edwagreen Though the first two chapters of this documentary were rather dry in taste, the documentary itself got far better as we began to approach modern times.Even Simon Scharma, the narrator, seemed to come more alive as the film went on.This was extremely informative to watch. Let us remember that for example, Jews were expelled from England circa 1270.The Jewish people have always used assimilate to integrate themselves into society. Sadly, we saw that this certainly hasn't succeeded and we saw the obvious examples of the Nazi era with its resulting holocaust, and even the Dreyfuss Affair in France as an anti- semitic adventure on the part of the French people.We saw how our Jewish people have attempted to use music and culture in the assimilation process. Interesting to learn how the song Over the Rainbow is based on a Yiddish lullaby.

enginquiry **spoiler alert**I found it to be an excellent overview of the story of the Jews. I agree with some of the other reviewers that the scope was rather limited -- it did not include many of the Jewish groups that are scattered throughout the world. If it did, I think it would have to be a much, much longer series, because there is truly a lot to be said.Having said that, where I disagree with some reviews, is that I think he explains very well why the Jews have survived as a people, alluding not only to the adaptation of its religion to the nomadic lifestyle (i.e. the memory of the spoken word, the work of Moses Mendelsohnn, the ghettos (for example, in Venice); the Talmud and its portable and philosophically-malleable nature; and the openness with which certain countries and communities allowed Jews to enter, collaborate and prosper. I think a reviewer mentioned that it felt as though the host wanted the viewer to feel guilt. I did not get that feeling at all. I think he wanted the viewer to understand that, unfortunately, the sad state of the Jewish story, "paranoia confirmed by history", cannot be denied. I also strongly agree that Herzl's notion of Zionism and its true meaning has been well defined and brought into more proper context by the host and by what Herzl saw happen in Europe, including France (e.g. Dreyfus). Namely, that Jews were still being treated like vermin for being Jews, in spite of assimilation. The idea of Jews needing a nation makes a lot of sense -- at least it *made* a lot of sense in the world of Herzl -- and this Zionism made even *more* sense to Jews during WW2. So, as defined by Jews needing this home, like any nation, it is in that sense a noble endeavor that, had it happened earlier, may have saved Jews from prosecution. Though I have yet to find a Jew who wouldn't trade the lives lost for Israel.While there is debate about Israel/Palestine and origins and land, I think it would be fair to say though, that if we all came back to where we came from originally, Saudi Arabia would have to give part of Medina to the Jews, which of course will never happen. So, because we don't necessarily come back to where we originated. It has to be, as they say, a world of adaptation. But that's where this stops being a review and becomes a personal opinion. Anyway, great introduction but definitely, DEFINITELY begs for further research. And I'm sure it was not meant to be the end-all-be-all of historic series. I would like to see one on Russian Jews sometime, as well as Mountain Jews.

huguespt This is a very interesting Mocmentry of the Jewish history over the years as per Mr Schama. I enjoyed the history of this series however by the third episode I found Mr. Schama to be the, well "everyone in history has beaten up Jews", if Mr. Schama could be a little more reportive rather then, it seems asking anyone watching this program for an apologie. I do not condone war, genocide of any race or religion however I think a TV series should report the facts and not make the viewer want to switch off because it is a world that beats Jews. The first 2 episodes were not like the third as in they were factual and good reporting were as by the third episode, I found it more of a political/religious statement rather than an unbiased reporter giving the facts with passion rather someone that realistically wants to petition people to aplogise for the horrors of the past. Mr Schama needs to stay a reporter or a protester and reflect this in his Mocumentaries. Worth watching. It was informative. I say Mocumetrey rather than Documentary as to me a reporter of a Documentary is un- biased, Mr, Schama is far from unbiased but to me asks for an apologie from the viewer. There is so much horror in human past and even present of many peoples but for a documentary this needs to be unbiased. As I have said worth watching if by the time you get to the third episode, I wont watch anymore from Mr. Schama unless he can be a reporter rather than a person too close to the subject matter.

Guy Before I begin, I'd like to note that the rating for this series has been artificially decreased by a large number of people giving it a score of "1". Although it has faults, it does not deserve this and I strongly suspect that this is due to political (anti-Jewish or anti- Israel) partisanship.It is hard to believe that it has taken so long for this series to be made -- and so disappointing that it isn't better than it is. The Jews are a fascinating people whose impact on history has been out of all proportion to their numbers. To tell their story properly would have required many, many hours. Unfortunately they only got five hours.What really sinks this series though is its focus. It is telling that it is titled the "story" of the Jews rather than the "history" of the Jews. Ultimately this tells an outdated and over-simplistic story that can be summed up as: the Jews are unjustly exiled from Israel, they wander and suffer irrational persecution at the hands of the gentiles, then after the Holocaust they return in triumph to Israel in 1948.Despite opening the series with shots of Jews of all races and nations, this is ultimately the story of European Jews (largely the Ashkenazi but also the Sephardim occasionally). Not only does this ignore the importance of genetics in Jewish history and tradition - "Jew" can be both a religious and an ethnic description - but it also means that Jews who don't fit this narrative - like the Turkic Khazar warrior Jews - are omitted entirely. This gives a warped idea of Jewish history.This sort of partial history is unfortunately constant and tinged with ethno-chauvinism; Schama is quite happy to point the finger at everyone but his own people (with the exception of the final episode dealing with the Israel/Palestine issue). All too often he is content to describe the suffering of the Jews without explaining why they were persecuted. Or he explains it as mere irrational hatred, which is no answer at all.At times it is clear that Schama, whose speciality is the Enlightenment, is not comfortable. His episode on Biblical Judiasm is rambling, only finding focus with the Roman defeat of the Jewish revolt. His episode on medieval Judaism ranges from the wrong (Andalusia was not the paradise he thinks -- see Maimonides) to the bizarre (apparently the Christians hated the Jews because of the sermons of one priest in one country at one time). The Early Modern period is skipped over entirely.On the post-1789 world he is much better, although still partial. He rightly points out the important Jewish contribution to the Enlightenment but fails to point out their equal investment in the bloody step-child of the Enlightenment that was Communism. Unusually he largely skips the Holocaust/Shoah but does so without undermining its power. His interview with a Lithuanian Jew, the only survivor of his village because he was conscripted into the Red Army, is heartbreaking.The final episode, on the creation of the State of Israel, is probably the most interesting and contains the greatest variety of viewpoints. Sadly it comes down to: pre-1967 Israel (socialist, secular) good, post-1967 Israel (religious, militarist) bad. I find that too simplistic. Schama is a Zionist who wants peace in the Holy Land and I don't think he ever really deals with the contradictions inherent in his position; so long as there are two groups sharing one land there will be conflict.Undoubtedly the (pro-)Israel episode is the reason for the low score of this series. I will lay my cards on the table and say that although I have friends who are partisans of both sides, personally I hold no brief for either.By telling it as a story, Schama fails to even ask the most interesting questions: why have the Jews survived, over the centuries and in the face of persecution, when so many others haven't? Why do they have such great achievements when there are so few of them? And why do they always end up being hated?This is a documentary worth watching: the subject matter is fascinating, it is beautifully shot and Simon Schama is as warm, personable and witty a presenter as ever. If you watch it, you will learn. However it has major flaws. There are too many unsupported statements, the focus of the series is too narrow, the facts are sometimes sloppy and there is too little self-criticism. Ultimately, this is not history but a story, which as Schama says, has not yet ended. You may enjoy this story. I found myself wishing for something a little more factual.