Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

J. C. Hurewitz, Middle East Politics: The Military Dimension . New York, Frederick A. Praeger, 1969, xviii, 553 pp. Maps, Tables, Bibliographic Note, Index. Paper, $ 3.95

J. C. Hurewitz, Middle East Politics: The Military Dimension . New York, Frederick A. Praeger,... BOOK REVIEWS On all these aeeounts, this is a significant study and does a great deal of justice to an otherwise muddled subject that received muddled treatment in the past. Though Professor el-Sayyid went over familiar grounds at appropriate junctures in her study, her treatment was uniformly fair, gentle, and pereeptive. Revisionist historians of modern Egypt will undoubtedly quarrel with minor points here and there, but they will not be able to dispense with this work. And for many years to come, this study will by the standard reference for a critical period in Egyptian history. Northwestern University Evanston, U.S.A. IBRAHIM ABU-LuGHOD J. C. Hurewitz, Middle East Politics: The Military Dimension. New York, Frederick A. Praeger, 1969, xviii, 553 pp. Maps, Tables, Bibliographie Note, Index. Paper, $ 3.95 Professor J. C. Hurewitz has attempted the impossible in three parts. He has given a historical introduction to modern military history ; he has provided a detailed analysis of each of eighteen separate Middle Eastern states; and he has summarized the significance of the details, It is a difficult concept and a difficult book as well. The briefhistorical analysis is an attempt to do too much, so that the generalizations make the historically-oriented uncomfortable. For example, "Muskim dynasties ofthe day (the eighteenth century) were tribal in origin" (p. 18) except, for example, for the most important of them, the Ottoman state (which was gazi in origin) or the Safavid state (wh ich was religious in origin). Another small example is the assertion (p. 26) that the palace schools of the Ottomans were gradually abandoned before mid-seventeenth century, whereas in reality, there were still 400 or 500 pages in the palace school at the time ofthe destruction ofthe]anissaries in 1826, and the institution wobbled on in senility till 1922. Further, there is the kind of assertion which carries so much information and so many implications that it would take a book of qualifiers to untangle them, "Thus, paradoxically, in republican Syria, the traditional Islamic pattern of military-political dominance of the total population by its most illiterate section, usually tribal, had become fixed in Syria... " (p. 15). In short, it is not possible to give a meaningful history ofthe military in the Middle East in a mere sixty-five pages. The same criticism might almost but need not be made of the final seetion, the summation. The material here is so new, the many policies described so much a matter of opinion or outlook, that they can be validly offered as one set of set of interpretations. The middle section, the important part which constitutes the body of the book, has two major disadvantages : the information ab out current military status is so transitory that it often changes between formulation and publication, and it is impossible to read for general information, loaded as it is with specific data. For that specific data, however, we in the field must thank Professor Hurewitz. It was a lang and difficult job to find and organize it and it provides a useful ready reference to the names and numbers of the players in an ever-changing scene. I shall gladly keep it on my shelf for that purpose. The Rutgers State University, New Brunswick, U.S.A. Journal of Asian and African Studies V,3 SABRA F. MESERVEY http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Asian and African Studies (in 2002 continued as African and Asian Studies) Brill

J. C. Hurewitz, Middle East Politics: The Military Dimension . New York, Frederick A. Praeger, 1969, xviii, 553 pp. Maps, Tables, Bibliographic Note, Index. Paper, $ 3.95

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/j-c-hurewitz-middle-east-politics-the-military-dimension-new-york-HeKfTqE7Ls

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© Copyright 1970 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0021-9096
eISSN
1568-5217
DOI
10.1163/15685217-90007081
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS On all these aeeounts, this is a significant study and does a great deal of justice to an otherwise muddled subject that received muddled treatment in the past. Though Professor el-Sayyid went over familiar grounds at appropriate junctures in her study, her treatment was uniformly fair, gentle, and pereeptive. Revisionist historians of modern Egypt will undoubtedly quarrel with minor points here and there, but they will not be able to dispense with this work. And for many years to come, this study will by the standard reference for a critical period in Egyptian history. Northwestern University Evanston, U.S.A. IBRAHIM ABU-LuGHOD J. C. Hurewitz, Middle East Politics: The Military Dimension. New York, Frederick A. Praeger, 1969, xviii, 553 pp. Maps, Tables, Bibliographie Note, Index. Paper, $ 3.95 Professor J. C. Hurewitz has attempted the impossible in three parts. He has given a historical introduction to modern military history ; he has provided a detailed analysis of each of eighteen separate Middle Eastern states; and he has summarized the significance of the details, It is a difficult concept and a difficult book as well. The briefhistorical analysis is an attempt to do too much, so that the generalizations make the historically-oriented uncomfortable. For example, "Muskim dynasties ofthe day (the eighteenth century) were tribal in origin" (p. 18) except, for example, for the most important of them, the Ottoman state (which was gazi in origin) or the Safavid state (wh ich was religious in origin). Another small example is the assertion (p. 26) that the palace schools of the Ottomans were gradually abandoned before mid-seventeenth century, whereas in reality, there were still 400 or 500 pages in the palace school at the time ofthe destruction ofthe]anissaries in 1826, and the institution wobbled on in senility till 1922. Further, there is the kind of assertion which carries so much information and so many implications that it would take a book of qualifiers to untangle them, "Thus, paradoxically, in republican Syria, the traditional Islamic pattern of military-political dominance of the total population by its most illiterate section, usually tribal, had become fixed in Syria... " (p. 15). In short, it is not possible to give a meaningful history ofthe military in the Middle East in a mere sixty-five pages. The same criticism might almost but need not be made of the final seetion, the summation. The material here is so new, the many policies described so much a matter of opinion or outlook, that they can be validly offered as one set of set of interpretations. The middle section, the important part which constitutes the body of the book, has two major disadvantages : the information ab out current military status is so transitory that it often changes between formulation and publication, and it is impossible to read for general information, loaded as it is with specific data. For that specific data, however, we in the field must thank Professor Hurewitz. It was a lang and difficult job to find and organize it and it provides a useful ready reference to the names and numbers of the players in an ever-changing scene. I shall gladly keep it on my shelf for that purpose. The Rutgers State University, New Brunswick, U.S.A. Journal of Asian and African Studies V,3 SABRA F. MESERVEY

Journal

Journal of Asian and African Studies (in 2002 continued as African and Asian Studies)Brill

Published: Jan 1, 1970

There are no references for this article.