A House of Many Mansions: The History of Lebanon Reconsidered

Rating:
Summary: Very few new facts, disappointing.
Review: A good account of the modern history of Lebanon. The author shows he is clearly an expert on 20th century Lebanon and the intricacies of modern lebanese politics. A major flaw, however, is the abscence of any significant reference to the massacres of 1860 (an attempt perhaps to minimalize them). More importantly, his reinterpretation of the history of the Maronites before the 19th century is not based on any new facts, which strips it of its scholarly value. In this regard the book becomes a vehicle for the author's opinions without adding much to what is known about lebanese or maronite history. He would have done better had he concentrated on Lebanon in the modern times.

Rating:
Summary: The typical stereotype reaction
Review: I found the book very good and neutral. Concerning the comments of Abdel Hussein Hussein, I would say that he did not understand the main lesson of the book. Using the typical stereotype reaction by saying: "The Maronites should understand..." Mr. Hussein just committed the same mistake that was pinpointed by Kamal Salibi. I think it is time to wake up and understand that while Maronite, Sunni and Chiaa leaders were always hand in hand in securing silently their own personal interests, they where at the same time convincing people, such as Mr. Hussein, that the community was at risk and they should react (Just note that the worst combats during the Lebanese war were inter-community ones)

Rating:
Summary: A very good book. Recommended
Review: Mr. Salibi has every right to publish his political theories, but not to disguise them as peer reviewed history. A very disappointing book by (whom I used to consider) a respected historian. Napoleon once said, 'History is the version of past events that people (read: winners) have decided to agree upon'. Apparently, Mr. Salibi agrees. His current version of history is that Lebanon always was and hence should always remain a Syrian province.

Rating:
Summary: Biased Point of View
Review: Mr. Salibi is known to create his own history and dismiss facts that might not serve his point of view. In this book, the events that took place in 1860s are not mentioned, which is very strange. These events are a turning point in the modern history of Lebanon, however since they create a justification for the creation of Lebanon in its current state and borders, Mr. Salibi chooses to omit them.
I found it also "funny" that Mr. Salibi made a great effort to prove that the Maronites are Arabs while it is widely known and acknowledged that they are direct descendants of the Assyrians and still use the language of their ancestors in their mass.
For any serious reader interested in the history of Lebanon, I suggest instead: The Breakdown of the State in Lebanon, 1967-1976 by Farid El Khazen (a very objective and serious piece of work).

Rating:
Summary: hajj
Review: The eradication of the 1860 detailed maassacres from the book is a bit dissapointing as it offers a lot of light about the future shape and the emergence of the state of greater lebanon, by France under pressure from an organized social energy "The Maronites" who knew what they wanted and to make a success out of it. On a larger picture the author uses very good and easy commentary about the modern history of Lebanon that helps you easily read through the book without getting bored.
.
remember that you should read nor to contradict nor to believe in, but to weigh and to consider.


Rating:
Summary: This is your reference in Lebanese history
Review: Those who know Kamal Salibi, know that he is not affiliated with any Lebanese political group or party and that's what shoots Salibi's review of the Lebanese history up high.
Being an academic historian, Salibi wipes out popular versions of the Lebanese history and replaces them with a more analytical, critical, and well-researched version. In the heyday of a never ending debate about the identity of the Lebanese people, an objective historical record is highly needed.
Several Maronite historians should understand that they do not come from a different ethnic stock. They must thoroughly read their historical texts and subject them to historical analysis. Maronite history has become similar to a religious faith: it is not receptive of any historical examination.
Salibi does not favor one group more than another in this book. He only classifies groups according to the available texts and what he gets in conclusion is a different story about the history of Lebanon which might be sad, but true.
The anonymous reviewer who scorns Salibi for this book is apparently writing with the current political situation (the Syrians influencing Lebanese politics) in the back of his mind. This kind of review is what historians call biased history. Salibi never suggests that Lebanon must become a Syrian province, the reviewer reached to this conclusion by him/herself.

Rating:
Summary: Thank God Salibi is not a politician
Review: Those who know Kamal Salibi, know that he is not affiliated with any Lebanese political group or party and that's what shoots Salibi's review of the Lebanese history up high.
Being an academic historian, Salibi wipes out popular versions of the Lebanese history and replaces them with a more analytical, critical, and well-researched version. In the heydey of a never ending debate about the identity of the Lebanese people, an objective historical record is highly needed.
The Maronites should understand that they do not come from a different ethnic stock. They must thouroughly read their historical texts and subjet them to historical analysis. Maronite history has become similar to a religious faith: they are not ready to open up for historical analysis.
Salibi does not favor one group more than another in this book. He only classifies groups according to the available texts and what he gets in conclusion is a different story about the history of Lebanon which might be sad, but true.
The anonymous reviewer who scorns Salibi for this book is apparently writing with the current political situation (the Syrians influencing Lebanese politics) in the back of his mind. This kind of review is what historians call biased history. Salibi never suggests that Lebanon must become a Syrian province, the reviewer reached to this conclusion by him/herself.