HISTORY GONE WRONG? 393the thousand years from the fall of the western Roman empire (tradi
tionally dated 476) to the overseas expansion of Christian Europe. In
this sense, it anticipates the potency of the later European imperial
sweep, which would go even wider and deeper, imposing its calendar
on the world and turning "anno Domini'into "Common Era."
The critical difference between the two rushes of power is the place
of technology. The first—the Muslim—rested on old ways but new
men, on the fighting zeal of fast-moving, horse-mounted warriors who
were convinced that God and history were on their side. These men
simply overpowered the salaried minions and indifferent subjects of
despotic empires, pausing only for an occasional digestion of conquest
and booty. The second—the European push—was based on superior
firepower and moved by profit: loot yes, but above all, continuing,
sustainable profit. (When I was a student, we learned about the three
G's: God, Gold, and Glory. They all mattered, but the greatest of all
was Gold, because gold paid the bills, armed the fleets, lured and con
soled the flesh.)
The European rush was potentially stronger, because of its material
basis. The Europeans at their peak could defeat anybody. Their only se
rious adversaries were other Europeans. But the Muslim rush was at
once more uncompromising and more insatiable. The combination of
prowess and faith held apocalyptic implications in both directions—in
its triumphs and in its disappointments.
European expansion (imperialism) was not apocalyptic. It was at
bottom an expression of power. As a response to a calculus of dispar
ity and opportunity, it was cost-conscious, hence opportunistic in both
directions. Oh yes, souls mattered to the Europeans, more to some
countries than to others—so to Catholics more than to Protestants.
(We saw this with the Dutch in Asia.) But rarely did souls count
enough to get in the way of profit and loss. Prestige also mattered, but
again prestige, like everything, had its price. That's why European em
pires dissolved as and when they did. When the European powers met
colonial resistance and the cost of staying rose, they packed up and got
out (India is the prime example), often at heavy cost to newly free na
tive peoples.
Not so for Islam. The Muslim warrior was doing God's work, and
- Some readers will recall as counterevidence the French reluctance to leave Vietnam
and then Algeria. True enough, but the French had (and have) a higher pride quotient
than other Europeans. And once the issue was settled, the French and other European
colons cleared out of Algeria as fast as they could.