www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Ancient Greek wisdom, Byzantines, and Islam

Islamic scholars have been given credit for preserving Greek knowledge during the "dark ages" in the West. However, it has been apparently claimed by Greeks that the Byzantine empire was really the source of the preservation of ancient Greek learning during the "dark ages" of the West. Is any one on this forum knowledgable about this historical controversy? Does anyone know a good book or web site about this issue?

I do believe the Irish have been taking credit for this. However, the English conveniently burned all sacred relics and texts they could find in the 16th century, so we may never know.

However, the Greek texts were re-introduced to the Late Medieval West supposedly via Ireland and Irish-affiliated houses such as St. Gall, Lindesfarne, etc. The Benedictines preserved texts as well, the story goes.

Of course, Irish monasticism is based on Egyptian monasticism, so we can say at least Eastern-influenced groups preserved texts.

My knowledge of the Roman Empire's libraries in the East are limited, however. This may also be a case of "we may never know" because of the Western Crusader and later Ottoman Turk invasions and sacks of Constantinople.

In our politically correct era of West (that is, western European) bashing, it is often said that the Islamic world preserved Greek wisdom and passed it on to the Europeans. This is correct, but the implication that Muslims did this single-handed is not. Like most historical phemonena, the spread of the western intellectual tradition (that is, the one that began with the ancient Greeks) is complex. Medeival Islamic peoples played a large and important role as did Greek and Latin Christians. Yes, virtually the whole of the ancient Greek heritage was preserved in the libraries of the Eastern Roman Empire and eventually found its way into the Latin West. Thus, medieval Latin-speaking scholars often had two sources for pagan Greek texts: one Arabic and another Greek.

There is a good deal of modern scholarship on the transmission of Greek and Arabic texts to the medieval Latin West, much of it rather technical. A good place to start for the general reader is David C. Lindberg's The Beginnings of Western Science (University of Chicago Press, 1992). Prof. Lindberg's book is careful, accurate, and accessible.

Dr. Michael

Here is a good article on this subject,in yesterday's The American Thinker http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4744.
Jonathan Carson, the author of the article, is calling the concept of Islamic preservation of Greek knowledge "dhimmi history". It seems to predate thie decade's emphasis on 'political correctness". It is found in the Oxford University History of Islam:
In �Islam and Christendom,� a similar chapter in The Oxford History of Islam, Jane Smith identifies the greatest of the Arab contributions to Western culture that Johns says we fail to respect at our peril:

It has long been recognized that one of the most significant and lasting contributions of the medieval Muslim world to Christendom was to provide access for western scholars to the great classics of Greece and Rome by their translation into Arabic, from which they were rendered into European languages. Most of the works of Plato and Aristotle were known to Arab Muslims.

Since Smith�s passage is written in the language of dhimmitude, it is itself in need of translation. �Most of the works of Plato� means The Republic. �Most of the works of...Aristotle� includes works that Aristotle did not write and that do not reflect his philosophy. Access �for western scholars to the great classics of...Rome� means nothing. A �lasting� contribution means access to a translation from Arabic into Latin until a translation directly from the Greek is available or even means access to a translation from Arabic into Latin after a translation directly from the Greek is already available. The passive �were rendered� means �were rendered by Christians and Jews, not Muslims.�

A parting thought: was Gibbon's "The Fall of the Roman Empire" important in the general idea that the Byzantine empire was not important and that not much intellectually happened there?

I took a quick look at Carson's article. Some of the points that he makes are well-taken. Yet, I do think that he may go overboard by questioning whether there was a "golden age of Islamic philosophy."

I think that there was and that medieval Islamic scholars made substantial contributions to western civilization. Moreover, Islamic schools had a great influence of the development of intellectual life in western Europe. Thus, I agree that one should not diminish the medieval Islamic contribution.

My problem is with claims that the west has diminished this contribution. This is not true. You do not have to look very far in medieval Latin texts to find great praise of Islamic scholars. This has always been acknowledged in Latin west, from the twelfth century to our own day. The claim to the contrary is simply politically-inspired Euro-bashing for which there is no historical evidence.

I do not think that a useful response to this Euro-bashing (on this topic) is to diminish the medieval Islamic contribution. It is rather to affirm the Islamic contribution and ask why Islamic lands today are no longer the great centers for intellectual life that they once were. This, it seems to me, the the more interesting question.

Regarding the medieval Greek (Byzantine) contribution, I agree that it is not appreciated. This is because it is relatively unknown. Exactly why this is the case is an interesting historical question to which I do not have a good answer. In any case, the notion that nothing of intellectual originality came out of the medieval Greek east is certainly untrue. Even older histories, such as that of Tatakis, give evidence of this. New scholarship currently underway will provide even more evidence in the near future.

Dr. Michael