This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should this article use "Islamic" or "Arab" as a qualifier? As far as I know, "Arab" refers to an ethnicity, and does not encompass Muslim culture as a whole (northern Africa is not "Arab", neither is Iran, nor Turkey). On the contrary "Islamic" refers to the Muslim realm as a whole. I think "Islamic civilization" is an expression which is extensively used. Does anybody have comments? PHG ( talk) 06:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello. There is reason to assume that user Jagged 85 does not actually reads what he writes and cites, but rather relies on a method of creating articles by copy and paste tidbits from all over WP and elsewhere. This combined with his consistent one-sidedness creates controversial contents. His Islamic Golden Age has also been critically regarded by other users. Before posting the same things twice, I would like to point at Islamic Golden Age#discussion for further discussion.
I have to stress that the problem of Jagged 85's articles cannot be fixed by punctual improvements. It is created by his C&P method, with which he creates more rapidly controversial contents which knowledgeable users can counter-check with the claimed sources. So please do not remove the neutrality tag. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 04:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The article seems biased to me because it assumes that Europe would not have retained the documents and knowledge of classical Greece and Rome without Arab help. That is false. It must be remembered that the Eastern Roman Empire did not fall and did not lose any of the knowledge of classical Greece and Rome. Indeed, the Eastern Empire was the source of Arab knowledge. The Eastern Empire ultimately fell to Arab armies and we are "indebted" to the Arabs for whatever they saved from that collapse. But, that indebtedness is akin to being thankful to a man who saved one painting from your house after putting the house on fire. The article just does not seem neutral to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.235.82 ( talk) 21:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Are there still outstanding issues with this article? Or can we remove the tags? If anyone has concerns, could you please provide details? Thanks, El on ka 07:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
The jury system was Nordic Anglo-Saxon:
"The legal traditions of the Danes were also different. It was they who evolved the 12-man jury system. This was soon borrowed by the English, who exported it to the rest of the world..." (BBC) http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/conquest/wessex_kings/anglosaxon_law_02.shtml
So basically, the article lies - it says that the Normans introduced the jury system into England, which is rubbish, and that the Normans got this from the Arabs, which is also Islamist drivel.
The article paints a very one-sided picture, and has obviously been written by a Muslim with an agenda to promote Islam. Europeans in the Middle Ages, had superior ship building and armour technology (to the Arabs), crossed the Atlantic at the end of the Middle Ages(before the Arabs) invented and developed the art and science of writing Music, and the Bible was PRINTED in Europe, centuries before the first Koran in the east. The banking system of the Crusaders was way in advance to that used by the Arabs. A Knight could deposit money in Scotland and withdraw the cash in Jerusalem - the Arabs had nothing like that. When the Turks finally took Constantinople, they marvelled at its riches and fantastic architecture, which was superior to that found in their own Empire ... Constantinople was a CHRISTIAN EUROPEAN city. The Christian cathederal there, then became the finest "mosque" in the Muslim world - built and designed, of course, by "Barbaric" European Christians of the Middle Ages. I admit that none of this is actually denied in the article, but neither is it mentioned. It should be clearly stated that in many ways parts of Medieval Europe were more advanced than Arabia.
Finally, the Arabian / Islamic societies had a love for autocratic regimes that seems to linger to this day, whilst in much of Europe the Feudal system (which was by no means Utopia) at least limited the abslote power of a ruler - eg - the Magna Carta, and within the European Feudal system everybody had their civil rights relative to their social position, whilst in Islamic kingdoms, civil rights rarely exsisted outside the whims of the current ruler. The article paints the picture of a debased backward Medieval Europe reliant upon the light of Islam for guidance - HA! Oh well, politically correct Wikipedia strikes again. TB -- 121.218.100.212 ( talk) 05:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Sources..... I mean really, everything I stated is just common accepted history ... but fair enough, here it is:
JURY SYSTEM
Encyclopedia Britannica ... (6/660 15th edition) "Historical details of the jury's inception are unknown, but it may have originated in England." Encyclopedia Britannica says nothing about the Arabs as far as the jury system goes - but they do mention the Saxons & Ancient Greeks, who I seem to remember were not Muslims (-:. Winston Churchill, in his much valued History of The English Speaking Peoples, also says that the Anglo Saxons introduced the Jury System. So there you have it: Encyclopedia Britannica, Winston Churchill & The BBC - good enough?
So, your -quote- "well-referenced and POV free" article (see below) in fact, is telling us lies. And they want to promote this to GA?
Now can I ask for a source please.....
We often hear how the Muslims "invented manned flight" - the story goes that a Muslim strapped wings to himself, in the manner of a bird, in Spain, jumped off a cliff .... fell, and killed himself. No technical drawings of this "glider" were ever available (which is a good job, because it obviously didn't work). This is not my POV by the way - this is the story as Muslims tell it. No Muslims in the Middle Ages ever tried it again - least of all those who actually saw the would-be aviator fall to his death.
Now, how on earth did this obscure, tragicomic and little documented event influence later European glider experiments???? Of course it didn't! I have given my sources, now let me ask for theirs! Prove the link!
I am insulting nobody, but a fact's a fact: this article was obviously written to promote Islam. But alas, it is only a "fool" that points out that the emperor has no clothes.
TB -- 124.176.66.35 ( talk) 19:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Do you think we can possibly promote the article to GA? It seems both well referenced and POV free. I shall nominate the article on the GA page and if it has any issues then we'll sort them out. Lord of Moria (Avicenna) Talk Contribs 14:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Many of the claims are not backed up. For example, the claim that Alhazen's Book of Optics is mentioned in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, is untrue. In fact Rhazes, Averroes and Avicenna are mentioned by Chaucer in the Prologue. Avicenna is mentioned twice, in the Prologue and The Pardoner's Tale. But Alhazen and his book are not, to my knowledge and research, in Chaucer's Tales or Prologue. IAC-62 ( talk) 11:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I just read this article for the first time and it seems to me that a lot of it is just plain wrong. From a common sense approach, if the Arabs/Muslims/Islamic Civilization invented algebra, then the Roman built their aqueducts without the use of algebra, and similar engineering feats by the Egyptians and Greeks were performed without the use of any advanced mathematics. Likewise, the jury system is known to predate Islam and not be of Arabic origin: to quote Wikipedia's Jury article, "The modern jury evolved out of the ancient custom of many ancient Germanic tribes". Wikipedia's University article says that the University of Constantinople was founded by Theodosius II in 425 with 31 chairs -- again antedating Islam. The detail in the section on Education is unnecessary. It would be sufficient to note that some ideas were borrowed from the universities in Islamic lands and incorporated into European universities, rather than implying that there was no educational system at all in Europe until the Muslims came along. Economics: COME ON. It's been the goal of men to get rich since the idea of value was first imagined. The roots of the ideas of capitalism, partnership, credit, profit and suchlike concepts are lost in antiquity. There was nothing unique about the Arab/Muslim/Islamic Civilization monetary system. The concepts mentioned in the article can all be found in the Old Testament, to give one source. Absurdly, the picture implies that they invented coin weights -- the ignorant Vikings never thought of such a thing! The Point of View appears to me to be intentionally skewed by using citations from Islamic writers instead of European authorities. In short, I think this article has SEVERE problems. It approaches the level of propaganda. 24.27.25.87 ( talk) 21:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Eric
I feel that the article has enough relevant content, as well as being broad enough in scope, to meet the Good Article criteria. It also appears to be well sourced with over 140 footnotes and 4 separate references. I reccomend the article for GA status. ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 18:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
While i agree with all the above, looking at the talk page confirms my inital feelings of the article being one sided. there must be scholars that contest this, and whether that is because of their studies or their biases is immaterial, they should still be included. And even with all the citation, there are a lot of:
But many writers do not, and i expect some have views that cannot be reconciled with this at all. That needs to be said in many cases.
Yes, they are similar, as the citation says, but so is the story of Romulus and Remus. Similariy != influence. We don't claim this author was influenced by the Aeniad.
The second sentence is cited, but the claim doesn't cover the first sentence. If the first was extropolated from the second, this is synthesis. If not, it needs a cite (maybe just a dulplicate of the appropriate cite). One guy reporting treatment != hughly developed medicine, so needs to be cited seperately.
also: "European scholars and writers influenced by this novel include John Locke, [1] Gottfried Leibniz, [2] Melchisédech Thévenot, John Wallis, Christiaan Huygens, [3] George Keith, Robert Barclay, the Quakers, [4] and Samuel Hartlib. [5]"
Are the uncited authors without reference, or included in one of the other references? Why only cite some? either duplicate the cites, or delete those uncited. Yobmod ( talk) 14:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Well written:
(a)Prose
(b)MOS
Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) references
(b) (depends on what one considers contentious)
(c)
Broad in its coverage:
(a)
(b) (presence of islamic characters in a play = too much detail imo, is not an important influence in itself)
Neutral: (needs to show people disagree with this interpretation of history)
Stable:
Illustrated:
(a)
(b)
Overall, i think this article should go through a thorough peer review process before it can be called a Good Article. Yobmod ( talk) 13:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I started looking at this article to provide a second opinion but found so many prose issues in the lead paragraph alone I am inclined to agree with Yobmod about a peer review. Its an important and interesting topic with a mass of sources and information and a peer review can only do it good!
examples;
These are not consistent. Many books have no publisher or ISBNs. At least one has no author.
Many passages are unreferenced. For example Various mechanical and agricultural equipment was adopted from Islamic lands, such as the noria and the windmill. Numerous new techniques in clothing, as well as new materials were also introduced: muslin, taffetas, satin, skirts. Trade mechanisms were also transmitted: tarifs, customs, bazars, magazins.
A number of these link to irrelevent articles of the same name or disambiguation pages.
Far too short, simple and one-sided for such a substantial and important topic. I was surprised at the assertion from McDonald made in the lead as I thought such contributions were pretty well recognised and documented. Then I looked at the reference for McDonald and it is dated to 1931, yet it is presented as if it were the state of play now. This has a somewhat misleading effect. If there was a growing number of scholars in 1931 - then make that point. What is the general scholarly take on the subject now?
Fainites barley 18:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Right I'll get to work right away. Lord of Moria Talk Contribs
Hey, first, let me say that I think this is a great article - good topic, well defined and well written. However, given the possible problems around the term "Islamic" in this context I think the article should clarify somewhere in the intro that:
I don't think we should change the existing text of the article, only point out these things somewhere in the intro to the article. The fact that no culture is an island is hinted at in the first section today, but I think it could be expanded/clarified with (at least) the examples I give above. Erikarver ( talk) 13:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I beg to differ. The Arabs were a small minority/military elite in the lands they conquered and as such largely assimilated their cultures. Even the term "Islamic empire" is a misnomer given that after the first Umma was broken there was no coherent/centralized "empire" in the modern sense of the word. However, I'll find the sources to prove what I claim above. All the best Erikarver ( talk) 16:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, sorry, but I didn't find it in that article. Could you please point me to the source. Erikarver ( talk) 08:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I've finally found an online version of Ira Marvin Lapidus' A History of Islamic Societies. It is considered one of the key books on Islamic / Middle Eastern history. She makes it quite clear that there was a great deal of continuum between the pre-Islamic and Islamic societies. Regarding Christian populations in the Middle East, on pages 200-201 she writes:
...the mass of Middle Eastern peoples were not soon or easily converted. Only with the breakdown of the social and religious structures of non-muslim communities in the tenth to twelfth centuries did the weakening of churches, the awakening omf Muslim hostility to non-Muslims, sporadic and localized persecution, and the destruction of the landed gentry of Iraq and Iran destroy the communal organization of non-Muslim peoples... Large parts of Egypt and Iran were probably converted in the tenth and eleventh centuries. In northern Syria, however, Christian majorities survived through the twelfth century, until - compromised by their sympathies with and assistance to the Crusaders - they were put under severe pressure. Most converted in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but substantial Christian minorities remained. Similarly, most of the remaining Christian population of Egypt adopted Islam in the fourteenth century. [1]
I would also suggest the sections on Persian and Hellenistic influences (p. 76-77). With regard to the Persian and Hellenistic/Greek influence Lapidus writes (p. 76):
With political advice came technical and scientific knowledge. Iran was an important transmitter of Indian and Hellenistic medical, mathematical and astronomical ideas... Thus, elements of the Persian heritage became an integral part of Islamic civilization. [2]
On Hellenist influces (p. 77-78) she writes
Alexandrian Hellenistic thought also came into the mainstream of the emerging Islamic culture. The Alexandrian school was moved to Antioch in Syria and then to Marw in Khurasan and Harran in Mesopotamia. Some of the scholars were Nestorian Christians, but others, at Harran, were pagans... Thus Greek thought survived under church and royal patronage and was transferred to Abbasid Baghdad. [3]
So, to me the term "Islamic culture" is about as complicated and intertwined with previous and other cultural influces as "Christian culture" of the time was. Any comments on the above? The above views are supported by William Dalrymple, author of several books on the Middle East and religion. In this interview with Australian national radio he says:
And it's interesting that the Middle East was still a majority Christian area when the Crusades began, it was the bitterness brought by the Crusaders into the Middle East that led to the Middle East becoming a largely Muslim area. It's a very, very important fact that right up to the 11th century, the Middle East was still majority Christian. [4]
I would also urge you to read How Greek Science Passed to the Arabs by De Lacy O'Leary. Erikarver ( talk) 08:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
The idea that Muslims were in the majority is different to suggesting that Arabs were (all Arabs - as an ethnic group - were expected to be Muslims, but, with the rise of the Abbasids, not all Muslims needed to be Arabs). But whatever ethnic origin they came from, they were Arabized -- they adopted Arabic as their language without necessarily adopting any Islamic practices or beliefs (cp. the liturgy of the Melkite church, which rapidly adopted Arabic after the conquest). Yet the idea that Muslims formed a majority is also open to question. I have not met anyone anymore who takes seriously Bulliet's idea of a rapidly increasing conversion based on use of 'Islamic' names. Rather, some areas in Muslim dominated territories would have had no Christians or Jews in them (they had become depopulated, either because of unbearable taxation or warfare); others with few or no Muslims (they just carried on as before); and many places in the middle. Most of the time it's difficult to know; large cities were probably majority Muslim -- although with very powerful minorities from the other faiths -- the countryside probably varied. Dalrymple is talking through his hat though: the Crusades didn't register all that much at the time; the demonization of the Crusades and crusading is more the product of nineteenth century reaction to European intervention than anything similar at the time. Hostiensis ( talk) 21:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to add the following info to the article PHG ( talk) 13:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC):
Influence of Islamic coinage
Islamic coins did have some influence on early European coinage. The 8th century English king Offa of Mercia minted copies of Abbasid dinars struck in 774 by Caliph Al-Mansur with "Offa Rex" centered on the reverse. [6] The moneyer visibly had no understanding of Arabic as the Arabic text contains many errors. Such coins may have been produced in order to trade with Islamic Spain.
In Sicily, Malta and South Italy from about 913 tarì gold coins of Islamic origin were minted in great number by the Normans, Hohenstaufens and the early Angevins rulers. [7] When the Normans invaded Sicily in the 12th century, they issued tarì coins bearing legends in Arabic and Latin. [8] The tarìs were so widespread that imitations were made in southern Italy ( Amalfi and Salerno) which only used illegible "pseudo-Kufic" imitations of Arabic. [9] [10]
According to Janet Abu-Lughod: "The preferred specie for international transactions before the thirteenth century, in Europe as well as the Middle East and even India, were the gold coins struck by Byzantium and then Egypt. It was not until after the thirtheenth century that some Italian cities ( Florence and Genoa) began to mint their own gold coins, but these were used to supplement rather than supplant the Middle Eastern coins already in circulation." [11]
Feel free to add the following to the article. PHG ( talk) 15:38, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Western imitations of Arabic script
The Arabic Kufic script was often imitated in the West during the Middle-Ages and the Renaissance, to produce what is known as pseudo-Kufic: "Imitations of Arabic in European art are often described as pseudo-Kufic, borrowing the term for an Arabic script that emphasizes straight and angular strokes, and is most commonly used in Islamic architectural decoration". [13] Numerous cases of pseudo-Kufic are known from European art from around the 10th to the 15th century. Pseudo-Kufic would be used as writing or as decorative elements in textiles, religious halos or frames. Many are visible in the paintings of Giotto. [14] The exact reason for the incorporation of pseudo-Kufic in early Renaissance painting is unclear. It seems that Westerners mistakenly associated 13-14th century Middle-Eastern scripts as being identical with the scripts current during Jesus's time, and thus found natural to represent early Christians in association with them: [15] "In Renaissance art, pseudo-Kufic script was used to decorate the costumes of Old Testament heroes like David". [16] Another reason might be that artist wished to express a cultural universality for the Christian faith, by blending together various written languages, at a time when the church had strong international ambitions. [17]
References
- Braden K. Frieder Chivalry & the perfect prince: tournaments, art, and armor at the Spanish Habsburg court Truman State University, 2008 ISBN 193111269X, ISBN 9781931112697
- Cardini, Franco. Europe and Islam. Blackwell Publishing, 2001. ISBN 9780631226376
- Grierson, Philip Medieval European Coinage Cambridge University Press, 2007 ISBN 052103177X, ISBN 9780521031776
- Mack, Rosamond E. Bazaar to Piazza: Islamic Trade and Italian Art, 1300-1600, University of California Press, 2001 ISBN 0520221311
- Matthew, Donald, The Norman kingdom of Sicily Cambridge University Press, 1992 ISBN 9780521269117
Image of Christian and Muslim playing
lute (ouds), miniature from Catinas de Santa Maria by king
Alfonso X. Feel free to insert this image into the article.
Phg (
talk)
20:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to insert the following paragraph into the article. Phg ( talk) 21:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Islamic carpets in European painting
Islamic carpets of Middle-Eastern origin, either from the Ottoman Empire, the Levant or the Mamluk state of Egypt or Northern Africa, were used as important decorative features in paintings from the 13th century onwards, starting from the Medieval period and continuing into the Renaissance period. Such carpets were often integrated into Christian imagery as symbols of luxury and status of Middle-Eastern origin, and together with Pseudo-Kufic script offer an interesting example of the integration of Eastern elements into European painting.
Here's an extract of Obama's Cairo speech, regarding Islamic contributions to civilization and Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment, possibly an interesting quote regarding the modern acknowledgement of these contributions:
"As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality". Barack Obama, 4 June 2009, Cairo ( Obama speech: An analysis BBC 4 June 2009)
Phg ( talk) 06:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Per Honor et Gloria
✍
12:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Some elements from the Museum of London and the British Museum:
Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 13:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 20:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
we don't need to make assumptions that aristotle text was lost and then muslim scientist found it and use it....moslem scientists achievement were nothing related with aristotle text, maybe too little, and we know that aristotle was a philosopher not a scientist, philosopher not use scientific methode, maybe only a theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shatree ( talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
The rationale for this article's title and scope rests on the premise that "Islam is used in the meaning of a civilization and not that of a religion", a premise, which, however, is simply asserted but not supported by sources. So what is the difference and how are these two notions kept apart in the article? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 21:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Wainwright
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should this article use "Islamic" or "Arab" as a qualifier? As far as I know, "Arab" refers to an ethnicity, and does not encompass Muslim culture as a whole (northern Africa is not "Arab", neither is Iran, nor Turkey). On the contrary "Islamic" refers to the Muslim realm as a whole. I think "Islamic civilization" is an expression which is extensively used. Does anybody have comments? PHG ( talk) 06:46, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello. There is reason to assume that user Jagged 85 does not actually reads what he writes and cites, but rather relies on a method of creating articles by copy and paste tidbits from all over WP and elsewhere. This combined with his consistent one-sidedness creates controversial contents. His Islamic Golden Age has also been critically regarded by other users. Before posting the same things twice, I would like to point at Islamic Golden Age#discussion for further discussion.
I have to stress that the problem of Jagged 85's articles cannot be fixed by punctual improvements. It is created by his C&P method, with which he creates more rapidly controversial contents which knowledgeable users can counter-check with the claimed sources. So please do not remove the neutrality tag. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 04:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The article seems biased to me because it assumes that Europe would not have retained the documents and knowledge of classical Greece and Rome without Arab help. That is false. It must be remembered that the Eastern Roman Empire did not fall and did not lose any of the knowledge of classical Greece and Rome. Indeed, the Eastern Empire was the source of Arab knowledge. The Eastern Empire ultimately fell to Arab armies and we are "indebted" to the Arabs for whatever they saved from that collapse. But, that indebtedness is akin to being thankful to a man who saved one painting from your house after putting the house on fire. The article just does not seem neutral to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.235.82 ( talk) 21:57, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Are there still outstanding issues with this article? Or can we remove the tags? If anyone has concerns, could you please provide details? Thanks, El on ka 07:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
The jury system was Nordic Anglo-Saxon:
"The legal traditions of the Danes were also different. It was they who evolved the 12-man jury system. This was soon borrowed by the English, who exported it to the rest of the world..." (BBC) http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/trail/conquest/wessex_kings/anglosaxon_law_02.shtml
So basically, the article lies - it says that the Normans introduced the jury system into England, which is rubbish, and that the Normans got this from the Arabs, which is also Islamist drivel.
The article paints a very one-sided picture, and has obviously been written by a Muslim with an agenda to promote Islam. Europeans in the Middle Ages, had superior ship building and armour technology (to the Arabs), crossed the Atlantic at the end of the Middle Ages(before the Arabs) invented and developed the art and science of writing Music, and the Bible was PRINTED in Europe, centuries before the first Koran in the east. The banking system of the Crusaders was way in advance to that used by the Arabs. A Knight could deposit money in Scotland and withdraw the cash in Jerusalem - the Arabs had nothing like that. When the Turks finally took Constantinople, they marvelled at its riches and fantastic architecture, which was superior to that found in their own Empire ... Constantinople was a CHRISTIAN EUROPEAN city. The Christian cathederal there, then became the finest "mosque" in the Muslim world - built and designed, of course, by "Barbaric" European Christians of the Middle Ages. I admit that none of this is actually denied in the article, but neither is it mentioned. It should be clearly stated that in many ways parts of Medieval Europe were more advanced than Arabia.
Finally, the Arabian / Islamic societies had a love for autocratic regimes that seems to linger to this day, whilst in much of Europe the Feudal system (which was by no means Utopia) at least limited the abslote power of a ruler - eg - the Magna Carta, and within the European Feudal system everybody had their civil rights relative to their social position, whilst in Islamic kingdoms, civil rights rarely exsisted outside the whims of the current ruler. The article paints the picture of a debased backward Medieval Europe reliant upon the light of Islam for guidance - HA! Oh well, politically correct Wikipedia strikes again. TB -- 121.218.100.212 ( talk) 05:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Sources..... I mean really, everything I stated is just common accepted history ... but fair enough, here it is:
JURY SYSTEM
Encyclopedia Britannica ... (6/660 15th edition) "Historical details of the jury's inception are unknown, but it may have originated in England." Encyclopedia Britannica says nothing about the Arabs as far as the jury system goes - but they do mention the Saxons & Ancient Greeks, who I seem to remember were not Muslims (-:. Winston Churchill, in his much valued History of The English Speaking Peoples, also says that the Anglo Saxons introduced the Jury System. So there you have it: Encyclopedia Britannica, Winston Churchill & The BBC - good enough?
So, your -quote- "well-referenced and POV free" article (see below) in fact, is telling us lies. And they want to promote this to GA?
Now can I ask for a source please.....
We often hear how the Muslims "invented manned flight" - the story goes that a Muslim strapped wings to himself, in the manner of a bird, in Spain, jumped off a cliff .... fell, and killed himself. No technical drawings of this "glider" were ever available (which is a good job, because it obviously didn't work). This is not my POV by the way - this is the story as Muslims tell it. No Muslims in the Middle Ages ever tried it again - least of all those who actually saw the would-be aviator fall to his death.
Now, how on earth did this obscure, tragicomic and little documented event influence later European glider experiments???? Of course it didn't! I have given my sources, now let me ask for theirs! Prove the link!
I am insulting nobody, but a fact's a fact: this article was obviously written to promote Islam. But alas, it is only a "fool" that points out that the emperor has no clothes.
TB -- 124.176.66.35 ( talk) 19:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Do you think we can possibly promote the article to GA? It seems both well referenced and POV free. I shall nominate the article on the GA page and if it has any issues then we'll sort them out. Lord of Moria (Avicenna) Talk Contribs 14:17, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Many of the claims are not backed up. For example, the claim that Alhazen's Book of Optics is mentioned in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, is untrue. In fact Rhazes, Averroes and Avicenna are mentioned by Chaucer in the Prologue. Avicenna is mentioned twice, in the Prologue and The Pardoner's Tale. But Alhazen and his book are not, to my knowledge and research, in Chaucer's Tales or Prologue. IAC-62 ( talk) 11:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I just read this article for the first time and it seems to me that a lot of it is just plain wrong. From a common sense approach, if the Arabs/Muslims/Islamic Civilization invented algebra, then the Roman built their aqueducts without the use of algebra, and similar engineering feats by the Egyptians and Greeks were performed without the use of any advanced mathematics. Likewise, the jury system is known to predate Islam and not be of Arabic origin: to quote Wikipedia's Jury article, "The modern jury evolved out of the ancient custom of many ancient Germanic tribes". Wikipedia's University article says that the University of Constantinople was founded by Theodosius II in 425 with 31 chairs -- again antedating Islam. The detail in the section on Education is unnecessary. It would be sufficient to note that some ideas were borrowed from the universities in Islamic lands and incorporated into European universities, rather than implying that there was no educational system at all in Europe until the Muslims came along. Economics: COME ON. It's been the goal of men to get rich since the idea of value was first imagined. The roots of the ideas of capitalism, partnership, credit, profit and suchlike concepts are lost in antiquity. There was nothing unique about the Arab/Muslim/Islamic Civilization monetary system. The concepts mentioned in the article can all be found in the Old Testament, to give one source. Absurdly, the picture implies that they invented coin weights -- the ignorant Vikings never thought of such a thing! The Point of View appears to me to be intentionally skewed by using citations from Islamic writers instead of European authorities. In short, I think this article has SEVERE problems. It approaches the level of propaganda. 24.27.25.87 ( talk) 21:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Eric
I feel that the article has enough relevant content, as well as being broad enough in scope, to meet the Good Article criteria. It also appears to be well sourced with over 140 footnotes and 4 separate references. I reccomend the article for GA status. ErikTheBikeMan ( talk) 18:57, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
While i agree with all the above, looking at the talk page confirms my inital feelings of the article being one sided. there must be scholars that contest this, and whether that is because of their studies or their biases is immaterial, they should still be included. And even with all the citation, there are a lot of:
But many writers do not, and i expect some have views that cannot be reconciled with this at all. That needs to be said in many cases.
Yes, they are similar, as the citation says, but so is the story of Romulus and Remus. Similariy != influence. We don't claim this author was influenced by the Aeniad.
The second sentence is cited, but the claim doesn't cover the first sentence. If the first was extropolated from the second, this is synthesis. If not, it needs a cite (maybe just a dulplicate of the appropriate cite). One guy reporting treatment != hughly developed medicine, so needs to be cited seperately.
also: "European scholars and writers influenced by this novel include John Locke, [1] Gottfried Leibniz, [2] Melchisédech Thévenot, John Wallis, Christiaan Huygens, [3] George Keith, Robert Barclay, the Quakers, [4] and Samuel Hartlib. [5]"
Are the uncited authors without reference, or included in one of the other references? Why only cite some? either duplicate the cites, or delete those uncited. Yobmod ( talk) 14:39, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Well written:
(a)Prose
(b)MOS
Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) references
(b) (depends on what one considers contentious)
(c)
Broad in its coverage:
(a)
(b) (presence of islamic characters in a play = too much detail imo, is not an important influence in itself)
Neutral: (needs to show people disagree with this interpretation of history)
Stable:
Illustrated:
(a)
(b)
Overall, i think this article should go through a thorough peer review process before it can be called a Good Article. Yobmod ( talk) 13:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I started looking at this article to provide a second opinion but found so many prose issues in the lead paragraph alone I am inclined to agree with Yobmod about a peer review. Its an important and interesting topic with a mass of sources and information and a peer review can only do it good!
examples;
These are not consistent. Many books have no publisher or ISBNs. At least one has no author.
Many passages are unreferenced. For example Various mechanical and agricultural equipment was adopted from Islamic lands, such as the noria and the windmill. Numerous new techniques in clothing, as well as new materials were also introduced: muslin, taffetas, satin, skirts. Trade mechanisms were also transmitted: tarifs, customs, bazars, magazins.
A number of these link to irrelevent articles of the same name or disambiguation pages.
Far too short, simple and one-sided for such a substantial and important topic. I was surprised at the assertion from McDonald made in the lead as I thought such contributions were pretty well recognised and documented. Then I looked at the reference for McDonald and it is dated to 1931, yet it is presented as if it were the state of play now. This has a somewhat misleading effect. If there was a growing number of scholars in 1931 - then make that point. What is the general scholarly take on the subject now?
Fainites barley 18:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
Right I'll get to work right away. Lord of Moria Talk Contribs
Hey, first, let me say that I think this is a great article - good topic, well defined and well written. However, given the possible problems around the term "Islamic" in this context I think the article should clarify somewhere in the intro that:
I don't think we should change the existing text of the article, only point out these things somewhere in the intro to the article. The fact that no culture is an island is hinted at in the first section today, but I think it could be expanded/clarified with (at least) the examples I give above. Erikarver ( talk) 13:58, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I beg to differ. The Arabs were a small minority/military elite in the lands they conquered and as such largely assimilated their cultures. Even the term "Islamic empire" is a misnomer given that after the first Umma was broken there was no coherent/centralized "empire" in the modern sense of the word. However, I'll find the sources to prove what I claim above. All the best Erikarver ( talk) 16:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Hi, sorry, but I didn't find it in that article. Could you please point me to the source. Erikarver ( talk) 08:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
I've finally found an online version of Ira Marvin Lapidus' A History of Islamic Societies. It is considered one of the key books on Islamic / Middle Eastern history. She makes it quite clear that there was a great deal of continuum between the pre-Islamic and Islamic societies. Regarding Christian populations in the Middle East, on pages 200-201 she writes:
...the mass of Middle Eastern peoples were not soon or easily converted. Only with the breakdown of the social and religious structures of non-muslim communities in the tenth to twelfth centuries did the weakening of churches, the awakening omf Muslim hostility to non-Muslims, sporadic and localized persecution, and the destruction of the landed gentry of Iraq and Iran destroy the communal organization of non-Muslim peoples... Large parts of Egypt and Iran were probably converted in the tenth and eleventh centuries. In northern Syria, however, Christian majorities survived through the twelfth century, until - compromised by their sympathies with and assistance to the Crusaders - they were put under severe pressure. Most converted in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but substantial Christian minorities remained. Similarly, most of the remaining Christian population of Egypt adopted Islam in the fourteenth century. [1]
I would also suggest the sections on Persian and Hellenistic influences (p. 76-77). With regard to the Persian and Hellenistic/Greek influence Lapidus writes (p. 76):
With political advice came technical and scientific knowledge. Iran was an important transmitter of Indian and Hellenistic medical, mathematical and astronomical ideas... Thus, elements of the Persian heritage became an integral part of Islamic civilization. [2]
On Hellenist influces (p. 77-78) she writes
Alexandrian Hellenistic thought also came into the mainstream of the emerging Islamic culture. The Alexandrian school was moved to Antioch in Syria and then to Marw in Khurasan and Harran in Mesopotamia. Some of the scholars were Nestorian Christians, but others, at Harran, were pagans... Thus Greek thought survived under church and royal patronage and was transferred to Abbasid Baghdad. [3]
So, to me the term "Islamic culture" is about as complicated and intertwined with previous and other cultural influces as "Christian culture" of the time was. Any comments on the above? The above views are supported by William Dalrymple, author of several books on the Middle East and religion. In this interview with Australian national radio he says:
And it's interesting that the Middle East was still a majority Christian area when the Crusades began, it was the bitterness brought by the Crusaders into the Middle East that led to the Middle East becoming a largely Muslim area. It's a very, very important fact that right up to the 11th century, the Middle East was still majority Christian. [4]
I would also urge you to read How Greek Science Passed to the Arabs by De Lacy O'Leary. Erikarver ( talk) 08:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
The idea that Muslims were in the majority is different to suggesting that Arabs were (all Arabs - as an ethnic group - were expected to be Muslims, but, with the rise of the Abbasids, not all Muslims needed to be Arabs). But whatever ethnic origin they came from, they were Arabized -- they adopted Arabic as their language without necessarily adopting any Islamic practices or beliefs (cp. the liturgy of the Melkite church, which rapidly adopted Arabic after the conquest). Yet the idea that Muslims formed a majority is also open to question. I have not met anyone anymore who takes seriously Bulliet's idea of a rapidly increasing conversion based on use of 'Islamic' names. Rather, some areas in Muslim dominated territories would have had no Christians or Jews in them (they had become depopulated, either because of unbearable taxation or warfare); others with few or no Muslims (they just carried on as before); and many places in the middle. Most of the time it's difficult to know; large cities were probably majority Muslim -- although with very powerful minorities from the other faiths -- the countryside probably varied. Dalrymple is talking through his hat though: the Crusades didn't register all that much at the time; the demonization of the Crusades and crusading is more the product of nineteenth century reaction to European intervention than anything similar at the time. Hostiensis ( talk) 21:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to add the following info to the article PHG ( talk) 13:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC):
Influence of Islamic coinage
Islamic coins did have some influence on early European coinage. The 8th century English king Offa of Mercia minted copies of Abbasid dinars struck in 774 by Caliph Al-Mansur with "Offa Rex" centered on the reverse. [6] The moneyer visibly had no understanding of Arabic as the Arabic text contains many errors. Such coins may have been produced in order to trade with Islamic Spain.
In Sicily, Malta and South Italy from about 913 tarì gold coins of Islamic origin were minted in great number by the Normans, Hohenstaufens and the early Angevins rulers. [7] When the Normans invaded Sicily in the 12th century, they issued tarì coins bearing legends in Arabic and Latin. [8] The tarìs were so widespread that imitations were made in southern Italy ( Amalfi and Salerno) which only used illegible "pseudo-Kufic" imitations of Arabic. [9] [10]
According to Janet Abu-Lughod: "The preferred specie for international transactions before the thirteenth century, in Europe as well as the Middle East and even India, were the gold coins struck by Byzantium and then Egypt. It was not until after the thirtheenth century that some Italian cities ( Florence and Genoa) began to mint their own gold coins, but these were used to supplement rather than supplant the Middle Eastern coins already in circulation." [11]
Feel free to add the following to the article. PHG ( talk) 15:38, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Western imitations of Arabic script
The Arabic Kufic script was often imitated in the West during the Middle-Ages and the Renaissance, to produce what is known as pseudo-Kufic: "Imitations of Arabic in European art are often described as pseudo-Kufic, borrowing the term for an Arabic script that emphasizes straight and angular strokes, and is most commonly used in Islamic architectural decoration". [13] Numerous cases of pseudo-Kufic are known from European art from around the 10th to the 15th century. Pseudo-Kufic would be used as writing or as decorative elements in textiles, religious halos or frames. Many are visible in the paintings of Giotto. [14] The exact reason for the incorporation of pseudo-Kufic in early Renaissance painting is unclear. It seems that Westerners mistakenly associated 13-14th century Middle-Eastern scripts as being identical with the scripts current during Jesus's time, and thus found natural to represent early Christians in association with them: [15] "In Renaissance art, pseudo-Kufic script was used to decorate the costumes of Old Testament heroes like David". [16] Another reason might be that artist wished to express a cultural universality for the Christian faith, by blending together various written languages, at a time when the church had strong international ambitions. [17]
References
- Braden K. Frieder Chivalry & the perfect prince: tournaments, art, and armor at the Spanish Habsburg court Truman State University, 2008 ISBN 193111269X, ISBN 9781931112697
- Cardini, Franco. Europe and Islam. Blackwell Publishing, 2001. ISBN 9780631226376
- Grierson, Philip Medieval European Coinage Cambridge University Press, 2007 ISBN 052103177X, ISBN 9780521031776
- Mack, Rosamond E. Bazaar to Piazza: Islamic Trade and Italian Art, 1300-1600, University of California Press, 2001 ISBN 0520221311
- Matthew, Donald, The Norman kingdom of Sicily Cambridge University Press, 1992 ISBN 9780521269117
Image of Christian and Muslim playing
lute (ouds), miniature from Catinas de Santa Maria by king
Alfonso X. Feel free to insert this image into the article.
Phg (
talk)
20:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to insert the following paragraph into the article. Phg ( talk) 21:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Islamic carpets in European painting
Islamic carpets of Middle-Eastern origin, either from the Ottoman Empire, the Levant or the Mamluk state of Egypt or Northern Africa, were used as important decorative features in paintings from the 13th century onwards, starting from the Medieval period and continuing into the Renaissance period. Such carpets were often integrated into Christian imagery as symbols of luxury and status of Middle-Eastern origin, and together with Pseudo-Kufic script offer an interesting example of the integration of Eastern elements into European painting.
Here's an extract of Obama's Cairo speech, regarding Islamic contributions to civilization and Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment, possibly an interesting quote regarding the modern acknowledgement of these contributions:
"As a student of history, I also know civilization's debt to Islam. It was Islam - at places like Al-Azhar - that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe's Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality". Barack Obama, 4 June 2009, Cairo ( Obama speech: An analysis BBC 4 June 2009)
Phg ( talk) 06:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
Per Honor et Gloria
✍
12:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Some elements from the Museum of London and the British Museum:
Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 13:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Per Honor et Gloria ✍ 20:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
we don't need to make assumptions that aristotle text was lost and then muslim scientist found it and use it....moslem scientists achievement were nothing related with aristotle text, maybe too little, and we know that aristotle was a philosopher not a scientist, philosopher not use scientific methode, maybe only a theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shatree ( talk • contribs) 15:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
The rationale for this article's title and scope rests on the premise that "Islam is used in the meaning of a civilization and not that of a religion", a premise, which, however, is simply asserted but not supported by sources. So what is the difference and how are these two notions kept apart in the article? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 21:51, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Wainwright
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).