Rating: 
Summary: A frustrating, short-lived read.
Review: I learned more about the Ottoman Empire in Mike Dash's "Tulipomania" than from this book. This is not a history but a free meditation about things Ottoman. If you know the history already, you might get some enjoyment out of the connections Goodwin makes. But if you want to learn about the history of the Ottoman Empire, this is the wrong book. (You cannot always trust the New York Times Book Review). To allow readers to callibrate my opinion: I think that Thomas Hugh's "Conquest" and his "The Slave Trade" are excellent history books.
Rating:
Summary: Not a history
Review: I too, stopped reading after about 100 pages, glad that I borrowed the book from the public library rather than purchasing it. The organization of the book, if it can be said to have one, seems to be stream-of-consciousness. The author seems more interested in impressing us with his erudition or sensitivity or whatever than in conveying information about the Ottoman Empire. Give this one a miss.
Rating: 
Summary: general overview of Ottoman history, culture, and customs
Review: Jason Goodwin has not produced here an exhaustive history of the Ottoman Empire, detailing every Sultan, event, nor all aspects of this once mighty empire. Nor does he claim to. He does not produce the end-all, be-all book on the subject, but then again, he doesn't claim that this is the only volume you'll ever need on the subject. Readers looking for such are sure to be disappointed. What he did produce is a book that highlights many aspects of the Ottoman Empire, its history, geography, culture, customs, and social mores. Much history is covered, from the days before the final fall of the Byzantine Empire into the early decades of the 20th century. Goodwin does a fairly good job covering large sections of Ottoman history, particularly with regards to Bayezit, Mehmet II, Suleyman the Magnificent, the numerous attempts to conquer Vienna and push into Europe, Barbarossa, the struggles the jannisaries had against modernization, the Crimean War, the Greek war of independence, Mehmet Ali...there is history here aplenty. Other periods or aspects of Ottoman history, such as the Young Turk movement, the Barbary pirates, or relations/actions against the Persians, are much less well-covered. To me though the real reason to buy this book is its fascinating potrayal of what life was actually like in the Ottoman Empire, addressing issues of nationalities, of the economy, of science and techonology, of every day life. I believe that a lot of these details are lacking in other works on the Ottomans. Goodwin discusses Ottoman view of time for instance, of the empire's long refusal to make use of clocks and watches long after Europe and the Americas had embraced them, and then suddenly becoming perhaps worshipful of them, erecting great clock towers that stood "as a symbol of Ottoman reform, lonely as lighthouses in every Ottoman city." Another sultan was known for his large collection of western timepieces, who "crammed his saloon with two hundred clocks, eighty of them grandfather clocks," setting Western visitors ill at ease. Goodwin goes into some detail about the Ottoman guild system, especially prevalent in Constantinople, each guild with its own distinct dress. Whether carpenter or chalk-maker, mason or gravedigger, tavern keeper or baker, each guild had a distinctive dress which its members proudly wore. Goodwin also writes of endowments or vakif, acts of piety and charity enshrined in Islamic law, where people willed money to provide for public services in perpuity after their death, franging from maintaing bridges to maintaing hostels or hans to even feeding birds when there was snow on the ground. Goodwin even goes into some of the fauna of the empire, of the numerous dogs for instance that once roamed the streets of Constantinople, regarded by the Ottomans as unclean but accepted by them for "their prescence in the divine plan, recognized their habits, and never called strays." Though perhaps negelecting some nationalities, Goodwin does discuss the customs, dress, habits, and relationship with the Ottoman government with such diverse nationalities as the Greeks, the Albanians, the Jews, and the Tartars. More than just some of the quirks and local color of the Ottoman Empire Goodwin goes into considerable about several major aspects of Ottoman life, in particularly how their military was arranged, how they waged war, and one of the hallmarks of the empire, the recruitment, organization, and usage of the janissaries, the slave soldiers of the Ottomans, for centuries recruited from a "boy levy" on the subject Balkan peoples. Goodwin also details the nature of the Sultancy, is progression from strong ruler to one who merely reigned, in the beginning a strong and charismatic military and spiritual leader, in the end one often as not beholden to the mob, of progression from the law of the fraticide to the infamous Cage instead, and its effects on the nature and type of Sultans that governed the Ottoman Empire. A final note I would like to make about the book is how it ties in the history of other regions of the world and how they either affected the Ottoman Empire or were affected by it. The massive influx for instance of cheap American silver by the Spanish into the Mediterranean caused massive inflation in the Ottoman Empire, which itself was based on a silver standard, one in which gold has less value than silver. As the Ottoman Empire slowly but surely conqured the archipelagoes of the Aegean and cut off most western trade in the eastern Mediterranean, how this lead to the decline of Venice and Genoa, in the latter's case pushing sailors that would have once made their fortunes in the Levant and perhaps the Black Sea to instead explore strange, new worlds. How the the threat of the Ottomans to Vienna and the heart of Europe in fact may have helped saved the Lutheran revolution and the Protestant reformation as a whole. And perhaps how in the end ultimately three of the greatest "superpowers" of the Renaissance - the Ottoman Empire, the Spanish, and the Venetians - succeeded together and ultimately failed together. In the end this is a good book, in some ways an introduction, to the Ottoman Empire, a civilization that boldly sought to straddle both Europe and Asia, one that once threatened all of Europe and one that was more centuries, even well into its long and slow decline, a land often of peace and prosperity. Well worth reading.
Rating: 
Summary: Lords of the Horizons
Review: Jason Goodwin has written an intriguing and in many ways melodic history of the Ottoman empire. The pages flow easily into one another full of delicious detail, and the personality and incongruity of Ottoman history come to life in the readers mind. But the book is by no means exhaustive. Goodwin's determination to write a work of literature means the history suffers. I finished it with little sense of the chronology of Ottoman history - more a confusing handful of pungent anecdotes that, while immensely entertaining, left me with a confused vision of the Empire. He also concentrates on the European empire, the Balkans especially - ignoring Egypt, Iraq and the eastern provinces - which is a visible gap in an Empire whose demise framed the modern Middle East. Nonetheless, his style makes the book a delightful gateway to the Ottoman Empire.
Rating: 
Summary: A Travel Through Ottoman History
Review: Jason Goodwin's "Lords of the Horizons: A History of the Ottoman Empire" is a look at one of the more intriguing empires in history. The Ottomans ruled an empire that contained much of the land that Alexander the Great conquered for Macedonia; but, managed to hold on to it for far longer than the Macedonians did. The Ottomans even have a place in making western civilization was it is today by besieging Venice in the 16th century and thereby giving a respite to the nascent Lutheran Reformation from the persecution of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles. "The Lords of the Horizons" shouldn't be thought of as primarily history even though its subtitle is "A History of the Ottoman Empire". What Goodwin has created is more of a travel through Ottoman history than an actual history. Goodwin tends to dash about from point to point in his narrative instead of focusing on one theme. Even if Goodwin's intention is to portray the Ottoman Empire as an unfocused entity, there are better ways to do so than by making the point via your style. As cultural history "The Lords of the Horizons" is interesting. Goodwin does a good job of explaining the power structure and social organization of the empire. The evolution of the empire from essentially a cult-of-personality government to a near-modern bureaucratic administration is well developed. Goodwin also deals with the trireligious nature of the empire and how the three religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) coexisted as well as they did. Where Goodwin comes up short is in his description of what most people would consider real history. Of particular interest would be the capture of Constantinople, the Greek independence fight, and World War I. Goodwin only discusses Constantinople with any kind of detail and not enough in my opinion. The other two events I mentioned are almost dismissed. You would think that the event that instigated the collpase of the empire, World War I, would be fully discussed; but, you would be very wrong. There are bits of information that can be gleaned from "The Lords of the Horizons" but not enough to make a good read. This book perhaps fills in the gaps of previous histories of the Ottoman Empire. I would recommend reading more thorough investigations of the empire before delving into Goodwin's.
Rating:
Summary: Poetic History
Review: Mr. Goodwin, in "Lords of the Horizons" writes in an elegant and enviable style. I loved his descpitions of the times and places. It was a modern poem about Ottoman History. At the same time, his knowledge, research, and schoolarship were superb. For a history book, this is about as good as it gets. My only complaint, a minor one, is that the author assumes the reader has some foundation in this subject. I did not. As such, the way he organized this book, and how it skips back and forth in time, was a little difficult for me to follow. Keep with it, however, and you will be rewarded with a very enjoyable read. In particular, "Lords of the Horizons" does two things. First it details the political history of the Ottoman Empire. He talks about the first great ruler, Oshman and his descendant. At first the Ottomans were warrior kings. (warrior sultans) With success and time, they became almost slave kings, doing the bidding of the military and the most recent political cabal. In this area, the book was good. However, the author bounces around from time to time and ruler to ruler. Mr. Goodwin has tried to develop trends in time and history and then apply them to this empire. His style generally works well, but it was a little confusing. Where Mr. Goodwin really excells is in his cultural history of the times. Lords of the Horizons informs the reader of tiny tidbits of histories, very interesting, yet rarely discussed. For example, the last chapter of this book talks about dogs. Dogs? Yes, Mr. Goodwin describes the dogs of the time and how they were almost living sanitation units of the time. He also has drawing of them, which I enjoyed. Mr. Goodwin also talks about the food, the dress, the customs of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultans loved clocks. The symbol of authority was the tail of a horse. More tails meant more authority. What type of clothes did the Greek Merchants use? How did the Ottomans view Christians in Europe vs. Muslims in Iran? It is all in this book and much more. The book is a delight and strongly recommended.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent capture of Ottoman Culture
Review: The reviews here seem to be mixed between those who absolutely detested it, and those who love it. I find myself in the middle. As a history it falls short, but Goodwin is not a historian, nor is it (desspite the title) designed to be a history per se. There were certain aspects of the writer's work I find irritating. He makes more than a few rather "arch" references- most of which I got (as I have always had a thing for the Ottomans, and have read most of the major books about them), some of which I didn't. The ones I didn't get the author didn't make clear enough to pursue through other sources- so the reader with serious historical interest is left hanging. This is the greatest flaw of the book. The best point of the book, and the one which makes it a worthwile read, is the excellent way the author makes Ottoman culture come alive. He gives the reader a real sense of what it was to be an Ottoman, or at the very least to have lived among them. His description of physical places is good as well, he really captures the essence of places such as Topkapi. Even though I had been there years before reading the book, his metaphorical comparison of it to a camp of war tents made in stone articulated well the feel of the place, which I had sensed incoherently, but was made plaiin when I read it. Utimately, the book is frustrating because it is merely good, whereas in certain instances it has flashes of greatness.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent capture of Ottoman Culture
Review: The reviews here seem to be mixed between those who absolutely detested it, and those who love it. I find myself in the middle. As a history it falls short, but Goodwin is not a historian, nor is it (desspite the title) designed to be a history per se. There were certain aspects of the writer's work I find irritating. He makes more than a few rather "arch" references- most of which I got (as I have always had a thing for the Ottomans, and have read most of the major books about them), some of which I didn't. The ones I didn't get the author didn't make clear enough to pursue through other sources- so the reader with serious historical interest is left hanging. This is the greatest flaw of the book. The best point of the book, and the one which makes it a worthwile read, is the excellent way the author makes Ottoman culture come alive. He gives the reader a real sense of what it was to be an Ottoman, or at the very least to have lived among them. His description of physical places is good as well, he really captures the essence of places such as Topkapi. Even though I had been there years before reading the book, his metaphorical comparison of it to a camp of war tents made in stone articulated well the feel of the place, which I had sensed incoherently, but was made plaiin when I read it. Utimately, the book is frustrating because it is merely good, whereas in certain instances it has flashes of greatness.
Rating:
Summary: Not a Traditional History
Review: This book has some interesting sections, but those looking for a more traditional history, either chronological or thematic, will be disappointed. I read the entire book and it is consistent throughout in reading more like a casual essay or a collection of thoughts, loosely structured around the chronology of the Ottoman Empire (the subtitle "A History of the Ottoman Empire" would better have been dropped). The specifics of historical events are often left out, making it difficult to investigate things further if one wished. Additionally, and a big sin in history works in my opinion, there were constant references to various regions and cities with extremely little in the way of historical maps to help the reader.
Rating:
Summary: Exquisite writing, paints broad strokes very well
Review: This is an excellent book.
For his style of writing alone, which is masterful in its ability to extemporize information and draw in the reader, this book deserves the highest acclaim.
I, too, get frustrated when what passes for history these days is too often devoid of facts and too centered on the plight of the common man such that the reader does not obtain an understanding of the grand scheme of things. But Goodwin's book is misunderstood in this regard. He is writing an introduction to the history of a civilization which existed for almost a thousand years. Why should he waste 20 pages on the intracacies of pre-World War I diplomatic connections, or spend more than one chapter on the fall of Constantinople (which I think was done rather well)? His writing is intended to give an impression of the leaders, the methods, the outlook, the designs, and even the bystanders (dogs) of an empire. For someone like myself who knew little (perhaps only the facts?) of the Ottomans, this was the perfect book.
|
