What do you think?
Rate this book
100 Myths about the Middle East
Much ink has been spilled in recent years about the Middle East. At the same time, no other region has been as misunderstood, nor framed in so many clichés and mistakenly held beliefs. In this much-needed and enlightening book, Fred Halliday debunks one hundred of the most commonly misconstrued "facts" concerning the Middle East--in the political, cultural, social, and historical spheres. In a straightforward and simple way that illuminates the issues without compromising their underlying complexities he gets to the core of each matter. The Israel-Palestine crisis, the Iran-Iraq war, the U.S.-led Gulf invasions, the Afghan-Soviet conflict, and other significant milestones in modern Middle East history come under scrutiny here, with conclusions that will surprise and enlighten many for going so persuasively against the grain of commonly held (mis)perceptions.
Saqi Books
Saqi Books
269 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 2005
12 people are currently reading
158 people want to read
About the author
Fred Halliday
72 books26 followersSimon Frederick Peter Halliday, FBA (22 February 1946 in Dublin, Ireland – 26 April 2010 in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain) was an Irish writer and academic specialising in International Relations and the Middle East, with particular reference to the Cold War, Iran, and the Arabian peninsula.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
July 5, 2020
انتهيت الان من قراءة كتاب "مائة وهم حول الشرق الاوسط للكاتب فريد هاليداي. الكتاب يعرض مائة اطروحة تتعلق بالمفاهيم المتداولة في الاوساط الاعلامية وبين المثقفين بخصوص الشرق الاوسط شعوبا واعتقادات وسياسات. قد لا اتفق مع الكاتب في بعض الاطروحات ولكن في العموم يورد الكتاب الكثير من الافكار والنقاط الجيدة. الكتاب جيد ويستحق القراءة
November 29, 2016
The author of this book (published in 2005) has clearly has it up to here with gross over-generalisations about politics, culture, and religion within the Middle East. As such, the tone of the book is determinedly pragmatic. To the point, indeed, of noting at one point that, 'It would be reasonable to assume that this is a conclusion with which no-one in the region, be they Jew, Arab, or Kurd, would concur.' This is in particular reference to a comment that Jerusalem has become, 'an overblown, chauvinistic fetish, and the object of arbitrarily intransigent nationalist demands on both sides'.
Probably the main message of the book is that the way religion is used by regimes, both in the Middle East, in Europe, and the US, reflects a careful assemblage of historic elements and traditions for political ends. There is definitely no inevitable clash of civilisations, rather a much more complicated and heterogeneous history of co-operation, trade, occupation, and conflict. This book doesn't attempt a huge depth of analysis, as the response to each of the 100 myths is kept to a few pages or less. It does, however, signpost the reader to further references. Since my knowledge of Middle Eastern history is patchy verging on non-existent, this book was helpful and informative.
I gave '100 Myths About the Middle East' three stars rather than four as the 100 myth structure does lead to a bit of incoherence. I would perhaps have preferred a narrative of longer chapters. On the other hand, the book reads as though written in response to a constant and tiresome barrage of misleading and oversimplified messages in politics and the media, so I can understand why it was structured in this way. It's also notable that it was written before the so-called Arab Spring; I'd be interested to read Halliday's thoughts on that.
Probably the main message of the book is that the way religion is used by regimes, both in the Middle East, in Europe, and the US, reflects a careful assemblage of historic elements and traditions for political ends. There is definitely no inevitable clash of civilisations, rather a much more complicated and heterogeneous history of co-operation, trade, occupation, and conflict. This book doesn't attempt a huge depth of analysis, as the response to each of the 100 myths is kept to a few pages or less. It does, however, signpost the reader to further references. Since my knowledge of Middle Eastern history is patchy verging on non-existent, this book was helpful and informative.
I gave '100 Myths About the Middle East' three stars rather than four as the 100 myth structure does lead to a bit of incoherence. I would perhaps have preferred a narrative of longer chapters. On the other hand, the book reads as though written in response to a constant and tiresome barrage of misleading and oversimplified messages in politics and the media, so I can understand why it was structured in this way. It's also notable that it was written before the so-called Arab Spring; I'd be interested to read Halliday's thoughts on that.
October 22, 2019
Halliday'in Orta Doğu'ya dair her kesim ve görüşten ezberleri yerle bir etmeye odaklandığı çalışması, ayrıntılı olmasa da iyi bir panorama sunuyor. Araplar, Yahudiler, tek tanrılı dinlerin geçmişi, Soğuk Savaş boyunca Orta Doğu... Tarihçi olmadığı için, tarihsel atıflarından ziyade modern döneme dair yorumları daha dikkate alınmalı. Ezberlerden ve önyargılardan arınıp, bütüncül perspektif edinmek için fena bir başlangıç olmayabilir...
February 20, 2012
A good enough introduction to the Middle-East for beginners. Easy to read language that raises some interesting points that may take some seasoned people by surprise.
The recurring thread of each answer reads a bit like a Marxist's perspective, which is to dispell the relevance of religion, culture, and genetics in favour of a politics-only perspective because all people are inherently the same, or at least share far more in common than separates them.
The author does so with frequent references to European/Western examples of similar behaviour. Eg. Europe historically expelled its Jews, so Arabs aren't any worse than Europeans for expelling their Jews. This holds water for apologists and many in the middle, but might not for people who view such comparisons as untenable). Another example of such relativism is a perceived myth that Arabs have little sense of humour, which the author aims to de-mythologise by stating that unlike in the US, Arabs mock their leaders daily (behind closed doors) and once sold books of Ayatullah Khomeini's strangest quotes. The simplest argument was that the reputation of Arab society as being more violent is unfounded because other cultures are also violent, so therefore it is unfair to point fingers. For me personally, this does little to dispell the 'myth' but is useful for honest introspection.
It's worthwhile to stress that the author emphasises that monolothic, all-encompassing labels such as 'the West', 'Arabs', 'Islam' etc. are misleading and obscurantist, because these very labels are explaining miscegenations rather than the individual parts unrelated to each other. For example, an Arab in Morocco has their own unique concerns and goals as compared to an Arab in far away Iraq, as an Italian and Austrian will have their own unique issues though both belong to 'the West'.
The author writes irreverantly of the recurring, sinewy themes dominating middle-eastern society, lambasting them in baleful terms, viz. fundamentalist religion and its self-appointed representatives; zionism; corrupt demagogues; foreign meddling; and more. On religion, he states that Islam is neither a religion of peace nor a religion of war, but merely a text that can be used in any expedient direction. Zionism is explained as a colonial enterprise. Arab leaders point fingers outside to avert reponsibility for their own failings. Foreign regimes are not all-controlling manipulators of Arab leaders (dispelling an Arab myth), but not disinterested respectable bystanders (dispelling a Western myth). He stresses none of these as being inherent characteristics of Middle-Eastern society and culture. Instead, these myths are said to be a natural entailment of a plethora of mishaps for the region, such as colonialism and the European concept of nationalism, and are therefore malleable enough to be rid of under the right circumstances.
I'm glad I read it, but on a borrowed free from the library for the weekend then returned on a Monday kind of way.
The recurring thread of each answer reads a bit like a Marxist's perspective, which is to dispell the relevance of religion, culture, and genetics in favour of a politics-only perspective because all people are inherently the same, or at least share far more in common than separates them.
The author does so with frequent references to European/Western examples of similar behaviour. Eg. Europe historically expelled its Jews, so Arabs aren't any worse than Europeans for expelling their Jews. This holds water for apologists and many in the middle, but might not for people who view such comparisons as untenable). Another example of such relativism is a perceived myth that Arabs have little sense of humour, which the author aims to de-mythologise by stating that unlike in the US, Arabs mock their leaders daily (behind closed doors) and once sold books of Ayatullah Khomeini's strangest quotes. The simplest argument was that the reputation of Arab society as being more violent is unfounded because other cultures are also violent, so therefore it is unfair to point fingers. For me personally, this does little to dispell the 'myth' but is useful for honest introspection.
It's worthwhile to stress that the author emphasises that monolothic, all-encompassing labels such as 'the West', 'Arabs', 'Islam' etc. are misleading and obscurantist, because these very labels are explaining miscegenations rather than the individual parts unrelated to each other. For example, an Arab in Morocco has their own unique concerns and goals as compared to an Arab in far away Iraq, as an Italian and Austrian will have their own unique issues though both belong to 'the West'.
The author writes irreverantly of the recurring, sinewy themes dominating middle-eastern society, lambasting them in baleful terms, viz. fundamentalist religion and its self-appointed representatives; zionism; corrupt demagogues; foreign meddling; and more. On religion, he states that Islam is neither a religion of peace nor a religion of war, but merely a text that can be used in any expedient direction. Zionism is explained as a colonial enterprise. Arab leaders point fingers outside to avert reponsibility for their own failings. Foreign regimes are not all-controlling manipulators of Arab leaders (dispelling an Arab myth), but not disinterested respectable bystanders (dispelling a Western myth). He stresses none of these as being inherent characteristics of Middle-Eastern society and culture. Instead, these myths are said to be a natural entailment of a plethora of mishaps for the region, such as colonialism and the European concept of nationalism, and are therefore malleable enough to be rid of under the right circumstances.
I'm glad I read it, but on a borrowed free from the library for the weekend then returned on a Monday kind of way.
June 14, 2013
أعلم أن الوقائع السياسية غير محسومة من حيث حقيقتها،وان كل مايتم تداوله هي مجرد تحليلات وترجيحات . إلا أني أجد متعة كبيرة في إفتراض أنها واردة جدا ..
يقول فريد :
لو قيل إن سبب الفرادة هو ضراوة الصراعات وحدتها بين الأعراق وخصوصا الصراع العربي الاسرائئيلي فإن هذا لايصمد أمام أي حكم مقارن : فأعداد كثيرة من البشر قتلت في صراعات بين الأعراق في رواندا ويوغوسلافيا السابقة ، من دون أن ننسى أوروبا الوسطى في القرن العشرين ، وأعدادهم أكثر بما لايقارن وبما لايقاس بمن قتل في الصراع من أجل القضية الفلسطنية المستمر منذ أكثر من نصف قرن . والإرهاب ليس ميزة للأسلام أو الشرق الأوسط فقد إستخدمته كل الأديان في التاريخ المعاصر للمنطقة لأغراض القتل الجماعي والتميز العرقي ، على غرار مابرهنت عليه المجموعات اليهودية كـ أرغون والميليشات المسيحية في لبنان .
يقول فريد :
لو قيل إن سبب الفرادة هو ضراوة الصراعات وحدتها بين الأعراق وخصوصا الصراع العربي الاسرائئيلي فإن هذا لايصمد أمام أي حكم مقارن : فأعداد كثيرة من البشر قتلت في صراعات بين الأعراق في رواندا ويوغوسلافيا السابقة ، من دون أن ننسى أوروبا الوسطى في القرن العشرين ، وأعدادهم أكثر بما لايقارن وبما لايقاس بمن قتل في الصراع من أجل القضية الفلسطنية المستمر منذ أكثر من نصف قرن . والإرهاب ليس ميزة للأسلام أو الشرق الأوسط فقد إستخدمته كل الأديان في التاريخ المعاصر للمنطقة لأغراض القتل الجماعي والتميز العرقي ، على غرار مابرهنت عليه المجموعات اليهودية كـ أرغون والميليشات المسيحية في لبنان .
November 3, 2012
This is an amazing book that, in short order, corrected many of my mis-beliefs, and informed me of much of the culture, religious proclivities, political aspirations, and attitudes about the west of so many mid-east countries and peoples. The lengthy glossary was particularly helpful. It's a fairly quick read, and the nature of the chapters allows you to put it down and pick it up at any time without losing any sense of continuity. Fred Haliday clearly knows his subject.
September 18, 2008
Illuminates/explodes 100 common myths about the Middle East.
This book confirms for me that much of what passes for news and analysis regarding the Middle East is re-hashing of various oversimplified, unhelpful, and often disingenious myths.
I would have appreciated if the book had given more references and offered options for further reading.
This book confirms for me that much of what passes for news and analysis regarding the Middle East is re-hashing of various oversimplified, unhelpful, and often disingenious myths.
I would have appreciated if the book had given more references and offered options for further reading.
July 23, 2012
Halliday wrote a revisionist history that acts as an alternative to mass media accounts of the Middle East post-9/11. However, I don't believe it to be any more accurate and includes a gag-worthy amount of personal political and religious opinion. Also noteworthy is that no sources are cited or mentioned. PASS.
Read
January 16, 202520 anos depois da publicação, este livro continua tão pertinente como o terá sido em 2005. Fred Halliday morreu pouco depois, em 2010, portanto nunca saberemos quais teriam sido as suas reflexões sobre a Primavera Árabe e os recentes desenvolvimentos na Palestina e na Síria.
Nota-se que era extremamente versado na região e que tinha pouca tolerância para a propagação de mitos e ideas falsas ou pré-concebidas que pululavam na altura e continuam agora, provavelmente com ainda mais fervor.
O formato (1 mito por página) facilita a leitura, mas deixa a desejar em termos de coerência narrativa. Teria preferido um pouco mais de detalhe. A escolha dos mitos e a sua ordenação obedecem certamente a algum critério, mas sem mais informação a relevância parece desfasada (também fruto da data de publicação).
Foi um exercício interessante ler o glossário da crise, i.e., as consequências linguísticas do 11 de Setembro de 2001 que me deixou com vontade de fazer algo semelhante para os dias que correm.
P.S. - É bom ver que há coisas que ainda não mudaram. Agora como na altura continuamos a ter péssimas traduções. Só li em português porque o requisitei da biblioteca e tive que exercer muita força de controlo para não corrigir os inúmeros erros gramaticais.
Nota-se que era extremamente versado na região e que tinha pouca tolerância para a propagação de mitos e ideas falsas ou pré-concebidas que pululavam na altura e continuam agora, provavelmente com ainda mais fervor.
O formato (1 mito por página) facilita a leitura, mas deixa a desejar em termos de coerência narrativa. Teria preferido um pouco mais de detalhe. A escolha dos mitos e a sua ordenação obedecem certamente a algum critério, mas sem mais informação a relevância parece desfasada (também fruto da data de publicação).
Foi um exercício interessante ler o glossário da crise, i.e., as consequências linguísticas do 11 de Setembro de 2001 que me deixou com vontade de fazer algo semelhante para os dias que correm.
P.S. - É bom ver que há coisas que ainda não mudaram. Agora como na altura continuamos a ter péssimas traduções. Só li em português porque o requisitei da biblioteca e tive que exercer muita força de controlo para não corrigir os inúmeros erros gramaticais.
November 5, 2023
Very interesting and informative book with a format that is easy to read. Every myth is divided like a chapter so the book goes by really fast. Debunks a lot of myths mostly Americans have about the middle east. Enjoyed and agreed with how he supported them maintaining their own cultures and staying orientalist in the face of western expansion into the reason. A lot of the myths were about the Arab-Israeli conflicts of history. He kind of had a moderate stance on it opting for the two state solution which isn't really working right now which is the only thing I disagreed with. Really goes in at the end talking about the role of women and alcohol in Islam.
November 8, 2022
A short book for people unfamiliar with the Middle East which breaks down some myths people may have. Sadly there's an absence of citations and references as well.
February 8, 2023
Repetitive, dumbly simplified and filled with lots of "as I was able to confirm when I visited (insert Middle Eastern country)..." kind of unscientific justifications.
July 6, 2010
I admit I skimmed parts of this book since the author was debunking myths that I didn't know existed. He did help me gain a different perspective on events and ideas brought up in the fiction I have been reading.
January 27, 2020
«100 Mitos Sobre O Médio Oriente», de Fred Halliday, tradução de Pedro Serras Pereira, edições Tinta da China
November 24, 2012
The concepts are not structered well enough, the Middle East is a huge geography, but the book in concentrated on isreal and iraq.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews