This book's Jamaican-African perspective seems to run out of steam about the time of Independence (1962). Coverage of the 20th century revolves around Marcus Garvey, Alexander Bustamente, and Norman Manley. The six post-Independence Prime Ministers appear in photos, but only Bustamente is discussed. There is no mention of the 1970s social unrest, nor of the rivalry between Michael Manley and Edward Seaga. Considerable attention is given to athletics and the creative arts, but very little to political economy. "Development," we learn, "is a state of mind" (410), and Jamaica's biggest development problem is not the lack of gainful employment (a view attributed to the Rastas and a group of women writers), but the Eurocentric, colonial system of education (402). This deliberate evasion of any possible controversy and of contemporary history suggests this book was written as a secondary school textbook.

In any history the selection of the important points which make up that history will make or break the work. Philip Sherlock and Hazel Bennett have written a work which selects people, places and events from the Afraican-Jamaican point of view rather than from a European point of view. The normal list of government officals and events is either not contained in this work or is played down. At the same time the African-Jamican is showcased. For example, Columbus gets about five pages in this book while Gargey has his own chapter and many additional pages. As the authors point out, this work differs significantly from other histories, most of which have been written from the perspective of the coloniser. The book presents a new perspective on Jamaican history which needs to be read and understood but done so with the other works. Only then will the failues of each type balance out to give the reader a total picture of Jamaican history.

Sherlock does a lengthy look at Jamaican history from a Jamaican point of view, with a special emphasis and sympathy to the enlsaved majority of Jamaica. Although most of the material in the book is not new, the interpretation is fresh, and from a perspective that has not been heard from often in works dealing with Caribbean history.

THE BOOK IS VERY BORING AND NOT GOOD READING MATERIAL. I AM READING THE BOOK FOR A UNIVERSITY CLASS AND DISLIKE THE READING ALTOGETHER. THE AUTHOR NEED TO TO TRY TO DO AN UPDATED AND MORE INTERESTING VERSION OF THE HISTORY. HOW CAN I UNDERSTAND THE WEST INDIES AND VISIT THE SITE IF I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THE BOOK... VERY VERY DULL!!!!!!

This book offered so many fascinating insights into European and colonial history, the slave trade, the way nation states wage war, race relations--topics that are as relevant today as they have been over the last four hundred years. In the small stage of the West Indies you can see them all played out.