Gelvin’s The Modern Middle East: A History and Cleveland and Bunton’s A History of the Modern Middle East are two excellent books that appear to offer two different, and opposing, approaches to studying Middle Eastern history. The Cleveland text focuses initially on the formation of Islam and early Islamic history, placing the emergence of powerful early empires like the Umayadd and Abbasid empires as a continuation of the conquests of Muhammad and the Rashidun Caliphate. Throughout most of Parts One and Two, Cleveland and Bunton are particulary concerned with the role religion has played in the region.
Gelvin’s introduction, however, states that one of the arguments of his book is that “historians specializing in the Middle East certainly have a story to tell, but it is a global story told in a local vernacular” (Gelvin 2). In the rest of his introduction, Gelvin briefly discusses the formation of groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, pointing out that these organizations are not the fanatical Islamist terrorist groups that reject modernity, but rather, modern unions that offer “alternative approaches to modernity” (Gelvin 6). Furthermore, he argues that al-Qaeda is inherently modern because it shares an outlook and modus operandi with anarchism, since it is a reactive, decentralized organization that attempts to destroy systems that promote modernity, much like nineteenth century European anarchist groups.
But to read these two texts as opposing one another, or as diametrically different, is to miss the fact that they are actually quite similar. Their main difference is not in their overt historiographical approach, but rather in the scope of these approaches. Gelvin’s text shows us a broad picture of the Middle East, taken from a...
... middle of paper ...
...lude from this statement that this is just more evidence of “typical” European colonialism that sought to subjugate local populations and negate their agency. Gelvin complicates this reading by showing how the European powers were engaged in a protracted battle for dominance and in a delicate balancing act between themselves that was played out in several theaters. Combining this with Cleveland’s focus on the local scene, the reader can understand how the Middle East was an integral part of this global story, and specifically, how the Ottoman Empire responded to the emerging modern world economy and the advent of modernity.
Works Cited
1. Gelvin, James L. The Modern Middle East: A History. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
2. Cleveland, William L., and Martin Bunton. A History of the Modern Middle East. 4th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2009.
Ansary, Mir Tamim. Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World through Islamic Eyes. New York: PublicAffairs, 2009. Print.
Lewis, Bernard. The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years. New York: Scribner,
Argo, a movie about the Iran-American conflict of 1979, is primarily set in the Middle East where all the inhabitants are wrongly depicted as full of mindless rage, screaming, irrational, and reasonless mobs. In 1891, French economist and journalist, Paul Leroy-Beaulieu, stated about the colonies of the Orient “a great part of the world is inhabited by barbarian tribes or savages, some given over to wars without end and to brutal customs, and others knowing so little of the arts and being so little accustomed to work and to invention that they do not know how to exploit their land and its natural riches. They live in little groups, impoverished and scattered.” Argo having strikingly similar depictions of Eastern people over a hundred years later raises the question “has the Western perspective of the East changed?”
Cobb, Paul. "Introduction." Ibn Munqidh, Usama. Book of Contemplation Islam and the Crusades. New York: Penguin Books, 2008. xv-xlii.
War and Peace in the Middle East by Avi Shlaim. In the novel War and Peace In the Middle East, author Avi Shlaim argues that Arab nations have been unable to escape the post-Ottoman syndrome. In particular, he describes how the various powers inside and outside the region have failed to produce peace. While some of Shlaim's arguments hinder the message, I agree with his overall thesis that the Middle East problems were caused and prolonged by the failure of both powers and superpowers to take into account the regional interests of the local states.
Print. Doak, Robin. Empire of the Islamic World. Rev. ed.
This marked the beginning of the Palestine armed conflict, one of its kinds to be witnessed in centuries since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War 1. Characterized by a chronology of endless confrontations, this conflict has since affected not only the Middle East relations, but also the gl...
Yapp, Malcolm. The Near East since the First World War: A History to 1995. London: Longman, 1996. Print.
The author exposes how the American and Arabs cultures met and interacted. It is clear that the Arab people did not comprehend the changes they would face. Furthermore, the Americans had to adapt but somehow still overcome religion and tradition. Consequently, the beginning of the oil era brought financial wealth but for the greater part brought painful changes to Arab societies. It is difficult to understand how oil wealth did not completely modernize the Middle East for a greater good. Instead we know about the real situation in both the novel and the real Arab culture and how oil money paired with retroactive empires, old religious beliefs and self-absorbed Western governments took over.
Maynes, Charles. "The Middle East in the Twenty-First Century." Middle East Journal 52.1 (1998): 9-16. JSTOR. Web. 6 June 2011.
G. Esposito, John L (2002) Islam; What Everyone Should Know. New York. Oxford University Press Inc.
Keddie, Nikki R., and Beth Baron. Women in Middle Eastern History: Shifting Boundaries in Sex and Gender. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1991.
Gerner, Deborah J., and Philip A. Schrodt. "Middle Eastern Politics." Understanding the contemporary Middle East. 3rd ed. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008. 85 -136. Print.
In “Back to Napoleon?” Dror Zeevi explores the notion that it was not simply one event, like Napoleon invading Egypt in 1798 that sparked the process of modernization in the Middle Eastern region, but rather it was the result of many internal and external processes interacting together, such as colonialism, that led to the modern Middle East. Throughout his piece, as we discussed in lecture, Zeevi suggests that modernization stems from changes in both epistemology and institution, concluding that we must reconsider why 1798 is the beginning of modernity by instead regarding it as the beginning of the colonial encounter (Class). History is not nearly as simple or as smooth as the Napoleon argument suggests.
...nd Politics." Encyclopedia of the Modern Middle East and North Africa. Ed. Philip Mattar. 2nd ed. Vol. 2. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2004. 890-895. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 24 Jan. 2012.