The Treatment of the Middle East in American High School Textbooks

You are visiting the old website of The Institute for Palestine Studies

Please visit our new websiteClick Here


VOL. 4


No. 3
P. 46
The Treatment of the Middle East in American High School Textbooks


A STUDY of the treatment of the Middle East in American textbooks can be quite revealing. The amount of space devoted to the subject may indicate in itself whether publishers, authors, and school administrators consider this area and its peoples worthy of substantial treatment or simply peripheral to the study of man's past and present. It obviously shows to some extent the degree to which popular Western prejudices and stereotypes are corrected or perpetuated by the schools. It can, furthermore, furnish us with a copy perhaps a somewhat less crude one - of such images.

This study is based on a careful investigation of twenty textbooks used in American junior and senior high schools, and listed in the bibliography at the end of this article. Books used for both world history and area studies classes are included. [1] Material relating to pre-Islamic history has been excluded. Since it is not possible to deal with every aspect of these books, I have chosen to concentrate on the extent of coverage and treatment of Islam, the contemporary Arabs, and the Arab-Israeli conflict.


The amount of space apportioned to the area varies considerably. In one case, a book [2] whose title makes no claim that it is anything more than a history of the Western world is, nevertheless, used (at least in Indiana) as a world history text. Other texts make some attempt to cover the whole world and thus devote, typically, 15-25 pages out of 700-900 pages to the Middle East, usually giving a reasonable amount of space to it only for the post-1945 period. The Middle East, in such cases, is clearly considered - like other non- Western areas to be a minor sideshow of the West. In a few exceptional cases, [3] the region is given something approximating a legitimate share of coverage. It should be pointed out, however, that even material on Middle Eastern topics may be related primarily to the West; for instance, a section on the Crusades is likely to emphasize the subsequent impact on Europe, and a section on the Ottoman Empire may stress the rise of nationalism in the Balkans.

With regard to subject matter, every world history [4] has a section on early Islam. This almost invariably includes a little information on the Prophet, basic Islamic beliefs, Islamic expansion, and Islamic civilization. A few authors also attempt to explain the Caliphate, the Shari'a, and the Sunni-Shi'a split. There is usually some mention of the Turks and Mongols and the decline of Islamic power. The Crusades are always covered - often in a separate chapter. There are usually a brief account of the rise and decline of the Ottoman Empire and a few scattered paragraphs on European imperialism during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Only one book [5] gives substantial and continuous treatment of Islamic history between the twelfth and twentieth centuries. Sections on the period since World War I are nearly universal, commonly giving a sketch of each country (tending to emphasize international relations) and sometimes including separate sub-sections on the Arab-Israeli conflict and Arab nationalism. The area studies books usually make an attempt to provide an interdisciplinary approach.


The treatment of Islam ranges from basically accurate to confused and half-digested material. Fundamental matters relating to the Five Pillars, basic doctrines, and the life of the Prophet are generally explained without any gross mistakes, although there is occasional confusion. [6] Concerning the Islamic doctrine of the Quran, the authors, with some exceptions, show a lack of understanding. It is common to find the Quran described as simply a collection of the Prophet Muhammad's writings, [7] although it would seem that what is relevant here is the Islamic doctrine.

One other matter is so simple that it might be overlooked. Statements to the effect that "Muslims worship a God named Allah" encourage the misconception that Muslims somehow, even if they are monotheistic, worship a different God from the One worshipped by Christians. While most books do not put this matter so crudely, it is the exceptional one which actually corrects this idea by explaining that "Allah is the Arabic word meaning God." [8] Without wishing to make too much of what may have been a typographical accident, I found it interesting that one author capitalized pronouns referring to the God of the ancient Hebrews but not those referring to the God of the Muslims. [9]

The texts which cover the Caliphate, the Shlari'a, and the Sunni-Shi'a split reveal a great deal of confusion. [10] While it may be too much to expect a non-specialist to grasp Islamic constitutional and legal theory, there are a number of statements of a totally ludicrous nature. Petrovich and Curtin, for example, state that the Umayyad Empire was named after Umar, and, although the passage is not clear, one also understands that Umar was the first Umayyad Caliph. [11] Another writer seems to be fancifully describing the closure of the gates of ijtihad in the following passage:

About 250 years after Mohammed's death, the caliph ordered the judges and other legal authorities to collect these laws and to allow no new ones in the future. These laws were put in order as a code agreed to by the judges of the time. [12]

The low point, however, is reached when one book - which repeatedly refers to the Caliphate in the present tense - concludes as follows:

Moslems are also united under the caliph and other religious leaders. One group of Moslems, who are trained in Islamic law and religion, make up the "Supreme Spiritual Committee of Islam." This group of high officials meets in Cairo. In their religion the people of the Middle East are united. [13]

As for images, Islam is never maligned in an extreme way. There is no open attack on the character or motives of the Prophet Muhammad, nor is there any labelling of Islam as a "pagan" or "false" religion or anything of that sort. The word "infidel" is not used. [14] Some books, in fact, go out of their way to refute Western misconceptions. For instance, one book [15] shows that Islam raised the status of women. Another author [16] goes to great lengths to contradict popular ideas about conversion by the sword and stresses Islam's improvement in the status of women, the requirement that jihad be defensive in nature, and similar matters.

In varying degree, however, Islam is sometimes presented as an intolerant religion. One book [17] perpetuates the misconception about conversion by the sword without even mentioning Islamic toleration. Another book tells us at one point that Muslims did not force Jews and Christians to give up their faith, but the emphasis is nevertheless on Islam's being "not a gentle faith" and the policy of converting "unbelievers... at swordpoint if necessary." [18] This is not, however, typical. In fact, in explaining the reasons for the Crusades, it is frequently explained that the Arabs had treated the Christians well but that the Turks were intolerant. The Crusaders - perhaps surprisingly - are not given any aura of righteousness in any of the books.

There are occasionally other statements of an objectionable nature. For example, one reads that "The Moslem heaven is a man's heaven, where women are mainly servants." [19]There is a flat statement that Muslim women have "no rights or privileges." [20] Other assertions are perhaps merely examples of careless writing but might be taken as subtle attacks on Islam. For instance, one reads that "The Meccans accepted Islam... and in return [italics added] Muhammad ordered all Muslims to face Mecca at prayer time...." [21] I infer that an opportunistic deal was made. Another writer seems to imply some doubt about the authenticity of Muhammad's prophethood and even his sincerity with the statement that "Muhammad claimed that he received divine instructions" and "believed that he was the Prophet." [22]

The greatness of medieval Islamic civilization is usually emphasized. One book refers to this as "the high point in the intellectual and cultural development of the human race up to that time." [23] The crudeness of the Crusaders in comparison with the highly civilized Muslims is commonly stressed, as is the subsequent impact of Islamic civilization on Europe.


With regard to the image of the contemporary Arabs, the first problem relates to definition. Although there is no statement that the words "Muslim" and "Arab" are interchangeable, I found only one book which corrects this misconception. [24] While such words are normally taken for granted - even when the authors are obviously unclear on the matter - a few books actually add to the reader's confusion. For instance, it is stated that "the North Africans, except the people of Egypt, are called Arabs," and that "The Egyptians are not Arabs, but because it is a Moslem land Egypt considers itself part of the Arab world.” [25]


A serious misconception which is fostered is that Middle Easterners, particularly Arabs, are predominantly nomadic. Most of the history texts dealing with events in chronological order- at least do not overtly encourage this idea. [26] The area studies books generally devote a disproportionate amount of space to nomadism and usually fail to point out the exceptional nature of this way of life in the region. One author, after saying that "Only nomads live in the desert," states that, "Most of the people of Jordan live in desert lands" and refers to "their nomadic life." [27] It is thus affirmed that at least most Jordanians are nomads. In a few cases, an accurate picture is given. One book even provides reasonably correct statistics on the percentages of Middle Easterners who are villagers, city dwellers, and nomads but still makes a peculiar statement to the effect that nomadism and farming are the major "two ways that a man may earn his living." [28]

One area studies text is an extreme example. A 24-page chapter on the Middle East ("The Dry World Culture Region") leads the reader to think that anything other than nomadism is a rarity. The introduction to the chapter states that there are "two large river valleys where large groups of people live. Only in these watered valleys can there be large-scale farming. In other parts of this region, scattered groups of people obtain their living from the dry land of the desert." [29] The supposed exception to nomadism is once again briefly mentioned, [30] and there are two brief references to cities, including a statement that "only two cities" - Cairo and Teheran - have populations as large as a million. [31] There is no mention of villages, although a half page is devoted to "oasis towns." [32] The overwhelming emphasis is on the physical aspects of the desert, camels, and nomadism. A disproportionate number of pictures are also devoted to these matters. Pakistanis, Afghans, Iranians, and Turks, as well as Arabs (these peoples, in any case, are not distinguished) are thus nomadic. The two and one-half pages on Israel, however, make clear to the most casual reader that the Israelis are a non-nomadic people. [33]


The presentation of contemporary Arab politics in matters not directly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict is not uniform. While there are no pro- Arab accounts, only a few of the books go out of their way to belittle Arab leaders. (It is interesting that former Premier Mussadiq of Iran is spoken of in more blatantly polemical language than is ever the case with any Arab leader.)  [34] The degree of fairness must not be overstated; for instance, in reference to the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, the somewhat polemical, if not strictly inaccurate, word "seizure" is commonly used. While no book accuses Arab nationalist leaders of being Communists, there is a statement that "opposition to pro-Western governments" is something created by "Soviet agents." [35] One book creates a sinister impression by saying that Egypt "became the storm centre of Arab nationalism" and continues by relating that, although "Great Britain and the United States made strenuous efforts to win the friendship of the Egyptian dictator," President Nasser still turned to the Soviet Union. [36] Another book makes selective use of facts to create a distorted image of President Nasser. Thus, emphasis is given to Nasser's statement, "Americans, may you shake to death on your fury"; with the "seizure" of the Canal Company, the frantic cheers of the Egyptian crowds are quoted, and we are told that "The Russians rubbed their hands in glee." [37]


With regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict, there is a variation from the basically objective to the grossly biased. I found no book which could be considered even slightly biased in the Arabs' favour. Out of sixteen books [38] which deal with the conflict at all (in some cases quite briefly), five may - with some qualifications - be put in the basically objective category. [39] I mean that, even if these books contain a few statements unfair to the Arab position or give more attention to the Zionist case, they, nevertheless, describe the conflict in such a way that the reader can roughly understand the two opposing positions. Books in a second category are considered biased because they simply neglect to explain why the Palestinians (if they mention that Palestinians exist) and other Arabs might, from their point of view, oppose Zionism and Israel; I found seven of these. [40] Those in the third category - extremely biased - of which I found three, also generally omit these matters and, in addition, attribute Arab attitudes to spurious and unworthy motives or otherwise engage in anti-Arab polemics. [41] One book - definitely biased - defies classification, as it combines characteristics of the first and third categories. [42]

I might note that even the "basically objective" books strengthen the Zionist case by at least implying that the modern Jews - instead of being a religious group of heterogeneous racial and ethnic backgrounds - are literally the same people as the ancient Israelites. [43] Thus the conception that the Zionist is "returning" to his real "homeland" is uncritically accepted.

The image of Israel and the Israelis - rightly or otherwise - is invariably laudatory; a typical description states that:

The Jews in Israel are working with devotion, with skill, and with imagination and a strong sense of purpose to make their country into a land of promise where Jews from all over the world can find a haven should they need one. They appear to be succeeding. [44]

A chapter written by Malcolm Kerr [45] is the primary example of a basically objective account. Kerr speaks of "the Jewish survivors of Nazism strewn across Europe in refugee camps, a wrenching challenge to the world's conscience." Then he states that, "The Arabs argued that the plight of European Jewry should not be solved at the expense of the Arab population of Palestine who constituted a two-thirds majority and wanted independence for themselves." [46] A balanced account is also given of the events leading to the 1967 war. Some rarely mentioned facts - that President Nasser promised not to "fire the first shot" and that Israel "launched a surprise attack" -are not obscured. [47]

Even this chapter, however, might be accused by some readers of doing more than justice at certain points to the Israeli position. One wonders why Kerr was so careful to specify that Jewish control was established, prior to the complete withdrawal of the British, in "the area assigned to them in the partition plan." [48] In explaining the reasons for the flight of the Palestinians in 1948, Kerr might be criticized for giving equal weight to Arab and Zionist explanations without indicating which is supported by the evidence. [49] A statement that "Nasser recklessly chose to gamble" in 1967, [50] while true, unnecessarily perpetuates the stereotype of his being a reckless gambler, when the statement could, with equal accuracy, be made about most national leaders who have made momentous decisions. Finally the list of suggested readings at the end of the chapter - clearly not prepared by Kerr - includes three books on the Arab-Israeli conflict: Leon Uris, Exodus; Yael Dayan, Israel Journal; and R.H. Crossman, Nation Reborn - hardly a balanced list by anyone's standard. [51] These, however, are small exceptions to a relatively lengthy (about five pages) and - in comparison with the others - incomparably superior account. [52]

Some exceptions in other "basically objective" books are more serious. One text - which I hesitatingly put in this category - avoids giving any reasons for the flight of the Palestinians and explains that the United Nations has failed to "resettle" them because they are "unwanted"; Israeli attacks are dismissed as "reprisals" for Arab "terrorism." It is noteworthy that, while the Viet Cong is referred to by the neutral phrase "guerrilla organization," al-Fateh is called a "terrorist organization." [53] Another book refers to the "Arab refugees who had chosen to leave" and perpetuates the fiction of "Nasser's insistence" that the Egyptian army "would drive the Israelis into the sea." [54]

A few examples will suffice to show how the books of the second category are biased by omission. For instance, the establishment of Israel is briefly described, with a flashback on the history of Palestine which entirely omits the Arab period. The country was thus presumably uninhabited from the dispersion of the Jews until it was "returned to them." [55] Another book deals briefly with the achievement of "independence" by Israel without any mention of the Palestine problem; one would think that this was simply another example of a country being emancipated from foreign rule and that Palestine had always been Jewish-inhabited. [56]

One book describes, in laudatory terms, the establishment and progress of Israel in "the Promised Land of the Jews... the original homeland of the Jewish people." But, it is noted, "Israel's location has caused the Jewish people a major problem, and many disputes have arisen with the Arabs over the holy places, Jordan River water, and boundaries"; the whole basic issue is thus neglected in favor of peripheral matters. Except for a note printed in the margin of one page in the teachers' edition, we are not told that Palestine had an Arab population, although there was one earlier reference to the fact that "the Moslems conquered Palestine and held the Holy Land for many years." [57] The teacher's guide, included in the teacher's edition, suggests among other projects that the teacher "obtain records of Israeli songs and play them for the class." Nothing comparable is suggested for other countries. [58]

The books in the third category go beyond mere omission. In fact, omission of basic facts is not always as complete as in the case of the second group. One book, for instance, contains a brief statement that the Arabs "believed" that Great Britain had promised the inclusion of Palestine in an Arab state during World War I and that "they [the Arabs] maintained [italics added] that they had lived on the land for centuries." [59] The careful reader of another book will, by reading between the lines, infer that, somehow, there were some Arabs living in Palestine, and there is even a later reference to "hundreds of thousands of Arab refugees." [60]

The tone of the latter example is noticeably pro-Zionist and anti-Arab. We are told that the Jews finally get a chance to "return" to the land from which they had been driven by the Romans. Britain pledges itself to establish a Jewish national home. (No mention is made of British pledges to the Arabs.) But the Jews "found a poor, barren, desolate country" until they, with a "tremendous expenditure of labour and money," turned it into "an oasis of Western civilization in the Middle East." The Arabs continuously "attacked the Jews." So, in order "to win them over," the British gave them "the much larger region east of the Jordan River." (One gathers that the British were thus more than generous with the Arabs at the expense of the Jews by "giving" them the larger part of Palestine, i.e., the desert of Transjordan.) The Arabs, however, were still not calmed, and, in 1939, "the British went further." Still, "new Arab disorders broke out." [61] (It was, obviously, only the Arabs- pampered by the British at the expense of the Jews - who created disorders.) In a later chapter, the authors resume by saying that British attempts "to appease the Arabs" were followed by "numerous violent clashes and acts of terrorism." (The terrorists are not identified as either Jews or Arabs.) Although we are told that Israel attacked Egypt in 1956 ("pleading self-defense"), the UN Emergency Force is said to have been "stationed along the Egyptian-Israeli frontier to prevent future Egyptian raids." [62]

As regards other distortions one author, not having mentioned the Palestine Arabs, explains that, "Part of the [Arab] opposition [to Israel] arose from the reappearance of ancient Moslem hatred of infidels, and part from the fact that, to Moslems, the Jews represented Western power." The same author says that "there were many instances of Arab-Jewish cooperation... partly because... the Christian Arabs felt the presence of another non-Moslem group gave them support."  [63] Another book explains the problem as being the result of Israel's "relatively high standard of living, which caused envy and discontent among the Arab peasants. Ruling families were faced with demands for a better way of life." It is also explained that "Arab nationalists, such as Nasser, stimulated anti-Jewish feeling as a means of uniting the Arab states." The only mention of Palestinian refugees is that they were another problem which "plagued" Israel and an assertion that they were "interned" by the Arab states. [64]


In conclusion, although most of the material in some textbooks is acceptable, the general situation is bleak. The area is often treated as being of minor importance in a world in which the West is all that really matters. Much is skipped over or treated in a sketchy way. One cannot avoid the impression that some of the authors - in the worst cases - are merely passing on the vague and distorted images which they have acquired from novels, Hollywood movies, casually-heard propaganda statements, and other textbooks. The result is not only a great deal of misinformation but also - whether from malice or a simple lack of knowledge - biased accounts of certain subjects, especially the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Research and scholarship requires investment. Generous contributions from people like you allow us to provide invaluable resources as a public good. Make a tax-deductible donation today!




Glenn Perry is Associate Professor of Political Science at Indiana State University.



World History


Frank Alweis, New Dimensions of World History. New York: American Book-Van Nostrand Co.,

1969. (Including a chapter on the post-1945 period by Malcolm Kerr).


Cyril E. Black, Our World History. Revised ed., Boston: Ginn and Company, 1965.


Ethel E. Ewing, Our Widening World: A History of the World's Peoples. Second ed., Chicago:

Rand McNally & Co., 1963.


Richard B. Ford, Tradition and Change in Four Societies: An Inquiry Approach. New York: Holt

Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968.


John F. Good, The Shaping of Western Society: An Inquiry Approach. New York: Holt, Rinehart,

and Winston, 1968.


Anatole G. Mazour and John M. Peoples. A World History: Men and Nations. Second ed., New

York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968.


Thomas P. Neill, Story of Mankind. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.


Michael B. Petrovich and Philip D. Curtin, The Human Achievement. Morristown (New Jersey):

Silver Burdett Co., 1967.


Nathaniel Platt and Muriel Jean Drummond, Our World Through the Ages. Third ed., Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967.


Leften S. Stavrianes, Loretta Kreider Andrews, George I. Blanksten, Roger F. Hackett, Ella

C. Leppert, Paul L. Murphy, and Lacey Baldwin Smith, A Global History of Man. Boston:

Allyn and Bacon, 1968. (Stavrianes is the author of the portions on the Middle East.)


T. Walter Wallbank and Arnold Schrier, Living World History. Third ed., Glenview (Illinois):

Scott, Foresman and Company, 1969.


Paul Thomas Welty, Man's Cultural Heritage: A World History. Revised ed., Philadelphia:


J.B. Lippincott, 1969.


Sydney H. Zebel and Sidney Schwartz, Past to Present: A World History. New York: Macmillan,



Area Studies


Jack Allen and Adelene E. Howland, Nations of Other Lands. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall,



Norman Carls (ed.), Knowing Our Neighbors in the Eastern Hemisphere. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968.


Kenneth S. Cooper, Clarence W. Sorensen, and Lewis Paul Todd, Mankind in Time and

Place: The Changing Old World. Park Ridge (Illinois): Silver Burdett Company, 1969.


Prudence Cutright, John Jarolimek, Loyal Durand, Jr., and J. Hubert Anderson, Living as

World Neighbors. Fourth ed., New York: The Macmillan Company, 1969.


Robert N. Saveland, Robert M. Glendenning, John F. Kolars, Marion I. Wright, and Howard

J. Critchfield, World Resources: Eastern Hemisphere. Boston: Ginn and Company, 1968. The

relevant chapter is written by John F. Kolars.


Kenneth D. Wann, Henry J. Warman, and James K. Canfield, Man and His Changing Culture.

Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968.


Paul Thomas Welty, The Asians: Their Heritage and Their Destiny. Third ed., Philadelphia:

J.B. Lippincott, 1970.


1 With two exceptions, which were chosen at random (those by Zebel and Schwartz and by Black), these are the books which have been selected by the state Textbook Commission in Indiana for use in Indiana schools. While my obseivations are confined to these twenty books, I have, cursorily or otherwise, examined several other textbooks. Ihave not included any books concerned exclusively with the Middle East, because such books are difficult to compare with general textbooks and because they are not, in any case, widely used.


2 John F. Good, The Shaping of Western Society: An Inquiry Approach (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968). Richard B. Ford, Tradition and Change in Four Societies: An Inquiry Approach (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968), deals with four societies only, none of which are in the Middle East.


3 E.g., 68 pages (excluding the pre-Islamic Middle East) out of 783 in Michael B. Petrovich and Philip D. Curtin, The Human Achievement (Morristown, New Jersey: Silver Burdett Co., 1967), and 74 pages out of 774 in Leften S. Stavrianes, Loretta Kreider Andrews, George I. Blanksten, Roger F. Hackett, Ella C. Leppert, Paul L. Murphy and Lacey Baldwin Smith, A Global History of Man (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1968). Stavrianes is the author of the portions on the Middle East.


4 Except for these referred to in footnote 2.


5 Petrovich and Curtin, op. cit. Ethel E. Ewing, in Our Widening World: A History of the World's Peoples (2nd ed., Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1963), also gives some attention to the nineteenth century.


6 For instance, in attempting to explain the First Pillar of Islam, Paul Thomas Welty includes belief in God, Muhammad and other prophets, man's eternal soul, paradise, hell, and the day ofjudgment, in Man's Cultural Heritage: A World History (Revised ed., Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1969), p. 183.


7 Anatole G. Mazour and John M. Peoples, A World History: Men and Nations (2nd ed., New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1968), p. 253. Petrovich and Curtin elaborate on this by saying that Muhammad's own writings were "quite detailed, and they were collected shortly after his death to form the Koran" (p. 451). An exception is Frank Alweis, New Dimensions of World History (New York: American Book-Van Nostrand Co., 1969), p. 233.


8 Jack Allen and Adelene E. Howland, Nations of Other Lands (Englewood Cliffs: PrenticeHall, 1967), p. 226.


9 Nathaniel Platt and Muriel Jean Drummond, Our World Through the Ages (3rd. ed., Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1967), pp. 39, 146.


10 Petrovich and Curtin, op. cit., Welty (Man's Cultural Heritage), and Ewing, op. cit.


11 Petrovich and Curtin, op. cit., p. 449.


12 Ewing, op. cit., p. 298.


13 Prudence Cutright, John Jarolimek, Loyal Durand, Jr., and J. Hubert Anderson, Living as World Neighbors (4th ed., New York: The Macmillan Company, 1969), p. 270.


14 Only Alweis (op. cit., p. 256) uses this word. In the context, it is not offensive, as the author seems to be saying that this is the word the Crusaders used.


15 Stavrianes, op. cit., p. 493.


16 Welty, Man's Cultural Heritage, op. cit., and The Asians: Their Heritage and Their Destiny (3rd. ed., Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1970).


17 Cutright, op. cit., pp. 164, 167.


18 Norman Carls (ed.), Knowing Our Neighbors in the Eastern Hemisphere (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968), pp. 81-82.


19 Platt and Drummond, op. cit., p. 145.


20 Cutright, op. cit., p. 269.


21 Thomas P. Neill, Story of Mankind (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968).


22 Allen and Howland, op. cit., p. 229 (italics added). A similar statement is made by Walter Wallbank and Arnold Schrier, Living World History (3rd ed., Glenview (Illinois): Scott, Foresman and Company, 1969), p. 184.


23 Neill, op. cit., p. 91.


24 Carls, op. cit., p. 1 6.


25 Cutright, op. cit., pp. 271, 275.


26 One history textbook does confuse some figures by stating that 10 percent of the people of the Arabian Peninsula and 40 percent of the people of Jordan are nomads. Stavrianes, op. cit., p. 451.


27 Kenneth S. Cooper, Clarence W. Sorensen and Lewis Paul Todd, Mankind in Time and Place: The Changing Old World (Park Ridge, Illinois: Silver Burdett Company, 1969), p. 69.


28 Allen and Howland, op. cit., pp. 242, 246. Carls also gives a fair picture and states that "perhaps three-quarters of the people live from the soil," op. cit., p. 93.


29 Kenneth D. Wann, Henry J. Warman and James K. Canfield, Man and His Changing Culture (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1968), p. 158.


30 Wann, op. cit., p. 164.


31 Ibid.


32 Wann, op. cit., p. 171.


33 Ibid, pp. 178-80.


34 Wallbank and Schrier (p. 703), without mentioning his name, refer to him as "a fanatical extremist." Also see Sydney H. Zebel and Sidney Schwartz, Past to Present: A World History (New York: Macmillan, 1960), p. 685.


35 Mazour and Peoples, op. cit., p. 788.


36 Zebel and Schwartz, op. cit., p. 685.


37 Platt and Drummond, op. cit., pp. 690, 692.


38 Aside from Ford and Good (see footnote 2), the conflict is not covered by Welty (Asians) and the book on geography by Robert N. Saveland, Robert M. Glendenning, John F. Kolars, Marion I. Wright and Howard J. Critchfield, World Resources: Eastern Hemisphere (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1968).


39 Alweis, op. cit., Welty (Man's Cultural Heritage), Petrovich and Curtin, op. cit., Stavrianes, op. cit., and Cyril E. Black, Our World History (Revised ed., Boston: Ginn and Company, 1965).


40 Those by Cutright, Wann, Allen and Howland, Carls, Platt and Drummond, Cooper, and Neill. The last two are borderline cases, as they make some mention of the Arab presence in Palestine or of the refugees.


41 Those by Zebel and Schwartz, Mazour and Peoples, and Ewing.


42 Wallbank and Schrier, Op. cit.


43 Regardless of the degree of truth in this common assumption, it is one which should not be uncritically accepted.


44 Welty, Man's Cultural Heritage, p. 228.


45 In Alweis, op. cit.


46 Alweis, op. cit., pp. 244-45.


47 Ibid., p. 648.


48 Ibid., p. 645.


49 "Some of the facts are unclear: what seems certain is that, with or without terrorism and with or without advice from their own leaders, many Arabs would have fled from the battlefield, as civilians commonly do in a war," ibid., pp. 646-47.


50 Ibid., p. 648.


51 Ibid., p. 662. The other titles on the list are Maureen Daly, Moroccan Roundabout; P.K. Hitti, Lebanon in History; Hussein I, Uneasy Lies the Head; F.I. Qubain, Reconstruction of Iraq; and J.M. Upton, History of Modern Iran.


52 A comparable account - although not included in this study - is that of Hugo Jaeckel and Don Peretz, The Middle East: A Scholastic World Affairs Multi- Text (New York: Scholastic Book Services, 1967), pp. 126-34.


53 Welty, Man's Cultural Heritage, pp. 66, 219, 657, 659.


54 Black, op. cit., pp. 675-76.


55 Cutright, op. cit., p. 288.


56 Allen and Howland, op. cit., p. 236.


57 Wann, op. cit., pp. 173, 178-80.


58 Ibid., p. 46.


59 Mazour and Peoples, op. cit., p. 787.


60 Zebel and Schwartz, op. cit., p. 681.


61 Ibid., pp. 569-71.


62 Ibid., pp. 681-84.


63 Ewing, op. cit., pp. 308-10.


64 Mazour and Peoples, op. cit., p. 788.