Empires in World History MOBI ✓ Empires in eBook

Empires in World History MOBI ✓ Empires in eBook

Empires in World History ➻ [Reading] ➽ Empires in World History By Jane Burbank ➰ – Capitalsoftworks.co.uk Empires vast states of territories and peoples united by force and ambition have dominated the political landscape for than two millennia Empires in World History departs from conventional European an Empires vast states of territories and peoples united by force and ambition have dominated the political landscape for than two millennia Empires in World History departs from conventional European and nation centered perspectives to take a remarkable look at how empires relied on diversity to shape the global order Beginning with ancient Rome and China and continuing across Asia Europe the Americas and Africa Jane Burbank and Frederick Cooper examine empires' conuests rivalries and Empires in eBook ï strategies of domination with an emphasis on how empires accommodated created and manipulated differences among populationsBurbank and Cooper examine Rome and China from the third century BCE empires that sustained state power for centuries They delve into the militant monotheism of Byzantium the Islamic Caliphates and the short lived Carolingians as well as the pragmatically tolerant rule of the Mongols and Ottomans who combined religious protection with the politics of loyalty Burbank and Cooper discuss the influence of empire on capitalism and popular sovereignty the limitations and instability of Europe's colonial projects Russia's repertoire of exploitation and differentiation as well as the empire of liberty devised by American revolutionaries and later extended across a continent and beyondWith its investigation into the relationship between diversity and imperial states Empires in World History offers a fresh approach to understanding the impact of empires on the past and present.


10 thoughts on “Empires in World History

  1. Enya-Marie Enya-Marie says:

    I probably would never have picked this book up if it wasn't a core text for a module I prefer studying topics in depth to breadth but I'm so glad I did This book is such a good read for giving you an understanding of modern international relations as well as being an accessible guide to world history without being too overwhelmingIt was uite easy to read from cover to cover though it took a while probably because I decided to highlight a lot of it and then resorted to typing out entire sections that I liked Read alongside Stephen Howe's 'Empire' part of the Very Short Introduction series which is about ideologies and concepts surrounding empires it gave a very thorough analytic and concise view of cause and effect without being too dry If academic history books were written like this then studying history would be much simpler


  2. Geordan Williams Geordan Williams says:

    If someone had never read a general history before then I would recommend A Splendid Exchange or this one It paints history in broad strokes that don't give you much detail; however it does so from a world perspective instead of a eurocentric one You get an excellent understanding of how societies interacted or didn't interact over the agesThe main point of the book is that different empires throughout history emphasized the differences between people accepted it and used it to their advantage I thought that the politics of difference as a tool was a little unwieldy since the authors could include almost anything under difference That being said there are two very important things I took out of this book First governments have historically governed separate populations in different ways; however most governments claim euality for their citizens today In what ways do these governments continue to govern separate populations differently? For instance minimum sentencing for powder versus crack cocaine how does that translate into a indirect form of politics of difference? Second nation states are a relatively new form of state and although history is written as if the nation state is the apex of political achievement this is not necessarily true Have we made a terrible mistake by spreading the notion that a single state should only contain a single nation? Given the amount of ethnic religious and cultural strife in the world today it would definitely appear so


  3. Grant Grant says:

    Fascinating Burbank and Cooper avoid the seemingly inevitable and largely useless debates over whether this or that society constituted an empire and whether empires are good or bad Instead they focus on how empires have managed the politics of difference meaning how governments have dealt with different people differently This framework allows for broad comparisons that provide insights into the universal challenges of organizing societies


  4. Nick Nick says:

    I will be honest and say I did not read it in full but read a few chapters skimmed others and read the conclusion The reason I did so was because I did not feel it to be of very high interest to me Not that the contents are badly written or that I saw huge mistakes but rather that I have read on almost every chapter in depth research and books What I read read as reminders and at times shallow ones To me that stems from the facts that the duo of authors tries to do two things with every chapter on the one hand they want to briefly summerize the empires to be discussed in every chapter secondly comment on and compare two or on the politics of difference they used In chapters that only has two such as the continental empires Russia and the USA that works adeuatly but when it becomes then that such as the one on 19th century Africa it results into to brief summeries or shallow comparisons The conclusion was on the one hand a commentary on what empires have lasted longest and the most lasting impact with China and Russia as not that surprising victors in that regard In addition to a rather vague suggestion on what could be learned from empires as uniters of difference and their potential for return in the future My overall impression was one of underwhelming As I said I have read detailed accounts on every empire discussed here and altough from what I read the summeries were well done given the limited amount of space they still left me wanting for More importantly was that I did not really feel the theme shining trough; yes the politics of difference was part of every analysis but again it left me wanting Finally I was a bit dissapointed in choises of empires I think no analysys of empire could ever ommit the Assyrians arguably the first empire nor the should it ommit all Indian empires while including the British dominion over India India has been an actor in the imperial game and one should always emphasise that when discussing Indian history I was propably not the right person for this book that felt geared towards a broader audiance Therefore I feel my review is a bith to harsh; For anyone who does not read as much academic books on the subjects this book should be a lot interesting and rewarding to read


  5. Daniel Cunningham Daniel Cunningham says:

    There are a number of places in this book where I felt the authors let their criticisms of the US and to a lesser extent of Europe get out of balance with their criticisms of non Western empires Eg there seemed to be an emphasis on the well studied popular failings of Western colonialism but Ottoman and Chinese historical and current population destruction movements etc were treated blandly? Uncritically in the common sense of the word? This is perhaps the result of bias as Americans as I am it is easier and comfortable in the dominant academic and progressive culture clearly not in conservative or reactionary segments to judge ourselvesTo be clear see 5 stars this did not diminish the book greatly in my view but it did stick out in a number of places That critiue aside this book explores how empires have managed people throughout history and indirectly and in one or two places in the conclusion directly asks the uestions Wereare empires all bad? and What has nationalismthe nation state gotten wrong?


  6. Daniel Kukwa Daniel Kukwa says:

    It's dense it's comprehensive and it's a great overview of all aspects of empire in all its forms over the last 2000 years If you're a student of history there will be much in here that is familiar but it's an excellent synthesis that leaves no stone un turned in its examination of the mechanics behind running huge polities That said it's also an awkward examination; the shape and size of the book isn't conducive to easy reading


  7. Nathan Albright Nathan Albright says:

    Empires can be a tricky subject to write about  It is easy for people to feel a sense of moral fury when it comes to empires and the way that they have behaved throughout history but the authors do a good job at being fair minded when it comes to both the good and bad sides of empires  As many people are not used to giving credit where it is due that is impressive  The authors are also critical about both the nostalgia for empire as well as the way that imperialism fell not because of humanitarian reasons per se but because in an age of growing social welfare states in imperial states most empires simply ceased to be profitable given the minimal economic development of most colonial areas and the growing opposition that was faced in many areas  Also the authors are wise to note that the age of empires is not necessarily over and that they may return because there has been no great change in human nature over the course of the last few decades something that many writers of history have conveniently forgotThis book is almost 500 pages long and is divided into 14 large chapters  The book begins with a list of illustrations and a preface and then discusses imperial trajectories 1 around the world as well as the similarities and differences between imperial rule in Rome and ancient China 2  After that the author discusses what happened after Rome in the Mediterranean and European world regarding the different models of empire between Christians and Muslims 3 as well as the Eurasian connections of the Mongol Empire 4  There is a discussion of the Ottoman and Spanish empires and their importance beyond the Mediterranean 5 as well as the Oceanic economies and colonial societies between Europe Asia and the Americas 6  The authors discuss empire building beyond the steppe in Russia and China 7 as well as the relationship between empire nation and citizenship in the revolutionary era 8  The authors slow down the time span to discuss the spread of Russia and the United States across continents 9 as well as imperial repertoires and the myths of modern imperialism on the right and left 10  After that the authors discuss sovereignty and empire in 19th century Europe and its near abroad 11 as well as war and revolution in an imperial world between World War I and the end of World War II 12  Finally the authors close with a discussion of the end of empire 13 as well as the relationship between empires states and the political imagination 14 after which there are suggested reading and citations as well as an indexThe author's view of histories is uite expansive beginning in early history and continuing to the present day  Of particular importance is the way that empires have always involved the disparate power between rulers and ruled as well as the politics of difference that have always separated peoples and prevented a great deal of buy in  That said empires have also generally reuired at least enough local buy in to endure and the authors explore those aspects of various empires that have made them lasting as well as important in the course of the world  In particular the authors are intrigued by the difference between the persistent Chinese unity despite periods of disagreement and the eually persistent disunity in the former Roman empire something that would be of interest to many readers as well  This book is a long one and one that would take people uite a while to read but if they have an interest in reading about empires and want to do it right there is a lot to appreciate here  Not everyone is going to want to think of anything positive to come out of the Mongol Empires or the empires of Western European countries but those who are willing to reflect on the balance sheet of empires will find a lot here to think about


  8. Jacob Clauson Jacob Clauson says:

    Wonderful reference book for anyone wanting a thematic view of world history The author is very open about not covering every aspect of world history but examining empires that aren't normally compared in World History class


  9. Sam Lo Sam Lo says:

    Made a good description for “what is empire”


  10. Locki Kenyon-Quigley Locki Kenyon-Quigley says:

    An easy read that hits key points without being an affront to prevailing historiographical methodology


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

10 thoughts on “Empires in World History

  1. Enya-Marie Enya-Marie says:

    I probably would never have picked this book up if it wasn't a core text for a module I prefer studying topics in depth to breadth but I'm so glad I did This book is such a good read for giving you an understanding of modern international relations as well as being an accessible guide to world history without being too overwhelmingIt was uite easy to read from cover to cover though it took a while probably because I decided to highlight a lot of it and then resorted to typing out entire sections that I liked Read alongside Stephen Howe's 'Empire' part of the Very Short Introduction series which is about ideologies and concepts surrounding empires it gave a very thorough analytic and concise view of cause and effect without being too dry If academic history books were written like this then studying history would be much simpler

  2. Geordan Williams Geordan Williams says:

    If someone had never read a general history before then I would recommend A Splendid Exchange or this one It paints history in broad strokes that don't give you much detail; however it does so from a world perspective instead of a eurocentric one You get an excellent understanding of how societies interacted or didn't interact over the agesThe main point of the book is that different empires throughout history emphasized the differences between people accepted it and used it to their advantage I thought that the politics of difference as a tool was a little unwieldy since the authors could include almost anything under difference That being said there are two very important things I took out of this book First governments have historically governed separate populations in different ways; however most governments claim euality for their citizens today In what ways do these governments continue to govern separate populations differently? For instance minimum sentencing for powder versus crack cocaine how does that translate into a indirect form of politics of difference? Second nation states are a relatively new form of state and although history is written as if the nation state is the apex of political achievement this is not necessarily true Have we made a terrible mistake by spreading the notion that a single state should only contain a single nation? Given the amount of ethnic religious and cultural strife in the world today it would definitely appear so

  3. Grant Grant says:

    Fascinating Burbank and Cooper avoid the seemingly inevitable and largely useless debates over whether this or that society constituted an empire and whether empires are good or bad Instead they focus on how empires have managed the politics of difference meaning how governments have dealt with different people differently This framework allows for broad comparisons that provide insights into the universal challenges of organizing societies

  4. Nick Nick says:

    I will be honest and say I did not read it in full but read a few chapters skimmed others and read the conclusion The reason I did so was because I did not feel it to be of very high interest to me Not that the contents are badly written or that I saw huge mistakes but rather that I have read on almost every chapter in depth research and books What I read read as reminders and at times shallow ones To me that stems from the facts that the duo of authors tries to do two things with every chapter on the one hand they want to briefly summerize the empires to be discussed in every chapter secondly comment on and compare two or on the politics of difference they used In chapters that only has two such as the continental empires Russia and the USA that works adeuatly but when it becomes then that such as the one on 19th century Africa it results into to brief summeries or shallow comparisons The conclusion was on the one hand a commentary on what empires have lasted longest and the most lasting impact with China and Russia as not that surprising victors in that regard In addition to a rather vague suggestion on what could be learned from empires as uniters of difference and their potential for return in the future My overall impression was one of underwhelming As I said I have read detailed accounts on every empire discussed here and altough from what I read the summeries were well done given the limited amount of space they still left me wanting for More importantly was that I did not really feel the theme shining trough; yes the politics of difference was part of every analysis but again it left me wanting Finally I was a bit dissapointed in choises of empires I think no analysys of empire could ever ommit the Assyrians arguably the first empire nor the should it ommit all Indian empires while including the British dominion over India India has been an actor in the imperial game and one should always emphasise that when discussing Indian history I was propably not the right person for this book that felt geared towards a broader audiance Therefore I feel my review is a bith to harsh; For anyone who does not read as much academic books on the subjects this book should be a lot interesting and rewarding to read

  5. Daniel Cunningham Daniel Cunningham says:

    There are a number of places in this book where I felt the authors let their criticisms of the US and to a lesser extent of Europe get out of balance with their criticisms of non Western empires Eg there seemed to be an emphasis on the well studied popular failings of Western colonialism but Ottoman and Chinese historical and current population destruction movements etc were treated blandly? Uncritically in the common sense of the word? This is perhaps the result of bias as Americans as I am it is easier and comfortable in the dominant academic and progressive culture clearly not in conservative or reactionary segments to judge ourselvesTo be clear see 5 stars this did not diminish the book greatly in my view but it did stick out in a number of places That critiue aside this book explores how empires have managed people throughout history and indirectly and in one or two places in the conclusion directly asks the uestions Wereare empires all bad? and What has nationalismthe nation state gotten wrong?

  6. Daniel Kukwa Daniel Kukwa says:

    It's dense it's comprehensive and it's a great overview of all aspects of empire in all its forms over the last 2000 years If you're a student of history there will be much in here that is familiar but it's an excellent synthesis that leaves no stone un turned in its examination of the mechanics behind running huge polities That said it's also an awkward examination; the shape and size of the book isn't conducive to easy reading

  7. Nathan Albright Nathan Albright says:

    Empires can be a tricky subject to write about  It is easy for people to feel a sense of moral fury when it comes to empires and the way that they have behaved throughout history but the authors do a good job at being fair minded when it comes to both the good and bad sides of empires  As many people are not used to giving credit where it is due that is impressive  The authors are also critical about both the nostalgia for empire as well as the way that imperialism fell not because of humanitarian reasons per se but because in an age of growing social welfare states in imperial states most empires simply ceased to be profitable given the minimal economic development of most colonial areas and the growing opposition that was faced in many areas  Also the authors are wise to note that the age of empires is not necessarily over and that they may return because there has been no great change in human nature over the course of the last few decades something that many writers of history have conveniently forgotThis book is almost 500 pages long and is divided into 14 large chapters  The book begins with a list of illustrations and a preface and then discusses imperial trajectories 1 around the world as well as the similarities and differences between imperial rule in Rome and ancient China 2  After that the author discusses what happened after Rome in the Mediterranean and European world regarding the different models of empire between Christians and Muslims 3 as well as the Eurasian connections of the Mongol Empire 4  There is a discussion of the Ottoman and Spanish empires and their importance beyond the Mediterranean 5 as well as the Oceanic economies and colonial societies between Europe Asia and the Americas 6  The authors discuss empire building beyond the steppe in Russia and China 7 as well as the relationship between empire nation and citizenship in the revolutionary era 8  The authors slow down the time span to discuss the spread of Russia and the United States across continents 9 as well as imperial repertoires and the myths of modern imperialism on the right and left 10  After that the authors discuss sovereignty and empire in 19th century Europe and its near abroad 11 as well as war and revolution in an imperial world between World War I and the end of World War II 12  Finally the authors close with a discussion of the end of empire 13 as well as the relationship between empires states and the political imagination 14 after which there are suggested reading and citations as well as an indexThe author's view of histories is uite expansive beginning in early history and continuing to the present day  Of particular importance is the way that empires have always involved the disparate power between rulers and ruled as well as the politics of difference that have always separated peoples and prevented a great deal of buy in  That said empires have also generally reuired at least enough local buy in to endure and the authors explore those aspects of various empires that have made them lasting as well as important in the course of the world  In particular the authors are intrigued by the difference between the persistent Chinese unity despite periods of disagreement and the eually persistent disunity in the former Roman empire something that would be of interest to many readers as well  This book is a long one and one that would take people uite a while to read but if they have an interest in reading about empires and want to do it right there is a lot to appreciate here  Not everyone is going to want to think of anything positive to come out of the Mongol Empires or the empires of Western European countries but those who are willing to reflect on the balance sheet of empires will find a lot here to think about

  8. Jacob Clauson Jacob Clauson says:

    Wonderful reference book for anyone wanting a thematic view of world history The author is very open about not covering every aspect of world history but examining empires that aren't normally compared in World History class

  9. Sam Lo Sam Lo says:

    Made a good description for “what is empire”

  10. Locki Kenyon-Quigley Locki Kenyon-Quigley says:

    An easy read that hits key points without being an affront to prevailing historiographical methodology

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *