 |
|
Title: The Great Arab Conquests: How the Spread of Islam Changed the World We Live In
ISBN: 0306815850
Author:
Hugh Kennedy
Publicate Date: 2007-09-10
Publish: 2007-09-10
List Price: $27.95
Average Customer Rating: 4.0
Format: Hardcover
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $13.99
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $10.82
Amazon Merchant Price: $18.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: Laocoon has nothing on this.
This book addresses an important topic, about which every "westerner" should know something; I looked forward to reading and digesting it. Unfortunately, although the book begins well, the reader is soon lost in a mishmash of disorganized information, apparently assembled with little or no thought given to logical structure. I would only recommend the book to someone who is prepared to construct his own outline after multiple attempts to read it.
|
2: Superb history of Islamic expansion
In 680, an Iraqi monk asked (I am paraphrasing) "How is it the Arabs created such an enormous empire (by 744 it would stretch from the Pyrenees to the Hindu-Kush) so quickly?" Hugh Kennedy answers this in _The Great Arab Conquests_. His conclusions may surprise you.
Kennedy begins with an introduction to Arabia before Mohammed, giving context to the social and political climate of the people who would embark on this wide-spread conquest. Following the death of Mohammed in 632, Kennedy explains the motives behind Islam's expansion outside Arabia. At the risk of oversimplifying a well-researched and well-written account, it was primarily due to opportunities for individual glory and wealth, not religious zeal, as one might expect.
What is most interesting, perhaps, is not the "why" behind the expansion, but the "how". Afterall, the Sassanid and Byzantine Empires were wealthy, powerful and well-organized; that their vast holdings in present-day Iraq, Iran, the Levant and Egypt would collapse so quickly was far from a given. Kennedy does an outstanding job of illlustrating this, as well. To briefly touch on a few points: both the Byzantines and Sassanids had exhausted themselves from warfare between them, and their constituent populations saw the Arab invaders as "liberators". Additionally, the Muslims did not force Islam on the conquored - rather, they were primarily interested in collecting tribute (which, in some cases, was less than had been paid in taxes to either Byzantine or Sassanid overlords). Finally, there was a strong social component as well: Islam is egalitarian, giving the poor and dispossesed an opportunity to become one of the "conquoring" class.
As Kennedy points out, there has been little scholarship around this question (historians are either Islamists, ancient historians or historians of the Middle Ages - this period of time straddles all three) and the available sources are not primary. Nonetheless, he has done a remarkable job in answering the question posed by this 7th century monk.
The book was a little heavy on the military history for my taste, and I wanted to give it four stars. To be fair, however, conquoring is a function of the military, and the title clearly states its objective is the nature of Muslim conquest - therefore I can't fault the book on this point. I would also add that the maps are excellent, providing a useful tool to reference as you read Kennedy's narrative. Highly recommended for historians and armchair historians, and for those who seek a better understanding of the Near East.
|
3: Very interesting book for a difficult task
I was searching for a good, synthetic but serious book about the muslim conquest for a long time. For me as a french, it was a more difficult task to find it in my native language since many books about the subject in french are too old or too summarized.
The great arab conquest is a solid, well documented book and the author gave us an almost complete view, altough not exhaustive, about the conquest.
It was important for me to find an author who could work with arabic sources, even if the account from muslims historians must be studied carefully. Hugh Kennedy has aknowledged, with humillity, that he cannot give a full light about all the events and due to a lack of sources many of them will remained uncertain.
The book give us also a good background about the situation in arabia, the neighbouring empires and the doctrinal divisions especially in the byzantines provinces. It is necessary introduction for understanding the conquests.
The chapters are divided by geographical areas of conquest which is not very imaginative but it has the advantage to be simple and Hugh Kennedy is hopefully a good narrator so the book is not difficult to assimilate.
We can also notice that the author refers to the "arab conquests" and not "muslim conquests" as usual (in my case in france)and i found his view on the subject very interesting. Arabs were the bulk of the army with a strong arab spirit, the tribal ties "'a??abiyya" - including internal divisions between the tribes, the idea of being a superior cast, remained vivid even with their fellow muslims from other ethnies.
Although Hugh Kennedy doesn't differentiate himself with other scholars about the reasons of the conquest's success, persians and byzantines weakened by their previous conflict, hostility of some christians populations towards the byzantine church, this book is a must have for everyone who want to learn about this period of history and a good beginning for those who want to read further with other scholars such as at-Tabari.
ps: Sorry if my english is a little "boring"
|
4: Don't sweat the details, read for the "big picture".
Hugh Kennedys' Great Arab Conquests, covers the expansion of Islam from Muhammad's death in 632 until 750. This is a timeperiod unfamilar to most readers. Hence, many place names and historical personages, are unfamilar (Can you place Transoxania on a map?). Ocassionally, but not often enough, the author clarifies by saying, "in what is modern day . . ." He included several maps, but neglected to include modern-day boundaries.
The minute details of the where and the what are clearly important to the author. Such details are necessary not just the sake accuarcy, but to establish the author as unbiased in his conclusions. While he doesn't say explicitly, he seems to be aware that as a "British professor" his conclusions will come under particuarly close scrunity by Muslims in general and Islamic scholars in particular.
Still whatever one's faith, the swift expansion of Muslim rule, is impressive and therefore important to understand. The historial signficance alone makes "Great Arab Conquests" an important read. Additionaly, given author's passion for accuaracy and objectivity, the reader has confidence that this is THE book to read on the subject.
|
5: From Tangiers to Tukharistan
Kennedy traces the Arab conquests from the death of the Prophet Mohammed in 632 to their conclusion at the door steps of China in the East and Europe in the west just over hundred years later.
Kennedy ascribes the amazing success of these conquests to several attributes:
--Muslim solidarity behind their self-confident religion and its promises of success in victory and eternal glory in honorable defeat.
--Arabic physical endurance as they marched from the desert reaches of the Saudi Arabian peninsula north, east, and west to far borders broader than the Roman empire they helped to splinter.
--Invaded societies weakened by religious infighting (Orthodox vs. "heretical" Christians), other enemies (the ongoing battles between the Byzantine and Persian empires weakened both societies in advance of the Muslim incursion), and possibly declining populations decimated by the vermin-borne plagues which would later ravish Europe.
--Defeated peoples who were often willing to accept, without revolt or insurrection, the light hand of Islamic rule which at times was no worse than the local polity, and at times even preferable.
The surviving contemporary sources Kennedy has available to draw on are frustratingly sparse, mostly unverifiable, and often written for specific audiences and purposes at cross-purposes with those of a modern historian. In particular, the Muslim accounts were usually written for the purposes of documenting the participants in conquests, marches, and battles to justify claims of religious, tribal, and financial honor. Most of the Muslim writers were working decades and centuries after the events, writing moralistic tales to gloss and glorify the heroes of the faith and the field of battle.
Still, Kennedy does a good job with the necessarily broad narrative, drawing interesting lessons even from the most abstract and obviously allegorical writing, while stressing the irresolvable uncertainty about chronology, characters, and geographic locations.
One striking observation Kennedy makes from the few narratives written by contemporary or near-contemporary Christian writers was their almost universal lack of religious rancor against the Muslim invaders. These writers were more likely to see the Muslim invaders as God's chosen vessels of punishment of Christian heresies than as anti-Christian heretics themselves.
Ultimately, Kennedy concludes, the Arabic advance was stopped more by the geographical limits of the Atlantic Ocean at the western edge of North Africa and the impassable mountains of the Sino-Pakistan border in the East. In fact, Kennedy says the borders of the Arabic empire can be traced with surprising accuracy by following the 1,000-meter contour lines on a relief map; the warriors who haled from and fought so well in hot, dry lowlands, were apparently not physically acclimated or politically predisposed to fight, live, and rule in higher and cooler climates. The few rebuffs that the Arab armies suffered occurred in the highlands of Spain in the West and Pakistan in the East.
Another interesting question that Kennedy raises is the essential nature of the conquests. Were the participants acting primarily as Arabs, or as Muslims? Were they seen by their protagonists primarily as Arabs, or as Muslims? While the conquests began as an explicitly religious jihad, much of the morale and motivation of soldiers was driven by tribal loyalty which preceded religious affiliation with the Prophet and his potent ideals. Did the answer to those questions matter to the success of the conquests? In some of the eastern reaches of the conquests it did, says Kennedy, where the attackers faced the most foreign environments, cultures, and religions (Buddhism and Zoroastrianism).
|
|
|
|
|
