Europe's debt to Islam given a skeptical look

[Kosmo]

"When Sylvain Gouguenheim looks at today's historical vision of the history of the West and Islam, he sees a notion, accepted as fact, that the Muslim world was at the source of the Christian Europe's reawakening from the Middle Ages.

 

He sees a portrayal of an enlightened Islam, transmitting westward the knowledge of the ancient Greeks through Arab translators and opening the path in Europe to mathematics, medicine, astronomy and philosophy - a gift the West regards with insufficient esteem.

 

"This thesis has basically nothing scandalous about it, if it were true," Gouguenheim writes. "In spite of the appearances, it has more to do with taking ideological sides than scientific analysis."

 

For a controversy, here's a real one. Gouguenheim, a professor of medieval history at a prestigious university, l'

[Ludovicus]

Arab contributions to European identity: Let's start with about 7,000 Arabic loan words in the Spanish language.

 

http://spanish.about.com/b/2006/07/12/arab...-in-spanish.htm

 

"Of course, most Spanish words came originally from Latin. But many of them, 7,000 by one count, came originally from Arabic as a legacy of the Moorish invasion of 711 CE. "

[Ursus]

Well, this is indeed interesting.

 

As for me, I always thought it was the Byzantines who preserved the classical heritage. The Islamic destruction of Byzantium sent not a few Byzantine scholars to Italy, thus facilitating the Rennaisance.

[Ludovicus]

Well, this is indeed interesting.

 

As for me, I always thought it was the Byzantines who preserved the classical heritage. The Islamic destruction of Byzantium sent not a few Byzantine scholars to Italy, thus facilitating the Rennaisance.

 

 

Yes, Byzantine refugees from the fall of Constantinople did arrive in Europe with classical heritage contributions. Aristotle's works and other classical translations had arrived in Europe much earlier, thanks to Arab scholars. St. Thomas Aquinas was one many European scholars who employed the recently discovered Aristotelean concepts to remake Roman Catholic theology.

 

"After the Roman period, Aristotle's works were by and large lost to the West for a second time. They were, however, preserved in the East by various Muslim scholars and philosophers, many of whom wrote extensive commentaries on his works. Aristotle lay at the foundation of the falsafa movement in Islamic philosophy, stimulating the thought of Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd and others.

 

As the influence of the falsafa grew in the West, in part due to Gerard of Cremona's translations and the spread of Averroism, the demand for Aristotle's works grew. William of Moerbeke translated a number of them into Latin. When Thomas Aquinas wrote his theology, working from Moerbeke's translations, the demand for Aristotle's writings grew and the Greek manuscripts returned to the West, stimulating a revival of Aristotelianism in Europe, and ultimately revitalizing European thought through Muslim influence in Spain to fan the embers of the Renaissance."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle#The_loss_of_his_works

 

One of the most famous centers cultural sharing was Toledo, where Jewish, Arabic, and Christians worked to produce translations of the Greeks and Romans into several languages. Another part of this multicultural project was the translation of Arab scientific writings on optics, mathematics, philosophy, and religion. Here are some details from Wikipedia on the subject on Toledo:

 

"Toledo, however, was a center of multilingual culture, with a large population of Arabic speaking Christians (Mozarabs) and had prior importance as a center of learning. This tradition of scholarship, and the books that embodied it, survived the conquest of the city by King Alfonso VI in 1085. A further factor was that Toledo's early bishops and clergy came from France, where Arabic was not widely known. Consequently the cathedral became a center of translations, which were on a scale and importance that "has no match in the history of western culture".[22]

King Alfonso X (the Wise)

King Alfonso X (the Wise)

 

Among the early translators at Toledo were an Avendauth (who some have identified with Abraham ibn Daud), who translated Avicenna's encyclopedia, the Kitāb al-Shifa (The Book of Healing), in cooperation with Domingo Gundisalvo, Archdeacon of Cu

[Gaius Octavius]

I believe that the truth lies somewhere in between. The fact that Egyptians, Greeks, Jews, Romans, and mis-alleged Byzantines, provided the foundations for Moslem advances is too often disregarded. Persian, Indian and Chinese influences are also disregarded. Christian 'Byzantine' emigrants from Constantinople brought their books, learning, and art to Christian Europe during the 1400's. This was once held to be the kick start for the Renaissance. In the 1200's a school of medicine was established at the University of Bologna, where logic and mathematics were long taught. This is not to denigrate Arabic or Moslem advances and contributions to civilization. The fact that there are Arabic loan words in Spanish has all to do with the Moorish conquest.

 

I believe that the theory that the West owes all to Arabs and Moslems came to bear during the mid-20th century when Europe needed Moslem labor.

[DecimusCaesar]

I believe that the 12th century philosopher Roger Bacon was highly influenced by Middle Eastern science. His experiments in optics and prisms were influenced by Arabic works, and many of his ideas predated Issac Newton's work in the field, even though Newton takes most of the credit for those discoveries.

 

Abū al-'Iz Ibn Ismā'īl ibn al-Razāz al-Jazarī was greatly influenced by the works of Heron of Alexandria and Philon of Byzantium. Many of his inventions were so advanced that his 'Double-action suction pump with valves and reciprocating piston motion' were not equalled in engineering until the 20th century. As a matter of fact, that technology was not thought to have been created until the 1920's. The rediscovery of Al-Jazari's works have led to engineering history having to be rewritten.

 

Sadly though, many of these technologies did not reach Europe for many centuries. One type of water pump in use by Al-Jazari in the 12th century did not appear in Europe till the 1400's. The Arabs often deliberately cut off their discoveries from Western Europe - after all, they didn't want their enemies to get their hands on their ideas. That attitude must have held back European development for a long time. Still, the Medieval Europeans did produce many of the technologies in use in the Arab World independently. The Byzantines also had similar attitudes towards the Europeans. Bishop Louis Prand who had visited Byzantium, brought a copy of Ptolemy's Almagest to bring back to his study in Europe. He was stopped at Byzantium's borders by officials who confiscated the books. The Byzantines certainly didn't want knowledge getting into the hands of the barbarians.

 

You could argue therefore that the Fall of Byzantium and the decline of the Arab World would have been a blessing to the Europeans. Without it the Renaissance would have been delayed. Then again, the Medieval Europeans were not as backward or as ignorant as many people believe.

[Horatius]

Correct me if I am wrong but I don't think the Ottoman's were Arabs at all but were the very people that comprised the Byzantine Empire in Anatolia that converted to Islam. They ruled Arabs, Christians, Jews and many other cultures and ethnic groups. Baghdad had many Christians and was supposedly a great center of culture at that time. I see them more as a Muslim version of the Byzantines because they absorbed a lot of that culture and being in control of Constantinople (and Greece) meant they would have access to documents and learning dating back to Rome itself. The Crusader sack of Constantinople in 1204 is an interesting counterpoint to the Ottoman's conquest in 1453 when Mehmed II declared himself Caesar and made Constantinople the capital of the empire.

[Kosmo]

The Crusader sack of Constantinople in 1204 is an interesting counterpoint to the Ottoman's conquest in 1453 when Mehmed II declared himself Caesar and made Constantinople the capital of the empire.

 

The faboulous loot of 1204 also brought countless manuscripts to Western Europe.

The main point is that after Carlomagne the West had very developed libraries (for their time) in the monasteries and also many educated people. After 1200 his universities were far better then what anybody else had.

Besides byzantines a source for classical textes was, surprisingly, Ireland.

The ideea that the West lost somehow his roman heritage and recomposed it from various sources in Renaissance should be dismissed.

Most latin texts available to us were available to them and they transmitted them to us. It was the greek literature that they did not have and this was what they recieved from Byzantium. What they got was mostly greek originals as they had poor latin translations.

Even more important medieval society was inovative and original. Those classical texts had less influence on every day life and here it's were the revolution took place (political and religious institutions, crafts, agriculture, military etc)

[Ludovicus]

The Crusader sack of Constantinople in 1204 is an interesting counterpoint to the Ottoman's conquest in 1453 when Mehmed II declared himself Caesar and made Constantinople the capital of the empire.

 

The faboulous loot of 1204 also brought countless manuscripts to Western Europe.

The main point is that after Carlomagne the West had very developed libraries (for their time) in the monasteries and also many educated people. After 1200 his universities were far better then what anybody else had.

Besides byzantines a source for classical textes was, surprisingly, Ireland.

The ideea that the West lost somehow his roman heritage and recomposed it from various sources in Renaissance should be dismissed.

 

 

 

Please reference these ideas with some evidence, some citations other than your own. That would help the discussion a lot.

Edited April 30, 2008 by Ludovicus

[Gaius Octavius]

Please reference these ideas with some evidence, some citations other than your own. That would help the discussion a lot.

 

By asking that question, are you trying to imply that Kosmo is wrong? After the fall of the West, an Iron Curtain did not separate Europe. This is common knowledge. Western European libraries, particularly those of the Vatican and monasteries, did have the works of such as Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Michael Psellus. Let me try an example. I am sure that Croatian libraries have all of the German chemical texts. Yet, they did not advance chemistry the way the Germans did. That does not mean that the Croatians were not aware of these texts. To ask one to 'prove' the above would be pointless. (All, of course, in my opinion.)

[Northern Neil]

I think one thing could be considered here: Europe is indeed indebted to the Arab/islamic world for many things. But, is this because of Islam, or despite Islam? Many areas of the middle east conquered by the muslims in the 7th century already had a scholastic/scientific legacy going back hundreds of years. To say that Islam was responsible for this continuing trend, and subsequent benefits to the West, is a bit like saying Christianity is responsible for many of the industrial and technological advances of the 19th century.

 

I welcome gouganheim's analysis. Here in Europe, probably more than in the US, the 'benefits' of Islam and the evils of the Crusades are trumpeted - I think to appease a highly irrascible and defensive Muslim mindset, rather than to facilitate an even debate. When BBC historians and journalists hammer home - AGAIN - the evils of the crusades and how it is our fault the west is perceived so negatively by the Islamic world, they forget - or omit - several facts. The Crusades happened between 900 and 700 years ago, yet no - one points out that only 400 years before the first crusade, the lands it sought to conquer were actually Christian. In addition, when the crusades were going on, muslim expansionism was in the mid-point of an extremely aggressive phase in which it happily scythed its way through Christian lands for a thousand years, only to be stopped at the gates of Vienna. Muslim expansionism only stopped once the West gained the technological advantage. I believe this was partly due to a Chinese invention...

Edited April 30, 2008 by Northern Neil

[Gaius Octavius]

Amen, N.N.

[Segestan]

Islam has added nothing positive to European culture or history. Islam is a system not a religion, a system that brings tyranny, brutality while destroying the conquered peoples free speech. The supposed knowledge that Mohammad

[Horatius]

I think one thing could be considered here: Europe is indeed indebted to the Arab/islamic world for many things. But, is this because of Islam, or despite Islam? Many areas of the middle east conquered by the muslims in the 7th century already had a scholastic/scientific legacy going back hundreds of years. To say that Islam was responsible for this continuing trend, and subsequent benefits to the West, is a bit like saying Christianity is responsible for many of the industrial and technological advances of the 19th century.

In addition, when the crusades were going on, muslim expansionism was in the mid-point of an extremely aggressive phase in which it happily scythed its way through Christian lands for a thousand years, only to be stopped at the gates of Vienna. Muslim expansionism only stopped once the West gained the technological advantage. I believe this was partly due to a Chinese invention...

I agree with Neil on much of this but I think it should be pointed out that the Crusader sack of 1204 was particularly brutal http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/choniates1.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade. If I remember right even the Pope was outraged http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1204innocent.html. This weakening of the Byzantines and the subsequent European refusal to assist them later against the Muslims is really strange. It's almost as if they perceived Islam as the lesser evil at the time or maybe they just had so much antipathy towards the vestiges of Rome (or Orthodoxy) that they would rather cut off their nose to spite their face. I don't think there is much doubt even a medium sized European army could have saved the Eastern empire. If I remember right the artillery used by the Muslim armies to breach the mighty walls of Constantinople was made in Europe!( I'm wrong here apparently this was an Ottoman invention http://www.muslimheritage.com/topics/defau...m?ArticleID=369 but I'll leave it in because I remember something about European artillery maybe that the Byzantines requested some built but were refused ) How long the East could survive or recover any kind of power is debatable though. Sorry, a bit off topic I know, I think it is an interesting and pivotal part of history though especially since it meant the the final destruction of the Roman empire. Unless of course you see the Ottomans as a continuation of it. It looks awfully complicated to me almost Byzantine lol. In the end I suppose many cultures had a part in preserving the greco-roman heritage (and losing much more of it). Thank god for Arabic numerals though

Edited May 1, 2008 by Horatius

[Kosmo]

The Crusader sack of Constantinople in 1204 is an interesting counterpoint to the Ottoman's conquest in 1453 when Mehmed II declared himself Caesar and made Constantinople the capital of the empire.

 

The faboulous loot of 1204 also brought countless manuscripts to Western Europe.

The main point is that after Carlomagne the West had very developed libraries (for their time) in the monasteries and also many educated people. After 1200 his universities were far better then what anybody else had.

Besides byzantines a source for classical textes was, surprisingly, Ireland.

The ideea that the West lost somehow his roman heritage and recomposed it from various sources in Renaissance should be dismissed.

 

 

 

Please reference these ideas with some evidence, some citations other than your own. That would help the discussion a lot.

 

First of all these things are common knowledge and I should be asked to prove only sensational claims. A very good source about education in western Europe during the Middle Ages it's vol 2 of "Istoria Civilizatiei" by Ovidiu Dramba, but I doubt that it is usefull to you

Some wikipedia links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbey_of_St._Gall

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobbio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montecassino

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coll%C3%A8ge_de_Sorbonne

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bologna

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Montpellier

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Ir...400.E2.80.93800

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carolingian_Renaissance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcuin_of_York