What do you think?
Rate this book
The Silk Roads: A New History of the World
From the Middle East and its political instability to China and its economic rise, the vast region stretching eastward from the Balkans across the steppe and South Asia has been thrust into the global spotlight in recent years. Frankopan teaches us that to understand what is at stake for the cities and nations built on these intricate trade routes, we must first understand their astounding pasts.
Frankopan realigns our understanding of the world, pointing us eastward. It was on the Silk Roads that East and West first encountered each other through trade and conquest, leading to the spread of ideas, cultures and religions. From the rise and fall of empires to the spread of Buddhism and the advent of Christianity and Islam, right up to the great wars of the twentieth century—this book shows how the fate of the West has always been inextricably linked to the East.
Frankopan realigns our understanding of the world, pointing us eastward. It was on the Silk Roads that East and West first encountered each other through trade and conquest, leading to the spread of ideas, cultures and religions. From the rise and fall of empires to the spread of Buddhism and the advent of Christianity and Islam, right up to the great wars of the twentieth century—this book shows how the fate of the West has always been inextricably linked to the East.
636 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2015
About the author
Peter Frankopan
28 books1,419 followersPeter studied History at Jesus College, Cambridge, where he was Foundation Scholar, Schiff Scholar and won the History Prize in 1993, when he took an outstanding first class degree. He did his D.Phil (Ph.D) at Corpus Christi College, where he was elected to a Senior Scholarship before moving to Worcester College as Junior Research Fellow in 1997. He has been Senior Research Fellow since 2000 and is Director of the Oxford Centre for Byzantine Research at Oxford University. He is a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, the Royal Society of Arts, the Royal Anthropological Institute, and the Royal Asiatic Society.
Peter has held visiting Fellowships at Dumbarton Oaks (Harvard) and Princeton, and has lectured at universities all over the world including Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, NYU, Notre Dame, King's London and The Institute of Historical Research. He writes regularly for the national and international press about current affairs and about how history helps to explain the present. His work has been translated into twelve languages.
Peter chairs a collection of family businesses in the UK, France, Croatia and the Netherlands, including A Curious Group of Hotels which he set up with his wife Jessica in 1999.
He is actively involved with several charities, mainly in the areas of education, international development, gender studies and classical music. Both he and Jessica are Companions of the Guild of Benefactors at Cambridge University. He has been a Governor of Wellington College since 2006.
He chairs the Frankopan Fund, which has awarded more than a hundred scholarships and awards to outstanding young scholars from Croatia to study at leading academic institutions in the UK, USA and Europe.
A chorister at Westminster Cathedral as a boy, music scholar at school and choral scholar at Cambridge, he is an accomplished musician and has recorded many albums as a singer and instrumentalist.
A keen sportsman, Peter won blues at both Oxford and Cambridge for minor sports, and represented Croatia internationally at cricket. He plays for the Authors CC, a team of writers whose members has included PG Wodehouse and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In recent years, the team has toured India and Sri Lanka, and played against the Pope's 1st XI - St Peter's CC - in England and in Rome.
In the summer of 2013, Bloomsbury published The Authors XI. A Season of English Cricket from Hackney to Hambledon. It was as one of The Guardian's Books the year, and was one of Hilary Mantel's Books of the Year in the Observer.
Peter has held visiting Fellowships at Dumbarton Oaks (Harvard) and Princeton, and has lectured at universities all over the world including Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, NYU, Notre Dame, King's London and The Institute of Historical Research. He writes regularly for the national and international press about current affairs and about how history helps to explain the present. His work has been translated into twelve languages.
Peter chairs a collection of family businesses in the UK, France, Croatia and the Netherlands, including A Curious Group of Hotels which he set up with his wife Jessica in 1999.
He is actively involved with several charities, mainly in the areas of education, international development, gender studies and classical music. Both he and Jessica are Companions of the Guild of Benefactors at Cambridge University. He has been a Governor of Wellington College since 2006.
He chairs the Frankopan Fund, which has awarded more than a hundred scholarships and awards to outstanding young scholars from Croatia to study at leading academic institutions in the UK, USA and Europe.
A chorister at Westminster Cathedral as a boy, music scholar at school and choral scholar at Cambridge, he is an accomplished musician and has recorded many albums as a singer and instrumentalist.
A keen sportsman, Peter won blues at both Oxford and Cambridge for minor sports, and represented Croatia internationally at cricket. He plays for the Authors CC, a team of writers whose members has included PG Wodehouse and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. In recent years, the team has toured India and Sri Lanka, and played against the Pope's 1st XI - St Peter's CC - in England and in Rome.
In the summer of 2013, Bloomsbury published The Authors XI. A Season of English Cricket from Hackney to Hambledon. It was as one of The Guardian's Books the year, and was one of Hilary Mantel's Books of the Year in the Observer.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,682 reviews
February 12, 2016
Oh - I am really disappointed with this book! Maybe because I had very different expectations about it. I've read the title and the introduction by the author, and I thought that it was exactly what I want - to know more about the people of this region over the centuries. I wanted to find out about their way of life, religions, political systems, culture and economy. I wanted to know more about their interactions with each other and (only at the last place) their interactions with the other parts of the world.
As a result of reading this book I barely got the answer on the last issue and the sense of chronology, which I knew anyway.
I think to say the book is dealing with the complexity of this region in the historical perspective would be overstatement big time. It deals more with the Europe's and later the US's policies, predominately at the Middle East region and their mistakes over the centuries. So if this is your main interest in the book, you might be satisfied. For me the book was as West centred as many other World Histories apart from that normally you have too much of Europe's praise. While here it is Europe and the US bashing. You barely hear about China, the Ottoman empire has almost mentioned in passing (apart from Senan's architecture). But we are treated to the detailed consideration of the courses of the Irangate in the US. I agree that it is important. But I rather read a separate book about this. While here I wanted to find out how the Iranians were leaving before and after the Islamic Revolution for example.
The Early Europe has got a rough treatment. For example the fact that the Arabs stopped their conquest at the borders of the modern France is explained that they had nothing to gain from going further, the military resistance by the local population is mentioned but in passing. The same situation with the Mongols five centuries later - really? What a coincidence! The renaissance should be called "naissance" as Early Modern Europe had nothing to do with Rome - i totally missed this point. Those people in the 15th century thought differently.
Also I did not get what is new about this "New History of the World."
As a summary, if it is your first book about the world history, go for it, if you are ready to skip China, the South America to name a few and have a flavour for the Modern Middle East's politics (especially blunders made by the US in treating Iran and Iraq). Also if you are interested to hear quite a bit of the author's judgements in the area - go for it.
If you are interested in the history of peoples of the steppe, like I was, you would probably not be satisfied. I am starting again to look for a book about The Silk Road.
As a result of reading this book I barely got the answer on the last issue and the sense of chronology, which I knew anyway.
I think to say the book is dealing with the complexity of this region in the historical perspective would be overstatement big time. It deals more with the Europe's and later the US's policies, predominately at the Middle East region and their mistakes over the centuries. So if this is your main interest in the book, you might be satisfied. For me the book was as West centred as many other World Histories apart from that normally you have too much of Europe's praise. While here it is Europe and the US bashing. You barely hear about China, the Ottoman empire has almost mentioned in passing (apart from Senan's architecture). But we are treated to the detailed consideration of the courses of the Irangate in the US. I agree that it is important. But I rather read a separate book about this. While here I wanted to find out how the Iranians were leaving before and after the Islamic Revolution for example.
The Early Europe has got a rough treatment. For example the fact that the Arabs stopped their conquest at the borders of the modern France is explained that they had nothing to gain from going further, the military resistance by the local population is mentioned but in passing. The same situation with the Mongols five centuries later - really? What a coincidence! The renaissance should be called "naissance" as Early Modern Europe had nothing to do with Rome - i totally missed this point. Those people in the 15th century thought differently.
Also I did not get what is new about this "New History of the World."
As a summary, if it is your first book about the world history, go for it, if you are ready to skip China, the South America to name a few and have a flavour for the Modern Middle East's politics (especially blunders made by the US in treating Iran and Iraq). Also if you are interested to hear quite a bit of the author's judgements in the area - go for it.
If you are interested in the history of peoples of the steppe, like I was, you would probably not be satisfied. I am starting again to look for a book about The Silk Road.
July 24, 2022
4.5 " epic, illuminating, depleting, disheartening " stars !!!
2018 Honorable Mention Read.
I started this very long book back in September of 2017 and almost half way through took a lengthy break as there was a chapter missing in my ebook and I had to wait a few months to get a copy from the library. I also needed a break from the many evils of world history.
Over my life I have tried to read a number of very thick books that cover the world from the beginning of historical time and have always failed. The books were either too dense or too dry or did not hold my interest. Yet I knew to read such a book was really important. I had too many gaps in my knowledge and like many of us would fill it in with childhood skewed religious classes or flimsy psychological, sociological and feminist understandings. I needed this so desperately and this book was able to deliver a wealth of knowledge, a bit of depth to my understanding of world economics and politics and power dynamics but also, to be honest, despair on the relentless suffering that most of our fellow beings experience for the majority of their lives and in all time periods although the races, classes and ethnicities all take their turn.
What was most appealing about this book to me was that the eye view of whatever is happening in each time period was primarily kept on the area of the world we know as the Silk Roads. The turbulent Middle East and the mysterious lands of Central Asia. Mr. Frankopan was able to give these cultures and places more of a voice in their importance as well as contribution to knowledge and culture that most Eurocentric or Far East centric historical books tend to give. I really appreciated this and helped me understand and integrate gaps in understanding in what I knew from my few readings in European, American and Chinese history.
Mr. Frankopan accomplished quite a feat in being to condense a world history into bite size chunks that layered knowledge onto understanding and at times even illumination as to how we got into the huge mess that is our modern world. His writing was interesting, neutral, at times entertaining and always with his eye on his central thesis of the most strategically/economically/culturally relevant areas for whatever superpowers happened to be flexing their muscles were in the areas of what we know as the Middle East and Central Asia.
In summary, Mr. Frankopan helped me achieve 3 remarkable results
1. I finally understand, in a limited way, why the Middle East is such a volatile powder keg and its very good and valid reasons for being so. The dirty games that Imperialist regimes have played in this area are immense, cruel and unfathomable.
2. Truly appreciated the contributions to art, music, literature, science and medicine that the peoples of Central Asia and Persia contributed to the world especially in the Dark and Middle Ages in Europe.
3. Solidified my understanding that people and regimes in power are primarily corrupt and yes, evil,
sometimes with a lower case -e and sometimes with a capital one. Evil and cruelty has been perpetuated by every regime in power and that control and greed are the primary reasons for this.
We are often told that we need to learn from our knowledge of history but I feel it is more likely to help us understand what is inevitable. I will stop there so I don't move into despair.....
2018 Honorable Mention Read.
I started this very long book back in September of 2017 and almost half way through took a lengthy break as there was a chapter missing in my ebook and I had to wait a few months to get a copy from the library. I also needed a break from the many evils of world history.
Over my life I have tried to read a number of very thick books that cover the world from the beginning of historical time and have always failed. The books were either too dense or too dry or did not hold my interest. Yet I knew to read such a book was really important. I had too many gaps in my knowledge and like many of us would fill it in with childhood skewed religious classes or flimsy psychological, sociological and feminist understandings. I needed this so desperately and this book was able to deliver a wealth of knowledge, a bit of depth to my understanding of world economics and politics and power dynamics but also, to be honest, despair on the relentless suffering that most of our fellow beings experience for the majority of their lives and in all time periods although the races, classes and ethnicities all take their turn.
What was most appealing about this book to me was that the eye view of whatever is happening in each time period was primarily kept on the area of the world we know as the Silk Roads. The turbulent Middle East and the mysterious lands of Central Asia. Mr. Frankopan was able to give these cultures and places more of a voice in their importance as well as contribution to knowledge and culture that most Eurocentric or Far East centric historical books tend to give. I really appreciated this and helped me understand and integrate gaps in understanding in what I knew from my few readings in European, American and Chinese history.
Mr. Frankopan accomplished quite a feat in being to condense a world history into bite size chunks that layered knowledge onto understanding and at times even illumination as to how we got into the huge mess that is our modern world. His writing was interesting, neutral, at times entertaining and always with his eye on his central thesis of the most strategically/economically/culturally relevant areas for whatever superpowers happened to be flexing their muscles were in the areas of what we know as the Middle East and Central Asia.
In summary, Mr. Frankopan helped me achieve 3 remarkable results
1. I finally understand, in a limited way, why the Middle East is such a volatile powder keg and its very good and valid reasons for being so. The dirty games that Imperialist regimes have played in this area are immense, cruel and unfathomable.
2. Truly appreciated the contributions to art, music, literature, science and medicine that the peoples of Central Asia and Persia contributed to the world especially in the Dark and Middle Ages in Europe.
3. Solidified my understanding that people and regimes in power are primarily corrupt and yes, evil,
sometimes with a lower case -e and sometimes with a capital one. Evil and cruelty has been perpetuated by every regime in power and that control and greed are the primary reasons for this.
We are often told that we need to learn from our knowledge of history but I feel it is more likely to help us understand what is inevitable. I will stop there so I don't move into despair.....
October 2, 2015
This is the most unbiased and objective narration of history focussing on the rich history of countries on the old Silk Route. The aim was simple, somehow focus the spotlight of history back on this region instead of focussing on European and American historical version which seems to be widely prevalent. Peter has weaved a tremendous story which at times almost seems apocryphal to someone like myself who is steeped with the popular historical narrative. The fact that Peter is a well respected historian does help matters as it forced me to take his view seriously. I would highly recommend this beautifully crafted and engaging historical narrative which reads like a well made documentary.
June 16, 2017
This is a frustrating, though still useful, book. Historian Peter Frankopan's title claims this is "a new history of the world". He then proposes that what the world needs is to reorient its focus from Europe to "the silk roads", vaguely defined by him as "the region between East and West.. from the Eastern shores of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean to the Himalayas". This almost certainly reflects the fact that the core of this region happens to his particular area of interest (Turkey, Persia, Central Asia and Russia) as a historian. Having made this decision, he has to force the rest of the story to keep coming back to this region, to somehow keep his argument afloat. My recurring thought on reading this book was that all this is unnecessary. He could have written a history of the region without pretending that this was the REAL history of the world, and it would have worked fine. Or he could have attempted a history of the world and not bothered with this tendentious framing. But he insists on doing both, and it causes endless (and needless) irritation.
The other issue is that having attempted a sort of forced universal history, he wanders into areas where he is clearly not an expert and makes some surprisingly basic errors. For example, the abduction of Sita is described as being part of the great Indian epic, the Mahabharata (it is actually in the Ramayana; a mistake that could be avoided by even the most basic familiarity with Indian culture); and the Quranic verse "hold fast to the rope of Allah" (3:103) is interpreted (with breathtaking audacity, if not accuracy) as a possible message of conciliation between Muslims, Jews and Christians (it is an explicit call for Muslim unity, against all comers). These are minor details, but they should put the reader on guard. More seriously, at one point he claims that the building of the Taj Mahal owes to the riches that the Mughals gathered from Europe, which in turn was getting them from the newly discovered Americas ("India's glory came at the expense of the Americas"), which is a bit much. As far as I know, It came from the sweat and blood Indian peasants, not from events in the distant Americas. I don't claim to be an expert on precious metal flows of that era, but the claim seems needlessly hyperbolic. If he is right, I would love to hear more about it though (PS: the erudite Pseudoerasmus pointed me to one of his posts that shed light on this issue, and basically says the injuns paid for it, not the Americas).
There is also a consistent and very strong undertow of what may be described as "Eurocentric-self-hate" throughout the book. Peter thinks the West has been very vicious and uniquely rapacious in history, which is a kind of mirror image of the idea that the West has been uniquely powerful in history. Even where this is likely true (e.g. in the 19th century), his treatment of this seems to be too close to popular postmarxist postmodern historiography for comfort.
In general, the account of recent events (the book ends with the recent American disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan) is too superficial to satisfy anyone who is genuinely interested in any particular theater of conflict, and too trite and formulaic to be categorized as a groundbreaking universal history. The last chapter is a good example of the irritating way he mixes occasional good insights with his need to fit everything into his original "silk roads as center of the world" thesis. He also has a tendency to rather pompously assert "the West needs to give up its current disastrous focus on X and step back and adopt the correct way of looking at things"; which is irritating because X is usually a straw man and the "correct way" is mostly a rewording of his unproven "center of the world" thesis.
My last point is bit hard to convey, but I will try: Frankopan displays absolutely no awareness of the fact that he himself is part and parcel of the institutions and society which he repeatedly dismisses as painfully naive and incompetent. One gets the feeling that the author really believes that he and Oxford will be just fine, since they are somehow above the fray. As an (artificial) vantage point from which to write the book, this is not a bad idea, but when reading the book one gets the distinct impression that this is not just a strategic (and justifiable) vantage point, it is a thought that has really never crossed his mind. My point is this: a universal history is ultimately a reflection of the wisdom, insight, discernment and, yes, character, of the author. He is picking and choosing what few things to present out of a gigantic mass of materials, and he decides how to frame it; and Peter Frankopan does not impress me in this regard. And being impressive in this regard does not always mean one has to agree with the author's conclusions. Christopher Beckwith (author of "Empire of the Silk Roads") may have many opinions I do not share, but he commands respect by his impressive and careful scholarship and his deeply thought out positions. In short, what he says has weight, even if I do not agree with his conclusion. Peter Frankopan does not match that standard. He may have access to more facts, but he is no Gibbon, and that knocks this book down a peg.
Still, the book is not without its redeeming features. He has read widely and there are genuine insights and nuggets of interesting information scattered throughout the book, making it worth your while. You would be well advised to suspend judgement about the frame in which he has chosen to frame them, and you should keep in the back of your mind the fact that all his minor facts are not necessarily correct.
Still, worth a read.
PS: for a really good book about the Silk Roads, one that will teach you new things and genuinely make you think new thoughts, check out Christopher Beckwith's "Empires of the Silk Road". Razib Khan has an excellent review.
The other issue is that having attempted a sort of forced universal history, he wanders into areas where he is clearly not an expert and makes some surprisingly basic errors. For example, the abduction of Sita is described as being part of the great Indian epic, the Mahabharata (it is actually in the Ramayana; a mistake that could be avoided by even the most basic familiarity with Indian culture); and the Quranic verse "hold fast to the rope of Allah" (3:103) is interpreted (with breathtaking audacity, if not accuracy) as a possible message of conciliation between Muslims, Jews and Christians (it is an explicit call for Muslim unity, against all comers). These are minor details, but they should put the reader on guard. More seriously, at one point he claims that the building of the Taj Mahal owes to the riches that the Mughals gathered from Europe, which in turn was getting them from the newly discovered Americas ("India's glory came at the expense of the Americas"), which is a bit much. As far as I know, It came from the sweat and blood Indian peasants, not from events in the distant Americas. I don't claim to be an expert on precious metal flows of that era, but the claim seems needlessly hyperbolic. If he is right, I would love to hear more about it though (PS: the erudite Pseudoerasmus pointed me to one of his posts that shed light on this issue, and basically says the injuns paid for it, not the Americas).
There is also a consistent and very strong undertow of what may be described as "Eurocentric-self-hate" throughout the book. Peter thinks the West has been very vicious and uniquely rapacious in history, which is a kind of mirror image of the idea that the West has been uniquely powerful in history. Even where this is likely true (e.g. in the 19th century), his treatment of this seems to be too close to popular postmarxist postmodern historiography for comfort.
In general, the account of recent events (the book ends with the recent American disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan) is too superficial to satisfy anyone who is genuinely interested in any particular theater of conflict, and too trite and formulaic to be categorized as a groundbreaking universal history. The last chapter is a good example of the irritating way he mixes occasional good insights with his need to fit everything into his original "silk roads as center of the world" thesis. He also has a tendency to rather pompously assert "the West needs to give up its current disastrous focus on X and step back and adopt the correct way of looking at things"; which is irritating because X is usually a straw man and the "correct way" is mostly a rewording of his unproven "center of the world" thesis.
My last point is bit hard to convey, but I will try: Frankopan displays absolutely no awareness of the fact that he himself is part and parcel of the institutions and society which he repeatedly dismisses as painfully naive and incompetent. One gets the feeling that the author really believes that he and Oxford will be just fine, since they are somehow above the fray. As an (artificial) vantage point from which to write the book, this is not a bad idea, but when reading the book one gets the distinct impression that this is not just a strategic (and justifiable) vantage point, it is a thought that has really never crossed his mind. My point is this: a universal history is ultimately a reflection of the wisdom, insight, discernment and, yes, character, of the author. He is picking and choosing what few things to present out of a gigantic mass of materials, and he decides how to frame it; and Peter Frankopan does not impress me in this regard. And being impressive in this regard does not always mean one has to agree with the author's conclusions. Christopher Beckwith (author of "Empire of the Silk Roads") may have many opinions I do not share, but he commands respect by his impressive and careful scholarship and his deeply thought out positions. In short, what he says has weight, even if I do not agree with his conclusion. Peter Frankopan does not match that standard. He may have access to more facts, but he is no Gibbon, and that knocks this book down a peg.
Still, the book is not without its redeeming features. He has read widely and there are genuine insights and nuggets of interesting information scattered throughout the book, making it worth your while. You would be well advised to suspend judgement about the frame in which he has chosen to frame them, and you should keep in the back of your mind the fact that all his minor facts are not necessarily correct.
Still, worth a read.
PS: for a really good book about the Silk Roads, one that will teach you new things and genuinely make you think new thoughts, check out Christopher Beckwith's "Empires of the Silk Road". Razib Khan has an excellent review.
September 10, 2016
The Silk Roads is part of the genre of popular history books that purports to tell the history of the world through one particular theme or from one particular vantage point, and is better than most of them. Peter Frankopan is a trained historian, and so knows how to synthesise a great deal of information from cultures across Asia and Europe and the span of several centuries in a nuanced manner. As an example of a sweeping chronicle, there's much to admire here. The author knows how to keep a narrative moving at a brisk pace and when to throw in the occasional wry aside, which also helps the reader to move quickly through such a thick book. Frankopan's main point—that central Asia is far more central to world history than is popularly thought or than most Western textbooks teach—is well-made, if not exactly new. I found the early chapters of this book particularly engrossing, as Frankopan—a Byzantinist—is clearly most at home in those centuries.
Sadly, as the book progressed, I got a little more dissatisfied with it. Once the European Age of Exploration begins, the focus shifts so that we get more of a sense of how imperialist powers used Asia to fight their battles than anything else. This is, of course, an important story, and I learned some new things about British, French, and Russian involvement in Iran and Iraq to appal and depress me. But what I didn't get much of a sense of was the voices of those who lived in those regions and the reactions which they had to the forces swirling around their homes. Nor did I get a sense of the interactions between central Asia and the world to the south and east of it. There's little about China and nothing about, say, the Swahili coast. This serves to subtly, and I am sure unintentionally, reinforce the idea that the history of central Asia is important inasmuch as it helps to contextualise things that happened in the West. This may well be a function of the secondary scholarship on which Frankopan is drawing as he moves further and further from his areas of expertise, but it's a shame.
Sadly, as the book progressed, I got a little more dissatisfied with it. Once the European Age of Exploration begins, the focus shifts so that we get more of a sense of how imperialist powers used Asia to fight their battles than anything else. This is, of course, an important story, and I learned some new things about British, French, and Russian involvement in Iran and Iraq to appal and depress me. But what I didn't get much of a sense of was the voices of those who lived in those regions and the reactions which they had to the forces swirling around their homes. Nor did I get a sense of the interactions between central Asia and the world to the south and east of it. There's little about China and nothing about, say, the Swahili coast. This serves to subtly, and I am sure unintentionally, reinforce the idea that the history of central Asia is important inasmuch as it helps to contextualise things that happened in the West. This may well be a function of the secondary scholarship on which Frankopan is drawing as he moves further and further from his areas of expertise, but it's a shame.
January 2, 2020
Simply stunning, a clear-eyed, convention-defying overview of human history. If you were to give an alien a single book to understand the large-scale building blocks of history, this would be an excellent choice. Comparing favourably with Yuval Noah Harari's blockbuster Sapiens due to its meticulous referencing, this is a book on - really - economic history that I simply could not put down. If I could make this review physically glow, I would. I loved this book that much.
May 21, 2023
One of the books that I would like to see on my shelf for future reference/reread.
OverDrive, thank you!
OverDrive, thank you!
January 19, 2024
This book covers the history of the area known as the Silk Road since it was first used, by traders circa 200 years BCE, up to very recent times. I'd touched on some of this history before but Peter Frankopan comes at events from a slightly different angle: essentially, his premiss is that early civilisation wasn't actually shaped by the Greeks, Romans and Egyptians - it was the Persians who provided the catalyst for much of the learning and development that established the world we now live in. His view is that as people travelled the Silk Road routes, between China and the Mediterranean, ideas and religions as well as all sorts of goods travelled with them and that early scholars from the surrounding areas were, in fact, way ahead of the curve.
At an early stage I was seeking out early maps of the area to ascertain where exactly Persia, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Asia Minor and other ancient names actually featured in the geography as we understand it today. The text is, in truth, rather textbook dry but it’s also peppered with small bits of wisdom and knowledge that surprised and delighted me. But it's a long book and I started to find myself rushing through sections to get to the periods I was most interested in.
The final sections of the book deal with events post WWII. I found to this part to be fascinating; even though I'd lived through most of this period, I quickly realised how little I really knew about how this bit of history had unfolded. The conclusion to the book is sobering too as it draws attention to the rich natural resources of the area (gas, oil and minerals) and how this is bringing increasing wealth to nations I couldn't even point to on a map. Frankopan suggests that history may well be turning full circle and cites examples to support his case that in the future the East may be rediscover its former pre-eminence over the West.
A thoughtful and thought provoking book for anyone interested in discovering more about the colourful history of this area.
At an early stage I was seeking out early maps of the area to ascertain where exactly Persia, Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Asia Minor and other ancient names actually featured in the geography as we understand it today. The text is, in truth, rather textbook dry but it’s also peppered with small bits of wisdom and knowledge that surprised and delighted me. But it's a long book and I started to find myself rushing through sections to get to the periods I was most interested in.
The final sections of the book deal with events post WWII. I found to this part to be fascinating; even though I'd lived through most of this period, I quickly realised how little I really knew about how this bit of history had unfolded. The conclusion to the book is sobering too as it draws attention to the rich natural resources of the area (gas, oil and minerals) and how this is bringing increasing wealth to nations I couldn't even point to on a map. Frankopan suggests that history may well be turning full circle and cites examples to support his case that in the future the East may be rediscover its former pre-eminence over the West.
A thoughtful and thought provoking book for anyone interested in discovering more about the colourful history of this area.
March 4, 2016
Well written, well researched, interesting and original - all good points about a book that is excellent in parts. I enjoyed reading it, found much to be compelling and challenging to some of my own views, but at times I found this book frustrating.
For all its excellence, this is less one book than two. And neither of those books quite fulfils the promise of the title. The first book, roughly chapters 1-16, is a history of trade routes - and in being that, it is largely about Eurasia. The second book, roughly chapters 17 onwards is a much more detailed history, still with an emphasis on trade, but might be better called "why the world is now in the mess it is in". Both of these books are very good, but they do not quite fit seamlessly together. The first book is broad brush history, the second is much more detailed ordering of facts leading to forward looking conclusions. In both cases the term "Silk Road" is a metaphor for trade routes, rather than being specifically about "The Silk Road", and it is pretty much about Eurasia and not the world as a whole (and there is a lot of world outside Europe and Asia).
But both books are good enough to forgive these faults.
The first book is a wonderful general history. It shows quite how much of history is not about the west. It rebalances the bias of the traditional western histories I have grown up with. Its not that western history is not interesting and important, it is both of these things, but there is so much history which is not the history of the west - and it is worth knowing. For long periods western Europe was a quiet backwater compared to what was happening in the rest of the world. Read this if you like big historical themes and interesting original insights.
The second book is a story of ongoing disaster - influenced heavily by mistaken policies firstly of Britain and then America in the middle east and Asia. It's quite an eye opener, if not always a pleasant one to read. The British Empire may not have been one of the worst, but in the second book you learn it was full of plenty of self-interest, deviousness and unpleasant behaviour. And the behaviour of America in the last few decades has been no better, possibly even worse. If you are westerner and you are irritated by the chants of hypocrisy pointed at us from middle eastern countries- read this to understand why that anger has a very valid and strong basis.
For all its excellence, this is less one book than two. And neither of those books quite fulfils the promise of the title. The first book, roughly chapters 1-16, is a history of trade routes - and in being that, it is largely about Eurasia. The second book, roughly chapters 17 onwards is a much more detailed history, still with an emphasis on trade, but might be better called "why the world is now in the mess it is in". Both of these books are very good, but they do not quite fit seamlessly together. The first book is broad brush history, the second is much more detailed ordering of facts leading to forward looking conclusions. In both cases the term "Silk Road" is a metaphor for trade routes, rather than being specifically about "The Silk Road", and it is pretty much about Eurasia and not the world as a whole (and there is a lot of world outside Europe and Asia).
But both books are good enough to forgive these faults.
The first book is a wonderful general history. It shows quite how much of history is not about the west. It rebalances the bias of the traditional western histories I have grown up with. Its not that western history is not interesting and important, it is both of these things, but there is so much history which is not the history of the west - and it is worth knowing. For long periods western Europe was a quiet backwater compared to what was happening in the rest of the world. Read this if you like big historical themes and interesting original insights.
The second book is a story of ongoing disaster - influenced heavily by mistaken policies firstly of Britain and then America in the middle east and Asia. It's quite an eye opener, if not always a pleasant one to read. The British Empire may not have been one of the worst, but in the second book you learn it was full of plenty of self-interest, deviousness and unpleasant behaviour. And the behaviour of America in the last few decades has been no better, possibly even worse. If you are westerner and you are irritated by the chants of hypocrisy pointed at us from middle eastern countries- read this to understand why that anger has a very valid and strong basis.
March 6, 2016
Don't let the size of "The Silk Roads" daunt you. It's very readable. The scope is huge, geographically and over centuries, but Peter Frankopan keeps everything clear and moving along.
I lack familiarity with the history, so I can't say whether his arguments, his judgements on history, are true -- and what is truth? Probably if each of us studied the same scholarly texts we'd decide things a bit differently. But his arguments did hang together: the evidence he presents supports his insights.
Frankopan has a nice style for a popular history book. The scholarship is evident (and the referencing is great if you want to dig deeper with additional reading), but he wears it lightly and the wry sharpness of his judgement on the greed, violence, delusion and sheer stupidity of various individuals and nations/empires helps kick the book along.
The complexity and good governance of the empire Ghengis Khan founded made for fascinating reading. Skip through a few centuries and the Russian factor in the decision to start World War I is one I hadn't read before (confessing my ignorance). Even the twentieth and twenty first centuries, where I thought I knew more contained surprises. "The Great Game", as the British called it, was never a game. Resources, wealth and security, power, religion and identity, mix to create a volatile region that impacts the world.
I'm not sure I agree with Frankopan's conclusion that the world is turning back to centre on the old silk roads. That power shift to China, the belly of the old Soviet Union and the Middle East seems disputable from my corner of the world, Australia. And yet, there's now a train (or composed of several trains) that carries cargo from China across the old silk roads' spine. Maybe the upheaval in the Middle East, the terrible suffering of its people, is because of power shifting and players fighting to seize their opportunities, or to resist losing what they have.
"The Silk Roads" is an interesting and absorbing read that lingers in the mind.
I lack familiarity with the history, so I can't say whether his arguments, his judgements on history, are true -- and what is truth? Probably if each of us studied the same scholarly texts we'd decide things a bit differently. But his arguments did hang together: the evidence he presents supports his insights.
Frankopan has a nice style for a popular history book. The scholarship is evident (and the referencing is great if you want to dig deeper with additional reading), but he wears it lightly and the wry sharpness of his judgement on the greed, violence, delusion and sheer stupidity of various individuals and nations/empires helps kick the book along.
The complexity and good governance of the empire Ghengis Khan founded made for fascinating reading. Skip through a few centuries and the Russian factor in the decision to start World War I is one I hadn't read before (confessing my ignorance). Even the twentieth and twenty first centuries, where I thought I knew more contained surprises. "The Great Game", as the British called it, was never a game. Resources, wealth and security, power, religion and identity, mix to create a volatile region that impacts the world.
I'm not sure I agree with Frankopan's conclusion that the world is turning back to centre on the old silk roads. That power shift to China, the belly of the old Soviet Union and the Middle East seems disputable from my corner of the world, Australia. And yet, there's now a train (or composed of several trains) that carries cargo from China across the old silk roads' spine. Maybe the upheaval in the Middle East, the terrible suffering of its people, is because of power shifting and players fighting to seize their opportunities, or to resist losing what they have.
"The Silk Roads" is an interesting and absorbing read that lingers in the mind.
February 23, 2023
I like Frankopan's comparisons of events in Central Asia with those in the West. For example, he describes the development of the Islamic empire, from a peace treaty among tribes, to a mercenary alliance for shared plunder, much as the booty from raids on Spanish ships was divided up in Elizabethan England. With their reportedly God-given right of conquest, the Arab commanders behaved much like the masters of later European empires: “ordained by the Lord on high, who both gives and takes away kingdoms from whomever and in whatever way he wishes” (Jose de Costa, cited p. 213). As for the women, Frankopan explains,
"Islamic societies generally distributed wealth more evenly than their Christian counterparts, largely thanks to the very detailed instructions set out in the Quran about legacies … A Muslim woman could expect to be much better looked after than her European peer … in Europe, primogeniture concentrated resources in the hands of one child, and paved the way for great fortunes to be built up" (pp. 256–257).
Then Frankopan competently relates all the other tides of history across a vast region that's strangely central and remote at the same time.
"Islamic societies generally distributed wealth more evenly than their Christian counterparts, largely thanks to the very detailed instructions set out in the Quran about legacies … A Muslim woman could expect to be much better looked after than her European peer … in Europe, primogeniture concentrated resources in the hands of one child, and paved the way for great fortunes to be built up" (pp. 256–257).
Then Frankopan competently relates all the other tides of history across a vast region that's strangely central and remote at the same time.
December 14, 2016
4.75
An extremely well researched but defintely not "dry" history of the Silk Roads. I am definitely a happy camper.
Need time to gather my thoughts and refer to my notes for a better and cohesivereview reaction...
An extremely well researched but defintely not "dry" history of the Silk Roads. I am definitely a happy camper.
Need time to gather my thoughts and refer to my notes for a better and cohesive
February 22, 2020
The Silk Roads is history painted on an epic scale. The books starts with the birth of human civilisation in the Fertile Crescent and in China, and takes the reader through to the 21st century, becoming more reportage on current events. Between is a journey as fascinating as one made by any caravan crossing the mountains and deserts of Central Asia on the silk road of the title.
This a book about Asia, and the links that run between the Far East and the Atlantic in the Far West. Frankopan uses the silk road as a metaphor for cultural exchange of all sorts. Flowing alongside the spices, treasure and exotic goods we expect are new religions, important innovations, poets and misfits, philosophies and political thought – mostly, but not always forces for good.
What makes this account so compelling for a western student of history like myself, is the way the author shifts the reader’s focus a quarter turn of the globe to the east. Familiar events, like the rise of Rome, the Crusades, or the World Wars look quite different from that perspective, challenging excepted norms.
The writer’s style is a little repetitive in places, labouring some points he has already established, but the strength of the content wins through. Definitely a good read.
This a book about Asia, and the links that run between the Far East and the Atlantic in the Far West. Frankopan uses the silk road as a metaphor for cultural exchange of all sorts. Flowing alongside the spices, treasure and exotic goods we expect are new religions, important innovations, poets and misfits, philosophies and political thought – mostly, but not always forces for good.
What makes this account so compelling for a western student of history like myself, is the way the author shifts the reader’s focus a quarter turn of the globe to the east. Familiar events, like the rise of Rome, the Crusades, or the World Wars look quite different from that perspective, challenging excepted norms.
The writer’s style is a little repetitive in places, labouring some points he has already established, but the strength of the content wins through. Definitely a good read.
June 10, 2018
1.5*
This book. It's been such a disappointment: Not only is the title an exercise in how to cram several misrepresentations in less than ten words, but the writing style left me rather unimpressed, too.
There is little that is new about the history contained in the book. It certainly is not a history of the world (Europe, perhaps, but the focus on the power struggles between Christianity and Islam, and later on the West v. the East, and the US against Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan does not make this a book about the history of world). It is even less a book about the Silk Roads.
If you picked this up in the hope of learning about the trade routes and the people who live or travel along them, you've picked the wrong book.
Sure there were a few interesting snippets of history in this, but the authors choice of not going into a lot of detail and preferring to follow up events with other events without providing a lot of deliberations about the possible connections or effects, does not make for inspiring reading. Unless, that is, we are talking about the inspiration to look for other books.
Maybe the premise of the book was a little too ambitious? Maybe some editor should have pointed out some of the gaps ... or at least that the title does not reflect the content of the book?
Whatever the cause of its failings, I was hoping for a thoughtful insight into the history of the Silk Roads, but all I got from the books was what read like the work of a self-congratulatory academic who couldn't make up his mind what to write about and looked at history mostly through Union-Jack-striped goggles.
This book. It's been such a disappointment: Not only is the title an exercise in how to cram several misrepresentations in less than ten words, but the writing style left me rather unimpressed, too.
There is little that is new about the history contained in the book. It certainly is not a history of the world (Europe, perhaps, but the focus on the power struggles between Christianity and Islam, and later on the West v. the East, and the US against Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan does not make this a book about the history of world). It is even less a book about the Silk Roads.
If you picked this up in the hope of learning about the trade routes and the people who live or travel along them, you've picked the wrong book.
Sure there were a few interesting snippets of history in this, but the authors choice of not going into a lot of detail and preferring to follow up events with other events without providing a lot of deliberations about the possible connections or effects, does not make for inspiring reading. Unless, that is, we are talking about the inspiration to look for other books.
Maybe the premise of the book was a little too ambitious? Maybe some editor should have pointed out some of the gaps ... or at least that the title does not reflect the content of the book?
Whatever the cause of its failings, I was hoping for a thoughtful insight into the history of the Silk Roads, but all I got from the books was what read like the work of a self-congratulatory academic who couldn't make up his mind what to write about and looked at history mostly through Union-Jack-striped goggles.
February 17, 2018
This is a world history from the perspective that the area between China and Europe is the “center of gravity” of everything important in human endeavors. For the author, Frankopan, this loosely defined region is bounded by western China, northern India, the Horn of Africa, eastern Syria, and southern Russia. Roughly speaking this places Uzbekistan in the center. When passage through this area was the only way for trade goods to be transported between east and west it was indeed an important area. Trade and exchange through this area resulted in a development of culture and wealth such that by around 1000 A.D. world riches were concentrated around Baghdad. But ever since the 1500s when Europeans learned how to sail the oceans to reach the Far East, most of history has moved elsewhere. Frankopan insists that it’s still important and will be more so in the future.
World history from the time of Alexander the Great to the present is a massive scope to fit into a 500-page history (additional 100 pages of notes and bibliography). Thus as a world history this book is somewhat cursory in its coverage, but detailed and interesting anecdotes are provided focusing on the Middle East area. All the important events are included (e.g. Alexander the Great, the Roman and Sassanid Empires, Attila the Hun, multiple religions—Islam in particular, Crusades, Mongols, Western traders and colonialist, Muslim Mughals in India, the Great Game, World War One, World War II). Through the coverage of these events the author provides special emphasis on and praise of the cultures in the targeted area.
Likewise he also demonstrates subtile prejudice against Western influences by pointing out their mistakes and weaknesses. When the narrative reaches the late twentieth century the book provides a thorough account of British and American meddling in Iranian affairs and their support of the Shah. Needless to say this is the tortured part of modern history and makes French, British and American foreign policy look foolish and bad.
At the end of the book Frankopan forecasts a coming renewed glory for the Silk Road region. “We are seeing signs of the world’s center of gravity shifting—back to where it lay for millennia." Perhaps, time will tell. But these words have a tinge of rose colored glasses.
Below are several excerpts taken from the book. I don't claim them to be the most important parts of the book, just things I found interesting.
The following excerpt is an example of an interesting anecdote from the ninth century that tells how a semi-nomadic tribe, the Khazars, in the Russian Steppes ended up adopting Judaism as their religion in spite of efforts by Christian and Moslem missionaries to win them over. (British spelling is used throughout the book)
Link to article titled, "Eurasia, the supercontinent that will define our century":
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/0...
World history from the time of Alexander the Great to the present is a massive scope to fit into a 500-page history (additional 100 pages of notes and bibliography). Thus as a world history this book is somewhat cursory in its coverage, but detailed and interesting anecdotes are provided focusing on the Middle East area. All the important events are included (e.g. Alexander the Great, the Roman and Sassanid Empires, Attila the Hun, multiple religions—Islam in particular, Crusades, Mongols, Western traders and colonialist, Muslim Mughals in India, the Great Game, World War One, World War II). Through the coverage of these events the author provides special emphasis on and praise of the cultures in the targeted area.
Likewise he also demonstrates subtile prejudice against Western influences by pointing out their mistakes and weaknesses. When the narrative reaches the late twentieth century the book provides a thorough account of British and American meddling in Iranian affairs and their support of the Shah. Needless to say this is the tortured part of modern history and makes French, British and American foreign policy look foolish and bad.
At the end of the book Frankopan forecasts a coming renewed glory for the Silk Road region. “We are seeing signs of the world’s center of gravity shifting—back to where it lay for millennia." Perhaps, time will tell. But these words have a tinge of rose colored glasses.
Below are several excerpts taken from the book. I don't claim them to be the most important parts of the book, just things I found interesting.
The following excerpt is an example of an interesting anecdote from the ninth century that tells how a semi-nomadic tribe, the Khazars, in the Russian Steppes ended up adopting Judaism as their religion in spite of efforts by Christian and Moslem missionaries to win them over. (British spelling is used throughout the book)
Remarkably a copy of the khagan's reply to this letter survives with the Kazar ruler explaining his tribes conversation to Judaism. The decision to convert, wrote the Khagan was the result of the great wisdom of the one of his predecessors, who had brought delegations representing different faiths to present the case for each. Having pondered how best to establish the facts the rule had asked the Christians whether Islam or Judaism was the better faith. When they replied that the former was certainly worse than the later, he asked the Muslims whether Judaism or Christianity was preferable. When they lambasted Christianity and also replied that Judaism was the less bad of the two, the Khazar ruler announced that he had reached a conclusion: both had admitted that "the religion of the Israelites was better," he declared, so "trusting in the mercies of God and the power of the Almighty, I choose the religion of Israel, that is, the religion of Abraham. (p109)Slavery was endemic in Islamic society during the zenith of its culture in the medieval years—much the same as it had been in the Roman Empire during its heyday. The following excerpt from the book provides a discussion of the extent of slavery in Islamic lands:
Recent research suggests that at the height of its power the Roman Empire required 250,000—400,000 new slaves each year to maintain slave population. The size of the market in the Islamic lands was considerably larger—assuming the demand for slaves was analogous—stretching from Spain through to Afghanistan, which would suggest that the number of slaves being sold may have been far greater even than those for Rome. Although the limitations of the source material are frustrating, some idea of the likely scale comes from the fact that one account talks of a caliph and his wife owning a thousand slave girls each, while another was said to own no fewer than four thousand. Slaves in the Muslim world were as ubiquitous—and silent—as they were in Rome. (p116)The book mentions that much of the gold and silver taken by Spain from the newly found mines of North and South America ended up in the far east in payment for luxury goods such things as spices, silks and fine china. China in particular had a preference for silver relative to gold, thus a large portion of the silver ended up in China. The following excerpt discusses the economic consequences of such an accumulation of silver in China:
Much of the silver that flooded into China was spent in a series of major reforms, not the least of which were the monetisation of the economy, the encouragement of free labour markets and a deliberate program to stimulate foreign trade. Ironically, China's love of silver and the premium it placed on this particular precious metal became its Achilles heel. With such great quantities of silver reaching China, above all through Manila, it was inevitable that its value would start to fall, which over time caused price inflation. the net result was that the value of silver, and above all its value in relation to gold, was forced into line with other regions and continents. Unlike India, where the impact of the opening up of the world produced new wonder of the world, in China it was to lead to a serious economic and political crisis in the seventeenth century. Globalisation was no less problematic five centuries ago than it is today. (p235)This book provides a history written from an intentionally non-Western point of view. This difference in perspective is what makes it unique and worth reading.
Link to article titled, "Eurasia, the supercontinent that will define our century":
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/0...
May 26, 2019
This is not the history of the Silk Road. If you are looking for descriptions on the trade routes, system, goods, traders, trade journeys, etc, forget about it. The book focuses more on Western-based historical development as well as events. Totally not what I am looking for.
August 15, 2018
This is one of the most beautiful history books I have ever read. It was recommended to me by 7Jane (thank you, 7Jane) and in turn I have recommended this to a few other people. What attracted me was the title and the beautifully designed cover. However, the title was a bit of a misnomer when it says that it is a new history of the world.
The book largely concentrates on Europe and the Middle East with a passing reference to other countries. The book is written in a chronological order starting with the Medieval Age and ending in 2000s. The book gives insights into the political landscape of each region and the history behind the major events that have occurred in the world. Each chapter is divided into different historical periods and each such chapter has small nuggets of information which was absolutely delightful to read.
The author has done a wonderful job putting together such a well researched tome. However, this is not an in-depth research into the history of the world.
The book largely concentrates on Europe and the Middle East with a passing reference to other countries. The book is written in a chronological order starting with the Medieval Age and ending in 2000s. The book gives insights into the political landscape of each region and the history behind the major events that have occurred in the world. Each chapter is divided into different historical periods and each such chapter has small nuggets of information which was absolutely delightful to read.
The author has done a wonderful job putting together such a well researched tome. However, this is not an in-depth research into the history of the world.
November 10, 2022
Quite good. Well researched, well structured, and well written. I disagree slightly with the notion that history tends to focus on the West. Anyone who enjoys learning history is familiar with the Persian Empire, the Mongols, the Crusades, and the Ottomans. I think just about everyone understands the key role Central Asia and the Middle East have played in geopolitics in the 20th and 21st centuries due to natural resources. I don't think there is anything eye opening here, but it is an excellent overall history. I enjoyed it thoroughly.
March 3, 2017
A broad and comprehensive overview of the history of the world, starting with the Persians in the 6th century BC, and ending with the contempory challenges in Central Asia. For me, this book had three merits.
First of all, I admired the way the author explains the connections between and the interdependency of historical events in completely different parts of the world. After reading this book, I realized that globalisation is not new, but existed throughout the history of the world. One great example: the description of the Chinese economy in the 16th Century : a copy/paste of the current situation with mass production and a keen monetary policy.
East and West have influenced each other throughout history, and Central Assia - home of the Silk Roads - played an active role therein, because it literally tied both worlds together. This is the second strong point of the book. It doesn't describe world history from the point of view of Europe (or later, the USA and/or USSR), but it looks to the world from within Central Asia. I never realized the great importance of Persia/Iran untill I read this book. And Irak, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. And what about the Central-Asean republics of the former USSR? Due to their geographical situation, they seem a little bit 'forgotten' by us Westerners, but it didn't prevent these regions from influencing history in a great many ways. What will the future bring, knowing that these regions are literally sitting on piles of natural resources (both energy and minerals).
'Follow the money' is the leitmotiv of this book. Money - and thus, political power - moved from Ancient Greece to Rome, to Constantinopel, to Spain and Portugal, to Northwest Europe, to the British Empire, to the USA, to the Middle-East, and next, to where?
One thing is for sure: we can't ignore Central Asia in the coming decades.
First of all, I admired the way the author explains the connections between and the interdependency of historical events in completely different parts of the world. After reading this book, I realized that globalisation is not new, but existed throughout the history of the world. One great example: the description of the Chinese economy in the 16th Century : a copy/paste of the current situation with mass production and a keen monetary policy.
East and West have influenced each other throughout history, and Central Assia - home of the Silk Roads - played an active role therein, because it literally tied both worlds together. This is the second strong point of the book. It doesn't describe world history from the point of view of Europe (or later, the USA and/or USSR), but it looks to the world from within Central Asia. I never realized the great importance of Persia/Iran untill I read this book. And Irak, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc. And what about the Central-Asean republics of the former USSR? Due to their geographical situation, they seem a little bit 'forgotten' by us Westerners, but it didn't prevent these regions from influencing history in a great many ways. What will the future bring, knowing that these regions are literally sitting on piles of natural resources (both energy and minerals).
'Follow the money' is the leitmotiv of this book. Money - and thus, political power - moved from Ancient Greece to Rome, to Constantinopel, to Spain and Portugal, to Northwest Europe, to the British Empire, to the USA, to the Middle-East, and next, to where?
One thing is for sure: we can't ignore Central Asia in the coming decades.
December 13, 2017
61st book for 2017.
This book is all over the place. While I enjoyed sections of it (the discussion of slave markets in Central Europe was an eye opener), it lacked clear focus. You'd be forgiven for thinking that this would be a "new history of the silk roads", but it's not. It's mostly a story about European (predominantly England - France barely gets a mention - and later US and USSR) relations to Asia, but it jumps all over the place. Why on earth was their a whole chapter on Spain's conquest of the Americas? The time between 15th-19th Centuries is barely mentioned, and then there is a longish (and misplaced) discussion of the US wars Iraq and Afghanistan near the end. The reader finishes with hardly any understanding of what formed the countries/peoples/cultures of Asia. Oh and China hardly rates a mention.
Quite disappointing.
This book is all over the place. While I enjoyed sections of it (the discussion of slave markets in Central Europe was an eye opener), it lacked clear focus. You'd be forgiven for thinking that this would be a "new history of the silk roads", but it's not. It's mostly a story about European (predominantly England - France barely gets a mention - and later US and USSR) relations to Asia, but it jumps all over the place. Why on earth was their a whole chapter on Spain's conquest of the Americas? The time between 15th-19th Centuries is barely mentioned, and then there is a longish (and misplaced) discussion of the US wars Iraq and Afghanistan near the end. The reader finishes with hardly any understanding of what formed the countries/peoples/cultures of Asia. Oh and China hardly rates a mention.
Quite disappointing.
June 28, 2021
The Silk Road seems too simple a title for what it actually was, which is an ancient and important trade route that linked the Western world with the Middle East and Asia. Here, Peter Frankopan both takes his readers on a journey across this route and explores pivotal moments in history that altered the concertation of power, both surrounding and beyond it.
I was pleased to find how engaging a tone this non-fiction book took. Never did I find the contents drily narrated and never did a series of dates and facts overtake the telling of the stories this contained. Peter Frankopan is obviously a well-researched individual and a well-respected historian, but also proved himself a great storyteller here. This is just as important a quality for me, when looking for a non-fiction book to immerse myself in, and I found his style of writing exactly what I was looking for.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Thank you to the author, Peter Frankopan, and the publisher, Bloomsbury, for this opportunity.
I was pleased to find how engaging a tone this non-fiction book took. Never did I find the contents drily narrated and never did a series of dates and facts overtake the telling of the stories this contained. Peter Frankopan is obviously a well-researched individual and a well-respected historian, but also proved himself a great storyteller here. This is just as important a quality for me, when looking for a non-fiction book to immerse myself in, and I found his style of writing exactly what I was looking for.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for an honest review. Thank you to the author, Peter Frankopan, and the publisher, Bloomsbury, for this opportunity.
January 4, 2023
Akkora hájp vette körül ezt a kötetet („a történelemtudomány rocksztárja”, mondja a fülszöveg, oda ne rohanjak), azt hittem, olyan újszerű elméletekkel fog bombázni, hogy az agyam kisül. Ehhez képest némileg lankadtan haladtam az elejével. Olybá tűnt, sima lineáris eseménytörténetet olvasok, ami komótosan baktat az ókortól napjainkig, egyetlen specifikuma, hogy a világ köldökének nem a Nyugatot, hanem Közép-Ázsiát tekinti. A régiót, ami egyfelől összeköti Európát Kínával és Indiával, lüktető artériája pedig a Selyemút. Másfelől pedig olyan, önjogukon is hatalmas birodalmak otthona, mint Perzsia vagy a Mogul Birodalom. Aztán egy idő után megbékéltem a helyzettel, és elkezdtem értékelni. Elsősorban azért, mert egy ilyen monstre összefoglalás egy kevéssé ismert, de annál lényegesebb régióról mindenképpen olyasmi, amit értékelni kell.
Frankopan mellesleg vérbeli ökonomistaként vizsgálja a történelmet. Értve ezalatt, hogy ő a birodalmak felemelkedését és bukását szinte mindig a gazdaságra, vagy pontosabban: a kereskedelemre vezeti vissza. Ebben a megközelítésben az „áru” a központi elem, vagyis valami, ami X-nek van, Y pedig meg akarja szerezni*. No most ha visszamegyünk ezer évet, azt látjuk, Kínának volt selyme, Északnak volt szőrméje, Délnek volt fűszere, satöbbi, satöbbi. Ők mind szerették volna megtalálni a maguk fogyasztóit. És itt jöttek be a képbe a kereskedők, akiket nevezzünk Z-nek. Ők voltak (az artériás metaforánál maradva) a szorgos kis vörösvértestek, akik az éltető oxigént (vagyis az árut) elvitték egyik helyről a másikra, közben persze lefölözték a maguk tisztes hasznát. Ezek a kereskedők Közép-Ázsia lakói voltak, és sikerük egyben azt is jelentette, hogy a térségben gombamód szaporodni kezdtek az olyan pompásabbnál pompásabb városok, mint mondjuk Szamarkand. Ebben a megközelítésben az iszlám vallás csak mellékszál – igaz, olyan mellékszál, ami pontosan lefektetett szabályrendszerével maximálisan kompatibilis a kereskedői mentalitással. A keresztes háborúk pedig nem többek, mint a periférián élő kellemetlen, hónaljszagú barbárok zsemzsegései.
(A szamarkandi múlt.)
(És a szamarkandi jövő - az új reptéri terminál.)
Mert tény, ami tény, Nyugat-Európa ebben az időszakban csak periféria, legalábbis Róma összeomlása után. De olyan periféria, ami többre vágyik. Ugorjunk csak a XV. századba (bocs, nem fogom rigorózusan követni Frankopan fejtegetéseit, csak ugrándozom itt, mint egy kölyökzerge), és mit látunk? Egy végtelenül potens Oszmán Birodalmat, ami épp most kebelezi be Konstantinápolyt. Közép-Ázsia tehát a csúcson, azt hihetnénk. De közben történik valami, ami halálos sebet ejt Közép-Ázsián, még ha nem is esik le nekik rögtön. Az, hogy a keresztények felülnek a vitorlásaikra, és elkezdik felfedezni a világot. Ezzel pedig tulajdonképpen kiveszik az egyenletből Z-t, a közép-ázsiai kereskedőt – a selyemutakat a tengerre helyezik át, szegény Z meg ott szomorkodik meló nélkül a tevéjével a sivatagban. Túlzok, persze, hogy túlzok, de azért a folyamat világos: a régió lassan jelentéktelenedni kezd, mert nem sok mindent tud nyújtani.
Európa pedig felemelkedik**. Karavellái megjelennek mindenhol, ahol nekik tetsző árut remélnek. És bizony ideje visszatérni az „áru” azon jellegzetességéhez, hogy X birtokában van, és Y meg akarja szerezni. Mert ugye a „szerzés” klasszikus és kulturált módja a vásárlás. De ha Y sokkal, de sokkal-sokkal-sokkal erősebb, mint X, akkor gondolhatja úgy, a vásárlás nem kötelező elem, behelyettesíthető az „elvevés” technikájával. És lőn. Európa olyan erős lett (most ne részletezzük, hogyan), hogy ő határozza meg a tranzakció feltételeit – és amit rákényszerít a többiekre, az néha közelebb áll az „elvevéshez”, mint a „vásárláshoz”. Ezt hívják imperializmusnak.
Ugorjunk megint. A karavellákat leváltották közben a vasból készült hadihajók, amelyek olajjal mennek. És bizony ez azt jelenti, hogy Közép-Ázsia megint felkerül a térképre, ugyanis van neki valami, ami hirtelen értékes lesz: olaja. És bár kezdetben úgy fest, a Nyugat itt is rá tudja kényszeríteni akaratát azokra, akik az erőforrásokat birtokolják, de a huszadik század ebben a tekintetben változást hoz: a nagyhatalmak egyre többször kudarcot vallanak, nagyobb kulimászba másznak bele, mint amiből ki lehet vergődni, rájönnek, hogy a nyers erőszak több problémát szül, mint amennyit megold. A súlypontok pedig ismét átrendeződnek. Hát, itt tartunk ma. Az átrendeződésnél. Csak mi is jó helyre rendeződjünk át.
Megjegyz: Mondhatjuk bravúrnak, hogy Frankopan egy olyan csontig lerágott témát is képes eredeti módon megközelíteni, mint a második világháború. Megközelítésében ugyanis a Szovjetunió lerohanása nem ideológiai kérdés volt, hanem Hitler azon félelmét tükrözte, hogy esetleg Németországot megfosztják bizonyos nélkülözhetetlen áruktól: az olajtól és (főleg) a búzától. Ezt megelőzendő próbál egyfelől eljutni Bakuig, másfelől pedig megszerezni a gazdag ukrán búzatermő vidékeket – és (nem mellesleg) eltakarítani onnan a felesleges kenyérpusztítónak ítélt helyi lakosságot, bármi áron.
Megjegyz.2.: Putyin, te meg másszál fel egy létrára, és essél le. Ezt csak úgy mondom, mindentől függetlenül.
* Beilleszthetők az egyenletbe az olyan, látszólag csak pusztítással járó támadások is, mint amivel a vikingek vagy a mongolok ajándékozták meg a civilizációt. Már csak azért is, mert ezek is tekinthetők egy bizonyos áru, mégpedig a „rabszolga” beszerzésére indított expedícióknak.
** Persze itt diverzifikálnunk kell. Amikor ugyanis Európa felemelkedéséről beszélünk, egy többrétegű folyamatot látunk, amiben először felemelkedik Velence, aztán lehanyatlik, mert a spanyolok és a portugálok elveszik előlük a show-t. Aztán az ibériaiaknak is leáldozik, amint felkel Nagy-Britannia napja, aki aztán több mint száz évre monopóliumot jelent be a világtengerekre, hogy aztán átadja a stafétát az USÁ-nak. Mindez kívülről nézve „nyugati sikertörténet”, belülről nézve viszont többlépcsős, belháborúkkal tarkított eseménysor.
Frankopan mellesleg vérbeli ökonomistaként vizsgálja a történelmet. Értve ezalatt, hogy ő a birodalmak felemelkedését és bukását szinte mindig a gazdaságra, vagy pontosabban: a kereskedelemre vezeti vissza. Ebben a megközelítésben az „áru” a központi elem, vagyis valami, ami X-nek van, Y pedig meg akarja szerezni*. No most ha visszamegyünk ezer évet, azt látjuk, Kínának volt selyme, Északnak volt szőrméje, Délnek volt fűszere, satöbbi, satöbbi. Ők mind szerették volna megtalálni a maguk fogyasztóit. És itt jöttek be a képbe a kereskedők, akiket nevezzünk Z-nek. Ők voltak (az artériás metaforánál maradva) a szorgos kis vörösvértestek, akik az éltető oxigént (vagyis az árut) elvitték egyik helyről a másikra, közben persze lefölözték a maguk tisztes hasznát. Ezek a kereskedők Közép-Ázsia lakói voltak, és sikerük egyben azt is jelentette, hogy a térségben gombamód szaporodni kezdtek az olyan pompásabbnál pompásabb városok, mint mondjuk Szamarkand. Ebben a megközelítésben az iszlám vallás csak mellékszál – igaz, olyan mellékszál, ami pontosan lefektetett szabályrendszerével maximálisan kompatibilis a kereskedői mentalitással. A keresztes háborúk pedig nem többek, mint a periférián élő kellemetlen, hónaljszagú barbárok zsemzsegései.
(A szamarkandi múlt.)
(És a szamarkandi jövő - az új reptéri terminál.)
Mert tény, ami tény, Nyugat-Európa ebben az időszakban csak periféria, legalábbis Róma összeomlása után. De olyan periféria, ami többre vágyik. Ugorjunk csak a XV. századba (bocs, nem fogom rigorózusan követni Frankopan fejtegetéseit, csak ugrándozom itt, mint egy kölyökzerge), és mit látunk? Egy végtelenül potens Oszmán Birodalmat, ami épp most kebelezi be Konstantinápolyt. Közép-Ázsia tehát a csúcson, azt hihetnénk. De közben történik valami, ami halálos sebet ejt Közép-Ázsián, még ha nem is esik le nekik rögtön. Az, hogy a keresztények felülnek a vitorlásaikra, és elkezdik felfedezni a világot. Ezzel pedig tulajdonképpen kiveszik az egyenletből Z-t, a közép-ázsiai kereskedőt – a selyemutakat a tengerre helyezik át, szegény Z meg ott szomorkodik meló nélkül a tevéjével a sivatagban. Túlzok, persze, hogy túlzok, de azért a folyamat világos: a régió lassan jelentéktelenedni kezd, mert nem sok mindent tud nyújtani.
Európa pedig felemelkedik**. Karavellái megjelennek mindenhol, ahol nekik tetsző árut remélnek. És bizony ideje visszatérni az „áru” azon jellegzetességéhez, hogy X birtokában van, és Y meg akarja szerezni. Mert ugye a „szerzés” klasszikus és kulturált módja a vásárlás. De ha Y sokkal, de sokkal-sokkal-sokkal erősebb, mint X, akkor gondolhatja úgy, a vásárlás nem kötelező elem, behelyettesíthető az „elvevés” technikájával. És lőn. Európa olyan erős lett (most ne részletezzük, hogyan), hogy ő határozza meg a tranzakció feltételeit – és amit rákényszerít a többiekre, az néha közelebb áll az „elvevéshez”, mint a „vásárláshoz”. Ezt hívják imperializmusnak.
Ugorjunk megint. A karavellákat leváltották közben a vasból készült hadihajók, amelyek olajjal mennek. És bizony ez azt jelenti, hogy Közép-Ázsia megint felkerül a térképre, ugyanis van neki valami, ami hirtelen értékes lesz: olaja. És bár kezdetben úgy fest, a Nyugat itt is rá tudja kényszeríteni akaratát azokra, akik az erőforrásokat birtokolják, de a huszadik század ebben a tekintetben változást hoz: a nagyhatalmak egyre többször kudarcot vallanak, nagyobb kulimászba másznak bele, mint amiből ki lehet vergődni, rájönnek, hogy a nyers erőszak több problémát szül, mint amennyit megold. A súlypontok pedig ismét átrendeződnek. Hát, itt tartunk ma. Az átrendeződésnél. Csak mi is jó helyre rendeződjünk át.
Megjegyz: Mondhatjuk bravúrnak, hogy Frankopan egy olyan csontig lerágott témát is képes eredeti módon megközelíteni, mint a második világháború. Megközelítésében ugyanis a Szovjetunió lerohanása nem ideológiai kérdés volt, hanem Hitler azon félelmét tükrözte, hogy esetleg Németországot megfosztják bizonyos nélkülözhetetlen áruktól: az olajtól és (főleg) a búzától. Ezt megelőzendő próbál egyfelől eljutni Bakuig, másfelől pedig megszerezni a gazdag ukrán búzatermő vidékeket – és (nem mellesleg) eltakarítani onnan a felesleges kenyérpusztítónak ítélt helyi lakosságot, bármi áron.
Megjegyz.2.: Putyin, te meg másszál fel egy létrára, és essél le. Ezt csak úgy mondom, mindentől függetlenül.
* Beilleszthetők az egyenletbe az olyan, látszólag csak pusztítással járó támadások is, mint amivel a vikingek vagy a mongolok ajándékozták meg a civilizációt. Már csak azért is, mert ezek is tekinthetők egy bizonyos áru, mégpedig a „rabszolga” beszerzésére indított expedícióknak.
** Persze itt diverzifikálnunk kell. Amikor ugyanis Európa felemelkedéséről beszélünk, egy többrétegű folyamatot látunk, amiben először felemelkedik Velence, aztán lehanyatlik, mert a spanyolok és a portugálok elveszik előlük a show-t. Aztán az ibériaiaknak is leáldozik, amint felkel Nagy-Britannia napja, aki aztán több mint száz évre monopóliumot jelent be a világtengerekre, hogy aztán átadja a stafétát az USÁ-nak. Mindez kívülről nézve „nyugati sikertörténet”, belülről nézve viszont többlépcsős, belháborúkkal tarkított eseménysor.
June 10, 2016
This is a profoundly ambitious book, aiming to tell the whole history of the world from the perspective of the "Silk Roads" that run through Asia. In a way it is almost impossibly ambitious, because the subject itself is limitlessly broad, potentially. The author runs through the history in a way that is generally satisfactory, although by necessity he has to skim over many events that were quite monumental. This is a general world-history, a clearly written and useful one, but not one that necessarily breaks new ground or proposes a new thesis.
What I found most notable about the book however is how it recontextalizes current events. We're living through a transitional stage in human history, where economic and political predominance is shifting away from the Western hemisphere.
The idea of Western Europe and North America being central to world history is a new one. The norm in human history has been Asia as the locus of events. With the end of the colonial period and the fracturing of the great European empires - an event of a magnitude that we don't always appreciate today - Asia is once more returning to its normal place in world affairs. The rise of Asia is the story of the 21st century. This book charts out well how power moved west bit by bit, and is slowly migrating back again. This is not to say that other regions of the world will be desolate, advances in technology and growing populations globally suggest that the world will be a Silk Road on a grand scale. But its clear that Obama's "pivot to Asia" was a recognition of the fact that Europe is no longer the most important region for the United States in the world going forward.
What I found most notable about the book however is how it recontextalizes current events. We're living through a transitional stage in human history, where economic and political predominance is shifting away from the Western hemisphere.
The idea of Western Europe and North America being central to world history is a new one. The norm in human history has been Asia as the locus of events. With the end of the colonial period and the fracturing of the great European empires - an event of a magnitude that we don't always appreciate today - Asia is once more returning to its normal place in world affairs. The rise of Asia is the story of the 21st century. This book charts out well how power moved west bit by bit, and is slowly migrating back again. This is not to say that other regions of the world will be desolate, advances in technology and growing populations globally suggest that the world will be a Silk Road on a grand scale. But its clear that Obama's "pivot to Asia" was a recognition of the fact that Europe is no longer the most important region for the United States in the world going forward.
October 4, 2023
Excellent!
February 16, 2020
Един общо взето скромен адвокат от Австралия на предела между 19-ти и 20-ти век, натъкнал се на златно находище и напазарувал впоследствие куп луксозни имоти в старата родина, Англия, дава началото на онова, което впоследствие ще стане известно като British Petroleum (BP). А първата концесия е в днешен Иран. Някога средоточие на подправки и коприна от Изтока към Запада, и на...роби от Запада към Изтока. Древните печеливши търговии днес са засенчени от петрола. А петролът просто следва старите търговски пътища, артериите между Изтока и Запада, които си остават източник на обмен, приключения и богатства...и свидетели на куп войни за завоюването им, както и на доста страдания за обитателите си.
Тази и още доста други интересни истории са част от сладкодумната, пъстра история, разказана от Питър Франкопан. Хумор, анекдоти, екзотични детайли и задълбочено проучване правят книгата вълнуващо и информативно четиво от античността до наши дни.
И все пак Франкопан не успява да реализира амбицията си за “нова” история. В стремежа си да представи на читателя по-слабо коментиран регион, какъвто е Средният Изток (предимно Иран, Ирак и Афганистан), Франкопан прави капиталната грешка да се опита да обвърже цялата световната история само с един регион. И се проваля с гръм и трясък.
Причините са няколко:
1. Сменяйки перспективите през различните епохи, той често губи от поглед тъкмо региона, за който говори. В тези случаи Франкопан вади на сцената стандартната евроцентрична и силно англоцентрична трактовка за историята, каквато я има в учебниците и из повечето научнопопулярни канали. Нищо ниво, нищо неочаквано. От великите географски открития до индустриалната революция все едно човек чете различна книга.
2. В други епохи пък преобладава изцяло Средният Изток, и тогава човек се чуди къде паднаха зад борда други ключови световни събития (атомната бомба?). Някак не се е получила цялост, балансът в изложението липсва, двете части не са се споили успешно.
3. В някои епохи, опитвайки се да наблъска колкото се може повече информация, бегло споменава събития, украсявайки ги с прекрасен стил, вместо да ги дообясни.
4. Използваните източници от 19-ти век нататък са само английски и американски. Те са му били и под ръка (в Иран и Русия едва ли биха отворили архивите си за Франкопан), и са доста изчерпателни, но и абсолютно, безпардонно и арогантно едностранчиви.
Достойно за похвала е яс��о изразеното критично отношение на самия Франкопан към прилаганите политики или даваните оценки от страна на Англия и САЩ. За мен лично най-интересна беше частта за 19-ти, 20-ти и 21-век. Откриването на петрола, старите и новите империи в действие и слабостта на местните стари култури, както и всички заложени мини в различните периоди, които избухват по различно време и все “неочаквано”, са поднесени ясно, обосновано и последователно. Със старата истина, че с краткосрочни решения и политики не се решават дългосрочни проблеми. И че войните се водят за ресурси - просто ресурсите варират във времето. Ако пък някой се чуди какво се случва сега между Иран и САЩ, ще намери голяма част от отговора при Франкопан. Освежаваща е и тезата, че търговските пътища на коприната сменят предназначението си през вековете за други стоки, религии и идеи (дали заглавието на всяка глава).
Повече щеше са ми хареса Франкопан да беше написал история само за Средния Изток, и да беше използвал неанглоезични гледни точки. Макар че и така е увлекателно.
П.С. Българското издание е нечитаемо! Много рядко чета книга в оригинал, просто обичам да е на български, и това е едно от изключенията. Но качеството на превода е такова, че в случая четенето в оригинал е задължителна и единствено разбираема опция. Освен това в българското издание липсват картите и илюстрациите - не са критични, но все пак си имат предназначение, и пропускът е дразнещ.
3,5 звезди
Тази и още доста други интересни истории са част от сладкодумната, пъстра история, разказана от Питър Франкопан. Хумор, анекдоти, екзотични детайли и задълбочено проучване правят книгата вълнуващо и информативно четиво от античността до наши дни.
И все пак Франкопан не успява да реализира амбицията си за “нова” история. В стремежа си да представи на читателя по-слабо коментиран регион, какъвто е Средният Изток (предимно Иран, Ирак и Афганистан), Франкопан прави капиталната грешка да се опита да обвърже цялата световната история само с един регион. И се проваля с гръм и трясък.
Причините са няколко:
1. Сменяйки перспективите през различните епохи, той често губи от поглед тъкмо региона, за който говори. В тези случаи Франкопан вади на сцената стандартната евроцентрична и силно англоцентрична трактовка за историята, каквато я има в учебниците и из повечето научнопопулярни канали. Нищо ниво, нищо неочаквано. От великите географски открития до индустриалната революция все едно човек чете различна книга.
2. В други епохи пък преобладава изцяло Средният Изток, и тогава човек се чуди къде паднаха зад борда други ключови световни събития (атомната бомба?). Някак не се е получила цялост, балансът в изложението липсва, двете части не са се споили успешно.
3. В някои епохи, опитвайки се да наблъска колкото се може повече информация, бегло споменава събития, украсявайки ги с прекрасен стил, вместо да ги дообясни.
4. Използваните източници от 19-ти век нататък са само английски и американски. Те са му били и под ръка (в Иран и Русия едва ли биха отворили архивите си за Франкопан), и са доста изчерпателни, но и абсолютно, безпардонно и арогантно едностранчиви.
Достойно за похвала е яс��о изразеното критично отношение на самия Франкопан към прилаганите политики или даваните оценки от страна на Англия и САЩ. За мен лично най-интересна беше частта за 19-ти, 20-ти и 21-век. Откриването на петрола, старите и новите империи в действие и слабостта на местните стари култури, както и всички заложени мини в различните периоди, които избухват по различно време и все “неочаквано”, са поднесени ясно, обосновано и последователно. Със старата истина, че с краткосрочни решения и политики не се решават дългосрочни проблеми. И че войните се водят за ресурси - просто ресурсите варират във времето. Ако пък някой се чуди какво се случва сега между Иран и САЩ, ще намери голяма част от отговора при Франкопан. Освежаваща е и тезата, че търговските пътища на коприната сменят предназначението си през вековете за други стоки, религии и идеи (дали заглавието на всяка глава).
Повече щеше са ми хареса Франкопан да беше написал история само за Средния Изток, и да беше използвал неанглоезични гледни точки. Макар че и така е увлекателно.
П.С. Българското издание е нечитаемо! Много рядко чета книга в оригинал, просто обичам да е на български, и това е едно от изключенията. Но качеството на превода е такова, че в случая четенето в оригинал е задължителна и единствено разбираема опция. Освен това в българското издание липсват картите и илюстрациите - не са критични, но все пак си имат предназначение, и пропускът е дразнещ.
3,5 звезди
December 9, 2016
In this book, Peter Frankopan wants to give an alternative insight in the history of the world by describing the history of the Persian region which has shaped and still shapes the world we live in today
The traditional view that the world we know today was shaped by the Romans and the Greeks is challenged in this book. Instead, Frankopan places the center the centre of the world in the region of modern Iraq, Iran, the Caucasus and the Russian steppes.
The silk roads have functioned as the world's arteries where people, goods and ideas have flowed as long as human history. Frankopan vividly describes the history of regions, with colourful quotes from varying sources. He does this objectively and from a non-Western point of view which - in its own right - is a fresh way of looking at things.
I personally found the part where Frankopan deals with the discovery of oil in the region, the role the British and later the Americans played in this region and how this has developed in the world of conflict we live today. In this way, it is not so much a new history of the world, but rather an alternative history.
The only criticism I have on this book, is its conclusion. In Frankopan's view this region is rising in importance, with large amounts of resources still yet untouched, waiting to be turned into economic growth for the whole population. But ask everyone that lives in the region, and they will answer that these riches will only end up in the pocket of greedy dictators and the small political elite.
The traditional view that the world we know today was shaped by the Romans and the Greeks is challenged in this book. Instead, Frankopan places the center the centre of the world in the region of modern Iraq, Iran, the Caucasus and the Russian steppes.
The silk roads have functioned as the world's arteries where people, goods and ideas have flowed as long as human history. Frankopan vividly describes the history of regions, with colourful quotes from varying sources. He does this objectively and from a non-Western point of view which - in its own right - is a fresh way of looking at things.
I personally found the part where Frankopan deals with the discovery of oil in the region, the role the British and later the Americans played in this region and how this has developed in the world of conflict we live today. In this way, it is not so much a new history of the world, but rather an alternative history.
The only criticism I have on this book, is its conclusion. In Frankopan's view this region is rising in importance, with large amounts of resources still yet untouched, waiting to be turned into economic growth for the whole population. But ask everyone that lives in the region, and they will answer that these riches will only end up in the pocket of greedy dictators and the small political elite.
March 10, 2023
I spent a months of my life happily wallowing in the interesting denseness of silk roads, so trying to pithily sum it all up in a couple of lines is beyond me. For a start Frankopan doesn't really seem to feel in anyway confined to one particular geographical region despite the title, ranging freely across the world stage as he feels fit. Also some of the theories he advances are a puzzling but given the swingeing ambition it seems churlish to quibble.
The most striking bits I was left with, the abruptness of the shift in the centre of economic and military power was to first Western Europe and then the United States was and how temporary this shift maybe in the grand scheme of things. The last section on the West's relationships with the area between the Eastern Mediterranean to the Himalayas so fluid defined repeats itself first as a tragedy and then as tragedy part II through part XX with little farce to be had.
One to enjoy (and set aside a chunk of time!)
The most striking bits I was left with, the abruptness of the shift in the centre of economic and military power was to first Western Europe and then the United States was and how temporary this shift maybe in the grand scheme of things. The last section on the West's relationships with the area between the Eastern Mediterranean to the Himalayas so fluid defined repeats itself first as a tragedy and then as tragedy part II through part XX with little farce to be had.
One to enjoy (and set aside a chunk of time!)
December 15, 2017
It is not easy to write a history of the world that stays on message and the theme here is on the silk roads, or rather, the dominance of a region of the world with all the silk, then the slaves, then the spices, then the labor, and then the oil. It starts with the Persian empire and runs to today and it keeps the focal point and the perspective on the lands across the silk road. It shows not only why Genghis Khan was successful, but why Khomeini came to power. Books like these are a nice antidote to the "clash of civilizations" prattle coming from the Huntington's and Sam Harris' of the world. This is an absolute must-read.
January 29, 2019
I found this very interesting, dealing with a lot of complex issues in an interesting way. It did take me a while to get into though - I might have got more out of it reading it in book form not on audiobook.
March 27, 2017
I LOVED this book. If you are extremely well versed in history, then, to you, it might not read like the "new history of the world," the book promises. Since I am only a moderate reader of history, there was plenty of new information for me in this book. Usually, the history that interests me most involves great scientists or inventors or the kings, queens, and other rulers of the world from the distant past. When trying to read about more recent events, such as the Revolutionary war, WWI or WWII, my eyes glaze over and my mind begins to wander. Surprisingly, when this book chronicled the Revolutionary War, WWI and WWII, I was completely addicted to every page. Prior to reading this book, if you asked me how the Revolutionary War began, I surely would not have told you that the unethical actions of some dude named Robert Clive (so good!) was a key motivator for the people living in America to fight for the right to be their own country. If anyone had asked me about the Holocaust, I would not have known that it really started in the wheat fields of Russia. Every time Frankopan relayed a well-told history, I would start to feel as if I had heard it before (who hasn't heard of Alexander the Great, Queen Isabella, Hitler, or the many other rulers who have shaped our world) Frankopan would introduce me to people I had never heard about in any classroom or book (Do you know the story of how Yale thieved his way to the good life and to having an ivy named after him?).
At first this book seemed like a standard history. Beginning as far back as history records, Frankopan took his reader on a sweeping and marvelous journey through time, witnessing the conquering and colonization of our globe. At it's core, this book has one central question, "What travels up and down the arteries and veins (waterways) of the earth?" You might think the answer is, "Material goods travel from one place to another via the Silk Road." The answer is so much better than that. What really traverses the veins and arteries of Earth is power -- who can sell the most goods, make the most money, conquer the most land, steal the most from the citizens of every land, and so on.
As he told each history, he absolutely excelled at making the reader wonder, 'What would *I* have done if I had been the ruler of that country at the time?' It's so easy to engage in Monday morning quarterbacking and pass judgement on what various leaders did wrong. I personally despise Reagan because of the racists ideologies to which he subscribed and continually perpetuated. It is easy, no matter which leaders you idolize or despise, to engage in black and white (wrong and right) thinking. It's much harder to stop and ask yourself, "If I were Reagan, what would I have done?" While I know perfectly well that I would never have made it my mission to promote the idea of the black welfare queen, driving around in her Cadillac (on her way to meet her next dude who will impregnate her with yet another baby tax dollars will have to pay for), I don't know what I would have done about funding Saddam and his army. Sure, the Iran-Contra affair was pretty bad. As a liberal, I see it as particularly horrible. And yet, what would I have done if I were Reagan. I found myself stunned at my own inability to take the best action to keep our country safe. If Reagan refused to fund Saddam, he risked Saddam turning to other countries who would have been more than happy to fund him and form an alliance against the U.S.. I don't condone Reagan's actions. Further, I support any efforts that ensured transparency and brought him to task in front of the American people; and still, I find it almost impossible to figure out what *I* would have done in Reagan's place. This happened so often throughout the book, with so many different leaders of different countries and companies, that I found myself in a state of constant moral crisis. When a book puts me in such a conflicted state, for such a long time period, I find that extremely rewarding. My dopamine neurons were going crazy, making me completely addicted to every page of this book. Every day, I had to put myself in the place of someone else, a powerful leader, and try to imagine what I would have done differently.
There were so many great stories about how humans (usually those with the most power) used the Silk Road to destroy enemies, that it is hard to pick only a few to highlight in this review. Here are some of, what I found to be, the most enjoyable stories in this book:
All three of these stories involve the East India company. No matter how much I read about the EIC, the info I discover never fails to amaze me.
1) The East India Company drugged its way to power. Talk about roofying whole masses of people to get what you want! The EIC started out as a company of merchants who sold goods from one continent to another. However, when they began dealing drugs, they rose to become an occupying power. Their transition into drug dealers was seamless and is what allowed them transition from every day merchant to a major ruling force in the world.
China specialized in trading silk, porcelain, and, above all, tea, making them a powerful world leader. The EIC was able to get its foot in the door by trading goods, but when the peoples of India grew opium and the EIC traded it, a major shift in power occurred. The EIC funneled in opium for the Chinese people to get hooked on, while funneling out all the material goods. As the Chinese people became more and more addicted to opium, the European people became more and more addicted to material goods. All of this added up to great wealth and power for the EIC and the European Country that owned it.
2) Prior to when Yale (who would eventually be the main benefactor of Yale University in Connecticut) served in the Navy, most of the positions in a company were assigned to people who were born to good families. Yale was an average person who started out in a lowly position in the Navy. Through this new power structure, which allowed anyone to move up if they worked hard and had seniority, Yale was able to move up in ranks and hold a high position in the EIC. Fortuitously, he was station in Madras. All the goods that were shipped up and down the waterways in a large area around Madras had to go through Madras to be "taxed". For Yale, "taxing" meant helping himself to whatever the hell he wanted. Because of the diamonds and spices Yale stole from the local merchants, he became one of the wealthiest men in the world. His crimes didn't go unnoticed. But, rather than being punished, he was simply asked to leave, and leave he did! He took all that stolen "new money" with him and spent it on the finest life had to offer. When Yale was older, he made a very large donation to the Connecticut School. Hoping for more donations of that kind, the renamed themselves Yale.
3) No one from the original Tea Party would ever vote for Trump. How do I know? Trump is too much like Robert Clive of the EIC, and the Tea Party was *formed in response* to an absolute hatred for Robert Clive.
Robert Clive was hired to look out for the interests of the shareholders in the EIC, and look out for their interests he did! Robert Clive was stationed at a tax port along the trade routes. (It was shocking to me to see how wealthy a few individuals became because they were at the right place at the right time.) Clive made it his mission to redistribute wealth, what is equivalent to tens of billions of today's dollars, from the locals to the pockets of the few elite shareholders in the EIC. The locals were already poor and found daily living a struggle. Clive's redistribution hit the locals even harder. As he lined the pockets of himself and the other shareholders, the locals starved to death around him. A full 1/3 of the population starved to death as the rich got markedly richer. There was a huge outcry. Articles strewn the paper, shaming Clive for his misdeeds. The people chastised him for allowing millions to starve to death while he and a chosen few enjoyed enormous wealth. When confronted, Clive took a "Who Me?" approach, stating that he was hired to look out for the shareholders, not the poor-- as if that would make it ok to knowingly line his pockets with the very money the locals needed to survive.
The mass starvation had an extremely negative impact on the success of the very company from which Clive was making his living. It's sort of hard to have workers to do work when you let them all die. The loss of manpower resulted in bankruptcy for the EIC. What was a company to do? Easy, get a bailout! Where could they find the money for a bailout? That was a little more difficult. They pick pocketed the local Indian people into absolute devastation. So, they couldn't raise taxes on them. The people in England were already livid. It was decided they would raise the taxes on the colonist in America, who were already paying a higher tax rate. The colonists, then English subjects, said fuck that! And thus, the Tea Party was born.
The Tea Party blocked passage of ships, stating that they refused to pay even more tax to a country that raped and pillaged everything they could from the people of India. The colonists felt certain EIC would do the same to them as they did to the people in India. With fury, when a few ships made it into the Boston Harbor, the Tea Partiers sunk the ship, saying they would rather see the tea at the bottom of the ocean than pay for the misdeeds of Clive and his fellow thieves.
According to Frankopan, The powerful elite had "spread their tentacles" as far as they could, taking every resource they could. The colonists cut those greedy tentacles right off; and in doing so, America was born.
I want to write about how a man named D'arcy struck oil and changed the way we fought wars and, in turn, changed the face of the world. But, this review is long enough already. I highly recommend you read it for yourself.
At first this book seemed like a standard history. Beginning as far back as history records, Frankopan took his reader on a sweeping and marvelous journey through time, witnessing the conquering and colonization of our globe. At it's core, this book has one central question, "What travels up and down the arteries and veins (waterways) of the earth?" You might think the answer is, "Material goods travel from one place to another via the Silk Road." The answer is so much better than that. What really traverses the veins and arteries of Earth is power -- who can sell the most goods, make the most money, conquer the most land, steal the most from the citizens of every land, and so on.
As he told each history, he absolutely excelled at making the reader wonder, 'What would *I* have done if I had been the ruler of that country at the time?' It's so easy to engage in Monday morning quarterbacking and pass judgement on what various leaders did wrong. I personally despise Reagan because of the racists ideologies to which he subscribed and continually perpetuated. It is easy, no matter which leaders you idolize or despise, to engage in black and white (wrong and right) thinking. It's much harder to stop and ask yourself, "If I were Reagan, what would I have done?" While I know perfectly well that I would never have made it my mission to promote the idea of the black welfare queen, driving around in her Cadillac (on her way to meet her next dude who will impregnate her with yet another baby tax dollars will have to pay for), I don't know what I would have done about funding Saddam and his army. Sure, the Iran-Contra affair was pretty bad. As a liberal, I see it as particularly horrible. And yet, what would I have done if I were Reagan. I found myself stunned at my own inability to take the best action to keep our country safe. If Reagan refused to fund Saddam, he risked Saddam turning to other countries who would have been more than happy to fund him and form an alliance against the U.S.. I don't condone Reagan's actions. Further, I support any efforts that ensured transparency and brought him to task in front of the American people; and still, I find it almost impossible to figure out what *I* would have done in Reagan's place. This happened so often throughout the book, with so many different leaders of different countries and companies, that I found myself in a state of constant moral crisis. When a book puts me in such a conflicted state, for such a long time period, I find that extremely rewarding. My dopamine neurons were going crazy, making me completely addicted to every page of this book. Every day, I had to put myself in the place of someone else, a powerful leader, and try to imagine what I would have done differently.
There were so many great stories about how humans (usually those with the most power) used the Silk Road to destroy enemies, that it is hard to pick only a few to highlight in this review. Here are some of, what I found to be, the most enjoyable stories in this book:
All three of these stories involve the East India company. No matter how much I read about the EIC, the info I discover never fails to amaze me.
1) The East India Company drugged its way to power. Talk about roofying whole masses of people to get what you want! The EIC started out as a company of merchants who sold goods from one continent to another. However, when they began dealing drugs, they rose to become an occupying power. Their transition into drug dealers was seamless and is what allowed them transition from every day merchant to a major ruling force in the world.
China specialized in trading silk, porcelain, and, above all, tea, making them a powerful world leader. The EIC was able to get its foot in the door by trading goods, but when the peoples of India grew opium and the EIC traded it, a major shift in power occurred. The EIC funneled in opium for the Chinese people to get hooked on, while funneling out all the material goods. As the Chinese people became more and more addicted to opium, the European people became more and more addicted to material goods. All of this added up to great wealth and power for the EIC and the European Country that owned it.
2) Prior to when Yale (who would eventually be the main benefactor of Yale University in Connecticut) served in the Navy, most of the positions in a company were assigned to people who were born to good families. Yale was an average person who started out in a lowly position in the Navy. Through this new power structure, which allowed anyone to move up if they worked hard and had seniority, Yale was able to move up in ranks and hold a high position in the EIC. Fortuitously, he was station in Madras. All the goods that were shipped up and down the waterways in a large area around Madras had to go through Madras to be "taxed". For Yale, "taxing" meant helping himself to whatever the hell he wanted. Because of the diamonds and spices Yale stole from the local merchants, he became one of the wealthiest men in the world. His crimes didn't go unnoticed. But, rather than being punished, he was simply asked to leave, and leave he did! He took all that stolen "new money" with him and spent it on the finest life had to offer. When Yale was older, he made a very large donation to the Connecticut School. Hoping for more donations of that kind, the renamed themselves Yale.
3) No one from the original Tea Party would ever vote for Trump. How do I know? Trump is too much like Robert Clive of the EIC, and the Tea Party was *formed in response* to an absolute hatred for Robert Clive.
Robert Clive was hired to look out for the interests of the shareholders in the EIC, and look out for their interests he did! Robert Clive was stationed at a tax port along the trade routes. (It was shocking to me to see how wealthy a few individuals became because they were at the right place at the right time.) Clive made it his mission to redistribute wealth, what is equivalent to tens of billions of today's dollars, from the locals to the pockets of the few elite shareholders in the EIC. The locals were already poor and found daily living a struggle. Clive's redistribution hit the locals even harder. As he lined the pockets of himself and the other shareholders, the locals starved to death around him. A full 1/3 of the population starved to death as the rich got markedly richer. There was a huge outcry. Articles strewn the paper, shaming Clive for his misdeeds. The people chastised him for allowing millions to starve to death while he and a chosen few enjoyed enormous wealth. When confronted, Clive took a "Who Me?" approach, stating that he was hired to look out for the shareholders, not the poor-- as if that would make it ok to knowingly line his pockets with the very money the locals needed to survive.
The mass starvation had an extremely negative impact on the success of the very company from which Clive was making his living. It's sort of hard to have workers to do work when you let them all die. The loss of manpower resulted in bankruptcy for the EIC. What was a company to do? Easy, get a bailout! Where could they find the money for a bailout? That was a little more difficult. They pick pocketed the local Indian people into absolute devastation. So, they couldn't raise taxes on them. The people in England were already livid. It was decided they would raise the taxes on the colonist in America, who were already paying a higher tax rate. The colonists, then English subjects, said fuck that! And thus, the Tea Party was born.
The Tea Party blocked passage of ships, stating that they refused to pay even more tax to a country that raped and pillaged everything they could from the people of India. The colonists felt certain EIC would do the same to them as they did to the people in India. With fury, when a few ships made it into the Boston Harbor, the Tea Partiers sunk the ship, saying they would rather see the tea at the bottom of the ocean than pay for the misdeeds of Clive and his fellow thieves.
According to Frankopan, The powerful elite had "spread their tentacles" as far as they could, taking every resource they could. The colonists cut those greedy tentacles right off; and in doing so, America was born.
I want to write about how a man named D'arcy struck oil and changed the way we fought wars and, in turn, changed the face of the world. But, this review is long enough already. I highly recommend you read it for yourself.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,682 reviews