Mohammed and Charlemagne

Rating:
Summary: Groundbreaking When It Was Published...Just For Scholars Now
Review: 1st: This is an old book and needs to be treated as such. When Pirenne wrote this book there was no archeology, arch. has changed the way people think about the transition, and most of what P says can be discounted by looking at arch. 2nd: Havighurst's book, despite its title, which makes it sound really helpful, is out of date and not worth looking at. 3rd: You don't actually need to read thisbook to get the argument. Read David Whitehouse's "Moh, Charl and Origins.." and that tells you what P says quite quickly. That's the only book you need. However, it was published in 1983, and newer sources (see McCormick) should be considered for any scholarly undertaking. This is an ever growing field, and new archeological evidence appears every year.

Rating:
Summary: Charlemagne AND Mohammed
Review: Belgian historian Henri Pirenne's thesis, that the Mediterranean World of Antiquity was broken by the rise of Islam in the seventh and eighth centuries and not by the Germanic invaders of the fifth and sixth centuries has been subject to endless criticism, debate and revision since Mohammed and Charlemage was first published in Europe in 1937.

In Pirenne's view, the conquest of the eastern and southern coasts of the Mediterranean, of Spain, and of the important islands had shut off the movement of world trade which had flourished during the late Roman times. The result of this closure returned western Europe to an earlier "natural" and rural economic system, which set in motion a shifting of the balance of power in Europe from the Mediterranean region to the north.

Although by the time Mohammed and Charlemagne was published the theory that Rome had collapsed suddenly under the impact of the immense German invasions during the fifth century was being qualified, it was Pirenne's theory on the end of the Ancient World and the beginning of the Middle Ages that upset traditional historical conceptions. He advanced the thesis that the Ancient World ended only after the Arab invasions of the seventh and eighth centuries had swept around the coasts of Mediterranean and had converted it into a Moslem lake on which, as one Arab writer said, the Christians could no longer "float a plank." This, Pirenne argued, had been accomplished by the last quarter of the eighth century and had destroyed the essential unity of the Roman Empire. For centuries the Mediterranean had been a "Roman lake" the Mare Nostrum of the Romans which held the great imperial structure together: Rome's trade and commerce, its military and naval might, the important exchange of ideas.

The Mediterranean unity of the Roman Empire had not, according to Pirenne, been destroyed by the German tribes that had occupied the western Empire. The Germans admired the superior Roman civilization and diligently set about to continue it, copying everything from the Roman emperors' dress and ceremonies to the government structures and gold coinage. They did whatever they could to preserve Roman culture.

This book is a classic which is as timely today as it was when it was first published on the eve of WWII. Read it for Pirenne's immaculate scholarship and his then provocative theory that the Teutonic "barbarians" were the upholders and awestruck heirs of Rome and not its destroyers--that distinction belongs to rise Islam.

Rating:
Summary: Fascinating Yet Flimsy
Review: Henri Pirenne, who revolutionized the study of medieval beginnings, presents a thorough explanation of his intriguing thesis in this final historical volume. His point is well taken, that the Moslem invasions of the 7th and 8th centuries were just as crucial, if not more so, to the dawn of the Middle Ages as were the Germanic invasions of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th. However, as far-sighted as this idea may be, there is a near obsessiveness with proving his point that tends to make Pirenne's work seem less than well-founded. Several wide sweeping generalizations are made, such as the observation that the Germanic invaders contributed nothing of worth to their new surroundings, but rather came for the social paradise that was the Roman Empire. Also, he seems to contradict his own conclusions from time to time, as in his assertion that Charlemagne both sought and did not seek a Mediterranean Empire during his reign. As a whole, though, the book is a fascinating read.

For those who do not have any knowledge of Latin or French, the book makes a difficult read, as many of his sources are quoted in their original language, and beginning historians may have trouble with the veritable barrage of unfamiliar names and concepts. However, two works which may make this problem a little less severe are William Bark's "Origins of the Medieval World," and "The Pirenne Thesis," edited by Alfred Havighurst.

Rating:
Summary: Masterpiece!
Review: Mohammed and Charlemagne is the last work of Henri Pirenne. It was published after his death and represents a masterpiece of historical scholarship. This is a seminal work that challenged the thesis that Germanic barbarians obliterated the Roman Empire. His revolutionary thesis was that the unexpected rise and advance of Islam led to the downfall of the Empire. With the rise of Islam, the Mediterranean was no longer a thoroughfare of commerce and ideas. Without the Mediterranean, commerce dried up to a trickle and Europe slipped into the Middle Ages.

The revision and completion of the book was completed by one of Pirenne's students after his death. That leads to one of my criticisms. Previous works by Pirenne I found engaging and masterfully written. This work however, seemed to lack the same literary style and, as a consequence, I found it to be a choppy read that lacked the clear crispness of his previous works. While this statement is subjective, it is not irrelevant. When Pirenne expounds on economic and sociological issues of the Middle Ages his words literally leap off the page. It is disappointing that this subject does not surface until the end of the book.

Rating:
Summary: Masterpiece!
Review: Mohammed and Charlemagne is the last work of Henri Pirenne. It was published after his death and represents a masterpiece of historical scholarship. This is a seminal work that challenged the thesis that Germanic barbarians obliterated the Roman Empire. His revolutionary thesis was that the unexpected rise and advance of Islam led to the downfall of the Empire. With the rise of Islam, the Mediterranean was no longer a thoroughfare of commerce and ideas. Without the Mediterranean, commerce dried up to a trickle and Europe slipped into the Middle Ages.

The revision and completion of the book was completed by one of Pirenne's students after his death. That leads to one of my criticisms. Previous works by Pirenne I found engaging and masterfully written. This work however, seemed to lack the same literary style and, as a consequence, I found it to be a choppy read that lacked the clear crispness of his previous works. While this statement is subjective, it is not irrelevant. When Pirenne expounds on economic and sociological issues of the Middle Ages his words literally leap off the page. It is disappointing that this subject does not surface until the end of the book.