Having been challenged by interpretations,and analyzing the assumptions behind the concept of Western civilization, The Western Experience presents a confused panorama about what Western Civilization is all about. Is European Civilization the civilization of Modern Europe and America excluding Australia? The concept of civilization is avoided in spite of the fact that the text was designed to provide an analytical and comprehensive account of the processes by which European society and civilization evolved. Civilization is defined as just a social organization with more complex rules than those of the cavemen. The proper concept of civilization is not treated in a rational and coherent manner. How does the narrative around selected recurring themes fit together under a broader concept of civilization in order to understand the continuing thread of developmment of the so-called western civilization? How do you distinguish one civilization from another in space and in time?

I had to purchase this book for my guide to AP European History.

I had never before had a course in European History and this gave me a disadvantage in using this book.

Because the text assumes you know who everyone is, the immeadiately tell you every single way history views important people, classes, wars, monarchs, etc.

Also, the reading can get very tedious.

However, I gave this book 3 stars because it does offer more than just what happened. It also tries to show the student, "why did it happen."

TO teachers/professors: Only give this book to your class if they have some experience of European History

"The Western Experience" edited by Chambers covers a massive range of topics in a manner that is conducive to the understanding of the material. The book discusses many Social, Political and economic trends for each respective time frame. However, there are some glaring omissions as a historical text. The book will state for example, that a certain organization was established in a certain year, however, nothing further is mentioned. No explanations as to why or as to what purpose said organization ultimately served. Further, the text becomes, at times, difficult to follow, as things are not discussed in chronological order. The reader often has difficulty in distinguishing the year and what specific events where happening elsewhere at the same time. But it must be noted here that the reader most certainly does recognize parallelism within history, as the result of its interconnected, yet non-chronological, organization scheme.

If must be noted, however, that while it is at times difficult to follow, the book, especially in the more modern history parts, does a relatively good job of remaining objective.

continuation... Mention is made of a new civilization taking root in the west and north of Europe without specifying what are the elements and characteristics of such a civilization. Why west and north and not the south such as Italy or Spain and Portugal? The factors and conditions that make-up this new civilization are not analyzed nor systematized. Medieval civilization is mentioned without describing how it developed through its supposedly unifying theme of community and class identity. Finally in the epilogue, Roman Civilization is touched under Human Rights, as Roman law was extended wherever Roman civilization could reach. Roman Imperial Civilization is a sub-title but there is no analysis nor consideration of this HIGHER empire as a civilization. If historians look to Near Eastern societies for the root conceptions of organized government, writing, law, complex religious ideas, ethical values, etc., cornerstones of modern society,

they should also trace the origins and development of Western Civilization under this context.