Copying and preserving, but not really advancing? It seems to be leveled that Byzantine philosopher were mediocre.
WI Islam had never existed
- Thread starter LNSS
- Start date
Copying and preserving, but not really advancing? It seems to be leveled that Byzantine philosopher were mediocre.
If it's snobbism, it's very misplaced snobbism, because what we call the 'Eastern Roman Empire' or the 'Byzantine Empire' was not called 'Rhomaion' by its own people. If speaking Greek, they called it 'Basileia (tōn) Rhōmaiōn', 'Rhōmania' or sometimes 'Rhōmais'. If speaking Latin, they called it 'Imperium Romanum' or 'Romania'.
Anyone who tries to make himself look educated by calling it 'Rhomaion' instead manages to make himself look misinformed.
I'm not an expert on Byzantine science, but I don't see much difference between Arabs copying and preserving Greek texts and Byzantine/Romans copying and preserving Greek texts.
Even if we accept this as true (and I don't see any sign of the sort of systematic copying and innovation among Byzantine scholars), it's more the cultural/eonomic implications I'm thinking of.
I have a hard time seeing a Byzantine agricultural revolution along the lines of the Arab one.
The Arabs took it further though and actually produced new things, giving their position on the crossroads between the West and India for example we received Algerbra.
Not to say the Byzantines were not developing too, especially given their proximity to Islamic centers of learning, but it would seem the Byzantines were not as productive. At least I don't hear Byzantine science as regarded as Islamic or Chinese or Latin Renaissance.
That says more for the advantages of being at the crossroads than some superior Arabic or Islamic ability to innovate.
Keep Egypt, and I suspect a lot more - goods and ideas both - is coming from India into the Byzantine Empire than was OTL after the Arab conquest.
Given that its been only fairly recently that the Byzantines have been acknowledged as anything other than decadent Greek imposters by Western civilization, and that Byzantium is barely even mentioned in standard up to high school texts outside "And Alexius asked for help from the West, enter the crusades.", I'm not surprised.
Not to mention that compared to the West, the Byzantines don't need a rebirth of classical learning or to rediscover the works of the ancients when they already have them present and accessible.
I wouldn't want to try to compare Byzantium and China, however - circumstances are too different.
How do you go from "I don't think this specific culture is superior" to "I don't think that culture matters at all."?
Personally I don't see any innate cultural "advantage" that the Abbasids had over the ERE. The Abbasids had the luxury of being considerably wealthier and more powerful, which will of course aid scientific development. But both were, by modern standards, extremely primitive, chauvinistic and intolerant religious theocracies dominated by autocratic semi-divine monarchies. Let this never be forgotten by those who would idealise medieval Islamic states (or indeed Byzantium) in comparison with contemporary Western Europe.
A world without Muhammad would make an excellent subject for a collaborative TL, I feel.
As to be expected whenever you live in a poor realm. A Byzantine Empire that survives in the Middle East would be much wealthier realm with larger and more well developed cities, which could easily create the kind of middle classes that pursue intellectual development. As it was, the Byzantines were quite poor. Urban centers in Anatolia and the Balkans drastically shrunk as food supplies from Syria and Egypt dried up, with Arab raids causing further economic destruction.
The Muslim tradition of science and philosophy developed under the conditions of a vast, wealthy empire, it didn't just crop up because of the Koran or anything silly like that.
As a further point, although it's about as cliche as anything else, many leading Byzantine scholars have pointed out the dearth of sources. It's possible Byzantine intellectuals came up with various concepts at similar times to their Muslim rivals, and probably received knowledge from them from the Muslims themselves at any rate. We just don't know enough. We have partial copies of many texts made by Emperors themselves, so it's not too surprising that we see very little evidence of the Byzantines preserving or advancing science and philosophy (or at the very least them gaining these advances from their Muslim neighbors.)
Last edited:
Another misconception to point out is that Zoroastrianism was denying. While the state sponsored sect might have been unpopular, it was by no means the only sect, and various other sects were very popular.
And proceeded to launch Messianch, Revolutionary Revolts shortly after conquest.
It is indeed. Would anybody else be up for working on something like this? Malta Shah?
Widunkin seems quite knowledgable about Early Middle Ages germanic world as well. MNP is as well for the same period, but he seems less active than he used to be, unfortunatly.
PMs are now flying around for a collaborative project. If anyone thinks they can bring some wisdom to the table, please PM myself or LSC.