What do you think?
Rate this book
The Idea of the Muslim World: A Global Intellectual History
When President Barack Obama visited Cairo in 2009 to deliver an address to Muslims worldwide, he followed in the footsteps of countless politicians who have taken the existence of a unified global Muslim community for granted. But as Cemil Aydin explains in this provocative history, it is a misconception to think that the world s 1.5 billion Muslims constitute a single religio-political entity. How did this belief arise, and why is it so widespread? The Idea of the Muslim World searches for the intellectual origins of a mistaken notion and explains its enduring allure for non-Muslims and Muslims alike.
Conceived as the antithesis of Western Christian civilization, the idea of the Muslim world emerged in the late nineteenth century, when European empires ruled the majority of Muslims. It was inflected from the start by theories of white supremacy, but Muslims had a hand in shaping the idea as well. Aydin reveals the role of Muslim intellectuals in envisioning and essentializing an idealized pan-Islamic society that refuted claims of Muslims racial and civilizational inferiority.
After playing a key role in the politics of the Ottoman Caliphate, the idea of the Muslim world survived decolonization and the Cold War, and took on new force in the late twentieth century. Standing at the center of both Islamophobic and pan-Islamic ideologies, the idea of the Muslim world continues to hold the global imagination in a grip that will need to be loosened in order to begin a more fruitful discussion about politics in Muslim societies today.
Conceived as the antithesis of Western Christian civilization, the idea of the Muslim world emerged in the late nineteenth century, when European empires ruled the majority of Muslims. It was inflected from the start by theories of white supremacy, but Muslims had a hand in shaping the idea as well. Aydin reveals the role of Muslim intellectuals in envisioning and essentializing an idealized pan-Islamic society that refuted claims of Muslims racial and civilizational inferiority.
After playing a key role in the politics of the Ottoman Caliphate, the idea of the Muslim world survived decolonization and the Cold War, and took on new force in the late twentieth century. Standing at the center of both Islamophobic and pan-Islamic ideologies, the idea of the Muslim world continues to hold the global imagination in a grip that will need to be loosened in order to begin a more fruitful discussion about politics in Muslim societies today.
304 pages, Hardcover
First published April 24, 2017
23 people are currently reading
738 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
May 6, 2017
Many Muslims and non-Muslims today take for granted the existence of a coherent and timeless "Muslim world," either asserting its existence in the present, or aspiring to return to it through a project of political unity. But in reality, not only has no such Muslim world ever existed, the whole concept of such an entity was the conscientious creation of both Islamophobes and pan-Islamists during the WW1-era imperial period. When "Muslim" was created as a racial category, the idea of a "Muslim world" gradually came into existence. But this idea was as ahistorical as it was opportunistic.
Before our current world of nation states, most people, of all religions, lived in multi-religious empires. There was no contradiction between being a Muslim living under the British Queen or a Christian living under the Ottoman Sultan. Both were common and unremarkable. But as the empires began to break apart these identities underwent a gradual and inexorable process of "racialization." In response to political developments, Western thinkers began to create an archetype of a "Muslim", both as an imperial subject and as a foreigner. It suddenly became suggested that Muslims shared a political outlook regardless of where they lived in the world. Muslims, like Christians, most often were asking for rights within the imperial system, rather than independence from it. But in response to these claims for equal rights, Western imperial thinkers created a racialized depiction of Muslims as inferior in order to disable their claims. As they were racialized, people slowly began to think of themselves as separate ethnicities and nations that had to live in "their own" political communities.
In response to these changes, nascent Islamist movements began arguing in favor of something called "Islamic Civilization" to assert their own equality with racist Western intellectuals. Despite their generally opposed positions, however, both sides took for granted the existence of a Muslim world that they were arguing over. Pro-Muslim scholars like Arnold Toynbee also fed into this idea, framing the world in "civilizational" terms, of which Islamic Civilization was one. Over time, this idea gained strength and led to people really believing such an entity existed, despite all evidence to the contrary - namely the vast differences among Muslims across political and cultural lines.
This racialized portrait of Muslims has survived in the present day thanks to the actions of both Islamists and Islamophobes, arguing over the characteristics of a unitary entity that never existed. Their arguments are akin to claiming that a "Black Civilization" exists, has certain characteristics, and correspondingly Black people all over the world should volunteer to fight and support certain causes, as though no material differences existed between them. Some in fact do argue this, but it is clear to see how manufactured a discourse it is.
As Aydin demonstrates, none of the signal episodes of "civilizational" clash or triumph between the Muslim world and the West were never understood as such during in their own time. The "Gates of Vienna" battle between the Hapsburgs and Ottomans was a moment in which Muslims and Christians served on both sides, and Napoleon's conquest of Egypt was never seen as a Christian attack on Muslims - Napoleon himself had considered converting to Islam for reasons of political expediency! Counterintuitively to our present way of thinking, the biggest ever Muslim empire in the world was in fact the British Empire, a body through which Indian Muslims were able to attain a great deal of political power in the world, which they promptly lost after the empire collapsed.
Aydin's book contains many great sections on the contributions of different pan-Islamic thinkers, including lesser known figures like Shakib Arslan (actually a Druze!) and Namik Kemal. As he demonstrates, the idea of a shared political destiny among Muslims actually hit its peak around the time of WW1, a time when the Ottoman Empire was for the first time ever broadly seen as a symbol of Muslims shared hopes for dignity, safety and identity. When Western Christian empires began to break apart the Ottoman realms on religious grounds (see: The Greek War of Independence), it triggered discontent among their own Muslim subjects who viewed these actions as hypocritical and insulting. These Muslims then began to see themselves less as imperial subjects and more as a racialized category (aided in this feeling by heightening imperial racism) with profound links to other Muslims around the world, a process that was expedited by increasing lines of communication and travel among Muslims of different backgrounds. Prior to WW1, the Ottomans were clearly part of the European Concert of Empires and used pan-Islamism mainly as a pro-Western tool for keeping the peace with the Britain, only later deploying it as an anti-British ideology when the political winds changed. Divorced from those imperial origins, pan-Islamism has now become a predominantly anti-imperial and anti-Western approach to world affairs. But as Aydin demonstrates, this is very much a contingent phenomenon rather than something about Islam's inherent political content.
This book does a lot to put Islamic history back in context, particularly the idea that Islam is an "Arab" phenomenon, a claim that would have been totally baffling to anyone living even a century ago. Until recently pan-Islam ran predominantly on an Istanbul to Delhi axis, with Turks and Indians making up the dominant image of Muslims in the world. Only after the fall of the Ottomans and partition of India did Arabs and Persians begin to contest for the leadership of the "Muslim world," and manufacture an image of themselves at its head. The late-Saudi embrace of pan-Islamism (following the Camp David-triggered decline of Egyptian influence) is the most recent and powerful example of this.
Aydin charts a very compelling narrative of how the "Muslim world" discourse has emerged and reinforced itself, generally to the detriment of all. Muslim solidarity and support against oppression does not necessitate arguing for the existence of a shared civilization or political order across the world, and the effort to argue for such an order has been a hugely destructive effort by Islamists and Islamophobes alike. There is an urgent need for disaggregating identities to fight both anti-Muslim racism and religious homogenization. The latter project is currently being pursued most forcefully by the establishments of both Saudi Arabia and Iran, countries that are trying to deploy an illusory "Muslim world" for strategic purposes, just as the late-Ottomans and even Ataturk once did.
This is really an excellent book that I will be thinking about for a long time. Along with unearthing such great history, its biggest value is in demonstrating how contingent and recent many of our ideas about the world and our identities really are.
Before our current world of nation states, most people, of all religions, lived in multi-religious empires. There was no contradiction between being a Muslim living under the British Queen or a Christian living under the Ottoman Sultan. Both were common and unremarkable. But as the empires began to break apart these identities underwent a gradual and inexorable process of "racialization." In response to political developments, Western thinkers began to create an archetype of a "Muslim", both as an imperial subject and as a foreigner. It suddenly became suggested that Muslims shared a political outlook regardless of where they lived in the world. Muslims, like Christians, most often were asking for rights within the imperial system, rather than independence from it. But in response to these claims for equal rights, Western imperial thinkers created a racialized depiction of Muslims as inferior in order to disable their claims. As they were racialized, people slowly began to think of themselves as separate ethnicities and nations that had to live in "their own" political communities.
In response to these changes, nascent Islamist movements began arguing in favor of something called "Islamic Civilization" to assert their own equality with racist Western intellectuals. Despite their generally opposed positions, however, both sides took for granted the existence of a Muslim world that they were arguing over. Pro-Muslim scholars like Arnold Toynbee also fed into this idea, framing the world in "civilizational" terms, of which Islamic Civilization was one. Over time, this idea gained strength and led to people really believing such an entity existed, despite all evidence to the contrary - namely the vast differences among Muslims across political and cultural lines.
This racialized portrait of Muslims has survived in the present day thanks to the actions of both Islamists and Islamophobes, arguing over the characteristics of a unitary entity that never existed. Their arguments are akin to claiming that a "Black Civilization" exists, has certain characteristics, and correspondingly Black people all over the world should volunteer to fight and support certain causes, as though no material differences existed between them. Some in fact do argue this, but it is clear to see how manufactured a discourse it is.
As Aydin demonstrates, none of the signal episodes of "civilizational" clash or triumph between the Muslim world and the West were never understood as such during in their own time. The "Gates of Vienna" battle between the Hapsburgs and Ottomans was a moment in which Muslims and Christians served on both sides, and Napoleon's conquest of Egypt was never seen as a Christian attack on Muslims - Napoleon himself had considered converting to Islam for reasons of political expediency! Counterintuitively to our present way of thinking, the biggest ever Muslim empire in the world was in fact the British Empire, a body through which Indian Muslims were able to attain a great deal of political power in the world, which they promptly lost after the empire collapsed.
Aydin's book contains many great sections on the contributions of different pan-Islamic thinkers, including lesser known figures like Shakib Arslan (actually a Druze!) and Namik Kemal. As he demonstrates, the idea of a shared political destiny among Muslims actually hit its peak around the time of WW1, a time when the Ottoman Empire was for the first time ever broadly seen as a symbol of Muslims shared hopes for dignity, safety and identity. When Western Christian empires began to break apart the Ottoman realms on religious grounds (see: The Greek War of Independence), it triggered discontent among their own Muslim subjects who viewed these actions as hypocritical and insulting. These Muslims then began to see themselves less as imperial subjects and more as a racialized category (aided in this feeling by heightening imperial racism) with profound links to other Muslims around the world, a process that was expedited by increasing lines of communication and travel among Muslims of different backgrounds. Prior to WW1, the Ottomans were clearly part of the European Concert of Empires and used pan-Islamism mainly as a pro-Western tool for keeping the peace with the Britain, only later deploying it as an anti-British ideology when the political winds changed. Divorced from those imperial origins, pan-Islamism has now become a predominantly anti-imperial and anti-Western approach to world affairs. But as Aydin demonstrates, this is very much a contingent phenomenon rather than something about Islam's inherent political content.
This book does a lot to put Islamic history back in context, particularly the idea that Islam is an "Arab" phenomenon, a claim that would have been totally baffling to anyone living even a century ago. Until recently pan-Islam ran predominantly on an Istanbul to Delhi axis, with Turks and Indians making up the dominant image of Muslims in the world. Only after the fall of the Ottomans and partition of India did Arabs and Persians begin to contest for the leadership of the "Muslim world," and manufacture an image of themselves at its head. The late-Saudi embrace of pan-Islamism (following the Camp David-triggered decline of Egyptian influence) is the most recent and powerful example of this.
Aydin charts a very compelling narrative of how the "Muslim world" discourse has emerged and reinforced itself, generally to the detriment of all. Muslim solidarity and support against oppression does not necessitate arguing for the existence of a shared civilization or political order across the world, and the effort to argue for such an order has been a hugely destructive effort by Islamists and Islamophobes alike. There is an urgent need for disaggregating identities to fight both anti-Muslim racism and religious homogenization. The latter project is currently being pursued most forcefully by the establishments of both Saudi Arabia and Iran, countries that are trying to deploy an illusory "Muslim world" for strategic purposes, just as the late-Ottomans and even Ataturk once did.
This is really an excellent book that I will be thinking about for a long time. Along with unearthing such great history, its biggest value is in demonstrating how contingent and recent many of our ideas about the world and our identities really are.
February 6, 2019
Cemil Aydin’s The Idea of the Muslim World: A Global Intellectual History examines whether the “Muslim world” is a unified geopolitical entity purportedly bound together across a diverse geography by a shared religious tradition. For Aydin, the response is a definitive “no.” Aydin argues that the persistence of this geopolitical idea of the Muslim world is not an outgrowth of shared history or immutable ideology within Muslim societies (5). Instead, he says, it is “a function of the civilizational and geopolitical narratives concocted in encounters of Muslim societies with European empires, reconfigured according to the exigencies of the Cold War” (5). In response to both Islamophobes who situate the Muslim world as one monolithic entity that has always been at odds with the Western world, or a “clash of civilizations,” as well as pan-Islamists who also situate their political grievances against the West in the context of a subjected Muslim world, Aydin shows how both groups created the Muslim world for their own strategic and political purposes. For him, the Muslim world is a myth, an illusion, an imagined global unity that was only mobilized in the context of waning empire in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
To be sure, while Aydin’s argument is thought-provoking, and pushes us to question our assumptions and the categories we impose on diverse historical phenomenon, regions, and places, I believe he goes too far in merely stating that the Muslim world is an illusion, or a myth. He does not clearly identify what the relationship of the “ummah” or the community of Muslims is to this idea of the Muslim world. He relegates the idea of the ummah to a religious community of believers, arguing that it has no real connection to the geopolitical and racialized category of the “Muslim world.” Yet, one wonders if this distinction between a “religious community” and a “geopolitical community” is productive; surely it has no purchase for the category of “Islam,” which is not necessarily a religion in the same way as Western Christianity might be. While the modern period with its new geopolitical and economic formations might have changed or evolved the idea of the Muslim world, Aydin does not adequately engage with how Muslim communities perceived of themselves in relation to each other in the pre-modern period. This is a huge flaw in the overall argument of the book. Nonetheless, Aydin shows more finesse in discussing how diverse moments in nineteenth and twentieth century, including the breakup of the Ottoman empire, World War I and II, as well as the Cold War, reformulated the varying centers of power within the Muslim world.
Aydin’s methodology also appeared to be a bit selective. As an intellectual history, Aydin focuses primary on European thinkers and their modernist Muslim counterparts. This is a text of elites; and not necessarily the subaltern. He primarily focuses on thinkers from the Ottoman/ Arab worlds, and there is little engagement with source material in the wide range of languages (Urdu, Malay, Farsi) that constitute the Muslim world.
To be sure, while Aydin’s argument is thought-provoking, and pushes us to question our assumptions and the categories we impose on diverse historical phenomenon, regions, and places, I believe he goes too far in merely stating that the Muslim world is an illusion, or a myth. He does not clearly identify what the relationship of the “ummah” or the community of Muslims is to this idea of the Muslim world. He relegates the idea of the ummah to a religious community of believers, arguing that it has no real connection to the geopolitical and racialized category of the “Muslim world.” Yet, one wonders if this distinction between a “religious community” and a “geopolitical community” is productive; surely it has no purchase for the category of “Islam,” which is not necessarily a religion in the same way as Western Christianity might be. While the modern period with its new geopolitical and economic formations might have changed or evolved the idea of the Muslim world, Aydin does not adequately engage with how Muslim communities perceived of themselves in relation to each other in the pre-modern period. This is a huge flaw in the overall argument of the book. Nonetheless, Aydin shows more finesse in discussing how diverse moments in nineteenth and twentieth century, including the breakup of the Ottoman empire, World War I and II, as well as the Cold War, reformulated the varying centers of power within the Muslim world.
Aydin’s methodology also appeared to be a bit selective. As an intellectual history, Aydin focuses primary on European thinkers and their modernist Muslim counterparts. This is a text of elites; and not necessarily the subaltern. He primarily focuses on thinkers from the Ottoman/ Arab worlds, and there is little engagement with source material in the wide range of languages (Urdu, Malay, Farsi) that constitute the Muslim world.
October 25, 2017
A somewhat decent treatment of the issue of the "Muslim world," which - although Aydin doesn't spend as much effort in clearly defining and delineating his terms as the reader might like - is taken to refer to "a global Muslim community" existing in sufficient religio-political unity to be treated as a united demographic with common interests.
Aydin's key thesis, that "Muslims did not imagine belonging to a global political unity until the peak of European hegemony in the late nineteenth century," is likely correct. His style of argument, however, is essentially not to present any arguments, but rather to simply narrate the history of discourse about "the Muslim world" as it emerged. Unfortunately, by beginning his book when he does, neglecting to do an in-depth analysis of the distinction (as he sees it) between "the Muslim world" and the ummah, and by eschewing clear argument, the effort is rather feeble compared with other treatments of similar themes, e.g., Mona Hassan's Longing for the Lost Caliphate.
Moreover, Aydin's work is steeped in a range of postcolonialist tropes (appealing for some readers, perhaps, but not terribly impressive to this one); he frequently reduces any external discourse to mere rhetorical techniques while giving greater credibility to the substantial quality of Muslim authors; and is far too free in applying labels like 'Islamophobic' in many cases where no fair person could see it applying, e.g., in Roman Catholics distributing tracts encouraging conversion to Catholicism.
But, to Aydin's credit, he does disrupt some popular images when he points out the ways in which imperial aspirations and projects were not simply a one-way street; and he does rightly criticize many Islamists for imposing their own ideologies on past figures, movements, and eras that embodied different values and sensibilities.
Aydin's key thesis, that "Muslims did not imagine belonging to a global political unity until the peak of European hegemony in the late nineteenth century," is likely correct. His style of argument, however, is essentially not to present any arguments, but rather to simply narrate the history of discourse about "the Muslim world" as it emerged. Unfortunately, by beginning his book when he does, neglecting to do an in-depth analysis of the distinction (as he sees it) between "the Muslim world" and the ummah, and by eschewing clear argument, the effort is rather feeble compared with other treatments of similar themes, e.g., Mona Hassan's Longing for the Lost Caliphate.
Moreover, Aydin's work is steeped in a range of postcolonialist tropes (appealing for some readers, perhaps, but not terribly impressive to this one); he frequently reduces any external discourse to mere rhetorical techniques while giving greater credibility to the substantial quality of Muslim authors; and is far too free in applying labels like 'Islamophobic' in many cases where no fair person could see it applying, e.g., in Roman Catholics distributing tracts encouraging conversion to Catholicism.
But, to Aydin's credit, he does disrupt some popular images when he points out the ways in which imperial aspirations and projects were not simply a one-way street; and he does rightly criticize many Islamists for imposing their own ideologies on past figures, movements, and eras that embodied different values and sensibilities.
May 12, 2019
In his book, Aydin sets out to provide the reader with the history and development of the idea of the Muslim World. By this, the author is referring to an imagined, essentialized and monolithic geopolitical unit, whose members' (in this case, Muslims) actions are intrinsically bound to their faith, and not influenced by any other external factors or realities.
Aydin distinguishes the notion of the Muslim World from concepts like the ummah and Dār al-Islām as one that, unlike the latter two, is predicated primarily on geopolitical grounds and objectives steeped in the realities and historical context of the modern world (which inspired many to conceptualize their own imagined communities), rather than pre-modern spiritual and legal grounds.
He ties its inception to the late nineteenth century, wherein increasingly paranoid and white supremacist colonial authorities, politicians and evangelicals engaged in the racialization of Muslims. This had the effect of creating not only a new and global sense of solidarity among Muslims (aided by reforms in transport and communications), but a notion — hitherto unimagined — of a shared civilization that had gone into decline. In essence, Islamic elites responded to European criticisms using the latter's own terms and essentializing framework(s). While not linear by any means, this back and forth between (mostly) white Christian Europeans and Muslims all around the world set off a cycle wherein both parties cemented the notion of there being a Muslim World.
The Idea of the Muslim World is an invaluable and accessible read, for those whose studies touch upon Islam and the layperson, alike. While I would have liked to see more engagement with subaltern groups, and perhaps the texts of more Iranian, Central Asian and Southeast Asian figures, the book provides readers with a robust enough framework to explore this more themselves on their own time. Most importantly, Aydin does a great job at providing the reader with crucial historical context, without which we couldn't properly understand how the notion came to be. It lives on today in the minds of many Muslims and non-Muslims, and will likely continue to until we begin decolonizing the humanities and social sciences, opening up whole new avenues of analysis and understanding from which all stand to greatly benefit.
Aydin distinguishes the notion of the Muslim World from concepts like the ummah and Dār al-Islām as one that, unlike the latter two, is predicated primarily on geopolitical grounds and objectives steeped in the realities and historical context of the modern world (which inspired many to conceptualize their own imagined communities), rather than pre-modern spiritual and legal grounds.
He ties its inception to the late nineteenth century, wherein increasingly paranoid and white supremacist colonial authorities, politicians and evangelicals engaged in the racialization of Muslims. This had the effect of creating not only a new and global sense of solidarity among Muslims (aided by reforms in transport and communications), but a notion — hitherto unimagined — of a shared civilization that had gone into decline. In essence, Islamic elites responded to European criticisms using the latter's own terms and essentializing framework(s). While not linear by any means, this back and forth between (mostly) white Christian Europeans and Muslims all around the world set off a cycle wherein both parties cemented the notion of there being a Muslim World.
The Idea of the Muslim World is an invaluable and accessible read, for those whose studies touch upon Islam and the layperson, alike. While I would have liked to see more engagement with subaltern groups, and perhaps the texts of more Iranian, Central Asian and Southeast Asian figures, the book provides readers with a robust enough framework to explore this more themselves on their own time. Most importantly, Aydin does a great job at providing the reader with crucial historical context, without which we couldn't properly understand how the notion came to be. It lives on today in the minds of many Muslims and non-Muslims, and will likely continue to until we begin decolonizing the humanities and social sciences, opening up whole new avenues of analysis and understanding from which all stand to greatly benefit.
June 1, 2017
This book is a pretty dense read if you want to explore the premise of every example and inference used. What really attracted me towards reading it is that the book explores the farcical notion of ancient demand for a Muslim caliphate, and rebuts the idea with tons of examples.
The book speaks of how an Imperial hegemony over dissemination of geopolitical ideas has confused the world post the imperial age into believing that there has always been a semblance of unity among the muslim nations, who are now drawn in their struggle to build an Islamic Caliphate. Cemil Aydin takes every imperialistic notion of the caliphate, and breaks through them by quoting historical facts and precedents that are contrary to the very foundation of such beliefs.
Simplistically, the books brings to fore the idea that Islamic world is not an idea conjured alone by the pious radicals of Islam, but is a consequence of the brutality and marginalization of many muslim majority countries by the English, Dutch, French, Russians and many others.
Lastly, I would like to state that this book should not be treated as the absolute truth, but as an interesting perspective that doesn't usually find resonance across popular mediums. I would however implore you to read this book, and many others like this to better understand the issue.
The book speaks of how an Imperial hegemony over dissemination of geopolitical ideas has confused the world post the imperial age into believing that there has always been a semblance of unity among the muslim nations, who are now drawn in their struggle to build an Islamic Caliphate. Cemil Aydin takes every imperialistic notion of the caliphate, and breaks through them by quoting historical facts and precedents that are contrary to the very foundation of such beliefs.
Simplistically, the books brings to fore the idea that Islamic world is not an idea conjured alone by the pious radicals of Islam, but is a consequence of the brutality and marginalization of many muslim majority countries by the English, Dutch, French, Russians and many others.
Lastly, I would like to state that this book should not be treated as the absolute truth, but as an interesting perspective that doesn't usually find resonance across popular mediums. I would however implore you to read this book, and many others like this to better understand the issue.
December 26, 2024
An excellent, very readable historical study of the emergence of the idea of the "Muslim world" from the late 19th century onwards. The argument is relatively simple - the image of a coherent, singular "Muslim world" is a construct belonging to and born out of specific contexts of imperialism and racialisation, in some ways (unintentionally) co-constructed by Islamophobic thinkers, colonizers and pan-Islamists, and this image often continues to go unchecked, and to be deployed to reproduce civilizational discourses. However, the historical scope of the study is impressive. It opened up many new points and historical examples for further reading, and I found the book's basis in the history of the late Ottoman Empire a fruitful starting point. Aydin did not engage much with the concept of "ummah" and its relationship to the later discourse of the "Muslim world", but this might be the work of a different book.
July 30, 2020
This is a great book! I don’t agree with the thesis of the book, however, because I believe the events starting in the late 1800s documented in the book show how our current conceptions of the Muslim world were formed rather than these events being the first time the idea of the Muslim world was ever formed, since the 13th century. The reason I really like this book though is because it filled in so many gaps on South Asian Muslim political thought between the 1860s to the popularization of Pakistan, and also explains the current lack of confidence South Asian Muslims have with their identities today.
December 4, 2019
Interessante dal punto di vista storico e molto completo: le diverse prospettive anche a livello temporale mi hanno fatto pensare a che cosa presupponiamo che gli altri pensino e alle conseguenze di questo, anche nella prospettiva delle fonti di autori musulmani citate. L’idea del “mondo musulmano” che ci siamo creati ha il peso dell’idea e della parola che diventano realtà, quando in effetti, le differenze che stupiscono dovrebbero diventare delle ricchezze, i tratti comuni andrebbero valorizzati e invece creare muri anche di pensiero, risulta più semplice.
February 18, 2018
Somewhat interesting but has a simple premise: There was no unified concept of a "Mulsim World" before the 1980's, so this concept can not be explained as a root cause of the terrorism of today.
OK but not so creative.
OK but not so creative.
March 8, 2018
That book taught me so much about History of the Ottoman Empire and the 19th-20th era. It's very detailed and well-documented with a very interesting insight of the notion of religion and race. I recommend it to anyone who wants to Know more about relationship between the Middle East and the world
March 18, 2018
super succint and important historical analysis/geneaology of the racialization/essentialization of Islam and Muslims. goes through the eighteenth century up through the fall of the ottoman empire through until the present. dense history but smooth reading
October 3, 2018
Absolutely excellent. Very helpful global tracing of the racialization of Muslims, predominantly from the 19th century onward. Aydin helpfully distinguishes between the concept of umah and the much more recent created notion of a Muslim world.
October 4, 2018
Good book that goes deeply on the origins of the concept of a united Muslim word. The Only problem is the scarcity of exact references. Still this is way better than the Graham E. Fuller's "A World with out Islam" (2010) that deals with the same concept.
August 13, 2019
3.5 stars
January 14, 2023
In the increasingly diverse world we live in, this book is an essential to all Muslims. The term "Muslim world" is widely in circulation without proper understanding of its implications.
December 21, 2024
so fkn comprehensive. u will learn a lot. pay attention to facetiousness
August 2, 2025
Für meinen Kurs gelesen und sehr viel Neues gelehrt. Leider war es manchmal ein bisschen unübersichtlich, ohne roten Faden oder chronologische Reihenfolge.
Read
April 22, 2018Excellent book. I reviewed it for The Friday Times Pakistan. Here is the link to my piece.
http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/con...
http://www.thefridaytimes.com/tft/con...
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews