Mohammed and Charlemagne: A Revision
Robert Sabatino Lopez
IT is not my purpose to challenge the core of Pirenne's conclusions. Mahomet et Charlemagne, and Dopsch's Grundlagen however much one may disagree on point details range implications have helped historians realize that their traditional division ages was wrong: Germanic invasions did mark beginning a new era; Arab did.' This undoubtedly true in so far as history culture concerned. The great push Germans had been preceded by long interpenetration, followed thorough fusion newcomers into mass conquered people. followers Alaric, Theodoric Clovis neither wanted nor could break moral unity Western Empire, its connections with East. They only gave political expression those particularisms which were already cracking surface old Roman edifice without breaking deep foundations. Latin language literature, advanced barbarization precipitated impact rude invaders, remained common background European culture. greatest achievements mediaeval 'Germanized' world, Church either heritage or an imitation institutions. As soon Europe again able produce something original, peoples took lead. Niebelungennot wooden buildings forgotten for Romanesque French ('Gothic') architecture, Italian Divina Commedia. On other hand, wherever Arabs stepped Romanic soil (except Spain Sicily, outposts they held too short time), eradicated classic roots forever. A slow but sweeping revolution won over masses Syria, Egypt, North Africa civilization, whose religion (these typical expressions people's soul) conquerors. There no Imperium.2 Even where there imitation, original blend formed out three cultures Graeco-Roman, Persian, Semitic.
Speculum