Customer Reviews

Civilization: A New History of the Western World

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I picked this up with a bit of trepidation: For some time, I'd been feeling the need to refresh my memory of Western Civ, so I welcomed the idea of a well-written five-hundred page survey; but I don't have much sympathy for simple-minded notions of The West as Vile Conqueror, or globalization as The Destroyer of What Matters, that many reviewers impute to the author.

I was pleased, then, to find this book considerably more balanced than the reviews would lead one to expect. I don't think it's entirely fair to say, for instance, that Osborn is "on the side of" what's local, oral, customary, etc., as if he were some sort of ideologue. He certainly presents the costs of universalistic, abstracted, impersonal modes of social organization, and in so doing he makes one realize that the shape the world has taken under old-fashioned notions of "being civilized" need not have been how history developed. But he does seem to appreciate the allure and value, as well as the costs, of "Western civilization," as it's conventionally conceived, and he has lots of good things to say about how Western notions have promoted freedom and self-respect, and especially artistic vigor, among previously-oppressed groups. One comes away with much richer notions of how people make lives.

It is certainly unfair to describe the work as "strident." There's an edge of sorrow and bewilderment to the writing--like, What are we supposed to do now?--and impatience with the sort of Triumphalist tradition in Western Civ that resolutely refuses to think clearly and carefully about the humane costs of our particular way of life and its spread, or to consider the possibility that maybe sometimes, in some parts of the world even today, we'd do well to keep to ourselves our grubby Western ideas of nation-states pursuing written rules and formal processes instead of imposing them at gun point. (Can anyone say, "Iraq"? Anyone who believes that armies can make the Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds, etc., settle down into a stable rule-following nation state really needs to read this book.)

Because the book is balanced and well argued, I find myself less contemptuous of anti-WTO, anti-capitalist arguments than before I read it. "Ah--so that's what those nutty protesters are going on about," I found myself understanding at various points. I found myself thinking it would be most interesting to have Osborn sit down with Amartya Sen for a conversation on development and goodness, and wondered who would come away having more influenced the other.

Reading this book has forced me into some serious reflection on my prior beliefs--and that seems like a worthy reason to recommend any work, to me.

Why only four stars? There were a few places where I couldn't tell whether Osborn was summarizing available data or waxing eloquent with speculation, and there were a few places where I found myself thinking, "You can't possibly know that--no one can." But those are not dominant problems with the book, just occasional irritants.

Osborne's book opens with a nineteen-page "Prologue", which is a helpful summary of his thesis that contributes useful coherence to the remaining 473 pages of historical narrative. The book also has a bibliography for further reading and an index.

In his "Prologue" the author notes that the events of 9/11 and their aftermath have brought the vague idea of Western civilization, a reflection of who we are and what we value, into the foreground, as what we are defending in the war on terror.

But he adds that civilization is not merely a set of virtuous concepts; it is also the effects that these concepts have generated in history, and he therefore offers a historical approach to understanding the meaning of civilization. Thus, an anthropological etymology of the meaning of "civilization".

From the time of the ancient Greeks civilization has been opposed to the barbarianism of other societies. Western historians have typically attempted to trace a thread of European civilization from ancient Greece, through Rome, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and into the nineteenth-century society of the British Empire. And this thread was spun with optimism and the idea of progress.

But the needless and futile carnage of World War I changed the idea of European civilization to one that carries pessimism and the negation of the idea of progress. Freud said of the First World War "It is not that we sank so low, but that we never came so high as we thought." Thus barbarism is not others, but rather is in each man with his base and brutal instincts that can never be expunged, so every man is both civilized and barbarian. Osborne sees this pessimism as a throwback to St. Augustine, who wrote: "Take away the barriers created by laws, men's brazen capacity to do harm, their urge to self-indulgence, would rage to the full."

Osborne's thesis is not a new historical interpretation. For example in his book Rococo to Revolution: Major Trends in Eighteenth-Century Painting (World of Art) (1969), Michael Levey of King's College, Cambridge University, wrote that that the eighteenth century - from Watteau to Goya - saw a violent collision of opposing forces, which was at base a clash between the conscious and the unconscious mind - a very Freudian approach. And he notes that after the fall of the Bastille, optimism and belief in nature as a guide were shot to pieces by the fusillades that followed and that continued to Waterloo.

Nonetheless I enjoy reading a history with a thesis more than reading a chronology of tedious details.

Thomas J. Hickey

Civilization pulls the beard on many classic text on European history like the Durant series I grew up on. This series was written during the Cold War and could not escape from the fear of the time.

The author presents a much needed revision and many intriguing insights. Here's some excerpts:
"Generations of schoolchildren have been taught that waves of invaders from Jutland and west Saxony swept into the east and south of Britain as the Romans withdrew. The Celtic inhabitants of the lowlands were then forced back to the far west and North."
"This story, which is almost entirely untrue, was largely created in the seventh century (i.e. 300 years later) by Bede."

"The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at West Heslerton was placed among Bronze Age burial mounds, and more than 80 percent of the 200 human remains discovered were of people of Celtic, or old British, ancestry -- and none suffered violent deaths or major injuries." (pg. 40-41)
What the author is saying is that what we were taught in high school history was wrong. The Anglo-Saxon invasion was a dilution of cultures not an invasion. An invasion fits nicely with modern misconceptions of European behavior.

The author also explores many new theories about European history and digs deep into European philosophy to understand who we were 10,000 years ago, how we evolved, and thereby discover who we are now. I found many of the new theories fascinating. Many ideas seemed appropriate for our times. Here's an excerpt:
"For three decades from the mid-1840's, free trade seemed to work; the British economy prospered as more controls were lifted and income and other taxes were reduced. It seemed that this was the "natural" way in which an industrial economy should run. But this turned out to be an illusion. It has been convincingly argued (see for example, Gray) that controlled and regulated markets, with their forest of evolving customary restraints, are the product of "natural" human society, brought about by the overriding need for social cohesion, while free markets have to be imposed by a strong authoritarian state." (pg. 350-351).

At the time, the British government was controlled by the East Indian company, the first modern corporation. The worker rebellions of the 1840's, the resulting work of Marx and Engels and even the American Revolution were a response to corporate encroachment on individual freedom.

I found the modern view of the rise of capitalism and the interaction with the age of discovery very engrossing.

European treatment of the natives of America was different than earlier absorption of people in Europe during the early Iron Age and Bronze age. John Keagan, a traditional military historian, would have you believe that all was conquest. To Europeans during the age of discovery, formed by the recent reformation in religion and the explosive growth of nationalism and industrialization, led them to think of the natives as backward, unworthy animals. Wealth, and its entanglement with power, led us to conquer and annihilate rather than absorb. Look at how the Saxons melted peacefully into the culture dominated by the Celts and Romans in southern England. The same can largely be said of the later Norman invasion of England and France.
There was some bloodshed during these periods but it was nothing like the European subjugation of North and especially South and Central America. Capitalism is to blame. Capitalism is a uniquely European invention evolving from Martin Luther and the Reformation. Taking the good with the bad we have the creation of the individual conscience.

Unfortunately, modern capitalism still struggles with the question of morality; the religions born of Martin Luther's 95 thesis have proven a poor answer.

Much of the world took to Western Capitalism easily enough but could not understand its connection with individual conscience. Thus, the Chinese can indulge in stealing, e.g., copying movies, while in headlong pursuit of Capitalism, an evil if unrestrained.
This is an excellent history text and should enjoy a long shelf life. The author has managed to make history interesting again.
If this review was useful, please add your vote.

FOR 27 YEARS I HAVE TAUGHT A FRESHMAN COURSE ON CIVILIZATION, AVERAGING 170 OR SO STUDENTS EACH SEMESTER. FOR MANY YEARS I USED TRADITIONAL CIVILIZATION TEXTBOOKS, BUT FOUND THEM INCREASINGLY ANNOYING: OFTEN DULL, OVER-DETAILED, TERRIFICALLY EXPENSIVE AND, TO ADD INJURY, EDITIONS ARE [UNNECESSARILY AND TRIVIALLY]CHANGED EVERY COUPLE YEARS, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR STUDENTS TO BUY/SELL USED TEXTS. THE EXPENSIVE TEXTS MIGHT BE WORTH IT IF STUDENTS READ THEM, BUT MANY DON'T! SOME YEARS AGO I SWITCHED TO AN UNUSUAL SURVEY TEXT [SEE MY REVIEW ON NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC'S, CONCISE HISTORY OF THE WORLD: AN ILLUSTRATED TIME-LINE, AND ROGER OSBORNE'S CIVILIZATION: A NEW HISTORY OF THE WESTERN WORLD]. THE LATTER IS NEITHER A TRADITIONAL TEXTBOOK OR A COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY, FOR WHICH I AM GRATEFUL, BUT AN ANALYSIS OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION. THE TEXT IS READABLE, INTERESTING AND AT TIMES A PASSIONATE CONDEMNATION OF HISTORIC TRENDS THAT MASQUERADE AS "PROGRESS." WHETHER AN ANALYSIS OF PLATO, ARISTOTLE AND THE RATIONAL MIND, THE RISE OF THE MILITARY STATE, COLONIZATION AND SLAVERY OR, TECHNOLOGY, IDEOLOGY, APOCALYPSE, OSBORNE MAKES THE CASE THAT, "THE HEART OF MAN IS DECEITFUL ABOVE ALL THINGS AND DESPERATELY WICKED" [QUOTING JEREMIAH THE PROPHET, NOT OSBORNE]! MY STUDENTS ACTUALLY LIKE OSBORNE [A STRANGE BUT HAPPY TURN OF EVENTS] AND FIND THEMSELVES PONDERING HOW HIS CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE EVILS OF GLOBALIZATION INTERSECT WITH THEIR LOVE-AFFAIR WITH FAST FOOD AND THE LATEST INTERNATIONAL FASHIONS.

Western civilization is something that most Americans cherish. But is it really something to be admired without analysis, criticism, or perspective? "Civilization: A New History of the Western World" by Roger Osbourne tries to take a full on scholarly approach to western civilization in its entirety. Pulling no punches, it discusses Hitler as much as it does the cure for Polio, and spans from the early Greek states to the events leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. An original work of seminal scholarship, "Civilization" is educational and interesting in its content, making it a 'must' for history buffs and a welcome addition to both academic and community library World History reference collections.

William Grimes in 'The New York Times' has high praise for the narrative power of this work. He claims it reads like a novel and summarizes forty- thousand years of Western history in five - hundred pages.
Osborne comes down hard on Western civilization for dominating native peoples and destroying their cultures. A major example of his is the American treatment of its native Indians. Focusing on this example is perhaps a sign that he is not completely objective and fair when surveying the role of the present standard bearer of Western civilization the United States.

Tim Gardam in the Guardian focuses on another aspect of the work.

"Osborne is on the side of 'the communal, local, interpersonal, instinctive, extemporary and impressionistic aspects of life which are degraded when customary laws give way to written rules, experience to abstraction'. ...The Renaissance is the repository of the myths' about Western civilisation. The Reformation turned the medieval multitude into the lone Protestant pilgrim. This forged the nation state, which provided 'the national interest', a moral alibi for citizens to behave in ways that would shame us individually.
Osborne has written a popular intellectual history but his conclusion that we should not trust the intellectual assumptions on which history is based is too strident to be convincing.. The values of the Enlightenment - individual conscience, rational scepticism, intellectual curiosity - allow us to dissent from our rulers when they co-opt civilisation to their cause."

The sense both these reviewers give is that Osborne's message in analyzing the past twenty years of Western history somehow diminishes the credibility of what both clearly consider a tour- de- force, and a work well- worth reading.

Civilization a New History of the Western World relates the birth and development of what is known as the western civilization or culture. The author, Roger Osborne, starts his examination of the western world with prehistoric Europe and ends up with the post 9-11 world in less than 500 pages. To his credit, Osborne gives new insights in the spiritual, intellectual, social, and artistic life of the western world. Some insights clearly challenge what some readers have learned in school.

Osborne rightly emphasizes that the history of the western civilization has had its ups and downs. History has never been a straight line, but a work in progress. Osborne clearly shows that the Western world tends to consider itself as the lighthouse that wants to bring western values to the rest of humanity regardless of the different views of the local populations on these western values.

Osborne repeatedly deplores the tendency for the West to advertise its modus operandi as the best form of organization and its willingness to use force to exact it. Osborne does not seem to fully accept the reality that the ideas that have conquered the world, more specifically capitalism and democracy, emanate from the West. Furthermore, war is as inevitable as death because the modern state aims to be as efficient as possible to wage war when the opportunity arises to maximize its chance of survival and prosperity.

Globalization forces more and more non-western countries to adapt to the western imperative that has proven to be the most successful, at least with respect to the political and economic arenas.

The book arrived speedily, just in time for my classes! It's in very nice condition and I could probably sell it back to the store on my campus, it looks so good. Thank you!

I suspect that most reviews are disproportionately either 1 or 5 star. This is to be expected, people are more likely to put finger to keyboard if they really like or dislike a work rather than one that doesn't induce strong views.
I'm conscious that I'm writing this review long after the main body of reviews have been written so I am concentrating on two points of negative criticism. I suggest anyone reading this read the other reviews on .com or .co.uk also to get a more complete view.

Western racism in general and (white) American racism in particular is a major theme. Far more space is given to the struggles of African-Americans than to those of other disadvantaged groups. The issue is treated in a somewhat black and white manner. On page 470 we are told "whites used every means they could of, including murder, to prevent black voter registration". A word like "some" or even "many" in front of the word "whites" would not have tarred an entire group with the same brush. On page 482 we are told that "African-Americans are seven times more likely to be jailed" without being told what the African-American crime rates are (e.g. that African-Americans commit murder at about seven times the rate at which white Americans do). On page 490 we are told "that African-American society is the source of the overwhelming majority of cultural innovations in the west".
Really?
African-American society has made a hugely disproportionate contribution to innovation in popular music but in what other area can the same be said?
For me Mr Osborne's coverage of post-WW2 is unbalanced as evidenced by the fact that William Calley, Quentin Tarantino and Hype Williams are deemed worthy of mention but not Norman Borlaug, Neil Armstrong or James Watson.

While the Korean War barely rates a mention Vietnam is dealt with in depth. We are told that the war "quickly became a conflict between outsiders - the Americans - and local people" and that Nixon "managed to involve Cambodia". In conclusion we are told that "(B)y the end of the war in 1973, 58,174 Americans had been killed...it is estimated that around one million Vietnamese soldiers and four million civilians lost their lives".
Now for a writer who writes so much about racism Mr Osborne is guilty of treating the anti-communist Vietnamese as non-existent or, at best, "puppets". Non-Western casualties of the Vietnam War are uncertain but for every American killed about 4 or 5 South Vietnamese soldiers were killed. They don't exist for Mr Osborne. The civilian casualties are generally estimated in the 2 million range and no effort is made to guestimate who killed how many of them. Nixon didn't "involve" Cambodia. The communists did. Nixon escalated it.
Most telling is that he thinks the war ended in 1973 not the actual year of 1975. 1973 was the year American troops withdrew as did, so it would seem, Mr Osborne's interest.

Why then the 3 star rating? Well, as I said, I was concentrating on two specific criticisms. Most of the book I find a solid if unspectacular piece of writing.
Perhaps writers of world or civilizational histories might be better advised to end their narrative a few decades before present but perhaps their motive for getting through the first few millennia is to get to give us a piece of their mind at the end.

Very entertaining book. Glad I purchased it. Author beautifully summarizes major events or people in just a few paragraphs. Examples: St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas. The introductory pages about those who "discovered" America are amazing. Ex. They were only coming to make money, either by taking gold or silver or finding a passage to the Far East, so they could make money.