The Different Scopes of Gelvin and Cleveland

1611 Words4 Pages

Gelvin’s The Modern Middle East: A History and Cleveland and Bunton’s A History of the Modern Middle East are two excellent books that appear to offer two different, and opposing, approaches to studying Middle Eastern history. The Cleveland text focuses initially on the formation of Islam and early Islamic history, placing the emergence of powerful early empires like the Umayadd and Abbasid empires as a continuation of the conquests of Muhammad and the Rashidun Caliphate. Throughout most of Parts One and Two, Cleveland and Bunton are particulary concerned with the role religion has played in the region.

Gelvin’s introduction, however, states that one of the arguments of his book is that “historians specializing in the Middle East certainly have a story to tell, but it is a global story told in a local vernacular” (Gelvin 2). In the rest of his introduction, Gelvin briefly discusses the formation of groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, pointing out that these organizations are not the fanatical Islamist terrorist groups that reject modernity, but rather, modern unions that offer “alternative approaches to modernity” (Gelvin 6). Furthermore, he argues that al-Qaeda is inherently modern because it shares an outlook and modus operandi with anarchism, since it is a reactive, decentralized organization that attempts to destroy systems that promote modernity, much like nineteenth century European anarchist groups.

But to read these two texts as opposing one another, or as diametrically different, is to miss the fact that they are actually quite similar. Their main difference is not in their overt historiographical approach, but rather in the scope of these approaches. Gelvin’s text shows us a broad picture of the Middle East, taken from a...

... middle of paper ...

...lude from this statement that this is just more evidence of “typical” European colonialism that sought to subjugate local populations and negate their agency. Gelvin complicates this reading by showing how the European powers were engaged in a protracted battle for dominance and in a delicate balancing act between themselves that was played out in several theaters. Combining this with Cleveland’s focus on the local scene, the reader can understand how the Middle East was an integral part of this global story, and specifically, how the Ottoman Empire responded to the emerging modern world economy and the advent of modernity.

Works Cited

1. Gelvin, James L. The Modern Middle East: A History. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

2. Cleveland, William L., and Martin Bunton. A History of the Modern Middle East. 4th ed. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2009.

Open Document