Islamic Expansion: Book Recommendation

Can anyone recommend a good book or two that covers the initial several centuries of the Islamic expansion? 

Not sure this is the right forum for this request but I became interested in the topic reading about the Carolingians and their encounters with the muslims.

Well, I just recently bought "The Great Arab Conquests" by Hugh Kennedy. I haven't read it yet so I can't vouch for it, but this guy has written a lot of books on the history of the caliphates, so you might want to google his name in amazon or something.

Carolgians were a bit late in the day. A Good book is "Sword of God" by Lt Gen Akram, which is a biography of Khalid Bin Walid, the main protagonist in the conquests.

Legacy of Jihad? I'm sceptical. I vouch for anything Runciman though.

I'm not worried about the range of sources or the qualifications of the scholars, I'm worried about the title which implies an islamophobic agenda. If it doesn't have such an agenda then the title is poorly chosen given the connotations of "jihad" today.

Well, Runciman didn't write anything about the Islamic expansion AFAIK, but I enjoyed his crusades trilogy even if I didn't agree with his take on everything, perhaps mostly due to its thoroughness and style. I've heard his books "The Fall of Constantinople" and "The First Crusade" are great reads�too though I haven't picked them up yet, Lars Brownworth (guy behind the 12 Byzantine Rulers podcast) recommends them as well.

Originally posted by Reginmund I'm not worried about the range of sources or the qualifications of the scholars, I'm worried about the title which implies an islamophobic agenda. If it doesn't have such an agenda then the title is poorly chosen given the connotations of "jihad" today.

That is your free choice but first review it then judge. I seem to gather, no offense, but Swedes seem more PC than many Americans.

Originally posted by eaglecap Originally posted by es_bih Originally posted by Reginmund Legacy of Jihad? I'm sceptical. I vouch for anything Runciman though. Which ones do you recommend? You said you were Bosnian- if this is the case then most likely your ancestors were Orthodox Christians - maybe Catholics- what do you think? Why do you think they converted? es_bih did you immigrate here or were you born in the USA? I consider anyone who has become a citizen and has payed their dues as American as any native born. My mother's side is from Greece. I will check out those links you gave me earlier so I can hear what you are saying, you sound like a reasonable person. Robert Spencer has never taught me to hate Muslims but I dislike any group that is inolved with violence; including the IRA, Tamil Tigers, radical Hindus, Christina abortion bombers ( I am pro life) or whoever.

There were almost no Orthodox Chrisians in Bosnia proper prior to Ottomans moving in Vlachs and Slavic Orthodox peoples into northern Bosnia as a landed milita, save for Hercegovina. Mostly Catholics, and the independent Bosnian Church which broke away from Rome and governed itself.

I was born in Bosnia, but I am an American citizen so a Bosnian American, like you would be a Greek American I believe.


As far as my ethnicity it is complex. I have a mixed ancestry actually so I cannot speak for Bosnians whose family is only from Bosnia. Those were their ancestors converted for various reasons I believe that most did for religous reasons. Islam did not become the major religion for about 10 generations after the Bosnian kingdom fell to the Ottoman Empire. In the 1600s it became the majority so it gives you an idea that the shift was gradual and the Bosnian churche's dogma was in line with Islamic theology, too.

I am mostly of Bosnian ancestry. I have Turkish ancestry too from my mom's side, and I have a little from my dad's. I also have Serbian (he was Muslim however) ancestry from my dad's side generations back, my great great great great grandfather moved from Serbia to Bosnia around the late 1800s.

So I am about 55% Bosnian, 30 % Turkish, and 15% Serbian.





Edited by es_bih - 23-Mar-2008 at 01:22

Originally posted by eaglecap That is your free choice but first review it then judge. I seem to gather, no offense, but Swedes seem more PC than many Americans.

I don't see why I should be offended by something directed at Swedes. I'm a Norwegian of partly German descent.

Without going into detail I'm probably among the least PC guys on this forum. I don't know what's PC when it comes to religion; I'm hugely sceptical of them all, but I'm no islamophobe.

Europe.

The Ottoman Empire, or any other empire where Islam was the majority and/or state religion, were political structures and acted as such; they did not embody Islam and their� acts�cannot�be�ascribed�to�"Muslims"�but�only�to�the�political�structure�in�question.�
Lately this faulty logic has become widespread as it is now fashionable to criticise Islam, usually�by�connecting�all�critiqueworthy�acts�commited�by�Muslims�to�the�entire�religious�
community�(regardless�of�denomination)�and�sometimes�the�religion itself. However,�people�would�certainly�raise�their�eyebrows�if�anyone�spoke�about
the "Christian genocide�of�the�Jews" the�"Shinto�rape�of�Nanking"�or�the "Buddhist�
oppression�of�Tibet".


Edited by Reginmund - 23-Mar-2008 at 20:13