History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)

Book Description

Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.

Customer Reviews:

Has history been tampered with?.......2007-10-23

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/RAZQNMXM4M9CL Has history been tampered with? Yes, it has! Did events and eras such as the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Roman Empire , the Dark Ages, and the Renaissance, actually occur within a very different chronology from what we've been told? Yes, they certainly did!

The history of humankind is both drastically shorter and dramatically different than generally presumed.

Why is it so? On one hand, it was usual custom to justify the claims to title and land by age and ancestry, and on the other the court historians knew only too well how to please their masters. The so called universal classic world history is a pack of intricate lies for all events prior to the 16th century. World history as we learn it today was entirely fabricated in the 16th-18th centuries. It's likely that nobody told you before, but

there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that is reliably and independently dated prior to the 11th century.

Naturally, after what you've learned in school and university, you will not easily believe that the classical history of ancient Rome, Greece, Asia, Egypt, China, Japan, India, etc., is manifestly false.

You will point accusing finger to the pyramids in Egypt, to the Coliseum in Rome and Great Wall of China etc., and claim, aren't they really ancient, thousands of years ancient? Well, there is no valid scientific proof that they are older than 1000 years!

The oldest original written document that can be reliably dated belongs to the 11th century!

New research asserts that Homo sapiens invented writing (including hieroglyphics) only 1000 years ago. Once invented, writing skills were immediately and irreversibly put to the use of ruling powers and science.

The consensual chronology we live with was essentially crafted in the 16th century by the Jesuits.

The world history was compiled from contradictory mix of innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts and other irrefutable proofs delivered by late mediaeval astronomers that were cemented by the authority of writings of the Church Fathers.

Early in life, we learn about ancient history. Children love the magical lessons of history - they are like fairy tales. Teachers recite breathtaking stories; very soon We learn by heart the names and deeds of brave warriors, wise philosophers, fabulous pharaohs, cunning high priests and greedy scribes.

We learn of gigantic pyramids and sinister castles, kings and queens, dukes and barons, powerful heroes and beautiful ladies, emaciated saints and low-life traitors.

Ancient history is based documents, manuscripts, printed books, paintings, monuments and artefacts - called primary sources.

The problem is that neither these ancient documents, nor events described therein can be irrefutably dated, moreover they contradict each other for the most part.

When a school textbook tells us that Genghis Khan in year X or Alexander in year Y, have each conquered half of the world, it means only that it is so said in some of the written sources.

There are no answers to simple questions:

When were these primary sources written?

Where and by whom were these sources found?

It is wrongly presumed that ancient and medieval chronicles, written by Genghis Khan's or Alexander the Great contemporaries and eyewitnesses, are readily available. Actually, only sources written hundreds or even thousands of years after the events are there, compiled mostly in the 16th 18th centuries, or even later.

As a rule, these sources suffered considerable multiple manipulations, falsifications and distortions by editing. At the same time,

innumerable originals of ancient documents under various pretexts were destroyed in Europe under various pretexts.

The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries.

Geographical locations became clearly defined on maps only with the advent of printing.

This made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes of the military, navigation, education and governance tasks.

Historians from Oxford say: "hey, everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.

`Julius Caesar' statement is only a point of view as

there is simply no irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar or any other great name of antiquity ever existed.

Better than that - extremely rare sources that can be reliably dated back to the 10th-14th centuries A D, do not show the polished picture of classical history.

They show a picture both contradictory and confusing.

All methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts are erroneous:

Radio-carbon C14 method produces dating with exactitude of plus minus 1500 years, therefore it is too crude for dating of events in historical timeframe!

The Almagest tractate, which lies as corner stone contemporary chronology, compiled in the 2nd century A D by Ptolemy, the founding father of astronomy, contains astronomical data of 9th to 16th century!

The Bronze Age,that has supposedly began 5000 years ago. Bronze is made of 90% copper and 10% tin, but the technology for tin extraction dates back to 14th century A D!.

All eclipses contained in manuscripts, like Thucydides one, relating 'ancient' events have exclusively medieval dating. All horoscopes cut in stone or painted in Egyptian temples, like Dendera have exclusively early medieval dating solutions.

Not quite what you have learned in school? Open your eyes, and, you will find sufficient proof to reach step by step the inevitable conclusion that the classical chronology is false and therefore, that the history of ancient and medieval world universally accepted today, is also false. Have a fresh outlook on everything said or printed about "ancient" and "enigmatic" Roman, Greek and Egyptian, medieval as well as all other "lost and found" civilizations.

Antiquity and Dark Ages are phantoms invented in the 16th 18th and polished in 19th 20thcenturies. Human civilization is in fact barely 1000 years old!

This book will change your perception of History forever!
What if Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented during Renaissance?
What if The Old Testament was a rendition of events of the Middle Ages?
What if Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD?
Sounds Unbelievable?
Not after you've read "History: Fiction or Science?" by Anatoly Fomenko, the genius mathematician.
Armed with astronomy and computers Anatoly Fomenko turns History into a rocket science.

Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03

Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.

Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09

There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.

For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.

Very Interesting.......2007-03-07

It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.

The Ottoman Empire and the World-Economy (Studies in Modern Capitalism)

Average customer rating:

The Ottoman Empire and the World-Economy (Studies in Modern Capitalism)

Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Economic History | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Turkey | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
ASIN: 0521526078

Book Description

This collection of essays represents a departure from the traditional perspective, recently questioned by many scholars, from which Ottoman history is usually written. Central to the establishment of Western domination over the ‘East’ is the writing of its history in terms of Western hegemony, above all in the case of the Ottoman Empire, which has been characterised as static, irrational and authoritarian in contrast with the dynamic, rational, democratic West. This book contrasts sharply with conventional studies of the Ottoman Empire, based on this European world-view, that focus on political military, and cultural institutions. Following a series of general theoretical discussions about Ottoman social structure, the contributors turn to case studies directed either to theoretical problems or to ‘facts’ which suggest new avenues of conceptualisation.

The Ottoman Empire and the World Economy: The Nineteenth Century (Suny Series in Middle East Studies)

Average customer rating:

The Ottoman Empire and the World Economy: The Nineteenth Century (Suny Series in Middle East Studies)
Resat Kasaba
Manufacturer: State University of New York Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Economic Conditions | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Economic Conditions | International | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Turkey | Asia | History | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0887068057

OTTOMAN: An entry from Macmillan Reference USA's
<i>Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World</i>

Average customer rating:

OTTOMAN: An entry from Macmillan Reference USA's Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World
Donald Quataert
Manufacturer: Macmillan Reference USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Digital
ASIN: B000M4QPVC

Book Description

“Islam and the Muslim World” will help people understand the fastest growing religion in the United States and the dominant religion in a wide area of the rest of the world. This informative and interesting new encyclopedia explores an increasingly important force in the modern world, looking at Islam's role in the modern world, in the context of the religion's history and development over the last 13 centuries, and contains thematic articles, biographies of key figures, definitions, and more, filling a need in this key area of religious studies and serving as a resource for those eager to become better informed.

Pan-Islamism: Indian Muslims, the Ottomans and Britain (1877-1924) (Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage - Politics, Society and Economy , No 12)

Average customer rating:

Pan-Islamism
Its a great contribution and an indispensable source.

Pan-Islamism: Indian Muslims, the Ottomans and Britain (1877-1924) (Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage - Politics, Society and Economy , No 12)
Azmi Ozcan
Manufacturer: Brill Academic Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Turkey | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Europe | History | Subjects | Books

General | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

Islamic | World | History | Subjects | Books

General | Interior Design | Home & Garden | Subjects | Books

Book Description

This important study examines the Indo-Muslim attitude towards the Ottomans from the start of the Russo-Turkish war in 1877 until the end of the Caliphate in 1924. The period treated coincides with what is commonly described as the Pan-Islamic Movement; the British reaction to the Pan-Islamic developments is also discussed extensively. No comprehensive study to date has dealt with the nature of the relations between the Ottomans and other Muslims, and therefore this work provides new historical, religious and political perspectives on the modern history of Indian Muslims. In addition to Indian, Pakistani, Ottoman and British archival material, publications such as diaries, memoirs, newspapers and books have been incorporated, including writings in Urdu which are generally inaccessible to most historians studying late nineteenth-century Ottoman history.

Customer Reviews:

Pan-Islamism.......2001-08-06

The Indian romance with the Ottoman Empire has been known from British and Indian sources, but Özcan fleshes out the story - and a fascinating one it is - with information from the Turkish archives. First, he shows that the Indian connection did not begin, as is usually thought, in the 1870s, but goes back to the 1530s, when the Ottomans sent a fleet of two thousand men to Diu and Indian Muslims expressed a desire for Ottoman suzerainty. By the 1550s, a cultural nexus had also grown up, so that a renowned Turkish architect was building in Agra and Delhi. It then continued; inn 1777, for example, the sultan of Malabar sought financial help from Istanbul.

Second, Özcan shows how the Ottoman Empire filled this same role for a variety of other Muslim countries-such as the khanates of Central Asia and distant Atjeh (in today's Indonesia). Interestingly, these states not only asked for Ottoman help (which they sometimes got-twenty battleships to Atjeh to fight the Portuguese in 1556) but also offered their own services (the khan of Bukhara offered all help in 1719 against Russia).

With the collapse of Muslim power in India in 1857, a longing developed there for the symbols of Turkish sovereignty, which the British agilely exploited their own purposes (for example, prevailing on the Ottoman sultan to encourage Indians to accept British rule). Sultan Abdülhamit II (r. 1876-1908) put great stress on his pan-Islamic role, going so far as to assert that "one word" from him "would be enough for starting a jehad against ... the Christians." Of course, when war came in 1914, that "one word" proved not to be enough, and although the Indian Muslims remained attached to their Turkish coreligionists, they did not revolt against British rule. Contrarily, the Indians could do nothing to stop Kemal Atatürk from abolishing the caliphate in 1924, an act that effectively cut the links between Turkey's and India's Muslims.

Middle East Quarterly, June 1999

Its a great contribution and an indispensable source........1999-06-22

...There are a few works on the relations between the Ottomans and the Indian muslims. The existing ones however, mainly based on the English sources. The fact that the Ottoman archival material used for the first time in a study dealing also with the modern history of the Indian muslims vis a vi the British and the Ottomans, makes this study indispensable for those who are interested in the history of respective lands. Therefore Dr. Ozcan's work is a great contribution and deserves every credit....

Book Description

State and Peasant in the Ottoman Empire studies the dynamics of Ottoman peasant economy in the sixteenth century. First, it shows that contrary to the conventional wisdom about the `stationariness'of the Asian agrarian economies, Ottoman peasant economy witnessed substantial growth in response to population increase, urban commercial expansion and to increased taxation demands. Second, the book argues that economic development did not take place independently of political structures, of the state. This meant that in the light of the fiscal and legitimation concerns of the Ottoman state and contrary to the assumptions of the models of economic development, changes in population and in commercial demand did not result in the disruption of the integrity of the small peasant holding as the primary unit of production. The book develops these arguments in the context of a detailed empirical study of the economic trends, of the state rules or institutions that embodied the relations of revenue extraction, and of exchange in Ottoman Anatolia.

Struggle for Domination in the Middle East: The Ottoman-Mamluk War, 1485-91 (The Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage : Politics, Society and Economy, Vo)

Average customer rating:

A refreshing overview of Mamluk and Ottoman relations

Struggle for Domination in the Middle East: The Ottoman-Mamluk War, 1485-91 (The Ottoman Empire and Its Heritage : Politics, Society and Economy, Vo)
Shai Har-El
Manufacturer: Brill Academic Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

General | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

Turkey | Asia | History | Subjects | Books

General | Middle East | History | Subjects | Books

General | Military | History | Subjects | Books

General | World | History | Subjects | Books

Islamic | World | History | Subjects | Books

General | Interior Design | Home & Garden | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 9004101802

Book Description

This two-part volume offers a comprehensive account of the conflict between the Ottoman and Mamluk Empires. Part One explores Ottoman-Mamluk relations from their inception in the middle of the 14th century to the laying of the foundations of the conflict in the second half of the 15th century. Part Two offers a detailed description of the actual war of 1485-91, and analyzes it from various angles including military, economic, and diplomatic. Based largely on Ottoman, Mamluk and Italian primary sources--documentary and narrative--the volume helps to understand the second and final war between the Ottomans and Mamluks in 1516-17, which resulted in the downfall of the Mamluk Empire and the firm establishment of Ottoman power in the Middle East.

Customer Reviews:

A refreshing overview of Mamluk and Ottoman relations.......2005-12-04

Starting with the reign of Sultan Mehmed the conqueror (1451-81), the Ottomans (whose economic, military, and political power was on the rise) began to pursue a policy of imperialism. Combining this strategy with constant expansion through military conquests, the Ottomans sought to acquire more power and simultaneously, affect a favourable change in the distribution of that power in the region with the ultimate goal of establishing a worldwide empire. In contrast, the Mamluks (whose power was in constant decline) pursued a policy of status-quo-they sought to keep power and maintain the distribution of power that already existed. Moreover, unlike the Ottomans, the Mamluks' main instruments for preserving the status quo were alliances, as well as patron-client relationships with buffer principalities on the frontier. Eventually, there arose a conflict between the two powers, one in which the Ottomans always took the initiative and sought through offensive measures to increase their power at the expense of the Mamluks. Beginning in territorial competition, this conflict resulted in a direct opposition marked by two wars, the penultimate of which is the subject of Shai Har-El's impressive Struggle for domination in the Middle East.

In his preface, Har-El laments, "Mamluk history in general is still a barren field of research" and that, "historians working within the Oriental tradition have often avoided a conceptual inquiry into the history of relations between states, concentrating rather on the nation-state as the central focus of analysis" (xi). He attributes this to the "relative abundance of source material on states in comparison to the paucity of information on their foreign relations." Written under the auspices of Professor Halil Inalcik, Har-El's book thus not only fills a great void in modern scholarship on the history of southeastern Anatolia, but it also provides an excellent overview of diplomatic and military relations between the Mamluk and Ottoman states. The book is divided into two parts: the first half is devoted to Ottoman-Mamluk relations from their inception in the middle of the fourteenth century up to the outbreak of the first war, and the second half to the actual war itself.

In part one, Har-El goes into great depth to make the reader understand the roots and patterns of the conflict, especially by analyzing the underlying causes that exacerbated the hostility and culminated in the first war. The introduction begins with a description of the administrative and military organization of the Mamluk Anatolian frontier, followed by a presentation of the Ottoman-Mamluk confrontation over the frontier principalities of Karaman and Dulkadir, which triggered a series of events that lead to the first war. The second part comprehensively (and according to the author, accurately) reconstructs the various stages of the war and studies it from four different perspectives: the strategy and policy of the two powers, the military engagements, the impact of the war on the domestic life of the Mamluk state, and the related struggles in the diplomatic arena.

In the introduction, Har-El begins by discussing features of medieval diplomacy. Surprisingly, this deceptively basic discussion turns out to be quite important in understanding the Mamluk-Ottoman conflict. After the rise of Islam in the seventh century, Anatolia became a frontier for the Arab Islamic Empire, and later, of the `Abbasid caliphate. It was only in the eleventh century that the Turkish Seljuk sultans succeeded in breaching the barrier (after the battle of Manzikert in 1071) and pushed the barrier to western Anatolia. After the disintegration of the Seljuk Empire in the thirteenth century, a series of small principalities were established, the Ottoman principality being one of them. At that time, the Mamluk Empire, whose territory extended into southeastern Anatolia, was the most powerful state in the Muslim world. However, over the span of the next century, the Ottoman dynasty established itself as a rival empire comprising a vast territory in the Balkans and the whole of Anatolia up to the Taurus Mountains and the Euphrates River-for the first time, its Eastern boundary was in direct contact with the Mamluk Empire.

To offer a better analytic framework, Har-El has developed an ingenious method of considering each frontier zone as "subordinate systems," wherein a pattern of intern-state politics in a given region is subordinated to the bi-bloc international system. He identifies the Anatolian system as unstable, one in which the relations between its members were marked by aggressiveness in the purposes and means of conflict, and by constant territorial changes. To this end, Har-El identifies five devices employed by the Ottomans and the Mamluks to maintain or disturb the balance of power between them: "divide and rule, spheres of influence, intervention, alliances, and buffer zones." In particular, the establishment of a buffer zone between the two empires was a prerequisite for stability in the Anatolian system. However, the gradual reduction in the number of lesser powers, and the eventual disappearance of the buffer zone removed the essential conditions for stability and made the system more penetrable, consequently bringing the two powers into conflict.

Also in the introduction, Har-El delves into the principles of Intra-Muslim Conflict Relations, with an excellent explanation on the development of how the shari'a came to allow for jihad in intra-Muslim (or as he prefers to call it, "internal") wars. The basics of patron-client relationships as a method of statecraft are covered, and the sources for the first war are not only richly documented, but also discussed at great length despite their not being critically discussed (it is also not clear why Har-El chose to discuss his material so late in the introduction). The majority of his sources are narrative literature, particularly chronicles, though he concedes that a "major problem encountered in using this material is the traditional copying of one chronicler from his predecessor's works, which necessitates much comparison and collation" (18). In addition, Har-El has also made much use of various historical handbooks, including biographical dictionaries and bureaucratic literature, as well as travel accounts.

Keeping in line with his theoretical framework as mentioned above, Har-El focuses extensively on the buffer principalities of Dulkadir and Ramadan. This includes a detailed history of the principalities, their military organization, a discussion of their districts, and defensive perimeters. Furthermore, rather than simply attributing the decline of the Mamluks with the Timurid invasions at the turn of the fifteenth century, Har-El explains how demographic, economic, political, and military causes combined not only to weaken the regime, but also to seriously undermine its defensive systems. For example, because of the decline of their power, the Mamluks left their long coasts defenceless and open to attack by the growing Ottoman navy. In fact, except for a few isolated instances, there is no mention in the chronicles of a Mamluk fleet.

With the disappearance of all major fortresses on the Syria-Palestinian coast, the vulnerability of the Mamluk Empire to naval attacks became even greater. In fact, in part two when Har-El discusses the war, it is surprising to read how the Mamluks prevailed despite their odds and weaknesses. Thus concludes part one, with a survey of the five years preceding the outbreak of war, during which strained relations over the frontier region were exacerbated by the support given by the Mamluk sultan to Jem, the brother and rival of the Ottoman sultan, Bayezid. While the first part of the book was heavily based on Mamluk sources, the second part of the book balances this bias by presenting a detailed account of the war based largely on Ottoman sources. Furthermore, not only does it cover the military history of the campaigns, but also the repercussions of the Ottoman-Mamluk rivalry on European diplomacy.

Har-El describes the 1488 battle between the Mamluk and Ottoman armies in detail and supplements it with well-illustrated maps, as well as figures and tables explaining the artillery, formations, composition, and other aspects of both the armies (and navies). As a result, it is unsatisfactory to read him describe the war in the concluding chapter as "a series of campaigns in which the Ottomans repeatedly occupied Cilicia and lost it to the Mamluks, who won the military encounters but were unable to follow up their victories because of internal and financial problems" (192)-this attempt to simplify what so far had been presented as an extremely complex situation throughout the book comes off as unwelcome and unappreciated.

The book is shoddily edited-there are glaring spelling errors (khilafa is spelled "hilafa" [9]), grammatical errors, and awkwardly constructed sentences. In addition, there are other technical mistakes: two minor examples include the author making gaza the fifth pillar of Islam (65) when he clearly meant sixth, (casting doubt on his knowledge on Islam is unreasonable) and biographical dictionaries (23) are transformed into bibliographical dictionaries. Furthermore, while there are numerous other illustrations besides maps in the book, these seem to have been added without any purpose, almost as an afterthought to fill space. For example, there are illustrations from the nineteenth century depicting Mamluk life ("A Mamluk in Full Armour" [170]), yet we cannot be sure of their accuracy because of the apparent anachronism. However, one cannot let these errors detract us from the quality of the rest of the work, because ultimately, building upon a wealth of contemporary and secondary sources, Har-El has produced a magnificent work of military history that is clearly and methodically presented.

Incorporation into the world-economy: Change in the structure of the Ottoman Empire, 1750-1839

Average customer rating:

Incorporation into the world-economy: Change in the structure of the Ottoman Empire, 1750-1839
Immanuel Maurice Wallerstein
Manufacturer: Fernand Braudel Center for the Study of Economies, Historical Systems, and Civilizations, State University of New York at Binghamton
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Unknown Binding

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books
ASIN: B0006EHRY2

Average customer rating:

Ottoman Empire and the World Economy
Resat, 1954- Kasaba
Manufacturer: see notes for publisher info
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
ASIN: B000NOX06Y

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books