Thursday, August 10, 2023

Book Review - Major Events in World History

 Like it's similarly titled companion (Major Events in American History), this book was published in 2021. 

Just like the other book (albeit by different authors), this book uses “America” to incorrectly mean the United States only.

Table of contents:

Ancient Civilizations – All 8 sections are about Eurasia. Two of them are potentially not secular, especially “the Life of Jesus” section. There are zero sections about anywhere in the Americas, Africa, or Oceana.

The Middle Ages – Not only is the term “middle ages” Eurocentric (because it refers to a specific time period of European history, not world history), again all 8 are about Eurasia. In fact, 7 of the 8 are about Europe specifically.

The Age of Exploration and Reformation – Again, the title is Eurocentric. This was not a worldwide “age of exploration,” the rest of the world had already experienced that long before Europe. But for Europe this wasn’t even “exploration.” This era was all colonization for Europeans. Reformation was also exclusive to Europe at the time. This is not world history; this is European history. All 4 sections are about Europeans brutally invading other parts of the world. This is the first time the Americas and Africa show up….in the 1400s.

The Age of Revolution and Enlightenment – The title is Eurocentric, yet again. Six of the seven sections are about Europeans or Euro-Americans.

The Age of Imperialism and Industry – Also Eurocentric. All four sections are about Europeans or Euro-Americans.

The World Wars and the Rise of the Modern Era – Every section relates to Europeans or Euro-Americans.

Post World War II and Modern Times – Only two, maybe 3, are about non European/Euro-American histories, but each of those still connects to Europeans/Euro-Americans in some way.

This entire book might as well be called Major Events in European History.

I will skip the introduction summary and dive right into some of the 50 sections. I will skip sections that are not relevant to this review.

“Mesopotamia”

This states that the earliest human civilizations were in Mesopotamia. This is incorrect. There are multiple ancient civilizations around the world that are contemporaries of Mesopotamia. There are multiple independent centers of ancient civilization and agriculture in the world. It also claims that writing, math, time, and maps all began here. Again, not correct. These inventions were independently created in various parts of the world around similar time periods and are not all attributed to or connected to Mesopotamia. We need to move away from “Mesopotamia is where it all began” narratives and recognize that these things developed independently around the world.

“Abraham: The Father of Three Faiths”

This is somewhat not a secular summary of these faiths and incorrectly refers to Judaism and Christianity together as “Judeo-Christianity.” This is largely a US Christian concept that is not widely accepted around the world. This section also ends with the “ten commandments” under the “explore more” section which is explicitly not secular.

“The Greek Empire and Alexander the Great”

This section incorrectly attributes Greek democracy as the foundation of many modern governments. This is a common misconception. Most modern “democracies” (or democratic republics) are not as inspired by Greek democracy as people think. There are many other democratic influences on modern governments that are not from the Greeks.

“The Life of Jesus”

This section is explicitly not secular. It is written as if information about Jesus and his early followers from the bible are known to be historically factual. Many historians do not agree. The “History Revealed” section at the end contains misinformation and has teachings about the trinity.

Several of these sections end with references to the Christian bible that seem out of place, like the Mesopotamia and Babylonia sections. I wouldn’t call this completely secular.

“The Crusades”

This is written in a very pro-Christian biased manner. It makes statements like “European Christians went to Jerusalem to take back the Holy Land from Islamic rule.” (Emphasis mine). That land has always been considered holy to multiple religions, not just Christianity. The section is not entirely accurate about the purpose of the crusades and the harm caused by them. It glosses over a lot of important information about that harm. It also tries to make it sound sort of “nice” in the “history revealed” section at the end.

“Mongolian Invasion of Europe”

This section claims that Genghis Khan conquered Asia…as in all of Asia. While they did conquer and rule a significant area of Asia, it wasn’t the entire continent.

“The Renaissance”

This says it started in Italy but makes blanket statements that makes it sound as if the whole world was experiencing this. It says that it was a time when things like art, science, literature, etc. moved to “the forefront of life.” It should say “forefront of European life.” This also incorrectly attributes many scientific understandings to Europeans. Much of the “scientific revolution” in Europe was driven by information from BIPOC people in other parts of the world. Many things Europeans figured out in that time were already known in other parts of the world.

“Invention of the Printing Press”

This starts off by saying, “It was invented in the early 1400s, although similar inventions had been used earlier in China and Korea.” It then goes on to talk about the German printing press as if this was the first invention of it instead of acknowledging that this wasn’t the first invention of it. Super Eurocentric.

“Portugal Sets Sail”

This claims that this was “the beginning of the Age of Exploration.” Again, this should be called the European Age of Colonization, because it was not “exploration.” This was also not the beginning of world travel, which this (as most others) seems to imply. Europeans were pretty late to the game in world travel.

“Columbus Explores the Americas”

No…no he did not. This is also, ridiculously, the first mention of the Americas in the entire book. Columbus was not trying to explore, that was not his motivation, and he explicitly stated in his own words that he wasn’t exploring. He invaded and colonized. That is not the same thing. This claims that he was “an Italian explorer” but he was not. We don’t know his actual origin, “Italy” as a country didn’t exist at the time, and he was a slaver trader and treasure hunter, not explorer. This misnames his ships instead of admitting we don’t know the actual names of two of them. It claims he was looking for India, but “India” didn’t exist as a country/wasn’t called that in 1492. He was looking for the Indies. This then claims that Columbus called the area “the West Indies,” but he did no such thing because he just thought he was in the Indies. It uses Eurocentric language like “New World.” This really needs to stop. It does say that Columbus and other Europeans that followed killed, beat, and enslaved millions of Indigenous people, but it claims that this is “recent findings.” None of that is “recent findings.” These things were written down by those Europeans themselves 500 years ago! It has always been known. It also says that people are replacing Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day to “honor the Native Americans who were wiped out.” What a crass thing to say. No, that is not the purpose of IPD and we weren’t “wiped out.” This entire section is just the same old mythology that’s been repeated for decades but isn’t based in reality. It then recommends a terrible book at the end in the “Explore More” section. It suggests reading Encounter by Jane Yolen, but this is not a good book and should not be recommended. 

“Cortes and South American Aztecs”

The what?? The “Aztec” were NOT South American. This author has a serious problem with the geography of the Americas. How can anyone take this book seriously if she can’t get basic facts right?? Not only that, the history here isn’t accurate either. It perpetuates the myth that the “Aztec” thought Cortes was a god. Folks, please stop repeating this myth! It has been disproven repeatedly. It also attributes the genocide that occurred to only disease, rather than intentional killing. It was genocide. Call it what it is. It incorrectly uses the term “Mayan” instead of Maya. It says that the “Aztec, Mayan, and Incan culture are the backbone of civilization in Mexico, Central America, and South America.” No, the Mexica (“Aztec”), Maya, and Inca cultures (plural!) were descended from other civilizations before them. Those civilizations before them were the backbone of cultures in those places. It then says “…despite the entire population almost getting wiped out.” Again, crass language, but this isn’t even true. There are millions of Maya people in Mexico and Central America today. The language of the “Aztec” is spoken by 1.5 million people in Mexico. The people were not “almost entirely wiped out” at all! The civilizations ended and dispersed, but the people continued to exist and still do today. This section is horrible.

“The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade”

This claims that the trans-Atlantic slave trade started with Europeans bringing Africans to the Americas, but it did not. It was started by Columbus who brought enslaved Taino from the Caribbean to Europe. This also continues to use Eurocentric language like “New World.”

“The Seven Years War”

This whole thing is Eurocentric and makes no effort to acknowledge that Europeans were fighting over land and “resources” in the Americas that weren’t theirs. It also has a strange part about the “Iroquois tribes” that seems out of place. It’s about their lifeways and that they had “a well developed government” as if that is unusual?? It also says their longhouses were “long, narrow buildings” but they weren’t narrow. That whole part is weird.

“The European Enlightenment”

This states that the “Age of Enlightenment” occurred “when people stopped believing only in religion and superstition and started discovering more about reason and science.” This implies that “people” just means Europeans. This only happened in Europe, not the whole world. Using Eurocentric terms like “Age of Enlightenment” to apply to the whole world is entirely incorrect. And the word “people” does not mean “European” despite it being used that way in so-called “world history” resources all the time. And the whole world did not need to go through an “age of enlightenment” either, like Europe did, because they weren’t living without reason and science all that time. Much of the European Enlightenment was inspired by BIPOC cultures around the world, including Indigenous civilizations in North America. The summary at the end again uses “people” when it should say “European.” It makes it sound like some universal worldwide change in thinking when it wasn’t. Extremely Eurocentric.

“The American Revolution”

Even though the book Major Events in American History acknowledged the Proclamation of 1763 as being a major cause of the revolution, this section in this book does no such thing. This is too important to leave out. One of the major causes of the American Revolution was the fact that the colonists wanted to keep killing Native people and taking their land and the British made a proclamation that said they couldn’t. This book doesn’t even mention it. It also claims that the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776. It was not.

“Haitian Revolution”

Continues the use of Eurocentric terminology “the New World.” It claims that the Taino and Ciboney were “wiped out,” but they were not. It also attributes this to mostly disease, not genocide. Not only do Taino people still exist (most people in Puerto Rico, for example, have Taino ancestry), but their culture had a massive influence on the Caribbean cultures we see today.

“The Women’s Movement”

This makes no mention of the fact that this movement was quite racist and exclusive to white women. It also doesn’t mention that the 19th amendment only ended up giving white women the right to vote. It claims that it “…gave women the right to vote across the United States,” but BIPOC women were still excluded from voting. In the “history revealed” section at the end it has a short little “…but actually” about how it didn’t apply to Black women, as if that’s a footnote and not a major part of this history. This also is almost entirely about the movement in the United States so why is it in a world history book?

“Gold Rush”

I understand that the California gold rush brought people from other parts of the world to the US, but why is this in a world history book? This is typically not covered in world history. There are many actual world history events that could have gone into this book, but the author focuses almost entirely on European and Euro-American history instead. Surprisingly it uses the term “California genocide” in part of it, which I did not expect. This section did a better job with that issue that the one in the Major Events in American History book, but I still don’t see why it is included in a world history book.

“The Suez Canal and the Scramble for Africa”

Other than a few sections that involve the slave trade, this is the first real mention of Africa in the entire book. It’s as if Africa, the Americas, and Oceana just don’t exist until Europeans start interacting with them (and Oceana isn't even mentioned anywhere in the book at all). It’s also not really about Africa, but what Europeans were doing there.

“The Rise of Communism”

This is a very poor understanding of what communism actually is. It reads as anti-communist propaganda rather than objective history.

“Civil Rights Movement”

This is written as if it is understood this took place in the US without stating that. Since this is a world history book, it should explicitly state that this was in the United States. Instead, it just says “During the civil rights movement, people organized, marched, and fought for Black people to have equal rights.” As if this was something all over the world? Only later does it indicate that this was the United States. In a world history book, these things should not be blanket statements as if they apply to the whole world. At the end of the section, it says that the civil rights movement helped ignite other rights movements and then lists several people groups, but it does not mention Indigenous people. In both US history and world history resources, Native Americans disappear by 1900. In world history materials that mention issues in the US, like this, Indigenous people should be included. We are as much part of modern world history as anyone else. And especially in a topic like this, where Native people worked in solidarity with Black people, and the Red Power movement was a major part of rights movements in this era, there is no reason to leave us out.

“The War on Terror”

This is United Statesian propaganda. It is highly biased.

 

This entire book is just European/Euro-American history with few exceptions. It is certainly not “world history.” The book is extremely Eurocentric and biased in how it is written and how non-European/western cultures and beliefs are written about. It is very US-centric as well. Most world history materials include more of the world and a little less of the US. This book doesn’t even mention Oceana and both the Americas and Africa are never mentioned except in relation to Europeans. I wouldn’t consider the book entirely secular either, especially the first 2 categories of so-called “world history.”

I definitely do not recommend this book.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Curriculum Review: A History of Us - The New Nation 1789-1850 by Joy Hakim

This whole series is a trainwreck. They’re so horrible, but you can’t stop reading in disgusted awe of how horrifying this woman’s writing c...