The Arab civilisation then and now

[p(-)0ENiX]

Did Abraham peace be upon him had a son called Israel?
Ismael was the son of Hagar, and Isaac was the son of Sarah .
Does Koran mention that Hagar was Black (automatically associated with a slave) or a blonde or another skin colour "slave", and that Sarah was a blonde "free" woman?
Obviously not.

Abraham had 2 sons; Ishmael from Hagar & Isaac from Sarah. Jacob, also known as Israel, is the son of Isaac. No, the Quran does not mention Hagar's or Sarah's skin color. Not all slaves were black by the way, that's a common misconception to assume anyone referred to as a slave is black. Hagar wasn't black either, had she been black, her descendants would probably be black too. Abraham & Sarah being from Babylon would have naturally been fair skinned.

 

[Wright]

Greece was not only famous for its mathematics, but also botony, optics, war strategy, philosophy, astromomy. To claim all of Greek literature is a copy is just dumb. Philosophical governmental systems developed by the Greeks are still in use today. The first written account of history itself named after Hirodotus is greek in origin.
Most of all Greeks gave us Philosophical skepticism. something which I believe influenced the Renaissance. It was also the Greeks who drew the first world maps.

The Egyptians never developed a language that was easily written. Hieroglyphics lack abstract words present in the greek language, and are more ceremonial in their application. A very primitive writing system.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Greece was not only famous for its mathematics, but also botony, optics, war strategy, philosophy, astromomy. To claim all of Greek literature is a copy is just dumb. Philosophical governmental systems developed by the Greeks are still in use today. The first written account of history itself named after Hirodotus is greek in origin.
Most of all Greeks gave us Philosophical skepticism. something which I believe influenced the Renaissance. It was also the Greeks who drew the first world maps.

The Egyptians never developed a language that was easily written. Hieroglyphics lack abstract words present in the greek language, and are more ceremonial in their application. A very primitive writing system.

I have a feeling that some of the members here supporting the ancient Egyptians over the ancient Greeks are only doing so because modern Egyptians refer to themselves as Arabs, & they happen to be Muslims too. Had that not been the case, they would have been more willing to give credit to Greece for all of her glorious accomplishments in the past.

 

[Developereo]

Greece was not only famous for its mathematics, but also botony, optics, war strategy, philosophy, astromomy. To claim all of Greek literature is a copy is just dumb. Philosophical governmental systems developed by the Greeks are still in use today. The first written account of history itself named after Hirodotus is greek in origin.
Most of all Greeks gave us Philosophical skepticism. something which I believe influenced the Renaissance. It was also the Greeks who drew the first world maps.

The Egyptians never developed a language that was easily written. Hieroglyphics lack abstract words present in the greek language, and are more ceremonial in their application. A very primitive writing system.

History, as written and interpreted by Western historians, gives credit to, and unduly emphasizes, Greek achievements. For example, maps have been around for centuries before the Greeks, but previous maps are dismissed by Western "historians" as being not quite acceptable. Does anyone seriously believe that the ancients managed to govern immense empires without knowledge of their and their enemies' domains?

As more and more archaeological evidence emerges of previous cultures and their accomplishments, this skewed emphasis on Greece will diminish over time. The Greeks themselves acknowledged that they learned a lot from the ancients. Alexander is known to have had deep admiration for, and to have made it a top priority to absorb,the knowledge and culture of his Middle Eastern conquests.

I have a feeling that some of the members here supporting the ancient Egyptians over the ancient Greeks are only doing so because modern Egyptians refer to themselves as Arabs & they happen to be Muslims too. Had that not been the case, they would have been more willing to give credit to Greece for all of her glorious accomplishments in the past.

Your feeling is wrong. It is about setting the historical record straight and giving credit where it is due. It's not just about Egyptians; but about Persians, Mesopotamians, Arabs, Indians, Chinese, etc. The only reason Greece takes center stage is because the dominant culture of TODAY is Western and it uses Greek writings as its basis.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

Your feeling is wrong. It is about setting the historical record straight and giving credit where it is due. It's not just about Egyptians; but about Persians, Mesopotamians, Arabs, Indians, Chinese, etc. The only reason Greece takes center stage is because the dominant culture of TODAY is Western and it uses Greek writings as its basis.

I am certain that some members are only supporting the ancient Egyptians for the reasons stated previously. You might be an exception to that. Give credit where credit is due, the ancient Greeks did make many contributions to the world. Sure they learnt & borrowed from others, but all civilizations did that, including the Islamic civilization.

In other words, what you basically want is that the Western world should forget about its own accomplishments & focus on & take pride in the eastern world alone, right?

Inventions and Discoveries of Ancient Greek Scientists

 

[Wright]

History, as written and interpreted by Western historians, gives credit to, and unduly emphasizes, Greek achievements. For example, maps have been around for centuries before the Greeks, but previous maps are dismissed by Western "historians" as being not quite acceptable. Does anyone seriously believe that the ancients managed to govern immense empires without knowledge of their and their enemies' domains?

As more and more archaeological evidence emerges of previous cultures and their accomplishments, this skewed emphasis on Greece will diminish over time.

The earliest successful attempt to navigate the known world to the unknown was Alexander's conquests and the first truely global maps representing Asia, Europe, Africa, south Asia were born. Egypt was much less expansionistic, and remained centered around the Nile.

As with all successful systems, the Greek language is still around today, and Greek philosophy is still very much in use.
Whereas the civilizations you have mentioned have long ago been forgotten, along with their 60 digit number systems and their unconvntional language forms.
I'm sure we can agree that Greeks and Romans influenced western civilization more than others. And thus the west is more concened with them.

And if Arabs are so keen to find out more about their past, they should invest more in archeological projects. But from what I have seen they tend to destroy old shrines and artifacts.

 

[The SC]

Greece was not only famous for its mathematics, but also botony, optics, war strategy, philosophy, astromomy. To claim all of Greek literature is a copy is just dumb. Philosophical governmental systems developed by the Greeks are still in use today. The first written account of history itself named after Hirodotus is greek in origin.
Most of all Greeks gave us Philosophical skepticism. something which I believe influenced the Renaissance. It was also the Greeks who drew the first world maps.



The Egyptians never developed a language that was easily written. Hieroglyphics lack abstract words present in the greek language, and are more ceremonial in their application. A very primitive writing system.

The Greeks were the first ones to have translated Egyptian Hieroglyphics, so all the credit of what you say goes to the Egyptians who were an amalgam of local cultures with influences on and from Mesopotamia and the Indus valley civilisations, this goes far before even the existence of the the term Arab (from phoenix Arabia and desert Arabia covering Egypt and beyond) or Greek as a matter of fact.
Indeed, it is an early version of Google Translation:

For nearly 1,500 years, no one could read hieroglyphs, the ancient Egyptian picture-writing. The French scholar Jean-Francois Champollion spent most of his life trying to break the code. He made his first breakthrough in 1822, while studying the Roseta Stone, and soon experts were able to read the inscriptions that cover many Egyptian artefacts.
The stone is a slab of black basalt, found near Rosetta in the delta.
Inscribed in 196 B.C., the Rosetta Stone was unearthed again in 1799. The text is repeated in hieroglyphs, demotic and Greek. Champollion could read Greek, and so he used this text to translate the other two scripts.
The text is a message of thanks to Pharaoh Ptolemy V.

Jean-Francois Champollion (1790-1832), is a
brilliant linguist who had mastered 12 languages by age 16. The first hieroglyphs he deciphered were pharaoh's names. By 1824, he had translated most of the symbols and begun to unravel Egyptian grammar.

ROSETTA STONE

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

The Greeks were the first ones to have translated Egyptian Hieroglyphics, so all the credit of what you say goes to the Egyptians who were an amalgam of local cultures with influences on and from Mesopotamia and the Indus valley civilisations, this goes far before even the existence of the the term Arab (from phoenix Arabia and desert Arabia covering Egypt and beyond) or Greek as a matter of fact.

Are you referring to me? When I said that modern day Egyptians or North Africans are Arabs, I meant that they are Arabs only because they speak Arabic in modern times. Arabs are a language, not a race. Geographical Arabia is only the Arabian peninsula, Egypt & the rest of north Africa is not part of the Arabian peninsula.

 

[Developereo]

I am certain that some members are only supporting the ancient Egyptians for the reasons stated previously. You might be an exception to that. Give credit where credit is due, the ancient Greeks did make many contributions to the world. Sure they learnt & borrowed from others, but all civilizations did that, including the Islamic civilization.

Inventions and Discoveries of Ancient Greek Scientists

I am not denying that Greek civilization made important contributions. I am disputing this assertion of so many "firsts" by Greeks. The classification is artificially justified by Western historians by dismissing previous civilizations' achievements.

And quoting Western sources to justify Greek accomplishments is meaningless. It begs the current discussion.

The earliest successful attempt to navigate the known world to the unknown was Alexander's conquests and the first truely global maps representing Asia, Europe, Africa, south Asia were born. Egypt was much less expansionistic, and remained centered around the Nile.

What's a "truly global" map? Alexander's maps did not include the Americas. Does that make them not "global"? On the other hand, Babylonian maps preceded Anaximander and showed the relevant geographies. We know that the ancient Mesopotamians traded as far away as the Indus Valley and, possibly, beyond, which means their trade caravans knew the regions they traveled.

Western historians have made an arbitrary mark and decided certain maps are "global" and earlier ones are not.

As with all successful systems, the Greek language is still around today, and Greek philosophy is still very much in use.
Whereas the civilizations you have mentioned have long ago been forgotten, along with their 60 digit number systems and their unconvntional language forms.

The language and culture of Persian, Indus Valley and Chinese civilizations are very much alive today. Those civilizations predate Greece by millenia. We still use the Babylonian system of base 60 every time we tell the time, use astronomy, use navigation, or talk about 360 degree circles. The Babylonians were solving quadratic equations centuries before the Greeks were even babes in diapers.

I'm sure we can agree that Greeks and Romans influenced western civilization more than others. And thus the west is more concened with them.

Absolutely. Greek civilization is the basis and cornerstone of modern Western civilization. No one is denying that.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

I am not denying that Greek civilization made important contributions. I am disputing this assertion of so many "firsts" by Greeks. The classification is artificially justified by Western historians by dismissing previous civilizations' achievements.

And quoting Western sources to justify Greek accomplishments is meaningless. It begs the current discussion.

What do you mean by "it begs the current discussion"? So now you assume that the link I provided is meaningless because it's a western source?

It's obvious that you are simply trying to discredit the accomplishments of the ancient Greeks. My discussion with you is over.

I advise others to check out the source I provided earlier in post #95 regarding Greek inventions & discoveries.

Here is another interesting article:

The Presocratic Philosophers - Pythagoras of Samos

 

[Developereo]

What do you mean by "it begs the current discussion"? So now you assume that the link I provided is meaningless because it's a western source?

It means that you don't understand the concept of "begs the question".

The whole point is that Western historians discount previous civilizations' achievements to give initial credit to Greeks.

 

[p(-)0ENiX]

It means that you don't understand the concept of "begs the question".

The whole point is that Western historians discount previous civilizations' achievements to give initial credit to Greeks.

I do understand the concept of it "begs the question". I read your reference to it as "begs the current discussion" in a hurry & ended up getting confused, & that's my mistake.

There are many documentaries on previous civilizations & their accomplishments. I really doubt that Western historians intentionally try to give initial credit to the Greeks. The Egyptian & other civilizations are studied in a great amount of detail by historians from all over the world. Any attempt at falsely giving credit to another nation for the accomplishment of another should theoretically be easily discovered.

 

[Wright]

I am not denying that Greek civilization made important contributions. I am disputing this assertion of so many "firsts" by Greeks. The classification is artificially justified by Western historians by dismissing previous civilizations' achievements.

And quoting Western sources to justify Greek accomplishments is meaningless. It begs the current discussion.



What's a "truly global" map? Alexander's maps did not include the Americas. Does that make them not "global"? On the other hand, Babylonian maps preceded Anaximander and showed the relevant geographies. We know that the ancient Mesopotamians traded as far away as the Indus Valley and, possibly, beyond, which means their trade caravans knew the regions they traveled.

Western historians have made an arbitrary mark and decided certain maps are "global" and earlier ones are not.



The language and culture of Persian, Indus Valley and Chinese civilizations are very much alive today. Those civilizations predate Greece by millenia. We still use the Babylonian system of base 60 every time we tell the time, use astronomy, use navigation, or talk about 360 degree circles. The Babylonians were solving quadratic equations centuries before the Greeks were even babes in diapers.



Absolutely. Greek civilization is the basis and cornerstone of modern Western civilization. No one is denying that.

I believe a very large chunk of global archeology, (especially Egyptian) has been carried out by "western archeologiests", thus there will certainly be a degree of bias. However given the current archeological climate, where evidence is formeost and personal opinions must be proven. Anyone is free to refute prior western assertions. This includes Arabs.

And this goes beyond human civilization, to prehistoric taxonomy. I have yet to see a significant Arab contribution to identifying distant human ancestors, classification of theropods, etc. As a result there is bound to be a bias in these areas as well.

I posted a video in this thread earlier, about the DNA tests of King Tut's mummy. If I remember correctly it was a Swis team which did the testing. Perhaps the Arabs had done some testing of their own prior to this? But I am inclined to believe they did not. And thus someone else stepped in to find that missing information, and with the results may have included their own bias unknowingly.

If any area of science is dominated by certain people you can expect some degree of bias. Solution is simply for others to get involved and present their viewpoints in the scientific manner.

This also can be applied to the recent studies being done on CERN like labs in the US and Europe.

 

[trinity]

Most of this gibberish is from RADIOISLAM.com which itself is full of factual errors. One that stuck out the most was how Arabs created Zero not Indians. GTFO

 

[Developereo]

There are many documentaries on previous civilizations & their accomplishments. I really doubt that Western historians intentionally try to give initial credit to the Greeks. The Egyptian & other civilizations are studied in a great amount of detail by historians from all over the world. Any attempt at falsely giving credit to another nation for the accomplishment of another should theoretically be easily discovered.

An example will illustrate my point.

Even though we now know that the Babylonians used the mathematical concept centuries before Pythagoras wrote down his theorem, it won't change anything. It will remain Pythagoras' Theorem because it is his works which form the basis of Western, and global, science today. It doesn't take anything away from Pythagoras, but it does provide context to the claim of being the "first" to do something.

I believe a very large chunk of global archeology, (especially Egyptian) has been carried out by "western archeologiests", thus there will certainly be a degree of bias. However given the current archeological climate, where evidence is formeost and personal opinions must be proven. Anyone is free to refute prior western assertions. This includes Arabs.

And this goes beyond human civilization, to prehistoric taxonomy. I have yet to see a significant Arab contribution to identifying distant human ancestors, classification of theropods, etc. As a result there is bound to be a bias in these areas as well.

I posted a video in this thread earlier, about the DNA tests of King Tut's mummy. If I remember correctly it was a Swis team which did the testing. Perhaps the Arabs had done some testing of their own prior to this? But I am inclined to believe they did not. And thus someone else stepped in to find that missing information, and with the results may have included their own bias unknowingly.

If any area of science is dominated by certain people you can expect some degree of bias. Solution is simply for others to get involved and present their viewpoints in the scientific manner.

This also can be applied to the recent studies being done on CERN like labs in the US and Europe.

I absolutely agree that the Middle Eastern countries need to invest more in science, including archaeology and rediscovering their own historical record. India and China have used their newfound wealth to give due importance to these activities, and we are seeing the fruits of that investment.