Customer Reviews

The New Penguin History of the World: Fourth Edition

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I feel that two things need to be accepted if this book is going to be appreciated.

First:

Roberts one-way-or-another justifies the emphasis that he places on Europe (and especially Western Europe) and (later) on America in account of the fact that these areas are largely influential in the world today. In this sense, it is more a history of the modern world - and of events that brought this about - rather than of the world as it may have been at any selected time in history. Given this logic, areas like China, for example, tend to receive attention more proportional to Roberts' assumptions on their place in the world at the time of writing, rather than in respect to how powerful and influential they may once have been (or may soon become).

Accordingly, this history starts off more-or-less in the traditional way, with much emphasis being placed on the early Middle Eastern / Mediterranean civilisations (the Sumerians, the Egyptians, the Greeks, etc). It then progresses comfortably to the rise and fall of Rome (and the Greco-Roman Empire) and then to the tumultuous rise of (especially Western) Europe to world supremacy. As we know, this then passes on to America and (for a while) Russia.

All the other main players, such as Japan, China, India, and the Ottoman Empire (to name only a handful) receive their due chapters (often with much emphasis on how they affected or otherwise failed to affect Europe). Then of course such civilisations as those once belonging to the Americas get their coverage partly because we've heard of them, partly because it's important to see how Western civilisations swept them away, and partly (I venture to say) because without the Americas the book would hardly seem geographically balanced.

What I am getting at here is that this book might disappoint some people who want for a more balanced perspective on history, but it shouldn't significantly bother anyone who is happy to read the chain of events as outlined above. As I have already touched upon, some justification can be found in the fact that Roberts is really more interested in giving us a history as far as it has shaped today's world. Another thing to bear in mind is that it is merely a one volume book, and as such much of these limitations are quite unavoidable. This is the first thing that a reader must come to accept if he or she is going to enjoy this book (and readers who are looking for a more balanced and thorough account need to appreciate that they will ultimately have to read a great many related books). After all, there is much history to be understood from this book, even if it cannot hope to fit the whole history of the world so neatly into only one volume.

Second:

The other thing to accept or appreciate is more a matter of the book's register. For example, it may help if the reader already has some general historical knowledge; it is very much a book for people who are already fascinated by history. (There are much more entertaining reads for those who are relatively new to the subject. Try something by Giles Milton, or read something more specific - say, about WWII, or any other particular history that interests you.) In other words, I doubt this is a book to inspire in the uninitiated a new found love for historical literature, but if you already have this love then this book will do much to further your interest and consolidate your knowledge.

By way of another example, I am at the moment two-thirds of the way through reading 'The Penguin History of Europe', by J.M. Roberts - I have already read many similar histories (such as 'Europe: A History', by Norman Davies) - and I find Roberts' style to be very similar in both books. It is in no way nearly as balanced or compulsive as other reads (Davies' book is brilliant for this), but it is thorough, educational, and mostly enjoyable, and it keeps me turning the pages. However, it may say something to add that I have read perhaps seven or eight other books since starting on this one if only to keep it light, and so neither reads are easy.

Overall, 'The New Penguin History of the World' is a thoroughly good book. It is mostly interesting, always educational, and it pretty much accomplishes what it sets out to do. If you can accept the near-inevitable Western emphasis on this book, and if you are already something of a history buff, then I am sure that you will fully enjoy this read. I may have found it a challenge - sometimes getting through a chapter could be nearly overwhelming - but this reflects more on the depth of the work than on the style in which it is written. It is much to say for the book that despite the density of the thing it kept me happily turning the pages for weeks on end.

This is the last edition of the book there will be. Roberts died soon after he finished this book. The original one volume "History of the World" was the best one volume world history book in existence. The update is well worth the price for it as well. I own several editions of the book.

I would compare the excellence in quality of the book to the 11 volume "Story of Civilization" series by Wil Durant. Of course, Durant's works are in many cases outdated today. Roberts updated his work in order to "fix" things where evidence has leaned one-way or-another over the last several years, as well as to bring it up-to-date with the fall of the Soviet Union and the new global supremacy of the United States.

Of course, Roberts only hits the highlights. But he doesn't ignore anything; even so-called minor issues are discussed. In many ways, he is outlining how the modern world came to be the way it is. All too much of what passes for history now a days is really little more than gossip about minor events in the relatively recent past. The grand sweep of historical events is often lost. Looking at well sells as history books today can make one cringe that somebody would read something, let alone write it.

Because people lack and true appreciation and understanding of history, they seem to be electing leaders who also lack the willingness to learn from past events. Democracy is on - at the very lest - a tenitive rise. Leaders need to know how Rome or Britain affected things in the modern political landscape. Churchill made decisions that are still being played out in the Middle East and Iraq today. Roman and even ancient Greek leaders had to deal with the issues of in the Balkans in southeast Europe over two-millennia ago. You can't fully understand the former Yugoslavia without understanding Roman province carving and its long term affects on world history.

How can leaders hope to make the best decisions if they don't understand the causes of the original problems? And since democratically elected leaders are, at least in the West, the norm now, people need to understand history in order to recognize people who understand it.

Roberts tries to restore the grand scope to the matter of human history. Something people and our political leaders seem to have very much lost sight of now. True History, the whys and wherefores need more attention.

Not having read his older version I have no idea how it compares or how much has been changed and/or added. My first attempt at a straight through read of a book on the subject, I am confident I made a good choice in picking up this particular book.

Some have said that this book suffers from an over-abundence of euro-centrism. I would disagree. If your conception of a fair portrayl of world history is the collection of "national" (for lack of a better word) histories each given an equal amount of attention (or even an amount of attention proportinate to their achievments within their borders), then this book will certainly not satisfy you. In this book, great civilazations (such as the chinese, japanese, and native americans) that were more isolationist in ideology get compartively little attention because they contributed compartively little to the lives of those living outside their oversight. Therefore, in selecting national histories to focus on, Roberts spends a large portion of the time discussing the history of europeans because they played a large role ("for better or for worse" he acknowledges) in the histories of other people. That europeans, for better or for worse, have succeded more then any other people in spreading their idealogies and influences is less a matter of opinion and more a matter of fact.


So if you are interested in a 1200-page, slightly sophisticated introduction to world history, with a particular focus on war and economics, I would heartily recommend this book.

There are two ways to write history, one as a tapestry that follows the threads of social themes continuously through the ages, the other as a mosaic that jumps from major event and personality to major event and personality. The New Penguin History of the World is solidly in the first camp, more a social history tracing such things as economics, politics, and religion than a compendium of the events that resonate most loudly in our past. Each approach has its pros and cons. The mosaic can oversimplify as the author attempts to crystallize long term and continuous trends into discrete events but it also provides clear milestones of major changes and their consequences. The tapestry can weave a more continuous story of important topics one at a time but can veil as much as it reveals. Sadly this book veils and clouds a lot more than I think it has to.

For the positive I cannot give the book anything less than four stars because it is simply a breathtaking achievement, literally a history of the world from "cave-man" times (obviously analysis of anthropological evidence and not "events") to around 2007 (updated by a second author for the more recent years after Mr. Roberts' passing.) It also does an excellent job of filtering out the most important aspects of such a giant topic, and even at 1188 pages of densely packed text can only scratch the surface. In the end you will be put on an excellent footing for further reading on nearly any subject of history and to be able understand it in its comprehensive context by reading this book. It is thus eminently worth it. (Even though, it can literally take months to read.)

However some negatives did detract. Although a "tapestry" as explained above it doesn't really draw any sweeping conclusions of convincing or profound nature (it does make a small few attempts), something of a lost opportunity given its amazing scope. As a matter of fact he is rather open about tending to avoid such conclusions. Any judgement from history would be non-final and arguably biased but I would rather hear the author's best and most insightful stab at it and then think over whether I agree or disagree than be left with nothing to mull over. However this is not to say that he doesn't provide any attempts at explanation, he does sometimes, and it's a sad disappointment that the whole world appears a nail. Mr. Roberts wields the hammer of "overpopulation" and this becomes the reason for every ill almost any society throughout history has encountered. Demography is certainly one of the most powerful forces driving history on a scale such as this, but the author seems to lack any imagination or will to attempt other perhaps more plausible explanations for many world events. Near the more recent part of the book you can see more clearly that the author also brings a progressive bias. Although there were many small cases (far more praise for Democratic US presidents, backhanded compliments for the Republican ones, reform always being described as necessary and change always described as good, etc.) the thing that struck me most egregiously was that in his page or two on Mao Tze-Tung he spent more time on the fact that Mao wrote poetry than he did on the fact that Mao has the blood of more people on his hands than any other person who has lived in history. Mao is ultimately presented as a great modernizer who made some missteps along the way. A small example, but one that for some reason I felt particularly telling.

Nonetheless the drawbacks do not approach undoing the value of reading the book. A great, solid foundation for learning world history, one that I am glad to have read and makes me interested in further detail reading.

I've been a reading a lot of history in the last few years, each book an in-depth study of a particular period or country or a recurring theme. Quite often I realized that I didn't understand the offstage action, so I went looking for a broad-brush world history to provide some context for my *other* reading. If that's what you are looking for, this book is ideal.

It is Euro-centric. But if you are interested in how events in one part of the world affected another, for long stretches of world history what happened in, say, Japan had no bearing on anyone but the Japanese.

I must sadly agree that there is simply not enough coverage of many regions and their rich histories: Roberts' unfortunately places too much emphasis on the flowering of Europe and its tremendous, ambivalent impact on the rest of the world. For those of us who might have been intrigued by finding out more about the Muslim heritage in SouthEast Asia (and its dialogue with Hinduism, Buddhism and Confucianism) - or the kingdoms of Benin, Congo, or Oman - the book is, on that score, a disappointment.
So why four stars?
Because the book is nonetheless VERY VERY GOOD. Roberts is never dry or dull, and attempts to be judicious and coolly objective. His partisanship is I suspect structural, not rhetorical. Narrative history at its best is enthralling, provocative and entertaining. This is narrative history close to its best.
And those who feel the need to castigate Roberts for any reference to September 11, 2001 should be aware that Roberts mentions that tragic event to argue AGAINST the defining role in world history that many have claimed for it. He is according it its PROPER place against the polemics surrounding it.

It took me two separate mult-week sessions to complete this tome, about 1200 pages of small print, but it was well worth the effort. Reading this book gave me a much better Big Picture grasp of human history. Of course a single book covering thousands of years of history is going to pick and choose what to devote attention to, so anyone can nitpick the choices, but it's really a great accomplishment.

The first half of the book covers pre-history through the Middle Ages, and the second half proceeds from aroung 1500 to present day. Although there is a general focus on the Western world, there is still a good deal written about China, India, and the Muslim world, though certainly not in proportion to population. Africa receives some treatment, but a relatively small amount.

I would probably not recommend this to high school students, unless their attention span is significantly above average. It's well written, but you have to want to learn about the subject.

Summary: well worth the many hours!

The book is helping me reviewing my knowledge on world history, with vivid approaches in simple language. It is specially advisable to people whose mother-tongue is not english as is my case.

Roberts is a master of the broad brush, managing to make world history a page-turner and 1200 pages seem like 300 (or so). Because the subject's so large, it always feels like you're moving at high speed and observing from high above. There's little room for detail, but that's the nature of world history. The beauty of it is that Roberts makes connections and observations of patterns, and we're able to do the same, which wouldn't be possible in a history of smaller scope with more detail (of course, we need both).

One particularly valuable example is the context in which he places the American Revolution and subsequent US expansion. At the time, the revolution was a relatively small matter and Europe was focused on more important things. After the war, Britain controlled the seas and also controlled the territory north of the new nation. With a weak power (Spain) controlling much of the areas south and west, and with France checked by Britain in North America, the US was able to expand in an essentially invisible bubble of protection created by Britain. It was in Britain's interests to let this weak little English-speaking upstart expand rather than allowing another European power to fill the relative void of North America (it doesn't make it right, but one of the European powers would have done it if the US hadn't). A little deflating for our national mythology, but isn't that one of the purposes of history done well?

This is an excellent comprehensive coverage of recorded human history. My views of The New Penguin History of the World are:
(+)Covering all the major events and civilizations with the breadth that their significance deserves. Note that it is all done at an introductory level for obvious space limitations.
(+)Very thorough and comprehensive
(-)Mainly focuses on western history with less attention to the rest of the world so the title may be slightly deceiving.
(-)A more minor issue but still of detrimental value: the publisher must have wanted to maintain this work as a single tome so cramming 1264 pages necessitated the use of a small font. The small font is less comfortable to read but as mentioned above this is a minor issue.