July 27, 2020
It reads very much as an economic history of Portugal, although there are also some good aspects of social and general history in it as well. It does have some odd coverage because of this where some aspects of Portuguese history are covered in much depth while others are seemingly skipped over quickly.
August 29, 2023
I read this book because of an upcoming vacation in Portugal, which will be my first time in that nation. The book came recommended to me. While the book is informative, it is dry and is a tough slog. I think the book would benefit from being further broken up into sub-chapters and summary chapters.
February 10, 2020
A tradução da edição da Edipro está horrível.
O livro em si entrega aquilo a que se propõe: um resumo da história de Portugal. Caso o leitor deseje se aprofundar em algum ponto dessa história, ele pode consultar a bibliografia disponível ao final do livro.
O livro em si entrega aquilo a que se propõe: um resumo da história de Portugal. Caso o leitor deseje se aprofundar em algum ponto dessa história, ele pode consultar a bibliografia disponível ao final do livro.
April 28, 2022
This is good summary of the history of Portugal. It is a good blend of scholarly analysis and clear prose. It enables the reader to get a clear understanding of how Portugal has developed and its very different trajectory from Spain. Recommended.
May 20, 2024
Blev læst på min første tur til Portugal nogensinde, men fremstår langt mere tørt informativ end inspirerende. Giver nogle grundlæggende historiske nedslagspunkter men kunne man ikke fået dem lige så godt - og måske endda bedre - end i en wikipedia-artikel?
Read
July 19, 2024A superb and highly readable history of Portugal, a fantastically rich country with an incredible past. this book is a special good on economic and political history; my only gripe is that I wish there was a little bit more on art and literature.
June 26, 2020
Escrita pouco fluída.
Anda para a frente e para trás no tempo sem lógica aparente...
Anda para a frente e para trás no tempo sem lógica aparente...
August 3, 2020
Rather dry, but I learned a lot.
September 25, 2020
Despite some unconformities, overall it is a good approach to the history of my beautiful and peaceful country with its almost 900 years of history...
March 23, 2022
The book is a whirlwind tour of Portuguese history presenting all the relevant information for anyone needing an introduction to the country's history.
December 28, 2022
Looks like written by someone who hates Portugal to the guts
February 14, 2023
Good, concise history of Portugal.
March 14, 2023
Excellent introduction!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews