What do you think?
Rate this book
丕禺鬲乇丕毓 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 丕賱丨丿賷孬 - 氐賳丕毓 丕賱賲賱賵賰
A brilliant narrative history tracing today鈥檚 troubles back to the grandiose imperial overreach of Great Britain and the United States.
Kingmakers is the gripping story of how the modern Middle East came to be, as told through the lives of the Britons and Americans who shaped it. Some are famous (Lawrence of Arabia and Gertrude Bell); others infamous (Harry St. John Philby, father of Kim); some forgotten (Sir Mark Sykes, Israel鈥檚 godfather, and A. T. Wilson, the territorial creator of Iraq). All helped enthrone rulers in a region whose very name is an Anglo-American invention. The aim of this engrossing character-driven narrative is to restore to life the colorful figures who gave us the Middle East in which Americans are enmeshed today.613 pages, Unknown Binding
First published June 9, 2008
33 people are currently reading
622 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 31 reviews
April 27, 2020
賷禺鬲丕乇 丕賱賲丐賱賮丕賳 佟佗 卮禺氐賷丞 乇卅賷爻賷丞 賱毓亘鬲 丿賵乇丕 賰亘賷乇丕 賮賷 鬲卮賰賷賱 丕賱丿賵賱 賮賷 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱丕賵爻胤 賵兀賮乇賷賯賷丕.
丕賱賲丐賱賮丕賳 賷賳馗乇丕賳 亘廿毓噩丕亘 丕賱賶 賴匕賴 丕賱卮禺氐賷丕鬲 賵丕賱鬲賷 賯丿賲鬲 禺丿賲丕鬲 賰亘賷乇丞 丕賱賶 兀賵胤丕賳賴丕 丕賱廿賲亘乇賷丕賱賷丞 賵丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇賷丞 囟丕乇亘賷賳 亘毓乇囟 丕賱丨丕卅胤 賲丕 兀爻賮乇鬲 毓賳賴 賴匕賴 丕賱兀毓賲丕賱 賲賳 囟丨丕賷丕 亘乇賷卅丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱氐乇丕毓.
丕賱鬲卮丿賯 亘丕賱丿賷賲賯乇丕胤賷丞 賵孬賲 丕賱丕賳賯賱丕亘 毓賱賶 丨丕賰賲 噩丕亍 亘丕賳鬲禺丕亘丕鬲 賮賯胤 賱丕賳賴 賱賲 賷賵丕賮賯 毓賱賶 爻賷丕爻丕鬲賴賲 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳鬲 鬲丨賯賯 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲 賲孬賱 丕賱丕賳賯賱丕亘 毓賱賶 賲氐丿賯 賮賷 丕賷乇丕賳.
丕賵 賲賳丿賵亘 爻丕賲賷 賷賲丿丨賵賳賴 賱丕賳賴 丨爻賳 丕賯鬲氐丕丿 丿賵賱丞 賵乇賮毓 廿賳鬲丕噩賴丕 賮賷 丨賷賳 賱賲 賷賯賲 亘亘賳丕亍 賲丿乇爻丞 賵丕丨丿賴 丕賵 噩丕賲毓丞 賱乇賮毓 賲爻鬲賵賶 丕賱鬲毓賱賷賲 賱卮毓亘賴丕 丕賱睾丕乇賯 賮賷 丕賱噩賴賱.
賲丕 丕賱匕賷 賷賯賳毓賳丕 丕賳 爻賷丕爻賷 賮賷 亘賱丿 毓乇亘賷 賷毓賲賱 賲丕 賮賷 賵爻毓賴 賱鬲丿賲賷乇 亘賱丿 賲丕 賵丕丨鬲賱丕賱賴 賲賳 丕噩賱 丕賳 賷毓賷卮 賴匕丕 丕賱卮毓亘 賮賷 乇賮丕賴賷丞 賵丨乇賷丞 孬賲 鬲兀鬲賷 丕賱賳鬲丕卅噩 賰丕乇孬賷丞 賵丕賱卮毓亘 丕賱匕賷 爻賲丨 賱賴賲 亘廿丨鬲賱丕賱 亘賱丿賴 賷賮賯丿 丕丨鬲乇丕賲賴 賱匕丕鬲賴.
丕賵 鬲賳氐賷亘 賲賱賵賰 賵乇丐爻丕亍 毓賱賶 卮毓賵亘 賱丕 鬲毓乇賮賴賲 賵賱丕 鬲丨亘賴賲貙 亘賱 賷毓賲賱賵賳 毓賱賶 鬲賱賲賷毓賴丕 賵賴賷 賱丕 鬲毓乇賮 卮賷卅賸丕 毓賳 丕賱卮毓亘 丕賱匕賷 爻鬲丨賰賲賴貙 賵亘丕賱賳賴丕賷丞 賷賮賯丿 賴匕丕 丕賱丨丕賰賲 丕丨鬲乇丕賲賴 賱賳賮爻賴 賵丕丨鬲乇丕賲 卮毓亘賴 賵賷亘毓丿 毓賳賴 賳賴丕卅賷丕 賵賷賴鬲賲 亘丕賱賱賴賵. 賵賲氐賱丨鬲賴 賵賲氐賱丨丞 毓丕卅賱鬲賴.
賰丕賳 兀賵賱賶 賲賳 丕賱賲丐賱賮丕賳 爻乇丿 丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 亘賳丕亍丕 毓賱賶 丕賱賵孬丕卅賯 丕賱鬲賷 丕賮乇噩 毓賳賴丕 賲賳 丕賱丿賵丕卅乇 丕賱乇爻賲賷丞 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賵賷鬲乇賰 丕賱丨賰賲 賱賱賯丕乇賷亍 . 亘丿賱賸丕 賲賳 丕鬲賴丕賲 丕賱卮毓賵亘 亘毓丿賲 丕賱丕賲鬲賳丕賳 賱賲丕 賮毓賱鬲賴 賴匕賴 丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賲丨鬲賱丞 賵丕賱鬲賷 爻賱亘鬲 禺賷乇丕鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱卮毓賵亘 賵鬲乇賰鬲賴 賮乇賷爻丞 賱賱丨乇賵亘 賵丕賱賳夭丕毓丕鬲.
賲毓 匕賱賰 賮丕賱賰鬲丕亘 噩賷丿 賵賷賰卮賮 禺賮丕賷丕 賲賴賲丞 賱鬲兀爻賷爻 亘毓囟 丕賱丿賵賱 賵丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 丕賱鬲賷 乇丕賮賯鬲賴丕 賵丕賱賲丐丕賲乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨丿孬鬲.
丕賱賲丐賱賮丕賳 賷賳馗乇丕賳 亘廿毓噩丕亘 丕賱賶 賴匕賴 丕賱卮禺氐賷丕鬲 賵丕賱鬲賷 賯丿賲鬲 禺丿賲丕鬲 賰亘賷乇丞 丕賱賶 兀賵胤丕賳賴丕 丕賱廿賲亘乇賷丕賱賷丞 賵丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇賷丞 囟丕乇亘賷賳 亘毓乇囟 丕賱丨丕卅胤 賲丕 兀爻賮乇鬲 毓賳賴 賴匕賴 丕賱兀毓賲丕賱 賲賳 囟丨丕賷丕 亘乇賷卅丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱氐乇丕毓.
丕賱鬲卮丿賯 亘丕賱丿賷賲賯乇丕胤賷丞 賵孬賲 丕賱丕賳賯賱丕亘 毓賱賶 丨丕賰賲 噩丕亍 亘丕賳鬲禺丕亘丕鬲 賮賯胤 賱丕賳賴 賱賲 賷賵丕賮賯 毓賱賶 爻賷丕爻丕鬲賴賲 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳鬲 鬲丨賯賯 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲 賲孬賱 丕賱丕賳賯賱丕亘 毓賱賶 賲氐丿賯 賮賷 丕賷乇丕賳.
丕賵 賲賳丿賵亘 爻丕賲賷 賷賲丿丨賵賳賴 賱丕賳賴 丨爻賳 丕賯鬲氐丕丿 丿賵賱丞 賵乇賮毓 廿賳鬲丕噩賴丕 賮賷 丨賷賳 賱賲 賷賯賲 亘亘賳丕亍 賲丿乇爻丞 賵丕丨丿賴 丕賵 噩丕賲毓丞 賱乇賮毓 賲爻鬲賵賶 丕賱鬲毓賱賷賲 賱卮毓亘賴丕 丕賱睾丕乇賯 賮賷 丕賱噩賴賱.
賲丕 丕賱匕賷 賷賯賳毓賳丕 丕賳 爻賷丕爻賷 賮賷 亘賱丿 毓乇亘賷 賷毓賲賱 賲丕 賮賷 賵爻毓賴 賱鬲丿賲賷乇 亘賱丿 賲丕 賵丕丨鬲賱丕賱賴 賲賳 丕噩賱 丕賳 賷毓賷卮 賴匕丕 丕賱卮毓亘 賮賷 乇賮丕賴賷丞 賵丨乇賷丞 孬賲 鬲兀鬲賷 丕賱賳鬲丕卅噩 賰丕乇孬賷丞 賵丕賱卮毓亘 丕賱匕賷 爻賲丨 賱賴賲 亘廿丨鬲賱丕賱 亘賱丿賴 賷賮賯丿 丕丨鬲乇丕賲賴 賱匕丕鬲賴.
丕賵 鬲賳氐賷亘 賲賱賵賰 賵乇丐爻丕亍 毓賱賶 卮毓賵亘 賱丕 鬲毓乇賮賴賲 賵賱丕 鬲丨亘賴賲貙 亘賱 賷毓賲賱賵賳 毓賱賶 鬲賱賲賷毓賴丕 賵賴賷 賱丕 鬲毓乇賮 卮賷卅賸丕 毓賳 丕賱卮毓亘 丕賱匕賷 爻鬲丨賰賲賴貙 賵亘丕賱賳賴丕賷丞 賷賮賯丿 賴匕丕 丕賱丨丕賰賲 丕丨鬲乇丕賲賴 賱賳賮爻賴 賵丕丨鬲乇丕賲 卮毓亘賴 賵賷亘毓丿 毓賳賴 賳賴丕卅賷丕 賵賷賴鬲賲 亘丕賱賱賴賵. 賵賲氐賱丨鬲賴 賵賲氐賱丨丞 毓丕卅賱鬲賴.
賰丕賳 兀賵賱賶 賲賳 丕賱賲丐賱賮丕賳 爻乇丿 丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 亘賳丕亍丕 毓賱賶 丕賱賵孬丕卅賯 丕賱鬲賷 丕賮乇噩 毓賳賴丕 賲賳 丕賱丿賵丕卅乇 丕賱乇爻賲賷丞 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賵賷鬲乇賰 丕賱丨賰賲 賱賱賯丕乇賷亍 . 亘丿賱賸丕 賲賳 丕鬲賴丕賲 丕賱卮毓賵亘 亘毓丿賲 丕賱丕賲鬲賳丕賳 賱賲丕 賮毓賱鬲賴 賴匕賴 丕賱丿賵賱 丕賱賲丨鬲賱丞 賵丕賱鬲賷 爻賱亘鬲 禺賷乇丕鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱卮毓賵亘 賵鬲乇賰鬲賴 賮乇賷爻丞 賱賱丨乇賵亘 賵丕賱賳夭丕毓丕鬲.
賲毓 匕賱賰 賮丕賱賰鬲丕亘 噩賷丿 賵賷賰卮賮 禺賮丕賷丕 賲賴賲丞 賱鬲兀爻賷爻 亘毓囟 丕賱丿賵賱 賵丕賱丕丨丿丕孬 丕賱鬲賷 乇丕賮賯鬲賴丕 賵丕賱賲丐丕賲乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨丿孬鬲.
March 24, 2023
Karl E. Meyer and Shareen Blair Brysac鈥檚 Kingmakers provides a dozen portraits of British and American colonialists whose actions shaped the Middle East, for good or (mostly) for ill. The book starts with Lord Cromer鈥檚 tenure as Proconsul in Egypt, establishing a much-copied system of 鈥渋ndirect rule鈥� where the British allowed local rulers to manage a country鈥檚 day-to-day workings while 鈥渁dvising鈥� behind the scenes. From there, the authors chronicle a variety of colorful figures, using their lives as a window into specific regions, countries and peoples impacted by their actions. Some of the figures discussed here are well-known, like T.E. Lawrence of Arabia and his distaff counterpart Gertrude Bell, who played a crucial role in the creation of modern Iraq, or Paul Wolfowitz, whose 2003 invasion wrecked the same country. Meyer and Brysac also discuss less-remembered individuals like H. St. John Philby, the diplomat and explorer who converted to Islam and became an adviser to Ibn Saud (his son, Kim Philby, gained even greater notoriety as a Soviet spy); John Glubb, the stolid soldier who organized Jordan鈥檚 Arab Legion which served as a safeguard of that Kingdom鈥檚 independence and an assurance of continuing British influence; Sir Percy Sykes, who engineered a coup d鈥檈tat in 1920s Persia and Kermit Roosevelt, the CIA operative who repeated the performance against Mohammed Mossadegh three decades later. Meyer and Brysac鈥檚 cameo portraits of these and other figures (Charles Gordon, Sir Percy Cox, Emir Faisal, Chaim Weitzmann and others flit through chapters not directly involving them) are colorful and convincing, showing how imperialism was driven by a variety of motives. Capitalist exploitation, paternalist liberalism, geopolitical fears of an enemy (whether Ottoman Turkey, Imperial Germany, the Soviet Union or various pan-Arab and Islamic movements) gaining power in the region, expediency (as in the Balfour Declaration, portrayed here as the brainchild of Sir Mark Sykes who elsewhere carved up the Middle East with France) and often inscrutable personal motivations. Not all of the chapters are equally compelling; Arnold T. Wilson is credited with creating modern Iraq when his own featured chapter puts more emphasis on Sir Percy Cox, while the chapter about imperial 鈥減ower couple鈥� Lord and Lady Lugard focuses strangely on a digressive account of the Jameson Raid in South Africa. Still, Meyer and Brysac鈥檚 account reinforces Forster鈥檚 comment that 鈥淓nglishmen like posing as Gods鈥�; even those with good intentions or noble motives treat Arabs, Turks, Persians and Jews as pawns or playthings with little regard for how they might feel about, or react to foreign meddling. As such, Kingmakers offers a case study in the long, corrosive impacts of imperialism, and how the impersonal machinations of states are compounded by shortsighted cynicism, individual egos and personal folly.
April 15, 2014
丕亘鬲丿兀鬲 丕賱丨賰丕賷丞 賲毓 丕賱賲爻鬲卮乇賯賷賳 丕賱匕賷賳 賲賴丿賵丕 賱丨乇賰丞 丕賱鬲亘卮賷乇 賮賷 賳賴丕賷丕鬲 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱鬲丕爻毓 毓卮乇貙 賴丐賱丕亍 丕賱賲亘卮乇賵賳 丕賱匕賷賳 賵囟毓賵丕 丕賱禺胤賵胤 丕賱毓乇賷囟丞 賵賲賴丿賵丕 賱丕賲亘乇丕胤賵乇賷丕鬲賴賲 賱丕賯鬲爻丕賲 鬲乇賰丞 丕賱乇噩賱 丕賱賲乇賷囟 賮賷 丕爻賷丕 (丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷丞)貙 毓賳丿賲丕 亘丿兀鬲 丕賱鬲胤賱毓丕鬲 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇賷丞 丕賱賶 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賳胤賯丞 鬲賲 丕乇爻丕賱 毓賲賱丕丐賴賲 賵噩賵丕爻賷爻賴賲 賱賷丿乇爻賵丕 賵賷禺胤胤賵丕 賵賷鬲丌賲乇賵丕 賵賲賳 孬賲 賱賷囟毓賵丕 丕賱禺胤賵胤 毓賱賶 噩爻丿 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賳胤賯丞 賵賷賯鬲爻賲賵賴丕. 賰丕賳賵丕 丿亘賱賵賲丕爻賷賵賳 賲賳 丕賱丿乇噩丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞貙 氐丨丕賮賷賵賳貙毓賱賲丕亍 丌孬丕乇貙 賲丐乇禺賵賳貨 爻賲賽賾賴賲 賲丕 卮卅鬲貙 亘丿兀鬲 丕賱賱毓亘丞 賵鬲賲 鬲丨囟賷乇 丕賱毓賲賱丕亍 賵丕爻鬲賲乇鬲 丕賱賲丐丕賲乇丞貙 賰丕賳鬲 賲氐丕賱丨賴賲 賮賵賯 賰賱 賲氐賱丨丞貙 鬲睾賳賵丕 亘丕賱丿賷賲賵賯乇丕胤賷丞 賵丕賱丨乇賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 爻賵賮 賷噩賱亘賵賳賴丕 賱丕賴賱 丕賱亘賱丕丿貙 囟乇亘賵丕 毓賱賶 賵鬲乇 丕賱噩賴賱 賵丕賱鬲禺賱賮 丕賱匕賷 爻賷乇賮毓賵賳賴 毓賳 毓丕鬲賯賳丕貙 賵賱賰賳 丕亘丿丕賸 賱賲 鬲賰賳 賳馗乇鬲賴賲 賱賳丕 丕賱丕 賳馗乇丞 丕賱爻賷丿 丕賱賲鬲賰亘乇 丕賱匕賷 賱賳 賵賱賲 賷賳馗乇 丕賱賶 賳賮爻賴 賳馗乇丞 丕賱賲爻丕賵丕丞 賲毓 賲賳 賷馗賳 丕賳賴賲 丿賵賳賴 賮賷 丕賱毓乇賯.
賴賱 丕賳鬲賴鬲 丕賱賱毓亘丞貙 賴賱 鬲賵賯賮 丕賱睾乇亘 毓賳 賳馗乇鬲賴 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賱丕卅賷丞貙 賴賱 鬲賵賯賮鬲 丕胤賲丕毓賴 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賳胤賯丞責 賱丕 丕毓鬲賯丿 匕賱賰 賮賲丕 夭丕賱鬲 丕賱賰毓賰丞 賰丕賲賱丞 丕賱丿爻賲 鬲購睾乇賷 丕賱噩賲賷毓 亘兀禺匕 賯胤毓丞 賲賳賴丕貙 賵賱丕 毓夭丕亍 賱丕賴賱 丕賱賰毓賰丞 丕賱匕賷賳 賮乇胤賵丕 亘丨賯賵賯賴賲 賵丕賲賰賳賵丕 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲乇 賲賳 乇賯丕亘賴賲貙 賱賯丿 丌賳 丕賱丕賵丕賳 丕賳 賷爻鬲賷賯馗 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賵賷賳賴囟 賮賷 胤乇賷賯 丕賱鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 乇亘賯丞 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇貙 賵賰賲丕 賯丕賱 丕賱卮賴賷丿 丕賱賲乇丨賵賲 爻賷丿 賯胤亘: 匕賴亘 丕賱丕賳噩賱賷夭 丕賱丨賲乇 賵丕鬲賶 丕賱丕賳噩賱賷夭 丕賱爻賲乇. 賵丕鬲賶 賲賳 亘毓丿賴賲 賰賱 兀賮賾丕賯 丕賱賶 賴匕賴 丕賱丕乇囟 丕賱胤賷亘丞 丕賱胤丕賴乇丞 賱賷丿賳爻賴丕 賵丕賴賱賴丕 賲丕 夭丕賱賵丕 賳丕卅賲賷賳.
賴賱 丕賳鬲賴鬲 丕賱賱毓亘丞貙 賴賱 鬲賵賯賮 丕賱睾乇亘 毓賳 賳馗乇鬲賴 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賱丕卅賷丞貙 賴賱 鬲賵賯賮鬲 丕胤賲丕毓賴 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賳胤賯丞責 賱丕 丕毓鬲賯丿 匕賱賰 賮賲丕 夭丕賱鬲 丕賱賰毓賰丞 賰丕賲賱丞 丕賱丿爻賲 鬲購睾乇賷 丕賱噩賲賷毓 亘兀禺匕 賯胤毓丞 賲賳賴丕貙 賵賱丕 毓夭丕亍 賱丕賴賱 丕賱賰毓賰丞 丕賱匕賷賳 賮乇胤賵丕 亘丨賯賵賯賴賲 賵丕賲賰賳賵丕 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲乇 賲賳 乇賯丕亘賴賲貙 賱賯丿 丌賳 丕賱丕賵丕賳 丕賳 賷爻鬲賷賯馗 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賵賷賳賴囟 賮賷 胤乇賷賯 丕賱鬲丨乇乇 賲賳 乇亘賯丞 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇貙 賵賰賲丕 賯丕賱 丕賱卮賴賷丿 丕賱賲乇丨賵賲 爻賷丿 賯胤亘: 匕賴亘 丕賱丕賳噩賱賷夭 丕賱丨賲乇 賵丕鬲賶 丕賱丕賳噩賱賷夭 丕賱爻賲乇. 賵丕鬲賶 賲賳 亘毓丿賴賲 賰賱 兀賮賾丕賯 丕賱賶 賴匕賴 丕賱丕乇囟 丕賱胤賷亘丞 丕賱胤丕賴乇丞 賱賷丿賳爻賴丕 賵丕賴賱賴丕 賲丕 夭丕賱賵丕 賳丕卅賲賷賳.
June 24, 2010
A fascinating treatment of a complex subject. Meyer's study encompasses over twelve decades and the theatres of Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudia Arabia, Jordan, and Lebanon, seeking understanding of how the Near East states evolved from oppressed Ottoman provinces to the unstable polities of the 21st century. His principal mechanism is to center chapters on specific personalities (e.g. Bell, Copeland, Lawrence, Wolfowitz -- almost all engaging, attractive and noble) who pushed for outcomes that invariably turned sour. I was intrigued by the myths and misconceptions that this narrative exposes - among them that Euro-American interventions were typically choices between unpalatable indigenous factions, that interventions were as often engineered by the political left as the right, that oil politics came into play well after foreign interventions reached their maturity, and that a great deal of damage had already been done by the Turks. Meyer reaches a bleak and even patronizing conclusion: that no matter how pure the motive, there was no way to "win": that these polities were too far degraded by the end of WW1 to expect anything other than corrupt and brutish regimes to characterize the Near East.
August 31, 2014
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 噩賷丿
睾賳賷 亘丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲
賵賴賵 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 氐賳丕毓 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 丕賱丨丿賷孬 賲賳匕 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱鬲丕爻毓 毓卮乇 賵丨鬲賶 丕丨鬲賱丕賱 丕賱毓乇丕賯 賮賷 2003
賷爻乇丿 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰賲 賴丕卅賱 賲賳 丕賱賲丐丕賲乇丕鬲 賵丕賱丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 丕賱爻乇賷丞 賵丕賱賲卮亘賵賴丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀丿鬲 廿賱賶 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 亘卮賰賱賴 丕賱丨丕賱賷
丕賱賲毓賷亘 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賵 禺乇賵噩賴 毓賳 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 賮賷 賲賵丕囟毓 賰孬賷乇丞,
賵丨丿賷孬賴 毓賳 兀禺亘丕乇 卮禺氐賷丞, 兀賵 爻賮爻胤丕鬲 賮賱爻賮賷丞 賱丕鬲賮賷丿 丕賱賯丕乇卅 (丨爻亘 乇兀賷賷),
賵賴賵 賲丕 噩毓賱賴 賷賯毓 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱丨噩賲 丕賱賰亘賷乇 (616 氐賮丨丞(
賰匕賱賰 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷毓乇囟 賵噩賴丞 丕賱賳馗乇 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賮賷 賲賵丕囟賷毓 鬲賴賲 丕賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱毓乇亘賷,
賲孬賱 賯囟賷丞 賮賱爻胤賷賳, 賵賷亘丿賷 丌乇丕亍賴 賮賷 卮禺氐賷丕鬲 睾賷乇鬲 賲噩乇賶 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱毓乇亘賷
賵賮賯丕賸 賱賱乇丐賷丞 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞, 丿賵賳 兀賳 賷毓胤賷 兀丿賳賶 丕賴鬲賲丕賲 賱賱賳氐賮 丕賱丌禺乇 賲賳 丕賱氐賵乇丞 ( 丕賱乇兀賷 丕賱毓乇亘賷(
廿賳賾 丕賱賯丕乇卅 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賱丨馗 賲丿賶 丕賱鬲賯丕乇亘 賮賷 丕賱賵賯丕卅毓 賵丕賱兀丨丿丕孬
亘賷賳 賲丕 賷噩乇賷 丕賱賷賵賲 賮賷 丕賱毓乇丕賯 賵爻賵乇賷丕 賵賲氐乇, 賵賲丕噩乇賶 賯亘賱 賯乇賳 賲賳 丕賱夭賲丕賳
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 睾賳賷 亘丕賱賵賯丕卅毓 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞, 廿賱兀 廿賳賴 賷噩亘 兀賳 賱丕 賷丐禺匕 賰賵孬賷賯丞,
禺丕氐丞賸 毓賳丿賲丕 賷鬲毓賱賯 丕賱兀賲乇 亘賲賳 賷賲孬賱 丕賱禺賷乇 (丕賱睾乇亘 賵噩賵丕爻賷爻賴:丨爻亘 乇兀賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘)
賵賲賳 賷賲孬賱 丕賱卮乇 (丕賱賲卮乇賯 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷)
睾賳賷 亘丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲
賵賴賵 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 氐賳丕毓 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 丕賱丨丿賷孬 賲賳匕 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱鬲丕爻毓 毓卮乇 賵丨鬲賶 丕丨鬲賱丕賱 丕賱毓乇丕賯 賮賷 2003
賷爻乇丿 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰賲 賴丕卅賱 賲賳 丕賱賲丐丕賲乇丕鬲 賵丕賱丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 丕賱爻乇賷丞 賵丕賱賲卮亘賵賴丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀丿鬲 廿賱賶 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 亘卮賰賱賴 丕賱丨丕賱賷
丕賱賲毓賷亘 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賵 禺乇賵噩賴 毓賳 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 賮賷 賲賵丕囟毓 賰孬賷乇丞,
賵丨丿賷孬賴 毓賳 兀禺亘丕乇 卮禺氐賷丞, 兀賵 爻賮爻胤丕鬲 賮賱爻賮賷丞 賱丕鬲賮賷丿 丕賱賯丕乇卅 (丨爻亘 乇兀賷賷),
賵賴賵 賲丕 噩毓賱賴 賷賯毓 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱丨噩賲 丕賱賰亘賷乇 (616 氐賮丨丞(
賰匕賱賰 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷毓乇囟 賵噩賴丞 丕賱賳馗乇 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賮賷 賲賵丕囟賷毓 鬲賴賲 丕賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱毓乇亘賷,
賲孬賱 賯囟賷丞 賮賱爻胤賷賳, 賵賷亘丿賷 丌乇丕亍賴 賮賷 卮禺氐賷丕鬲 睾賷乇鬲 賲噩乇賶 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱毓乇亘賷
賵賮賯丕賸 賱賱乇丐賷丞 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞, 丿賵賳 兀賳 賷毓胤賷 兀丿賳賶 丕賴鬲賲丕賲 賱賱賳氐賮 丕賱丌禺乇 賲賳 丕賱氐賵乇丞 ( 丕賱乇兀賷 丕賱毓乇亘賷(
廿賳賾 丕賱賯丕乇卅 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賱丨馗 賲丿賶 丕賱鬲賯丕乇亘 賮賷 丕賱賵賯丕卅毓 賵丕賱兀丨丿丕孬
亘賷賳 賲丕 賷噩乇賷 丕賱賷賵賲 賮賷 丕賱毓乇丕賯 賵爻賵乇賷丕 賵賲氐乇, 賵賲丕噩乇賶 賯亘賱 賯乇賳 賲賳 丕賱夭賲丕賳
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 睾賳賷 亘丕賱賵賯丕卅毓 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞, 廿賱兀 廿賳賴 賷噩亘 兀賳 賱丕 賷丐禺匕 賰賵孬賷賯丞,
禺丕氐丞賸 毓賳丿賲丕 賷鬲毓賱賯 丕賱兀賲乇 亘賲賳 賷賲孬賱 丕賱禺賷乇 (丕賱睾乇亘 賵噩賵丕爻賷爻賴:丨爻亘 乇兀賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘)
賵賲賳 賷賲孬賱 丕賱卮乇 (丕賱賲卮乇賯 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷)
June 12, 2016
I was expecting a history of Western influence on the modern Middle East, but that's not quite what I got. Meyer and Brysac instead have written a dozen short biographies of various British and Americans who had a hand in shaping of the Middle East. It almost works, but there's a good bit of overlap and plenty of holes. It also focuses more on the British than the Americans (nine to three). The biographical material is interesting, but there's not always a lot of depth and where there is depth it's often the result of tangents rather than the main subject.
August 15, 2015
丕賱賰孬賷乇 噩丿丕賸 賲賳 "丕賱乇睾賶 " 賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 賰孬賷乇丞 賱丕 兀噩丿 爻亘亘丕賸 賱匕賰乇賴丕 賮賶 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱匕賶 賱丕 賷鬲賳丕賵賱 鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲賳胤賯丞 亘賯丿乇 賲丕 賷鬲賳丕賵賱 丕賱卮禺氐賷丞 丕賱丕賲亘乇賷丕賱賷丞 丕賱亘乇賷胤丕賳賷丞 賲賳 禺賱丕賱 賳賲丕匕噩 賲鬲毓丿丿丞 賱噩賳賵丿 賵 賯丕丿丞 賵 賲睾丕賲乇賷賳 賵毓賲賱丕亍 丕爻鬲禺亘丕乇丕鬲 氐賳毓賵丕 亘爻賷賵賮 丕賱丕賲亘乇丕胤賵乇賷丞 賵 匕賴亘賴丕 賵丕賯毓 賳毓賷卮丞 ..
*丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲爻賱賶 賵孬乇賶 賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲賷丕賸 賵 賱賰賳丞 賲賱賶亍 亘丕賱丕禺胤丕亍 丕賱賮丕丿丨丞 氐丨丨 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳賴丕 丕賱賲鬲乇噩賲 賵 鬲乇賰 亘毓囟賴丕
*丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲爻賱賶 賵孬乇賶 賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲賷丕賸 賵 賱賰賳丞 賲賱賶亍 亘丕賱丕禺胤丕亍 丕賱賮丕丿丨丞 氐丨丨 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳賴丕 丕賱賲鬲乇噩賲 賵 鬲乇賰 亘毓囟賴丕
July 2, 2020
Orta Do臒u tarihi 眉zerine okudu臒um en ilgin莽 kitaplardan biri diyebilirim..
Kitab 1882-de 陌ngilizlerin M谋s谋r谋 i艧gal etmesi ile ba艧l谋yor. Asl谋nda M谋s谋r 陌ngilis ve Osmanl谋 delegesinin birge y枚netimine tabi k谋l谋n谋r ama bunlar asl谋nda bir 枚rtmece. Ger莽ekte ise 眉lkeyi sadece 陌ngilizler y枚netiyor ve s谋kl谋kla M谋s谋rda 莽谋kacaklar谋na dair s枚zler verirler. Ama M谋s谋r Osmanl谋lar谋n Alman saf谋nda Birinci D眉nya Sava艧谋na kat谋lmas谋 ile resmen 陌ngilier taraf谋ndan i艧gal olunur. M谋s谋r谋n ilk genel valisi Lord Cromer (Evelyn Baring) olmu艧tur. M谋s谋rda milliyet莽ilerin ezeli d眉艧man谋 olmu艧 bir adamd谋r Lord Cromer. Kitap Orta Do臒uda kral yaratm谋艧 yabanc谋 艧ahsiyetler 眉zerinden, bir nevi biyografi temelli Orta Do臒u tarihi kitab谋d谋r ama bu sizi aldatmas谋n. Zira 艧ahsiyetler s谋ralamas谋 b枚lgenin tarihi ile kesin uyumludur. Osmanl谋ya isyan etmi艧 araplar谋 ve Mekke 艧erifi Melik H眉seyni y枚nlendirmi艧 T. E. Lawrence (nam谋-di臒er Arab Lawrence), H眉seyinle 1916 boyunca M谋s谋rdan mektupla艧m谋艧 Henry McMahon, Faysal谋 Irak kral谋 yapan, Irak谋n s谋n谋rlar谋n谋 d眉zenleyen ve Faysal i莽in ta莽 giyme t枚reni d眉zenleyen Gertrude Bell ve daha ba艧ka bir莽ok ingiliz ve amerikal谋y谋 anlat谋yor. G眉n眉m眉z Orta Do臒usunun yarat谋lmas谋nda eme臒i ge莽en yabanc谋 ve emperyalist zihniyyeti, Mark Sykes ve George Picout taraf谋ndan Orta Do臒unun parxalanmas谋n谋 temel alan Sykes-Picout anla艧mas谋n谋 Orta Do臒uyu kana boyayan Balfour deklarasyonunu da unutmamak gerek. Kitap Amerikan谋n Irak i艧galinin mimar谋 Paul Wolfowitz ile son buluyor. Yazarlar olabilidi臒ince tarafs谋z olmaya 莽al谋艧m谋艧 ve Orta Do臒unun kana bulanmas谋n谋n nedenlerinin ad谋 ge莽en 艧ah谋slar oldu臒unu anlatmaya 莽al谋艧m谋艧lar. Orta Do臒u konusuna ilgi duyan herkesin rahatl谋kla okuyabilece臒i bir kitap.
Kitab 1882-de 陌ngilizlerin M谋s谋r谋 i艧gal etmesi ile ba艧l谋yor. Asl谋nda M谋s谋r 陌ngilis ve Osmanl谋 delegesinin birge y枚netimine tabi k谋l谋n谋r ama bunlar asl谋nda bir 枚rtmece. Ger莽ekte ise 眉lkeyi sadece 陌ngilizler y枚netiyor ve s谋kl谋kla M谋s谋rda 莽谋kacaklar谋na dair s枚zler verirler. Ama M谋s谋r Osmanl谋lar谋n Alman saf谋nda Birinci D眉nya Sava艧谋na kat谋lmas谋 ile resmen 陌ngilier taraf谋ndan i艧gal olunur. M谋s谋r谋n ilk genel valisi Lord Cromer (Evelyn Baring) olmu艧tur. M谋s谋rda milliyet莽ilerin ezeli d眉艧man谋 olmu艧 bir adamd谋r Lord Cromer. Kitap Orta Do臒uda kral yaratm谋艧 yabanc谋 艧ahsiyetler 眉zerinden, bir nevi biyografi temelli Orta Do臒u tarihi kitab谋d谋r ama bu sizi aldatmas谋n. Zira 艧ahsiyetler s谋ralamas谋 b枚lgenin tarihi ile kesin uyumludur. Osmanl谋ya isyan etmi艧 araplar谋 ve Mekke 艧erifi Melik H眉seyni y枚nlendirmi艧 T. E. Lawrence (nam谋-di臒er Arab Lawrence), H眉seyinle 1916 boyunca M谋s谋rdan mektupla艧m谋艧 Henry McMahon, Faysal谋 Irak kral谋 yapan, Irak谋n s谋n谋rlar谋n谋 d眉zenleyen ve Faysal i莽in ta莽 giyme t枚reni d眉zenleyen Gertrude Bell ve daha ba艧ka bir莽ok ingiliz ve amerikal谋y谋 anlat谋yor. G眉n眉m眉z Orta Do臒usunun yarat谋lmas谋nda eme臒i ge莽en yabanc谋 ve emperyalist zihniyyeti, Mark Sykes ve George Picout taraf谋ndan Orta Do臒unun parxalanmas谋n谋 temel alan Sykes-Picout anla艧mas谋n谋 Orta Do臒uyu kana boyayan Balfour deklarasyonunu da unutmamak gerek. Kitap Amerikan谋n Irak i艧galinin mimar谋 Paul Wolfowitz ile son buluyor. Yazarlar olabilidi臒ince tarafs谋z olmaya 莽al谋艧m谋艧 ve Orta Do臒unun kana bulanmas谋n谋n nedenlerinin ad谋 ge莽en 艧ah谋slar oldu臒unu anlatmaya 莽al谋艧m谋艧lar. Orta Do臒u konusuna ilgi duyan herkesin rahatl谋kla okuyabilece臒i bir kitap.
December 8, 2012
Full disclosure, I skipped about 100 of this book鈥檚 420 pages, and then read the conclusion, but I鈥檓 calling it close enough. Mostly because chugging through the 300-some pages I did read was punishment enough that I feel I鈥檝e earned it.
Which is not to say that this is a bad book. I think the book was a good idea, badly handled. The title sort of illustrates the problem, as 鈥渢he invention of the modern Middle East鈥� implies a historical narrative, while 鈥淜ingmakers鈥� implies a series of biographical portraits. The book ends up trying to do both and the outcome is a muddle.
I imagine that the book nonetheless works for many people; I however was not among them. A story of the shaping of the Middle East over a century or so would be interesting to me, but in Kingmakers the thread of that story was chopped up and maddeningly difficult to follow. One of the biggest problems was, probably, that many of the figures profiled were contemporaries whose kingmaking activities overlapped, and as a result the same events were repeatedly half-told two or three or four times, rather than told well, and clearly, once.
Another problem is that the biographies largely failed because they were also choppy but, moreover, just weren鈥檛 interesting. Lawrence of Arabia I鈥檝e heard of, and I knew the name Sykes, but most of the other kingmakers were not individuals I had a personal interest in. This can be overcome if one first clearly introduces why a person should be interesting, after which even relatively pedestrian details of that person鈥檚 life can become interesting because they are about that interesting person rather than the schmoe down the street. But Kingmakers didn鈥檛 pull off this trick.
Which is a pity, not only because of how I was disappointed with a book I鈥檝e had on my list for some time, but because there is good and important information and analysis in this book. I will admit that, as a citizen of one of the imperialist nations whose misdeeds figure prominently in Middle Eastern history, Kingmakers is strong drink. Reactionaries might never imagine it, but even a liberal American like myself gets little joy out of recitation of our government鈥檚 fucking over of people and nations. It鈥檚 still demoralizing even if you believe it鈥檚 accurate.
And I was familiar with much of this, already; fact is I don鈥檛 think I was really put off this book because it said bad things about America so much as by the awkward and clumsy way in which it said them. The first half of the book is largely about British meddling, and I found most of that at least as painful in spite of having a perverse ability, I will confess, to read about British imperialist aggression with a sort of cheery, sports contest perspective. Didn鈥檛 help, here; Kingmakers was just a tiresome slog regardless of whose country was doing the kingmaking.
Still, as I say, there is informative and intelligent content to be found in here. The epilogue to the book was a stirring, if too-late, redemption of the clumsy main chapters. One quote in particular stands out:
Which is not to say that this is a bad book. I think the book was a good idea, badly handled. The title sort of illustrates the problem, as 鈥渢he invention of the modern Middle East鈥� implies a historical narrative, while 鈥淜ingmakers鈥� implies a series of biographical portraits. The book ends up trying to do both and the outcome is a muddle.
I imagine that the book nonetheless works for many people; I however was not among them. A story of the shaping of the Middle East over a century or so would be interesting to me, but in Kingmakers the thread of that story was chopped up and maddeningly difficult to follow. One of the biggest problems was, probably, that many of the figures profiled were contemporaries whose kingmaking activities overlapped, and as a result the same events were repeatedly half-told two or three or four times, rather than told well, and clearly, once.
Another problem is that the biographies largely failed because they were also choppy but, moreover, just weren鈥檛 interesting. Lawrence of Arabia I鈥檝e heard of, and I knew the name Sykes, but most of the other kingmakers were not individuals I had a personal interest in. This can be overcome if one first clearly introduces why a person should be interesting, after which even relatively pedestrian details of that person鈥檚 life can become interesting because they are about that interesting person rather than the schmoe down the street. But Kingmakers didn鈥檛 pull off this trick.
Which is a pity, not only because of how I was disappointed with a book I鈥檝e had on my list for some time, but because there is good and important information and analysis in this book. I will admit that, as a citizen of one of the imperialist nations whose misdeeds figure prominently in Middle Eastern history, Kingmakers is strong drink. Reactionaries might never imagine it, but even a liberal American like myself gets little joy out of recitation of our government鈥檚 fucking over of people and nations. It鈥檚 still demoralizing even if you believe it鈥檚 accurate.
And I was familiar with much of this, already; fact is I don鈥檛 think I was really put off this book because it said bad things about America so much as by the awkward and clumsy way in which it said them. The first half of the book is largely about British meddling, and I found most of that at least as painful in spite of having a perverse ability, I will confess, to read about British imperialist aggression with a sort of cheery, sports contest perspective. Didn鈥檛 help, here; Kingmakers was just a tiresome slog regardless of whose country was doing the kingmaking.
Still, as I say, there is informative and intelligent content to be found in here. The epilogue to the book was a stirring, if too-late, redemption of the clumsy main chapters. One quote in particular stands out:
Taking hostile ideologies seriously does not preclude seeking the sources of their popular appeal. [鈥 If you were an Iranian, what would you make of the United States? Yes, it is outwardly a free country, and Americans do elect their leaders. But who elects the spy agencies, the Pentagon, the multinational corporations, the masters of the media, the think tanks, and lobbies that鈥攊n the eyes of many Iranians鈥攆orm an interlocking and impenetrable mosaic?Kingmakers, indeed.
July 1, 2015
Meyer and Brysac tell the stories of the founding of the modern countries of the Middle East and their current regimes using the "Great Man" style of history. Beginning with the work of Lord Cromer in Egypt and continuing through to the actions of Paul Wolfowitz in destabilizing Iraq, they relate the backgrounds and adventures (and, yes, that really is the right word) of British and American diplomats, bureaucrats, and spies, mostly unknown to the general public save for Wolfowitz and the famous T.E. Lawrence (of Arabia). The arrogance of these men and women is quite breathtaking. Hardly any of them took the time to understand the people whose fates they were so carelessly plotting and yet their impact on this least stable region of the world is still being felt today.
The authors make some interesting stylistic choices. They have deliberately written the book so that chapters can be read in any order -- though the printed order is roughly chronological and makes good sense. They also, wittingly or not, pick up on the literary styles of the subjects of each chapter. Much of the book reads like British Victorian or Edwardian "Boys Own" tales, not surprisingly given the subjects (even the two Englishwomen). The last chapter on Wolfowitz is cold, detached and analytical, much like the man himself and his writing.
If you are interested in the history of how the British and then American Empires have played at running the world where they were not invited, this is an excellent study. If you'll hear no inconvenient truths about the U.S. and our closest allies, you won't like this at all.
The authors make some interesting stylistic choices. They have deliberately written the book so that chapters can be read in any order -- though the printed order is roughly chronological and makes good sense. They also, wittingly or not, pick up on the literary styles of the subjects of each chapter. Much of the book reads like British Victorian or Edwardian "Boys Own" tales, not surprisingly given the subjects (even the two Englishwomen). The last chapter on Wolfowitz is cold, detached and analytical, much like the man himself and his writing.
If you are interested in the history of how the British and then American Empires have played at running the world where they were not invited, this is an excellent study. If you'll hear no inconvenient truths about the U.S. and our closest allies, you won't like this at all.
January 21, 2016
An interesting approach to a complicated subject. The author never fails to make his 'characters' interesting. As an American I was surprised at how many British subjects had a hand in shaping the region that I have never heard of. The sections on the Americans I had heard of were just as informative. I do feel that the author has a tendency to over simplify how each figure he examines controlled or influenced their respective situations. Obviously the Easterners faced significant challenges in standing up to their Western benefactors/antagonists but the author at times mitigates and down plays how their choices influenced how the West dealt with them. Saying all that, it is still a wonderful and educational read and I would recommend it to anyone with any interest at all in the region, history, or diplomacy.
June 16, 2014
I gave up. Very slow-going. It defeated me.
August 1, 2020
I wish I could give this 3.5 stars because I am truly torn between 3 and 4.... Suffice to say this is a maddening read by brilliant authors who couldn't get out of their own way.
On the positive side, the structure of approaching this from a character-centric point of view is brilliant. Superficially, it is a refreshing change from most history texts covering events or periods of time which often use the unoriginal, but practical, chronological approach to book building. There are tangible downsides to an explicitly chronological approach; firstly, the writing is not explicitly thematic, which is troublesome from a learning perspective; secondly, it is boring. In that respect, Kingmakers hits a home run with its format by disguising its topics within the story of one influential character in each chapter. Another benefit of this approach is that it highlights just how reliant history is on the individual decisions of fallible men and women. McMillan in "Paris 1919" does a wonderful job of highlighting how the Paris Treaty fomented many modern day political quagmires simply because men with egos in dimly lit rooms made impulsive decisions. Kingmakers succeeds in this respect, showing how the very humanness of major players affected their decisions, with repercussions decades later.
The text is, however, unwieldy. The downside to focusing on characters unilaterally, is that some topics/chapters don't fit the mold. The result is some chapters scarcely focus on their namesake and devolve into discussions that are at best related to, and at worst, violently tangential to, the individual you thought you would be learning about. To the learner themselves, this can feel disorienting; a paragraph that branches off to discuss a minor player suddenly turns into a ten page "explainer" making the reader feel like they're lost at sea. The Cromer, Lawrence of Arabia, and Wolfowitz chapters are more mechanical and straightforward while others lack the same discipline, and ultimately, any appeal. The authors also tend to engage in a style of writing that is akin to history professors chatting about a favourite topic at an after-work social, rather than a text meant to objectively delineate a historical topic. Some chapters therefore feel like they're intended for insiders only, with casual name drops and whimsical references about dress style and personality traits. To an expert, this might be enjoyable, and even seen as whimsical; to the common reader seeking to learn, it's maddening to follow.
Ultimately, this book should be read. It is informative, and its underlying thematic goals are achieved. However, one needs to be ready for chapters that are poorly written and disorienting, to gain from other parts of the book that are truly wonderful. On first reflection, I found myself wishing the whole book was more like the epilogue, which was organized and succinct, as if the authors had sobered up from their night of revelry talking about their favourite topic, the making of the Middle East.
On the positive side, the structure of approaching this from a character-centric point of view is brilliant. Superficially, it is a refreshing change from most history texts covering events or periods of time which often use the unoriginal, but practical, chronological approach to book building. There are tangible downsides to an explicitly chronological approach; firstly, the writing is not explicitly thematic, which is troublesome from a learning perspective; secondly, it is boring. In that respect, Kingmakers hits a home run with its format by disguising its topics within the story of one influential character in each chapter. Another benefit of this approach is that it highlights just how reliant history is on the individual decisions of fallible men and women. McMillan in "Paris 1919" does a wonderful job of highlighting how the Paris Treaty fomented many modern day political quagmires simply because men with egos in dimly lit rooms made impulsive decisions. Kingmakers succeeds in this respect, showing how the very humanness of major players affected their decisions, with repercussions decades later.
The text is, however, unwieldy. The downside to focusing on characters unilaterally, is that some topics/chapters don't fit the mold. The result is some chapters scarcely focus on their namesake and devolve into discussions that are at best related to, and at worst, violently tangential to, the individual you thought you would be learning about. To the learner themselves, this can feel disorienting; a paragraph that branches off to discuss a minor player suddenly turns into a ten page "explainer" making the reader feel like they're lost at sea. The Cromer, Lawrence of Arabia, and Wolfowitz chapters are more mechanical and straightforward while others lack the same discipline, and ultimately, any appeal. The authors also tend to engage in a style of writing that is akin to history professors chatting about a favourite topic at an after-work social, rather than a text meant to objectively delineate a historical topic. Some chapters therefore feel like they're intended for insiders only, with casual name drops and whimsical references about dress style and personality traits. To an expert, this might be enjoyable, and even seen as whimsical; to the common reader seeking to learn, it's maddening to follow.
Ultimately, this book should be read. It is informative, and its underlying thematic goals are achieved. However, one needs to be ready for chapters that are poorly written and disorienting, to gain from other parts of the book that are truly wonderful. On first reflection, I found myself wishing the whole book was more like the epilogue, which was organized and succinct, as if the authors had sobered up from their night of revelry talking about their favourite topic, the making of the Middle East.
January 1, 2023
Having previously read another book by the same authors on the Great Game (competition between Imperial Russia and UK for dominion in central Asia) I was intrigued when I saw they had written another one. Examining how the countries and governments of Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia came to be though the lives of important 鈥榖ehind the scenes鈥� British and American people of influence was fascinating. Kingmakers would be great for anyone wishing to gain a greater understanding of the history and politics of this complex region. I would highly recommend it.
August 22, 2022
Kingmakers was a solid piece of history, going over the major western individuals in the formation of the modern Middle East. What I wished it did better was be more comprehensive and focused on a narrative that did not leave as many gaps. Also wish had chapters focused on individuals from the Middle East rather than just imperialists.
May 15, 2019
Narrative/personality driven look at Anglosphere involvement in the Middle East - mostly the many, many mistakes. At times challenging to follow for someone (like me) with limited background on the history, especially British colonial history, in the region.
December 28, 2019
NICE BOOK.
October 1, 2014
This book is in-depth enough to offer an easy to follow guide on how the western powers used the difficulties already in place and then did their worst to form many of the additional on-going problems in the Middle East.
Well researched. Excellent comparisons. Fine conclusion expressed in this excerpt: 鈥溾€merican鈥elf-flattering image of a City on the Hill whose special qualities has made the United States freer, wiser, and purer than its sovereign sisters鈥︹€�, sums up the continuing misdirected political philosophy of many leaders in the United States who make the policy for the entire country.
Consciousness raising, yes. Well worth the read. I鈥檒l be keeping it in my personal library.
Well researched. Excellent comparisons. Fine conclusion expressed in this excerpt: 鈥溾€merican鈥elf-flattering image of a City on the Hill whose special qualities has made the United States freer, wiser, and purer than its sovereign sisters鈥︹€�, sums up the continuing misdirected political philosophy of many leaders in the United States who make the policy for the entire country.
Consciousness raising, yes. Well worth the read. I鈥檒l be keeping it in my personal library.
June 13, 2010
This is an important, well researched book - I just could not get into reading it throughly - perhaps because I had just read two non-fiction, well researched books that were written in a more "reader friendly, less text-book kind of style ... I think I should try this again later and I'll bet I give it a way better rating ... sometimes, for me personally, what I have just read influences what I think about other books.
January 10, 2017
Fascinating series of sketches about the lives and actions of the Europeans and Americans who created the modern Middle East during and after the First World War, including TE Lawrence, Gertrude Bell, Churchill, and many more. Absolutely fascinating. Well research and well written. Each chapter focuses on a single person and you can read them in any order. Well worth reading for anyone trying to understand the motivations of the people there and the history of the region.
September 25, 2008
Beautifully written and with aspirations to finding wisdom in the study of history. I have read the chapter (12) on Paul Wolfowitz and the wonderfully understated epilogue.
I hope to read more of this and will report back.
I hope to read more of this and will report back.
April 5, 2009
Very interesting, but I found parts of it a little hard to read. There was so much information in some of his sentences I had trouble following them! Someone with a better knowledge of the history of this area might do better!
March 16, 2009
A very readable history of the modern Middle East, narrated in the form of short biographies of the Western "kingmakers" from Lord Cromer to Paul Wolfowitz, who have influenced modern Middle Eastern history.
March 31, 2009
Looked interesting. Well written! In depth history. Different than Robert Lacey's House of Sa'ad..yet covers some common history.
Currently reading
May 21, 2010stories about countries as buffers in the great game and some of the (mostly british) people that made these stories.
July 8, 2012
A fun read about how the Brits shaped the modern Middle East.
September 10, 2016
Some of the chapters are good. Some suck. Could have used another passover by a good editor.
February 1, 2016
Good book. But writing is a bit slow.
Read
April 9, 2024賷氐賮 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰賷賮 鬲賲 丕賳卮丕亍 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 鬲丨鬲 賴賷賲賳丞 丕賱睾乇亘 賵賲賳 兀噩賱 鬲丨賯賷賯 賲氐丕賱丨賴 賵賰賷賮 鬲賲賰賳 亘毓囟 賲賵馗賮賶 賴匕丕 丕賱睾乇亘 賲賳 氐賳丕毓丞 賯賷丕丿丕鬲 亘賱丿丕賳賴 孬賲 鬲丿毓賶 賴匕賴 丕賱兀賯胤丕乇 丕賱丨乇賷丞 賵丕賱丕爻鬲賯賱丕賱
January 10, 2025
賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 賰孬賷乇丞 賵 賯氐氐 丕賰孬乇
賱賲 鬲噩丿 丕亘賱睾 賲賳 丕賱毓亘丕乇丞 丕賱賵丕乇丿丞 賮賷 賳賴丕賷丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰禺賱丕氐丞 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賰賱賴 :
丕賱賲丕囟賷 亘賱丿 丕噩賳亘賷 賷賮毓賱 賮賷賴 丕賱賳丕爻 丕賱丕賲賵乇 亘卮賰賱 賲禺鬲賱賮
賱賲 鬲噩丿 丕亘賱睾 賲賳 丕賱毓亘丕乇丞 丕賱賵丕乇丿丞 賮賷 賳賴丕賷丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰禺賱丕氐丞 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賰賱賴 :
丕賱賲丕囟賷 亘賱丿 丕噩賳亘賷 賷賮毓賱 賮賷賴 丕賱賳丕爻 丕賱丕賲賵乇 亘卮賰賱 賲禺鬲賱賮
Displaying 1 - 30 of 31 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.