A History of Asia

This is not your usually history book. It's written in a manner that you actually following the event and story of ancient India and China and other countries. Highly recommend for college courses that offer to use this book. A++

I read this textbook in a junior-level undergraduate course on the history of Asia. Rhoads Murphey's text certainly has a tall task in covering 4,000 years of history in severally culturally distinct regions in Asia, but I thought he succeeded. Another reviewer has pointed out that Murphey does a very good job of focusing on themes and meaningful interpretation of historical trends. I agree, and would further point out that this interpretation is not overdone -- the author doesn't resort to distilling complicated histories into linear progressions or other simplistic constructions. At times, I was a bit frustrated with the book's organization (chapters cover one or two civilizations, e.g. Japan and Korea, in a general time period), because it was sometimes difficult to pin down a basic chronology of a particular region/culture, but this frustration may have been a result of the format of the course for which I was reading this book. And in fairness, the book does provide convenient charts towards the beginning of each chapter listing major events and their dates. Finally, one of the more widely-read reviews on this page criticized Prof. Murphey's treatment of Islam. When the topic came up, it seemed to me that Islam's historical and cultural influence was treated in an accurate, honest, and fair way.

Let's not forget this fact: this is a college textbook. If you're looking for something that will be interesting reading or will keep you entertained when the television is off, you don't want this book. You will be overwhelmed by rafts of facts and will not be able to digest it all. Find another book.That said, this book is very good if you're interested in a thorough, exhaustive history of Asia. Murphey focusses on themes and meaning rather than lists of names and dates. Memorisation and quotation of established facts are not the order of the day. Probably an ideal introductory history of Monsoon Asia, this book makes a good gateway to further in-depth study of the area.That said, it's not a perfect book. Some broad claims are made about the region, such as the claim that Asian societies are older and possess greater sophistication. This is inaccurate -- after all, Egyptian civilization is two thousand years older, and the Fertile Crescent civilization is one thousand years older, than the civilizations of China and the Indus River valley. True, China was at one time the most powerful and sophisticated on Earth, but it is no longer, because it placed greater value on social stability than on development and growth. These claims are surely brash and possibly offensive to those who have struggled to make other civilizations advance beyond a crude level.Barring that sort of thing, however, this book is a good scholastic introduction to the history of Monsoon Asia. It will bore casual readers, keep that in mind. However, if you are interested in an in-depth study of the themes that continue to color Asia, this is your book.

I'm using this textbook for an asian studies class I'm taking. I find this book to be very well organized and informative and interesting. As a matter of fact, I've already finished the book even though only one quarter of the term has passed. The only problem I have with this book is that the author comments on the history a little too much instead of allowing the readers to make their own judgment. For example, he makes an outrageous suggestion that South Koreans would have been better off if the Korean War had not been fought after North Korea invaded. In addition, the author doesn't often present a balanced view on Asian history. He forcefully condemns western colonialism (fair enough), but then never criticizes, for example, China for being imperialistic towards its neighbors. He often criticizes westerners for being "arrogant," but rarely criticizes Chinese for being arrogant, and they did have a very arrogant attitude towards "outsiders" throughout their history, including all their Asian neighbors. He says, "It should be remembered, however, that Korea has the same geographic size and population, with a far older, more sophisticated culture. . . " Really? Older and more sophisticated than Greece, Italy, France, etc.? What is he basing his information on? "Equally old and sophisticated culture. . ." would be a much more accurate assessment. Still, this book is interesting and I recommend it.