@@masternobody1896 not true... if the golden age hadn't ended already they wouldn't have been conquered they were very weak effectively ruling the surroundings of baghdad only
Golden ages happens to states so I think you should have stuck to the fall of the abbasids and it's reasons not include other states that had other golden ages at different time periods for different reasons and under different political entities
Noice awesome video and map Al Muqaddimah I noticed the new coloring for the maps in the last video I just forgot to comment on that video that video was awesome and informative I didn’t know that Kashmir remained independent from the Mongols the Ghaznavids and the Ghurids and then was no longer until the Modern history and I am talking about Kashmir time period of it being independent or not from the medieval period till the Modern period, thx for the informative videos.
Nalanda was already a destroyed place, Only some remaining sages were killed by Khilji which ended Nalanda... Nalanda was not destroyed by Khilji, but already destroyed earlier... Get outside of Hindutwa Bhakt ideology and try to learn some history impartially... You'll see the real picture...
Uhm, I am writing from Latin America and it never crossed my mind to reflect on how the "discovery" and colonization of the American continent impacted the Islamic world. You have a good topic to develop another great video.
Renaissance, Colonization of the Americas, Discovery of the new trade routes combined with decline and instability of the Muslims, or more accurately "Easterns" shaped the world we live in today. Things could've gotten really different if, say, Morocco was stable and colonized the new world in early 1400s. But that didn't happen thus we live in a "Western" dominated world. China is catching up, though.
The period being discussed in this video Was about 200 years before that. The Mongols destroyed the empires in the 1200s. But yes, I see you’re greater point
@@muaviyehusrevsayar9439 yeah, there's a cool alternate history scenario about that, but sadly most Moroccan/maghrebi dynasties in the 15th/16th century were absolute bullshit :/, they were fat and lazy and didn't really care about the revolting tribes...
Absolutely incredible video. Your channel is the greatest reason I have developed an interest on eastern and islamic history. As I live in a mostly christian nation, this kind of knowledge is not considered particularly useful or interesting by universities and schools here and I had little knowledge on the subject. Your videos, however have helped me (and still do) to understand it is of extreme importance to see every point of view and how rich, interesting and important islamic history is. Please keep up your incredible work
Totally agree. I’m not a religious person, but I love history and religion/history are inextricably tied together. To me, the meteoric rise of the Islamic world in the early Middle Ages is one of the most interesting topics of history of all time. And this channel is so good at telling it. Love that you can tell the host is Muslim but is more interested in telling the history of Islam, rather than the theology of it.
@@hamidulislam9537 This whole miss guided notion that conquering foreign lands and "bring the light of civilization" would actually improve the lives of the conquered. In theory it sounded like a good idea in reality it most created corrupt systems and dependant economies that we still feel the consequences of even today. I'm not biased enough to say it was completely bad but it was done so poorly that most countries are in some ways still products of how that specific point in time affected them.
It should be noted the Sack of Baghdad not only massacred the majority of the population and the destruction of the house of wisdom, it also brought about the destruction of irrigation networks, which were cultivated over melenia. This turned once fertile land into desert land.
That doesn't matter. The main, most important thing as that Mecca and Medina, the birthplace and center of Islamic, Arab art, science, civilization was spared, survived and continued to thrive.
I love your channel so much. I wish one day someone could discover all the books lost during the Sack of Baghdad. Could you do a video on how the role women changed throughout Islamic history through the Rashidun, Early Umayyad, Late Umayyad, Abbassid dynasties please🤲
Wonderfully researched and put together. I have missed this kind of information growing up. Btw, coming over from Let's talk religion. I enjoy the collaboration between yourself, Let's talk religion and Useful Charts.
I also dislike the term “the Golden Age of Islam”, but the reason is that by using it a person emphasizes religious, rather than racial, identity. For example, the science and technology in the late Roman empire, as well as in Byzantium, predominantly came from the Middle Eastern and North African provinces (Syria, Egypt, etc). But many modern Middle Eastern idealogues are only interested in “Muslim” scientists, dismissing the vast heritage of Middle Eastern Christians, Jews, pagans etc. And as for the decline of the Middle East, the reason for that was the same as in many other civilizations - the dysgenic fertility.
@@rajnandinivishwas8789 I agree. Just as, say, there were Chinese who belonged to different religions, or Indians, or Europeans. “Muslim” is a religious cathegory, not a racial one
@Devil's Logic Technically they can, but that’s incorrect, because, say, Persians or peoples of Asia Minor were not Arabs (although genetically belonged to West Asian genetic cluster). It’s like saying that Western civilization is “English”.
@@bahtiyarbabazadeeski it is not exactly the same. English have a culture different than others europeans, different language, different names, and although they are all christians, the way they profess it varies. The same can not be said to islam. They try to have the same language, reverted people change his names to arabic ones ... Western have a strong foundation in countries, islam in the islamic community (unmahad, sorry can recall the spelling)
@@antonioribeiro6119 I understand what you are saying, but the reason for that is the relative secularization and developed-ness of the West and Europe as a whole (at least today). Can you say that Anglo-Saxons at the time of Crusades were very different from, say, Germans or even Spaniards? When the Middle East was relatively developed, Syrians were not the same as Egyptians, Christians (Christianity is also a Middle-Eastern religion, just as Islam and Judaism) were not the same as pagans, etc. The more developed a race becomes, the more diverse it becomes and the more cultures it produces. And today certain people try to limit Middle Eastern culture to Islam, and I disagree, because it undermines the achievements of people of the same racial stock, but of different religious views.
Turks were nomadic. They destroyed the intellectual mindset in Islamic world. Ibn Sina was constantly threatened by Turkic Gaznavids and protected by Persian Buyid dynasty. Especially lady Sayidda of Buyid dynasty.
I appreciate that you stated a lot of this to be your opinions (of course based on proper research), and your quarrel with the term 'Golden Age', as if it were some mystical aura permeating a bygone era. Reminds me of my quarrels with the term 'Dark Ages'. I realize these terms make it easier to tell a good story, but sometimes stories can get in the way of proper understanding of the past and the present. I've been interested in the goings on outside of mye hometurf for some while, and your content is really appreciated!
6:23 Thank you for debunking the fall of islamic scientific scholarship caused by Al-Ghazali alone. Whatifalthist, your collab always repeat this point as nausem. I wonder how varied their reading list are. 7:14 Whatifalthist also repeated ad nauseum that post-mongolic islam is more conservative. I cannot wait about your video on the topic.
Whatifalthist is somehow the most in-depth, but shallow alt-historian. Idk how to properly explain this, but what I mean is that his takes take some historical trends (of which he seems to have quite a bit of knowledge) and adds them to very basic/simplistic (or sometimes just... wrong) ideas. It's extremely fun to watch, though, as he goes very deep into the topics he covers, even if they can be crazy from time to time (like the industrialized ancient Greece video).
@@Azhar_shaikh1 he has a huge obsession with turkey for some reason and really likes to downplay colonialism and the level of development of African civilization
One of the main reason for the fall of Muslim Civilization was Geography and Demography. The rise and fall of Muslim Civilization is closely related with the Eminence of Horse-Cavalry and the fall of Horse-Cavalry and The Rise of Guns, Cannons and large Infantry. If you didn't had a large Population or large agricultural economy, you couldn't had a strong Infantry or a large Artillery. th-cam.com/video/aeUYCp01MeQ/w-d-xo.html
Thank you i noticed this too , when he said he would probably want to delete him from history like that's gonna have a significant change on society! Honestly he overestimates the influence of scholars especially those of nonreligious matters on the Muslim society back then lol
The Golden Age of Islam without mentioning Greece and India is like turkish history not mentioning the Arabs. When the rulers of Baghdad set up their colleges and libraries they had in mind the cities if the Roman Empire they just conquered and India. Alexandria, Damascus, etc. And dark ages didn't exist for East Roman Empire. We built Aya Sofya in 537AD, Anthemios and Isidoros were both scientists. So your golden age started when you took Roman middle east, and western renaissance started when they got hold of the books of Constantinople after the Greeks transferred them to Venice to escape the Turks in 1453. The same thing is always done by Catholics, silencing Constantinople because of religious differences
The Abbasids fell to the same trap that the Romans fell to and that is relying on soldiers of foreign origins too much. In the Romans' case, it's the Germanic tribes. In the Abbasids' case, it's the Turkic tribes. And eventually, both empires are conquered and dismantled into pieces by these tribal barbarians in the end for the sake of loots and promoting slavery with the expense of the destruction of the places of knowledge like the Library of Alexandria in Egypt and the House of Wisdom in Baghdad.
That was because the regimes were to intertwined with the ruling dynasty, and indigenous people were a great thread to ruling dynasty through it the regime. The election system has solved this issue to a degree but since democratic elections shows worse results to find, choose and cultivate real leaders the stability it brings leads stagnation. So as Muqaddimah suggests here the advancement in tech and sciences can be as fast as the Golden age of Islam even though we see many inventions, revolutionary ones only happens in critical moments or crisis times. You can see the slowing trend in sci-fi movies predictions are better than the reality of progress
@@Hi5Ripon Turks didn't get too much power neither middle easterners were backwarded. among Ottoman ruling class there were many Arabic, Kurdish, Persian, Roman, Serbian, Armanian and Tracian people. And many of them had great deal of autonomy for their nation. They had personal qualities about being a good scientist, or a poet or a lawyer etc. For example Nabi was a bureaucrat also a very good poet, he was Kurd. Fuzuli was a proffessor in Madrasah he was Turco- Persian. Sokullu was Serbian but he had great deal of projects like Don Volga Canal, Qairo Canal and Istanbul Canal. They did many great things but because they were better Muslims they didn't blabber about what they did, too much. They were modest, not mediocre. You either didn't watched the video because it clearly refers that what westerners did as colonization made the sure that decline would stay that way. Ruling class may have changed but we lost our civilization because we were forced to import western civ in expanse of our own wealth, they dried us out and left us with unedible civ. You can't make advancement in anything while trying to feed yourself and your family.
@@ercaner_buzbey Despite their boast of considering themselves as "Rome's successor" still Turks weren't even close to Arabs or even Amazighs when it came to advancements or progressiveness in Middle East Due to their savage heritage and thuggish-like mindsets that they bought it from Mongolia abstained people of their invaded territories to live under darkness and regressive lifestyles for centuries or look at Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Sudan on how they were laid waste
Islam had absolutely nothing to do with the, "golden age of Islam." The Abbasid empire was at the center of international trade and as such, benefited from "brain drain" from around the world. Once those trade routes were no longer important, it collapsed.
It kinda did In pre-islamic Iran it was impossible for a peasant to even get literate And some of the greatest scholars from the islamic golden age were iranians from a poor background Also unlike the renaissance Christian nations that the churchs in power were Sciencophobic The islamic ulama believed Science is good for us and they supported it Although i believe one of the main reasons for that era to end was the radical orthodox "muslims" that claimed we should only focus on god and don't care about other things, but meh... atleast they didn't called Science "magic"
Well as per my reserch, there was a school of thought in abbasid caliphate gave more importance the logic AND reason. That metaphysical school of thought was called mutazilizm. The ashari doctrine that we follow today is different from that school of thought. Ashari follows the literal meaning of quran while as mutazilism was very flexible. I mean islamic scholars back then were trying to determine whether free will exists or pre-destination(on the basis of how atom worked). Back then islam was far superior than anything, look were have we come. P:s. Thankyou for putting these interesting topics here, cheers!!
@Sports Entertainment does this mean that Mu'tazilism hold reason before scripture or does it hold reason as a way to 'amend' contradictions in scripture?
@Sports Entertainment the mu'tazila have committed shirk with many scholars explaining their stance as unislamic. This whole rationality reasoning leads to shirk. They rejected alot of the Sunnah. As for the claim that modern Saudi are salafi there are questions to be raised on that since the scriptures used are from Muhammad IBN abul wahab. He was inspired by IBN taymiah while not quiet understanding his text on fiqh and theology (aqeeda). For example he declared jihad against his Muslims brothers while getting aid from the British taking them as allies, completely oblivious of the fact that Quran says don't take the non believer as allies. You know his argument along with Shareef of Makkah that since the ottomans allied with the Germans the proclamation of jihad was not fit since it included jihad for the Germans. This is not to say Abdul wahab is wrong but has miscalculation in his theology. It also does not make the ottomans as the victim here but in reality the Muslims messed up by accepting them as the khalifa considering the fact the a Khalifa should be from quraish as stated in Hadith.
@Sports Entertainment I am not going to disagree with you but would like to you to view this from broader prospective. For instance he never claimed jihad against the British or french who where forcibly in Muslim lands prosecuting Muslims. He rather declared it against his brothers in Islam. I understand that certain tribes from najd started to do like some worship on graves however did he just view certain tribes or generalize that everyone not from his tribe and area is a mulhid? In any case he is still a scholar and is held with much regard and respect despite some of his shadowy policies.
@@sultansultan5447 i would have to disagree with you on this. I would not say that they commited shirk*(believing that there is other god than god). If you look at that times' demography on the basis of school of thought, mutazillahs were in majority and i would not say thay all were kafirs. It might just be my opinion but i think religion should be personal. Something that is between you and god and people should not be the onès making judgement. Brother if you look today as of how many schools of thoughts and schisms/divides are in islam(even in ashri school of thought itself) the mind is boggled. Rather than pointing a finger at some sect/part or even people, we should be personally involved in religion. For me one is muslim if one believes in kalimah, and after that it is only allah(God) that knows and one that makes the judgement. ::if i offend someone or if i have offended anyone, i appoligize but that is my opinion::
You missed thousands of Greeks ,Persian and hindu texts translated into so called islamic golden age . Islamic golden age was built upon pre islamic empire , once islam becomes strong , and there is no copying from others . Islamic golden age ends
"Saudi Arabia is an exception." But this is the problem. All the money, stability, and sovereignty in Saudi Arabia can't create a technological and science renaissance that Baghdad had created. So, like Bernard Lewis said: "What went wrong?"
@@fahimmorshed he made a series on the ummayads of Cordoba, just like that I want a video on the ummayads of damascus, he made only two videos on them I think
@@rishabhraviprasad6672 umayyads only ruled damascus for about 90 years. so 2 videos are enough I think for a channel of his scale. cz there are a lot more topics to talk about
@@fahimmorshed Then maybe he can talk about the aftermath of the abbasid collapse, which was the iranian intermezzo? It resulted in iranian empires like samanids, saffarids and eventually lead to the establishment of turco Afghan polities in india?
One smart 🍑. You are a soft ji ha di. You spoke about everything except the rise of Orthodox Islamic kingdoms, Law of shariya, degradation of women in different Caliphate, persecution of non muslims, forceful conversation etc The golden age ended as Muslim kings started to fund more quran based science and scholars. This was also the period of rise of Islamic Orthodoxy, something similar to talibanisation in Afghanistan. All the caliphates wanted to establish their kingdom on lines of words of Muhammad and Hadith. The different caliphates were actively involved in funding more and more muslim imams, mosque's etc. They started to shun any ideals, concepts, science, technology outside the Quran. The golden age was a period of inclusiveness. While the latter was a period of Orthodoxy.
Islam changed, proto Islam is different than 8th to 11th century. For example mutazila was popular and now not anymore. Athari or salafis got popular after 1800.
Your argument against a rise in orthodoxy being a prime factor in ending the golden age is both peculiar and flawed. You essentially say that since religion didn't play a major role in starting the golden age it couldn't have played a major role in ending it. That's obviously not true. You can murder a child without having given birth to it yourself. Religions are by their very nature conservative and reactionary. We've seen time and again throughout history how various religions have pushed back against the advance of human knowledge, often with great success. Hell, just look at the anti-vaccine movement in the United States, which at its core is driven by a distrust of science among Christian fundamentalists. You further cite a lack of evidence of a rise in religious conservatism during the golden age. It's not necessary that religion become more conservative, only that it be piously observed by the majority of the people, which by all accounts was the case at the time. A doctrinal shift, such as that promulgated by al-Ghazali, can then spread quickly through society, rewriting its rules of conduct.
Anyone who thinks Ghazali was responsible for ending the 'islamic golden age' is an idiot and totally ignorant. Ghazali mainly spoke out against the falsafah of his time. Neil degrasse Tyson is an absolute ignorant buffoon in regards to this topic, he said Ghazali said math was the work of the devil. Anyone who understands Islamic scholarship of the past and the doctrinal school Ghazali was apart of, knows how much of a ignorant statement that is. What Ghazali and the conservative scholars of his time wrote against, was the neo platonic teachings of the falaasifa. Their beliefs were clearly against the teachings of Islam from pretty much all the schools of creed. An example of this was most of the falaasifa held that the universe itself was eternal. Something that clearly contradicts mainstream Islam. There were more issues also. The point is, what Ghazali and the like spoke out against was where they contradicted the tenets of Islam. Not mathematics or science. You will not find one statement of Ghazali or any scholar of the time speaking out against mathematics or science. They spoke out against the religious beliefs of the falaasifa who happened to also generally be mathematicians and scientists. But what they spoke out against them for was not for being mathematicians or scientists but the religious beliefs they held. Ghazali himself and almost all the ashari scholars were schooled in logic. It was and is a fundamental part of their school of creed.
Your take also lacks evidence On the other hand, the amount of evidence pointing to the moral decadence and religious decline of the Muslims is massive. Anyone who thinks Al-Ghazali ended the Muslim Golden Age is an ignoramus. I can’t even begin to believe who popularized it. Was it Neil DeGrasse Tyson? He sucks at history in the first place. I feel that this comment steams from Eurocentric thought and ignorance towards Islam. Muslims did not face the problems Europeans did in terms of intellectual decline. When Europe had people living in the streets and its cities disorganized, Muslims adhered to Islam heavily and experienced a Golden Age Every time the Muslims abandoned Islam, God humiliates them. Islam promotes intellectualism and societal progress, and it provides the moral foundations for society to work. You simply can not use the case for Christians in your society on Muslims throughout history, because the two societies worked drastically differently.
Islam did played a role in the Golden age He didn't say that, It's undeniable and the ending of the Golden age was the instability among the Muslim world and still is, I don't know why would it not make sense to you. It wasn't a single factor but that's major factor and the colonization has not only effected Muslim word but all of Africa and South Asia as well
Not the mongol attacks, not the colonization, not the poltical upheavals, the evidence gathered from the data related to the scientific output over the years spanning hundreds of years has proven that it is indeed the sunni revivalism that marked the decline of the golden age. This study, the one I have shared below, clearly proves, using the analysis of the data via trend-break algorithms, that the observed decline in scientific output during the golden age PREDATES the mongol invasion and colonization. Please read with an open mind: Agreed mayaknife. It has been established using trend-break algorithms that the rise of orthodoxy is the chief factor that led to the downfall of science and rationalist thinking in the golden age. Al-Muqadimmah explains the end of the whole islamic civilization in this video, not what led to the decrease in the scientific output alone. Please read the following paper if anyone disagrees with the fact that sunni revivalism was the chief factor behind the fall of rationalist thought in the islamic world at that time. This is a highly cited paper which has surveyed the evolution of scientific production in the Islamic world over more than a millennium to explore whether scientific production in the Islamic world declined, to pinpoint when it declined, and to evaluate the validity of popular explanations for its decline. The primary measure of scientific production is derived from Harvard’s library holdings, which are among the most extensive in the world. These data show a sustained drop in the proportion of books dedicated to scientific topics that becomes statistically significant in the 12th century CE and persists through the end of the sample in 1800. This drop in scientific output is accompanied by a surge in books written on religious topics as well as an increase in derivative works (e.g. commentaries on previous works). Results using an alternative data set from seventeenth century Istanbul are qualitatively similar. Taken in unison, the results provide robust evidence that scientific production declined in the medieval Islamic world. The paper then evaluates possible explanations for this decline in scientific output. The empirical patterns cast doubt on hypotheses highlighting the role of colonialism or of the Mongol invasions as the observed decline predates these shocks. Among popular explanations for the decline, the data are most consistent with the “Sunni Revival” hypothesis (or Revival hypothesis for short) (Makdisi, 1973; Gibb, 1982). The classical version of this hypothesis claims that the Revival (which is believed to have begun in the eleventh century) marked a surge in the political power of religious leaders. This increase in political power was accompanied by the spread of institutions such as madrasas (educational centers where Islamic law was taught) that decreased the relative payoff to producing scientific knowledge. scholar.harvard.edu/files/chaney/files/paper.pdf
I think Eating civilization is the wrong analogy considering European Civilization drastically increased the global food output a big part of the explosion in global population.
@@harukrentz435 There is no world in which two cities like that are "nothing" and to speak like that wonders you as completely without merit. I wonder how many people like you understand that some of the things you say actively betray how little value there is in what you're saying.
Haru Krentz Damascus was once a (largely) undisputed shoo-in for oldest city. It was name-checked in Genesis, and there is evidence of settlement going back to 9,000BC. Unfortunately, there is no clear evidence of meaningful activity in what is now Damascus proper until the 2nd millennium BC - a bit like West Bromwich arriving seven centuries before Birmingham. (Herod, by the way, may also have been gifted Damascus. He was clearly doing something right.) Ironically, it is not Damascus but Aleppo, poor, benighted Aleppo, which is actually Syria’s largest city and was once a mighty rival to Cairo and Constantinople, that has a far stronger case for being the world’s oldest city. The evidence of settlement goes back to 6,000BC, but excavations north of the city suggest wandering nomads made domestic camps here 5,000 years before that. Written records show that Aleppo was an important city long before Damascus. It is really only since the opening of the Suez Canal that Aleppo has declined as a major trading city. Until the recent civil war, there had been serious efforts to preserve the citadel, which dates back to the first century BC, as well as Aleppo’s mosques and its medieval hammams and souks.
Okay careful with Ibn Khaldun. I love his work, he is most likely the first modern thinker in so far as social sciences go in the Mediterranean and European world, but his models of understanding socio-political change have been heavily critiqued and put into question in countless ways. Yes, he is a pioneer and a brilliant scholar, but I do not think framing this video around his ideas is a historiographical anachronism. It is too reductive, it leans heavily into geographical determinism (big no no), it is excessively structuralist and most importantly it lacks the nuance of modern historical theory, (identifying the particularities of a historical process and not only fitting it into a structural model). Also, his model talks about how change happens but never explains the reasons for said change. It almost feels like there is a predetermined and natural and absolute flow of time and states and people are just inside the natural progression of history removing all agency form the equation. This is a good exercise in applying a historiographical model to history, and certainly it has some elements that explain the end of the golden age but its massively out of date as a model of thinking to simply use it, without acknowledge the limitations of the framework and therefor the conclusions reached. This is even more true when you apply it to the post-colonial world. Reducing everything to political stability and the ability to finance scholars is just out of place in modern scholarship. On another subject I like your point on the idea of A golden age. It is also a very reductive and almost orientalist category. love the channel great video.
@@saimalishahid1406 Pick your poison! Historiographical approaches are massively diverse. Remember history is, by definition, a referential discipline. There is no “history” by itself its always the history of something. From political history to economics, social, cultural, the history of sexuality, war, the history of food, the use of animals, of our interaction with nature, of science and technology or ideas… any human dimension is a historical subject and a reference point for a historical analysis. Modern western historiography has gone so much further from the national political discourse from where it began on the XIX century. From Marxism and its idea of historical materialism (history as the struggle of classes over the means of production and the contradictions of capital, basically making the study of history a series of problems to explain and not just a succession of facts to re-tell) to traditional structuralism, Gramsci’s dialectical structuralism, British Marxists history from below, special history and historical geography focusing on undersetting the way space is signified and lived, more cultural and systemic approaches like the French annals school methodologies of understanding long systemic social processes and not the action of individual, the multitemporal understanding of Braudel that shows how different things change at different rates, more postmodern approaches like Foucault’s focus on power relationships, or a Geertz based cultural approach of the way modes of understanding culture change, or more post-colonial ideas, feminist approaches focusing on the different experience of history based on differing factors like gender or race… there is literally hundreds. The only definite conclusion in modern historiography is that history and humanity is way to complex to use on single form of understanding to explain everything. There is no master equation to explain the totality of human social existence. The answers in always a multi-dimensional and complex system of social structures that play with and against each other. History never repeats itself the exact same way there is always nuance and differentiating factors. No one can predict the exact future because life is not a mechanical system. In the same way history in not a one approach fits all you need to see history form multiple angels that are often contradictory because life is complex contradictory and diverse. No one historical approach is enough and has the total answer. If any historian claims to have the total truth of anything they are not a good historian. Exactly because of this there is no need to pretend to have all the answers all we really need to do is acknowledge the limitations of any historical approach.
Thanks for another great video! I think it would be cool if you made a series on famous Islamic figures. Some people whom I would be interested in seeing would be Tariq ibn Ziyad, Salahuddin Ayubi and Jallaludin Rumi.
Some of the Cities I am most interested in learning about under Islamic control are Fustat, Cairo, Alexandria, Babylon, Baghdad, Ctesiphon, Damascus, Medina, Mecca, Antioch, Gaza, Jerusalem, Petra, Memphis, Tunis, Carthage, Mosul, Tabriz, Basra, and many others!
14:35 I am curious about your view of Saudi Arabia in this context. They have the stability and the money, but what they are known for are religious orthodoxy and conspicuous consumption. Why don't they be the locomotive of progress?
The second age of stability as you call it under the gunpowder empires,despite being richer than Europe couldn't make any real scientific advances.Their advances were geared towards elite luxury consumption on architecture,clothing,jewellery,calligraphy etc - cultural but not really scientific.So just trade and gold and scholarly patronage is not an adequate explanation.I believe what the europeans achieved from the 16th century had 4 main reasons - 1.Stability of state succession system(european states didn't really have internal succession wars due to law of primogeniture legitimized by the pope of rome,local rulers couldnt bully the pope because he remained ourtside of their control) 2.Discovery of the New world- The massive lands of the new world reduced demographic and ecological pressures on europe,served as cheap source of raw materials as well as captive market - a triple bonanza due to proximity of geography.3.Scientific method - The europeans first understood empirical and systemic scientific method.Really one has to credit newton for it.Newton truly invented modern physics .Dalton created chemistry with atomic theory.This scientific method and its widespread dissemination through printing press is immensely important for technological revolution.4.Coal- England was lucky to have very easy access to huge deposits of coal at a critical juncture in its economic progress which served as the main energy resource of the industrial revolution.
Your breakdown of the natural cycle of empires is so perfectly accurate, and currently the state of the union here in the USA. "Eventually the empire declines as untrained incapable rulers start ascending the throne. Money dries up as does scholarly work."
@@stephenjenkins7971 There will be a tipping over point. It doesn't help how India has gone right wing, Europe has gone into retirement vacation mode. China does alot of research and will overtake US sooner or later.
@@ashishkalam9337 Very difficult with the culture in China currently. It isn't like China isn't hyper nationalist already and foreigners are trickling out of the country. Also, to be blunt, China is quickly going to retirement vacation mode too -not helped by the One Child Policy.
@@stephenjenkins7971 Its declining. Less and less people are going to college, and it seems the most recent gen(Gen Alpha) are struggling with basic reading comprehension compared to past generations.
I enjoyed this. Thank you. But I think you underestimate the role of religion - the theological tensions between liberal and fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. The scientific revolution would never have occurred in Europe if Church orthodoxies had not been challenged. I look forward to seeing your other videos...
But I think that cultural shifts also affected that decline. After the Mongols and the Crusades, there came a lot of rhetoric on how these things are happening because of our departure from Islam, and there was indeed a wave of conservatism. If it weren't for this, the Golden Age could have picked up afterwards. Just like it currently picks up again and again and again in the West despite a lot of instability with the World Wars, Cold War, etc.
This was truly informative, indeed enlightening, and also very entertaining - without being shallow. You did a really great job. I teach history and religion and have done that for some years and this was just great, and for me it was quite interesting to see that the Crusades didn't play a part in this video. Maybe they should have but they didn't have that great an impact on the islamic world - they had quite an impact on Europe and the Christian world though.
Using your conclusion, it seem that British already understood this a century ago. They purposively leaving their colonies in turmoil and creating a chaotic borders.
7:30 you paint mongols like savages but forget to mention that khakifate cut the head of mongol ambasador who brought 7 camels of gifts to make good relations which was an act of war
@@protocetus499 they did conquer other nations but the mass slaughter was not a must. Alexandar Nevsky in Russia made a pact with mongols to defend them self from europeans while other principalitis of russia fought them and got burned...
14:05 "They gave us something called civilization but turns out you can't eat civilization". That's truly an amazing quote. Also, was Turkey the only uncolonized Muslim nation by 1920s?
Well Turkey was considered European & wouldn't be colonised by other Europeans, they would only split up their Empire the same they did for Germany after WW1, they even referred to Turkey as the sick man of Europe during the Ottomans decline, Turkey being considered "not white/european" or worse "midden eastern" is a very recent thing due to the rise of identity politics & Christianity having a poor relationship with Islam post 9/11.
Hello i just want to Say i recently Discover this channel and I love it. Thanks for all your work and the amazing stories You bring us. I didn't know if You already do it, but can You consider to talk about the Bahmanid Sultanate of Deccan?
Mongol invasion was foretold by Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, in the following Hadith: *"The Hour will not be established till you fight with the Khudh and the Kirman from among the non-Arabs. They will be of red faces, flat noses and small eyes; their faces will look like flat shields, and their shoes will be of hair." [Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith **#3590**]*
Ibn Khaldun said in Al-Muqaddimah: "The appointment of an Imam is a duty that its obligation is known in Shariah by the consensus of the Sahabah and the followers because the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) after his death rushed to give bay’ah to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (ra) and gave him the responsibility to look after their affairs. This was the case in every era that followed and people were not left in chaos in any era. This consensus was established that it is an obligation to appoint an Imam. That is, the Ummah has transmitted this consensus and has become established in its seniors and classes; the existence is of unanimity is Mutawatir (recurrent).” That's the only way we will recover from this dark age. The Prophet (saw) said: “… and one who dies without having sworn allegiance will die the death of one belonging to the Days of Ignorance. ” Here we are now.
Dude very nice now I see an increase in quality of your videos because making videos on the same topic(Abbasids)made it a little boring but now that you are covering multiple topics it became interesting.
Can you make video about History of Islam In South East Asia especially maritime South East Asian Countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and Brunei 😁😁😁
I personaly hope to be alive to see the day in which the Maghreb is equal in prosperity to Europe. I'm seeing the starts of it! Hopefully Morroco does not get another king who says it's best the population to be illiterate, Algeria doesn't spiral into chaos and Tunisia can keep it's democracy....
Good job mate Everyone blame religion to end golden age of Islam I always felt like there can't single single reason but I never had full answer Now I got it thanks
It must be called the Abbasid Golden Age. No one calls The Greek Golden Age: The Cult of Zeus Golden Age The Mesopotamian or Egyptian: The Polytheistic GA The Ancient Indian: The Hindu The Current Western/ SEA: The secular Golden Age!!!! Just like anywhere else, Social and economic stability and openness to other cultures and their sciences, were the catalyst for the Abbasid Golden Age. Muslims were Muslims BEFORE and AFTER that Golden Age. By the way, there was another dynasty that had a similar Golden Age: The Umayyads in Spain. However, no Golden Age in North Africa, the Levant or Arabia the birth place of Islam. Many don’t know that the many of the scientists in the so called Islamic golden age were considered heretics by religious scholars, for their views of God, creation, afterlife etc.
You dont like the term "Islamic" but start to called it Abbasid Golden Age like the family alone contributed much to overall achievements. Muslims at that time lives in an Islamic caliphate which based on religion so it's correct to call it Islamic Golden age, have the Christians have same way of governing in Europe during medieval era in which the Pope have more secular power and personally patronized those scholars such thing as "Christian Golden Age" isn't wrong. Also for those scholars who were charged as heretics just because they have different view was quite common during that era in many places other than middle east and quite common during Islamic Golden Age that a scholar who studied various field of knowledges that included Islamic teaching which often made them developed their own religious interpretations, some of them gather popular support while the other got persecuted so it's not like secular knowledge vs religious knowledge but a religious man with secular knowledge vs another religious man with the secular knowledge.
@@apalahartisebuahnama7684 The name of the state was the Abbasid Caliphate. You are missing the point. There is NOTHING religious about scientific advancements. Most scientists who contributed to scientific advancements in the Middle East during that era were deists or atheists. They were smart intellectuals who in addition to their advancements in chemistry, math, medicine, optics and others had philosophical and works views that went against the doctrine of Islam. Read about the persecution of these scientists by famous Muslim Imams at the time. I won’t give you names. I want you to do your research..
Could you make a video on how to start a history based youtube channel and how to grow it add animations maps script and how do you do your research of the topics of your videos
My personal explanation (read: hot takes) of the intellectual flourishing and eclipse of the Middle East: Knowledge of the Classical world was highly institutionalized in the academy, a school producing clerks and administrators for imperial government based on study - but not so much research and development - of the great Classical works. The Roman and Persian emperors needed highly trained doctors and bureaucrats and priests, and so funded schools to produce them in much the same way most modern students are educated in order to be useful to existing business and government organizations. This is why, despite their continuity with the Classical world, neither the Byzantines nor the Sassanids had much innovative scholarship as their predecessors or successors. The Arab Conquests changed a lot, and it wasn't simply a matter of carrying on the old traditions. The regions that became the centers of early Islamic intellectual activity were not the same regions where Byzantine or Sassanid academies dominated. Instead of Alexandria, Egypt or the northern Mesopotamia, the Islamic Golden Age had its start in places like Khorasan or Kufa. Here is where I'd say Islam had its biggest influence and why 'Islamic' isn't such a bad descriptor, for the scholars of these places were frontiersmen who drew adventuring warrior-poet types looking for both religious military service on the borders and the education of aesthetic gentlemen somewhat removed from the cosmopolitan center of the new empire. These scholars started to spread west chasing patrons, government and mosque postings, and most importantly markets for their books. This is what set the IGA from earlier academy-style intellectual culture: a scholar didn't only study for the sake of being a useful clerk to the regime, but to also seek personal glory and wealth by gaining renown for their unique insight, their circle of students, and their publications that saw little issue with criticizing the Classics. As their fame grew, the aristocrats of the Arab caliphates sought prestige by patronizing their presence and work in their courts, competing with their rivals in attracting the best talents and offering great works of art and philosophy to their lieges. Instability didn't necessarily harm these endeavors. A lot of great works come from regions and places that were essentially divided into rival city-states competing against one another for prestige, and commonly at war. This seems to be true of Andalus as well as Renaissance Italy and the Early Modern Rhineland. A lot of petty rivals with a lot of gold and courtly culture that dueled over cultural capital as much as taxes and armies is a good way to induce the competitive spirit needed to promote men of talent to positions that supported their life's work. So what happened? With the rise of the military despots in the various Turkic and Berber dictatorships meant a steady replacement of the courtly rivalry between petty Arab emirs jostling for recognition from the caliph. Instead of legitimacy through renowned scholars at court, these states had to justify their rule through exclusively clannish armies, muscular militarism against non-believers, and a growing patronage of religious institutions as their proxies. Without a source of patronage, scholars had to seek work among these religious institutions which operated more like the old imperial academies, and so didn't allow for as much off-the-wall research as earlier times in order to not rock the boat. Interesting work was still happening, but had to be done in retirement and outside the madrassa, for private publication to a shrinking readership as a sort of anti-intellectualism took hold among the common folk and political leadership alike. Now, these things happened at all times of course, but the difference back in the old days of the IGA was that when things got too hot an scholar could pick up and move to a completely new state, with the most famous example of Ibn Battuta finding work at the opposite end of the Islamic world. But as Europe began to cut off safe travel from Spain and North Africa with expansions and raids in the Mediterranean, and the rise of the Mongol successor states created a dangerous political border between the Turkic and Mongol states along Mesopotamia, it was becoming more and more difficult to simply migrate for greener pastures. The rise of the great Gunpowder Empires didn't help either as these states were so massive and centralized that a troubled scholar would have to go wide and far to find equal opportunities without trouble following them, and moving between these courts was fraught with intrigue and suspicion by each state. Sources: [1] My Ass (2021)
I completely agree you synthesize most of what I was thinking to write. In addition, I would like to mention the scientific revolution, which is based on doubt. Some European kingdoms adopted the scientific method, especially the protestant kingdoms, this adoption implied even questioning the existence of god, like Descartes, Pascal, and Hume did. This is important because only through experience, a.k.a. the experiment, we are only able to discard a hypothesis. This shift of paradigm was massive because natural philosophers started to rely on experiments rather than arguments, speeches, and words. "Question everything" even my own existence, an action that the main streams are Islam probably are not willing to accept.
@@ifrobayom Madrid, Lisbon, Milan, Rome, Naples, Barcelona, Paris, Brussels, Munich, Vienna, Cologne, Prague,Warsaw, Geneva, Bern, Venice are all Roman catholic in culture in this time period you describe and still really are to some degree, the only protestant city to compete with these cities were London, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Philedelphia (USA). The enlightenment was a movement of Catholic and Deist thinkers with a small contingent of British/Dutch based protestants. Not the other way round!!! Atheism had no role in the enlightenment, most enlightenment thinkers were very religious. Not all of course, few were atheists of course BUT the vast majority were extremely religious. 1. One of these is founded on the possibility of thinking the "idea of a being that is supremely perfect and infinite," and suggests that "of all the ideas that are in me, the idea that I have of God is the most true, the most clear and distinct." Descartes considered himself to be a devout Catholic. Source-René Descartes - Wikipedia 2. Blaise Pascal was a French philosopher, mathematician, scientist, inventor, and theologian. In mathematics, he was an early pioneer in the fields of game theory and probability theory. In philosophy he was an early pioneer in existentialism. As a writer on theology and religion he was a defender of Christianity. Source- Pascal, Blaise | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy 3. David Hume is the greatest philosopher Britain has produced and an intellectual hero to many atheists. His arguments against religion are clear, incisive and devastating. The only fly in the ointment is the very strong evidence that he wasn't an atheist at all, but an agnostic. Source- www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/06/religion-philosophy-hume-miracles#:~:text=David%20Hume%20is%20the,at%20all%2C%20but%20an%20agnostic. Three quick google searches already dismiss your response. As you can see in your example alone. 2 of the 3 were hardcore catholics. And the other a loose protestant, who was probably somewhat religious. Now you can see why I as a Historian always get ticked off when I see modern atheistic people or American Protestants either claim the enlightenment as the work of protestants or the other point being atheists claim that the great thinkers were Atheists which is actually absolute rubbish, even in the MODERN day top universities the very elite students generally tend to be religious at least from what i've seen personally anyway. Your one correct point being however the questioning off everything Scientific based in which turn led to the Scientific revolution is absolutely correct and something i totally agree with in regards to that one specific angle of your's. However the questioning of God big no no, definitely not in the way you described it anyway. Your approach is one of modern Atheistic day thinking NOT enlightenment thinking!!!
You know colonization actually cost more money that it gave the metropoles, overall. There were some spikes like the silver from America but those weren't colonies, they were 100% fully integrated lands of the Spanish Empire, and the tax on them was 20%, much lower than today's standards, and mostly only precious metals, not on all the other activities. But by the XXth century all colonies where at net loss overall for Britain and France. The real harm was sapping out all political and military power from the conquered regions and doubly so when they got independent during the cold war, as nobody wanted to follow on the colonizer's footsteps, meaning free market, so for decades from India to Morocco everyone tried socialism... and succeed, which is why their economies failed.
I kinda agree with you in almost every point, it was really good the way you made us think about the widespread narrative of what was the Islamic Golden Age and how it supposedly ended. I have a minor problem with the supposed natural cycle, because it could lead us to analyze history in a purely theoretical one, rather than supporting with source evidence, however I'll not go to this rabbit hole. My major problem is that to explain the actual state of the Islamic world decadence you put all the guilt on the colonialism, yes, colonialism was the a primary cause in the colonialism era and part for the actual the instability, however the social-political landscape of the Islamic world has also a huge part in this decadence. A lot of the problems that happened in Syria, Egypt, Libya etc. recently was not the result directly of the legacy of colonialism, rather it was bad and often the authoritarian governments that didin't support education, neither free thought. It is kinda hard to develop your own ideas if there's a risk of persecution of your own government based on political or religious beliefs. And here it is a thing, I'm from Brazil, far, really far from being a perfect country, however it at least guarantees free thought - at least after the dictatorship - and there is a lot, really a lot, of Arab and Turk descent - some of them are Muslim, some not- that contributes greatly to our intellectual life here. Some examples: a lot of high reputable Doctors are from Lebanese and Syrian descent; my university's teacher of modern history Abdala is of Muslim Turk descent, and the ex-mayor of São Paulo for the Workers Party (PT) and former candidate to presidency Haddad is also a reputable academic and a USP's professor I think is of Muslim Lybian descent. Also a honorable mention to a scholar that I love, Edward Said, he was a muslim palestinian. Sorry for the long comment, and for my English, because is not my primary language, so it could be confusing to understand me sometimes. Nonetheless, awesome video.
colonialism didn't stop with the independance of muslim countries , it contenu with neo colonialism it's good that you are from brazil because we can make a good conparision with muslim countries as they are like brazil third world countries , there are some muslim countries which are catching up with the west like turkey and malaysia , golf countries are very rich but the rulers are so backward , Pakistan is a 200 millions people country and they have nuclear technology but they are in conflict with India that have 1,3 billions people , and the majority of muslim countries are under corrupt and dictator rulers and also under neo colonialism , the muslim world is very important geographically so all the super powers want to control it and this destabilize it , it's not like brazil which is a country in south america fare from the strategic routes of the world but in general the standards of living in the majority of muslims countries are equal to that in brazil and some are even better , we have the same problem as in other third world countries and the religion have little to no relation with this problems , the majority of muslims know that they are underdeveloped and they know that science is important to developpement and they want to develop theirs countries but corruption and dictatory and neo colonialism make that very difficult greetings to you from Algeria
@@krimozaki9494 Fair enough, and here comes my lacking knowledge of contemporary political history of majority- Muslim countries, however I assume isn't far from similar in Brazil. Here a lot of the today's backward politicians and also the military 1964 dictatorship were supported massively reactionary extremely right-wing religious groups from the Catholic Church and nowadays, the Evangelicals. And the historiography over here about Brazilian politics is moving towards recognizing the domestic reactionary forces rather than the old pressured US omnipotence that ruined much of the 3rd world. I think it's not possible to underestimate the effect that the religious institution and also sometimes beliefs can influence politics. Maybe you could share with me some insights about the case of Algeria or other primarily Muslim countries. Without further ado, I would thank for your goodwill in responding to me.
@@niltomperimneto in Algeria for example we still have a despotic military regime supported by france but with a democratic façade , the military ruling class is totaly secular but they rule the country with a mix between scularism and islam to satisfay all the diffrent category of the people if i understand you correctly the church supported the military regime in Brazil , in the muslims countries is the opposite , there is a small part of the islamic spectrum that support the regime but the rest opposing it , some peacefully but some with violence especially in the 90's , this gives the regime a reason to oppresse any opposition in the name of fighting terrorism , some countries escape the millitary regime and became a powerful country like turkey for the islamic patries in the muslim worls , some are realy backward and they can't creat a developed country , and some are more reasonable and understand that they need to take new and modern ideas
I love your videos Al-Muqqaddimah, but I have some reservations about the view of colonization you exposed here. Europen colonization of the Middle East was brief, actually only after WWI, with the fall of the Ottomans (in Egypt it came earlier, but informally), and was arguably more of a headache to them caused by overreach. In India the local elites were more than willing to support the British, and many Indians saw whther the wind was blowing and fought alongside them. Whether you pay taxes to London or Delhi is irrevelant for most people. Persia got pretty much scot free, because it ws a useful buffer between British India and Russia. What I mean is tha blaming colonialism for all miseries in the Muslim Wolrd is massive exageration. It's worse effects weere probably in Western and Centra Africa.
It's not direct control that hurt them the most. The discovery of the Americas and the shifting of the Asian trade routes, indirect results of colonization (and sometimes direct, look at the Portuguese-Ottoman conflict in the Indian Ocean, cutting off the Turks from most Eastern trade, and the explosion in Western piracy), slowly starved the Muslim empires of trade. By the time the Europeans took over directly, the damage was already done. Their retreat then left behind even more problems, like the ones we see in the Levant today.
The English killed literally millions of us, between the massacres, forced labor in terrible conditions, and the sloppy partition job. We absolutely did not think that there was no difference between local rule and being condescended and subjugated by the English Also, the video discussed the Muslim world, not the Middle East. Most of the Muslim world was colonized for a lot longer than, say, the gulf. And the video did not frame colonization the way you claim. Watch it again, and put aside your preconceptions
Super interesting video! Your explanation of the concepts was really good. I’d be interested in hearing more about how European colonialism affected the Islamic world. Those narratives aren’t heard anywhere near as much as the traditional European ones.
Colonialism has not ended, it's as brutal as ever - take a look at Iraq, Afghanista, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Palestine etc - who would have thought centuries of otherisation and demonisation could lead to such murderous, genocidal barbarity..
The Muslim World, especially the Gulf, could make a comeback if they invest their oil and gas money into research, which, to their credit, some countries (UAE, Iran, and Qatar) are doing already. But religious reform is necessary to foster an intellectually oriented culture, I mean, religious zealotry is never good for dissemination of knowledge, for that, just look at the USA with their evangelicals and their anti-science positions.
"religious zealotry is never good for dissemination of knowledge, for that, just look at the USA with their evangelicals and their anti-science positions." You can't prove a "never" statement with just an example. Multiple counter-examples from different religions exist: the so-called golden age of Islam, which spanned many regions of the Muslim world and the renaissance and probably more. So now why isn't science flourishing in these rich oil countries? The answer is the same for "why is the world still so dependent on the Dollar?" The very perception of these countries being academically underperforming and other countries being academically excellent pushes scientists away to those better countries, making this perception a self-fulfilling prophecy.
@@aladinsura121 You're speaking as if they have no agency or capacity to do otherwise and that's not at all the case. The US and the west should of course cease supporting Israeli colonialism and assassination, end the sanctions against Iran, and do many other things (like support the creation of a free Kurdistan.) The West is to blame for so very much in the region and it's connection to that cannot possibly be overstated. THAT SAID: some of these countries have the most wealthy economies in the world, where enormous sums of money could be invested in the infrastructure, education, peerlessly funded laboratories and cutting edge research and developing facilities. The means to drag the region away from a purely resource-based economy are there, as are a collection of parasitic elites who have no intention of doing so.
@@TheBarser Yes. Period, full stop. How and on what time line? That's a very different question. I think that the largest driver of that would be reducing economic quality within majority Islamic states and building up consistency within their political structures. As an outsider, it seems that a great deal of the reform is hindered by the instability within the nation's, expressed as a symptom within the faith, not as a cause.
I'm sorry but I disagree with your opinion that the Golden Age was NOT an exception to the normal when it comes to its existence it was anything but natural or normal. The sheer scope of translated works and languages that were being spoken during this time frame in Baghdad is leagues above what had been done until that point in time. The Library of Alexandria which many will consider to be the greatest library to have existed during this timeframe had books in only 3 languages; Greek, Egyptian and an Afro-Asian language lost to time. Compare that to the works in the House of Baghdad you have Arabic, Greek, Sanskrit, Persian, Syriac, and Chinese to name a few on top of the translated works of other classics that were being worked on amongst these scholars and transported back to their respective countries. Furthermore we know that these works have played an incredibly vital role in the spread of knowledge from East to West with works playing important roles within the European Renaissance (as you've previously pointed out) but also in establishing the Arab Muslims as players in the intellectual space with important advancements in Astronomy, Medicine and Mathematics. The Golden Age of Islam should be recognized and properly characterized for what it was; The most important intellectual space in Islamic history with work that to this day has had a profound impact on the World.
I agree with what you said but you're talking about its scale. I said that the scale was an exception but its mere existence was normal. On a smaller scale, the region had always produced works of research. Written Word was invented there, after all. I agree
Visit my Patreon to support the channel by pledging a dollar or more: www.patreon.com/AlMuqaddimahYT
You can also became a member on TH-cam.
Hi, could you please indicate some reference books on this topic. It's something I have been looking to learn about
Mongols ended islam golden age
@@masternobody1896 not true... if the golden age hadn't ended already they wouldn't have been conquered they were very weak effectively ruling the surroundings of baghdad only
Golden ages happens to states so I think you should have stuck to the fall of the abbasids and it's reasons not include other states that had other golden ages at different time periods for different reasons and under different political entities
Noice awesome video and map Al Muqaddimah I noticed the new coloring for the maps in the last video I just forgot to comment on that video that video was awesome and informative I didn’t know that Kashmir remained independent from the Mongols the Ghaznavids and the Ghurids and then was no longer until the Modern history and I am talking about Kashmir time period of it being independent or not from the medieval period till the Modern period, thx for the informative videos.
Everyone talks about the burning of he library of Alexandria but never the sacking of Baghdad
People who are interested in history will be sad about both.
Even the destruction of Nalanda University in India by bhaktiyar khilji.
Destruction of Nalanda University was also sad.😞
@@Shastrisknowledgebytes I dont know about that university, can you introduce?
Nalanda was already a destroyed place, Only some remaining sages were killed by Khilji which ended Nalanda... Nalanda was not destroyed by Khilji, but already destroyed earlier...
Get outside of Hindutwa Bhakt ideology and try to learn some history impartially... You'll see the real picture...
Uhm, I am writing from Latin America and it never crossed my mind to reflect on how the "discovery" and colonization of the American continent impacted the Islamic world. You have a good topic to develop another great video.
Renaissance, Colonization of the Americas, Discovery of the new trade routes combined with decline and instability of the Muslims, or more accurately "Easterns" shaped the world we live in today. Things could've gotten really different if, say, Morocco was stable and colonized the new world in early 1400s. But that didn't happen thus we live in a "Western" dominated world.
China is catching up, though.
@@muaviyehusrevsayar9439 india to and russia honestly having other superpower is great because it make sure to keep the others in check
I always wondered how life would be like if Muslim's ran into Aztecs. We'd prolly be hermano hermanos 😆
The period being discussed in this video Was about 200 years before that. The Mongols destroyed the empires in the 1200s. But yes, I see you’re greater point
@@muaviyehusrevsayar9439 yeah, there's a cool alternate history scenario about that, but sadly most Moroccan/maghrebi dynasties in the 15th/16th century were absolute bullshit :/, they were fat and lazy and didn't really care about the revolting tribes...
Absolutely incredible video.
Your channel is the greatest reason I have developed an interest on eastern and islamic history. As I live in a mostly christian nation, this kind of knowledge is not considered particularly useful or interesting by universities and schools here and I had little knowledge on the subject. Your videos, however have helped me (and still do) to understand it is of extreme importance to see every point of view and how rich, interesting and important islamic history is. Please keep up your incredible work
Do search Dr Stef Keris channel as well.
@@muhammadkhan2007 Thanks! Will definetly check it out!
Great comment. New subscriber here. Utterly anti religious westerner but am fascinated by the history our calm and so thorough host presents!
Totally agree. I’m not a religious person, but I love history and religion/history are inextricably tied together.
To me, the meteoric rise of the Islamic world in the early Middle Ages is one of the most interesting topics of history of all time. And this channel is so good at telling it. Love that you can tell the host is Muslim but is more interested in telling the history of Islam, rather than the theology of it.
"But, as it turns out, you can't eat civilization."
Very clever and funny. Good job!
Probably the most accurate summation of what European colonization actually did to the world.
@@zenoblues7787 I don't get it
@@hamidulislam9537 This whole miss guided notion that conquering foreign lands and "bring the light of civilization" would actually improve the lives of the conquered. In theory it sounded like a good idea in reality it most created corrupt systems and dependant economies that we still feel the consequences of even today. I'm not biased enough to say it was completely bad but it was done so poorly that most countries are in some ways still products of how that specific point in time affected them.
@@zenoblues7787 Ah I see now. Thank you for the response.
As an arab/persian, i'm happy to see someone talking about our indian brothers 🇰🇼 💙 🇮🇳
India has the 2nd largest muslim population in the world. Just Imagine if Pakistan and Bangladesh weren't seperated from India.
@@harikrishnan4183 doesn't Pakistan have more muslims than India?
@@yousifbk8165 yes now Pakistan has the 2nd and India is at 3rd
@@harikrishnan4183 It’s too bad you guys kept rioting and killing each other. It would be a very nice thing to see everyone united. Pipe dream.
@Mohammad Abu Allah arab persian means i am half arab half persian, the flag is Kuwait flag
It should be noted the Sack of Baghdad not only massacred the majority of the population and the destruction of the house of wisdom, it also brought about the destruction of irrigation networks, which were cultivated over melenia. This turned once fertile land into desert land.
It's said eight hundred thousand people were killed over forty days. Europeans could have likely got the job done in 24 hours.
That doesn't matter. The main, most important thing as that Mecca and Medina, the birthplace and center of Islamic, Arab art, science, civilization was spared, survived and continued to thrive.
الحمدلله يا أخي You made my day. May Allah give you more power to increase your wisdom and sharpness of your tongue when talking the truth.
I love your channel so much. I wish one day someone could discover all the books lost during the Sack of Baghdad. Could you do a video on how the role women changed throughout Islamic history through the Rashidun, Early Umayyad, Late Umayyad, Abbassid dynasties please🤲
You truly are one of the best historians on this platform. Thanks for everything you do!
Wonderfully researched and put together. I have missed this kind of information growing up.
Btw, coming over from Let's talk religion. I enjoy the collaboration between yourself, Let's talk religion and Useful Charts.
You went into a lot of depth, found it really impressive.
hello
@@micahistory you alright bro 😂
@@forgottenhistory6232 yes just watches your new video
@@micahistory thanks bro
I also dislike the term “the Golden Age of Islam”, but the reason is that by using it a person emphasizes religious, rather than racial, identity. For example, the science and technology in the late Roman empire, as well as in Byzantium, predominantly came from the Middle Eastern and North African provinces (Syria, Egypt, etc). But many modern Middle Eastern idealogues are only interested in “Muslim” scientists, dismissing the vast heritage of Middle Eastern Christians, Jews, pagans etc. And as for the decline of the Middle East, the reason for that was the same as in many other civilizations - the dysgenic fertility.
Agreed.. even they always try to destroy history before Islam
@@rajnandinivishwas8789 I agree. Just as, say, there were Chinese who belonged to different religions, or Indians, or Europeans. “Muslim” is a religious cathegory, not a racial one
@Devil's Logic Technically they can, but that’s incorrect, because, say, Persians or peoples of Asia Minor were not Arabs (although genetically belonged to West Asian genetic cluster). It’s like saying that Western civilization is “English”.
@@bahtiyarbabazadeeski it is not exactly the same. English have a culture different than others europeans, different language, different names, and although they are all christians, the way they profess it varies. The same can not be said to islam. They try to have the same language, reverted people change his names to arabic ones ...
Western have a strong foundation in countries, islam in the islamic community (unmahad, sorry can recall the spelling)
@@antonioribeiro6119 I understand what you are saying, but the reason for that is the relative secularization and developed-ness of the West and Europe as a whole (at least today). Can you say that Anglo-Saxons at the time of Crusades were very different from, say, Germans or even Spaniards? When the Middle East was relatively developed, Syrians were not the same as Egyptians, Christians (Christianity is also a Middle-Eastern religion, just as Islam and Judaism) were not the same as pagans, etc. The more developed a race becomes, the more diverse it becomes and the more cultures it produces. And today certain people try to limit Middle Eastern culture to Islam, and I disagree, because it undermines the achievements of people of the same racial stock, but of different religious views.
LOVE IT. The visuals have definitely improved. More power to you
Shout out to Let's Talk Religion for introducing some of us to this absolute hidden gem of a channel.
Make a serise on Fatimids
And Seljuks🙂
And Mamluks🙄
And meybe Gaznavids
Turk empires 😍
I do believe the fatimids were kinda an arab dynaste and the mamluks were Circassian dynaste
@@dawale9601 Mamluks are two states Circassian Burji Empire and Turkic Bahri Empire, Fatimid is Arabic Empire
fatimids🤮🤮
Turks were nomadic. They destroyed the intellectual mindset in Islamic world. Ibn Sina was constantly threatened by Turkic Gaznavids and protected by Persian Buyid dynasty. Especially lady Sayidda of Buyid dynasty.
I appreciate that you stated a lot of this to be your opinions (of course based on proper research), and your quarrel with the term 'Golden Age', as if it were some mystical aura permeating a bygone era. Reminds me of my quarrels with the term 'Dark Ages'.
I realize these terms make it easier to tell a good story, but sometimes stories can get in the way of proper understanding of the past and the present. I've been interested in the goings on outside of mye hometurf for some while, and your content is really appreciated!
6:23 Thank you for debunking the fall of islamic scientific scholarship caused by Al-Ghazali alone. Whatifalthist, your collab always repeat this point as nausem. I wonder how varied their reading list are.
7:14 Whatifalthist also repeated ad nauseum that post-mongolic islam is more conservative. I cannot wait about your video on the topic.
Whatifalthist is somehow the most in-depth, but shallow alt-historian. Idk how to properly explain this, but what I mean is that his takes take some historical trends (of which he seems to have quite a bit of knowledge) and adds them to very basic/simplistic (or sometimes just... wrong) ideas.
It's extremely fun to watch, though, as he goes very deep into the topics he covers, even if they can be crazy from time to time (like the industrialized ancient Greece video).
Whatifalthist seems prejudiced and even he admits that he doesn't have much knowledge about the east
@@Azhar_shaikh1 he has a huge obsession with turkey for some reason and really likes to downplay colonialism and the level of development of African civilization
One of the main reason for the fall of Muslim Civilization was Geography and Demography. The rise and fall of Muslim Civilization is closely related with the Eminence of Horse-Cavalry and the fall of Horse-Cavalry and The Rise of Guns, Cannons and large Infantry. If you didn't had a large Population or large agricultural economy, you couldn't had a strong Infantry or a large Artillery.
th-cam.com/video/aeUYCp01MeQ/w-d-xo.html
Thank you i noticed this too , when he said he would probably want to delete him from history like that's gonna have a significant change on society! Honestly he overestimates the influence of scholars especially those of nonreligious matters on the Muslim society back then lol
The Golden Age of Islam without mentioning Greece and India is like turkish history not mentioning the Arabs. When the rulers of Baghdad set up their colleges and libraries they had in mind the cities if the Roman Empire they just conquered and India. Alexandria, Damascus, etc. And dark ages didn't exist for East Roman Empire. We built Aya Sofya in 537AD, Anthemios and Isidoros were both scientists. So your golden age started when you took Roman middle east, and western renaissance started when they got hold of the books of Constantinople after the Greeks transferred them to Venice to escape the Turks in 1453. The same thing is always done by Catholics, silencing Constantinople because of religious differences
The Abbasids fell to the same trap that the Romans fell to and that is relying on soldiers of foreign origins too much. In the Romans' case, it's the Germanic tribes. In the Abbasids' case, it's the Turkic tribes. And eventually, both empires are conquered and dismantled into pieces by these tribal barbarians in the end for the sake of loots and promoting slavery with the expense of the destruction of the places of knowledge like the Library of Alexandria in Egypt and the House of Wisdom in Baghdad.
That was because the regimes were to intertwined with the ruling dynasty, and indigenous people were a great thread to ruling dynasty through it the regime. The election system has solved this issue to a degree but since democratic elections shows worse results to find, choose and cultivate real leaders the stability it brings leads stagnation. So as Muqaddimah suggests here the advancement in tech and sciences can be as fast as the Golden age of Islam even though we see many inventions, revolutionary ones only happens in critical moments or crisis times. You can see the slowing trend in sci-fi movies predictions are better than the reality of progress
Exactly...giving too much power to Turks led to the decline in Middle Eastern Civilization
@@Hi5Ripon Turks didn't get too much power neither middle easterners were backwarded. among Ottoman ruling class there were many Arabic, Kurdish, Persian, Roman, Serbian, Armanian and Tracian people. And many of them had great deal of autonomy for their nation. They had personal qualities about being a good scientist, or a poet or a lawyer etc. For example Nabi was a bureaucrat also a very good poet, he was Kurd. Fuzuli was a proffessor in Madrasah he was Turco- Persian. Sokullu was Serbian but he had great deal of projects like Don Volga Canal, Qairo Canal and Istanbul Canal.
They did many great things but because they were better Muslims they didn't blabber about what they did, too much. They were modest, not mediocre.
You either didn't watched the video because it clearly refers that what westerners did as colonization made the sure that decline would stay that way. Ruling class may have changed but we lost our civilization because we were forced to import western civ in expanse of our own wealth, they dried us out and left us with unedible civ. You can't make advancement in anything while trying to feed yourself and your family.
@@ercaner_buzbey Despite their boast of considering themselves as "Rome's successor" still Turks weren't even close to Arabs or even Amazighs when it came to advancements or progressiveness in Middle East
Due to their savage heritage and thuggish-like mindsets that they bought it from Mongolia abstained people of their invaded territories to live under darkness and regressive lifestyles for centuries or look at Iraq, Syria, Egypt and Sudan on how they were laid waste
@@Hi5Ripon the turks where good especially the Seljuks and Ottomans
In retrospect, the Ottomans cutting the Europeans off from the trade with Asia was a really bad idea.
The Musics used in this video are bangers, takes me back in time.
Great video as always.
isnt using musical instruments haram in Islam.. it seeks too much attention
@@randomuser5780 No, there's a valid ikhtilaf, and you could say YT takes too much of our attention as well.
Islam had absolutely nothing to do with the, "golden age of Islam." The Abbasid empire was at the center of international trade and as such, benefited from "brain drain" from around the world. Once those trade routes were no longer important, it collapsed.
It kinda did
In pre-islamic Iran it was impossible for a peasant to even get literate
And some of the greatest scholars from the islamic golden age were iranians from a poor background
Also unlike the renaissance Christian nations that the churchs in power were Sciencophobic
The islamic ulama believed Science is good for us and they supported it
Although i believe one of the main reasons for that era to end was the radical orthodox "muslims" that claimed we should only focus on god and don't care about other things, but meh... atleast they didn't called Science "magic"
Easy they ran out of gold
And thus, they entered the “en Age” 😂
Well as per my reserch, there was a school of thought in abbasid caliphate gave more importance the logic AND reason. That metaphysical school of thought was called mutazilizm. The ashari doctrine that we follow today is different from that school of thought. Ashari follows the literal meaning of quran while as mutazilism was very flexible. I mean islamic scholars back then were trying to determine whether free will exists or pre-destination(on the basis of how atom worked). Back then islam was far superior than anything, look were have we come.
P:s. Thankyou for putting these interesting topics here, cheers!!
@Sports Entertainment does this mean that Mu'tazilism hold reason before scripture or does it hold reason as a way to 'amend' contradictions in scripture?
@Sports Entertainment the mu'tazila have committed shirk with many scholars explaining their stance as unislamic. This whole rationality reasoning leads to shirk. They rejected alot of the Sunnah. As for the claim that modern Saudi are salafi there are questions to be raised on that since the scriptures used are from Muhammad IBN abul wahab. He was inspired by IBN taymiah while not quiet understanding his text on fiqh and theology (aqeeda). For example he declared jihad against his Muslims brothers while getting aid from the British taking them as allies, completely oblivious of the fact that Quran says don't take the non believer as allies. You know his argument along with Shareef of Makkah that since the ottomans allied with the Germans the proclamation of jihad was not fit since it included jihad for the Germans. This is not to say Abdul wahab is wrong but has miscalculation in his theology. It also does not make the ottomans as the victim here but in reality the Muslims messed up by accepting them as the khalifa considering the fact the a Khalifa should be from quraish as stated in Hadith.
@Sports Entertainment In what sense is this brief?
@Sports Entertainment I am not going to disagree with you but would like to you to view this from broader prospective. For instance he never claimed jihad against the British or french who where forcibly in Muslim lands prosecuting Muslims. He rather declared it against his brothers in Islam. I understand that certain tribes from najd started to do like some worship on graves however did he just view certain tribes or generalize that everyone not from his tribe and area is a mulhid? In any case he is still a scholar and is held with much regard and respect despite some of his shadowy policies.
@@sultansultan5447 i would have to disagree with you on this. I would not say that they commited shirk*(believing that there is other god than god). If you look at that times' demography on the basis of school of thought, mutazillahs were in majority and i would not say thay all were kafirs. It might just be my opinion but i think religion should be personal. Something that is between you and god and people should not be the onès making judgement. Brother if you look today as of how many schools of thoughts and schisms/divides are in islam(even in ashri school of thought itself) the mind is boggled. Rather than pointing a finger at some sect/part or even people, we should be personally involved in religion. For me one is muslim if one believes in kalimah, and after that it is only allah(God) that knows and one that makes the judgement.
::if i offend someone or if i have offended anyone, i appoligize but that is my opinion::
We need to stop living in the past and reform our communities for the future.
I agree we need to learn from what they did right and move on, time for the rise to come again.
Thank you for the well researched content of this video, looking forward to more such pieces from you
7:30 classic mongols, their empire taking up half the screen yet still not fitting
Yes they had the biggest empire ever seen at the time
@@ahmedkhaled8719 still Biggest
You missed thousands of Greeks ,Persian and hindu texts translated into so called islamic golden age . Islamic golden age was built upon pre islamic empire , once islam becomes strong , and there is no copying from others . Islamic golden age ends
Bhai, video to dekh lia kro, comment se pehly.
@@AlMuqaddimahYT bro you indian muslim?
"Saudi Arabia is an exception."
But this is the problem. All the money, stability, and sovereignty in Saudi Arabia can't create a technological and science renaissance that Baghdad had created. So, like Bernard Lewis said: "What went wrong?"
Sauds are greedy they love to use money on useless thing rather then knowledgeable or helping other muslim countries
I have wondered about this for a long time. Thank you for your summerization of the topic.
7:12 THNK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP
Very informative video and your opinions are fascinating. I hope to see you talk in length about Islam in Southeast Asia.
I really like this channel, by the way will u make a series on the umayyads like the abbasids?
he has a series on the umayyads of damascus and cordoba.
@@fahimmorshed he made a series on the ummayads of Cordoba, just like that I want a video on the ummayads of damascus, he made only two videos on them I think
@@rishabhraviprasad6672 umayyads only ruled damascus for about 90 years. so 2 videos are enough I think for a channel of his scale. cz there are a lot more topics to talk about
@@fahimmorshed Then maybe he can talk about the aftermath of the abbasid collapse, which was the iranian intermezzo? It resulted in iranian empires like samanids, saffarids and eventually lead to the establishment of turco Afghan polities in india?
@@rishabhraviprasad6672 I think he has a plan for that. He said it in 100k livestream.
I think is a masterpiece presentation in such timescale- full of facts , well presented, easy to digest by anyone interested
I was waiting for this
Very well done. 👏🏾 I appreciate your take on this complex topic.
One smart 🍑. You are a soft ji ha di. You spoke about everything except the rise of Orthodox Islamic kingdoms, Law of shariya, degradation of women in different Caliphate, persecution of non muslims, forceful conversation etc
The golden age ended as Muslim kings started to fund more quran based science and scholars. This was also the period of rise of Islamic Orthodoxy, something similar to talibanisation in Afghanistan. All the caliphates wanted to establish their kingdom on lines of words of Muhammad and Hadith.
The different caliphates were actively involved in funding more and more muslim imams, mosque's etc. They started to shun any ideals, concepts, science, technology outside the Quran.
The golden age was a period of inclusiveness. While the latter was a period of Orthodoxy.
You don't know a sh*t about islamic golden age what kind of bs are you making
Cry More islamaphopie 🤡
It would be good if you did like a one hour lecture with slide shows. There’s so much interesting information that would be good in a long format.
You forgot to mention how taking Spain from the muslims helped accelerate the Renaissance and the translation of muslim works.
There’s a ton of missed points in here. I think the channel is a very basic overview.
Spain and Sicily too
The Crusades, Mongols, Plague, Civil Wars, Ottomans, Seljuks, and many other reasons are responsible.
Incredible bro. amazing content as always. Salam, from Indonesia
Ran with swords all around.what golden age.
😗 200 year's of British 🇬🇧 ✝️ raj was fantastic 😂🤣🤣
In sha Allah... have longed for this kind of videos.. loads of love brother..
What ended the golden age of Muslims not of Islam
Islam still the same.
Islam changed, proto Islam is different than 8th to 11th century. For example mutazila was popular and now not anymore. Athari or salafis got popular after 1800.
Thanks for this great video
Your argument against a rise in orthodoxy being a prime factor in ending the golden age is both peculiar and flawed. You essentially say that since religion didn't play a major role in starting the golden age it couldn't have played a major role in ending it. That's obviously not true. You can murder a child without having given birth to it yourself. Religions are by their very nature conservative and reactionary. We've seen time and again throughout history how various religions have pushed back against the advance of human knowledge, often with great success. Hell, just look at the anti-vaccine movement in the United States, which at its core is driven by a distrust of science among Christian fundamentalists.
You further cite a lack of evidence of a rise in religious conservatism during the golden age. It's not necessary that religion become more conservative, only that it be piously observed by the majority of the people, which by all accounts was the case at the time. A doctrinal shift, such as that promulgated by al-Ghazali, can then spread quickly through society, rewriting its rules of conduct.
Anyone who thinks Ghazali was responsible for ending the 'islamic golden age' is an idiot and totally ignorant.
Ghazali mainly spoke out against the falsafah of his time. Neil degrasse Tyson is an absolute ignorant buffoon in regards to this topic, he said Ghazali said math was the work of the devil. Anyone who understands Islamic scholarship of the past and the doctrinal school Ghazali was apart of, knows how much of a ignorant statement that is.
What Ghazali and the conservative scholars of his time wrote against, was the neo platonic teachings of the falaasifa. Their beliefs were clearly against the teachings of Islam from pretty much all the schools of creed. An example of this was most of the falaasifa held that the universe itself was eternal. Something that clearly contradicts mainstream Islam. There were more issues also. The point is, what Ghazali and the like spoke out against was where they contradicted the tenets of Islam. Not mathematics or science. You will not find one statement of Ghazali or any scholar of the time speaking out against mathematics or science. They spoke out against the religious beliefs of the falaasifa who happened to also generally be mathematicians and scientists. But what they spoke out against them for was not for being mathematicians or scientists but the religious beliefs they held. Ghazali himself and almost all the ashari scholars were schooled in logic. It was and is a fundamental part of their school of creed.
I encourage you to read Ghazali's works for yourself.
Your take also lacks evidence
On the other hand, the amount of evidence pointing to the moral decadence and religious decline of the Muslims is massive. Anyone who thinks Al-Ghazali ended the Muslim Golden Age is an ignoramus. I can’t even begin to believe who popularized it. Was it Neil DeGrasse Tyson? He sucks at history in the first place.
I feel that this comment steams from Eurocentric thought and ignorance towards Islam. Muslims did not face the problems Europeans did in terms of intellectual decline. When Europe had people living in the streets and its cities disorganized, Muslims adhered to Islam heavily and experienced a Golden Age
Every time the Muslims abandoned Islam, God humiliates them. Islam promotes intellectualism and societal progress, and it provides the moral foundations for society to work. You simply can not use the case for Christians in your society on Muslims throughout history, because the two societies worked drastically differently.
Islam did played a role in the Golden age He didn't say that, It's undeniable and the ending of the Golden age was the instability among the Muslim world and still is, I don't know why would it not make sense to you.
It wasn't a single factor but that's major factor and the colonization has not only effected Muslim word but all of Africa and South Asia as well
Not the mongol attacks, not the colonization, not the poltical upheavals, the evidence gathered from the data related to the scientific output over the years spanning hundreds of years has proven that it is indeed the sunni revivalism that marked the decline of the golden age. This study, the one I have shared below, clearly proves, using the analysis of the data via trend-break algorithms, that the observed decline in scientific output during the golden age PREDATES the mongol invasion and colonization.
Please read with an open mind:
Agreed mayaknife. It has been established using trend-break algorithms that the rise of orthodoxy is the chief factor that led to the downfall of science and rationalist thinking in the golden age. Al-Muqadimmah explains the end of the whole islamic civilization in this video, not what led to the decrease in the scientific output alone. Please read the following paper if anyone disagrees with the fact that sunni revivalism was the chief factor behind the fall of rationalist thought in the islamic world at that time. This is a highly cited paper which has surveyed the evolution of scientific production in the Islamic world over more than a millennium to explore whether scientific production in the Islamic world declined, to pinpoint when it declined, and to evaluate the validity of popular explanations for its decline. The primary measure of scientific production is derived from Harvard’s library holdings, which are among the most extensive in the world. These data show a sustained drop in the proportion of books dedicated to scientific topics that becomes statistically significant in the 12th century CE and persists through the end of the sample in 1800.
This drop in scientific output is accompanied by a surge in books written on religious topics as well as an increase in derivative works (e.g. commentaries on previous works). Results using an alternative data set from seventeenth century Istanbul are qualitatively similar. Taken in unison, the results provide robust evidence that scientific production declined in the medieval Islamic world. The paper then evaluates possible explanations for this decline in scientific output. The empirical patterns cast doubt on hypotheses highlighting the role of colonialism or of the Mongol invasions as the observed decline predates these shocks. Among popular explanations for the decline, the data are most consistent with the “Sunni Revival” hypothesis (or Revival hypothesis for short) (Makdisi, 1973; Gibb, 1982). The classical version of this hypothesis claims that the Revival (which is believed to have begun in the eleventh century) marked a surge in the political power of religious leaders. This increase in political power was accompanied by the spread of institutions such as madrasas (educational centers where Islamic law was taught) that decreased the relative payoff to producing scientific knowledge. scholar.harvard.edu/files/chaney/files/paper.pdf
Great content! You just earned yourself a new subscriber!
Tons of Turk empires in video 😻😻😻😍😍😍
That's all you care about?
Turks have no big empire
Arab have biggest empire
@@Ahmed-Bin-Koshari 5 iq comment
@@thewarriorfrog
Golden age of Islam is because Arab rule
When Turk rule golden age ends
@@thewarriorfrog
I have high iq I don’t care what you think
This is superb video bruhhhhh 😍😍
amazing video man we really needed this
I think Eating civilization is the wrong analogy considering European Civilization drastically increased the global food output a big part of the explosion in global population.
Baghdad became largest city on earth for more than 300 year with its rival being cordoba
Nothing compare to ancient cities in China like Luoyang or Chang'an.
@@harukrentz435 There is no world in which two cities like that are "nothing" and to speak like that wonders you as completely without merit.
I wonder how many people like you understand that some of the things you say actively betray how little value there is in what you're saying.
Haru Krentz Damascus was once a (largely) undisputed shoo-in for oldest city. It was name-checked in Genesis, and there is evidence of settlement going back to 9,000BC. Unfortunately, there is no clear evidence of meaningful activity in what is now Damascus proper until the 2nd millennium BC - a bit like West Bromwich arriving seven centuries before Birmingham. (Herod, by the way, may also have been gifted Damascus. He was clearly doing something right.)
Ironically, it is not Damascus but Aleppo, poor, benighted Aleppo, which is actually Syria’s largest city and was once a mighty rival to Cairo and Constantinople, that has a far stronger case for being the world’s oldest city. The evidence of settlement goes back to 6,000BC, but excavations north of the city suggest wandering nomads made domestic camps here 5,000 years before that.
Written records show that Aleppo was an important city long before Damascus. It is really only since the opening of the Suez Canal that Aleppo has declined as a major trading city. Until the recent civil war, there had been serious efforts to preserve the citadel, which dates back to the first century BC, as well as Aleppo’s mosques and its medieval hammams and souks.
Haru Krentz the middle east is older than your existence my Chinese lil friend
This guys video editing always impresses me
Okay careful with Ibn Khaldun. I love his work, he is most likely the first modern thinker in so far as social sciences go in the Mediterranean and European world, but his models of understanding socio-political change have been heavily critiqued and put into question in countless ways. Yes, he is a pioneer and a brilliant scholar, but I do not think framing this video around his ideas is a historiographical anachronism. It is too reductive, it leans heavily into geographical determinism (big no no), it is excessively structuralist and most importantly it lacks the nuance of modern historical theory, (identifying the particularities of a historical process and not only fitting it into a structural model). Also, his model talks about how change happens but never explains the reasons for said change. It almost feels like there is a predetermined and natural and absolute flow of time and states and people are just inside the natural progression of history removing all agency form the equation.
This is a good exercise in applying a historiographical model to history, and certainly it has some elements that explain the end of the golden age but its massively out of date as a model of thinking to simply use it, without acknowledge the limitations of the framework and therefor the conclusions reached. This is even more true when you apply it to the post-colonial world. Reducing everything to political stability and the ability to finance scholars is just out of place in modern scholarship.
On another subject I like your point on the idea of A golden age. It is also a very reductive and almost orientalist category.
love the channel great video.
That's interesting. Though what is a relatively new model that can be used to look at history?
@@saimalishahid1406 Pick your poison! Historiographical approaches are massively diverse. Remember history is, by definition, a referential discipline. There is no “history” by itself its always the history of something. From political history to economics, social, cultural, the history of sexuality, war, the history of food, the use of animals, of our interaction with nature, of science and technology or ideas… any human dimension is a historical subject and a reference point for a historical analysis. Modern western historiography has gone so much further from the national political discourse from where it began on the XIX century. From Marxism and its idea of historical materialism (history as the struggle of classes over the means of production and the contradictions of capital, basically making the study of history a series of problems to explain and not just a succession of facts to re-tell) to traditional structuralism, Gramsci’s dialectical structuralism, British Marxists history from below, special history and historical geography focusing on undersetting the way space is signified and lived, more cultural and systemic approaches like the French annals school methodologies of understanding long systemic social processes and not the action of individual, the multitemporal understanding of Braudel that shows how different things change at different rates, more postmodern approaches like Foucault’s focus on power relationships, or a Geertz based cultural approach of the way modes of understanding culture change, or more post-colonial ideas, feminist approaches focusing on the different experience of history based on differing factors like gender or race… there is literally hundreds.
The only definite conclusion in modern historiography is that history and humanity is way to complex to use on single form of understanding to explain everything. There is no master equation to explain the totality of human social existence. The answers in always a multi-dimensional and complex system of social structures that play with and against each other. History never repeats itself the exact same way there is always nuance and differentiating factors. No one can predict the exact future because life is not a mechanical system. In the same way history in not a one approach fits all you need to see history form multiple angels that are often contradictory because life is complex contradictory and diverse. No one historical approach is enough and has the total answer. If any historian claims to have the total truth of anything they are not a good historian. Exactly because of this there is no need to pretend to have all the answers all we really need to do is acknowledge the limitations of any historical approach.
@@Belckan500 Lovely
Thanks for another great video!
I think it would be cool if you made a series on famous Islamic figures. Some people whom I would be interested in seeing would be Tariq ibn Ziyad, Salahuddin Ayubi and Jallaludin Rumi.
I can't Wait Wallahi 😅😅😅
Some of the Cities I am most interested in learning about under Islamic control are Fustat, Cairo, Alexandria, Babylon, Baghdad, Ctesiphon, Damascus, Medina, Mecca, Antioch, Gaza, Jerusalem, Petra, Memphis, Tunis, Carthage, Mosul, Tabriz, Basra, and many others!
4:38 Baghdad looks like the typical isekai city
new anime in the making
This video gave me so much hope for a better future💕
14:35 I am curious about your view of Saudi Arabia in this context. They have the stability and the money, but what they are known for are religious orthodoxy and conspicuous consumption. Why don't they be the locomotive of progress?
When you say Europe was dark I bet you can't define dark and may Islam never ever bounced back.
The second age of stability as you call it under the gunpowder empires,despite being richer than Europe couldn't make any real scientific advances.Their advances were geared towards elite luxury consumption on architecture,clothing,jewellery,calligraphy etc - cultural but not really scientific.So just trade and gold and scholarly patronage is not an adequate explanation.I believe what the europeans achieved from the 16th century had 4 main reasons - 1.Stability of state succession system(european states didn't really have internal succession wars due to law of primogeniture legitimized by the pope of rome,local rulers couldnt bully the pope because he remained ourtside of their control) 2.Discovery of the New world- The massive lands of the new world reduced demographic and ecological pressures on europe,served as cheap source of raw materials as well as captive market - a triple bonanza due to proximity of geography.3.Scientific method - The europeans first understood empirical and systemic scientific method.Really one has to credit newton for it.Newton truly invented modern physics .Dalton created chemistry with atomic theory.This scientific method and its widespread dissemination through printing press is immensely important for technological revolution.4.Coal- England was lucky to have very easy access to huge deposits of coal at a critical juncture in its economic progress which served as the main energy resource of the industrial revolution.
Great video, I never really thought of there being a second golden age of islam
Your breakdown of the natural cycle of empires is so perfectly accurate, and currently the state of the union here in the USA.
"Eventually the empire declines as untrained incapable rulers start ascending the throne. Money dries up as does scholarly work."
Then you need a reality check since the US is pretty much one of the go-to places for scholarly advancement and research. Like, seriously.
@@stephenjenkins7971 There will be a tipping over point. It doesn't help how India has gone right wing, Europe has gone into retirement vacation mode. China does alot of research and will overtake US sooner or later.
@@ashishkalam9337 Very difficult with the culture in China currently. It isn't like China isn't hyper nationalist already and foreigners are trickling out of the country. Also, to be blunt, China is quickly going to retirement vacation mode too -not helped by the One Child Policy.
@@stephenjenkins7971 So, if China falls, who takes over? India?
@@stephenjenkins7971 Its declining. Less and less people are going to college, and it seems the most recent gen(Gen Alpha) are struggling with basic reading comprehension compared to past generations.
I enjoyed this. Thank you. But I think you underestimate the role of religion - the theological tensions between liberal and fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. The scientific revolution would never have occurred in Europe if Church orthodoxies had not been challenged.
I look forward to seeing your other videos...
But I think that cultural shifts also affected that decline. After the Mongols and the Crusades, there came a lot of rhetoric on how these things are happening because of our departure from Islam, and there was indeed a wave of conservatism. If it weren't for this, the Golden Age could have picked up afterwards. Just like it currently picks up again and again and again in the West despite a lot of instability with the World Wars, Cold War, etc.
This was truly informative, indeed enlightening, and also very entertaining - without being shallow. You did a really great job. I teach history and religion and have done that for some years and this was just great, and for me it was quite interesting to see that the Crusades didn't play a part in this video. Maybe they should have but they didn't have that great an impact on the islamic world - they had quite an impact on Europe and the Christian world though.
Using your conclusion, it seem that British already understood this a century ago. They purposively leaving their colonies in turmoil and creating a chaotic borders.
Wonderful video
7:30 you paint mongols like savages but forget to mention that khakifate cut the head of mongol ambasador who brought 7 camels of gifts to make good relations which was an act of war
@@Hamid_Lightworker wrong he did not disrespect them... what did he do?
@@dr.umarjohnson2453 then why subutsi lay waste to all kingdom?
@@protocetus499 they did conquer other nations but the mass slaughter was not a must. Alexandar Nevsky in Russia made a pact with mongols to defend them self from europeans while other principalitis of russia fought them and got burned...
@@Hamid_Lightworker they brought order
and that justifies what the mongols did?
This was insightful and eye opening.
14:05 "They gave us something called civilization but turns out you can't eat civilization". That's truly an amazing quote.
Also, was Turkey the only uncolonized Muslim nation by 1920s?
Iran
Well Turkey was considered European & wouldn't be colonised by other Europeans, they would only split up their Empire the same they did for Germany after WW1, they even referred to Turkey as the sick man of Europe during the Ottomans decline, Turkey being considered "not white/european" or worse "midden eastern" is a very recent thing due to the rise of identity politics & Christianity having a poor relationship with Islam post 9/11.
Most of Saudi arabia and whole Iran was never colonized
So was Afghanistan.
Hello i just want to Say i recently Discover this channel and I love it. Thanks for all your work and the amazing stories You bring us.
I didn't know if You already do it, but can You consider to talk about the Bahmanid Sultanate of Deccan?
Mongol invasion was foretold by Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, in the following Hadith:
*"The Hour will not be established till you fight with the Khudh and the Kirman from among the non-Arabs. They will be of red faces, flat noses and small eyes; their faces will look like flat shields, and their shoes will be of hair." [Sahih al-Bukhari, Hadith **#3590**]*
I like the way you say "Bagdad"
I hope it would very near to its native speakers
I haven't even watched the video yet, but let me guess: first internal revolts and then funny looking horse archers burning everything in their path
Wonderful and great research! Thanks a lot😊 what books can I refer in English to understand more about the topic discussed in this video
Your finest work yet, comrade
excellent and perfect....i am thinking even in translating the video to arabic because its so important to understand reality
Ibn Khaldun said in Al-Muqaddimah: "The appointment of an Imam is a duty that its obligation is known in Shariah by the consensus of the Sahabah and the followers because the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) after his death rushed to give bay’ah to Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (ra) and gave him the responsibility to look after their affairs. This was the case in every era that followed and people were not left in chaos in any era. This consensus was established that it is an obligation to appoint an Imam. That is, the Ummah has transmitted this consensus and has become established in its seniors and classes; the existence is of unanimity is Mutawatir (recurrent).”
That's the only way we will recover from this dark age. The Prophet (saw) said: “… and one who dies without having sworn allegiance will die the death of one belonging to the Days of Ignorance. ” Here we are now.
Dude very nice now I see an increase in quality of your videos because making videos on the same topic(Abbasids)made it a little boring but now that you are covering multiple topics it became interesting.
Can you make video about History of Islam In South East Asia especially maritime South East Asian Countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Philippines and Brunei 😁😁😁
@Abid Rahman Vietnam is Mainland South East Asian Countries like Thailand, Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia
Quality videos love It 😍
I personaly hope to be alive to see the day in which the Maghreb is equal in prosperity to Europe. I'm seeing the starts of it! Hopefully Morroco does not get another king who says it's best the population to be illiterate, Algeria doesn't spiral into chaos and Tunisia can keep it's democracy....
Love amizigh/Maghreb history. Kings and generals did a two part special on the history of the Maghreb that was really well done. I recommend.
Good job mate
Everyone blame religion to end golden age of Islam
I always felt like there can't single single reason but I never had full answer
Now I got it thanks
It must be called the Abbasid Golden Age.
No one calls
The Greek Golden Age: The Cult of Zeus Golden Age
The Mesopotamian or Egyptian: The Polytheistic GA
The Ancient Indian: The Hindu
The Current Western/ SEA: The secular Golden Age!!!!
Just like anywhere else, Social and economic stability and openness to other cultures and their sciences, were the catalyst for the Abbasid Golden Age.
Muslims were Muslims BEFORE and AFTER that Golden Age.
By the way, there was another dynasty that had a similar Golden Age: The Umayyads in Spain.
However, no Golden Age in North Africa, the Levant or Arabia the birth place of Islam.
Many don’t know that the many of the scientists in the so called Islamic golden age were considered heretics by religious scholars, for their views of God, creation, afterlife etc.
You dont like the term "Islamic" but start to called it Abbasid Golden Age like the family alone contributed much to overall achievements. Muslims at that time lives in an Islamic caliphate which based on religion so it's correct to call it Islamic Golden age, have the Christians have same way of governing in Europe during medieval era in which the Pope have more secular power and personally patronized those scholars such thing as "Christian Golden Age" isn't wrong. Also for those scholars who were charged as heretics just because they have different view was quite common during that era in many places other than middle east and quite common during Islamic Golden Age that a scholar who studied various field of knowledges that included Islamic teaching which often made them developed their own religious interpretations, some of them gather popular support while the other got persecuted so it's not like secular knowledge vs religious knowledge but a religious man with secular knowledge vs another religious man with the secular knowledge.
@@apalahartisebuahnama7684
The name of the state was the Abbasid Caliphate. You are missing the point.
There is NOTHING religious about scientific advancements.
Most scientists who contributed to scientific advancements in the Middle East during that era were deists or atheists. They were smart intellectuals who in addition to their advancements in chemistry, math, medicine, optics and others had philosophical and works views that went against the doctrine of Islam.
Read about the persecution of these scientists by famous Muslim Imams at the time.
I won’t give you names. I want you to do your research..
Could you make a video on how to start a history based youtube channel and how to grow it add animations maps script and how do you do your research of the topics of your videos
Wow this video was really interesting I've to learn a lot I loved your use of terminology it explained this much more clearly. Well done ❤️
Wow 😲 incredible insights ⭐️🖤
My personal explanation (read: hot takes) of the intellectual flourishing and eclipse of the Middle East:
Knowledge of the Classical world was highly institutionalized in the academy, a school producing clerks and administrators for imperial government based on study - but not so much research and development - of the great Classical works. The Roman and Persian emperors needed highly trained doctors and bureaucrats and priests, and so funded schools to produce them in much the same way most modern students are educated in order to be useful to existing business and government organizations. This is why, despite their continuity with the Classical world, neither the Byzantines nor the Sassanids had much innovative scholarship as their predecessors or successors.
The Arab Conquests changed a lot, and it wasn't simply a matter of carrying on the old traditions. The regions that became the centers of early Islamic intellectual activity were not the same regions where Byzantine or Sassanid academies dominated. Instead of Alexandria, Egypt or the northern Mesopotamia, the Islamic Golden Age had its start in places like Khorasan or Kufa. Here is where I'd say Islam had its biggest influence and why 'Islamic' isn't such a bad descriptor, for the scholars of these places were frontiersmen who drew adventuring warrior-poet types looking for both religious military service on the borders and the education of aesthetic gentlemen somewhat removed from the cosmopolitan center of the new empire.
These scholars started to spread west chasing patrons, government and mosque postings, and most importantly markets for their books. This is what set the IGA from earlier academy-style intellectual culture: a scholar didn't only study for the sake of being a useful clerk to the regime, but to also seek personal glory and wealth by gaining renown for their unique insight, their circle of students, and their publications that saw little issue with criticizing the Classics. As their fame grew, the aristocrats of the Arab caliphates sought prestige by patronizing their presence and work in their courts, competing with their rivals in attracting the best talents and offering great works of art and philosophy to their lieges.
Instability didn't necessarily harm these endeavors. A lot of great works come from regions and places that were essentially divided into rival city-states competing against one another for prestige, and commonly at war. This seems to be true of Andalus as well as Renaissance Italy and the Early Modern Rhineland. A lot of petty rivals with a lot of gold and courtly culture that dueled over cultural capital as much as taxes and armies is a good way to induce the competitive spirit needed to promote men of talent to positions that supported their life's work.
So what happened? With the rise of the military despots in the various Turkic and Berber dictatorships meant a steady replacement of the courtly rivalry between petty Arab emirs jostling for recognition from the caliph. Instead of legitimacy through renowned scholars at court, these states had to justify their rule through exclusively clannish armies, muscular militarism against non-believers, and a growing patronage of religious institutions as their proxies. Without a source of patronage, scholars had to seek work among these religious institutions which operated more like the old imperial academies, and so didn't allow for as much off-the-wall research as earlier times in order to not rock the boat. Interesting work was still happening, but had to be done in retirement and outside the madrassa, for private publication to a shrinking readership as a sort of anti-intellectualism took hold among the common folk and political leadership alike.
Now, these things happened at all times of course, but the difference back in the old days of the IGA was that when things got too hot an scholar could pick up and move to a completely new state, with the most famous example of Ibn Battuta finding work at the opposite end of the Islamic world. But as Europe began to cut off safe travel from Spain and North Africa with expansions and raids in the Mediterranean, and the rise of the Mongol successor states created a dangerous political border between the Turkic and Mongol states along Mesopotamia, it was becoming more and more difficult to simply migrate for greener pastures. The rise of the great Gunpowder Empires didn't help either as these states were so massive and centralized that a troubled scholar would have to go wide and far to find equal opportunities without trouble following them, and moving between these courts was fraught with intrigue and suspicion by each state.
Sources:
[1] My Ass (2021)
I completely agree you synthesize most of what I was thinking to write. In addition, I would like to mention the scientific revolution, which is based on doubt. Some European kingdoms adopted the scientific method, especially the protestant kingdoms, this adoption implied even questioning the existence of god, like Descartes, Pascal, and Hume did. This is important because only through experience, a.k.a. the experiment, we are only able to discard a hypothesis. This shift of paradigm was massive because natural philosophers started to rely on experiments rather than arguments, speeches, and words. "Question everything" even my own existence, an action that the main streams are Islam probably are not willing to accept.
@@ifrobayom
Madrid, Lisbon, Milan, Rome, Naples, Barcelona, Paris, Brussels, Munich, Vienna, Cologne, Prague,Warsaw, Geneva, Bern, Venice are all Roman catholic in culture in this time period you describe and still really are to some degree, the only protestant city to compete with these cities were London, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Philedelphia (USA). The enlightenment was a movement of Catholic and Deist thinkers with a small contingent of British/Dutch based protestants. Not the other way round!!! Atheism had no role in the enlightenment, most enlightenment thinkers were very religious. Not all of course, few were atheists of course BUT the vast majority were extremely religious.
1. One of these is founded on the possibility of thinking the "idea of a being that is supremely perfect and infinite," and suggests that "of all the ideas that are in me, the idea that I have of God is the most true, the most clear and distinct." Descartes considered himself to be a devout Catholic.
Source-René Descartes - Wikipedia
2. Blaise Pascal was a French philosopher, mathematician, scientist, inventor, and theologian. In mathematics, he was an early pioneer in the fields of game theory and probability theory. In philosophy he was an early pioneer in existentialism. As a writer on theology and religion he was a defender of Christianity.
Source- Pascal, Blaise | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
3. David Hume is the greatest philosopher Britain has produced and an intellectual hero to many atheists. His arguments against religion are clear, incisive and devastating. The only fly in the ointment is the very strong evidence that he wasn't an atheist at all, but an agnostic.
Source- www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/feb/06/religion-philosophy-hume-miracles#:~:text=David%20Hume%20is%20the,at%20all%2C%20but%20an%20agnostic.
Three quick google searches already dismiss your response. As you can see in your example alone. 2 of the 3 were hardcore catholics. And the other a loose protestant, who was probably somewhat religious.
Now you can see why I as a Historian always get ticked off when I see modern atheistic people or American Protestants either claim the enlightenment as the work of protestants or the other point being atheists claim that the great thinkers were Atheists which is actually absolute rubbish, even in the MODERN day top universities the very elite students generally tend to be religious at least from what i've seen personally anyway.
Your one correct point being however the questioning off everything Scientific based in which turn led to the Scientific revolution is absolutely correct and something i totally agree with in regards to that one specific angle of your's.
However the questioning of God big no no, definitely not in the way you described it anyway. Your approach is one of modern Atheistic day thinking NOT enlightenment thinking!!!
@@europatony1520 this! So much this!!
It was less about questioning existence of God and more about uncovering the mysteries of God
Thanks!
I commend you for educating us, without Muslim apologetics and revisionism.
*I commend you for educating us, with Muslim apologetics and revisionism.
You know colonization actually cost more money that it gave the metropoles, overall. There were some spikes like the silver from America but those weren't colonies, they were 100% fully integrated lands of the Spanish Empire, and the tax on them was 20%, much lower than today's standards, and mostly only precious metals, not on all the other activities.
But by the XXth century all colonies where at net loss overall for Britain and France.
The real harm was sapping out all political and military power from the conquered regions and doubly so when they got independent during the cold war, as nobody wanted to follow on the colonizer's footsteps, meaning free market, so for decades from India to Morocco everyone tried socialism... and succeed, which is why their economies failed.
I kinda agree with you in almost every point, it was really good the way you made us think about the widespread narrative of what was the Islamic Golden Age and how it supposedly ended. I have a minor problem with the supposed natural cycle, because it could lead us to analyze history in a purely theoretical one, rather than supporting with source evidence, however I'll not go to this rabbit hole.
My major problem is that to explain the actual state of the Islamic world decadence you put all the guilt on the colonialism, yes, colonialism was the a primary cause in the colonialism era and part for the actual the instability, however the social-political landscape of the Islamic world has also a huge part in this decadence. A lot of the problems that happened in Syria, Egypt, Libya etc. recently was not the result directly of the legacy of colonialism, rather it was bad and often the authoritarian governments that didin't support education, neither free thought. It is kinda hard to develop your own ideas if there's a risk of persecution of your own government based on political or religious beliefs.
And here it is a thing, I'm from Brazil, far, really far from being a perfect country, however it at least guarantees free thought - at least after the dictatorship - and there is a lot, really a lot, of Arab and Turk descent - some of them are Muslim, some not- that contributes greatly to our intellectual life here. Some examples: a lot of high reputable Doctors are from Lebanese and Syrian descent; my university's teacher of modern history Abdala is of Muslim Turk descent, and the ex-mayor of São Paulo for the Workers Party (PT) and former candidate to presidency Haddad is also a reputable academic and a USP's professor I think is of Muslim Lybian descent.
Also a honorable mention to a scholar that I love, Edward Said, he was a muslim palestinian. Sorry for the long comment, and for my English, because is not my primary language, so it could be confusing to understand me sometimes. Nonetheless, awesome video.
colonialism didn't stop with the independance of muslim countries , it contenu with neo colonialism
it's good that you are from brazil because we can make a good conparision with muslim countries as they are like brazil third world countries , there are some muslim countries which are catching up with the west like turkey and malaysia , golf countries are very rich but the rulers are so backward , Pakistan is a 200 millions people country and they have nuclear technology but they are in conflict with India that have 1,3 billions people , and the majority of muslim countries are under corrupt and dictator rulers and also under neo colonialism , the muslim world is very important geographically so all the super powers want to control it and this destabilize it , it's not like brazil which is a country in south america fare from the strategic routes of the world
but in general the standards of living in the majority of muslims countries are equal to that in brazil and some are even better , we have the same problem as in other third world countries and the religion have little to no relation with this problems , the majority of muslims know that they are underdeveloped and they know that science is important to developpement and they want to develop theirs countries but corruption and dictatory and neo colonialism make that very difficult
greetings to you from Algeria
@@krimozaki9494 Fair enough, and here comes my lacking knowledge of contemporary political history of majority- Muslim countries, however I assume isn't far from similar in Brazil. Here a lot of the today's backward politicians and also the military 1964 dictatorship were supported massively reactionary extremely right-wing religious groups from the Catholic Church and nowadays, the Evangelicals. And the historiography over here about Brazilian politics is moving towards recognizing the domestic reactionary forces rather than the old pressured US omnipotence that ruined much of the 3rd world.
I think it's not possible to underestimate the effect that the religious institution and also sometimes beliefs can influence politics. Maybe you could share with me some insights about the case of Algeria or other primarily Muslim countries.
Without further ado, I would thank for your goodwill in responding to me.
@@niltomperimneto in Algeria for example we still have a despotic military regime supported by france but with a democratic façade , the military ruling class is totaly secular but they rule the country with a mix between scularism and islam to satisfay all the diffrent category of the people
if i understand you correctly the church supported the military regime in Brazil , in the muslims countries is the opposite , there is a small part of the islamic spectrum that support the regime but the rest opposing it , some peacefully but some with violence especially in the 90's , this gives the regime a reason to oppresse any opposition in the name of fighting terrorism , some countries escape the millitary regime and became a powerful country like turkey
for the islamic patries in the muslim worls , some are realy backward and they can't creat a developed country , and some are more reasonable and understand that they need to take new and modern ideas
Very good job. Like to see that. Al ghazali alone was a theory that keep buzzing my ears. This makes more sense.
I love your videos Al-Muqqaddimah, but I have some reservations about the view of colonization you exposed here. Europen colonization of the Middle East was brief, actually only after WWI, with the fall of the Ottomans (in Egypt it came earlier, but informally), and was arguably more of a headache to them caused by overreach. In India the local elites were more than willing to support the British, and many Indians saw whther the wind was blowing and fought alongside them. Whether you pay taxes to London or Delhi is irrevelant for most people. Persia got pretty much scot free, because it ws a useful buffer between British India and Russia. What I mean is tha blaming colonialism for all miseries in the Muslim Wolrd is massive exageration. It's worse effects weere probably in Western and Centra Africa.
The Ottomans colonized middle east far longer than the westerners did.
@@harukrentz435 Also the Arabs lol
It's not direct control that hurt them the most. The discovery of the Americas and the shifting of the Asian trade routes, indirect results of colonization (and sometimes direct, look at the Portuguese-Ottoman conflict in the Indian Ocean, cutting off the Turks from most Eastern trade, and the explosion in Western piracy), slowly starved the Muslim empires of trade. By the time the Europeans took over directly, the damage was already done. Their retreat then left behind even more problems, like the ones we see in the Levant today.
The English killed literally millions of us, between the massacres, forced labor in terrible conditions, and the sloppy partition job. We absolutely did not think that there was no difference between local rule and being condescended and subjugated by the English
Also, the video discussed the Muslim world, not the Middle East. Most of the Muslim world was colonized for a lot longer than, say, the gulf. And the video did not frame colonization the way you claim. Watch it again, and put aside your preconceptions
Bruh. See the south east asia during colonial era
Super interesting video! Your explanation of the concepts was really good. I’d be interested in hearing more about how European colonialism affected the Islamic world. Those narratives aren’t heard anywhere near as much as the traditional European ones.
Colonialism has not ended, it's as brutal as ever - take a look at Iraq, Afghanista, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Palestine etc - who would have thought centuries of otherisation and demonisation could lead to such murderous, genocidal barbarity..
The Muslim World, especially the Gulf, could make a comeback if they invest their oil and gas money into research, which, to their credit, some countries (UAE, Iran, and Qatar) are doing already. But religious reform is necessary to foster an intellectually oriented culture, I mean, religious zealotry is never good for dissemination of knowledge, for that, just look at the USA with their evangelicals and their anti-science positions.
Iran neither are a part of GCC nor Arabs
"religious zealotry is never good for dissemination of knowledge, for that, just look at the USA with their evangelicals and their anti-science positions." You can't prove a "never" statement with just an example. Multiple counter-examples from different religions exist: the so-called golden age of Islam, which spanned many regions of the Muslim world and the renaissance and probably more.
So now why isn't science flourishing in these rich oil countries? The answer is the same for "why is the world still so dependent on the Dollar?" The very perception of these countries being academically underperforming and other countries being academically excellent pushes scientists away to those better countries, making this perception a self-fulfilling prophecy.
@@aladinsura121 You're speaking as if they have no agency or capacity to do otherwise and that's not at all the case.
The US and the west should of course cease supporting Israeli colonialism and assassination, end the sanctions against Iran, and do many other things (like support the creation of a free Kurdistan.)
The West is to blame for so very much in the region and it's connection to that cannot possibly be overstated.
THAT SAID: some of these countries have the most wealthy economies in the world, where enormous sums of money could be invested in the infrastructure, education, peerlessly funded laboratories and cutting edge research and developing facilities.
The means to drag the region away from a purely resource-based economy are there, as are a collection of parasitic elites who have no intention of doing so.
Religious reform... yes there is your problem. It is something that needs to happen. But can it be done with Islam?
@@TheBarser Yes. Period, full stop.
How and on what time line? That's a very different question.
I think that the largest driver of that would be reducing economic quality within majority Islamic states and building up consistency within their political structures. As an outsider, it seems that a great deal of the reform is hindered by the instability within the nation's, expressed as a symptom within the faith, not as a cause.
I'm sorry but I disagree with your opinion that the Golden Age was NOT an exception to the normal when it comes to its existence it was anything but natural or normal. The sheer scope of translated works and languages that were being spoken during this time frame in Baghdad is leagues above what had been done until that point in time. The Library of Alexandria which many will consider to be the greatest library to have existed during this timeframe had books in only 3 languages; Greek, Egyptian and an Afro-Asian language lost to time. Compare that to the works in the House of Baghdad you have Arabic, Greek, Sanskrit, Persian, Syriac, and Chinese to name a few on top of the translated works of other classics that were being worked on amongst these scholars and transported back to their respective countries. Furthermore we know that these works have played an incredibly vital role in the spread of knowledge from East to West with works playing important roles within the European Renaissance (as you've previously pointed out) but also in establishing the Arab Muslims as players in the intellectual space with important advancements in Astronomy, Medicine and Mathematics. The Golden Age of Islam should be recognized and properly characterized for what it was; The most important intellectual space in Islamic history with work that to this day has had a profound impact on the World.
I agree with what you said but you're talking about its scale. I said that the scale was an exception but its mere existence was normal. On a smaller scale, the region had always produced works of research. Written Word was invented there, after all. I agree