Emmet Scott’s Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy is not only a fascinating study but an important book, which, I believe, will eventually lead to a paradigm shift - a change in the way we look at the history of Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval Period, and how we answer the question, “What ended Roman civilization and brought about the Dark Ages?”
It is a riveting tale - a history of ideas that does much to illuminate current concerns. Scott takes as his starting point the thesis of the Belgian historian Henri Pirenne [1862-1935] that the real destroyers of classical civilization were the Muslims. Scott refines, corrects and augments Pirenne’s insight, and he does so by taking into account two essential disciplines often neglected in studies of this period - archaeology and Islamology. As Scott points out, very few historians paid any attention to the nature of Islam or its beliefs - they simply assumed that Islam was and is a faith no different from others. As for the former element: Scott argues correctly that the written records cannot be taken at their face value, and must be supported by archaeology.
I shall not spoil the fun by revealing what his conclusions are, but they are arrived at after an exhilarating intellectual ride through the history and archaeology of Byzantium, the Roman presence in the West, Middle East, North Africa, the Mediterranean, and much, much more.
-- IBN WARRAQ author of Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Conventional scholarly wisdom has held that German conquest ended Roman civilization and brought on the Dark Ages. Henri Pirenne strongly disagreed. Almost a hundred years ago, he argued that starting in the seventh century, Islam was a destructive, indeed a catastrophic, force that caused Europe’s Dark Ages. Most European historians have disagreed, claiming that Islam was a tolerant, enlightened force that began to raise Europe out of its darkness. The myth of a so-called Islamic “Golden Age” in Spain is an expression of that view. Scott defends and enlarges upon Pirenne’s thesis, arguing that these historians have paid scant “attention to the nature of Islam or its beliefs.” Like much of our media and government officials, they assume that Islam is a religion like any other. Scott argues that, with its doctrine of never-ending “holy war” against all non-believers, Islam was “an unprecedentedly destabilizing influence.”
As with all good history, by reading Scott’s well-written, richly-detailed account of the perils that almost destroyed Western civilization in an earlier age, we are informed of the danger that confronts our civilization in our time. This book is a must-read for any person concerned with the future of Western civilization in our times.
-- Richard L. Rubenstein, author of Jihad and Genocide
--New English Review
A number of books published in recent years have demolished the myth of an allegedly tolerant Islamic culture that preserved the Greco-Roman heritage. Ibn Warraq s book Why the West Is Best is among the better and more accessible titles in this field. As I concluded in one of my earlier essays, the only part of the ancient Greek heritage that proved to be more compatible with Muslim than with Christian European culture was slavery, and possibly anal sex with young boys in certain parts of the Islamic world.
In early 2012 the historian Emmet Scott published Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy --Front Page Magazine
If you are on a limited budget or have limited time and can only read one book this year, Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited is the one to buy. And a purchase will most likely be necessary, since it will be unavailable in most libraries, what with the hot breath of CAIR and MCB and all the other surrogates of the Muslim Brotherhood breathing down librarians’ necks.
For more than a thousand years Europe and the European diaspora have struggled to cope with the enormity of the devastation inflicted on us by the Islamic invasions. Our collective memory has attempted — and failed — to retain an accurate idea of what actually happened to us.
In earlier centuries our ability to understand was limited by the inadequacy of communication over vast distances and times. Later, during the European ascendancy, it was difficult to comprehend how much damage could be inflicted by such a primitive and barbaric culture.
By the time the European colossus stood astride the globe in the nineteenth century, Islam was a trivial retrograde rabble that deserved no respect and even less attention. How could it have come within a hair’s breadth of smothering European civilization in its cradle?
The truth of what Islam did — and continues to do — to Western Civilization has finally been reconstructed. Like an accomplished forensic detective, Emmet Scott has assembled all the pieces of evidence and built an airtight case against Islam.
The only verdict possible is “Guilty!”
In the days and months to come the airwaves and the internet will be flooded with ads for books about Barack Hussein Obama, or Mitt Romney, or the meltdown of the euro. Resist their blandishments. Forego just one of those transient and evanescent books.
Instead, read Emmet Scott’s magnum opus. This one is for the ages.
After you finish >Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited, your understanding of and reverence for our precious civilization will be fundamentally reorganized. This book is truly artful because it changes the way you see.
---Baron Bodissey --Gates of Vienna