A Short History of the World Kindle Edition

I am not a history buff and would say I am mildly interested in history. This book provides a free, concise, basic, and short history of important events the human world. As the author states early, it should give you an idea of the chronology of events. If you take this 165-or-so-pager for what it is and don't think you'll come away as a history expert or believe you'll remember every detail, this is a solid resource.In all my education, I think reading this book would have been a better beginning for a foundation. Schooling seemed to jump over the place with times and requiring absolute dates instead of giving a relative perspective of where events stood. For example, while school had taught me what the Persian empire was, I couldn't even give a ballpark guess where it stood on a timeline and how long it lasted. Even with so much information in the text, the book makes history easy to understand. I never thought I would never use 'history' and 'easy' in a single sentence.I read this book in only a few days and found it entertaining mostly because the author doesn't just list events but delves into the motivation and causal relationships between different parts. Even in the historical areas I considered myself to be more stronger in, I found I learned just as much as those that were relatively new.I think this book or one like it is an absolute must read for everyone. I was disgusted when I realized how little I knew about world history and it will only take a few hours of time to finish this making the educational value worth its weight in gold.

A Review of Christopher Lascelles' Book "A Short History of the World"To write a short history of the world can be a daunting task. On one hand so much information needs to be squeezed in and be kept in readable form. But, alternatively, the reader can benefit by observing features and trends which may be lost in the details of a larger account. In Simon Singh's detailed book (more than 500 pages in fine print) about the origin of the universe, it is hard to see the forest from the trees!In reading Lascelles' book, one of the features that become evident throughout the book is the emphasis on wars, aggression, violence and the urge for some nations to dominate others. In a way, it reads like a book on the history of human wars and great battles. It seems to underline Darwin's remarks about the struggle of the species and the "...survival of the fittest " . But this applies to the animal kingdom; we humans have the power of reasoning and should be expected to behave more sanely.If we think back about those considered to be the greatest leaders in our history, we sense that the emphasis is mostly on Hannibal, Alexander the Great, Julius Cezar, Genghis Khan, Napoleon Bonaparte,Adolf Hitler,Mao Zedong, Stalin and few others. They were distinguished for there performance in wars and in conquering and occupying other nations. They were in fact mostly cruel and merciless leaders responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people. They all have blood on their hands, some more than others. Yet they represent our past, our history. Of course, there were other great names of persons who had done a great service to humanity, but those remain less noticed, if not forgotten. They are mostly ignored in this book. What percent of the public is familiar with such people like Jonas Salk, James Parkinson, Louis Pasteur, Alexander Fleming,James Watson,Alois Alzheimer ? These outstanding medical scientists are responsible for saving the lives of millions of patients, and continue to do so today. What about other scientists who changed our way of thinking and acting, like Nicolaus Copernicus, Galellius, Newton, Einstein, Stephen Hawking? Were they not as crucial in the development of our lives? Yet they are little thought of; fame remains with the most destructive leaders.Why this obsession with terrible leaders and destructive wars? Is this tendency toward aggression and dominance innate in humans? Are we born with it? Is belligerence in our genes? Is it part of our creation or a development in our evolution? In National Geographic TV shows wild animals, like lions and tigers, are introduced with the announcement "This animal was born to kill! ". We don't belong in the wild kingdom (lucky for us!). However, some would argue that, most probably, we were born with a tendency to competitiveness, aggression and also the urge to dominate. How else can we explain some of these tendencies even in innocent preschool children? Or, the senseless riots in football games? What about the popes, the so called "messengers of peace? Pope Urban, and others, participated in the crusaders' wars as well as other wars in Europe? Fighting, it seems, was not beyond their responsibilities.Nevertheless, it seems imperative that our historians should aim for a more balanced approach in relating our past history. Our history has been much more than bloody wars. We have also a soft and humane side, one that rejects wars and killings. We're certainly eager to know, not only about who won battles or who conquered other nations, but also what happened in the development of our sciences, arts , medicine, religious trends, human relations, urban and sociological development as well as our philosophical thoughts. Books like Jacob Burkhardt's "The History of the Renaissance", or Lewis Mumford's "The City In History", or Karen Armstrong's "A History of God", are not only enlightening but also give us a more balanced view of the world we live in.Fuad R. QubeinJune,2016Sent from my iPad

This book is a really informative, comprehensive overview of many key events and turning points in world history. It moves forward through history chronologically, organized to cover key developments in the world's various regions during the same time period so the reader can understand how history was unfolding in different parts of the world at approximately the same time. Obviously, with such broad geographical scope, this concise history cannot provide an in-depth analysis of any single event or historical trend. Nonetheless, the author is adept at making profound analytical observations in a concise manner. This book is not simply a rendition of historical facts and dates. For the reader who aspires to expand their knowledge of world history, to develop a foundation for further reading and investigation, this book is both a strong starting point and a valuable reference to which one may return for orientation. I am surprised that we do not see more books of this kind. A critical reasoner might argue that history cannot be understood if too much emphasis is placed on describing dates, events and developments in history. However, it would seem that without this basic grounding, the student of history is at sea. I see this book as providing a useful service and setting the groundwork for the reader to go on to further critical analysis.