The most important aspect of Islam: A Short History is its length. Having now read this volume in the A Modern Library series and two volumes in the Penguin Lives series, I am starting to see the limitations of the endeavor to produce slim, inexpensive volumes. Although Armstrong's Buddha is not affected by the editorial constraints of these throwbacks to the Everyman books, Islam: A Short History is. But there are also problems with the argument, too.

In the first four chapters, Armstrong's coverage of the Islamic world is comprehensive and efficient. As in A History of God (HG), she makes a valid point: Muslims interpret the legitimacy of Islam by its worldly effects. Therefore, politics and religion are difficult to distinguish by using a western interpretation based on the Christian separation of God and world. Islam is also about practice, not belief, which is again a Christian interpretation. So, for instance, when Mehmed II conquers Constantinople, it is a ringing endorsement of Islamic legitimacy, but the British in India causes defensiveness. Armstrong also has an interesting line on the limitations of the Shariah: it is an antiquated pre-modern agrarian code ill-equipped for the industrial age. Until page 141, Armstrong has accomplished her task, but then in the last chapter, it unravels.

Already, in her discussions of the Ottoman Empire, centuries flow past at warp speed, but the last chapter is completely unlike the preceding four. Where before the book was history spiced with commentary, the last chapter is editorial littered with dates. Basically a quick and dirty discussion on jihad, the last chapter is theological, not historical. In the preceding four chapters, Armstrong again, as in HG, respectfully presents numerous scholars, like Ibn Sina and Ibn Rushd, but the last chapter is a defensive apology for various jihad commentators, such as Sayyid Qutb and Mawdudi. Armstrong valiantly tries to salvage the good in Islam from the damage wrought by these scholars' followers. However, she completely abandons history for commentary. Plugging dates and people may be pedestrian, but a source text for beginners should just provide basic facts without boring the reader.

Armstrong provides a handy index, maps, a glossary, an index of key figures, and endnotes, but her reading suggestions also suffer from the faults of the last chapter: too much breadth and not enough scrutiny. Those wanting more theology need only look here for help. The editorial limits of the series are probably responsible for the breadth of the last chapter's focus, but judging from the reading suggestions, it may have also saved us from a longer commentary. Armstrong's prose is as deft and inspired as always, but she loses her nerve in the last chapter. If I forget the last chapter, I can endorse this little book. But, the book very nearly inspires me to continue studying, if only to refute Armstrong's half-hearted editorializing.

Karen Armstrong, author of A History of God, writes well. She has a gift with words and a style that eases the reader through very difficult material.

I was highly enthused when I first got hold of this book. Like her other books, it is easy to read and highly engaging. She summarizes a very complex history nicely and covers major points of this history in encapsulated prose. If you are looking for a good overview of their history this is a great place to start.

Now for the bad news. She, in attempting to make the book palatable and not bogged down in theology and the 'warts and all' of historical detail, only skims the surface. I was left wondering what went wrong with Islam. If the view of Islam presented here is the 'true' Islam, how do we grapple with what it has become (at least its presentation in the more popular Western media outlets)? This book does not seek to answer those questions. Some have accused her of 'whitewashing' Islam's history. I suppose we must look at her intent. I believe she has attempted to write a good entry-level book in order to engage the reader to the positives rather than the negatives (which are much too easy to find) in order to even desire to understand it rather than attack it outright. In this she has succeeded quite well.

If you wish to understand the deeper meanings and varied histories of Islam's history, you may start here but do not be fooled. This book only scratches the surface.

In the past 50 years the religion of Islam has pushed into the western consciousness, extremely more so since September 11th. But very many people have no idea what Islam is and represents, and those who do know something often know wrong information. Armstrong tries to fill some of this knowledge void. She admirably takes 1500 years of history and condenses it down to under 200 pages - giving the reader an idea of the scope of it's history and how it developed. This book is for the new reader, who wants to learn, but is off put by the length of history, or the plethora of Arabic names and terms. She is able to give you an idea of how the crusades interacted with the development of Islam, without taking you through a detailed history of all the crusades. There is a bibliography to help you find more detailed information on a topic you are interested in.

What is useful is the conciseness of the writing, and providing a glossary of Arabic terms, as well as a who's who of important figures in Islamic history. Through the spread of Islam over the centuries you can see how we have come to the fractioning that we have today in the geo-political realm. If you invest some time in this book you will come away with a greater understanding and appreciation of one of the major world religions. And it is information like this that is so necessary to combat ignorance about our neighbors in the world.

This book's attemps at being a novel distract from the weak historical aspect of the book. This book is obviously not written by a scholar, and thus, reads like a newspaper article written by a reporter who did not understand is material fully. I suggest, if you want to learn what the world was like a 1000, read The Oxford History of Medival Europe, a real book of history.

"A.D. 1000" reads like a work of narrative fiction, and it proves quite interesting. The fundamental structure of the book follows the chronology of Gerbert's fascinating rise to the Papacy. Because of Gerbert's unusual opportunities for travel, educational development, and influence in the most powerful courts of Europe, the book provides opportunities to discuss living conditions in the time. But caveat emptor: the author is not sufficiently critical of his sources. Some descriptions are presented as fact even though other seasoned historians have discredited similar claims.

This is a very interesting book, not boring, not stuffy. It gives a good view of the turning of the first Milennium, from a few different angles. Easy to read, hard to put down. If you want to learn about that specific time period without feeling like you're doing boring homework then this is a good book for you!

I am a fan of Karen Armstrong, having several of her works upon my shelf. Much of her work contains a degree of her own brand of philosophy which, at times, can be a bit lengthy and academic. This book is no exception, for she inserts passages of poetic examples in historical narratives to illustrate the passion and dispair of a "people", particularly the Arabs.
This book is a sympathetic portrait of the Arab cause, especially noticeable is Karen's soft spot for Palestine and Yasser Arafat. For example, she states Israel made "retaliatory raids" into Jordan to attack the Fedayeen (Battle of Karameh), but does not mention the attack was a result of the 37th terrorist attack on Israel by the Fedayeen, this time killing school children traveling in a bus.
Karen also states Jordan's King Hussein expelled Arafat, but does not state the catalyst for this event was an assasination attempt on King Hussein by the Feydayeen. His motorcade was machine gunned by PLO terrorist. This is not mentioned in the book. Nor is the fact Jordan called on Israeli fighter jets to repel Syrian tanks as a result of these difficulties. King Hussein actually declared war on the Palastinians to removed them from Jordan. These are historical facts based on interviews with King Hussein of Jordan, often seen as an Arab outcast for calling on the Israel when threatened by a "brother" Arab.
I am not sypathetic to Jewish, Muslim, nor Christian. I appreciate clear thought and unbiased factual history. This book is not a good source for historical reference.

Karen Armstrong certainly explored the complexities of the crusades and identifying the similarities between the Outremer (crusader states) of the medieval era and modern day Israel. Both of which were/are seen as a foreign pestilence to the surrounding Arab population. She documents the brutality of radical crusaders such as the right-wing "Tafurs", who scoured the countryside around Antioch duriing the siege of 1096, and were said to have eaten Muslim flesh. Armstrong also presents a intrinsically spiritual connection in the first two crusades. She points to the "righteousness" of the Cluniacs and Cistercians in wanting to achieve dominance over the Near East. Though she does not justify the acts of the crusaders she certainly provides an insight into why Western Christians felt threatened.

Ms. Armstrong certainly expanded my preceptions about Islam without question. She explored in depth the anti-semetic views of both Jews and Muslims upheld by Christians, which she states to be a result of the crusades (she illustrates this heavily in the end). Islamic rulers for the most part upheld their teachings during this time, and were a moral opposite to the "moralist crusaders". The book gave me a fresh perspective from an Arab viewpoint, something certainly lacking in the modern era.

While the book had some good aspects some were certainly looked in a blatantly painful way. The author seemed to take an almost propagandist view of the Christian/Islamic relations from a Muslim perspective. The author wholeheartedly avoided the subject of the Arab conquest of the Middle East beginning in the 630's. She also forgot to mention the same ruthlessness projected by the Turks in dealing with the Byzantines and later the Slavs of Eastern Europe (i.e. policy of Islamization) in latter centuries. A description of the Armenian holocaust would have also been worth mentioning. The author had mentioned in the introduction that she was not writing an "exact history" of the tragic events that unfolded almost a millenia ago. However, on the back cover (paperback version) the book is listed as a historical publication.

I have learned a great deal about Islam, Judaism and Christianity. However, a clearly anti-western perspective was constantly reinforced without looking at the entirety of the subject (mentioned above) gave a sad one sided view of an already tragic situation in our modern world.

Please Excuse any spelling errors!

...I recently came across Karen Armstrong's _Holy War_,
which is a book I recommend wholeheartedly. The book's basic thesis
is that there is a strong connection between the Crusades from 1096
to 1300AD and the modern-day conflict between the Muslim, Jewish
and Christian worlds today. The book makes this argument very
convincingly and in a well-written, engaging style to boot. The
book was written in 1988, but has been re-released with a new
Introduction that discusses the 9/11 attacks and points but
Dubya's really, REALLY poor choice of the word "Crusade" to describe
the War on Terrorism.

The book doesn't look at the military, or economic perspectives
of the various monotheistic holy wars, but rather the religious and emotional

underpinnings of those wars (interestingly enough, all three religions
have a strong "Holy War" tradition - it's not just Islam).

The real gem of this book is that it attempts to view the conflict
from the three perspectives of the religions in question - and deconstructs
many myths and misunderstandings that the various religious sides have
had with regards to one another... Karen does a pretty fair
treatment of all three sides, not overly biased with one side or another,
but emphasizes the story which differs from the standard Western History we learn here in the US.

She then ties the Crusading experience with more modern conflicts such
as the multiple Arab-Israeli wars, the Camp David Accords (and the
assassination of Sadat), the Iranian Revolution, the Israeli
invasion of Lebanon, the rebirth of "jihad" in this century, and the
intefadah in the 1980s, etc.

The book has been a real eye opener on many fronts, and if you'd
like to try and "get in the shoes" and see the conflict from
multiple perspectives, and not just read the headlines but
really put multiple centuries of context to them, you'll
really want this book... she takes all three sides
to task at various times - but even if that is the case, it's
useful in that it takes the reader out of the Western dogma, and
more perspectives can't help but increase understanding.