Robert Spencer

|

Pamela Geller

|

Bat Ye'or

|

Brigitte Gabriel

|

Daniel Pipes

|

Debbie Schlussel

|

Walid Shoebat

|

Joe Kaufman

|

Wafa Sultan

|

Geert Wilders

|

The Nuclear Card

David J. Wasserstein: “Islam Saved Jewry”

Posted on 02 June 2012 by Emperor

David J. Wasserstein, professor of Jewish Studies at Vanderbilt University penned an interesting and refreshing article that likely caused the heads of Islamophobes to explode, titled, So, What did the Muslims do for the Jews?

He argues that before the birth of the Prophet Muhammad, Judaism under the Byzantines was near extinction, and under Persian rule was endanger of being relegated to a cult.

Had Islam not come along, Jewry in the west would have declined to disappearance and Jewry in the east would have become just another oriental cult.

Wasserstein doesn’t fall into the trap of painting a too utopian, rosy picture of Jewish life under Muslim rule, but does highlight the fact that in many places Jewish life and culture flourished, (for example in Andalusia).

by David Wasserstein (The JC)

Islam saved Jewry. This is an unpopular, discomforting claim in the modern world. But it is a historical truth. The argument for it is double. First, in 570 CE, when the Prophet Mohammad was born, the Jews and Judaism were on the way to oblivion. And second, the coming of Islam saved them, providing a new context in which they not only survived, but flourished, laying foundations for subsequent Jewish cultural prosperity – also in Christendom – through the medieval period into the modern world.

By the fourth century, Christianity had become the dominant religion in the Roman empire. One aspect of this success was opposition to rival faiths, including Judaism, along with massive conversion of members of such faiths, sometimes by force, to Christianity. Much of our testimony about Jewish existence in the Roman empire from this time on consists of accounts of conversions.

Great and permanent reductions in numbers through conversion, between the fourth and the seventh centuries, brought with them a gradual but relentless whittling away of the status, rights, social and economic existence, and religious and cultural life of Jews all over the Roman empire.

A long series of enactments deprived Jewish people of their rights as citizens, prevented them from fulfilling their religious obligations, and excluded them from the society of their fellows.

This went along with the centuries-long military and political struggle with Persia. As a tiny element in the Christian world, the Jews should not have been affected much by this broad, political issue. Yet it affected them critically, because the Persian empire at this time included Babylon – now Iraq – at the time home to the world’s greatest concentration of Jews.

Here also were the greatest centres of Jewish intellectual life. The most important single work of Jewish cultural creativity in over 3,000 years, apart from the Bible itself – the Talmud – came into being in Babylon. The struggle between Persia and Byzantium, in our period, led increasingly to a separation between Jews under Byzantine, Christian rule and Jews under Persian rule.

Beyond all this, the Jews who lived under Christian rule seemed to have lost the knowledge of their own culturally specific languages – Hebrew and Aramaic – and to have taken on the use of Latin or Greek or other non-Jewish, local, languages. This in turn must have meant that they also lost access to the central literary works of Jewish culture – the Torah, Mishnah, poetry, midrash, even liturgy.

The loss of the unifying force represented by language – and of the associated literature – was a major step towards assimilation and disappearance. In these circumstances, with contact with the one place where Jewish cultural life continued to prosper – Babylon – cut off by conflict with Persia, Jewish life in the Christian world of late antiquity was not simply a pale shadow of what it had been three or four centuries earlier. It was doomed.

Had Islam not come along, the conflict with Persia would have continued. The separation between western Judaism, that of Christendom, and Babylonian Judaism, that of Mesopotamia, would have intensified. Jewry in the west would have declined to disappearance in many areas. And Jewry in the east would have become just another oriental cult.

But this was all prevented by the rise of Islam. The Islamic conquests of the seventh century changed the world, and did so with dramatic, wide-ranging and permanent effect for the Jews.

Within a century of the death of Mohammad, in 632, Muslim armies had conquered almost the whole of the world where Jews lived, from Spain eastward across North Africa and the Middle East as far as the eastern frontier of Iran and beyond. Almost all the Jews in the world were now ruled by Islam. This new situation transformed Jewish existence. Their fortunes changed in legal, demographic, social, religious, political, geographical, economic, linguistic and cultural terms – all for the better.

First, things improved politically. Almost everywhere in Christendom where Jews had lived now formed part of the same political space as Babylon – Cordoba and Basra lay in the same political world. The old frontier between the vital centre in Babylonia and the Jews of the Mediterranean basin was swept away, forever.

Political change was partnered by change in the legal status of the Jewish population: although it is not always clear what happened during the Muslim conquests, one thing is certain. The result of the conquests was, by and large, to make the Jews second-class citizens.

This should not be misunderstood: to be a second-class citizen was a far better thing to be than not to be a citizen at all. For most of these Jews, second-class citizenship represented a major advance. In Visigothic Spain, for example, shortly before the Muslim conquest in 711, the Jews had seen their children removed from them and forcibly converted to Christianity and had themselves been enslaved.

In the developing Islamic societies of the classical and medieval periods, being a Jew meant belonging to a category defined under law, enjoying certain rights and protections, alongside various obligations. These rights and protections were not as extensive or as generous as those enjoyed by Muslims, and the obligations were greater but, for the first few centuries, the Muslims themselves were a minority, and the practical differences were not all that great.

Along with legal near-equality came social and economic equality. Jews were not confined to ghettos, either literally or in terms of economic activity. The societies of Islam were, in effect, open societies. In religious terms, too, Jews enjoyed virtually full freedom. They might not build many new synagogues – in theory – and they might not make too public their profession of their faith, but there was no really significant restriction on the practice of their religion. Along with internal legal autonomy, they also enjoyed formal representation, through leaders of their own, before the authorities of the state. Imperfect and often not quite as rosy as this might sound, it was at least the broad norm.

Read the rest…

  • Truth Hurts

    The main point is that this highlights the FACT that the current EXISTENTIAL paranoid agenda of “either Islam or Judaism should/will survive” narrative as a zero-sum game being inevitable is FALSE.

    We can all live together, at least tolerance if not affection & love, as history shows.

  • http://www.loonwatch.com Garibaldi

    @Reynardine,

    Really, they opened up fine for me. Glad you liked the article!

    @JSB
    Mark Cohen is excellent on this subject, Danios heavily cited him in his piece on “Dhimmitude” I recall.

    About the Ottoman Empire, what you said makes sense! Thank you, for some reason I misread what Wasserstein wrote as saying Jewish cultural flourishing ended altogether with the decline of the Arab empires. I need to pay closer attention. :D

  • Reynardine

    Garibaldi: I followed your link, and the article is delightful. Alas, I couldn’t open the musical files.

  • mindy1

    How interesting…

  • Just Stopping By

    @Christian-friend: The article appears weak in part because it is a piece for the Jewish Chronicle, a general newspaper and not an academic or scholarly publication.

    @Reynardine: Another relevant point is that the academic fields of grammar and linguistics for Arabic experienced trememdous growth in Andalucía. Because of the similarities between Arabic and Hebrew, it was natural for Jews to apply those new ideas to Hebrew and focus more on that language.

    @Garibaldi: “Revisionist works that paint Muslim rule over the centuries as utterly bleak and meritless seem to have more currency today, when they wouldn’t have had in the past?” Yes, this is what Prof. Mark Cohen of Princeton has dubbed the “neo-lachrymose conception of Jewish-Arab history.” I have found him to be one of the best authors on this subject.

    As for the Ottoman question, I think you have to look at the timing mentioned. The quote you have starts, “Jewish cultural propserity in the middle ages operated in large part…” Most scholars treat the Middle Ages as ending roughly with the end of the 15th Centruy. The Ottoman Empire was a relatively small part of Jewish life until the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492, more or less the end of the Middle Ages, and the flight of many Spanish Jews to the Ottoman Empire. Similarly, only with the transfer of Palestine from the Mamluks to the Ottomans in 1516 would the religious and cultural centers there be considered Ottoman, again just at the end or just past the end of the Middle Ages. Thus the “in large part” of the quote would only apply to Ottoman Empire after (or perhaps at the very tail of) the Middle Ages.

  • Garibaldi

    @Reynardine,

    Malta and the Maltese language is fascinating! Have you read the Ornament of the World by Maria Rosa Menocal? It speaks exactly about what you wrote, the revivification of Hebrew in Andalusia: http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/04/book-review-ornament-of-the-world-by-maria-rosa-menocal/

  • Garibaldi

    @JSB, thank you for your as ever reasoned and balanced remarks. For the most part this history has not been “discomfiting,” especially, as you say for those who know Jewish history, but for some reason not as many people know or acknowledge this history today.

    Revisionist works that paint Muslim rule over the centuries as utterly bleak and meritless seem to have more currency today, when they wouldn’t have had in the past?

    I also wonder about this paragraph from Wasserstein,

    Jewish cultural prosperity in the middle ages operated in large part as a function of Muslim, Arabic cultural (and to some degree political) prosperity: when Muslim Arabic culture thrived, so did that of the Jews; when Muslim Arabic culture declined, so did that of the Jews.

    That’s an interesting observation, but is it wholly accurate? I thought Jewish culture under the Ottoman’s thrived as well, though I have not read too much on that subject.

  • Reynardine

    My understanding is that in Andalucía and perhaps elsewhere, proximity to a living Semitic language also helped to revive Hebrew and Aramaic. I note with interest that the Christian world associated Jews with Malta; Maltese, the only Semitic language written in the Roman alphabet, is also a Semitic language that seems to have derived from Mediterranean Arabic overlaid on a Carthaginian substrate.

  • Christian-friend

    I find this article weak, to be honest

  • MC

    Very interesting. it is a nice thing that he did not paint a beautiful picture or a horrid landscape but told the real facts.

  • Just Stopping By

    @Steve says, “I am not sure how that tallies with the suggestions elsewhere that islam guarantees equal rights for all.”

    Many people would say that the U.S. Constitution guarantees equal rights for all, and originally at least for all non-slaves. Yet, we know that this did not occur in practice, and there is still unequal treatment of people by the government. And there were certainly state laws and actions that discriminated on the basis of race.

    Islam is in some ways similar. Many Muslims point to the broader goal of equality and decry the instances of discrimination that they feel did and do not live up to that ideal. I am not sure if you accept that Islam guarantees equality for all, but many Muslims clearly do believe that, and, as with other religions, others do not.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/GargamelGold?feature=mhee CriticalDragon1177

    @Emperor

    Dianos should use the information presented in this article for his book debunking “Spencer’s Politically incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades.” It goes a long way to refute the “Islam is Evil” attitude presented by people like Spencer.

  • Benjamin Taghiov

    From an academic point of view, this is actually not a controversial subject. I appreciated this article a lot though. Thanks.

  • Steve

    An interesting read.

    “These rights and protections were not as extensive or as generous as those enjoyed by Muslims, and the obligations were greater”

    I am not sure how that tallies with the suggestions elsewhere that islam guarantees equal rights for all.

  • Just Stopping By

    Nice article. My only real objection is to the statement “This is an unpopular, discomforting claim in the modern world.”

    I don’t find the claim at all discomfiting. Nor is it actually that unpopular in the sense of not popularly known, at least among those who know Jewish history. Of course, any view of what would have happened in world history without some major figure or event will always be a bit speculative, and Prof. Wasserstein’s view is necessarily at a bit of an extreme in that he posits that Jewry would have disappeared rather than shrunk or adapted in some manner.

    If I had to dispute a part of what Prof. Wasserstein says, it would be his claims of how much Jews appear to have forgotten under Christendom. I’m sure the professor has done his homework, but that claim is not supported here and probably relies on some strong assumptions.

    Emporer is right in that it may have caused Islamophobes’ heads to explode, however. But that’s because they don’t know history. :-)

Advertise Here
Advertise Here