What do you think?
Rate this book
丿賷丕賳鬲丕賳 鬲丨鬲 乇丕賷丞 賵丕丨丿丞
As the author shows in this book, any notion that 'Christian Europe' has long been opposed by a 'Muslim non-Europe' misrepresents the facts of a complex and shared history. The motivations for these interfaith alliances were dictated by shifting diplomacies, self-interest and realpolitik, not by Jihad or religious war
295 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
3 people are currently reading
303 people want to read
About the author
Ian Almond
11听books39听followersIan Almond is a Professor of World Literature at Georgetown University (Qatar). He received his PhD in English Literature from Edinburgh University in 2000. He is the author of five books, most recently Two Faiths, One Banner (Harvard University Press, 2009) and History of Islam in German Thought (Routledge, 2010), and over forty articles in a variety of journals including PMLA, Radical Philosophy, ELH and New Literary History. He specializes in comparative world literature, with a tri-continental emphasis on Mexico, Bengal and Turkey. His books have been translated into eleven languages, including Arabic, Russian, Turkish, Korean, Serbo-Croat, Persian and Indonesian. His fifth book, on Nirad C. Chaudhuri, came out with Cambridge University Press last year.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 26, 2018
賲賳 兀毓馗賲 丕賱賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲賷 賯乇兀鬲賴丕 爻賳丞 佗贍佟侉 .. 鬲賳丕賵賱 毓賳 鬲丨丕賱賮丕鬲 亘賷賳 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 賵丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 囟丿 賲爻賱賲賷賳 兀賵 賲爻賷丨賷賳 賵匕賱賰 賮賷 毓賴丿 賲賱賵賰 丕賱胤賵丕卅賮 賮賷 丕賱兀賳丿賱爻 鬲亘賷賳 賱賷 丨賷賳賴丕 兀賳 丕賱丨丕賰賲 賱丕 賷賴賲賴 丕賱丿賷賳 賵賱丕 丕賱卮賴丕丿丞 賵賷乇囟賶 亘丕賱鬲丨丕賱賮 賲毓 丕賱卮賷胤丕賳 賱丨賲丕賷丞 賲賰丕賳賴貙.
賵亘毓丿賴丕 丕賳鬲賯賱 廿賱賶 丕賷胤丕賱賷丕 賵賲爻賱賲賷賳 氐賯賱賷丞 賵鬲丨丕賱賮丕鬲 丨丿孬鬲 賮賷 鬲賱賰 丕賱兀乇囟 賵亘毓囟 丕賱賯乇丕乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨丿孬鬲 賮賷 毓賴丿 賮乇賷丿乇賷賰 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賵賳賯賱 噩賲賷毓 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賱賯乇賷丞 鬲亘毓丿 伲 爻丕毓丕鬲 鬲賯乇賷亘丕 "亘丕賱爻賷丕乇丞" 毓賳 乇賵賲丕 .. 賵丕禺賷乇丕 毓賳 丕賱毓賴丿 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷 賵 賰賷賮賷丞 賮鬲丨 丕爻胤賳亘賵賱 亘賯賷丕丿丞 噩賷賵卮 廿爻賱丕賲賷丞 賵賲爻賷丨賷丞.
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 噩賲賷賱 噩丿丕貙 賷丨賲賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賰賳鬲 兀噩賴賱賴丕 賵賲賳 賰孬乇丞 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 賰賳鬲 兀賰鬲亘 毓賱賶 賴賵丕賲卮 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賰賷 賱丕 兀賳爻賶
賵亘毓丿賴丕 丕賳鬲賯賱 廿賱賶 丕賷胤丕賱賷丕 賵賲爻賱賲賷賳 氐賯賱賷丞 賵鬲丨丕賱賮丕鬲 丨丿孬鬲 賮賷 鬲賱賰 丕賱兀乇囟 賵亘毓囟 丕賱賯乇丕乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨丿孬鬲 賮賷 毓賴丿 賮乇賷丿乇賷賰 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賵賳賯賱 噩賲賷毓 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賱賯乇賷丞 鬲亘毓丿 伲 爻丕毓丕鬲 鬲賯乇賷亘丕 "亘丕賱爻賷丕乇丞" 毓賳 乇賵賲丕 .. 賵丕禺賷乇丕 毓賳 丕賱毓賴丿 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷 賵 賰賷賮賷丞 賮鬲丨 丕爻胤賳亘賵賱 亘賯賷丕丿丞 噩賷賵卮 廿爻賱丕賲賷丞 賵賲爻賷丨賷丞.
丕賱賰鬲丕亘 噩賲賷賱 噩丿丕貙 賷丨賲賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賰賳鬲 兀噩賴賱賴丕 賵賲賳 賰孬乇丞 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 賰賳鬲 兀賰鬲亘 毓賱賶 賴賵丕賲卮 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賰賷 賱丕 兀賳爻賶
July 7, 2019
毓賳丿賲丕 賯丕賲 爻賮賷乇 賲氐乇賷 亘夭賷丕乇丞 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕 賮賷 禺賲爻賷賳賷丕鬲 丕賱賯乇賳 丕賱佟伲貙 賮賵噩賶亍 賱丿賶 乇丐賷丞 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賷賲丕乇爻 毓賱賳丕賸 賮賷 丕賱亘賱丿丞 賵丕賱賲爻賱賲賵賳 賷丨鬲賱賵賳 賲乇丕賰夭 亘丕乇夭丞 賮賷 丕賱亘賱丕胤 丕賱賲賱賰賷. 賰丕賳鬲 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕 亘丨賯 賮爻丨丞 氐睾賷乇丞 賱賱廿爻賱丕賲 賮賷 賵爻胤 廿賷胤丕賱賷丕. 賵爻乇毓丕賳 賲丕 匕丕毓 賮賷 丕賱毓丕賱賲 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷 禺亘乇 爻賲丕丨 丕賱賲爻丨賷賷賳 亘賵噩賵丿 賲賯丕胤毓丞 丕爻賱丕賲賷丞 賮賷 賯賱亘 賲賲丕賱賰賴賲
毓賳丿賲丕 兀毓賱賳 丕賱賲賱賰 賲丕賳賮乇賷丿 賮毓賱賷丕賸 丕賱丨乇亘 賰丕賳 兀賵賱 賲賰丕賳 賮乇賾 廿賱賷賴 賴賵 賯氐乇賴 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賮賷 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕. 賷卮賷乇 賰賱 匕賱賰 廿賱賶 兀賳 丕賱賲賱賵賰 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 賱賲 賷卮毓乇賵丕 兀賳賴賲 賲賴丿丿賵賳 亘賷賳 乇毓丕賷丕賴賲 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賵賱賲 賷毓鬲亘乇賵丕 賲丿賷賳鬲賴賲 賲丿賷賳丞 賲毓丕丿賷丞 兀賵 睾乇賷亘丞
丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷賵賳 丕賱兀賵丕卅賱 賱賲 賷賰賵賳賵丕 廿爻賱丕賲賷賷賳 毓賱賶 丕賱廿胤賱丕賯貙 賵賷亘丿賵 兀賳賴賲 賱賲 賷鬲乇丿丿賵丕 賮賷 毓賯丿 氐賮賯丕鬲 賲賱丕卅賲丞 賲毓 兀賷 賲賳 噩賷乇丕賳賴賲貙 賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 賰丕賳賵丕 兀賲 賲爻賱賲賷賳貙 廿賳 爻丕毓丿賴賲 匕賱賰 毓賱賶 丕賱賲囟賷 賯丿賲丕賸 賮賷 胤賲賵丨丕鬲賴賲
賷購毓鬲亘乇 丕丨鬲賮丕馗 孬賷賵丿賵乇丕 亘毓賯賷丿鬲賴丕 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷丞 亘毓丿 夭賵丕噩賴丕 賲賳 兀賵乇賴丕賳 兀賲乇丕賸 丕爻鬲卮賳丕卅賷丕賸. 賱賲 鬲賰鬲賮賽 孬賷賵丿賵乇丕 丕賱丕丨鬲賮丕馗 亘毓丿丿 賰亘賷乇 賲賳 丕賱禺丿賲 丕賱賲爻丨賷賷賳貙 亘賱 賯丕賲鬲 兀賷囟丕賸 亘鬲賲孬賷賱 夭賵噩賴丕 丕賱賲爻賱賲 賮賷 丕賱丨賵丕乇 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷 賲毓 丕賱丨賰賾丕賲 丕賱睾乇亘賷賷賳
賷乇賵賷 兀丨丿 丕賱賲丐乇禺賷賳 丕賱賲爻丨賷賷賳 賰賷賮 禺乇噩鬲 噩賵賯丞 賲賳 丕賱兀胤賮丕賱貙 賵賴賲 賷睾賳賾賵賳貙 賮賷 賲丨丕賵賱丞 賱丕爻鬲毓胤丕賮 丕賱夭毓賷賲. 睾賷乇 兀賳 鬲賷賲賵乇賱賳賰 兀賲賻乇 賮乇爻丕賳賴 亘亘爻丕胤丞 亘賯鬲賱賴賲!
鬲賲 丕乇爻丕賱 丕賱爻賮乇丕亍 廿賱賶 亘賱丕胤 亘丕賷夭賷丿貙 賲毓 乇爻丕賱丞 鬲賳丕賵賱 賮賷賴丕 鬲賷賲賵乇賱賳賰 丕賱丕氐賵賱 丕賱睾丕賲囟丞 賱賱爻賱丕賱丞 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷丞貙 賲卮賷乇丕賸 廿賱賶 兀賳賴賲 賲鬲丨丿乇賷賳 賲賳 丕賱毓亘賷丿. 賮兀毓丕丿 亘丕賷夭賷丿 丕賱爻賮乇丕亍 廿賱賶 鬲賷賲賵乇 丨賱賷賯賷 丕賱匕賯賵賳貙 賵丨匕賾乇賴 賲賳 丕賱賲噩賷亍 廿賱賷賴.
丕賳丿賮毓 丕賱噩賳賵丿 丕賱兀鬲乇丕賰 廿賱賶 兀乇囟 丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 賵賴賲 賷乇丿丿賵賳: 丕賱賱賴 兀賰亘乇貙 丕賱賲賵鬲 賱賱賰賮丕乇!!! 賲毓 兀賳賴賲 賰丕賳賵丕 賷丨丕乇亘賵賳 噩賳亘丕賸 廿賱賶 噩賳亘 賲毓 賰賮丕賾乇 賲賳 噩賳爻賷丕鬲 賲禺鬲賱賮丞
亘賲丕 丕賳 丕賱噩賳賵丿 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賮賷 氐賮賵賮 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷賷賳 賱賲 賷爻乇賾賴賲 丕賱賯鬲丕賱 鬲丨鬲 賯賷丕丿丞 賲爻賷丨賷賷賳貙 丕囟胤購乇賾 丕賱囟亘丕胤 丕賱睾乇亘賷賷賳 廿賱賶 丕爻鬲禺丿丕賲 兀爻賲丕亍 鬲乇賰賷丞. 賮丨賲賱 囟丕亘胤 丕賲乇賷賰賷 賷丿毓賶 丕賱乇丕卅丿 亘賵賳賮丕賳鬲賷 丕爻賲 "賳賵乇賷爻 亘賰"貙 賮賷 丨賷賳 丨賲賱 丕賱噩賳乇丕賱 亘乇賷丕賳爻賰賷 丕爻賲 "卮丕賴賷賳 亘丕卮丕'. 賮兀毓胤鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱兀爻賲丕亍 丕賳胤亘丕毓丕賸 兀賳賴賲 賲爻賱賲賵賳貙 毓賱賲丕賸 兀賳 毓丿丿丕賸 氐睾賷乇丕賸 賲賳賴賲 丕毓鬲賳賯 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賮毓賱丕賸.
毓賳丿賲丕 兀毓賱賳 丕賱賲賱賰 賲丕賳賮乇賷丿 賮毓賱賷丕賸 丕賱丨乇亘 賰丕賳 兀賵賱 賲賰丕賳 賮乇賾 廿賱賷賴 賴賵 賯氐乇賴 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賮賷 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕. 賷卮賷乇 賰賱 匕賱賰 廿賱賶 兀賳 丕賱賲賱賵賰 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 賱賲 賷卮毓乇賵丕 兀賳賴賲 賲賴丿丿賵賳 亘賷賳 乇毓丕賷丕賴賲 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賵賱賲 賷毓鬲亘乇賵丕 賲丿賷賳鬲賴賲 賲丿賷賳丞 賲毓丕丿賷丞 兀賵 睾乇賷亘丞
丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷賵賳 丕賱兀賵丕卅賱 賱賲 賷賰賵賳賵丕 廿爻賱丕賲賷賷賳 毓賱賶 丕賱廿胤賱丕賯貙 賵賷亘丿賵 兀賳賴賲 賱賲 賷鬲乇丿丿賵丕 賮賷 毓賯丿 氐賮賯丕鬲 賲賱丕卅賲丞 賲毓 兀賷 賲賳 噩賷乇丕賳賴賲貙 賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 賰丕賳賵丕 兀賲 賲爻賱賲賷賳貙 廿賳 爻丕毓丿賴賲 匕賱賰 毓賱賶 丕賱賲囟賷 賯丿賲丕賸 賮賷 胤賲賵丨丕鬲賴賲
賷購毓鬲亘乇 丕丨鬲賮丕馗 孬賷賵丿賵乇丕 亘毓賯賷丿鬲賴丕 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷丞 亘毓丿 夭賵丕噩賴丕 賲賳 兀賵乇賴丕賳 兀賲乇丕賸 丕爻鬲卮賳丕卅賷丕賸. 賱賲 鬲賰鬲賮賽 孬賷賵丿賵乇丕 丕賱丕丨鬲賮丕馗 亘毓丿丿 賰亘賷乇 賲賳 丕賱禺丿賲 丕賱賲爻丨賷賷賳貙 亘賱 賯丕賲鬲 兀賷囟丕賸 亘鬲賲孬賷賱 夭賵噩賴丕 丕賱賲爻賱賲 賮賷 丕賱丨賵丕乇 丕賱爻賷丕爻賷 賲毓 丕賱丨賰賾丕賲 丕賱睾乇亘賷賷賳
賷乇賵賷 兀丨丿 丕賱賲丐乇禺賷賳 丕賱賲爻丨賷賷賳 賰賷賮 禺乇噩鬲 噩賵賯丞 賲賳 丕賱兀胤賮丕賱貙 賵賴賲 賷睾賳賾賵賳貙 賮賷 賲丨丕賵賱丞 賱丕爻鬲毓胤丕賮 丕賱夭毓賷賲. 睾賷乇 兀賳 鬲賷賲賵乇賱賳賰 兀賲賻乇 賮乇爻丕賳賴 亘亘爻丕胤丞 亘賯鬲賱賴賲!
鬲賲 丕乇爻丕賱 丕賱爻賮乇丕亍 廿賱賶 亘賱丕胤 亘丕賷夭賷丿貙 賲毓 乇爻丕賱丞 鬲賳丕賵賱 賮賷賴丕 鬲賷賲賵乇賱賳賰 丕賱丕氐賵賱 丕賱睾丕賲囟丞 賱賱爻賱丕賱丞 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷丞貙 賲卮賷乇丕賸 廿賱賶 兀賳賴賲 賲鬲丨丿乇賷賳 賲賳 丕賱毓亘賷丿. 賮兀毓丕丿 亘丕賷夭賷丿 丕賱爻賮乇丕亍 廿賱賶 鬲賷賲賵乇 丨賱賷賯賷 丕賱匕賯賵賳貙 賵丨匕賾乇賴 賲賳 丕賱賲噩賷亍 廿賱賷賴.
丕賳丿賮毓 丕賱噩賳賵丿 丕賱兀鬲乇丕賰 廿賱賶 兀乇囟 丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 賵賴賲 賷乇丿丿賵賳: 丕賱賱賴 兀賰亘乇貙 丕賱賲賵鬲 賱賱賰賮丕乇!!! 賲毓 兀賳賴賲 賰丕賳賵丕 賷丨丕乇亘賵賳 噩賳亘丕賸 廿賱賶 噩賳亘 賲毓 賰賮丕賾乇 賲賳 噩賳爻賷丕鬲 賲禺鬲賱賮丞
亘賲丕 丕賳 丕賱噩賳賵丿 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賮賷 氐賮賵賮 丕賱毓孬賲丕賳賷賷賳 賱賲 賷爻乇賾賴賲 丕賱賯鬲丕賱 鬲丨鬲 賯賷丕丿丞 賲爻賷丨賷賷賳貙 丕囟胤購乇賾 丕賱囟亘丕胤 丕賱睾乇亘賷賷賳 廿賱賶 丕爻鬲禺丿丕賲 兀爻賲丕亍 鬲乇賰賷丞. 賮丨賲賱 囟丕亘胤 丕賲乇賷賰賷 賷丿毓賶 丕賱乇丕卅丿 亘賵賳賮丕賳鬲賷 丕爻賲 "賳賵乇賷爻 亘賰"貙 賮賷 丨賷賳 丨賲賱 丕賱噩賳乇丕賱 亘乇賷丕賳爻賰賷 丕爻賲 "卮丕賴賷賳 亘丕卮丕'. 賮兀毓胤鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱兀爻賲丕亍 丕賳胤亘丕毓丕賸 兀賳賴賲 賲爻賱賲賵賳貙 毓賱賲丕賸 兀賳 毓丿丿丕賸 氐睾賷乇丕賸 賲賳賴賲 丕毓鬲賳賯 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賮毓賱丕賸.
February 8, 2017
The idea of a Christian Europe is an exercise in historical amnesia, according to professor Ian Almond. His Two Faiths, One Banner, a semi-academic work on Christian-Muslim military alliances throughout nine centuries of European history, seeks to provide a counter-narrative to a modern culture that has decided to 鈥渁irbrush Muslims and Jews out of our European heritage鈥� (1). Almond does not pull any punches in his retelling (as the previous quote might imply), especially in his introduction and conclusion, where the Western media, adherents to a 鈥渃lash of civilizations鈥� theory (most clearly developed by Samuel P. Huntington), politicians, and corporate and business elites all play the role of villains. The latter, in particular, are the 鈥渞eal threat to our society鈥� according to Almond, as they push news of terror plots and distort the religion of Islam to mislead public consciousness (222). Clearly, Two Faiths, One Banner is a book to be carefully considered in a post-September 11 world.
Two Faiths, One Banner is structured with an introduction, five chapters (each with endnotes and listed sources), conclusion, bibliography, and index. The chapter vignettes survey a vast sweep of history鈥�8 centuries altogether鈥攊n just over 200 pages. Topics for these essays include: (1) Muslim-Christian co-operation in eleventh century Spain, centering on King Alfonso VI; (2) Frederick II and the Saracens of Southern Italy; (3) Alliances in fourteenth century Greece and Asia Minor; (4) Christian-Turk alliances in Ottoman Hungary; and (5) Muslim alignment with both sides during the Crimean War, 1853-1856. The pace is quick throughout, and Almond proves to be a gifted storyteller with a talent for high drama. The author hopes in telling these stories of Muslim-Christian military alliances to show that Muslims have always been involved in the history of Europe, a fact that needs to inform our modern political and cultural debates.
The downsides of Almond鈥檚 broad focus are apparent. The five essays largely read independent of each other, and Almond is inconsistent as he moves through the epochs. For example, Almond gives the customary caution that we cannot project modern views of nationalism onto the Middle Ages; however, this warning is not developed until page 50, near the beginning of the second chapter. Ideally, this and related methodological issues should have been developed early on in the book. Curiously, we find Almond playing rather loosely with medieval understandings of nationality and identity elsewhere in the book, notably in his discussion of fourteenth century Turks, Byzantines, and Latins as 鈥渘ationalities and ethnic groups鈥� (96).
The most obvious downside of the book鈥檚 format鈥攁nd Almond鈥檚 argument鈥攊s that Almond runs the risk of being charged with the same selective exampling that he is reacting against. If the Western media鈥檚 鈥渟elective repetition鈥� of images and use of a 鈥淢uslim bogeyman鈥� discredits its narrative, then it follows that Almond鈥檚 own carefully constructed historical storyline is equally suspect. Regrettably, Almond does not acknowledge this tension and the hermeneutical problem it raises.
Another question regarding methodology also goes unanswered鈥攖o what extent can we assume a monolithic Islam (or Christianity) that can be 鈥渟ampled鈥� at various points over a period of 900 years and then picked up out of its immediate geographic, economic, and social context in order to inform our modern debates? Much of modern religious scholarship has helpfully used the language of 鈥淚slams鈥� and 鈥淐hristianities鈥� in underscoring the difficulties in comparing religious practice and understanding across historical, geographic, economic, and social lines. This problem comes to the forefront to a greater extent in this book since it is a study fueled by contemporary concerns. One wonders why鈥攇iven a supposed lack of awareness of Muslim-Christian alliances today鈥攚e need to go back to the medieval period at all? Could the author not have contributed to modern awareness by discussing the recent Muslim-Christian military cooperation in Iraqi Kurdistan and Eastern Europe? Of course, had Almond stayed in the modern period, there are so many examples of non-military alliances that could also be treated (the 1994 UN Conference in which Muslims and Roman Catholics came together, calls from the Archbishop of Canterbury for Christian-Muslim co-operation on the issue of global poverty, etc.).
In each chapter Almond builds his case using secondary sources for the most part and creates a flowing narrative; the author uses endnotes infrequently (less than 2 per page), which also helps readability for a non-technical audience. Numerous anecdotes and instances of Muslim-Christian military cooperation are woven into each chapter, and together give strong support to Almond鈥檚 pragmatic thesis that Muslims and Christians came together in peculiar ways to fight together. The evidence is weaker and somewhat speculative in instances where the author seeks to prove the existence of a shared culture between Muslims and Christians. Arguably, this instance of mutual understanding and cultural exchange is more important than military alliances in the author鈥檚 view (217-18).
At various points, Almond risks damaging his historical narrative by abrupt and needless comparisons to modern politics or religion. Examples in the discussion of 11th century Spain include the argument that Jews, Muslims, and Christians during this period lived more intimately than the average Berliner and German Turk today (31); the comparison of Abd Allah鈥檚 unpopularity in Granada to the unpopularity of Western-friendly governments such as those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia (37); and the counterfactual claim that Spanish Christianity today might resemble a theology closer to the Unitarians had the medieval papacy not pressed so hard for dropping the Mozarabic liturgy (38). The author can be forgiven for the occasional aside, but these frequent digressions, when coupled with his polemical introduction and conclusion, create the impression of a hidden agenda. Ironically, Almond warns against people with hidden agendas (221).
Despite the author鈥檚 bias and undefined methodology, the book is not without positives. Its strongest contribution lies in its accessibility for students, many of whom will be encountering new ideas. Arguably, Almond is partly correct: popular cultural suffers from a historical amnesia when it comes to Muslim and Christian interaction in the Middle Ages. Even basic points along the medieval story are often unknown; Almond creatively juxtaposes the few people that are aware of the Muslim army鈥檚 sack of Rome in 846 to the many people who know at least something about Rome being sacked by the Goths and Vandals. The book would benefit both instructors and students as a supplemental text that raises important issues in historiography, such as source criticism, meta-narratives, and revisionism.
To conclude, Two Faiths, One Banner is a study front-loaded with modern questions that often creep into the historical narrative as well. This fact, coupled with the notable absence of some important methodological discussions, creates a study that appears to be lacking objectivity and exists only for modern political and social interests. That aside, Two Faiths, One Banner might still make an important contribution to scholarship, but it will be one that awaits a full realization. Often, polemical histories such as Two Faiths, One Banner are vanguard projects that spur further studies. As it moves the pendulum of historical studies, it might influence future works to take a more synthetic treatment of the topic. In some ways, Two Faiths, One Banner could be likened to the popular American history work of Howard Zinn (specifically his A People鈥檚 History of the United States); both Zinn and Almond have sought to provide an engaging counter-narrative for their respective continents.
Two Faiths, One Banner is structured with an introduction, five chapters (each with endnotes and listed sources), conclusion, bibliography, and index. The chapter vignettes survey a vast sweep of history鈥�8 centuries altogether鈥攊n just over 200 pages. Topics for these essays include: (1) Muslim-Christian co-operation in eleventh century Spain, centering on King Alfonso VI; (2) Frederick II and the Saracens of Southern Italy; (3) Alliances in fourteenth century Greece and Asia Minor; (4) Christian-Turk alliances in Ottoman Hungary; and (5) Muslim alignment with both sides during the Crimean War, 1853-1856. The pace is quick throughout, and Almond proves to be a gifted storyteller with a talent for high drama. The author hopes in telling these stories of Muslim-Christian military alliances to show that Muslims have always been involved in the history of Europe, a fact that needs to inform our modern political and cultural debates.
The downsides of Almond鈥檚 broad focus are apparent. The five essays largely read independent of each other, and Almond is inconsistent as he moves through the epochs. For example, Almond gives the customary caution that we cannot project modern views of nationalism onto the Middle Ages; however, this warning is not developed until page 50, near the beginning of the second chapter. Ideally, this and related methodological issues should have been developed early on in the book. Curiously, we find Almond playing rather loosely with medieval understandings of nationality and identity elsewhere in the book, notably in his discussion of fourteenth century Turks, Byzantines, and Latins as 鈥渘ationalities and ethnic groups鈥� (96).
The most obvious downside of the book鈥檚 format鈥攁nd Almond鈥檚 argument鈥攊s that Almond runs the risk of being charged with the same selective exampling that he is reacting against. If the Western media鈥檚 鈥渟elective repetition鈥� of images and use of a 鈥淢uslim bogeyman鈥� discredits its narrative, then it follows that Almond鈥檚 own carefully constructed historical storyline is equally suspect. Regrettably, Almond does not acknowledge this tension and the hermeneutical problem it raises.
Another question regarding methodology also goes unanswered鈥攖o what extent can we assume a monolithic Islam (or Christianity) that can be 鈥渟ampled鈥� at various points over a period of 900 years and then picked up out of its immediate geographic, economic, and social context in order to inform our modern debates? Much of modern religious scholarship has helpfully used the language of 鈥淚slams鈥� and 鈥淐hristianities鈥� in underscoring the difficulties in comparing religious practice and understanding across historical, geographic, economic, and social lines. This problem comes to the forefront to a greater extent in this book since it is a study fueled by contemporary concerns. One wonders why鈥攇iven a supposed lack of awareness of Muslim-Christian alliances today鈥攚e need to go back to the medieval period at all? Could the author not have contributed to modern awareness by discussing the recent Muslim-Christian military cooperation in Iraqi Kurdistan and Eastern Europe? Of course, had Almond stayed in the modern period, there are so many examples of non-military alliances that could also be treated (the 1994 UN Conference in which Muslims and Roman Catholics came together, calls from the Archbishop of Canterbury for Christian-Muslim co-operation on the issue of global poverty, etc.).
In each chapter Almond builds his case using secondary sources for the most part and creates a flowing narrative; the author uses endnotes infrequently (less than 2 per page), which also helps readability for a non-technical audience. Numerous anecdotes and instances of Muslim-Christian military cooperation are woven into each chapter, and together give strong support to Almond鈥檚 pragmatic thesis that Muslims and Christians came together in peculiar ways to fight together. The evidence is weaker and somewhat speculative in instances where the author seeks to prove the existence of a shared culture between Muslims and Christians. Arguably, this instance of mutual understanding and cultural exchange is more important than military alliances in the author鈥檚 view (217-18).
At various points, Almond risks damaging his historical narrative by abrupt and needless comparisons to modern politics or religion. Examples in the discussion of 11th century Spain include the argument that Jews, Muslims, and Christians during this period lived more intimately than the average Berliner and German Turk today (31); the comparison of Abd Allah鈥檚 unpopularity in Granada to the unpopularity of Western-friendly governments such as those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia (37); and the counterfactual claim that Spanish Christianity today might resemble a theology closer to the Unitarians had the medieval papacy not pressed so hard for dropping the Mozarabic liturgy (38). The author can be forgiven for the occasional aside, but these frequent digressions, when coupled with his polemical introduction and conclusion, create the impression of a hidden agenda. Ironically, Almond warns against people with hidden agendas (221).
Despite the author鈥檚 bias and undefined methodology, the book is not without positives. Its strongest contribution lies in its accessibility for students, many of whom will be encountering new ideas. Arguably, Almond is partly correct: popular cultural suffers from a historical amnesia when it comes to Muslim and Christian interaction in the Middle Ages. Even basic points along the medieval story are often unknown; Almond creatively juxtaposes the few people that are aware of the Muslim army鈥檚 sack of Rome in 846 to the many people who know at least something about Rome being sacked by the Goths and Vandals. The book would benefit both instructors and students as a supplemental text that raises important issues in historiography, such as source criticism, meta-narratives, and revisionism.
To conclude, Two Faiths, One Banner is a study front-loaded with modern questions that often creep into the historical narrative as well. This fact, coupled with the notable absence of some important methodological discussions, creates a study that appears to be lacking objectivity and exists only for modern political and social interests. That aside, Two Faiths, One Banner might still make an important contribution to scholarship, but it will be one that awaits a full realization. Often, polemical histories such as Two Faiths, One Banner are vanguard projects that spur further studies. As it moves the pendulum of historical studies, it might influence future works to take a more synthetic treatment of the topic. In some ways, Two Faiths, One Banner could be likened to the popular American history work of Howard Zinn (specifically his A People鈥檚 History of the United States); both Zinn and Almond have sought to provide an engaging counter-narrative for their respective continents.
February 10, 2017
賷禺鬲鬲賲 丕賱賰丕鬲亘 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 亘毓亘丕乇丞 鬲卮賷乇 亘賵囟賵丨 賱賰賱 丕賱賰鬲丕亘丕鬲 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞.
"亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賾 賰丕賳鬲 廿丨丿賷 兀賰孬乇 丕賱賳鬲丕卅噩 廿孬丕乇丞 賱賱丿賴卮丞 賴賷 乇丐賷丞 丨噩賲 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲賮賯賵丿賵丕賱爻賴賵賱丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀購爻賯胤 亘賴丕 賲賳 丕賱夭賲賳.
賮孬賲丞 賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賲賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓丕鬲 兀賳 賷賯丿賲賴丕 賱賷卮乇丨 賰賷賮賷丞 賵賱丕丿鬲賴. 賵孬賲丞 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賳丕爻 賯乇丕亍鬲賴丕 賵賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賲噩鬲賲毓 鬲匕賰乇賴丕 賵賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱毓賳丕賵賷賳 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賵囟毓賴丕 毓賱賷 氐賮丨丕鬲 丕賱亘丨孬 毓賱賷 丕賱廿賳鬲乇賳鬲 兀賵 廿丨丿賷 丕賱賲賰鬲亘丕鬲 賵賷賳胤賵賷 鬲匕賰乇 兀賲乇 賵丕丨丿 毓丕噩賱丕賸 兀賲 丌噩賱丕賸 毓賱賷 胤賲爻 丌禺乇貨 賵亘賲丕 兀賳 丌賱賷丕鬲 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱賲爻鬲禺丿賲丞 賱賮賴賲 丕賱賲丕囟賷 鬲賳鬲賯賱 丿丕卅賲丕賸 賲毓賴 廿賱賷 丕賱丨丕囟乇 賷賲賰賳 賱亘毓囟 丕賱賲氐丕丿乇 兀賳 鬲購賳鬲爻賷 亘爻賴賵賱丞貙 賲孬賱 乇丕賰亘 爻賮賷賳丞 賲毓 丕賳丨乇丕賮 丕賱匕丕賰乇丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞 賮賷 丕鬲噩丕賴 賲禺鬲賱賮. 兀毓鬲乇賮 兀賳賳賷 賰賳鬲 兀賰賲賱賰 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 爻丕匕噩丞 廿賱賷 丨丿 賲丕 賯亘賱 兀賳 兀亘丿兀 賴匕丕 丕賱亘丨孬. 賮賯丿 賰賳鬲 兀鬲禺賷賱 兀賳 丕賱兀賲乇 兀卮亘賴 亘氐毓賵丿 鬲賱丞貙 賰賱賲丕丕夭丿丕丿 丕乇鬲賮丕毓賰 鬲賰鬲爻亘 乇丐賷丞 兀賵爻毓 賱賲爻丕丨丞 兀賰孬乇 丕賲鬲丿丕丿丕賸. 賵賰賱賲丕 賯乇兀鬲 兀賰孬乇 毓乇賮鬲 丕賱賲夭賷丿 毓賲丕 丨丿孬 亘丕賱賮毓賱. 賵賱賰賳 亘毓丿 毓丕賲賷賳 賲賳 丕賱亘丨孬 兀丿乇賰鬲 兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲卮亘賷賴 禺丕胤卅. 賮賳丨賳 賱丕 賳毓乇賮 丕賱賲夭賷丿 毓賳 兀賳賮爻賳丕 亘賱 賳毓丿賾賱 乇賵丕賷丕鬲賳丕 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 亘丕爻鬲賲乇丕乇. 賮賯丕卅賲丞 賲乇丕噩毓 賰鬲丕亘 賲丕 鬲卮賷乇 丿丕卅賲丕賸 廿賱賷 賰賱 賲丕 賰購鬲亘 丨賵賱 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 禺賱丕賱 丕賱爻賳賵丕鬲 丕賱兀乇亘毓賷賳 丕賱爻丕亘賯丞 賵賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱夭賲賳 賳亘賯賷 賳賵毓丕賸 賲丕 丿丕禺賱 賲賳丨賳賷 賷鬲亘丕丿賱 賲丕囟賷賳丕 賵丨丕囟乇賳丕 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 廿賱賷 丕賱兀亘丿.
賵亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷 賰鬲丕亘丞 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賷賲賰賳 丕爻鬲亘丿丕賱 丕爻鬲毓丕乇丞 丕賱鬲賱丞 亘丕賱爻賷丕乇丞 丕賱鬲賶 賷賯賵丿賴丕 丕賱爻丕卅賯 毓賱賷 胤乇賷賯 賲睾胤賷 亘囟亘丕亘 賰孬賷賮 賲囟賷卅丕賸 賲氐丕亘丨賴丕 丕賱兀賲丕賲賷丞 賵丕賱禺賱賮賷丞 亘丨賷孬 賱丕 賷乇賷 爻賵賶 毓賱賷 賲爻丕賮丞 毓卮乇丞 兀賲鬲丕乇兀賲丕賲賴 賵毓卮乇丞 兀賲鬲丕乇 禺賱賮賴.
賵丕賱胤乇賷賯 丕賱匕賷 鬲賲乇 毓賱賷賴 毓賱賷賴 丕賱爻賷丕乇丞 賷鬲睾賷乇 亘丕爻鬲賲乇丕乇 賲賳 丿賵賳 兀賳 賷鬲賲賰賳 丕賱爻丕卅賯 賲賳 乇丐賷丞 丕賱賲夭賷丿 兀賲丕賲賴 兀賵 禺賱賮賴."
兀賰孬乇 賲丕 兀孬丕乇 丿賴卮鬲賷 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賵囟賵毓 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕 鬲賱賰 丕賱賲丿賷賳丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賲孬賱 兀睾賱亘賴丕 賲爻賱賲賷賳 賯丕鬲賱賵丕 鬲丨鬲 賱賵丕亍 賮乇賷丿乇賷賰.
丕賱賲丿賷賳丞 丕賱賲爻賱賲丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲亘毓丿 兀賲賷丕賱 毓賳 乇賵賲丕 賲賵胤賳 丕賱賰丕孬賵賱賷賰賷丞 賮賷 丕賱毓氐賵乇 丕賱賵爻胤賷.
"亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賾 賰丕賳鬲 廿丨丿賷 兀賰孬乇 丕賱賳鬲丕卅噩 廿孬丕乇丞 賱賱丿賴卮丞 賴賷 乇丐賷丞 丨噩賲 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賲賮賯賵丿賵丕賱爻賴賵賱丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀購爻賯胤 亘賴丕 賲賳 丕賱夭賲賳.
賮孬賲丞 賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賲賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓丕鬲 兀賳 賷賯丿賲賴丕 賱賷卮乇丨 賰賷賮賷丞 賵賱丕丿鬲賴. 賵孬賲丞 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賳丕爻 賯乇丕亍鬲賴丕 賵賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賱賱賲噩鬲賲毓 鬲匕賰乇賴丕 賵賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱毓賳丕賵賷賳 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賰賳 賵囟毓賴丕 毓賱賷 氐賮丨丕鬲 丕賱亘丨孬 毓賱賷 丕賱廿賳鬲乇賳鬲 兀賵 廿丨丿賷 丕賱賲賰鬲亘丕鬲 賵賷賳胤賵賷 鬲匕賰乇 兀賲乇 賵丕丨丿 毓丕噩賱丕賸 兀賲 丌噩賱丕賸 毓賱賷 胤賲爻 丌禺乇貨 賵亘賲丕 兀賳 丌賱賷丕鬲 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱賲爻鬲禺丿賲丞 賱賮賴賲 丕賱賲丕囟賷 鬲賳鬲賯賱 丿丕卅賲丕賸 賲毓賴 廿賱賷 丕賱丨丕囟乇 賷賲賰賳 賱亘毓囟 丕賱賲氐丕丿乇 兀賳 鬲購賳鬲爻賷 亘爻賴賵賱丞貙 賲孬賱 乇丕賰亘 爻賮賷賳丞 賲毓 丕賳丨乇丕賮 丕賱匕丕賰乇丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞 賮賷 丕鬲噩丕賴 賲禺鬲賱賮. 兀毓鬲乇賮 兀賳賳賷 賰賳鬲 兀賰賲賱賰 賵噩賴丞 賳馗乇 爻丕匕噩丞 廿賱賷 丨丿 賲丕 賯亘賱 兀賳 兀亘丿兀 賴匕丕 丕賱亘丨孬. 賮賯丿 賰賳鬲 兀鬲禺賷賱 兀賳 丕賱兀賲乇 兀卮亘賴 亘氐毓賵丿 鬲賱丞貙 賰賱賲丕丕夭丿丕丿 丕乇鬲賮丕毓賰 鬲賰鬲爻亘 乇丐賷丞 兀賵爻毓 賱賲爻丕丨丞 兀賰孬乇 丕賲鬲丿丕丿丕賸. 賵賰賱賲丕 賯乇兀鬲 兀賰孬乇 毓乇賮鬲 丕賱賲夭賷丿 毓賲丕 丨丿孬 亘丕賱賮毓賱. 賵賱賰賳 亘毓丿 毓丕賲賷賳 賲賳 丕賱亘丨孬 兀丿乇賰鬲 兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲卮亘賷賴 禺丕胤卅. 賮賳丨賳 賱丕 賳毓乇賮 丕賱賲夭賷丿 毓賳 兀賳賮爻賳丕 亘賱 賳毓丿賾賱 乇賵丕賷丕鬲賳丕 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 亘丕爻鬲賲乇丕乇. 賮賯丕卅賲丞 賲乇丕噩毓 賰鬲丕亘 賲丕 鬲卮賷乇 丿丕卅賲丕賸 廿賱賷 賰賱 賲丕 賰購鬲亘 丨賵賱 丕賱賲賵囟賵毓 禺賱丕賱 丕賱爻賳賵丕鬲 丕賱兀乇亘毓賷賳 丕賱爻丕亘賯丞 賵賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱夭賲賳 賳亘賯賷 賳賵毓丕賸 賲丕 丿丕禺賱 賲賳丨賳賷 賷鬲亘丕丿賱 賲丕囟賷賳丕 賵丨丕囟乇賳丕 丕賱賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 廿賱賷 丕賱兀亘丿.
賵亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷 賰鬲丕亘丞 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賷賲賰賳 丕爻鬲亘丿丕賱 丕爻鬲毓丕乇丞 丕賱鬲賱丞 亘丕賱爻賷丕乇丞 丕賱鬲賶 賷賯賵丿賴丕 丕賱爻丕卅賯 毓賱賷 胤乇賷賯 賲睾胤賷 亘囟亘丕亘 賰孬賷賮 賲囟賷卅丕賸 賲氐丕亘丨賴丕 丕賱兀賲丕賲賷丞 賵丕賱禺賱賮賷丞 亘丨賷孬 賱丕 賷乇賷 爻賵賶 毓賱賷 賲爻丕賮丞 毓卮乇丞 兀賲鬲丕乇兀賲丕賲賴 賵毓卮乇丞 兀賲鬲丕乇 禺賱賮賴.
賵丕賱胤乇賷賯 丕賱匕賷 鬲賲乇 毓賱賷賴 毓賱賷賴 丕賱爻賷丕乇丞 賷鬲睾賷乇 亘丕爻鬲賲乇丕乇 賲賳 丿賵賳 兀賳 賷鬲賲賰賳 丕賱爻丕卅賯 賲賳 乇丐賷丞 丕賱賲夭賷丿 兀賲丕賲賴 兀賵 禺賱賮賴."
兀賰孬乇 賲丕 兀孬丕乇 丿賴卮鬲賷 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賵囟賵毓 賱賵鬲卮賷乇丕 鬲賱賰 丕賱賲丿賷賳丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賲孬賱 兀睾賱亘賴丕 賲爻賱賲賷賳 賯丕鬲賱賵丕 鬲丨鬲 賱賵丕亍 賮乇賷丿乇賷賰.
丕賱賲丿賷賳丞 丕賱賲爻賱賲丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲亘毓丿 兀賲賷丕賱 毓賳 乇賵賲丕 賲賵胤賳 丕賱賰丕孬賵賱賷賰賷丞 賮賷 丕賱毓氐賵乇 丕賱賵爻胤賷.
December 16, 2019
賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 毓丿賷丿丞 毓賳 丨乇賵亘 丕賱賲爻賱賲賷賳 賵丕賱賲賷丨賷賳 丕賱鬲賷 毓乇賮賳丕賴丕 禺丕賱氐丞 賱賱丿賷賳 賵丕賱賳鬲賷噩丞 兀賳 丨賷丕丞 丕賱爻賷丕爻丞 亘毓賷丿丞 毓賳 廿丿乇丕賰 丕賱毓丕賲丞
賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰孬賷乇丞 賵賯乇丕卅鬲賴 賱賷爻鬲 爻賴賱丞..
賲毓賱賵賲丕鬲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賰孬賷乇丞 賵賯乇丕卅鬲賴 賱賷爻鬲 爻賴賱丞..
August 3, 2023
賰鬲丕亘 乇丕卅毓 賵賱賰賳 賲卮賰賱鬲賷 賲毓賴 毓丿賲 丕賱鬲爻賱爻賱 丕賱夭賲賳賷 賱賱丕丨丿丕孬
February 20, 2017
This book was very accessible, the scholarship is well done and it's well organized. Very timely and relevant book.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.