In recent years Maan Abu Nowar has enriched an expanding yet still limited Jordanian historiography. A former army general and diplomat, Abu Nowar completed a doctoral thesis at Oxford on the first decade of the history of Transjordan under the British Mandate. This doctorate was turned into the first in a three-part series on Jordanian history under the British Mandate, which was then followed by a book on the 1948 war. The book reviewed here is the second in the series and was originally published privately, in English, in Amman in 1997. The new edition is nearly identical to the original one, save some stylistic editing modifications and high-quality layout and formatting, which make the book much more pleasant to read than the original, rather sloppy edition.

The book defies the conventional periodization of Jordanian political history, which usually posits the fifteen-year period from the British takeover of the administration of the country in 1924 to the amendment of the Anglo–Jordanian treaty and the outbreak of World War II in 1939 as the main stage in the state-building process. Instead, in keeping with Abu Nowar's approach of proceeding decade by decade, the book focuses on a specific ten-year period in the development of the emirate, from 1929 to the eve of World War II. Some chapters focus on major political events in chronological order, such as the tribal war on the Saudi frontier, the Palestine revolt, or the amendment of the Anglo–Jordanian treaty. Other chapters are thematic and cover the entire period, as in a chapter on the nature of British rule and interference or another about institutional developments. The text includes minute accounts of events, including long quotations and tables, but conspicuously omits, for example, the relations between ʿAbdullah and the local political elite with the Zionists. The study is based mainly on British records in the National Archives (formerly the Public Record Office), the Jordanian official gazette, and the protocols of the Legislative Council.

On one level, Abu Nowar's contribution needs to be seen and assessed against an anomaly that usually besets Jordanian historiography and that often limits its engagement with Western historiography. First, probably out of political sensitivity, Jordanian historians tend not to write on the Hashemite period and choose earlier periods as their subject of inquiry. Second, they generally publish their work in Arabic. The best works in Jordan have been written on the Ottoman period (Adnan al-Bakhit and his disciples). The best Hashemite historiography has been dominated by the semiofficial writings of Sulayman Musa. Third, the nature of the publishing industry and book market in Jordan and the relatively short shelf life these books enjoy in Amman bookstores make the task of retrieving them a real challenge. Many valuable works have gone unnoticed by scholars of Jordan based in Western universities. Abu Nowar's crafting of post 1920 Jordanian history and publishing it in the United Kingdom is therefore a welcome and valuable exception.

Abu Nowar grew up in Transjordan during the period under study, knows its society well, and met in person some of the personalities involved in the development of the country. He shares his memories of the period, thus allowing the reader a special insider's view. Abu Nowar's invaluable and original observations on the building of the central bureaucracy; the development of the education system; the emergence of a new, albeit small, intellectual elite; the growth and institutionalization of the Arab Legion; and the dynamics of relations between the few British colonial personnel and local society are some of his many contributions. At the same time, however, Abu Nowar's method of overcoming the political sensitivity of writing on the Hashemite period by being overtly pro-Hashemite weakens or undermines the credibility of parts of his work, especially his tendency to lionize King ʿAbdullah bin Hussein and to present him as faultless, altruistic, and completely dedicated to the national cause.

Another level on which to examine this book's merit has to do with its time of re-publication. Sound at the time of its original publication and making an important contribution then, the book suffers from a lack of any updating. Over the past decade or so, Jordanian studies have greatly evolved, and this means that Abu Nowar's book is largely outdated in light of new work. The political and diplomatic history that used to dominate the field has now been overshadowed by new works by historians, anthropologists, and political scientists that have revolutionized our understanding of Jordan's formative period. Works by Shyrock, Rogan, Fischbach, Massad, and others have changed the field beyond recognition, exploring many of the social and cultural aspects of the country's history. A study that does not draw on or engage such works must now be limited in its value.

In summary, this book is useful in two ways. First, its rich data and some of its interpretations will assist researchers focusing on many subjects related to Jordan, its political history, and development. Second, Abu Nowar's volume can be read as an example of a nationalist and pro-Hashemite interpretation of Jordanian history and thus serve as a primary source rather than merely a part of the secondary literature. However, we have yet to see a closer and mutually beneficial integration of the works of Jordanian and non-Jordanian scholars.