Article

2012-06-10 Home Front: Culture Wars

Sunday Morning Book Review #1: Mohammed & Charlemagne Revisited

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 2012-06-10 10:19|| || Front Page|| [6 views ] Top

#1 Just keep in mind that while the Western Empire was dealing with the Muslims in the south, they were also dealing with Saxons in the north. The sea faring raiders game their name to the Litus Saxonicum, a military command of the late Roman Empire in Britannia, centuries before. The depredations by the Saxons of Britain after the withdraw of the legions was not much different with the degradation of 'civilization' as attributed to this thesis. It's the Arthurian myth and history of the island that recalled a brief moment of recovery before the proverbial deluge.

Posted by Procopius2k 2012-06-10 11:02|| 2012-06-10 11:02|| Front Page Top

#2 ..gave their name..

Posted by Procopius2k 2012-06-10 11:03|| 2012-06-10 11:03|| Front Page Top

#3 This seems to be a replay of the exact theory of famed Belgian historian Henri Pirenne, who wrote in the early 20th century.

Posted by Glusoger Gruter1463 2012-06-10 11:29|| 2012-06-10 11:29|| Front Page Top

#4 Thank you GG, it reminded me. An anthology of both views are in The Barbarian Invasion:Catalyst of a New Order, ed. Katherine Fisher Drew; Robert Kreiger Publishing Co., Huntington NY, 1977. Google if interested.

Posted by Procopius2k 2012-06-10 11:38|| 2012-06-10 11:38|| Front Page Top

#5 Procopius2k, your book is available at Amazon.com, though not in Kindle form. :-).

Glusoger Gruter1463, good catch. Mr. Scott talks about Henri Pirenne's work as being key to his own thoughts in the free sample chapters available at the link lotp gives in the article.

#3 This seems to be a replay of the exact theory of famed Belgian historian Henri Pirenne, who wrote in the early 20th century.
Posted by: Glusoger Gruter1463 2012-06-10 11:29

Posted by trailing wife 2012-06-10 12:27|| 2012-06-10 12:27|| Front Page Top

#6 It is indeed Pirenne, extended with evidence beyond the Italian penninsula and with a strong focus on the economic impact of Islamic attacks.

However, as I noted, Scott's more sweeping claims fail to take into account internal issues which had endangered the empire for centuries before Islam came along. For instance, Diocletian imposed massive wage and price control in 301AD in an attempt to counter currency devaluation among other problems.

Moreover, there were serious cultural issues facing the empire as well - for instance, a major demographic drop among native Romans due in good part to deliberate use of effective abortion and contraception. Roman inheritance and tax laws did not particularly favor having children, and raising them got in the way of having fun. Similarly, participation in public affairs required one to invest a good deal of private money in pulic works, so over time Roman elites withdrew from leading the state while retaining their privileges. Legalizaion and later adoption of Christianity addressed the demographic but not the leadership problem.

Well before the sack of Rome, tribal groups were being paid to patrol the boundaries of the empire - or paid off to avoid attacks. Over time they were integrated more formally into the Roman armies, but usually without the discipline and structure of the legions. The results were mixed, to put it mildly .....

Posted by lotp 2012-06-10 12:33|| 2012-06-10 12:33|| Front Page Top

#7 for a major collapse around 620 AD?

A bit early. Muslim expansion to Africa really began only 20 years later. And pirates in the Mediterranean existed well before the Muslims took over. Rome seems to have coped with them for centuries.

Also Africa didn't turn into a wasteland after Muslim conquest. North Africa was actually only conquered in a second wave from 665 to 689.

The loss of Egypt dealt a heavy blow to the Byzantine empire, but it managee to stay alive for another 800 years. The Western Roman Empire had become disfunctional well before Mohammed was even born.

Posted by European Conservative 2012-06-10 14:50|| 2012-06-10 14:50|| Front Page Top

#8 "Islamic conquests resulted in rule by Arabs who neither knew nor cared about agriculture"

Also doubtful. This may have been true for the beduins of the Arab heartland, but the conquest of Mesopotamia changed all that. The early Arab success did not just rest with military exploits but with the ability of the conquerors to secure allies and adapt themselves quickly to their new surroundings. They did not destroy old Roman and Persian irrigati0n practices, but rather perfected them as evidenced in Andalucia.

Posted by European Conservative 2012-06-10 15:06|| 2012-06-10 15:06|| Front Page Top

#9 Later, perhaps. But there is a distinct layer in the archaeological remains, consistent throughout the Mediterranean and dated to about 625 or so, in which all of the irrigation and other infrastructure becomes heavily silted and non-functional.

That could be due to an environmental/weather disaster - but no records exist to suggest such, including in e.g. China. FWIW

Posted by lotp 2012-06-10 15:18|| 2012-06-10 15:18|| Front Page Top

#10 So if Roman civilization was thriving, what happened to cause a collapse?

Might not have been Islam but the Byzantine Empire, specifically Justinian's attempt to reconquer the western Empire. He laid waste to Italy a couple times over the time period ~ 530 to 550 CE trying to seize and hold it against the various Ostrogoths. In the process the accumulated wealth of the western Roman Senators, which had previously survived the collapse of the western Empire, was devastated. Similar results were seen in north Africa as Justinian took those, and his successors had to try and hold them against Vandals, Goths, military insurrections and finally the Muslims.

This pre-dates Islam by about a hundred years, but both the western Mediterranean empire and the eastern Byzantine Empire suffered because of Justinian's overly ambitious plans to reconquer all of what was formerly Roman territory.

Posted by Steve White 2012-06-10 17:19|| 2012-06-10 17:19|| Front Page Top

#11 I really enjoy this site. thank you

Posted by bman 2012-06-10 17:25|| 2012-06-10 17:25|| Front Page Top

#12 Steve White is correct. Justinian actually prepared the grounds for Muslim rule in North Africa which was seen as more benign (and to a point actually was) more benign than Byzantine rule.

Sure dhimmis had to pay a special tax but could still practice their faith and could rise to very high positions. Islamic "tolerance" very much depended on the respective Muslim ruler. Córdoba must have been one of the most civilized places in Europe, but let's not forget that the Islamic society in Andalucia depended a lot on slaves. Yet all this was not much different from the rest of serfdom in Europe. In the 11th century fanatics from Morocco took over and while they also adapted to a refined lifestyle, tolerance waned. Reconquered Christian Toledo shone brightly.

It's important not to interpret history with an ideological eye. Christians and Muslims weren't that much different in the Middle Ages. But the Muslim civilization stalled and turned backwards and never saw Enlightenment.

It still can, but this will change religion forever like it happened with Christianity. And a lot of blood will flow before hopefully success can be achieved.

Posted by European Conservative 2012-06-10 17:47|| 2012-06-10 17:47|| Front Page Top

#13 There was also a major Roman Persian war from about 582-602 AD which was supposed to have caused enormous damage to both the Sassaniod and the Roman empires.

Furthermore, both empires made use of Arab mercenaries, which had the effect of training the Arabs in various military tactics, while weakening the Byzantines and Persians and making them vulnerable to Arab conquest.

Posted by charger 2012-06-10 20:04|| 2012-06-10 20:04|| Front Page Top

#14 Very interesting, lotp, thanks!

Posted by KBK 2012-06-10 20:59|| 2012-06-10 20:59|| Front Page Top

#15 There are/were Muslims and Muslims. The much-touted liberal and sophisticated Islamic states in Spain were conquered by a bunch of non-sophisticated,non-liberal Muslims, another wave from North Africa.

Posted by Richard Aubrey 2012-06-10 23:35|| 2012-06-10 23:35|| Front Page Top

23:55 Pappy
23:50 JosephMendiola
23:35 Richard Aubrey
23:32 JosephMendiola
23:18 rjschwarz
23:13 JosephMendiola
23:00 JosephMendiola
22:49 JosephMendiola
22:24 Dan
21:24 Hellfish
21:19 USN,Ret
21:16 trailing wife
21:02 phil_b
20:59 KBK
20:14 Procopius2k
20:09 Procopius2k
20:06 JosephMendiola
20:04 charger
19:54 JosephMendiola
19:48 JosephMendiola
19:13 Zhang Fei
19:11 Lone Ranger
19:06 Zhang Fei
18:58 Barbara