history question Rome - Persia

[Anaoshak]

Gentleman Jim Safley Is A Qualified Historian Before He Joined The Centre His Software Expertise Are Aimed At Digitally Storing Old Archives and Documents.He Has Been Working As An Archivists Not Only At GMU But Several Other Projects As Well.

Will Durant Was Never A Professional Historian Never Did He Study It Academically Nor Did He Even Teach It He Only Started Reading It When He Became Lecturer At A Church.You Have To Understand The Kind of Environment and Kind of People He Was Delivering The Lecture to

His Depiction Of Muslim Rule in India Is Filled With Sweeping Generalisations.And That Is Something Hitorians Have Criticisised Him For In Other Places

Sorry, but Mr. Safley finished his Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), History in GMU in 2002 after finishing his Associate of Arts in 1999.
This is his work experience since he finished school,

• Software Developer + Metadata Specialist
  Center for History and New Media, George Mason University
  2002 – Present (14 years)
• Intern Records Manager
  National Office, Phi Beta Kappa Society
  2001 – 2002 (1 year)
• Student Archivist Assistant
  Special Collections and Archives, George Mason University
  2001 – 2002 (1 year)
• Internship
  Center for Legislative Archives, National Archives and Records Administration
  2000 – 2000 (less than a year)

He has only had a real job as a Software Developer and Metadata Specialist(For 14 years). His "Student Archivist Assistant" title is from when he went to GMU. I'm not trying to discredit the fellow, but to call him a Historian in the sense of what we are talking about now is a bit of a stretch with his pedigree, as well as not being able to find any of his papers or works. The projects he has worked on are , http://scripto.org/ , http://omeka.org/ , http://wardepartmentpapers.org/ and http://911digitalarchive.org/

You wrote that a lot of Historians criticised Will Durant's depiction of Muslim Rule in India? Who?

Will Durant, actually held a Bachelor of Arts(History) from Saint Peter's College and then also a PhD from Columbia University in Philosophy. But yes, he did lecture in a Church as well as was brought up as a Christian, i however don't really care what anyone Religious pedigree is. I researched it a little bit, and the only reason he basically is being called Islamophobic is because certain people don't want anything bad about Islam to be written or said. Or about certain countries etc.
Take me for example, i am a Persian/Iranian, whatever you want to call it. If i read about Nader Shah's invasion of the Mughal Empire, and read about the Massacre of Delhi from different accounts and they all corroborate the event. I'm not going to deny it just because he happened to be Iranian.
I read Reza Aslan's Zealot a while ago when the whole thing with him on Fox news happened a few years ago, basically someone was discrediting him because he as a Muslim wrote about Jesus the historical figure. I would never say that he is anti-christian or not a historian at all just because he happens to be a Muslim writing about Jesus.
To me, if you keep reading different books from different eras of time and written by different authors and you see a pattern about how historians are writing about a certain event, the more likely it is to have happened.

I can't speak for Age of Louis XIV that Plumb criticised, as i haven't read it. And Plumb himself has written books about the same era as Age of Louis XIV so I'm sure he knows what he is saying. He is accusing them of making history really shallow and short basically and misled because of it.
"Everything is gloss, smoothed away, made inevitable . . . the rhythm and flow of history . . . reduced to a collection of personalities . . . so facile that the unwary will be first ensnared and then misled."

Anyway , I've mainly only read their first book in the series, Our Oriental Heritage (1935).
Which is the one we are having this discussion about now And got me curious as to why you would write "Durant Is Known Islamophobe and Not A Historian At All. Numerous Historians Have Questioned His Works and Claims
and Even Refuted Some of Them." But not cite any sources or anything at all about it except a piece from a blog written by a guy who obviously has biased opinions.

Sorry friend, but there needs to be more than that to accuse a historian of being an Islamophobe and not a historian at all.

@MarkusS
http://io9.gizmodo.com/heres-what-third-century-china-thought-about-the-roman-1253007513
Maybe something? Not Persian and i know you wrote that you had read some of the stuff the Chinese wrote about Rome already. If i do find anything more, I'll let you know. Hopefully It's something new

 

[Samlee]

Which is the one we are having this discussion about now And got me curious as to why you would write "Durant Is Known Islamophobe and Not A Historian At All. Numerous Historians Have Questioned His Works and Claims
and Even Refuted Some of Them." But not cite any sources or anything at all about it except a piece from a blog written by a guy who obviously has biased opinions.

Sorry friend, but there needs to be more than that to accuse a historian of being an Islamophobe and not a historian at all.

Ok Let Me Give You Another Reference
James Henry Breasted, who was America’s preeminent Egyptologist and the founder of the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, wrote a lengthy review for the Saturday Review of Literature, claiming that Durant’s “effort to include so much detail has involved the author in disastrous difficulties.” As partial proof, Breasted alleged various errors of fact. For instance:

We have long known that the width of ancient Egyptian ships was regularly one-third of their length; but the author tells us that “ships a hundred feet long by half a hundred feet wide plied the Nile and the Red Sea.” . . . We are told by Mr. Durant in the matter of buildings that “by the Twelfth Dynasty the pyramid had ceased to be the fashionable form of sepulture,” although all the kings of this dynasty without exception were buried in pyramids.
(Breasted, Interpreting The Orient)

In Some Cases Durant Conceded To Historical Inaccuracies

“n the course of a thousand pages on thirty centuries of cultural history in Egypt and Asia I have made some serious errors of detail which would have been avoided by a specialist with a lifetime to devote to a segment of this subject.”
( Durant, “Letters to the Editor: Will Durant Replies to James H. Breasted: Interpreting the Orient,” Saturday Review of Literature, August 3, 1935).

Durant Made A sweeping Generalisation Of What Was Perhaps A Golden Era In Subcontinents History.A Ton Of Historians Can Refute His Claim Even His Depiction On The Life Of The Holy Prophet Is Far From Accurate And Is Objectionable To Me As A Muslim.


Riaz Haq May Be Biased But The Subject Of His Blogs Are Not History But Present Day Socio Economics of South Asia

It Is Pointless To Argue About Jim Safley's Qualifications If You Read His Text(So Unfortunate The Link Is No Longer Available) He Quoted Other Historians

And what happened to the Muslim empire? The same thing that happens to all empires.


Unfortunately It's true. If you read history, It'll describe the burning of libraries, books etc.
For example, Al-Tabari wrote that the Arab Commander Sa'ad ibn Abi Waqqas wrote to Caliph Umar asking what should be done with the books at Ctesiphon. Umar wrote back: "If the books contradict the Qur'an, they are blasphemous. On the other hand, if they are in agreement, they are not needed, as for us Qur'an is sufficient." The huge library was destroyed and the books, the product of the generations of Persian scientists and scholars were thrown into fire or the Euphrates. And same thing happened to other libraries such as the library of Rayy later on, also Temples were destroyed/or converted into mosques etc. Scholars were killed and so on and so forth.
Now, one could say "those are Islamophobic" views. And they probably would have been justly called that, If it wasn't written down by the muslims/arabs themselves both in history books as well as in hadiths. And this isn't limited to the Persian Empire only, for example Abd'l Latif of Baghdad states that the library of Alexandria was destroyed by Amr, by the order of Caliph Umar.

Keep in mind that most Arabs today, Are people who have been "arabized". Most of them weren't Arabs back then.

What you see today, being done to Hatra, Nimrud, to the temples of Palmyra and etc by certain groups in Iraq and Syria, It's a very similar pattern to what was done back then. Cultural genocide/cleansing.

Dear You Can't Take A Hadith On Face Value You Have To Look At Isnad And Authenticity Of It.Durants Claim That Arabs Burned Libraries Stands In Complete Contradiction To What He Writes Here


Islam and Science by Will Durant

(p 239-45) The Age of Faith by Will Durant 1950

In those lusty centuries of Islamic life the Moslems labored for such an understanding. The caliphs realized the backwardness of the Arabs in science and philosophy, and the wealth of Greek culture surviving in Syria.

The Umayyads wisely left unhindered the Christian, Sabaean, or Persian colleges at Alexandria, Beirut, Antioch, Harran, Nisibis, and Jund-i-Shapur; and in those schools the classics of Greek science and philosophy were preserved, often in Syriac translations. Moslems learning Syriac or Greek were intrigued by these treatises; and soon translations were made into Arabic by Nestorian Christians or Jews. Umayyad and Abbasid princes stimulated this fruitful borrowing.

Al-Mansur, al-Mamun, and al-Mutawakkil dispatched messengers to Constantinople and other Hellenistic cities-sometimes to their traditional enemies the Greek emperors-asking for Greek books, especially in medicine or mathematics; in this way Euclid's Elements came to Islam. In 830 al-Mamun established at Baghdad, at a cost of 200,000 dinars ($950,000), a "House of Wisdom" (Bayt al-Hikmah) as a scientific academy, an observatory, and a public library; here he installed a corps of translators, and paid them from the public treasury. To the work of this institution, thought Ibn Khaldun, Islam owed that vibrant awakening which in causes-the extension of commerce and the rediscovery of Greece-and results-the flowering of science, literature, and art-resembled the Italian Renaissance.

From 750 to 900 this fertilizing process of translation continued, from Syriac, Greek, Pahlavi, and Sanskrit. At the head of the translators in the House of Wisdom was a Nestorian physician, Hunain ibn Ishaq (809-73)- i.e., John son of Isaac. By his own account he translated a hundred treatises of Galen and the Galenic school into Syriac, and thirty-nine into Arabic; through his renderings some important works of Galen escaped destruction. Further, Hunain translated Aristotle's Categories, Physics, and Magna Moralia; Plato's Republic, Timaeus, and Laws; Hippocrates' Aphorisms, Dioscorides' Materia Medica, Ptolemy's Quadripartiturn, and the Old Testament from the Septaugant Greek.

Al-Mamun endangered the treasury by paying Hunain in gold the weight of the books he had translated. Al-Mutawakkil made him court physician, but jailed him for a year when Hunain, though threatened with death, refused to concoct a poison for an enemy. His son Ishaq ibn Hunain helped him with his translations, and himself rendered into Arabic the Metaphysics, On the Soul, and On the Generation and Corruption of Animals of Aristotle, and the commentaries of Alexander of Aphrodisias-a work fated to wield great influence on Moslem philosophy.

By 850 most of the classic Greek texts in mathematics, astronomy, and medicine had been translated. It was through its Arabic version that Ptolemy's Almagest received its name; and only Arabic versions preserved Books V-VII of the Conics of Apollonius of Perga, the Mechanics of Hero of Alexandria, and the Pneumatics of Philo of Byzantium. Strange to say, the Mohammedans, so addicted to poetry and history, ignored Greek poetry, drama, and historiography; here Islam accepted the lead of Persia instead of Greece.

It was the misfortune of Islam and humanity that Plato, and even Aristotle, came into Moslem ken chiefly in Neoplatonic form: Plato in Porphyry's interpretation, and Aristotle discolored by an apocryphal Theology of Aristotle written by a Neoplatonist of the fifth or sixth century, and translated into Arabic as a genuine product of the Stagirite. The works of Plato and Aristotle were almost completely translated, though with many inaccuracies; but as the Moslem scholars sought to reconcile Greek philosophy with the Koran, they took more readily to Neoplatonist interpretations of them than to the original books themselves. The real Aristotle reached Islam only in his logic and his science.

The continuity of science and philosophy from Egypt, India, and Babylonia through Greece and Byzantium to Eastern and Spanish Islam, and thence to northern Europe and America, is one of the brightest threads in the skein of history. Greek science, though long since enfeebled by obscurantism, misgovernment, and poverty, was still alive in Syria when the Moslems came; at the very time of the conquest Severus Sebokht, abbot of Kennesre on the upper Euphrates, was writing Greek treatises on astronomy, and was making the first known mention of Hindu numerals outside of India (662).

The Arabic inheritance of science was overwhelmingly Greek, but Hindu influences ranked next. In 773, at al-Mansur's behest, translations were made of the Siddhantas-Indian astronomical treatises dating as far back as 425 B.C.; these versions may have been the vehicle through which the "Arabic" numerals and the zero were brought from India into Islam.

In 813 al-Khwarizmi used the Hindu numerals in his astronomical tables; about 814 he issued a treatise known in its Latin form as Algoritinide numero Indorum "al-Khwarizmi on the Numerals of the Indians"; in time algorithm or algorism came to mean any arithmetical system based on the decimal notation.

In 976 Muhammad ibn Ahmad, in his Keys of the Sciences, remarked that if, in a calculation, no number appears in the place of tens, a little circle should be used "to keep the rows." This circle the Moslems called sifr, "empty" whence our cipher; Latin scholars transformed sifr into zephy rum, which the Italians shortened into zero.

Algebra, which we find in the Greek Diophantes in the third century, owes its name to the Arabs, who extensively developed this detective science. The great figure here-perhaps the greatest in medieval mathematics-was Muhammad ibn Musa (780-850), called al-Khwarizmi from his birthplace Khwarizm (now Khiva), east of the Caspian Sea. Al-Khwarizmi contributed effectively to five sciences:

he wrote on the Hindu numerals; compiled astronomical tables which, as revised in Moslem Spain, were for centuries standard among astronomers from Cordova to Changan; formulated the oldest trigonometrical tables known; collaborated with sixty-nine other scholars in drawing up for al-Mamun a geographical encyclopedia; and in his Calculation of Integration and Equation gave analytical and geometrical solutions of quadratic equations. This work, now lost in its Arabic form, was translated by Gerard of Cremona in the twelfth century, was used as a principal text in European universities until the sixteenth century, and introduced to the West the word algebra (al-jabr-"restitution," "completion").

Thabit ibn Qurra (826-901), besides making important translations, achieved fame in astronomy and medicine, and became the greatest of Moslem geometers. Abu Abdallah al-Battani (850-929), a Sabaean of Raqqa known to Europe as Albategnus, advanced trigonometry far beyond its beginnings in Hipparchus and Ptolemy by substituting triangular for Ptolemy's quadrilateral solutions, and the sine for Hipparchus' chord; he formulated the trigonometrical ratios essentially as we use them today.

The Caliph al-Mamun engaged a staff of astronomers to make observations and records, to test the findings of Ptolemy, and to study the spots on the sun. Taking for granted the sphericity of the earth, they measured a terrestrial degree by simultaneously taking the position of the sun from both Palmyra and the plain of Sinjar; their measurement gave ~ miles-half a mile more than our present calculation; and from their results they estimated the earth's circumference to approximate 20,000 miles.

These astronomers proceeded on completely scientific principles: they accepted nothing as true which was not confirmed by experience or experiment. One of them, Abu'l-Farghani, of Transoxiana, wrote (c. 86o) an astronomical text which remained in authority in Europe and Western Asia for 700 years. Even more renowned was al-Battani; his astronomical observations, continued for forty-one years, were remarkable for their range and accuracy;he determined many astronomical coefficients with remarkable approximation to modern calculations-the precession of the equinoxes at 54.5 a year, and the inclination of the ecliptic at 230.

Working under the patronage of the early Buwayhid rulers of Baghdad, Abu'l-Wafa (in the disputed opinion of Sadillot) discovered the third lunar variation 6oo years before Tycho Brahe.24 Costly instruments were built for the Moslem astronomers: not only astrolabes and armillary spheres, known to the Greeks, but quadrants with a radius of thirty feet, and sextants with a radius of eighty. The astrolabe, much improved by the Moslems, reached Europe in the tenth century, and was widely used by mariners till the seventeenth. The Arabs designed and constructed it with aesthetic passion, making it at once an instrument of science and a work of art.

Even more important than the charting of the skies was the mapping of the earth, for Islam lived by tillage and trade. Suleiman al-Tajir-i.e., the merchant-about 840 carried his wares to the Far East; an anonymous author wrote a narrative of Suleiman's journey; this oldest Arabic account of China antedated Marco Polo's Travels by 425 years.

In the same century Ibn Khordadhbeh wrote a description of India, Ceylon, the East Indies, and China, apparently from direct observation; and Ibn I-Iawqal described India and Africa. Ahmad al-Yaqubi, of Armenia and Khurasan, wrote in 891 a Book of the Countries, giving a reliable account of Islamic provinces and cities, and of many foreign states. Muhammad al-Muqaddasi visited all the lands of Islam except Spain, suffered countless vicissitudes, and in 985 wrote his Description of the Moslem Empire-the greatest work of Arabic geography before al-Biruni's India.

Abu al-Rayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Biruni (973-1048) shows the Moslem scholar at his best. Philosopher, historian, traveler, geographer, linguist, mathematician, astronomer, poet, and physicist-and doing major and original work in all these fields-he was at least the Leibniz, almost the Leonardo, of Islam. Born like al-Khwarizmi near the modern Khiva, he signalized again the leadership of the Transcaspian region in this culminating century of medieval science.

The princes of Khwarizm and Tabaristan, recognizing his talents, gave him a place at their courts. Hearing of the bevy of poets and philosophers at Khwarizm, Mahmud of Ghazni asked its prince to send him al-Biruni, Ibn Sina, and other savants; the prince felt obliged to comply (ioi8), and al-Biruni went to live in honor and studious peace with the bellicose ravisher of India.

Perhaps it was in Mahmud's train that al-Biruni entered India;in any case he stayed there several years, and learned the language and the antiquities of the country. Returning to Mahmud's court, he became a favorite of that incalculable despot. A visitor from northern Asia offended the king by describing a region, which he claimed to have seen, where for many months the sun never set.

Mahmud was about to imprison the man for jesting with royalty when al-Biruni explained the phenomenon to the satisfaction of the king and the great relief of the visitor. Mahmud's son Masud, himself an amateur scientist, showered gifts and money upon al-Biruni, who often returned them to the treasury as much exceeding his needs.

His first major work (c. 1000) was a highly technical treatise-Vestiges of the Past (Athar-ul-Baqiya).on the calendars and religious festivals of the Persians, Syrians, Greeks, Jews, Christians, Sabaeans, Zoroastrians, and Arabs. It is an unusually impartial study, utterly devoid of religious animosities. As a Moslem al-Biruni inclined to the Shia sect, with an unobtrusive tendency to agnosticism. He retained, however, a degree of Persian patriotism, and condemned the Arabs for destroying the high civilization of the Sasanian regime.

Otherwise his attitude was that of the objective scholar, assiduous in research, critical in the scrutiny of traditions and texts (including the Gospels), precise and conscientious in statement, frequently admitting his ignorance, and promising to pursue his inquiries till the truth should emerge. In the preface to the Vestiges he wrote like Francis Bacon: "We must clear our minds . . . from all causes that blind people to the truth-old custom, party spirit, personal rivalry or passion, the desire for influence." While his host was devastating India al-Biruni spent many years studying its peoples, languages, faiths, cultures, and castes. In 1030 he published his masterpiece, History of India (Tarikh al-Hind).

At the outset he sharply distinguished between hearsay and eyewitness reports, and classified the varieties of "liars" who have written history.28 He spent little space on the political history of India, but gave forty-two chapters to Hindu astronomy, and eleven to Hindu religion. He was charmed by the Bhagavad Gita. He saw the simi1arity between the mysticism of the Vedanta, the Sufis, the Neopythagoreans, and the Neoplatonists.

He compared excerpts from Indian thinkers with like passages from Greek philosophers, and expressed his preference for the Greeks. "India," he wrote, "has produced no Socrates; no logical method has there expelled fantasy from science." Nevertheless he translated several Sanskrit works of science into Arabic, and, as if to pay a debt, rendered into Sanskrit Euclid's Elements and Ptolemy's Almagest.

His interest extended to nearly all the sciences. He gave the best medieval account of the Hindu numerals. He wrote treatises on the astrolabe, the planisphere, the armillary sphere; and formulated astronomical tables for Sultan Masud. He took it for granted that the earth is round, noted "the attraction of all things towards the center of the earth," and remarked that astronomic data can be explained as well by supposing that the earth turns daily on its axis and annually around the sun, as by the reverse hypothesis.

He speculated on the possibility that the Indus valley had been once the bottom of a sea.31 He composed an extensive lapidary, describing a great number of stones and metals from the natural, commercial, and medical points of view. He determined the specific gravity of eighteen precious stones, and laid down the principle that the specific gravity of an object corresponds to the volume of water its displaces.

He found a method of calculating, without laborious additions, the result of the repeated doubling of a number, as in the Hindu story of the chessboard squares and the grains of sand. He contributed to geometry the solution of theorems that thereafter bore his name. He composed an encyclopedia of astronomy, a treatise on geography, and an epitome of astronomy, astrology, and mathematics.

He explained the workings of natural springs and artesian wells by the hydrostatic principle of communi- cating vessels.13 He wrote histories of Mahmud's reign, of Subuktigin, and of Khwarizm. Oriental historians call him "the Sheik" as if to mean "the master of those who know." His multifarious production in the same generation with Ibn Sina, Ibn al-Haitham, and Firdausi, marks the turn of the tenth century into the eleventh as the zenith of Islamic culture, and the climax of medieval thought.

Chemistry as a science was almost created by the Moslems; for in this field, where the Greeks (so far as we know) were confined to industrial experience and vague hypothesis, the Saracens introduced precise observation, controlled experiment, and careful records. They invented and named the alembic (al-anbiq), chemically analyzed innumerable substances, composed lapidaries, distinguished alkalis and acids, investigated their affinities, studied and manufactured hundreds of drugs.* Alchemy, which the Moslems inherited from Egypt, contributed to chemistry by a thousand incidental discoveries, and by its method, which was the most scientific of all medieval operations.

Practically all Moslem scientists believed that all metals were ultimately of the same species, and could therefore be transmuted one into another. The aim of the alchemists was to change "base" metals like iron, copper, lead, or tin into silver or gold; the "philosopher's stone" was a substance-ever sought, never found-which when properly treated would effect this transmutation.

Blood, hair, excrement, and other materials were treated with various reagents, and were subjected to calcination, sublimation, sunlight, and fire, to see if they contained this magic al-iksir or essence. He who should possess this elixir would be able at will to prolong his life. The most famous of the alchemists was Jabir ibn Hayyan (702-65), known to Europe as Gebir.

Son of a Kufa druggist, he practiced as a physician, but spent most of his time with alembic and crucible. The hundred or more works attributed to him were produced by unknown authors, chiefly in the tenth century; many of these anonymous works were translated into Latin, and strongly stimulated the development of European chemistry. After the tenth century the science of chemistry, like other sciences, gave ground to occultism, and did not lift its head again for almost three hundred years.

The remains of Moslem biology in this period are scant. Abu Hanifa al-Dinawari (815-95) wrote a Book of Plants based on Dioscorides, but adding many plants to pharmacology. Mohammedan botanists knew how to produce new fruits by grafting; they combined the rose bush and the almond tree to generate rare and lovely flowers. Othman Amr al-Jahiz (d. 869) propounded a theory of evolution like al-Masudi's: life had climbed "from mineral to plant, from plant to animal, from animal to man."

The mystic poet Jalal ud-din accepted the theory, and merely added that if this has been achieved in the past, then in the next stage men will become angels, and finally God.

Excerpts from Will Durant's The Age of Faith Pages 162-186 Pub. 1950

http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/is_durant.htm

 

[flamer84]

To be honest the constant Persian-Roman rivalry was inevitable and lets not forget that the Byzantines suffered massive losses aswell. The Arabs came all the way to the gates of Constantinople. If it wasnt for this legendary city the Romans would most likely have fallen aswell.

The Siege of 718 and the Battle of Tours are the 2 major events that stopped Islam from conquering Europe.

 

[Anaoshak]

Ok Let Me Give You Another Reference
James Henry Breasted, who was America’s preeminent Egyptologist and the founder of the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, wrote a lengthy review for the Saturday Review of Literature, claiming that Durant’s “effort to include so much detail has involved the author in disastrous difficulties.” As partial proof, Breasted alleged various errors of fact. For instance:

We have long known that the width of ancient Egyptian ships was regularly one-third of their length; but the author tells us that “ships a hundred feet long by half a hundred feet wide plied the Nile and the Red Sea.” . . . We are told by Mr. Durant in the matter of buildings that “by the Twelfth Dynasty the pyramid had ceased to be the fashionable form of sepulture,” although all the kings of this dynasty without exception were buried in pyramids.
(Breasted, Interpreting The Orient)

In Some Cases Durant Conceded To Historical Inaccuracies

“n the course of a thousand pages on thirty centuries of cultural history in Egypt and Asia I have made some serious errors of detail which would have been avoided by a specialist with a lifetime to devote to a segment of this subject.”
( Durant, “Letters to the Editor: Will Durant Replies to James H. Breasted: Interpreting the Orient,” Saturday Review of Literature, August 3, 1935).

Durant Made A sweeping Generalisation Of What Was Perhaps A Golden Era In Subcontinents History.A Ton Of Historians Can Refute His Claim Even His Depiction On The Life Of The Holy Prophet Is Far From Accurate And Is Objectionable To Me As A Muslim.


Riaz Haq May Be Biased But The Subject Of His Blogs Are Not History But Present Day Socio Economics of South Asia

It Is Pointless To Argue About Jim Safley's Qualifications If You Read His Text(So Unfortunate The Link Is No Longer Available) He Quoted Other Historians

As i said, yes, he had had difficulties with DETAILS and jumped over a bunch of stuff. That's what happens when you take that much history and try to write it down, which is exactly what is being said in the quote you just wrote, and also hence the quote i gave in my last post which basically is agreeing with what you just posted now. But i wouldn't discredit him as a historian because of that. Just about every historian gets critique as well as told that he/she has made errors. He hasn't been discredited as a historian by any historians. And you still haven't provided a single source when you said that "a lot of Historians criticised Will Durant's depiction of Muslim Rule in India". That was what i asked for.
Anyway, lets just agree to disagree because we aren't getting on the subject.

Jim Safley hasn't published any texts that i know it. That's what I'm pointing that out here ,how can one call him a "qualified historian" and not Will Durant. I mean, the link on Riaz Haq's source takes me to twitter when i click it. And his blog was the only source you gave, which is why i pointed it out. I haven't read his texts or his work in history, because i can't find any.

Dear You Can't Take A Hadith On Face Value You Have To Look At Isnad And Authenticity Of It. Durants Claim That Arabs Burned Libraries Stands In Complete Contradiction To What He Writes Here

Islam and Science by Will Durant

(p 239-45) The Age of Faith by Will Durant 1950

In those lusty centuries of Islamic life the Moslems labored for such an understanding. The caliphs realized the backwardness of the Arabs in science and philosophy, and the wealth of Greek culture surviving in Syria.

The Umayyads wisely left unhindered the Christian, Sabaean, or Persian colleges at Alexandria, Beirut, Antioch, Harran, Nisibis, and Jund-i-Shapur; and in those schools the classics of Greek science and philosophy were preserved, often in Syriac translations. Moslems learning Syriac or Greek were intrigued by these treatises; and soon translations were made into Arabic by Nestorian Christians or Jews. Umayyad and Abbasid princes stimulated this fruitful borrowing.

Al-Mansur, al-Mamun, and al-Mutawakkil dispatched messengers to Constantinople and other Hellenistic cities-sometimes to their traditional enemies the Greek emperors-asking for Greek books, especially in medicine or mathematics; in this way Euclid's Elements came to Islam. In 830 al-Mamun established at Baghdad, at a cost of 200,000 dinars ($950,000), a "House of Wisdom" (Bayt al-Hikmah) as a scientific academy, an observatory, and a public library; here he installed a corps of translators, and paid them from the public treasury. To the work of this institution, thought Ibn Khaldun, Islam owed that vibrant awakening which in causes-the extension of commerce and the rediscovery of Greece-and results-the flowering of science, literature, and art-resembled the Italian Renaissance.

From 750 to 900 this fertilizing process of translation continued, from Syriac, Greek, Pahlavi, and Sanskrit. At the head of the translators in the House of Wisdom was a Nestorian physician, Hunain ibn Ishaq (809-73)- i.e., John son of Isaac. By his own account he translated a hundred treatises of Galen and the Galenic school into Syriac, and thirty-nine into Arabic; through his renderings some important works of Galen escaped destruction. Further, Hunain translated Aristotle's Categories, Physics, and Magna Moralia; Plato's Republic, Timaeus, and Laws; Hippocrates' Aphorisms, Dioscorides' Materia Medica, Ptolemy's Quadripartiturn, and the Old Testament from the Septaugant Greek.

Al-Mamun endangered the treasury by paying Hunain in gold the weight of the books he had translated. Al-Mutawakkil made him court physician, but jailed him for a year when Hunain, though threatened with death, refused to concoct a poison for an enemy. His son Ishaq ibn Hunain helped him with his translations, and himself rendered into Arabic the Metaphysics, On the Soul, and On the Generation and Corruption of Animals of Aristotle, and the commentaries of Alexander of Aphrodisias-a work fated to wield great influence on Moslem philosophy.

By 850 most of the classic Greek texts in mathematics, astronomy, and medicine had been translated. It was through its Arabic version that Ptolemy's Almagest received its name; and only Arabic versions preserved Books V-VII of the Conics of Apollonius of Perga, the Mechanics of Hero of Alexandria, and the Pneumatics of Philo of Byzantium. Strange to say, the Mohammedans, so addicted to poetry and history, ignored Greek poetry, drama, and historiography; here Islam accepted the lead of Persia instead of Greece.

It was the misfortune of Islam and humanity that Plato, and even Aristotle, came into Moslem ken chiefly in Neoplatonic form: Plato in Porphyry's interpretation, and Aristotle discolored by an apocryphal Theology of Aristotle written by a Neoplatonist of the fifth or sixth century, and translated into Arabic as a genuine product of the Stagirite. The works of Plato and Aristotle were almost completely translated, though with many inaccuracies; but as the Moslem scholars sought to reconcile Greek philosophy with the Koran, they took more readily to Neoplatonist interpretations of them than to the original books themselves. The real Aristotle reached Islam only in his logic and his science.

The continuity of science and philosophy from Egypt, India, and Babylonia through Greece and Byzantium to Eastern and Spanish Islam, and thence to northern Europe and America, is one of the brightest threads in the skein of history. Greek science, though long since enfeebled by obscurantism, misgovernment, and poverty, was still alive in Syria when the Moslems came; at the very time of the conquest Severus Sebokht, abbot of Kennesre on the upper Euphrates, was writing Greek treatises on astronomy, and was making the first known mention of Hindu numerals outside of India (662).

The Arabic inheritance of science was overwhelmingly Greek, but Hindu influences ranked next. In 773, at al-Mansur's behest, translations were made of the Siddhantas-Indian astronomical treatises dating as far back as 425 B.C.; these versions may have been the vehicle through which the "Arabic" numerals and the zero were brought from India into Islam.

In 813 al-Khwarizmi used the Hindu numerals in his astronomical tables; about 814 he issued a treatise known in its Latin form as Algoritinide numero Indorum "al-Khwarizmi on the Numerals of the Indians"; in time algorithm or algorism came to mean any arithmetical system based on the decimal notation.

In 976 Muhammad ibn Ahmad, in his Keys of the Sciences, remarked that if, in a calculation, no number appears in the place of tens, a little circle should be used "to keep the rows." This circle the Moslems called sifr, "empty" whence our cipher; Latin scholars transformed sifr into zephy rum, which the Italians shortened into zero.

Algebra, which we find in the Greek Diophantes in the third century, owes its name to the Arabs, who extensively developed this detective science. The great figure here-perhaps the greatest in medieval mathematics-was Muhammad ibn Musa (780-850), called al-Khwarizmi from his birthplace Khwarizm (now Khiva), east of the Caspian Sea. Al-Khwarizmi contributed effectively to five sciences:

he wrote on the Hindu numerals; compiled astronomical tables which, as revised in Moslem Spain, were for centuries standard among astronomers from Cordova to Changan; formulated the oldest trigonometrical tables known; collaborated with sixty-nine other scholars in drawing up for al-Mamun a geographical encyclopedia; and in his Calculation of Integration and Equation gave analytical and geometrical solutions of quadratic equations. This work, now lost in its Arabic form, was translated by Gerard of Cremona in the twelfth century, was used as a principal text in European universities until the sixteenth century, and introduced to the West the word algebra (al-jabr-"restitution," "completion").

Thabit ibn Qurra (826-901), besides making important translations, achieved fame in astronomy and medicine, and became the greatest of Moslem geometers. Abu Abdallah al-Battani (850-929), a Sabaean of Raqqa known to Europe as Albategnus, advanced trigonometry far beyond its beginnings in Hipparchus and Ptolemy by substituting triangular for Ptolemy's quadrilateral solutions, and the sine for Hipparchus' chord; he formulated the trigonometrical ratios essentially as we use them today.

The Caliph al-Mamun engaged a staff of astronomers to make observations and records, to test the findings of Ptolemy, and to study the spots on the sun. Taking for granted the sphericity of the earth, they measured a terrestrial degree by simultaneously taking the position of the sun from both Palmyra and the plain of Sinjar; their measurement gave ~ miles-half a mile more than our present calculation; and from their results they estimated the earth's circumference to approximate 20,000 miles.

These astronomers proceeded on completely scientific principles: they accepted nothing as true which was not confirmed by experience or experiment. One of them, Abu'l-Farghani, of Transoxiana, wrote (c. 86o) an astronomical text which remained in authority in Europe and Western Asia for 700 years. Even more renowned was al-Battani; his astronomical observations, continued for forty-one years, were remarkable for their range and accuracy;he determined many astronomical coefficients with remarkable approximation to modern calculations-the precession of the equinoxes at 54.5 a year, and the inclination of the ecliptic at 230.

Working under the patronage of the early Buwayhid rulers of Baghdad, Abu'l-Wafa (in the disputed opinion of Sadillot) discovered the third lunar variation 6oo years before Tycho Brahe.24 Costly instruments were built for the Moslem astronomers: not only astrolabes and armillary spheres, known to the Greeks, but quadrants with a radius of thirty feet, and sextants with a radius of eighty. The astrolabe, much improved by the Moslems, reached Europe in the tenth century, and was widely used by mariners till the seventeenth. The Arabs designed and constructed it with aesthetic passion, making it at once an instrument of science and a work of art.

Even more important than the charting of the skies was the mapping of the earth, for Islam lived by tillage and trade. Suleiman al-Tajir-i.e., the merchant-about 840 carried his wares to the Far East; an anonymous author wrote a narrative of Suleiman's journey; this oldest Arabic account of China antedated Marco Polo's Travels by 425 years.

In the same century Ibn Khordadhbeh wrote a description of India, Ceylon, the East Indies, and China, apparently from direct observation; and Ibn I-Iawqal described India and Africa. Ahmad al-Yaqubi, of Armenia and Khurasan, wrote in 891 a Book of the Countries, giving a reliable account of Islamic provinces and cities, and of many foreign states. Muhammad al-Muqaddasi visited all the lands of Islam except Spain, suffered countless vicissitudes, and in 985 wrote his Description of the Moslem Empire-the greatest work of Arabic geography before al-Biruni's India.

Abu al-Rayhan Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Biruni (973-1048) shows the Moslem scholar at his best. Philosopher, historian, traveler, geographer, linguist, mathematician, astronomer, poet, and physicist-and doing major and original work in all these fields-he was at least the Leibniz, almost the Leonardo, of Islam. Born like al-Khwarizmi near the modern Khiva, he signalized again the leadership of the Transcaspian region in this culminating century of medieval science.

The princes of Khwarizm and Tabaristan, recognizing his talents, gave him a place at their courts. Hearing of the bevy of poets and philosophers at Khwarizm, Mahmud of Ghazni asked its prince to send him al-Biruni, Ibn Sina, and other savants; the prince felt obliged to comply (ioi8), and al-Biruni went to live in honor and studious peace with the bellicose ravisher of India.

Perhaps it was in Mahmud's train that al-Biruni entered India;in any case he stayed there several years, and learned the language and the antiquities of the country. Returning to Mahmud's court, he became a favorite of that incalculable despot. A visitor from northern Asia offended the king by describing a region, which he claimed to have seen, where for many months the sun never set.

Mahmud was about to imprison the man for jesting with royalty when al-Biruni explained the phenomenon to the satisfaction of the king and the great relief of the visitor. Mahmud's son Masud, himself an amateur scientist, showered gifts and money upon al-Biruni, who often returned them to the treasury as much exceeding his needs.

His first major work (c. 1000) was a highly technical treatise-Vestiges of the Past (Athar-ul-Baqiya).on the calendars and religious festivals of the Persians, Syrians, Greeks, Jews, Christians, Sabaeans, Zoroastrians, and Arabs. It is an unusually impartial study, utterly devoid of religious animosities. As a Moslem al-Biruni inclined to the Shia sect, with an unobtrusive tendency to agnosticism. He retained, however, a degree of Persian patriotism, and condemned the Arabs for destroying the high civilization of the Sasanian regime.

Otherwise his attitude was that of the objective scholar, assiduous in research, critical in the scrutiny of traditions and texts (including the Gospels), precise and conscientious in statement, frequently admitting his ignorance, and promising to pursue his inquiries till the truth should emerge. In the preface to the Vestiges he wrote like Francis Bacon: "We must clear our minds . . . from all causes that blind people to the truth-old custom, party spirit, personal rivalry or passion, the desire for influence." While his host was devastating India al-Biruni spent many years studying its peoples, languages, faiths, cultures, and castes. In 1030 he published his masterpiece, History of India (Tarikh al-Hind).

At the outset he sharply distinguished between hearsay and eyewitness reports, and classified the varieties of "liars" who have written history.28 He spent little space on the political history of India, but gave forty-two chapters to Hindu astronomy, and eleven to Hindu religion. He was charmed by the Bhagavad Gita. He saw the simi1arity between the mysticism of the Vedanta, the Sufis, the Neopythagoreans, and the Neoplatonists.

He compared excerpts from Indian thinkers with like passages from Greek philosophers, and expressed his preference for the Greeks. "India," he wrote, "has produced no Socrates; no logical method has there expelled fantasy from science." Nevertheless he translated several Sanskrit works of science into Arabic, and, as if to pay a debt, rendered into Sanskrit Euclid's Elements and Ptolemy's Almagest.

His interest extended to nearly all the sciences. He gave the best medieval account of the Hindu numerals. He wrote treatises on the astrolabe, the planisphere, the armillary sphere; and formulated astronomical tables for Sultan Masud. He took it for granted that the earth is round, noted "the attraction of all things towards the center of the earth," and remarked that astronomic data can be explained as well by supposing that the earth turns daily on its axis and annually around the sun, as by the reverse hypothesis.

He speculated on the possibility that the Indus valley had been once the bottom of a sea.31 He composed an extensive lapidary, describing a great number of stones and metals from the natural, commercial, and medical points of view. He determined the specific gravity of eighteen precious stones, and laid down the principle that the specific gravity of an object corresponds to the volume of water its displaces.

He found a method of calculating, without laborious additions, the result of the repeated doubling of a number, as in the Hindu story of the chessboard squares and the grains of sand. He contributed to geometry the solution of theorems that thereafter bore his name. He composed an encyclopedia of astronomy, a treatise on geography, and an epitome of astronomy, astrology, and mathematics.

He explained the workings of natural springs and artesian wells by the hydrostatic principle of communi- cating vessels.13 He wrote histories of Mahmud's reign, of Subuktigin, and of Khwarizm. Oriental historians call him "the Sheik" as if to mean "the master of those who know." His multifarious production in the same generation with Ibn Sina, Ibn al-Haitham, and Firdausi, marks the turn of the tenth century into the eleventh as the zenith of Islamic culture, and the climax of medieval thought.

Chemistry as a science was almost created by the Moslems; for in this field, where the Greeks (so far as we know) were confined to industrial experience and vague hypothesis, the Saracens introduced precise observation, controlled experiment, and careful records. They invented and named the alembic (al-anbiq), chemically analyzed innumerable substances, composed lapidaries, distinguished alkalis and acids, investigated their affinities, studied and manufactured hundreds of drugs.* Alchemy, which the Moslems inherited from Egypt, contributed to chemistry by a thousand incidental discoveries, and by its method, which was the most scientific of all medieval operations.

Practically all Moslem scientists believed that all metals were ultimately of the same species, and could therefore be transmuted one into another. The aim of the alchemists was to change "base" metals like iron, copper, lead, or tin into silver or gold; the "philosopher's stone" was a substance-ever sought, never found-which when properly treated would effect this transmutation.

Blood, hair, excrement, and other materials were treated with various reagents, and were subjected to calcination, sublimation, sunlight, and fire, to see if they contained this magic al-iksir or essence. He who should possess this elixir would be able at will to prolong his life. The most famous of the alchemists was Jabir ibn Hayyan (702-65), known to Europe as Gebir.

Son of a Kufa druggist, he practiced as a physician, but spent most of his time with alembic and crucible. The hundred or more works attributed to him were produced by unknown authors, chiefly in the tenth century; many of these anonymous works were translated into Latin, and strongly stimulated the development of European chemistry. After the tenth century the science of chemistry, like other sciences, gave ground to occultism, and did not lift its head again for almost three hundred years.

The remains of Moslem biology in this period are scant. Abu Hanifa al-Dinawari (815-95) wrote a Book of Plants based on Dioscorides, but adding many plants to pharmacology. Mohammedan botanists knew how to produce new fruits by grafting; they combined the rose bush and the almond tree to generate rare and lovely flowers. Othman Amr al-Jahiz (d. 869) propounded a theory of evolution like al-Masudi's: life had climbed "from mineral to plant, from plant to animal, from animal to man."

The mystic poet Jalal ud-din accepted the theory, and merely added that if this has been achieved in the past, then in the next stage men will become angels, and finally God.

Excerpts from Will Durant's The Age of Faith Pages 162-186 Pub. 1950

http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/is_durant.htm

I'm sorry my friend, but you didn't really read my post when you wrote ANY this. I'm talking about what happened during the Rashidun Caliphate, during the first couple of Conquests. This whole text that you have written, is about the Umayyad Caliphate and after that. And yes, it was A LOT better during that era than it was during the Rashidun Caliphate. But it wasn't good during that time either. It became better though, among other things because some people started translating books and etc into Arabic, mainly the Persians did in the beginning. According to some, they contributed the most to Islam. But it's up for debate. Not now though lol

And regarding hadiths, i read a bunch of them years ago and cross reference what is being said to different books. That's how i come to the conclusion that the one hadith with the most similarity as well as the earliest one, is probably the correct one, as in that's how it happened.

And i never wrote that the "Durants Claim That Arabs Burned Libraries". I don't know where you got that from.
There are arabic/muslic sources which wrote about it and those were the ones i wrote about.
These are just some of the authors that wrote about the burning of the Library of Alexandria,
Abd'l Latif of Baghdad (1162–1231), (which is the one i mentioned in my post which you replied to).
Al-Qifti (1172–1248)
Al-Maqrizi (1364–1442)

And the source i wrote about regarding the Burning of libraries in Ctesiphon, archives etc,
was according to an account by Al-Tabari (839–923).

 

[Arminkh]

That is our fault and i feel sorry for that. It was this senseless constant war between us and persia that allowed this to happen. I feel sorry for that.

It was only a matter of bad timing. Arabs invaded Iran just at the point that Sassanian empire was imploding from within. To make it worst, Iranians were going through the same paradigm shift that Europe went before the renascence meaning, they had had enough of their own religious leaders who were also abusing their power. So unfortunately there wasn't anything left to hold the nation together neither a strong government and sense of nationalism or any belief in a different religion to hold against Islam.

As others mentioned here, the destruction was beyond imagination and not only physical damage to the infrastructure and/or literature. Arabs intentionally tried to wipe out Iranian race and culture. For example Arabs had priority over Iranian men to marry Iranian women. Adopting Islam and Arabic names was an obligation or you had no choice but to live like a slave for all your life and even after that Iranians were treated as a second level civilian. I think it is a miracle that we have been able to save our language to some extent and our independent national identity.

The only things that saved Europe against the invasion were two things in my mind: 1- The body of water that exists between Europe and Middle east and has always protected Europe against Eastern armies and 2- The fact that Christianity was still young so the war turned into a religious crusade which is usually a stronger cause than national interests.

Going back to your question, libraries of the days were all destroyed. They even destroyed Tisfoon (Or Ctesiphon, Iran's capital) instead of living in it and used its stones to build a new city nearby which is knows as Baghdad today. What do you think could survive such a destruction? There are writings on the stone in hard to reach mountainous areas that describe Iran's wars with Roman empire but nothing about Roman culture, science or literature.

 

[MarkusS]

It was only a matter of bad timing. Arabs invaded Iran just at the point that Sassanian empire was imploding from within. To make it worst, Iranians were going through the same paradigm shift that Europe went before the renascence meaning, they had had enough of their own religious leaders who were also abusing their power. So unfortunately there wasn't anything left to hold the nation together neither a strong government and sense of nationalism or any belief in a different religion to hold against Islam.

As others mentioned here, the destruction was beyond imagination and not only physical damage to the infrastructure and/or literature. Arabs intentionally tried to wipe out Iranian race and culture. For example Arabs had priority over Iranian men to marry Iranian women. Adopting Islam and Arabic names was an obligation or you had no choice but to live like a slave for all your life and even after that Iranians were treated as a second level civilian. I think it is a miracle that we have been able to save our language to some extent and our independent national identity.

The only things that saved Europe against the invasion were two things in my mind: 1- The body of water that exists between Europe and Middle east and has always protected Europe against Eastern armies and 2- The fact that Christianity was still young so the war turned into a religious crusade which is usually a stronger cause than national interests.

Going back to your question, libraries of the days were all destroyed. They even destroyed Tisfoon (Or Ctesiphon, Iran's capital) instead of living in it and used its stones to build a new city nearby which is knows as Baghdad today. What do you think could survive such a destruction? There are writings on the stone in hard to reach mountainous areas that describe Iran's wars with Roman empire but nothing about Roman culture, science or literature.

Which is sad.

Our history teacher said our "empire" feels lonely because of that. We were the last one standing. We conquered egypt, greece and so on and made it part of our empire.

Thats great but also creates a problem. We made an outward position an inward position. Because of that we know only from us because ourself. It would make things so much easier to have an outside persepctive. The germanics had no literature and no accounts remained. The chinese talk about us like anotehr heavenly empire. There simply is too much distance. Persia was the only outside perspective we could have. So i guess all we can hope for is some old stuff found there now.

I cant imagine the aras got evrything. Iran is such a great nation. Who knows.

We find new things even in Rome today. Build a new parking lot and find old channels or even palace

 

[Arminkh]

Which is sad.

Our history teacher said our "empire" feels lonely because of that. We were the last one standing. We conquered egypt, greece and so on and made it part of our empire.

Thats great but also creates a problem. We made an outward position an inward position. Because of that we know only from us because ourself. It would make things so much easier to have an outside persepctive. The germanics had no literature and no accounts remained. The chinese talk about us like anotehr heavenly empire. There simply is too much distance. Persia was the only outside perspective we could have. So i guess all we can hope for is some old stuff found there now.

I cant imagine the aras got evrything. Iran is such a great nation. Who knows.

We find new things even in Rome today. Build a new parking lot and find old channels or even palace

It is hard to believe indeed. Nothing on paper has survived anyway if not by Arabs, environment have destroyed them for sure as unfortunately, Iranians were modern enough back then not to use clay or stone tablets for writing their day to day things so unlike the administrative archives of Archimedes that survived through time, all archives are gone.

But it is good to hope for it. We may find more things like this: I almost cried when I saw it last night:

Spoon and fork from Sassanian era. They look so modern even by today's standard:

Iranian sword. It is single blade and was a "quick draw" type like Samurai swords where the blade faces up while in holster enable the warrior to strike as soon as he draws.

Iranian Warrior against Greek warrior. As usual Iranians with their proud beard and Greeks with their clean shaved face:

And this one specially for you. Iran's Emperor Shapur the First in a man to man combat Against Roman emperor Valerian from third century. Again look at the faces, Iranians with mustache and beard and Romans with clean shaved faces. Isn't it funny that both sides have still kept this tradition?

 

[MarkusS]

It is hard to believe indeed. Nothing on paper has survived anyway if not by Arabs, environment have destroyed them for sure as unfortunately, Iranians were modern enough back then not to use clay or stone tablets for writing their day to day things so unlike the administrative archives of Archimedes that survived through time, all archives are gone.

But it is good to hope for it. We may find more things like this: I almost cried when I saw it last night:

Spoon and fork from Sassanian era. They look so modern even by today's standard:

Iranian sword. It is single blade and was a "quick draw" type like Samurai swords where the blade faces up while in holster enable the warrior to strike as soon as he draws.

Iranian Warrior against Greek warrior. As usual Iranians with their proud beard and Greeks with their clean shaved face:

And this one specially for you. Iran's Emperor Shapur the First in a man to man combat Against Roman emperor Valerian from third century. Again look at the faces, Iranians with mustache and beard and Romans with clean shaved faces. Isn't it funny that both sides have still kept this tradition?

It depends. We had an era when our emperors did also wear beards. During the imperial high time.

emperors like Marcus Aurelius:

Marcus Aurelius is by far the most important emperor for me. He was a titanic person.

I dont know how explain it but he was the right leader at the right time. When he became emperor the empire was at a hight but a horrific sickness infected people. Some kind of virus.

It killed in evry city. The poor, the rich. Chaos broke out and historians say rome would have collapsed if it wouldnt have been Marcus Aurelius as emperor. He allowed himself no weakness. He stood there like an icon and led the people through the darkness of those times.

he was no great warrior. More a philosopher. His enemy couldn´t be seen.

It would be so great to have outside accounts about him.

 

[-SINAN-]

It depends. We had an era when our emperors did also wear beards. During the imperial high time.

emperors like Marcus Aurelius:

Marcus Aurelius is by far the most important emperor for me. He was a titanic person.

I dont know how explain it but he was the right leader at the right time. When he became emperor the empire was at a hight but a horrific sickness infected people. Some kind of virus.

It killed in evry city. The poor, the rich. Chaos broke out and historians say rome would have collapsed if it wouldnt have been Marcus Aurelius as emperor. He allowed himself no weakness. He stood there like an icon and led the people through the darkness of those times.

he was no great warrior. More a philosopher. His enemy couldn´t be seen.

It would be so great to have outside accounts about him.

Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus ?

I was gonna ask if he was important in your history.

World's only single-piece 2nd century Caracalla statue discovered in southern Turkey

 

[Samlee]

As i said, yes, he had had difficulties with DETAILS and jumped over a bunch of stuff. That's what happens when you take that much history and try to write it down, which is exactly what is being said in the quote you just wrote, and also hence the quote i gave in my last post which basically is agreeing with what you just posted now. But i wouldn't discredit him as a historian because of that. Just about every historian gets critique as well as told that he/she has made errors. He hasn't been discredited as a historian by any historians. And you still haven't provided a single source when you said that "a lot of Historians criticised Will Durant's depiction of Muslim Rule in India". That was what i asked for.
Anyway, lets just agree to disagree because we aren't getting on the subject.

Jim Safley hasn't published any texts that i know it. That's what I'm pointing that out here ,how can one call him a "qualified historian" and not Will Durant. I mean, the link on Riaz Haq's source takes me to twitter when i click it. And his blog was the only source you gave, which is why i pointed it out. I haven't read his texts or his work in history, because i can't find any.



I'm sorry my friend, but you didn't really read my post when you wrote ANY this. I'm talking about what happened during the Rashidun Caliphate, during the first couple of Conquests. This whole text that you have written, is about the Umayyad Caliphate and after that. And yes, it was A LOT better during that era than it was during the Rashidun Caliphate. But it wasn't good during that time either. It became better though, among other things because some people started translating books and etc into Arabic, mainly the Persians did in the beginning. According to some, they contributed the most to Islam. But it's up for debate. Not now though lol

And regarding hadiths, i read a bunch of them years ago and cross reference what is being said to different books. That's how i come to the conclusion that the one hadith with the most similarity as well as the earliest one, is probably the correct one, as in that's how it happened.

And i never wrote that the "Durants Claim That Arabs Burned Libraries". I don't know where you got that from.
There are arabic/muslic sources which wrote about it and those were the ones i wrote about.
These are just some of the authors that wrote about the burning of the Library of Alexandria,
Abd'l Latif of Baghdad (1162–1231), (which is the one i mentioned in my post which you replied to).
Al-Qifti (1172–1248)
Al-Maqrizi (1364–1442)

And the source i wrote about regarding the Burning of libraries in Ctesiphon, archives etc,
was according to an account by Al-Tabari (839–923).

In Post #13 Your Fellow Countrymen New Quoted Mentioning Durant


He asks, this form of civilization pioneer in mastering the art of sailing (Which is only comparable to nowadays Astronavigation) why hasn't left any considerable sources of historical documentation and context?
He then puts forward some possible answers but insists the most probable answer must be the Arabs conquest of Persia and their slogan of "We've brought you a single book so no need of the other books and documents and they must be burnt"
and their burning of many Persian libraries and hand written historical documents.

This Was Rejected By Malik Alashter In Post #14 To Which You Replied In Post #16 That No It Is True.

The Authnticity of The Incident of The Burning Of The Alexandria Library Has Been Rejected By Several Westerners


And I Would Not Trust Al Tabari As Authoritative Since His Sources Are Secondary.He Has Written What He Has Heard From Other People And Some Of The Things He States May Be False.He Has Admitted This In The Preface Of His Book.There Are Many Stories Which Have No Corroboration In Any Sahih Hadith Or Any Other
Source

http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/The-Problems-With-Ibn-Ishaq.html

As Far As Durant Is Concerned I Am Sorry To Be Rude Dear But Now You Are Just Being Silly.Rashidun Caliphate Preceded The Ummayad Caliphate.If The Rashidun Caliphate Had Destroyed Libraries and Burnt Books Than What Was Left For The Ummyads To Preserve and Translate??????Don't You See This Is One Of The Many Errors And Contradictions Durants Work Has.

You Are Right Most Major Historians Get Criticized But Normally They Are Criticized For The Stance They Take or The Way They Interpret Certain Events.However When A Historian Is Being Questioned On The Point Of Facts Then It Is More Serious Because Not Only His Competence But Intellectual Integrity Is Being Questioned.

I Am Sorry The Link Of Jim Safley Does Not Exist Any More It Was A Good Expose of Durant.I Have Read It Many Times.

Historians May Not Criticized Durant By Name But His Claim That Muslim Rule In India Was The Bloodiest In History Has Definitely Been Refuted Rebutted And Thrown In The Rubbish Bin

 

[Anaoshak]

In Post #13 Your Fellow Countrymen New Quoted Mentioning Durant


He asks, this form of civilization pioneer in mastering the art of sailing (Which is only comparable to nowadays Astronavigation) why hasn't left any considerable sources of historical documentation and context?
He then puts forward some possible answers but insists the most probable answer must be the Arabs conquest of Persia and their slogan of "We've brought you a single book so no need of the other books and documents and they must be burnt"
and their burning of many Persian libraries and hand written historical documents.

This Was Rejected By Malik Alashter In Post #14 To Which You Replied In Post #16 That No It Is True.

The Authnticity of The Incident of The Burning Of The Alexandria Library Has Been Rejected By Several Westerners


And I Would Not Trust Al Tabari As Authoritative Since His Sources Are Secondary.He Has Written What He Has Heard From Other People And Some Of The Things He States May Be False.He Has Admitted This In The Preface Of His Book.There Are Many Stories Which Have No Corroboration In Any Sahih Hadith Or Any Other
Source

http://www.answering-christian-claims.com/The-Problems-With-Ibn-Ishaq.html

As Far As Durant Is Concerned I Am Sorry To Be Rude Dear But Now You Are Just Being Silly.Rashidun Caliphate Preceded The Ummayad Caliphate.If The Rashidun Caliphate Had Destroyed Libraries and Burnt Books Than What Was Left For The Ummyads To Preserve and Translate??????Don't You See This Is One Of The Many Errors And Contradictions Durants Work Has.

You Are Right Most Major Historians Get Criticized But Normally They Are Criticized For The Stance They Take or The Way They Interpret Certain Events.However When A Historian Is Being Questioned On The Point Of Facts Then It Is More Serious Because Not Only His Competence But Intellectual Integrity Is Being Questioned.

I Am Sorry The Link Of Jim Safley Does Not Exist Any More It Was A Good Expose of Durant.I Have Read It Many Times.

Historians May Not Criticized Durant By Name But His Claim That Muslim Rule In India Was The Bloodiest In History Has Definitely Been Refuted Rebutted And Thrown In The Rubbish Bin

Ok, now I'm almost certain that you are basically just writing stuff to defend "the name/history of" Islam. And not really on a basis of history and fact. First, the blog you sent me to earlier, from the gentleman who obviously was biased. And now this site you just sent now. "answering christian claims". Site's like that don't base anything off historical accuracy or fact most of the time and want to pain things the way they like it to be.
My belief is in science,history and facts.

When i responded to Malik Ashtar it was mainly when i read that he wrote in post #14.
"I don't think Arab burned any books from Persia the first Arab conquerer weren't like these savages we see today"
and that isn't true, what happens today in Syria and Iraq is due to the first Arab conquerers, those people look up to People like Umar, Abu bakr and the way they ruled etc. The fact is that the burning of the Alexandrian library has not been refuted. But yes, some say that it didn't happen and it has been challenged. The earliest records indicate that it did happen. And that is just one event of many recorded "cultural genocide" type of events.

As for Tabari or anyone who ever has written something "Bad" about this whole subject, No matter how much one twist and turns the truth, it doesn't make it into their own truth. Do you think for example i would ask Zakir Naik about an event in Islam that happened, and would get a truthful unbiased answer based on FACTS. No. Same thing if i would ask a Christian preacher about horrible events written in the Tanakh.
Anyway, Similar texts about how certain similar horrible events transpired back in those days were also written in Sahih al-Bukhari as well and many other sources.

Sorry friend If I'm being rude but now you are just trying to see and believe what you want. Even in the text that you quoted, by the Durants, and posted it says during the Ummayad caliphate, "The caliphs realized the backwardness of the Arabs in science and philosophy, and the wealth of Greek culture surviving in Syria." It even says how they sent messengers to Hellenistic cities to ask for Greek books, mainly about medicine and mathematics and etc etc. It says that The Arabic inheritance of science was overwhelmingly Greek, but Hindu influences ranked next and etc.
But yes, some works survived. But the bulk of books, and etc was destroyed. Especially during the Rashidun Caliphate.

No need to be sorry about the missing Jim Safley link. I probably still wouldn't have taken him serious unless he was a qualified historian, which he isn't really in the sense that we are talking about now. Plumb however who specialized in eighteenth-century history, is. Or well was. And as i agreed with you, some details were left out of the Durant's books. Keep in mind that the first published book, the one that we are discussing now, was published in 1935. And certain things are bound to lack in details.
Anyway, i was reading more about what Plumb said it got me to Wikipedia, which i try to avoid because you never know if the sources are correct but what you quoted Plumb saying about the Durant's had been on Wikipedia before but was deleted because he had also commended Durant's work. Check "talk" in the link for Story of Civ.

It's easy to say now that historians haven't criticized Durant by name when you realize that there is no one that has done so in regards to those events. And it has not been thrown into the rubbish bin at all. There are more records than just Durant that show Muslim Rule in India was Bloody. Me personally, i think Mongol rule was probably the bloodiest in history. But the Muslim rule in India was in no way rainbows and flowers and was indeed bloody. Anyone who has an unbiased view into this would know that.

 

[MarkusS]

Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus ?

I was gonna ask if he was important in your history.

World's only single-piece 2nd century Caracalla statue discovered in southern Turkey

Marcus Aurelius is one of our most important emperors and leaders of all time. You wont find many who achieved his legacy.

Caracalla was a bad emperor. Marcus Aurelius and Caracalla are like day and night. Marcus Aurelius the perfect one and Caracalla the horrible one.

 

[-SINAN-]

Caracalla was a bad emperor. Marcus Aurelius and Caracalla are like day and night. Marcus Aurelius the perfect one and Caracalla the horrible one.

So, there is a mistake in the news, ok.

 

[MarkusS]

So, there is a mistake in the news, ok.

Caracalla was emperor a few years after Marcus Aurelius.

How can i explain this. Marcus Aurelius was a titan. When he died Rome was shocked.

His last words were: Dont mourn me. Im just a man. Dont fear the future. You will battle it with the same weapons that bring you through the present."

For the empire it was like losing its father figure.

Caracalla wanted to be remembered like marcus Aurelius so he gave himself the throne title: Marcus Aurelius Severus Antoninus...

But you can copy a name...never a man.

Caracalla was psychotic and in constant fear to get killed...which then happened.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Caracalla was psychotic and in constant fear to get killed...which then happened.

If you be in constant fear of death ,then you make the people around you miserable and then they murder you for real. Its what happened to persons like King Nader of Afshar and Agha-Mohammad Khan-e-Qajar