Presenting many slaveholders as intelligent; honorable and pious men and women; this study asks how people who were admirable in so many ways could have presided over a social system that inflicted gross abuse on slaves. The South had formidable proslavery intellectuals who participated fully in transatlantic debates and boldly challenged an ascendant capitalist ("free-labor") society. Blending classical and Christian traditions; they forged a moral and political philosophy designed to sustain conservative principles in history; political economy; social theory; and theology; while translating them into political action.
#317080 in Books Cambridge University Press 2003-09-18Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.50 x .39 x 5.51l; .47 #File Name: 0521541115164 pages
Review
3 of 4 people found the following review helpful. Excellent bookBy Glogg ReneVery interesting and based on the different available information which is sifted according to possible influences of time and ideology. Due to limited information and the establishment of "the true history of Islam" - having only limited similarity with what really happened - Crone is trying to establish the real development.8 of 8 people found the following review helpful. The late early Caliphs were 'those who associate'By RoshanThis is a great book of late early (i.e. later than the 'righteously guided caliphs') religious and political authority amongst the early Muslims.What it conclusively shows is that previous generations of Muslims had not placed such emphasis on the persona of 'Muhammad'. It shows that the early caliphs shared both political and religious authority within the early Muslim (?Islamic) empire. Coinage issued at the time mentioned God's name; not Muhammad or the alleged 'shahadah' (ridiculed in the Quran 63:1).As time went on; disputes increasingly arose over the nature of succession. Instead of ruling by mutual consent (42:38) they started using the name of 'Muhammad' in vain and magical 'statements of hadith' which just happened to back up each individuals claim to power happened to be found by each grouping.Furthermore; the author conclusively shows (through written testimony) how many of the late early caliphs considered themselves almost above Muhammad.However; the 'scholars' or clerical class eventually came to rule supreme over this new body of Muslim law and the split between religious and political authority was made.This book presents the evidences first hand; rather than history books that choose not to and just provide a commentary. It is well worth the read.7 of 7 people found the following review helpful. what does "the caliphate" mean?By David Reid RossThis book has given us the Umayyad definition of "the caliphate". This turns out to be pretty much the same as the early 'Abbasid definition; and it remains the Shi'a definition - "God's viceroy". Tron Honto's review has covered the main points; so I'll just add a few addenda here.The arguments in this book weren't exactly new; Crone and Hinds admit a debt to Emile Tyan's work during the 1950s; and of course many Muslims themselves had been making that same point through history. But it seems that scholarly consensus from the 1950s to the 80s had not yet come to terms with Tyan. This book brought home Tyan's point to English-speaking scholars; and changed the consensus to such a degree that... it's no longer so easy even to find copies of Tyan's book.On that topic by the way; I must cavil that; since we mere mortals can't get Tyan; it's not helpful of this book to refer to Tyan where there were primary sources involved. For instance: This book claims that 'Umar called himself God's Sultan. For that; the primary source is Ibn Sa'd. This book pointed to Tyan. It *should* have pointed to Ibn Sa'd; with "apud Tyan" for good manners. So; that feature was annoying.(There have also been some comments - well; I saw the one comment; from Madelung in his 1997 "Succession to Muhammad" - that Abu Bakr might have called himself "the Prophet's caliph" and not "God's" after all. But I'm not yet sure I buy that. The pre-Siffin era is enough of a black hole; pre-`Umar is well-nigh unfathomable.)The book makes up for that by pointing to plenty of primary sources of POETRY; notably Farazdaq; who was about the biggest Umayyad suckup outside al-Zuhri. Scholars will have a lot of fun turning over the gems in the footnotes. The book also translates a few pro- and anti-Umayyad speeches; which encapsulate caliphist salvation-history; one way or another. Back then; this book had the only translations around; since then; Tabari has been translated; so that part is more redundant now.Readers will also need to take into account for p. 12 (esp. n. 16); 18 and 57 Crone's additional work to find references to khilafa in Kharijism: "The Kharijites and the caliphal title". Even the Muslim "anarchists"; she now admits; accepted khilafa on principle. It was just who got to BE the caliph which was the problem.I am giving this book five stars since it is a landmark in the history of Orientalism; and has withstood all counter-arguments up to now (`Umar on up; anyway). That's what happens when a book is right.
