Rating: 
Summary: Poor is a Generous Rating
Review: After reading "A Concise History of Portugal" I have to wonder why such poor material is allowed to be published. This book is so full of distortions, primarily regarding the sociology of the Portuguese within Portugal and the colonial empire, that it borders on fiction. Birmingham's research was acomplished through very faulty secondary sources, and it clearly shows. I have a substantial knowledge of Iberian (and Portuguese) history, and can safely say that certain sections of Birmingham's book (particulary with respect to social groups and ethnicity) are crude opinions presented as fact. This person is a respected historian? Maybe he is writing about the planet Pluto, not Portugal? That's it, he misspelled Pluto, slight mistake., My, My, standards certainly have deteriorated.
Rating:
Summary: Does Bimingham Know What Country he is Writing About?
Review: After reading "A Concise History of Portugal" I have to wonder why such poor material is allowed to be published. This book is so full of distortions, primarily regarding the sociology of the Portuguese within Portugal and the colonial empire, that it borders on fiction. Birmingham's research was acomplished through very faulty secondary sources, and it clearly shows. I have a substantial knowledge of Iberian (and Portuguese) history, and can safely say that certain sections of Birmingham's book (particulary with respect to social groups and ethnicity) are crude opinions presented as fact. This person is a respected historian? Maybe he is writing about the planet Pluto, not Portugal? That's it, he misspelled Pluto, slight mistake., My, My, standards certainly have deteriorated.
Rating: 
Summary: Not too bad, but could be better
Review: After reading a number of the previous Amazon.com book reviews of Mr. Birmingham's "Concise History of Portugal", I suppose I should hold back giving this book a better rating than 4. Frankly, I thought it was a very readable history, unlike the rest of the books in Cambridge's "Concise History" series -- but even though the previous reviewers weren't quite on the mark, I have to give them some credit.First of all, I don't know much about Portugal, so I'm not in a position to judge the accuracy of Birmingham's book. Yet I didn't notice anything blatantly absurd, which is what everybody else seems to think, and it strikes me as odd that such a well-known scholar on Portuguese and Portuguese Imperial history as David Birmingham should suddenly turn out a piece of complete junk, which is what the reviewers below claim. I wish they had pointed out what his mistakes actually were. And as for the one reviewer's assertion that Birmingham insults the Portuguese, I don't know what he's talking about, nor why Birmingham would have wanted to insult them. The author often criticized the brutality of Portugal's war in Angola, but I don't think that's a reason to lay into him. The major fault of the book is that it's just too short. Even though it's advertised as a "concise history", I felt like Birmingham just didn't write enough. How can anybody cover 2,000 years of Portuguese history in 192 pages? If Birmingham had added even a hundred pages more, it would have made this book a lot better and still not too long. Maybe we should blame his editors. Other gripes: Birmingham should have written more about Portuguese culture, such as literature, art, and music. His "Concise History" is not just a political history, and he manages to tie in some interesting sections on social and economic history, but the book leans heavily toward politics.
Rating:
Summary: Not too bad, but could be better
Review: After reading a number of the previous Amazon.com book reviews of Mr. Birmingham's "Concise History of Portugal", I suppose I should hold back giving this book a better rating than 4. Frankly, I thought it was a very readable history, unlike the rest of the books in Cambridge's "Concise History" series -- but even though the previous reviewers weren't quite on the mark, I have to give them some credit. First of all, I don't know much about Portugal, so I'm not in a position to judge the accuracy of Birmingham's book. Yet I didn't notice anything blatantly absurd, which is what everybody else seems to think, and it strikes me as odd that such a well-known scholar on Portuguese and Portuguese Imperial history as David Birmingham should suddenly turn out a piece of complete junk, which is what the reviewers below claim. I wish they had pointed out what his mistakes actually were. And as for the one reviewer's assertion that Birmingham insults the Portuguese, I don't know what he's talking about, nor why Birmingham would have wanted to insult them. The author often criticized the brutality of Portugal's war in Angola, but I don't think that's a reason to lay into him. The major fault of the book is that it's just too short. Even though it's advertised as a "concise history", I felt like Birmingham just didn't write enough. How can anybody cover 2,000 years of Portuguese history in 192 pages? If Birmingham had added even a hundred pages more, it would have made this book a lot better and still not too long. Maybe we should blame his editors. Other gripes: Birmingham should have written more about Portuguese culture, such as literature, art, and music. His "Concise History" is not just a political history, and he manages to tie in some interesting sections on social and economic history, but the book leans heavily toward politics.
Rating:
Summary: Maybe too concise
Review: Anticipating a trip to Portugal, I picked up this book to prepare myself figuring this would give me a bit of background on the country. First, I was suprised with the things I learned of its governmental and social history. It is not the typical western European country, but nonetheless has held its own. I did not realize that Britain played such a big role. Although I learned a bit about the government and economy (and through this, a little about the population), I did not see much about the humanities and arts. The author does mention that as the country was getting gold from its colonies, it built some beautiful buildings. Nothing else was covered. I would like to know more about the arts, and this book does not give that. The book is also not the quickest read. Given that it is a history, I would like things to be in chronological order. Birmingham will follow some actions a few decades forward to show the outcome, but then jump back to where he was without comment. This makes the flow a little distracting. I found myself jumping back a few pages to try to follow the narrative. Not the easiest of tasks. If you know nothing about Portugal, this book will give you a brief glimpse which will get you on the right path to understanding Portugal, but it by no means gives you the most authoritative or the most readable history.
Rating:
Summary: A reasonably good overview, but it contains inaccuracies.
Review: Birmingham has provided a well written primer for the reader who is searching for a basic body of reference on Portugal. However, some of his statements with respect to politics and, in particular, peoples, are very much open to question. One major example of this is that he fails to mention that more than 60 percent of the roughly 35,000 black African slaves that arrived in continental Portugal during the 15th and 16th centuries did not remain in the country, but were exported to the Gold Coast (for barter with African tribes), Sao Tome e Principe, Cape Verde, Madeira, Spain and Holland. One certainly cannot determine a legitimate census of this group of people by simply depending on descriptions of a ship's cargo and dock records (which he has ostensibly done through secondary sources). Moreover, his comments on miscegenation in mainland Portugal during this time frame are, to say the least, exagerated. By comparison, Livermore's "A New History of Portugal" is, overall, a much better study of Portuguese history.
Rating: 
Summary: A reasonably good basic history, but lacking in some areas.
Review: Cunningham is a an exceptional scholar, and he has made a name for himself in African studies. His book on Portugal, however, is lacking. Some portions are not fully based on verifiable fact. Several of his opinions are quite streched, and he is anthropologically incorrect when he refers to the Portuguese as a race. The Portuguese are not a race. They are a PEOPLE within the caucasian race.
Rating: 
Summary: Pretty good. Could be better.
Review: David Birmingham does a pretty good job of sharing a CONCISE history. Maybe more detail should be given to the history of Portugal before 1700 CE. If you are looking for a reasonably quick overview, then this an excellent starting point. If you are looking for greater detail, you are going to need more than this publication supplies you.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty good. Could be better.
Review: David Birmingham does a pretty good job of sharing a CONCISE history. Maybe more detail should be given to the history of Portugal before 1700 CE. If you are looking for a reasonably quick overview, then this an excellent starting point. If you are looking for greater detail, you are going to need more than this publication supplies you.
Rating:
Summary: A book with much distorted information.
Review: I am quite familiar with Portuguese history and am truly surprised by many things Cunningham has written. He is essentially accurate about the country's early history (say BC to through the 14th century), after that, there are numerous holes and distortions. Some of what he has written is actually insulting to a remarkable group of people. The Portuguese deserve much better. If you are interested in learning about Portugal there are some excellent history books available, auch as: Livermore's, A New Hisory of Portugal, and all of Boxer's books. Birmingham's book is close to being dust bin material!! I can just imagine what his upcoming book on Portugal and Africa is going to be like!!
|
