Vivienne Dobbs
Pirenne and Islam:
Criticisms on the Decline of the Roman Empire
Vivienne Dobbs
October 2, 2007
Vivienne Dobbs
The topic of the decline of the Roman Empire has been one of much historical
debate. Edward Gibbon, an eighteenth century historian, compiled a study, The Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire, in which he examines the cultural impurities of the
empire as the initial suggestion for the fifth century weakening and ultimate decline of
Roman antiquity. He emphasizes the Barbarian invasion as the beginning of the end for
the Romans, a theory that held fast throughout the nineteenth century. In the early
twentieth century a Belgian historian, Henri Pirenne, asserts an original postulate in The
Pirenne Thesis. He argues that it was not in the fifth century that the Roman Empire fell,
but instead it was the Islamic expansion of the seventh century that prompted the true
demise of the Roman Empire.
In the case of the German Barbarians, Pirenne theorizes in Mohammad and
Charlemagne that, “the Germanic invasions in the West could not and did not in any way
alter this state of affairs.”1 Pirenne believes that the Germans movement into Romania
during the fifth century was dictated not only by relative peace between Roman and
Barbarian but also by the infusion of the Germanic peoples into the Roman culture.2
Further more, Pirenne asserts these invaders of the West lacked both motive and purpose
to destroy the Roman Empire.3 Daniel Dennett likens Pirenne’s implication of the
Roman Empire essentially remaining Roman despite Barbarian assimilation to the
1 Henri Pirenne, Mohammed and Charlemagne (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2001),
119.
2 Robert S. Lopez, “Mohammed and Charlemagne: A Revision,” Speculum, Vol 18, No
1. (1943):14. http://jstor.org/.
3 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
166. http://jstor.org/.
Vivienne Dobbs
primacy of Anglo Saxon tradition in the United States despite immigration.4 The
“persistence of Romania” is mostly exemplified in the unaffected commercial activity
that the Romans experienced even after the Barbarian invasion, especially in
Merovingian Gaul.5 Romania continued to enjoy a market place dominated by trade,
Barbarian migration notwithstanding.
Instead, Pirenne advances the notion in his thesis that the decline of Roman
classical unity was prompted by the Arab expansion of the seventh century in Europe.
Focusing on the erosion of trade in the west, he offers a specific analysis on the
Carolingian abandoning of the importation of oriental goods during the reign of
Charlemagne.6 Pirenne comments on the disappearance of items such as oriental fineries
(silk and other fine clothes) as well as papyrus and most importantly gold in the Western
Roman Empire.7 He concludes that the Merovingian decline into anarchy, due to the
presumed decay in commercial activity, led to the development of an agricultural society
in Gaul, the Carolingians, and thus beginning the period of mediaeval feudalism.8
The insightful theory of Pirenne, however, has a varying number of overstated
claims. As discussed by Daniel Dennett, the lack of oriental products in the west after the
Islamic invasion is grossly exaggerated, if not contrived, by Pirenne. Evidence of
papyrus imported not only in Gaul a century after the invasion, but also to the papacy
4 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
166. http://jstor.org/.
5 . Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
166. http://jstor.org/.
6 Robert S. Lopez, “Mohammed and Charlemagne: A Revision,” Speculum, Vol 18, No
1. (1943): 15. http://jstor.org/.
7 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
167. http://jstor.org/.
8 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
167. http://jstor.org/.
Vivienne Dobbs
until the eleventh century, disproves the Arabic cessation of trade with the west.9 Being a
product exclusively produced in Egypt, it is obvious the trade routes to the East were not
closed by Muslims mandate.10
Pirenne uses the example of the decline of the Merovingian state to justify his
postulate that the Muslim-suppressed commerce created internal chaos.11 As a state
reliant on the activity of trade, Merovingian Gaul began to decline according to Pirenne
in 650 due to the stagnancy of trade between Gaul and the Orient.12 Proof of direct trade
between the Merovingian state and the East is subject to historical skepticism. Suggested
by Norman Baynes, evidence of direct trading between the two regions is non-existent.13
To humor the idea that the two regions did in fact trade directly, the question
becomes one of Muslim motivation for eliminating trade with the west. The answer to
which is simple; there was no such motivation.14 The Islamic society did not prohibit any
trading with non-Muslims. In fact, because of the conditions of the Islamic realm – a
desert, isolated from many resources – trading for the Muslims becomes one of their own
sustenance.15 The Islamic world, generally, was tolerant of Christians, even in their own
domain. In the early eighth century, Christians and Jews were protected (and labeled as
9 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
175. http://jstor.org/.
10 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
174. http://jstor.org/.
11 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
167. http://jstor.org/.
12 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
167. http://jstor.org
13 prob of trans p 60
14 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
168. http://jstor.org/.
15 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
168. http://jstor.org/.
Vivienne Dobbs
people of the book) under the jurisdiction of the Umayyad Caliph, Umar II. Furthermore,
Umar II openly decrees that it is God’s will that maritime ports be freely traveled and for
trade to remain uninhibited by government.16 Therefore, the trading hostility between
Western Europe and the Orient seemingly originates with the West.17
Unlike the irrefutably commercial-based Merovingian state, Pirenne suggests
Carolingian Gaul to be primarily, if not solely, agrarian. Charlemagne, as well as the
pope, sought to limit trading with the Orient during the eighth century.18 However,
according to a “capitulation issued by Charlemagne,” Carolingian Gaul did trade with
surrounding states.19 Also noted in Dennett’s Pirenne and Muhammad is the fact that
merchants throughout Italy, Scandinavia and the Baltic States ignored the legal and
ecclesiastical prohibition of trading with the Middle East.20 In exploring this point,
Dennett notes that the surrounding states of Carolingian Gaul were actively involved in
commerce with the Orient subsequent to the Islamic expansion. Gaul perhaps engaged in
inadvertent trade with the Orient through the commerce with its neighboring states. In
this case, Gaul not only engaged in domestic European trade, but also engaged in
involuntary trade with the Orient.
16 Andrew S. Ehrenkreutz, “Another Orientalist's Remarks concerning the Pirenne
Thesis,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 15, No. ½.
(1972): 97. http://jstor.org/.
17 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
168. http://jstor.org/.
18 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
175. http://jstor.org/.
19 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
177. http://jstor.org/.
20 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
175. http://jstor.org/.
Vivienne Dobbs
As for assuming that the elimination of oriental trade route to Gaul stifled the
Merovingian economy, Pirenne neglects to address the internal conflict arising in the
Roman Empire prior to said cessation. With the autonomous German states in the
established Roman Empire, differentiation in methods of rule and social obligation often
divided the already weakening Romania.21 Along with social and governmental variance,
Merovingian Gaul practiced an opposing monetary policy to that of the rest of Western
Roman Empire. Merovingian Gaul did not use a standardized coinage system. Instead,
private coins were minted creating a sever lack of economic unity amongst the
Merovingian state.22 This is representative of the decline in the cohesion of the monarchs
in Gaul and a disinterest in foreign relations. These internal issues left the Merovingian
state vulnerable, to the great (but uncalculated) advantage of the Arabs.
The evidence opposing Pirenne’s Thesis brings to light the many inaccuracies and
exaggerations Pirenne relies on to present his hypothesis. Though the Arab invasion did
expedite the decline of the already waning Roman Empire, it was not the beginning of
this process. In his work, Pirenne externally considers the expansion of Islam to be the
most important factor of Roman decline. On an intrinsic level, Pirenne further widens the
estrangement of Eastern and Western cultures. His thesis vilifies Arabs as the
warmongers who are responsible for what Pirenne himself calls “’the most essential event
in European history that had occurred since the Punic Wars.’”23
Bibliography
21 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
185. http://jstor.org/.
22 Robert S. Lopez, “Mohammed and Charlemagne: A Revision,” Speculum, Vol 18, No
1. (1943): 18. http://jstor.org/.
23 Daniel C. Dennett, Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (1948):
166. http://jstor.org/.
Vivienne Dobbs
Books
Pirenne, Henri, Mohammed and Charlemagne. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2001.
Journals
Dennett, Daniel C. Jr., “Pirenne and Muhammad,” Speculum, Vol. 23, No. 2. (Apr.
1948): 165-190. http://jstor.org/.
Ehrenkreutz, Andrew, S., “Another Orientalist’s Remarks concerning the Pirenne
Thesis,” Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient, Vol. 15, No.
½. (Jan. 1972): 94-104. http://jstor.org/.
Lopez, Robert, S., “Mohammed and Charlemagne: A Revision,” Speculum, Vol. 18, No.
1. (Jan. 1943): 14-38. http://jstor.org/.