Did the Islamic Golden Age Really Existed?

[dzheremi]

i am sure there were many of them. also if it were not for the Catholic Church, we would probably be speaking arabic right now.

Ya habibi, it’s not that bad!

Alvarillo: Thank you for your wonderful, informative posts. I have posted before here on CAF about the martyrs of Cordoba (850-859) and others during the days of al-Andalus. It certainly was not this ocean of tranquility, peacefulness, and tolerance that we are told it was. That is historical revisionism, whether it is on the part of modern Islamic apologists or others.

As to the topic of this thread, I do subscribe to the idea that the so-called “Islamic” golden age was not as we are told it was, but I would never argue from a position like that of the OP. It seems unnecessarily arrogant. I rather prefer the argument put forth by Assyrian scholar Peter BetBasoo expressed here (a text I’ve posted before). Certainly, Muslims have done many great things in the world for the advancement of all humanity (such as Mr. Muhammad Yunus, recipient of the 2006 Nobel peace prize for his work in micro-loan finance in Bangladesh), but the idea that Islam is to granted this status as a defender or propagator of scientific knowledge (often presented pitted against big, bad Christian Europe in its “dark age”) is quite frankly not only historically inaccurate, but terribly insulting to the many, many non-Muslims on whose backs this myth of an “Islamic golden age” is built.

 

[Libertarian_FL]

I was with you from the start. It is doubtless that there have been great contributions to science and civilization made by Muslims. Taking only one aspect for example, their capacity for taking the best from each of the cultures they conquered and combining it to form their own, as with architecture, was simply unparalleled.

However, as a Spaniard and as a student of history I can’t help but cringe at the inaccuracies that are constantly put forth about Al-Andalus. For example, and once again merely taking a small point so as to save time, the idea that they “ruled Spain for 700 years”. The year 711 the Moors came in, called by one of the two Visigoth factions fighting for supremacy to fight on their side and instead took over the country, in a short time and encountering very little (and where it was pathetic) resistance they easily penetrated up to the north. However, as early as 722 the reconquest had already started, and to make the blanket statement that they ruled Spain for 700 years doesn’t do justice to the complex period which was the reconquestwhen the situation was completely reversed by the end with the Moors only in Granada by the end of it and the Christian Kingdoms covering most of Spain, or the fact that from the 11th century onward the Califate was split into many rivaling kingdoms (reinos the taifas we call them, I don’t know what they would be in English). So, according to muslim propaganda and 19th century romantics, 3 centuries of a strong, centralized Moorish state (with many different political and phases within) fighting against weak Christian kingdoms, plus 4 centuries of weak Moorish kingdoms (with many different phases within too, even some great cultural and even military advances in this time) fighting against strong Christian nations equals seven centuries of Muslim rule in Spain.

It is true that this region DID have all three major faiths living as one in Spain. And it was the Catholic nations fighting them they could have opted for peace. And when Saladin retook Jerusalem did he ,like the Crusaders earlier,have a loodbath in the streets? Seems odd Catholics always ignore history when its their “bad thing”.

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

As others have already said. the conclusion of the OP that that the “golden age” may not have been all that it is touted for today is probably true, however the method for drawing that conclusion is faulty. One factor that is proven to be detrimental to muslim development is fasting while pregnant. The mother who fasts durring ramadon is slowing the brain development of the baby. the later in gestation the month falls the worse it is for the baby. I dont know who’s idea fasting for a month was but it sure didnt come from God.

 

[planten]

As others have already said. the conclusion of the OP that that the “golden age” may not have been all that it is touted for today is probably true, however the method for drawing that conclusion is faulty. One factor that is proven to be detrimental to muslim development is fasting while pregnant. The mother who fasts durring ramadon is slowing the brain development of the baby. the later in gestation the month falls the worse it is for the baby. I dont know who’s idea fasting for a month was but it sure didnt come from God.

There is no order to the pregnant ladies to fast During ramadhan. There is no such order. If any is doing it then it is at her own responsibilty and her own fault. It appears that you are Protesting to God on wrong grounds. You should not Protest.

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

**Actually… fasting in the Orthodox Church can be stricter than the Ramadan fast which ends at sundown. I don’t think Carnelian has any idea what he is talking about here. Orthodox fasts can be (and usually are) more absolute than the Ramadan rule in Islam. Orthodox fasting typically does not end at sundown.

Neither Muslims or Orthodox Christians insist on adherence to a fast when health may be compromised.**

 

[Andrew_Phillip]

As others have already said. the conclusion of the OP that that the “golden age” may not have been all that it is touted for today is probably true, however the method for drawing that conclusion is faulty. One factor that is proven to be detrimental to muslim development is fasting while pregnant. The mother who fasts durring ramadon is slowing the brain development of the baby. the later in gestation the month falls the worse it is for the baby. I dont know who’s idea fasting for a month was but it sure didnt come from God.

**Prayer and fasting are encouraged in the Bible.

Jesus did it too.

Jesus was God - so you are wrong. It is God’s idea, even if protestants don’t do it.**

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Did the Islamic Golden Age Really Existed?

Is this the bad grammar of the day thread? Wow! Talk about subject-verb agreement issues!

 

[benidict]

I was with you from the start. It is doubtless that there have been great contributions to science and civilization made by Muslims. Taking only one aspect for example, their capacity for taking the best from each of the cultures they conquered and combining it to form their own, as with architecture, was simply unparalleled.

However, as a Spaniard and as a student of history I can’t help but cringe at the inaccuracies that are constantly put forth about Al-Andalus. For example, and once again merely taking a small point so as to save time, the idea that they “ruled Spain for 700 years”. The year 711 the Moors came in, called by one of the two Visigoth factions fighting for supremacy to fight on their side and instead took over the country, in a short time and encountering very little (and where it was pathetic) resistance they easily penetrated up to the north. However, as early as 722 the reconquest had already started, and to make the blanket statement that they ruled Spain for 700 years doesn’t do justice to the complex period which was the reconquestwhen the situation was completely reversed by the end with the Moors only in Granada by the end of it and the Christian Kingdoms covering most of Spain, or the fact that from the 11th century onward the Califate was split into many rivaling kingdoms (reinos the taifas we call them, I don’t know what they would be in English). So, according to muslim propaganda and 19th century romantics, 3 centuries of a strong, centralized Moorish state (with many different political and phases within) fighting against weak Christian kingdoms, plus 4 centuries of weak Moorish kingdoms (with many different phases within too, even some great cultural and even military advances in this time) fighting against strong Christian nations equals seven centuries of Muslim rule in Spain.

it is a very complex subject and i am glad to have your expertise. i know very little about this time period. have only started studying spain in relation to my studies on the founder of opus dei. its a fascinating history. especially with the combination of religion and politcs in the earlier 20th century. Peace to you.

 

[SnakeMauler]

It is widely accepted that the Golden Age of Islam started in the 8th century and into the 13th century.

But let’s look at it carefully.

The Islamic era was established through warring turks in huge and terrible wars and conquests from the 7th to the 9th century that ultimately established the Caliphate.

Do you think its even remotely possible that while the empire was at war with people killing and getting killed, there were muslims who were feverishly working out mathematical algebras & science in made-shift laboratories and classrooms?

My point is this. It is (at least to me) totally ludicrous to believe that great mathematicians & scientists were born to the warring turks (barbaric in nature without any basics of math or science) during or right after the wars. It takes a few generations to produce great scientists & mathematicians.

Instead I believe it should be accepted that great mathematicians & scientists were captured and forcibly converted into muslims in these conquests. There was never any Islamic mathematicians nor Islamic scientists. There was a huge community of captive kafir mathematicians and scientists forced into islam and to adopt islamic names. Islam never had a great cultural golden age.

Just like the religion itself, everything that islam stands for is bogus and burgled/robbed/snatched/copied from the non-muslims. I cannot see how their claims can be validated/proven with sensible reasonings.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com

.

It’s a “Golden” age for Muslims, but not for all the poor people they took over.

 

[Contarini]

It’s a “Golden” age for Muslims, but not for all the poor people they took over.

Can you provide evidence showing in what way a Coptic peasant in AD. 700 was worse off than his ancestors in 600?

Edwin

 

[tomarin]

It is widely accepted that the Golden Age of Islam started in the 8th century and into the 13th century.

If you’ve ever stood in wonder before the Taj Mahal in India, you wouldn’t have any doubt that this Golden Age existed.

But let’s look at it carefully.

As other posters have pointed out, you’ve got a lot of basic facts wrong in what follows. So I commend you on your aspiration to look at the subject carefully, but you haven’t really started yet. My suggestion is that you counterbalance what you read on polemical websites with some actual scholarship about the period in question.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Did the Islamic Golden Age Really Existed?

Is this the bad grammar of the day thread? Wow! Talk about subject-verb agreement issues!

i noticed that too!!! maybe the OP was in a hurry or tired.

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

**Prayer and fasting are encouraged in the Bible.

Jesus did it too.

Jesus was God - so you are wrong. It is God’s idea, even if protestants don’t do it.**

We do, but we dont fast for a month.

 

[StrawberryJam]

We do, but we dont fast for a month.

I thought Jesus fasted for 40 days. So, shouldn’t people do it longer than a month?

 

[planten]

I thought Jesus fasted for 40 days. So, shouldn’t people do it longer than a month?

That was a good reminder in rememberance of Jesus. But protest about fasting may continue.

I have christian friends and as far as I know, I mean I have heard and believed, that christian fasting is more strict and TOUGH than the Muslims fasting.

 

[StrawberryJam]

That was a good reminder in rememberance of Jesus. But protest about fasting may continue.

I have christian friends and as far as I know, I mean I have heard and believed, that christian fasting is more strict and TOUGH than the Muslims fasting.

I’m sure the fasting believers of both sides that do it for the right reasons don’t find it TOUGH, but perhaps challenging. It may make them feel stronger in faith as a result.

As you say, the protest may continue.

Best to you planten

 

[SnakeMauler]

Can you provide evidence showing in what way a Coptic peasant in AD. 700 was worse off than his ancestors in 600?

Edwin

Not really. All I know is that it’s not right to take away peoples beliefs.

 

[MyRdmrLvs]

I thought Jesus fasted for 40 days. So, shouldn’t people do it longer than a month?

first walk on water, if that goes well begin fasting:thumbsup:

 

[Contarini]

Not really. All I know is that it’s not right to take away peoples beliefs.

Which the Muslims did not do. There are still a lot of Coptic Christians in Egypt. I suspect that given the chronic persecution they have endured from Muslims they regret the conquest now–but on the other hand they still commemorate in their hagiography the vicious persecution they endured from the Christian Roman Empire (for their belief that Christ has one nature instead of two).

This is the problem with statements about the evils of Islam made by people who have not actually studied the history, but simply judge everything from the vantage point of 21st-century democracy.

Most historical accounts I’ve read (see for instance Hodgson, The Venture of Islam) describe the Islamic conquerors as being (at least initially) more tolerant of the Coptic population than the Roman (Christian) government had been. Yes, the Christians had to pay a tax. Do you think they weren’t paying taxes before? Can you show me that the new taxes were higher? Again, the accounts I’ve read imply that they were lower. I’m not sure how this is determined, and I read with the awareness that sometimes Western scholars of Islam are actually biased in favor of Islam (out of a desire to be fair to a non-Western tradition). But I have certainly not seen any evidence that would lead me to believe that the condition of the non-Orthodox (or non-Catholic, if you prefer–those who did not belong to the imperial Church) inhabitants of the Roman Empire was worsened (at least in the short term) by coming under Muslim rule. Some later Islamic rulers were less tolerant, so I think a good case can be made that in the long run the Islamic conquest was a bad thing for the Copts (and the Jacobites in Syria). But it may depend on your perspective: it’s quite possible that if Syria and Egypt had remained under Roman rule, these groups would eventually have been forced back into the imperial Church. A Catholic or an Orthodox might regard this as a good thing. A Copt might see it differently.

Edwin

 

[7_Sorrows]

first walk on water, if that goes well begin fasting:thumbsup:

i know you are not the only poster who posted on fasting, but this thread is not about fasting. it is whether the islamic golden age really existed. we need to stick to the topic.