I had heard about this title and had been looking forward to this one. Thank you to Random House publishing for the ARC.

This is an interesting take on history and how the West was influenced not just by 1-2 ancient civilizations but by many. There are some broad stroke assertions which are probably a given considering the scope of the topic.

Overall, a good read.

How the World Made the West is a book with a number of layers to it.

The first is as an a history of Europe from 2000 BCE to 1500 CE. Many people reading this will be limited to an exposure to that in the form of a class titled 'Western Civ' some time in secondary school. But History Marches On, as new discoveries are made and old ones reassessed. It is great, and worth it for the citations alone in compiling the most current work on a broad topic.

The second is a critique on the concept of 'Western' as a coherent thing. The author's position can be summed up as: people, not peoples; civilization, not civilizations. The cultures, cities, and nations that are now considered the West would not think of themselves so, and the author believes that they would find the idea itself confusing and contradictory to their beliefs. Identity is local and, above all else, flexible. Western Civilization is an invention of the 19th century, arising as to justify colonial ambitions, and even a concept like multi-culturalism is flawed.

The third is as polemic, and it is bad as polemic. I was reminded the most of <i>The Daily Wire</i> and the pressing need to dunk on the other side even if it harms the argument itself. Reasonable facts get aggravating conjecture tacked on as dicta. Events are told to accomplish effects that make them misleading. Most irritating is the futzing around with language, where the author uses idiosyncratic definitions or redefines terms. Socrates was killed for that sort of thing is all I am saying.

The first layer makes this a great book. It is probably the most useful history book that I will read this year. The third layer is a problem. I had to stop reading at points out of irritation. I am willing to mark that down as white fragility, but usually it looked like me slamming into paywalls for hours of my life as I tried to substantiate claims, which almost always lead to finding out that they were mostly accurate, it was the weasely bit that was stated as conjecture. But look, if this is what shakes up your paradigm so that you are more in line with modern historical consensus, I am glad. I feel though it probably is going to elicit an audience of who problem.

The second layer...the second layer is the topic that I see most published reviews focusing upon. Here is the thing about that layer: the argument for it stops. It will pop back in, usually on what some specific person did or thought, but from about the description of the Hellenistic period onward it stops, and the book becomes a much more principalities and powers sort of history. Some sections, the collapse of the Roman empire, both east and west for instance, feel downright historically conservative in their presentations. I found myself bouncing between the first and last chapter, trying to triangulate what was going on.

Outside of how everyone seems to forget about the Hellenistic period (shout out to The Hellenistic Age Podcast</a> for pushing back at this), I think that there is something meaningful in the switch starting there. To take a very short go at it, I think that the idea of Western Civilization is of recent imagining, but the question of it, the idea of thinking about it, in and outside of Europe, is an old idea. And I can see why the author might not want to touch that, in the interest of not pulling her punches.

So, if the book had continued in the manner that it started, I would call it skippable. You will learn something but it is more a handbook in how to ruin Thanksgiving. However, its transition away from that to something blander makes it more useful. It does become a strong overview, intentionally broad, still occasionally misleading, but well sourced and well written. It is a good effort in this sort of modern historical reckoning. I am still waiting for someone to write what I think of as the definiative popular history to do it, though.

My thanks to the author, Josephine Quinn, for writing the book, and to the publisher, Random House Publishing, for making the ARC available to me.

I loved this book. I love reading about history and ancient cultures and this book is exactly what I wanted. i love Quinn's connection between different ancient worlds and how they connect with the modern world. If you are a history junkie like me especially when it comes to the ancient world this book is a must read for you