You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
alternatehistory.com
I have seen in many western (Orientalist non-Muslim historians) work the history as narrated by Muslim historians are always taken with a grain of salt. Mostly the attitute is that they are exaggerating too much, however, when it comes to western author we believe that they are the gold standard. Isn't that sorta double standard.
I have read some history by Tabari and other history books written by Muslim historians, and they paint somewhat different picture of Muslim generals and rulers. One point to be noted, invariably most of the western historians have tried to insinuate that most of the Muslim kings or generals were hidden homosexuals as they maintained a harem of boys (I have found no such description in Muslim history books). Now that sounds preposterous as firstly, homosexuality is banned in Islam, secondly, most of these royals were pious men according to Western historians as well.
How do you reconcile these differences? Are orientalist historians baised or misinformed about Islamic history?
I have found some of the resources of early Islamic history at these site, do you guys think they are realiable?