Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited

I have been reading the fascinating "Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisted."  Emmett Scott is revisiting the question of what destroyed the classical Greco-Roman civilization in Europe and brought on the Dark Ages.

A lot of credible people have long held that it was the barbarian invasions that ultimately took down Rome.  It turns out, however, there are some pretty good reasons to think it was not that simple, and that other factors were at work.  Mohammed's name in the title suggests where the argument is going.

However, I was troubled.  On the one hand, "Mohammed and Charlemagne" has the look and feel of a scholarly work.  It is well written, the arguments feel right, and there are plenty of citations.  However, I can find nothing on the author.  The book gives no university affiliation, an internet search brings up little beyond describing the man as "a historian," and the book is published by New English Review Press, not an academic publisher, so far as I know.

Part of my concern is that I have read other books with the look and feel of true scholarship that yet turned out to be bunkum.  A famous modern example is "The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews," by the " Historical Research Department of the Nation of Islam." "Secret Relationship" is a clever work, sophisticated and with lots of citations.  If you knew nothing about the Atlantic Slave Trade you would be persuaded.  In fact, the book is a superb instance of how to lie with facts.  Yes, Jews were part of the economic life of England and Holland but were they the driving force behind the Atlantic Slave Trade?  Not even close.  So, being troubled by Emmet Scott's lack of scholarly pedigree, I was going slow with the book.

To pick up the slack, I started reading "The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise."  This is a wholly different case.  Dario Fernandez-Morera is associate professor in the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at Northwestern University and the book is published by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.  OK, ISI is not Oxford University Press, but they are a known, credible organization.  The book, itself, is extensively researched and beautifully written.

In his introduction, Fernandez-Morera explains the controversies and motivates the need for a revisionist history of "al Andalus."  On page 9, paragraph 2, he writes,

   Some recent scholars in the English-speaking world have done excellent work, but with the exception of Emmet Scott they have either concerned themselves mainly with the Jewish experience or not adopted the approach of the present book, which looks at these cultures synchronically and comparatively..."

Bingo!  I now have a credible scholar credibly referring to Emmet Scott as a credible scholar.  I have established what the Muslims call "isnad", the chain of authority, and I can now proceed with "Mohammed and Charlemagne" with confidence.

So, if you are interested in the subject, you should feel free to get the book.  I will let you know what I think, in due course.