Book Review: Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World through Islamic Eyes, by Tamim Ansary

[inverarity]

The history of Islam told as a narrative, not as an apologetic, an indictment, or a treatise.

Comments

[ext_2137784]

You may want to check out "The Crusades Through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf, though it's entirely possible that this book's account of the crusades was heavily sourced from that. Basically my point is that describing the crusades as "plaguing the Mediterranean coast" is like saying that the American Civil War was a short-lived revolt in America's less-developed agricultural regions or that 9/11 was an airline accident that destroyed some skyscrapers and damaged a government building. The crusaders occupied the Arab world's most commercially important cities for over a hundred years, as well as one of their most important holy sites. If you want a clear analogy consider that Israel has existed for less than half as long as the Kingdom of Jerusalem and controls less than half as much territory. The cultural, political, and emotional impact of the crusades is far greater than this author seems to be admitting based on this review.

[inverarity]

It's not that he claims the crusades had no widespread or long term effect, but that at the time, few Muslims saw them as a major incursion with the kind of impact as the Seljuk or Mongol invasions. The crusades didn't reach Baghdad or Mecca or Persia or other major Islamic headlands. It's like comparing 9/11 to World War II. Emotionally and politically and psychologically, 9/11 was a very big deal, but its material impact on the US was not comparable.

[ext_2137784]

In terms of population, economic importance and military strength, the major islamic headlands at the start of the crusades were andalusia, Egypt and Syria/Iraq. Persia probably wasn't even majority islamic yet, had no centralized political authority after the Seljuks fell apart with Nizam Al-Mulk's death and was too poor to be truly considered a headland. Of those three headlands, Andalusia was completely destroyed, Egypt was invaded and it's most important cities were besieged or sacked multiple times. Syria lost it's access to the sea for a period of almost a hundred years as well as having almost all of it's most valuable cities taken and colonized by crusaders. The crusades may not have been as destructive as the Mongol invasions, but they fundamentally altered the political structures of the arab world. Also, none of the other invasions you mentioned actually resulted in islam being eradicated from a significant territory, the crusades did.

[paulliver]

I am a little puzzled by the title "Destiny Interrupted." What destiny did he think Islamic culture would achieve?

[ext_2137784]

It's the Islamic culture's perception of it's own destiny, almost all sufficiently powerful cultures develop one, and it takes more than a century or two of defeat and decline to eradicate it.

[paulliver]

Ah, yes, it is hard to give up the dream, historically or personally.

[tealterror0]

It's not hard to imagine a world where the Middle East, and not the West, became the dominant world power. That it didn't is probably not due to anything inherent in the culture or religion, but because of contingent historical circumstance.

[tealterror0]

I often hear liberal Muslims in the United States say that "jihad just means 'trying to be a good person,'" suggesting that only anti-Muslim bigots think the term has something to do with violence.

This defense has always seemed to kind of miss the point to me; same with the argument that Islam is a "religion of peace." It's not a religion of peace or of war; it's a religion with an extremely long history and a huge number of different strains that cannot possibly be summarized in a book, much less a phrase.

Seriously, it's not like Christianity--or hell, just about any ideology, including democracy, communism, etc.--can be accurately described as being "peaceful" or "violent" either.