Scan barcode
ihashem's review against another edition
2.0
Slightly disappointed because since his life legacy is the Sykes-Picot agreement and you have to read 2/3 of the book to get to that point. The end1/3 of the book, gives a strong finish of the events leading to the Sykes-Picot agreement and analysis of historical events leading to the creation of the Middle East. However to be honest I should have read a book titled the creation of the Middle East, as this book is just about the man. So if you are like me and looking for a historical analysis of events and a little bit about Sykes this is not that book.
aerlenbach's review against another edition
2.0
And with this book, I’ve now completed my globetrotting journey of European & US Imperialism of the last ~200 years. We conclude with the Middle East.
I was disappointed in this book because it was what it was: a biography. I wanted something more akin to my last book, “Gangsters of Capitalism” that talked more broadly about the historical contexts outside of the sphere of the subject matter (British & French colonialism and the dissolving Ottoman Empire during and after WW1).
The book ends at Sykes’ untimely death February 1919 from the pandemic of the time (then referred to as the Spanish Flu). Its brief epilogue then covers what the Allied Empires did to carve up the Ottoman Empire into the nation states we know today:
“A further cause for friction was the arbitrary and autocratic manner in which borders were delineated, with little regard for division along linguistic or religious lines, but entirely to suit the Allies’ political, strategic and commercial interests, the latter more and more influenced by the increasing demand for oil. The example of Iraq was typical, with Kurds to the north, Sunni Muslims in the centre and Shiite Muslims to the south.”
This was the real meat I wanted to get into. The author only covered this briefly at the end and did not explain how exactly the Sykes-Picot Agreement reflected the final post-war impositions onto the region. Though the author did talk a lot about Sykes’ interest in Zionism, foreshadowing the colonial apartheid state in occupied Palestine & Syria we all know and love today.
The author (the grandson of the subject) also claimed his grandfather ended up hating imperialism years after helping write one of the most important imperialist treaties in world history. He speculates that Sykes would have helped foster a more free and fair society had he not died beforehand. I am skeptical of this, and think he was trying to paint the man in a more endearing light.
I don’t know enough about this time in history, and I wish I had read a better book that covers it. I am open to recommendations. I do not recommend this book.
All I wanna know is: How influential were the ‘Sykes–Picot Agreement’ and the ‘Balfour Declaration’ to the ‘Supreme Council of the Peace Conference’ that met in San Remo in April 1920? How were they similar/different from each other? I don’t know. And the fact that I’ve learned enough from this book to be able to ask that question, but not answer it, shows why I’m frustrated.
I was disappointed in this book because it was what it was: a biography. I wanted something more akin to my last book, “Gangsters of Capitalism” that talked more broadly about the historical contexts outside of the sphere of the subject matter (British & French colonialism and the dissolving Ottoman Empire during and after WW1).
The book ends at Sykes’ untimely death February 1919 from the pandemic of the time (then referred to as the Spanish Flu). Its brief epilogue then covers what the Allied Empires did to carve up the Ottoman Empire into the nation states we know today:
“A further cause for friction was the arbitrary and autocratic manner in which borders were delineated, with little regard for division along linguistic or religious lines, but entirely to suit the Allies’ political, strategic and commercial interests, the latter more and more influenced by the increasing demand for oil. The example of Iraq was typical, with Kurds to the north, Sunni Muslims in the centre and Shiite Muslims to the south.”
This was the real meat I wanted to get into. The author only covered this briefly at the end and did not explain how exactly the Sykes-Picot Agreement reflected the final post-war impositions onto the region. Though the author did talk a lot about Sykes’ interest in Zionism, foreshadowing the colonial apartheid state in occupied Palestine & Syria we all know and love today.
The author (the grandson of the subject) also claimed his grandfather ended up hating imperialism years after helping write one of the most important imperialist treaties in world history. He speculates that Sykes would have helped foster a more free and fair society had he not died beforehand. I am skeptical of this, and think he was trying to paint the man in a more endearing light.
I don’t know enough about this time in history, and I wish I had read a better book that covers it. I am open to recommendations. I do not recommend this book.
All I wanna know is: How influential were the ‘Sykes–Picot Agreement’ and the ‘Balfour Declaration’ to the ‘Supreme Council of the Peace Conference’ that met in San Remo in April 1920? How were they similar/different from each other? I don’t know. And the fact that I’ve learned enough from this book to be able to ask that question, but not answer it, shows why I’m frustrated.
rhys_thomas_sparey's review
informative
slow-paced
2.0
A biography written in the same spirit as the Sykes-Picot agreement, with a hopefully less fatal fallout.
This is to say that it is encumbered with the irony of a baronet fortunately endowed with the time and resources to exonerate his grandfather of colonialist mistakes brought about by the British class system generally, and by the appointment of Mark Sykes specifically, alongside various other aristocrats, to positions of power for which they were only tenuously qualified. In Mark Sykes' case, these qualifications constitute a few gap years abroad, which are generously romanticised by his grandson in this volume.
But it isn't entirely uninformative. Most of the book details in story form, and with accessible prose, the events and influencing forces that directed Mark Sykes and his contemporaries to the disastrous colonial and postcolonial positions in which they ended up, which are actually very interesting -- David Lloyd George, T. E. Lawrence, and Winston Churchill all get a mention.
Christopher Sykes can be forgiven in a biography for detailing those aspects of Mark Sykes' personal life that many readers may find irrelevant or uninteresting, but these details do demonstrate (albeit unwittingly) the worrying extent to which much British colonialism was/remains the product of a rigid division of power, status, and wealth.
The most exciting part of this book is an extremely brief epilogue on the titular character's legacy, which could have replaced several chapters, though it surprisingly tries to unburden Mark Sykes of any responsibility regarding the fallout of the Sykes-Picot agreement.
While more reliable accounts exist, they are likely less accessible. Indeed, it is Christopher Sykes' ability to guide the reader through his grandfather's life that gives this book its value.
This is to say that it is encumbered with the irony of a baronet fortunately endowed with the time and resources to exonerate his grandfather of colonialist mistakes brought about by the British class system generally, and by the appointment of Mark Sykes specifically, alongside various other aristocrats, to positions of power for which they were only tenuously qualified. In Mark Sykes' case, these qualifications constitute a few gap years abroad, which are generously romanticised by his grandson in this volume.
But it isn't entirely uninformative. Most of the book details in story form, and with accessible prose, the events and influencing forces that directed Mark Sykes and his contemporaries to the disastrous colonial and postcolonial positions in which they ended up, which are actually very interesting -- David Lloyd George, T. E. Lawrence, and Winston Churchill all get a mention.
Christopher Sykes can be forgiven in a biography for detailing those aspects of Mark Sykes' personal life that many readers may find irrelevant or uninteresting, but these details do demonstrate (albeit unwittingly) the worrying extent to which much British colonialism was/remains the product of a rigid division of power, status, and wealth.
The most exciting part of this book is an extremely brief epilogue on the titular character's legacy, which could have replaced several chapters, though it surprisingly tries to unburden Mark Sykes of any responsibility regarding the fallout of the Sykes-Picot agreement.
While more reliable accounts exist, they are likely less accessible. Indeed, it is Christopher Sykes' ability to guide the reader through his grandfather's life that gives this book its value.
More...