Bible and Sword : England and Palestine from the Bronze Age to Balfour

Rating:
Summary: A gentle reminder of a great debt
Review: As one of Tuchman's first publications, this book is perhaps a little rougher than some of her more recent works. The scholarship is, of course, thorough and brilliant, but the refined irony and humour found in her "Calamitous 14th Century" is somewhat lacking. (Of course, practice does make perfect, and this is a fine early work.)

With this said, her thorough coverage of the Balfour mandate starts not in the 19th century, but far back in the past, even before Britain first began to recognize the Christian debt to the Jews. Starting in the Bronze age, continuing through the Crusades, exploring Victorian ideals, and finishing with a thorough review of the events leading up to the formation of Israel, this book is nothing if not thorough.

For anyone who enjoys Tuchman's work, this book is no disappointment. For anyone curious about the convoluted and intricate relationship between Britain and Palestine, between Christian and Jew, this book is essential reading.

Rating:
Summary: A gentle reminder of a great debt
Review: As one of Tuchman's first publications, this book is perhaps a little rougher than some of her more recent works. The scholarship is, of course, thorough and brilliant, but the refined irony and humour found in her "Calamitous 14th Century" is somewhat lacking. (Of course, practice does make perfect, and this is a fine early work.)

With this said, her thorough coverage of the Balfour mandate starts not in the 19th century, but far back in the past, even before Britain first began to recognize the Christian debt to the Jews. Starting in the Bronze age, continuing through the Crusades, exploring Victorian ideals, and finishing with a thorough review of the events leading up to the formation of Israel, this book is nothing if not thorough.

For anyone who enjoys Tuchman's work, this book is no disappointment. For anyone curious about the convoluted and intricate relationship between Britain and Palestine, between Christian and Jew, this book is essential reading.

Rating:
Summary: History and scholarship of the highest order
Review: Barbara Tuchman's first work of history, Bible and Sword: England and Palestine from the Bronze Age To Balfour, is vast in historical, religious, diplomatic and political scholarship. From the early times of the Beaker people and Caliphates to the first crusades and pilgrimages, all the way down to the creation of the Jewish homeland by the aristocratic and willowy former British Prime Minister Authur James Balfour and the Balfour Declaration of 1917 as well as the often overlooked Palestine Mandate, nothing is left out in describing how Israel came into being and England's often historically forgotten role in its conception. Of the two, the latter was actually the one "that gave a footing in public law to the restoration of Israel in Palestine" whereas the Balfour Declaration of 1917 "was simply a statement of policy that any subsequent government could have ignored". The Palestine Mandate was a global promise confirmed by Wilson's League of Nations and thus elevated the Balfour Declaration, which was absorbed with the mandate, to treaty status. Religiously speaking, the British wanted Israel settled so Christiendom would not only be the predominate faith above all the others, but so that Christ's appearance would not accelerate at unbelievable, astronomical speeds. Politically speaking, real bizarre! The criticism of this book is founded. The language is rather dry and antiquated. And there are minute biased overtones of the Christian faith. But the scholarship and information that is provided outweighs the negative tinctures in this book. It gives a broad understanding to a narrow subject.

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Reading from Tuchman as an Author in Progress
Review: I suspect that most people who read Bible and Sword do so after an enjoyable experience with one of Tuchman's acclaimed later works, such as Pulitzer Prize winners The Guns of August or Stillwell and the American Experience in China. I fall into the extreme end of this group, having read all 9 of her subsequent books before tackling this debut offering. Major fans of Tuchman will enjoy Bible and Sword on two levels--as a stand-alone historical work and as a window on the early development of one of the finest American-born historians.

Regarding the work itself, the topic of Britain's relationship with Palestine and central role in the movement toward re-establishment of the Jewish state is fascinating. The canvas is broad, covering roughly 1,700 years from the original Christian communities in 3rd century Britain to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which established the British policy of restoring the Jewish state to Palestine. The thesis is compelling, namely that the Balfour Declaration was the scion of twin progenitors--the Christian motivation to restore the Jews to the promised land as a prerequisite to the second coming of Christ and the imperial motivation to control the vital Mediterranean commercial route to India and the Far East. Interestingly, Tuchman makes it clear that, with several individual exceptions, these motivations had nothing to do with concern for the Jews but rather originated from the spiritual and temporal aspirations of Britain. The ebb and flow of the Britain-Palestine relationship makes for fascinating reading, covering topics such as the early Holy Land pilgrimages, the Crusades, the role of the British Navy in halting Napoleon's conquest of Palestine and the British role in propping up the Ottoman Turks.

Fans of Tuchman will immediately notice similarities to her later style while being struck by several glaring differences. Her almost lyrical, figurative style, while not as refined or prevalent as additional experience would eventually allow, is on display. For example, in describing the Turkish decision to seek help from Russia in fending off rebellion, she writes, "In his last agony, the Sultan, as a drowning man might clutch at a boa constrictor, accepted the help of his long-loathed enemy the Czar." Unfortunately, unlike her later works, Bible and Sword is plagued by an amazing number of relatively obscure literary, political and historical allusions that leave the reader with the impression of an unproven writer seeking desperately to provide evidence of her erudition. While this can be understood in the context of an aspiring historian without the typical credentials of a PhD and university professorship, it frustrates the non-academic reader, as is evidenced by an earlier Amazon review.

In the final analysis, Bible and Sword is a stimulating read, although unrefined in several respects. If you are looking to read only one or two Tuchman books, this is not the choice. But if you have an interest in the topic and/or a high level of interest in Tuchman as a writer, I highly recommend it.

Rating:
Summary: Well written, ends too soon
Review: I very much enjoyed Bible and Sword. Like all of Tuchman's work that I have read, it keeps your interest just as much as a good novel. There were several places in the book where I made a note "good writing" such as when she wrote "Now the rationalists galloped with the bit in their teeth."

This book is principally about the ties between Britain and Palestine. Tuchman starts covering the story of how the Jews got back to Israel with the earliest sympathies in Britain coming from

interpretations of the Christian Bible's Old Testament. She then describes the imagined connection between Joseph of Arimathea and Britain that began in the Middle Ages and goes on to cite evidence of Briton pilgrims to Palestine beginning as early as the time of St. Jerome, ca 386 AD. She then leads the reader through the Crusades and Middle Ages when at times there was a regular tourist service to the Holy Land. These connections were primarily concerned with the New Testament connection with Palestine. During the evangelical Christian movement in Britain of the 1800's, however, there again developed a connection with the names and scenes of the Old Testament. She shows how these emotional and spiritual connections melded with Britain's imperial interests and led to the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and then the British-led Palestine Mandate in 1922 for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Imperial interests wanted a friendly and British controlled Palestine to protect the eastern flank of Britain's route to India through the Suez canal. By the 1930's the Brits were already tired of the job and were looking for some one else to dump it on - and then WWII intervened.

Unfortunately, Tuchman dropped the story pretty much in the late 1920's after telling how the Turkish empire got dismantled with only a few later events mentioned. That was quite a disappointment. I would like to have had her tell the story of how the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine got reactivated after WWII and how the dimensions of the Jewish and Palestinian areas were decided, what the commitments to the non-Jewish citizens were, and how the Jewish partisans forced Britain to get out of Palestine.

I do have to say that Tuchman's view of the whole of her history is very British. She cites very few Arab sources, not even the English Arab, Lawrence of Arabia, other to mention that he existed and was very active in negotiations on the part of the Arab interests. I had to keep reminding myself that Tuchman was an American educated in America as she gave very little perspective on views from this side of the big pond.

For some more on the Arab view of the later influences of Europe on Palestine and other areas in the Middle East, I can recommend Part IV of Albert Hourani's book "A History of the Arab Peoples," it doesn't read like Tuchman but it does give much more of the non-European views.

Rating:
Summary: Well written, ends too soon
Review: I very much enjoyed Bible and Sword. Like all of Tuchman's work that I have read, it keeps your interest just as much as a good novel. There were several places in the book where I made a note "good writing" such as when she wrote "Now the rationalists galloped with the bit in their teeth."

This book is principally about the ties between Britain and Palestine. Tuchman starts covering the story of how the Jews got back to Israel with the earliest sympathies in Britain coming from

interpretations of the Christian Bible's Old Testament. She then describes the imagined connection between Joseph of Arimathea and Britain that began in the Middle Ages and goes on to cite evidence of Briton pilgrims to Palestine beginning as early as the time of St. Jerome, ca 386 AD. She then leads the reader through the Crusades and Middle Ages when at times there was a regular tourist service to the Holy Land. These connections were primarily concerned with the New Testament connection with Palestine. During the evangelical Christian movement in Britain of the 1800's, however, there again developed a connection with the names and scenes of the Old Testament. She shows how these emotional and spiritual connections melded with Britain's imperial interests and led to the Balfour Declaration in 1917 and then the British-led Palestine Mandate in 1922 for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Imperial interests wanted a friendly and British controlled Palestine to protect the eastern flank of Britain's route to India through the Suez canal. By the 1930's the Brits were already tired of the job and were looking for some one else to dump it on - and then WWII intervened.

Unfortunately, Tuchman dropped the story pretty much in the late 1920's after telling how the Turkish empire got dismantled with only a few later events mentioned. That was quite a disappointment. I would like to have had her tell the story of how the idea of a Jewish homeland in Palestine got reactivated after WWII and how the dimensions of the Jewish and Palestinian areas were decided, what the commitments to the non-Jewish citizens were, and how the Jewish partisans forced Britain to get out of Palestine.

I do have to say that Tuchman's view of the whole of her history is very British. She cites very few Arab sources, not even the English Arab, Lawrence of Arabia, other to mention that he existed and was very active in negotiations on the part of the Arab interests. I had to keep reminding myself that Tuchman was an American educated in America as she gave very little perspective on views from this side of the big pond.

For some more on the Arab view of the later influences of Europe on Palestine and other areas in the Middle East, I can recommend Part IV of Albert Hourani's book "A History of the Arab Peoples," it doesn't read like Tuchman but it does give much more of the non-European views.

Rating:
Summary: The title is the best summary of this book
Review: Ms.Tuchman traces the relationship between England and the establishment of a Jewish homeland. She takes us from the Beaker people who settled England to the Balfour Declaration of 1917. Tuchman, even in her first book, establishes a narrative style of writing about history that she would later use to achieve awesome heights in historical literature. The main enjoyment of this book is the detailed description of how the English were determined to regain Palestine for the Jewish people, so they then could be converted (whether the Jews wanted to or not),to christianity thus hastening the second comming of Christ. It also spreads some light on the seeming insanity of the puritans, who briefly changed England into a hebraic theocracy to protest the predominance of the Latin Catholic Church. It was probably impossible for Tuchamn to write this book without a little bias seeping through, and at times her treatment of the German people seems to be a little bit one sided, although this is quite understandable. If you ever wanted to know about the historical foundations of the Jewish Homeland, this book is for you.

Rating:
Summary: Ponderous Reading
Review: The information in the book is worthwile but Ms Touchman's style makes it difficult to get to. It is similar to the laborious process of getting the meat out of a blue crab. Many of the acecdotes she uses to punctuate her theme are redundant, her language and phrasing are cumbersome, and she assumes a knowlede of history not posessed by many people.

The book would have been much kinder to the reader if she provided greator historical perspective by tying the chapters together with a few paragraphs at the beginning of each describing what happened in the intervening years.

Ms Taubman is a brilliant woman and the content is worthwile. However the style is ponderous. I'm not likely to read another of her books. I'm sure that she is a first rate academician but am at a complete loss in trying to understand her acclaim as a writer.

Rating:
Summary: Personal Opinions Impede Objectivity
Review: The review by "hopefulskeptic" is an accurate summary and interpretation of "Bible and Sword." I would like to add my opinion regarding Barbara Tuchman's approach to writing this book.

During my reading of "Bible and Sword" I developed the impression that Barbara Tuchman wasn't objective about its subject matter. To be fair, she admits this in the foreword. However, I was surprised at the extent of her bias regarding one topic. This was evident when she made observations about the apparent lack of success Christians experienced in sharing their faith with Jews over a nineteen hundred year period. I've read a collection of books which draws a different conclusion. The collection is called "A History of Christianity" and was written by Kenneth Latourette. Latourette's research indicates that Christians experienced a modicum of success in witnessing to Jews during this period, excluding the Inquisition. Tuchman indicates in "Bible and Sword" that Christians had virtually no success. In fact, she states she cannot find any evidence of Jews converting to Christianity beyond a small number. This defies common sense. Given human nature there will always be people who voluntarily renounce their religion for another; Jews for Christianity, Catholics for Protestantism, Protestants for Judaism, etc.

Further, Tuchman displays thinly veiled contempt toward Christians who share their faith with Jews. Her tone is smug and is based in her belief that Judaism is a superior religion that no intelligent Jew would forswear for an inferior belief system, i.e. in her words, Christianity. She exposes her contempt at several points in the book. She gives no basis for her claim that Judaism is superior to Christianity. You as the reader are just required to accept her view as fact. My opinion is that once she ventured down this path she obligated herself to making her case. Actually, she could easily have told her account of history without offering her opinion on this topic. It didn't add anything to my understanding of the salient issues.

On these occasions she diverges from rational, objective analysis to an emotional defense of her religion. She is no longer an historian, but an apologist. This may be the outgrowth of a sense of persecution, which is understandable, but not fitting for a historian.

Her unrestrained attempt to coerce you into drawing a conclusion about an irrelevant issue, without providing adequate substantiation for her claims made me question her veracity on other topics she covered in subsequent books. Prior to reading "Bible and Sword" I had read "A Distant Mirror", "The March of Folly", "The Guns of August", and "Stilwell and the American Experience in China."

I qualify my criticism by noting that "Bible and Sword" was one of Barbara's Tuchman's earliest attempts at writing history, and that her style improved in succeeding works. However, better style should not imply more thorough research or honest exposition.

Let the reader beware: read more than one person's account of history before drawing any conclusions. Each historical account I've read (including Latourette's books) contains analyses that are influenced by the author's preconceptions.

Rating:
Summary: Personal Opinions Impede Objectivity
Review: The review by "hopefulskeptic" is an accurate summary and interpretation of "Bible and Sword." I would like to add my opinion regarding Barbara Tuchman's approach to writing this book.

During my reading of "Bible and Sword" I developed the impression that Barbara Tuchman wasn't objective about its subject matter. To be fair, she admits this in the foreword. However, I was surprised at the extent of her bias regarding one topic. This was evident when she made observations about the apparent lack of success Christians experienced in sharing their faith with Jews over a nineteen hundred year period. I've read a collection of books which draws a different conclusion. The collection is called "A History of Christianity" and was written by Kenneth Latourette. Latourette's research indicates that Christians experienced a modicum of success in witnessing to Jews during this period, excluding the Inquisition. Tuchman indicates in "Bible and Sword" that Christians had virtually no success. In fact, she states she cannot find any evidence of Jews converting to Christianity beyond a small number. This defies common sense. Given human nature there will always be people who voluntarily renounce their religion for another; Jews for Christianity, Catholics for Protestantism, Protestants for Judaism, etc.

Further, Tuchman displays thinly veiled contempt toward Christians who share their faith with Jews. Her tone is smug and is based in her belief that Judaism is a superior religion that no intelligent Jew would forswear for an inferior belief system, i.e. in her words, Christianity. She exposes her contempt at several points in the book. She gives no basis for her claim that Judaism is superior to Christianity. You as the reader are just required to accept her view as fact. My opinion is that once she ventured down this path she obligated herself to making her case. Actually, she could easily have told her account of history without offering her opinion on this topic. It didn't add anything to my understanding of the salient issues.

On these occasions she diverges from rational, objective analysis to an emotional defense of her religion. She is no longer an historian, but an apologist. This may be the outgrowth of a sense of persecution, which is understandable, but not fitting for a historian.

Her unrestrained attempt to coerce you into drawing a conclusion about an irrelevant issue, without providing adequate substantiation for her claims made me question her veracity on other topics she covered in subsequent books. Prior to reading "Bible and Sword" I had read "A Distant Mirror", "The March of Folly", "The Guns of August", and "Stilwell and the American Experience in China."

I qualify my criticism by noting that "Bible and Sword" was one of Barbara's Tuchman's earliest attempts at writing history, and that her style improved in succeeding works. However, better style should not imply more thorough research or honest exposition.

Let the reader beware: read more than one person's account of history before drawing any conclusions. Each historical account I've read (including Latourette's books) contains analyses that are influenced by the author's preconceptions.