>>60029489 the islamic world had good trade links with most of the known world at the time e.g europe and china/india so they figured out what the chinks and indians knew and then figured out what the europeans knew slaped all these foreign ideas together and declared it their own.
>/pol/ claims the islamic golden age was just stolen greco-roman knowledge >the successors of rome (western europe) were living in wooden huts and actively shunned ancient knowledge as pagan and un-christian >places where rome never had influence like persia were better than rome itself >even greece wasn't as prosperous as muslim lands
Yes, it happened. No it wasn't their own doing. They were literally building off of what was done before hand. Nothing wrong with that, Greeks after all were building off of older civilizations.
During the period of Islamic Golden Age, Islamic World was in it's infancy. It was the dying embers of much older and grander civilizations in the area. They did a lot for mathematics, sciences and astronomy. Giving the western world their numbers which were way better at doing math with than Roman Numerals.
However infancies don't last long and they collapsed back into barbarians. It wasn't until 1920s and the finding of oil did they become relevant again. However they never did grow out of the tribal stage, or sectarian tribalism.
If anything, their Golden Age is right now. Islam has never been so strong across the world than it is today. It's the fastest growing religion and the 'refugees' are making sure it reaches every corner of the world.
>>60029489 No. Europe is so great that when the Muslims allowed themselves to translate a few European translators they lived much better lives. The major failing of every society is abuses of power intended and often succeeding to preserve the status quo. Muslims are massively guilty of this. They reject better ideas so they don't have to change. Compare the Chinese Boxer Rebellion. And for most Muslim societies this type of rejection and self-limiting is their main mode of social analysis.
Full disclosure: every Muslim I've ever met is bro-tier, and I'm personally euphedoric.
Undergrad in poli sci and int'l law, master's in history from F.I.T., 2002.
It's not nice to say it /didn't/ happen, but ... it kinda didn't happen. Middle-age "Islamic" science, medicine, and philosophy has very tenuous ties to Islam itself. It's closer to "Arab and Berber golden age" than anything. During late Rome, greco-egyptians were doing great things in the medical field, and Muslims now claim responsibility for this, as well as "holding the books" of Plato et al.
And it's /mostly/ a golden age in that Europe is seen as a backwater at the time--after the collapse of Rome--and that is for several reasons that aren't quite correct either: >It was deemed a "dark age" by quatro-ciento Italian philosophers who didn't identify with Christians so much, so of course they didn't appreciate the beauty of Christian philosophy
>There was indeed a dearth of lit that survived the "dark ages," which was why the term was initially coined. Researchers found a great gap in source material from Europe, and only stuff from the Arabs, transmitted by Muslim-enforced trade routes. Those routes, extending into the Med. were vital in shutting down the Euros' ability to "talk" to us with source material.
If it weren't for the crusaders the fall of Constantinople wouldn't have happened.
But the notion that Islam was experiencing a golden age is still questionable. Consider this: Under the Roman emperors the Balkans and Anatolia were the richest places in the world. And of course they were. They are in a strategic position, have temperate climate and are full of resources.
But they were never rich again under Ottoman (Islamic) rule ...
>>60029489 It did. But contrary to what islam-apologists try to say, it didn't end because of the Crusades. The seeds for destruction of arabic science were sown by a philosopher called al-Ghazali, who pretty much said that things like aristotelean logic and experimentation are not islamic. As his ideas spread, the world of islam became more devout, but also more and more scientifically illiterate.
It was real, but it was basically because of stuff the Muslims stole from Persians and Byzantines. There was a golden age, despite them being Muslims, not because of them being Muslims. That's the important thing to understand.
i enter this thread because i knew that white people will be saying that it was all romans and greeks when even arabs and other muslim have admitted always that it was iranians knowledge that give birth to the islamic golden age
>On the long-term impact of this battle, Sir Muhammad Iqbal wrote: "If you ask me what is the most important event in the history of Islam, I shall say without any hesitation: “The Conquest of Persia.” The battle of Nehawand gave the Arabs not only a beautiful country, but also an ancient civilization; or, more properly, a people who could make a new civilisation with the Semitic and Aryan material. Our Muslim civilisation is a product of the cross-fertilisation of the Semitic and the Aryan ideas. It is a child who inherits the softness and refinement of his Aryan mother, and the sterling character of his Semitic father. But for the conquest of Persia, the civilisation of Islam would have been one-sided. The conquest of Persia gave us what the conquest of Greece gave to the Romans."
its amazing how pathetic and stupid you people are
>>60030992 Guess who defeated the Seljuk ooooh yeah the Egyptian kingdom guess who defeated the ottomans after fleeing from their rule and.took 70% oh yeah the Egyptian kingdom guess who defeated the mongols who tried to invade Europe and Africa oh yeah the Egyptian kingdom
>>60031413 they destroyed everything, that was haram for them they also destroyed most of books of the iranians and some iranians learned arabs and started translating the few books that they didnt destroy
Arabs were always stupid and are still worthless trash, they can't produce anything (E.g. Gulf States, everything in their country is almost made/run by foreigners), while Iran still produces many things on his own and has a great history of achievements
>>60031603 >(E.g. Gulf States, everything in their country is almost made/run by foreigners) that is false >>60031603 >while Iran still produces many things on his own and has a great history of achievements they are arabs just like gulf arabs they arent the ancient iranians
It happened but it was vastly overrated. What others have said about them basically borrowing the ideas of the classical Greeks is correct. This was knowledge that they came across after subjugating Syriac-speaking Nestorian Christians. The equally borrowed from the Chinese and Indians.
In terms of their own contributions to the sciences, these came mainly in the fields of optics, magnetism, and medicine. Figures like al-Kindi quite literally just adapted Hellenistic philosophy to an Arab-Islamic framework.
>>60031829 Tldr Every society struggles with change. Almost all try to stop it and go stagnant. Europe, because of its lack of centralized authority, went the other way and as a result dominated the world for centuries. A society that successfully limits what can be read cannot have a Golden Age and can only make incremental material gains from superior societies.
>>60031890 >he doesn't know farabi and kindi streamlined aristotlean thought into arabic jurisprudence
Why do you think averroes was praised so much? Because he came up with it? Nah mate, he was fighting against the ashari (read : anti-mutazilite) movement started by alghazelus a hundred years before to bring it back into their culture.
>>60032015 Wasn't it only because of the strongly centrialized catholic church western europe atually preserved and the Karolingian renaissance from the strong frankish empire we began making progress? The enlightenment even started in the absolute monarchy of France.
>>60029489 They conquered the Byzantines and used their knowledge for a couple of centuries before the constant infighting and stupidity of their religion tore it all down. So I guess yes, technically.
It's just a good thing that westerners stole it back before the mudfucks burned it all down. Take a look at what ISIS is doing even today: destroying ancient history and knowledge because it's non-Muslim. When Muslims have no one to fight they just start destroying shit around them, and then eventually start destroying themselves. It's a destructive religion by its very foundation.
>>60029613 Though they might have originated from there, nowadays they don't even resemble that much, but let's give credit where it's due, they did a whole bunch of stuff on álgebra, chemistry, literature, among other fields
>>60032286 >>60032269 >>60032115 >>60032015 >>60031878 GIYS‚ IGNORE THIS NIGGER JUST TRIES TO DENY ALL THE CIVILZATIONS BECAUSE HE I. A CIVILIZATIONLESS FAGGOTS THAT NIGGER WILL JUST DENY ANY FACTS ABOUT HOW THE BRITISH EMPIRE WAS THE.BIGGEST EMPIRE ETC AND WILL DENY THE ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS TOO STUPID NIGGER LMAO
>>60032488 >they did a whole bunch of stuff on álgebra, chemistry, literature, among other fields Nope, algebra comes from Greeks and Persians that were later conquered by Muslim armies. Mostly Arab Muslims claimed credit, but that's the pattern -- they conquer and claim they "invented" things that the people thay conquered created before Islam. Muslims are pathological liars, and once they run out of cultures to conquer and assimilate, their civilization rots and withers.
>>60032649 >yeah, no. what? they were at the same level in knowledge and sometimes in power Pic related if the Sassanid empire would have conquer central asia and united all the iranians under 1 empire the rome empire would have been ravaged
>>60029489 Well, yes. The Islamic world had a Golden Age. The mistake that is often made, however, is to think that either Islam or the Arabs had any hand in it. The Islamic Golden Age was mostly based on the translation, comment and research of previous works by Greeks, Han Chinese people and Indians, amongst other things numbers ("zero" is either Egyptian or Indian in origin, not Arab). Another very interesting fact is that most scientists from that era were of Iranian or Spanish descent and were mostly not Arabs.
In all fairness to our non-white guests, we do need to admit that we are coming from a place of privilege. We cannot understand what it's like to *not* be the race that is known as the authors of modern civilization.
This privilege surrounds us and blinds us to the fact that marginalized groups (some who are not yet civilized, and some who had to be dragged into modernity kicking and screaming) need to be able to dig into the footnotes of history to find their own relevance, however tangential to the subject.
"Oh look, a connection to Persia," they might say, totally ignoring the fact that Alexander the Great was a thing.
He got BTFO by ibn sina (avicenna) but still his contributions to medicine were bretty good. Including the discovery that fever was one of the human body's reaction to infections.
The problem with the islamic golden age is that all the good it did was rendered impotent by al ghazali's "incoherence of the philosophers". Hence why averroes called his counter response "incoherence of the incoherents". Sadly it never was enough to turn back the ship.
Islamic intellectuals to this day still consider ghazali to be a "proof of islam", which in respect is a title even superior to sheihk ul islam (the arabic equivalent of "doctor of the church" eg. Aquinas). Says it all really.
>>60033382 Of course. That doesn't mean the farsi/parsi language and culture didn't quickly become the dominant one in the future "iranian" region.
Eg. The franks came to dominate france under Clovis and later germany under Charlemagne. Does that suddenly mean we should stop referring to old france as french just because the franks only came from the northern regions of france and belgium/netherlands in casual conversations?
I see your point but it's semantics that belong in research papers and essays, not a wannabe chink imageboard.
>>60033929 >That doesn't mean the farsi/parsi language and culture didn't quickly become the dominant one in the future "iranian" region. lol that was AFTER ARAB INVASIONS and it happened because many arabs had to learn persian to understand the books they didnt destroy
they mongrelized persian culture and while mixing with other iranians they imposed that language on them and that is how you get your modern "iranian"
>>60033932 He himself didn't since he died pretty sharpish after extending into iran. The seleucid dynasty (and later the parthians & sassanids )did though.
It's pointless to argue that neither the greeks nor the assyrians had no cultural influence on either, let alone that they had any of their own. Ancient civilizations simply did not behave or think like we do about such things.
>>60031139 Before Baghdad happened though they had already gone full reaction and had begun to persecute scientists they found to be anti-islamic as well as artists. Everyone always ignores this and blames the end of their run on the Mongols, but that's simply not correct, the Abbasid Caliphate had already swung conservative and militaristic toward the end of it's tenure.
Exactly. There is no point in arguing what they were before since we're talking about iran during the islamic golden age, not the achaemenid/parthian/sassanian kind. Or even further if you want to unclude the babylonian/assyrian eras.
Point is that persians/iranians/whatever you want to call them were responsible for much of the intellectual contributions of the golden age. Even the bad ones like ghazali.
Ultimately what killed the islamic enlightenment was the resurgence of the faith in response to the mutalizite movement. Look up the ashar'i history, you'll see.
When you think about it, Islam has been nothing but a fucking shitshow. It's a religion dedicated to war. It has done nothing for humanity. Look at christianity and just,fuck man. Even then Islam is growing rapidly as shit. I would really like to see how the world looks like 1000 years ahead.
>>60034486 You seriously think leaving behind bogus governments (future diadochi and seleucids) is the equivalent of adopting persian culture?
And read that post again, I clearly said that thinking the hellenistic and persian cultures didnt influence each other is nonsense. Back in those days, you always made use of pre-existing modes of adminstrations and culture when you were doing your conquering presicely because it was difficult enough to develop and spread effectively on one's own. Simply put: you work with the locals and vice-versa.
But that does not mean Alexander was unmitigatedly adopting persiam culture and traditions. When he conquered gordium, he slashed in half their holy knot for fuck sake...
I chuckled at Al-ahzar's mosque being europe's model for the renaissance though.
Sylvester II already got most of his shit from Cordoba by the same time the mosque was even built. And no, islamic egypt didn't get gud until the ayubid (saladin's dynasty) and later the malmouk sultanate (which was actually where the remaining abassid rulers retired after the rise of the ottoman post mongol invasions).
Put it this way: How many "Islamic" philosophers weren't Aristotelians or Platonists?
Also think of it like this in the 600 years between Mo snuffing it and the sack of Baghdad almost nothing changed in the Islamic world technologically speaking. In Europe the time between the Renaissance and putting a man on the moon was about 600 years.
So the golden age wasn't really a period of spectacular human achievement.
>>60036508 It's kind of hard to say that the Islamic world didn't do anything. I mean, they did contributed to the world to a degree. But is it really fair to actually give the credit to Islam and not the scientists who managed to do science within an Islamic culture? You'd be surprised to know that Christians actually resented Greek ideals because of how the Romans treated Christians. It's all the same shit really. Religion is awful, Christians and Jihadists are just the same thing, a cult. Just give the credit to the scientists and individuals and not the societies they were in.
>>60037070 They did though. Avicenna's cannon of medicine was the medical go-to book in europe til the 17th or so century.
I'd give you that much of what they did was streamline, translate and compile al forms of knowledge they came across (being right in the middle of europe, asia, india and africa must have greatly helped for that). But they did come up with quite a few discoveries and inventions of their own. Either way it served its purpose.
The key difference is that we don't have europeans going around their daily lives spouting shit like " WE WUZ CONSULS N SHIEET" as if having been great aeons ago is a justification for remaining shit today.
>>60039724 Not saying he wasn't. He still got a lot of stuff from corboda though. I referred to him because he is one of the first well known european humanists to deal with arabic numerals, amongst other things.
Back in the 900s. Most intellectuals were platonists/aristotlean scholars. The europeans and arabs were no exception.
>>60040185 Got it. Some scholars decided to stay after the Christian Reconquista, the environment was freer. I remember this dude, Ghalib the Mozarabe. He was not in Cordoba but translated a ton of stuff.
>>60029489 Why do you people think historians suck Persian dick? It was all from them. And they got it from the Mesopotamians. Ever since the original settler tribes, the cultures that followed took what their predecessors had and took if forward.
>>60043441 I see, well Zahrawi makes a strong case for being an Arab, and that list is probably part of what have been lost during countless wars in the middle east and the burning of Baghdad library by mongols which possessed millions of books with many of them belonging to Arab scholars.
>>60043881 Historiography is always going to be a subject of contention, regardless of the source. It's a bit like epistemology where it's the structure itself of a field that's being studied and scrutinized.
Europe fell into a state of serious disrepair following Xiongnu incursions, resulting in germanic migration, empire crumbling, etc.
while the arabs kept "ancient knowledge" that europe lost, greek maths and sciences, Carthaginian physics, astronomy, Roman concrete, and built universities and shit to continue the legacy and over centuries improve on it. Islam didn't exactly big it to fruition, but it didn't suppress it either, originally at least.
>>60044179 I'm not sure they even bothered to make that kind of list at the time. We are interested in them, not the people of that day, at least I think. As far as I can remember, the people of the Middle-East made a bigger deal of their religion than of their bloodline.
Yeah, the burning of Baghdad was a crime against humanity. Not sure about "millions", but I know they had huge amounts of books and knowledge there. Loads were lost as well. Very sad, then again, there's nothing to be done about it.
Talking about Iraq always makes me sad. I've had to study its history for a course at university. It disgusts me how the region was plundered and abused, how many great things were lost and brought down by fools and barbaric hordes.
>>60044796 I am an atheist myself, and I hate how people interpret Islam through its many stages by a brief period in modern day history or its earliest days. Sure, Islam is fictitious like any other book out there, and it has many wrongs. But Muslim history during that "Golden era" was very interesting, and there was even advanced religious sects within Islam that Caliphs of that era followed called Mu'tazili, it called to consider religion as just spiritual thing, and scripts as a heritage and if they disagree with reasons then we must follow reason and science. That was 1100 years ago! >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu%CA%BFtazila
Sadly, and due to Islam having the "one nation for all" mentality, such a large empire couldn't have a continuous breed of good caliphs, and it lead to its weakness like Roman empire before it, and several other kingdom arisen inside this empire and its neighbors were getting stronger and attacked these newly formed separatist kingdoms. I hate modern Islam and the way Islam spread, but the Umayyad and the first half of the Abbasid caliphates were probably one of the best things to happen in that region.
>>60045091 >spaniards lol Anyway, many of them are Arabs, as for why "Gulf arabs" Don't have large representation, well it is easy, the gulf states were part of Persia, the inner part "Saudi" had a few immigration waves towards the north, and they were smaller in numbers compared to neighboring regions. So of course bigger populated regions are going to have more representation. With that being said, Arabs aren't just the ones living in the gulf, there's a second part of the Arabs that was even part of the Roman empire and had their own kingdoms and prosperous amazing cities (Eg. Petra)
>>60045335 >Atheist >Palestine Life must be fucking terrible where you live. Hizb Allah and the like must be a daily pain in the arse, mustn't it?
Yeah, there was an insane number of sects of Islam. I personally have heard good things about the Sufi's. They kind of fit your describtion of the Mu'tazila, but they were more spiritual than intellectual. I agree that there were amazing achievements during that era, but the system was made to fail. Not enough centrality, be it on a political or a religious level. The concept of 'ummat doesn't give enough coherence, since every sect will consider itself a 'ummat.
I wouldn't say in the whole region, but it certainly was for the Gulf region, Palestine and North Africa. I'm not so sure about Iraq, Iran and the other northern countries.
>>60045999 Dude, Saudi Arabia was empty even in the days of Muhammad, Muhammad was a good military leader whether you like it or not, he united the southern arabs and attacked neighboring regions, and the few guys that came after him were just as good as commanders. When wars ended and the empire expanded, many of these southern arabs returned to Mecca and Medina and their contributions were only to Islamic literature, the elite ones remained in the newly conquered regions and started to expand, and btw many of the local population remained with their original religions and languages, it was Mamluks and Kurds and later Turks that imposed Islamic conversion and Arabization on the population, first Arab caliphates (Umayyad, Abbasid) were much more relaxed about it that caused many parts of Syria and the Levant to remain Christian up until the Crusades ended. I used the term arab to express that not only Persians as many suggested in this thread contributed to the scientific movement but many from the regions that we consider Arabs today.
>>60046390 >I'm not so sure about Iraq, Iran and the other northern countries Are you kidding? Persia and Iraq reached an abundance in the amount of wealth during the Abbasids, even more than any region in the Islamic world. And combine that with the great scientific movement then, I don't see why it was bad for them? >M-muh ancient religions Even Islam is an extension of these religions.
>Life must be fucking terrible where you live Nah, just having different opinions most of the time.
>The concept of 'ummat doesn't give enough coherence, since every sect will consider itself a 'ummat. That's what I said. It is good as long there's a strong advanced empire to control all of the ummah and shit without it.
>>60030796 ottomans never cared about anatolia. they cared about balkans and gave their everything to that region. they exploited resources of anatolia for hundreds of years. in return, anatolian people rioted for 200 years.
>>60029489 This is a very complicated question. There certianly were quite a few advancments made in middle east during the medieval period. However, many of these were either: A) slight to non existent advanments and improvements of roman, greek and/or persian classical age knowledge B) discoveires in fileds such as medicine or astronomy, many of which had already been done by either earlier civilizations, or had been discovered by isolated civilizations (namley the mezo-american and south american civilization ps in regards to astronomy), or the inventions would be relativly useless in the long term, as people from other areas with no knowledge of the islamic discoveires would discover better solutions to the problems these inventions tried to solve. Or c) artistic works lost to the ages Furthermore, most of this was funded by rich shieks who were in no way funding this because of islam nor where the inventors scientists artist ect. motivated by islam. So to call it the "islamic golden age" is a misnomer, a better name would be "the medieval middle eastern golden age", telling us when where and what happened without confusing us by subtly implying islam had anything to do with the golden age beyond being the majority religion of the region it took place in.
>>60047017 I didn't mean that it didn't prosper. I'm just not sure it prospered more under islamic rule than under any other previous rule. The Middle-East was ruled by big powers, like Alexander the Great, Babylon, Akkad, after all.
I don't see where you get that "muh ancient religions" thing from.
The problem is, the 'Ummat is probably the reason why the Arabs aren't going to be a big power for a very long time. That's crippling.
>>60047485 Do you think your greentext somehow disproves my arguement? Or did you have no way to refute it and so you said to yourself "I know what I'll do! I'll rely on the steryotype that americans are stupid and use that to try to discredit him"
Yes, it did. It's pretty interesting because while the Carolingian renaissance was all Latin the Islamic Golden Age was all Greek. Catholics rediscovered writers like Cicero and thought of them as righteous pagans and all that, the Muslims did the same thing with philosophers like Plato.
The constitution of Iran is heavily influenced by Plato's Republic.
>>60047965 >there's no such thing as the Christian Golden Age That's because there hasn't been one singualar "golden age" for the western world after it became christian. We have the Renaissance, englightenment, the advancments made duting the 20th century, which includes a few different periods, like the space race, the computer boom, ect.
Without Islam, the Arabs wouldn't have been able to unite and would have stayed mainly irrelevant. Because of Islam, they started working together, built an empire so defined by muslim culture that I tend to call it "the muslim empire". "Golden Age" refers to a period of great prosperity. I think it's really used a lot for "scientifical achievements", but the original meaning is just that, a period of prosperity.
Also, to say "middle-eastern" would misrepresent the ethnical changes that were operated during that era. If you don't call it muslim, call it Arab. Given how important arabisation was to the muslim empire and how massively the non semite population was demographically crushed, I think that's one fair thing to say. Or maybe do you don't agree on this? But yeah, lots of what was claimed to be either muslim or Arab was actually Persian, Berber, Kurdish, etc etc.
>>60047819 >The Middle-East was ruled by big powers, like Alexander the Great, Babylon, Akkad, after all. And what makes you think they were more prosperous or peaceful than Ummyyad and Abbasid? If we consider Persia, Muslims didn't destroy any city in their capture of Persia and later Persia turned into a great hub for commerce and science, how's that a downgrade? When if you look at it, Persians at the time were defeated by a bunch of sandniggers from the desert. I think the first half of Abbasid and Umayyad were as great as any of these ancient civilizations. They had their own art, philosophy, scientific discoveries, bigger empire to trade in..etc. If anything they did what Alexander wanted to do which is unifying the empire in a one nation like state.
>>60047940 >invented surgery, and many medical advancements >great contributions to maths, even started their own branch of mathematics >earliest form of programmable machine >chemistry >astronomy >philosophy >invented optics science >many contributions to geography >engineering contributions . . . etc..
>>60030796 >If it weren't for the crusaders the fall of Constantinople wouldn't have happened.
Timur saved your ass from the Turks.
>In 1394, Bayezid laid siege to Constantinople.
>Thus, the siege of Constantinople continued, lasting until 1402. The beleaguered Byzantines had their reprieve when Bayezid fought the Timurid Empire in the East. At this time, the empire of Bayezid included Thrace (except Constantinople), Macedonia, Bulgaria, and parts of Serbia in Europe. In Asia, his domains extended to the Taurus Mountains. His army was considered one of the best in the Islamic world. In 1400, the Central Asian warlord Timur succeeded in rousing the local Turkic beyliks that had been vassals of the Ottomans to join him in his attack on Bayezid, who was also considered one of the most powerful rulers in the Muslim world during that period. In the fateful Battle of Ankara, on 20 July 1402, Bayezid was captured by Timur and the Ottoman army was defeated. Many writers claim that Bayezid was mistreated by the Timurids. However, writers and historians from Timur's own court reported that Bayezid was treated well, and that Timur even mourned his death. One of Bayezid's sons, Mustafa Çelebi, was captured with him and held captive in Samarkand until 1405.
>>60048498 Yeah I can agree with most of that. And I know the definition of go,den age, which is why I didn't deny that it happened, because the region definitely had one, but I was simply refuting the idea that this golden age entailed a great advancment of science without which the world would have never have been able to advance. "Arabian golden age" or "islamic empire golden age" would probably be a much better term.
>>60048498 >Kurdish Also you are being an ignorant nigger again. When people refer to it as "Arab" they are not taking the contribution from their original maker and attributing it to Arabs from Saudi Arabia. It is because even among your precious Berbers, ahmed, being an arab was a high status thing, as Arabs had sort of fanaticism about ancestry lines and their "purity". And back to the point, they say they are arabs because these people became Arabs whether at the time of the invention or later.
>>60048995 "Islamic Empire Golden Age" is long but probably captures the essence of what it was. As for the rest, I agree, although you'd have to discuss the relevance of that empire in terms of what it preserved from the Greeks and the Romans.
>>60048971 And what's wrong with that? Isn't that what science is? Building on previously known information and even changing it and adding to it? If every human decided to not learn from the other how to make fire, you'd be still in the jungle scratching your butt with a tree branch like a monkey. These people appreciated science and worked hard to improve it and add new things to it, and later invent their own things. If anything, it is a praise, since without them many of these scripts would've been lost, Ahmed.
Much of the aristotlean heritage was lost in medieval europe while platonism thrived. Europe still got echoes of it through the interim of the roman byzantine empire as well as its own inspired creations (eg. justinian corprus juris civilis), but the main bulk of aristotle's works came back to the west through the middleeast. One of the main reasons why crops of intellectuals like aquinas started to flourish again after the 11th century mark. Courtesy of the work of earlier clergy leaders like Sylvester II.
Ironically enough, it was the christian clergy that kept the flame of academia alive during the low middle ages to the high, and regressed only to what we contemporarily stereotype them to be AFTER the black plague where superstition and fear ran rampant.
>>60048767 >Muslims didn't destroy any city But they sure destroyed lots of stuff there. Anyway, that's not the point. Well some of those great empires, especially those that hailed from Mesopotamia, lasted much, much longer than the Muslim Empire. Now we have to put things into perspective. Of course, the Muslim Empire was richer and more powerful than the Akkadian Empire, but that's a question of era. Akkad was one of the very first empires in the world, so it wasn't as impressive as the Muslim Era Empire was. The Persians at the time were crumbling, they were at the end of their reign. Nothing impressive in beating a fallen giant.
Well, the Muslims did a poorer job at building their empire than the Sassanids or the Babylonians or the Akkadians. Those lasted a lot longer and with less trouble than the Muslim empire, which dissolved very quickly into a set of enemy realms.
>>60048767 >>invented surgery nope. that's a classical age invention, in fact recently it was discovered the Romans used many of the same tools for surgery that we use now, and that they would have been able to preform many advanced surgeries we previously thought were only first done in the modern era >>great contributions to maths, even started their own branch of mathematics they contributed to mathematics, but you're overstating the importance. >>earliest form of programmable machine that was the Greeks who did that actually but I'll admit that the during the period engineers such as Ismail al-Jazari did make impressive advancements, but they weren't the fist to do it, and it had no effect on robotics any where else in the world. >>chemistry >>astronomy >>philosophy those are just words, you're not stating how the Islamic empires did anything with them. granted the Islamic caliphates did make quite some advancements on astronomy, but it wasn't something toher cultures like the Chinese, Egyptians or south American and mesoamerican peoples hadn't discovered already. >>invented optics science optics date as far back as the Egyptians, and Islamic study of this was begun because of their study of Plato's Timaeus and Euclid's Optics >>many contributions to geography >>engineering contributions those are such vague stamens that they prove or disprove nothing, provide specific examples for these claims to matter. >>ect. seems you ran out of things to say so you resorted to this ad hominem: >>burger says they didn't do anything original which is completely false. The internet alone disproves, because of our invention of ARPANET
>>60049068 That's funny, a Moroccan gave me the same lecture some time ago, but he was bitching the other way around, he said that whole tribes convinced themselves that they were related to the Arabs, while it wasn't true. But you're acknowledging yourself that many things were called "Arab" while they weren't. So that's nice. Also, stop calling me an Arab, يا زنجي .
>>60050036 >Well, the Muslims did a poorer job at building their empire than the Sassanids or the Babylonians or the Akkadians. Those lasted a lot longer and with less trouble than the Muslim empire, which dissolved very quickly into a set of enemy realms. Not really, if you look at it like what Muslims think of it, Islamic caliphate lasted for over 1300 years, through several caliphate dynasties, arabs, persians, turks, kurds, fatimids..etc And same thing happened in ancient Egypt where rulers came from multiple ethnicities during its history, yet people never argue with its continuity as a civilization but look at it as a change of rule. You can fantasize all you want about ancient kingdoms, I live in the region and I spent most of my childhood reading its history, they did far more destruction, pillaging, massacring, and ethnic cleansing than first arab caliphates (ummayad, abbasid) ever dreamed of.
>>60050044 Go learn something, and then comeback :)
>>60050478 Many of those movements about muh heritage in the Arab world, is because people want to distance themselves from the massive failure that the region have became. Which is rather funny since the shit regions nowadays in the arab world, are the ones with the "we are not arab" people. If you look at the real arabs "gulfies" they are the most advanced countries and among the richest in the world, albeit a bit retarded culturally and socially. I think it is good that each arab nation find its own identity, but at the same time, having arabic as a common language for +350 million people is an economic advantage to these countries. France and England can only dream to have all Europe speaking their languages.
>>60050553 >I will say ad hominem because I learned it on /pol/ to sound smart You are retarded, and simply lacking good education which you claim to have it in the highest standard about the issue. So my advice to you remains the same, go learn something :)
>>60050932 >You are retarded, and simply lacking good education which you claim to have it in the highest standard about the issue. So my advice to you remains the same, go learn something :) I went to M.I.T. If you consider that a bad education then I'd love to see what you consider a good one. and that doesn't matter, because if I'm such a retard then you should easily be able to refute my argument. yet you haven't. If you can't disprove someone you believe is "retarded", what does that say about your mental capabilities?
>>60050482 >Islamic caliphate lasted for over 1300 years, through several caliphate dynasties, arabs, persians, turks, kurds, fatimids..
I'd consider your argument valid if there had been one power ruling over the whole territory for a set amount of t ime, but the fact is that the Arab world was divided and there were wars between factions and dynasties between the 12th century and the start of the Ottoman Empire. And I'm not even talking about how fucking troublesome the Kurds were in the Middle-East, I'm talking about how the Mashrek and the Maghreb were ruled by different dynasties that lead war against one another.
>they did far more destruction, pillaging, massacring, and ethnic cleansing than first arab caliphates (ummayad, abbasid) ever dreamed of. Hum...No. They utterly destroyed the indigenous population of the Middle-East. There's nothing but sandniggers all around, and maybe between 5 and 10% left of one population amongst other people that were ethnically cleansed by the Muslims. The other empires of the Middle-East, on the other hand, ruled through cultural assimilation. They had one dominant ethnia, and it shared its culture with the others, much like the Romans. Why? Because it's a good and effective way to rule over large territories.
>>60051407 >Tell me where were the scientific achievements from muslim countries the last couple hundred years? Hans, you know he'll just respond by saying it was Europeans fault they haven't done shit because "muh crusades"
>>60050806 >"gulfies" they are the most advanced countries and among the richest in the world Yeah, they're rich, but that's about it. They're not advanced in any way, shape or form. The only thing they understand is how to extract petrol. Other than that, they're retarded, not only culturally and socially, but also religiously, scientifically and literally.
That would be an advantage if they ever decided they wanted to speak fus7a. They mostly don't, they think it's too pompous and they mostly don't have the brains or the education to learn it properly.
Well they also want to say they're not arabs because, again, the Maghreb still has a lot of the original people of the region (about 40 to 50% depending on the region and country). So that's that. That's a lot more than in the Middle-East.
>>60051196 >I'd consider your argument valid if there had been one power ruling over the whole territory for a set amount of t ime, but the fact is that the Arab world was divided and there were wars between factions and dynasties between the 12th century and the start of the Ottoman Empire. And that didn't happen in the Roman empire? Didn't it even had several wars? Wasn't it divided into two western and eastern?
>Hum...No. Go learn something. Assyrians and Akkadians were the masters of ethnic cleansing and race mixing, they took every part of a single gender in the conquered population and replaced it with someone from foreign lands, ex. Samaritans (Half ancient hebrews, Half Assyrians). Also, you missed a point that I made clear during my first replies. Abbasids and Ummayads weren't that bad to the local population, and they only imposed special tax on them that wasn't much higher than Muslims paid. And due to that many of the Levant and Syria and Northern Iraq region aka fertile crescent was able to preserve its original religion and population up until the crusades, when Mamluks arrived and started the war of conversion towards the inhabitants. And btw Mamluks existed for the very same reason I mentioned before, since majority of Syria and Levant were of Christian religion they had to import soldiers from far regions and recruit them as an army.
>>60048767 >invented surgery, and many medical advancements bullshit. google Galen of Pregamum >great contributions to maths, even started their own branch of mathematics bullshit google Pythagoras >earliest form of programmable machine bullshit. astrrolabes were not "moslem inventions", even their name is greek >chemistry greek. >astronomy greek >philosophy greek >invented optics science italian >many contributions to geography bullshit, they used the maps of others. >engineering contributions muzzies never even achieved the skills of roman engineers.
the "moslem golden age" existed only as a counterpoint to the dark ages that were wracking europe and china at that time.
it's easy to be the "most advanced civilization" when every other civilization is busy destroying themselves.
Anyway, I like to join the gulf bashing party, but their HDI is on the rise, and rapidly, their universities are only increasing in ranks globally, they spend ridiculous amount of money to import western academics and institutes. And whether you like it or not, they have had some daring and interesting ideas going like masdar city, and the country that contain that project UAE is rapidly diversifying and becoming a trade and finance center, especially for Islamic finance which is rapidly growing. Bahrain is also an important hub for finance. As I said, they are retarded culturally and socially but they are doing somewhat good on other things, maybe they should be doing better, but for sure they are doing much better than other Arab countries.
>>60051744 Yes, it did. But we consider the two empires as separate entities. The fall of the Western Roman Empire marks the end of Antiquity, while the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire marks the end of the Middle Ages. Also, I'm not just talking about civil wars.
>Assyrians and Akkadians were the masters of ethnic cleansing and race mixing,
Now I'll need references on that.
Oh, right, Jizya? You mean the stuff the Dhimmi had to pay? THAT was supposed to be good in any way shape or form? I don't have a problem with the Jizya itself, it's a tax, but it's what it represents. People divided according to religion, and the Muslims had the best part in all things. If the other population made a move? They were fucked in the arse. Yes, being a dhimmi was so nice, compared to being a simple citizen of the Assyrian Empire.
Yeah, the Mamluks were terrible. As were the Turks and the other cunts.
>>60051773 >google Galen of Pregamum Google Al Zahrawi >The chief influence of Albucasis on the medical system of Europe was that his lucidity and method of presentation awakened a prepossession in favour of Arabic literature among the scholars of the West: the methods of Albucasis eclipsed those of Galen and maintained a dominant position in medical Europe for five hundred years, i.e long after it had passed its usefulness. He, however, helped to raise the status of surgery in Christian Europe; in his book on fractures and luxations, he states that ‘this part of surgery has passed into the hands of vulgar and uncultivated minds, for which reason it has fallen into contempt.’ The surgery of Albucasis became firmly grafted on Europe after the time of Guy de Chauliac (d.1368).
>bullshit >google Pythagoras What's Algebra you nigger >bullshit. >astrrolabes were not "moslem inventions", even their name is greek nice proof you've got there. Also Mohammad Musa and his brothers Ahmad and Hasan (collectively known as the "Banu Musa brothers") were also remarkable engineers. They are authors of the renowned Book of Ingenious Devices, which describes about one hundred devices and how to use them. Among these was "The Instrument that Plays by Itself", the earliest example of a programmable machine.
>>60052091 My mother's family is Flemish, my father's family is Italian. Fuck off, Muhammad.
As for the Gulf states. Just wait a few decades. When petrol runs out, they'll quickly go back to being completely irrelevant, and by the time that happens, I hope they'll have covered their arses. The things you named are indeed very interesting. Islamic finance has potential as well. But they'll need more than all that to survive when their oil runs out. Or when we don't need that kind of fuel anymore, which will happen, eventually. Then, the Gulf states will have very little for themselves.
>>60052330 >Now I'll need references on that. I gave you an example that you can look up in which it has references on Assyrians having it as a habit.
>Oh, right, Jizya? You mean the stuff the Dhimmi had to pay? THAT was supposed to be good in any way shape or form?
Yes, since they didn't have to serve in the army, they were citizens and reached high academic and government positions, many of the earliest caliphs advisors were Christian and Jews. And the amount of that tax is not varied, it is as much as Muslims pay with a few percentage added iirc. And to be able to just pay that and not serve in the army, and gain protection is not that much of a bad deal, don't you think?
>Yes, being a dhimmi was so nice, compared to being a simple citizen of the Assyrian Empire.
Yes, it was. I'd rather be Christian or Jew living in Umayyad or first half of Abbasid empire than any other early civilization.
The roots of algebra can be traced to the ancient Babylonians, who developed an advanced arithmetical system with which they were able to do calculations in an algorithmic fashion. The Babylonians developed formulas to calculate solutions for problems typically solved today by using linear equations, quadratic equations, and indeterminate linear equations. By contrast, most Egyptians of this era, as well as Greek and Chinese mathematics in the 1st millennium BC, usually solved such equations by geometric methods, such as those described in the Rhind Mathematical Papyrus, Euclid's Elements, and The Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art. The geometric work of the Greeks, typified in the Elements, provided the framework for generalizing formulae beyond the solution of particular problems into more general systems of stating and solving equations, although this would not be realized until mathematics developed in medieval Islam.
>>60052747 Nope, Imran There's a huge number of non Persian scientists And here's an example list. Also Imran, if you even pretend to know history then you'd realize that Persia was Sunni up until 17th century, and it was Shiites from Levant who converted them.
>>60052958 >gave you an example that you can look up in which it has references on Assyrians having it as a habit. Looking up is not my job if it's YOUR claim.
And in return, they had to pretend that they didn't have their own religion, could not renovate their own temples, were not allowed to marry outside of their religion, had their own tribunals and were second class citizens if there was any problem between a dhimmi and a Muslim. Gain protection? As in not get killed simply for not being a Muslim? Oh, and you had to be part of Ahl alkitaab to have the right to be a dhimmi. Atheists? Polytheists? They were fucking dead. The only reason why the Yazidi were allowed to live was because they were monotheists.
>I'd rather be Christian or Jew living in Umayyad or first half of Abbasid empire than any other early civilization. >any >not wanting to be a Roman or Greek citizen
Also, you don't seem to know all that much about the earlier populations of Mesopotamia.
The book was commissioned by the Abassid Caliph of Baghdad, Abu Jafar al-Ma'mun ibn Harun (786-833), who instructed the Banu Musa to acquire all of the Hellenistic texts that had been preserved by monasteries and by scholars during the decline and fall of Roman civilization. The Banū Mūsā brothers invented a number of automata (automatic machines) and mechanical devices, and they described a hundred such devices in their Book of Ingenious Devices.
Some of the devices described in the Book of Ingenious Devices were inspired by the works of Hero of Alexandria and Philo of Byzantium, as well as ancient Persian, Chinese and Indian engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Ingenious_Devices
>>60053038 >Europe was the prime example of equality LOL
Dhemmis rights in Umayyad and Abbasid >Personal freedom >Freedom of prayer >Freedom of ownership >Freedom of pursuing trade, education, and government positions. >Protection from prosecution
the only things that they weren't allowed to be is >army leaders
I don't see the grave inhumanity in that, while in Europe majority of people were second and third, even fourth class citizens.
>The roots of algebra can be traced to the ancient Babylonians >the guy who made it advanced, added plenty to it and wrote a book about its rules, and compiled an entire science out of it is a useless fuck, because he's a muslim >/pol/ logic Go get fucked by another Ahmed, Ahmed
>>60053267 >always have the Hajj They'll spend more money rebuilding what the muslims destroy and bury all the people the muslims trample than actually making profit out of it. Also, making profit from the Hajj is immoral for salafists, I'd expect.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.