AN AGGRESSIVE Bedouin horde, drunk on religion, sweeps out of the Arabian
			peninsula - on the way burning the great library of Alexandria - and, through
			wholesale massacre and forced conversion, imposes Islam on a vast area
			stretching from Spain to the fringes of China. If this is your mental
			picture of the rise of Islam, dimly remembered from some long-ago history
			lesson, take note: it is in almost every respect wrong.
			
			
			
			
			
			Hugh 
			Kennedy sets out to explain an historical puzzle. How could Arab
			forces, relatively small in number and with no particular superiority in
			weaponry, have pulled off such an apparently impossible feat? In the century
			that followed the death of the Prophet in 632, they challenged two
			established empires (the Byzantine and Sasanian). They conquered Syria in
			eight years, Iraq in seven, Egypt in a mere two and Spain and Portugal in
			five. At the same time, they pushed deep into Central Asia and the Indian
			subcontinent. How did they do it? Why did they not meet stronger and more
			sustained resistance? And, no less of a mystery, how did the empire they
			created endure?
			
			
			By painstakingly reconstructing the series of Arab conquests, Mr Kennedy
			paints a picture strikingly at odds with the popular cliches. "The Muslim
			conquests", he writes, "were far from being the outpouring of an unruly
			horde of nomads." The Bedouin of Arabia were tough and highly mobile, fired
			by tribal honour and love of booty as well as by zeal for Islam. They were
			led by intelligent men from the Meccan elite who knew they had to channel
			the "frenetic military energies of the Bedouin" outwards, or else face a
			real risk of implosion.
			
			
			These leaders also seem to have grasped that to have based their conquests
			on mass killings and conversion by the sword would have been a fatal
			mistake. There were massacres, but they were not the norm. If conquered
			peoples paid tribute and did not make trouble, they were largely left alone.
			
			
			Local people were incorporated into the new administrative class. Existing
			religions - Christianity in Syria and Egypt, Zoroastrianism in Persian-ruled
			areas, Hinduism and Buddhism farther east - were not persecuted. Large-scale
			conversions came much later; at the time there was little or no pressure on
			the conquered people to convert. As for the sack of the Alexandrian library,
			that, says Mr Kennedy, is a discredited myth. . . .
			
			FULL TEXT
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			
			Sir John Bagot Glubb, "The 
			great Arab conquests," Quartet Books (1980)
			
			
			Paul Lewis, "Charting the Lost
			Innovations of Islam," Guardian, March 10, 2006
			
			
			Alexander Kronemer, "Islamic Spain:
			History's refrain," Christian Science Monitor, August 22, 2007
			
			
Robert Fisk, "There's a reason why anti-Muslim
ideology hasn't found a home in Portugal: The Arabs were regarded as exotic and educated
peoples whose own culture was never erased from the streets of Portugal's
cities," independent.co.uk, February 22, 2018
			
			
			
	
	
	