Goffman explains his goals in the introductory chapter, where he gives a concise account of “orientalist” mythology and scholarship. Goffman’s task is a similarly novel one: to present an empathetic reading of the Empire and its relationship with Europe. The very inclusion of the Ottoman Empire in a series on European history signals that the editors take seriously the phrase “New Approaches” in their series title.

Moreover, the book’s multicultural ideology is particularly well suited for use in today’s updated history curricula.

Blanning (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2002) xxiii + 273 pp., ill., maps Daniel Goffman’s The Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe is one of the recent additions to Cambridge’s New Approaches to European History series, a group of updated, authoritative textbooks for “advanced school students and undergraduates.” The book bears all the marks of a classic textbook, including plenty of maps and illustrations, a glossary, and a chronological table. MARGARET LAMONT, English, UCLA Daniel Goffman, The Ottoman Empire and Early Modern Europe, New Approaches to European History, series ed. I would wish that Ghosh had made this statement earlier so that it might inform a larger part of the book, as it is only here at the end that the reason for her focus on the university-which sometimes, as in her discussion of Woodford, appears inexplicably biased-is finally explained. Ghosh partially answers these queries with her call for a “reassessment of the historiography of ‘medieval’ into ‘renaissance’ and ‘reformation’” (216) at the end of the book, a reassessment that she argues “cannot be complete without a far fuller investigation of late medieval intellectual history, including the history of intellectual institution” (216). Equally important, I wonder what is gained by a focus on the academic aspects (and repercussions) of Lollardy instead of on the political, lay-as opposed to academic, clerical-agency it gave, an agency that is so much of the reason the movement continues to fascinate today. REVIEWS 232 hermeneutical impasse anyway. In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Kafadar between two worlds