What do you think?
Rate this book
Aladdin's Lamp: How Greek Science Came to Europe Through the Islamic World
Aladdin’s Lamp is the fascinating story of how ancient Greek philosophy and science began in the sixth century B.C. and, during the next millennium, spread across the Greco-Roman world, producing the remarkable discoveries and theories of Thales, Pythagoras, Hippocrates, Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, Archimedes, Galen, Ptolemy, and many others. John Freely explains how, as the Dark Ages shrouded Europe, scholars in medieval Baghdad translated the works of these Greek thinkers into Arabic, spreading their ideas throughout the Islamic world from Central Asia to Spain, with many Muslim scientists, most notably Avicenna, Alhazen, and Averroës, adding their own interpretations to the philosophy and science they had inherited. Freely goes on to show how, beginning in the twelfth century, these texts by Islamic scholars were then translated from Arabic into Latin, sparking the emergence of modern science at the dawn of the Renaissance, which climaxed in the Scientific Revolution of the seventeenth century.
Here is early science in all its glory, from Pythagorean “celestial harmony� to the sun-centered planetary theory of Copernicus, who, in 1543, aided by the mathematical methods of medieval Arabic astronomers, revived a concept proposed by the Greek astronomer Aristarchus some eighteen centuries before. When Newton laid the foundations of modern science, building on the work of Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, and others, he said that he was “standing on the sholders [sic] of Giants,� referring to his predecessors in ancient Greece and in the Arabic and Latin worlds from the Middle Ages through the Renaissance.
Caliph Harun al-Rashid was one of the Muslim rulers who first promoted translating Greek texts into Arabic. His Baghdad is the setting for The Thousand and One Nights, in which Scheherazades’s “Tale of Aladdin and His Magic Lamp� reflects the marvels of the new science and the amazing inventions it was said to produce. John Freely’s Aladdin’s Lamp returns us to that time and brings to light an essential and long-overlooked chapter in the history of science.
Here is early science in all its glory, from Pythagorean “celestial harmony� to the sun-centered planetary theory of Copernicus, who, in 1543, aided by the mathematical methods of medieval Arabic astronomers, revived a concept proposed by the Greek astronomer Aristarchus some eighteen centuries before. When Newton laid the foundations of modern science, building on the work of Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, and others, he said that he was “standing on the sholders [sic] of Giants,� referring to his predecessors in ancient Greece and in the Arabic and Latin worlds from the Middle Ages through the Renaissance.
Caliph Harun al-Rashid was one of the Muslim rulers who first promoted translating Greek texts into Arabic. His Baghdad is the setting for The Thousand and One Nights, in which Scheherazades’s “Tale of Aladdin and His Magic Lamp� reflects the marvels of the new science and the amazing inventions it was said to produce. John Freely’s Aladdin’s Lamp returns us to that time and brings to light an essential and long-overlooked chapter in the history of science.
303 pages, Paperback
First published February 17, 2009
59 people are currently reading
2349 people want to read
About the author
John Freely
87books77followersJohn Freely was born in 1926 in Brooklyn, New York to Irish immigrant parents, and spent half of his early childhood in Ireland. He dropped out of high school when he was 17 to join the U. S. Navy, serving for two years, including combat duty with a commando unit in the Pacific, India, Burma and China during the last year of World War II. After the war, he went to college on the G. I. Bill and eventually received a Ph.D. in physics from New York University, followed by a year of post-doctoral study at Oxford in the history of science. He worked as a research physicist for nine years, including five years at Princeton University. In 1960 he went to İstanbul to teach physics at the Robert College, now the Boğaziçi University, and taught there until 1976. He then went on to teach and write in Athens (1976-79), Boston (1979-87), London (1987-88), İstanbul (1988-91) and Venice (1991-93). In 1993 he returned to Boğaziçi University, where he taught a course on the history of science. His first book, co-authored by the late Hilary Sumner-Boyd, was Strolling Through İstanbul (1972). Since then he has published more than forty books.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
October 24, 2011
Freeley does a pretty good job of cumulating all of the influences from the Islamic World that led to the Scientific Revolution, but it often just seems like he was collecting names and not explaining why science was important to Medieval Islam. Just seemed to miss the mark by a bit.
February 21, 2016
I’ll present two ideas regarding Science: How it goes forward (not so original idea)? And what drives it forward?
Unlike Art works which can be independent of any previous artistic advancements (a statement which I'm sure would provoke art critics to punch my face), Science grows by building on previous works, why reinvent the wheel? The world is out there, its laws will never change, g will always be 9.8 m/s2. Is it a loss when scientific discoveries are lost because of a fire that ate thousands of precious ancient books? Of course! But the good thing is that we can always rediscover the scientific achievements. I don’t know how historically accurate this story is but its meaning still holds: A scientist was observing devastatingly the Library of Baghdad burning. He held back his son who was trying to rescue some of the book saying it’s too dangerous. The son started to cry but the father comforted him by telling him as long as there are men who are passionate for Knowledge, Knowledge will never be “lost�. We will get delayed, up to about 1800 years when it came to the study of the solar system, but it will not be indiscoverable, unlike History and artistic works that when lost are lost forever because they will no longer be there, great worriers are already dead and so are the artists and their wild imaginations.
Archimedes in his long-lost-but-then-recently-rediscovered On the Method, he developed ways to calculate volumes that we couldn't calculate till the invention/discovery (trust me you don't want to dig into which is correct) of Calculus about 18 centuries later.
And for that reason we should always relax the chance of scientific plagiarism when the only evidence is just that the theory was already discovered (we should credit both the ancient and the classical scientists for the discovery), since anything can be discovered independently by anyone at any time. For example many Arab scholars claim that Newton stole many ideas from Arabic scientist without giving them credit, because how come that one man came up with these many discoveries? I myself in middle school read an article in the newspaper describing Perfect Numbers, and after few days of playing with paper and pen I discovered an equation that give the nth perfect number for any value of n, then I made a software to test it and turns out it only worked for the first few perfect numbers. After few years I stumbled upon Wikipedia’s page on Perfect Numbers, to find out that my equation, with slight alignment, is equal with Euclid’s Perfect Numbers equation, I to this day never felt happier! My equation was a two steps algorithm, the first line will give the nth prime number (it only worked for the first few ones) then you substitute that in the second line. The second line is exactly Euclid equation that needs to be substituted by a prime number, I thought the first line gave nths prime coincidently so I kept solving the first line for all n as possible till I hit a technical wall in the software (damn you overflow error!), I guess my mind was oriented into solving Perfect Numbers using algorithms because I’ve always been a computers geek and actually being that is the thing that gave me the hint to discover the equation (6 = 8 � 2, 28 = 32 � 4, 496 = 512 � 16), these numbers are all powers of two which I memorize by heart since they are common in computers. My only problem was that, without knowing it, I was trying to solve both Perfect Numbers and Prime Numbers at the same time, I had some big cojones! Was I plagiarizing Euclid? Of course not.
As for what drives Science (or any other field) forward is strongly the society’s / authority’s interest. Greek society was interested in Philosophy which created a rich environment for Philosophy development, giving us one of the most famous philosophers of all times, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (note they all were contemporaries of each other). The same applies to Music, most famous musicians are Mozart and Beethoven and many others, and in that period kings were so interested in music and the society too was interested in Opera and they had music saloons where they would hang around in them to listen to music (in return paying a monthly fee). In our modern time, the interest is in Sport so it’s no wonder that recently it’s so common to break historical records in many sports and games. “Directionism� is governed by both the time and the place, since it’s a social phenomenon, Ancient Greek Philosophy, Classical European Music. But the advancement in Sport is a world phenomenon, which hints at Globalism.
To compare Art with Science again, Art is very individualistic which allows brilliant artists to pop up even when it’s not aligned with society’s interest. You will, up to this day and in any time and in any society, see artists, but that is rarely the case for scientists. Art might have suffered from censorship during Dark Ages, but it never suffered from the lack of talent. A poor jobless person like Vincent Van Gogh became one of the most famous artists in history (his brother helped him financially so he don’t die of hunger), but most scientists are from Academia and either associated with a king or an institution, and that make sense since (applied) Science is a full-time job that needs space, equipment, and assistants so it’s no wonder that society’s / authority’s interest is a must!
And for that, I don't care about the controversial subject of most so-called Islamic scientists being either not Arabic or not Muslim. They were living in an Islamic Arabic society that cared for science. And for the same reason, when a contemporary Arabic scientist wins a Noble prize in Physics, I wouldn't feel proud if he was educated and did his research in Western universities. Geniuses are born everywhere and everythen, it’s all about society nurturing them or not.
Also, as evident in Sultan Murat III abolishing Istanbul Observatory and Ibn Rushd exile from Cordoba for two years, theologians' contempt for science doesn't matter, unless it pressured the authority. Al-Ghazali's Incoherence of Philosophers shouldn't be held (solely) responsible for accelerating the decline of Islamic Science, the caliphs that did not stand up for the scientists against the theologians are to blame. Why did Europe go into Dark Ages? Because the theologians were themselves the authority, the powerful Catholic Church.
-----
Mesopotamia to Greece to Arabia to Europe: "The Greek word for star, aster, is derived from Ishtar, the Babylonian fertility goddess, whom the Greeks identified with the planet Venus." And to this day the Arabic word for Sun is Shamash, the Mesopotamian deity and the Sun god.
"The multifaceted cultural interaction that has produced modern science should be of particular interest now, in light of the apocalyptic talk of a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West... As Edward Said remarked of the interconnected world in which this story is set: 'Partly because of empire, all cultures are involved in one another, none is single and pure, all are hybrid, heterogeneous, extraordinarily differentiated and unmonolithic."
The book was a bit boring , too informative and no argumentation. It's only "what" and some "how", without the "why". It might be the author's background, a scholar in the history of science. Nevertheless he claims it's the first book with a history-of-science scope such as here, but still is directed to the general reader and not the experts, so it wasn’t hard. I was excited at the beginning but then the book started to focus in the development of planetary systems. At the end he gave some history in rediscovering Greek scripts, which was interesting. Many of the rediscovered scripts were about, you guessed it, planetary systems, but I'll allow it.
I don't get it. Why the heavens-huge Ancient and Classical emphasis on studying Astronomy? And it's still going, Einstein with his space-time curvatures and all, and NASA THE hugest project in human history! Is it something in our blood? I mean, the ocean is right there but no one gives a fuck about what is under there, we only care about what's up there. Show Oceanus some love you guys!
"Harun Al-Rashid's Baghdad is the setting for the Thousand Nights and One Night, where the 'Tale of Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp' reflects the marvels of the new science and the amazing inventions and discoveries that were attributed to wizards scientists. The medieval Islamic scientist was, at least in the popular view, the prototype of the villainous Moor who led Aladdin to the lamp. As Shaharzad says of the Moor: 'From his earliest youth he had studied sorcery and spells, geomancy and alchemy, astrology, fumigation and enchantment; so that after thirty years of wizardry, he had learnt the existence of a powerful lamp in some unknown place, powerful enough to raise its owner above the kings and powers of the world.'"
-----
Ionia: The First Physicists
The author in first chapter explains how science canon started in Ionia, well, at least Physics, he only mentions Mesopotamia by saying a scholar here and there went there to learn some math from them (btw, there are recently-discovered Mesopotamian clay tablets that show how a cone volume is very accurately calculated!) but not talking about Mesopotamia itself at all. That was disappointing. As for Physics, Mesopotamia was so much into Myth so I don't think we might find much real Physics in their culture, except for Astronomy.
"Aristotle referred to first three philosophers of nature as physicists, from the Greek word Nature, contrasting them with earlier theologians, for they were the first who tried to explain phenomena on natural rather than supernatural grounds. Earthquakes, for example, which both Homer and Hesiod attributed to the action of Poseidon, the 'earth shaker,' were explained by Thales as the rocking of the earth while it floated in the all-encompassing waters of Oceanus." Wow they knew that at the time.
Aristotle thought that Thales chose water as the arche (fundamental substance) "from observation that the nourishment of all creatures is moist... and water is for most moist things the origin of their nature." "وجعلنا من الماء كل شيءٍ حي"
"Anaximander also wrote on the origin of animal and human life, and Plutarch credits him with believing in a theory of evolution: 'He says moreover that originally man was born from creatures of a diffract species, on the grounds that whereas other creatures quickly find food for themselves, man alone needs a long period of suckling; hence if he had been originally what he is now he could never have survived."
"The relative stability of nature was the result of what Heraclitus called the opposite tension, a balance of opposing forces producing equilibrium, and the unity of the cosmos was due to Logos, or Reason, which gives order to the natural world." For every action there is a reaction, “Reason� as in Laws of Physics.
"Xenophanes objected to the anthropomorphic polytheism of Homer and Hesiod, whom he condemned for having 'ascribed to the gods all deeds that among men are a shame and a reproach: thieving, adultery and mutual deception.' He said that men make gods in the image of themselves, so that 'the Ethiopians say their gods are snub-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have light blue eyes and red hair.' His own view was both monotheistic and pantheistic, as is evident from one of his fragments: 'God is one, greatest among gods and men, in no way like mortals either in body or mind. He sees as whole, perceives as a whole, hears as a whole. Always he remains in the same place, not moving at all, nor does it befit him to go here and there at different times; but without toil he makes all things shiver by the impulse of his mind."
"ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع العليم"، "ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير"، "الرحمن على العرش استوى"، "إنما أمره إذا أراد شيئاً أن يقول له كن فيكون". هل زينوفانيز هذا نبي؟؟
Then Ionia declined, Athens took over.
-----
Classical Athens
"Socrates tells of how he had been attracted to the ideas of Anaxagoras because of his concept of Nous, or Mind. But he was ultimately disappointed, for he found that Anaxagoras did not use Mind to explain the element of design or order in nature, giving materialistic reasons instead... Socrates was disillusioned by Anaxagoras and the other early natural philosophers because they only told him 'how' things happened rather than 'why'. What Socrates was looking for was a teleological explanation, one involving evidence of design in nature, for he believed that everything in the cosmos was directed toward attaining the best possible end."
Aristotle too believed in a teleological (that nature has a purpose and an end it is seeking) four elements world, the classical Earth, Water, Fire, and Air: "The natural motion of the terrestrial elements was to their natural place, so that if earth is displaced upward in air and released it will fall straight down, whereas air in water will rise, as does fire (linked to starts and light and rainbows and comets) in air. This linear motion of the terrestrial elements is temporary since it ceases when they reach their natural place."
Straton argued that falling objects accelerate since "water pouring down from a roof and falling from a considerable height, the flow at the top is seen to be continuous, but the water at the bottom falls to the ground in discontinued parts. This would never happen unless the water traversed each successive space more swiftly."
Then Athens burst into civil wars and unrest, eventually surpassed by Alexandria.
-----
Hellenistic Alexandria: The Museum and the Library
Athens gave us Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum, Alexandria gave us The Museum and The Library, and the brilliant mathematician Euclid and Archimedes and Pappus (influenced the brilliant mathematicians and physicists Descartes and Newton) whose work, in my opinion, was practical and helped in developing Math and Engineering, unlike Plato's sophistic dialogues..
Hipparchus calculated that a year is 365.2467 days and not 365.25 by going through observations of the constellation Virgo made 128 years earlier that revealed a 2 degrees shift since the observation.
The author also mentions Hypatia, btw a popular figure that shows up in many historical novels, to name one: عزازيل (I think it was successful enough to be translated to English, so go find your copy!)
Then with the rise of Christianity (in its first interpretation, before the Enlightenment, though the author doesn’t discuss that), Science declined severely. Pagan philosophy and research were attacked and rejected in favor of revelation.
-----
From Athens to Rome, Constantinople, and Jundishapur
Around second century BC, Rome absorbed both Greek land and culture (they have same Greek gods but with different names).
"This was later interpreted to mean that the atomic theory was not deterministic, since the 'swerve' made atomic motion unpredictable. The atomic theory was in this way made more acceptable for Christians, since it allowed for free will in human actions. Thus De Rerum Natura became popular in medieval Europe."
"During the early medieval period the attitude of Christian scholars was that the study of science was not necessary, for in order to save one's soul it was enough to believe in God, as Saint Augustine of Hippo wrote in his Enchiridion," and unfortunately this attitude exists among many people around here, that "yeah Science is good, but what is really great and going to improve Humanity is the study of Theology" as if we don't have million theology books already..
"Boethius writings played a substantial role in the transmission to medieval Europe of the basic parts of Aristotle's logic and of elementary arithmetic."
The Byzantine Empire at its peak (mid-sixth century) closed the ancient Platonic Academy, ending the last direct link with the classical past that existed for more than nine centuries. Some teachers went into exile and some were welcomed by the Persian king.
There was a great debate of why an arrow keeps moving. Aristotelian thought said that "air displaced by the arrow flows back to push it from behind (and I guess this is right, according to Aerodynamics), Platonic thought suggested that the arrow when fired receives an "incorporeal motive force" (and I guess this is right, according to Newton Three Laws of Physics).
-----
Baghdad's House of Wisdom: Greek Into Arabic
"One of Leo's students was captured by an Arab army in 830 and ended up at the court of the Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun (r. 813-33). The caliph, who was sponsoring translations of ancient Greek science and mathematics into Arabic, thus learned of Leo's accomplishment and invited him to Baghdad. But the Byzantine emperor Theophilus (r. 829-42) kept Leo in Constantinople by appointing him as the head of a new school of philosophy and science, where he had his students copy manuscripts of Archimedes and Euclid."
"Al-Mansur was the first caliph to have books translated from foreign languages into Arabic."
"Nawbaht was the first court astrologer of al-Mansur, and his examination of the celestial signs led him to advise the caliph to begin the construction of Baghdad on 30 July 762."
"Abu Sahl's [Nawbaht son and his successor] motive was to show that the Abbasid succession was preordained by the stars [zodiac signs] and God, and that it was now their dynasty's turn to renew knowledge." التطيبل يوصل لدرجة يستخدم التنجيم عشان يثبت أحقيّة العباسيين بالحكم؟؟
Abu Sahl also translated books from Persian in the House of Wisdom. Al-Khwarizmi (invented Algebra and Algorithm/Alkhwarizm) too was employed there as a full-time mathematician and astronomer.
"The motivation for translating Aristotle's Topics was that it taught the art of systematic argumentation, which was vital in discourse between Muslim scholars and those of other faiths and in converting nonbelievers to Islam, which became state policy under the Abbasids. Aristotle's Physics was first translated into Arabic during the reign of Harun Al-Rashid, the motivation apparently being its use in theological disputation concerning cosmology."
Al-Kindi, a polymath who developed a lot of awesome theories, "his studies of natural science convinced him of the value of rational thought, and as a result he was the first noted philosopher to be attacked by fundamentalist Muslim clerics."
"Al-Kindi begins The Theory of The Magic Art/On Stellar Rays by saying that stellar rays are emitted by celestial bodies and influence everything in the universe, mankind included, and that a study of the heavens thus allows astrologers to predict the future."
"The program of translation continued until the mid-eleventh century, both in the East and in Muslim Spain. By that time most of the important works of Greek science and philosophy were available in Arabic translations, along with commentaries on these works and original treaties by Islamic scientists that had been produced in the interim. Thus, through their contact with surrounding cultures, scholars writing in Arabic were in a position to take the lead in science and philosophy, absorbing what they had learned from the Greeks and adding to it to begin an Islamic renaissance, whose fruits were eventually passed on to western Europe."
Unlike Art works which can be independent of any previous artistic advancements (a statement which I'm sure would provoke art critics to punch my face), Science grows by building on previous works, why reinvent the wheel? The world is out there, its laws will never change, g will always be 9.8 m/s2. Is it a loss when scientific discoveries are lost because of a fire that ate thousands of precious ancient books? Of course! But the good thing is that we can always rediscover the scientific achievements. I don’t know how historically accurate this story is but its meaning still holds: A scientist was observing devastatingly the Library of Baghdad burning. He held back his son who was trying to rescue some of the book saying it’s too dangerous. The son started to cry but the father comforted him by telling him as long as there are men who are passionate for Knowledge, Knowledge will never be “lost�. We will get delayed, up to about 1800 years when it came to the study of the solar system, but it will not be indiscoverable, unlike History and artistic works that when lost are lost forever because they will no longer be there, great worriers are already dead and so are the artists and their wild imaginations.
Archimedes in his long-lost-but-then-recently-rediscovered On the Method, he developed ways to calculate volumes that we couldn't calculate till the invention/discovery (trust me you don't want to dig into which is correct) of Calculus about 18 centuries later.
And for that reason we should always relax the chance of scientific plagiarism when the only evidence is just that the theory was already discovered (we should credit both the ancient and the classical scientists for the discovery), since anything can be discovered independently by anyone at any time. For example many Arab scholars claim that Newton stole many ideas from Arabic scientist without giving them credit, because how come that one man came up with these many discoveries? I myself in middle school read an article in the newspaper describing Perfect Numbers, and after few days of playing with paper and pen I discovered an equation that give the nth perfect number for any value of n, then I made a software to test it and turns out it only worked for the first few perfect numbers. After few years I stumbled upon Wikipedia’s page on Perfect Numbers, to find out that my equation, with slight alignment, is equal with Euclid’s Perfect Numbers equation, I to this day never felt happier! My equation was a two steps algorithm, the first line will give the nth prime number (it only worked for the first few ones) then you substitute that in the second line. The second line is exactly Euclid equation that needs to be substituted by a prime number, I thought the first line gave nths prime coincidently so I kept solving the first line for all n as possible till I hit a technical wall in the software (damn you overflow error!), I guess my mind was oriented into solving Perfect Numbers using algorithms because I’ve always been a computers geek and actually being that is the thing that gave me the hint to discover the equation (6 = 8 � 2, 28 = 32 � 4, 496 = 512 � 16), these numbers are all powers of two which I memorize by heart since they are common in computers. My only problem was that, without knowing it, I was trying to solve both Perfect Numbers and Prime Numbers at the same time, I had some big cojones! Was I plagiarizing Euclid? Of course not.
As for what drives Science (or any other field) forward is strongly the society’s / authority’s interest. Greek society was interested in Philosophy which created a rich environment for Philosophy development, giving us one of the most famous philosophers of all times, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle (note they all were contemporaries of each other). The same applies to Music, most famous musicians are Mozart and Beethoven and many others, and in that period kings were so interested in music and the society too was interested in Opera and they had music saloons where they would hang around in them to listen to music (in return paying a monthly fee). In our modern time, the interest is in Sport so it’s no wonder that recently it’s so common to break historical records in many sports and games. “Directionism� is governed by both the time and the place, since it’s a social phenomenon, Ancient Greek Philosophy, Classical European Music. But the advancement in Sport is a world phenomenon, which hints at Globalism.
To compare Art with Science again, Art is very individualistic which allows brilliant artists to pop up even when it’s not aligned with society’s interest. You will, up to this day and in any time and in any society, see artists, but that is rarely the case for scientists. Art might have suffered from censorship during Dark Ages, but it never suffered from the lack of talent. A poor jobless person like Vincent Van Gogh became one of the most famous artists in history (his brother helped him financially so he don’t die of hunger), but most scientists are from Academia and either associated with a king or an institution, and that make sense since (applied) Science is a full-time job that needs space, equipment, and assistants so it’s no wonder that society’s / authority’s interest is a must!
And for that, I don't care about the controversial subject of most so-called Islamic scientists being either not Arabic or not Muslim. They were living in an Islamic Arabic society that cared for science. And for the same reason, when a contemporary Arabic scientist wins a Noble prize in Physics, I wouldn't feel proud if he was educated and did his research in Western universities. Geniuses are born everywhere and everythen, it’s all about society nurturing them or not.
Also, as evident in Sultan Murat III abolishing Istanbul Observatory and Ibn Rushd exile from Cordoba for two years, theologians' contempt for science doesn't matter, unless it pressured the authority. Al-Ghazali's Incoherence of Philosophers shouldn't be held (solely) responsible for accelerating the decline of Islamic Science, the caliphs that did not stand up for the scientists against the theologians are to blame. Why did Europe go into Dark Ages? Because the theologians were themselves the authority, the powerful Catholic Church.
-----
Mesopotamia to Greece to Arabia to Europe: "The Greek word for star, aster, is derived from Ishtar, the Babylonian fertility goddess, whom the Greeks identified with the planet Venus." And to this day the Arabic word for Sun is Shamash, the Mesopotamian deity and the Sun god.
"The multifaceted cultural interaction that has produced modern science should be of particular interest now, in light of the apocalyptic talk of a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West... As Edward Said remarked of the interconnected world in which this story is set: 'Partly because of empire, all cultures are involved in one another, none is single and pure, all are hybrid, heterogeneous, extraordinarily differentiated and unmonolithic."
The book was a bit boring , too informative and no argumentation. It's only "what" and some "how", without the "why". It might be the author's background, a scholar in the history of science. Nevertheless he claims it's the first book with a history-of-science scope such as here, but still is directed to the general reader and not the experts, so it wasn’t hard. I was excited at the beginning but then the book started to focus in the development of planetary systems. At the end he gave some history in rediscovering Greek scripts, which was interesting. Many of the rediscovered scripts were about, you guessed it, planetary systems, but I'll allow it.
I don't get it. Why the heavens-huge Ancient and Classical emphasis on studying Astronomy? And it's still going, Einstein with his space-time curvatures and all, and NASA THE hugest project in human history! Is it something in our blood? I mean, the ocean is right there but no one gives a fuck about what is under there, we only care about what's up there. Show Oceanus some love you guys!
"Harun Al-Rashid's Baghdad is the setting for the Thousand Nights and One Night, where the 'Tale of Aladdin and His Wonderful Lamp' reflects the marvels of the new science and the amazing inventions and discoveries that were attributed to wizards scientists. The medieval Islamic scientist was, at least in the popular view, the prototype of the villainous Moor who led Aladdin to the lamp. As Shaharzad says of the Moor: 'From his earliest youth he had studied sorcery and spells, geomancy and alchemy, astrology, fumigation and enchantment; so that after thirty years of wizardry, he had learnt the existence of a powerful lamp in some unknown place, powerful enough to raise its owner above the kings and powers of the world.'"
-----
Ionia: The First Physicists
The author in first chapter explains how science canon started in Ionia, well, at least Physics, he only mentions Mesopotamia by saying a scholar here and there went there to learn some math from them (btw, there are recently-discovered Mesopotamian clay tablets that show how a cone volume is very accurately calculated!) but not talking about Mesopotamia itself at all. That was disappointing. As for Physics, Mesopotamia was so much into Myth so I don't think we might find much real Physics in their culture, except for Astronomy.
"Aristotle referred to first three philosophers of nature as physicists, from the Greek word Nature, contrasting them with earlier theologians, for they were the first who tried to explain phenomena on natural rather than supernatural grounds. Earthquakes, for example, which both Homer and Hesiod attributed to the action of Poseidon, the 'earth shaker,' were explained by Thales as the rocking of the earth while it floated in the all-encompassing waters of Oceanus." Wow they knew that at the time.
Aristotle thought that Thales chose water as the arche (fundamental substance) "from observation that the nourishment of all creatures is moist... and water is for most moist things the origin of their nature." "وجعلنا من الماء كل شيءٍ حي"
"Anaximander also wrote on the origin of animal and human life, and Plutarch credits him with believing in a theory of evolution: 'He says moreover that originally man was born from creatures of a diffract species, on the grounds that whereas other creatures quickly find food for themselves, man alone needs a long period of suckling; hence if he had been originally what he is now he could never have survived."
"The relative stability of nature was the result of what Heraclitus called the opposite tension, a balance of opposing forces producing equilibrium, and the unity of the cosmos was due to Logos, or Reason, which gives order to the natural world." For every action there is a reaction, “Reason� as in Laws of Physics.
"Xenophanes objected to the anthropomorphic polytheism of Homer and Hesiod, whom he condemned for having 'ascribed to the gods all deeds that among men are a shame and a reproach: thieving, adultery and mutual deception.' He said that men make gods in the image of themselves, so that 'the Ethiopians say their gods are snub-nosed and black, the Thracians that theirs have light blue eyes and red hair.' His own view was both monotheistic and pantheistic, as is evident from one of his fragments: 'God is one, greatest among gods and men, in no way like mortals either in body or mind. He sees as whole, perceives as a whole, hears as a whole. Always he remains in the same place, not moving at all, nor does it befit him to go here and there at different times; but without toil he makes all things shiver by the impulse of his mind."
"ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع العليم"، "ليس كمثله شيء وهو السميع البصير"، "الرحمن على العرش استوى"، "إنما أمره إذا أراد شيئاً أن يقول له كن فيكون". هل زينوفانيز هذا نبي؟؟
Then Ionia declined, Athens took over.
-----
Classical Athens
"Socrates tells of how he had been attracted to the ideas of Anaxagoras because of his concept of Nous, or Mind. But he was ultimately disappointed, for he found that Anaxagoras did not use Mind to explain the element of design or order in nature, giving materialistic reasons instead... Socrates was disillusioned by Anaxagoras and the other early natural philosophers because they only told him 'how' things happened rather than 'why'. What Socrates was looking for was a teleological explanation, one involving evidence of design in nature, for he believed that everything in the cosmos was directed toward attaining the best possible end."
Aristotle too believed in a teleological (that nature has a purpose and an end it is seeking) four elements world, the classical Earth, Water, Fire, and Air: "The natural motion of the terrestrial elements was to their natural place, so that if earth is displaced upward in air and released it will fall straight down, whereas air in water will rise, as does fire (linked to starts and light and rainbows and comets) in air. This linear motion of the terrestrial elements is temporary since it ceases when they reach their natural place."
Straton argued that falling objects accelerate since "water pouring down from a roof and falling from a considerable height, the flow at the top is seen to be continuous, but the water at the bottom falls to the ground in discontinued parts. This would never happen unless the water traversed each successive space more swiftly."
Then Athens burst into civil wars and unrest, eventually surpassed by Alexandria.
-----
Hellenistic Alexandria: The Museum and the Library
Athens gave us Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum, Alexandria gave us The Museum and The Library, and the brilliant mathematician Euclid and Archimedes and Pappus (influenced the brilliant mathematicians and physicists Descartes and Newton) whose work, in my opinion, was practical and helped in developing Math and Engineering, unlike Plato's sophistic dialogues..
Hipparchus calculated that a year is 365.2467 days and not 365.25 by going through observations of the constellation Virgo made 128 years earlier that revealed a 2 degrees shift since the observation.
The author also mentions Hypatia, btw a popular figure that shows up in many historical novels, to name one: عزازيل (I think it was successful enough to be translated to English, so go find your copy!)
Then with the rise of Christianity (in its first interpretation, before the Enlightenment, though the author doesn’t discuss that), Science declined severely. Pagan philosophy and research were attacked and rejected in favor of revelation.
-----
From Athens to Rome, Constantinople, and Jundishapur
Around second century BC, Rome absorbed both Greek land and culture (they have same Greek gods but with different names).
"This was later interpreted to mean that the atomic theory was not deterministic, since the 'swerve' made atomic motion unpredictable. The atomic theory was in this way made more acceptable for Christians, since it allowed for free will in human actions. Thus De Rerum Natura became popular in medieval Europe."
"During the early medieval period the attitude of Christian scholars was that the study of science was not necessary, for in order to save one's soul it was enough to believe in God, as Saint Augustine of Hippo wrote in his Enchiridion," and unfortunately this attitude exists among many people around here, that "yeah Science is good, but what is really great and going to improve Humanity is the study of Theology" as if we don't have million theology books already..
"Boethius writings played a substantial role in the transmission to medieval Europe of the basic parts of Aristotle's logic and of elementary arithmetic."
The Byzantine Empire at its peak (mid-sixth century) closed the ancient Platonic Academy, ending the last direct link with the classical past that existed for more than nine centuries. Some teachers went into exile and some were welcomed by the Persian king.
There was a great debate of why an arrow keeps moving. Aristotelian thought said that "air displaced by the arrow flows back to push it from behind (and I guess this is right, according to Aerodynamics), Platonic thought suggested that the arrow when fired receives an "incorporeal motive force" (and I guess this is right, according to Newton Three Laws of Physics).
-----
Baghdad's House of Wisdom: Greek Into Arabic
"One of Leo's students was captured by an Arab army in 830 and ended up at the court of the Abbasid caliph al-Ma'mun (r. 813-33). The caliph, who was sponsoring translations of ancient Greek science and mathematics into Arabic, thus learned of Leo's accomplishment and invited him to Baghdad. But the Byzantine emperor Theophilus (r. 829-42) kept Leo in Constantinople by appointing him as the head of a new school of philosophy and science, where he had his students copy manuscripts of Archimedes and Euclid."
"Al-Mansur was the first caliph to have books translated from foreign languages into Arabic."
"Nawbaht was the first court astrologer of al-Mansur, and his examination of the celestial signs led him to advise the caliph to begin the construction of Baghdad on 30 July 762."
"Abu Sahl's [Nawbaht son and his successor] motive was to show that the Abbasid succession was preordained by the stars [zodiac signs] and God, and that it was now their dynasty's turn to renew knowledge." التطيبل يوصل لدرجة يستخدم التنجيم عشان يثبت أحقيّة العباسيين بالحكم؟؟
Abu Sahl also translated books from Persian in the House of Wisdom. Al-Khwarizmi (invented Algebra and Algorithm/Alkhwarizm) too was employed there as a full-time mathematician and astronomer.
"The motivation for translating Aristotle's Topics was that it taught the art of systematic argumentation, which was vital in discourse between Muslim scholars and those of other faiths and in converting nonbelievers to Islam, which became state policy under the Abbasids. Aristotle's Physics was first translated into Arabic during the reign of Harun Al-Rashid, the motivation apparently being its use in theological disputation concerning cosmology."
Al-Kindi, a polymath who developed a lot of awesome theories, "his studies of natural science convinced him of the value of rational thought, and as a result he was the first noted philosopher to be attacked by fundamentalist Muslim clerics."
"Al-Kindi begins The Theory of The Magic Art/On Stellar Rays by saying that stellar rays are emitted by celestial bodies and influence everything in the universe, mankind included, and that a study of the heavens thus allows astrologers to predict the future."
"The program of translation continued until the mid-eleventh century, both in the East and in Muslim Spain. By that time most of the important works of Greek science and philosophy were available in Arabic translations, along with commentaries on these works and original treaties by Islamic scientists that had been produced in the interim. Thus, through their contact with surrounding cultures, scholars writing in Arabic were in a position to take the lead in science and philosophy, absorbing what they had learned from the Greeks and adding to it to begin an Islamic renaissance, whose fruits were eventually passed on to western Europe."
September 21, 2010
ALADDIN’S LAMP: HOW GREEK SCIENCE CAME TO EUROPE THROUGH THE ISLAMIC WORLD BY JOHN FREELY: John Freely takes on a subject he clearly already knows a lot about, having written books on Istanbul, Turkey, Crete, and a good portion of Asia Minor. In Aladdin’s Lamp he goes into extreme detail in revealing how we are today able to enjoy the Greek classics of Plato, Homer, and many others. While the book at times takes on an almost classroom-like routine with chapter after chapter, throwing more information in an almost dry, regurgitative sense; Aladdin’s Lamp is nevertheless a very interesting book into the history of the classics and how they survived.
Freely begins at the beginning, perhaps going on for a little too long, but clearly relishing in telling the reader about some of the great works of the Greeks, with the likes of Archimedes, Plato, and Pythagoras, and what it is they found out in a time when science was a barely flourishing discipline. While on the one hand these were some amazing people who were able to come up with standards of architecture, and a surprisingly close approximation of the circumference of the Earth, Freely needs to get on with the reason for writing this book, and not give us a history lesson on Ancient Greece.
The first third of the book done, Freely finally goes into the next chapter of the Islamic world, how Baghdad was a paradise of the world that flourished with culture and literature. It was because of a number of circumstances, and the constant mixing of peoples with trade from throughout the Western World, that these sacred texts were first preserved after the fall of the Rome and then the Byzantine world, and then translated.
While the information may be overbearing at times and Freely lacks in a certain storytelling quality of making the book as enjoyable as some other works of nonfiction, Aladdin’s Lamp does provide insight into the turbulent times of the early Middle Ages, when civilizations and countries rose and fell within the blink of an eye, while culture and literature and science was kept � at times in secret � to be read and enjoyed by future generations.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to .
Freely begins at the beginning, perhaps going on for a little too long, but clearly relishing in telling the reader about some of the great works of the Greeks, with the likes of Archimedes, Plato, and Pythagoras, and what it is they found out in a time when science was a barely flourishing discipline. While on the one hand these were some amazing people who were able to come up with standards of architecture, and a surprisingly close approximation of the circumference of the Earth, Freely needs to get on with the reason for writing this book, and not give us a history lesson on Ancient Greece.
The first third of the book done, Freely finally goes into the next chapter of the Islamic world, how Baghdad was a paradise of the world that flourished with culture and literature. It was because of a number of circumstances, and the constant mixing of peoples with trade from throughout the Western World, that these sacred texts were first preserved after the fall of the Rome and then the Byzantine world, and then translated.
While the information may be overbearing at times and Freely lacks in a certain storytelling quality of making the book as enjoyable as some other works of nonfiction, Aladdin’s Lamp does provide insight into the turbulent times of the early Middle Ages, when civilizations and countries rose and fell within the blink of an eye, while culture and literature and science was kept � at times in secret � to be read and enjoyed by future generations.
For more book reviews and exclusive author interviews, go to .
September 19, 2014
A basic book of history will give the reader dates, places and names to memorize; a great book of history will show the reader the historical current that underlie the dates, places and names, to the point of making them secondary. Although Freely’s work showed hints of greatness, specially towards the end, it was nevertheless incapable of making the complete leap. He seems so obsessed with giving credit to all those who contributed to the beginnings of science that he ends up dedicating hardly more than a paragraph to most of them. This result in the reader getting a catalog of names and works without much analysis to understand more than who did what first. Freely treats the take up by Islamic science in the same way, giving names of who translated what work without going into why is it that Islam found a love for science and how they lost it. By far the greatest parts of the book are those that deal, quite thoroughly, with Copernicus and Newton, who, though certainly impacted by the Arab contributions to science, are far enough removed from them for the reader to wonder why that level of detail was not applied to the scientists who benefited the most from the Islamic contributions. Overall, this book fell flat from the promises of explaining, rather than just cataloging, the vital role that Islamic science had in ushering the scientific revolution.
November 21, 2018
قرأته مرتين بالحماس نفسه ودون ندم.
بالحقيقة, قراءتي له للمرة الثانية كانت أن اخترته هو تحديداً لأشارك فيه بمسابقة القراءة لأرامكو
وما زلت أفخر بما أنجزته في كل مرة أقرأ ملخصي عنه
أنصح بالقراءة وبشدة :)
April 21, 2012
I had high hopes for this guy, but the author would have saved us all time if he had just sketched out a timeline instead of writing a book. No interesting meat to the history, nothing.
January 2, 2023
This was a hard book to rate. There is a tremendous amount of information between the pages and the author had to do masses of research in order to find out about some of the tidbits and the less known scientists of more ancient times.
What science? Well, astronomy, astrology, medicine, philosophy, geography, engineering, herbal remedies, automatons, mathematics and geometry, ethics, logic, religious philosophy and far more.
But, for the first half, it read more like an encyclopedia by location and time period rather than alphabetical. For example: Georg of Corinth (he's made up) wrote commentaries, manuscripts, theses, or original works about such and such about an earlier scientist or their topic. Short description of Georg's theories and/or philosophy (and whether it was factual or not) and if there is a full manuscript available. Some scientists and their academics are only known by being referred to by other writers. Their travels, who they may have been mentored by or a famous student and a general idea of when they lived. NEXT!
Starting at ancient Ionia on the Turkish coast and the city states of Greece through Alexandria and its fabled library to Damascus, Constantinople, Baghdad and it's House of Wisdom, Cairo, and Jundishaper. The spread of Islam, the conquest of al-Andalus, Spain and Cordoba which eventually lead to the outward spread into Bologna, Italy, Paris, Oxford and the European universities. Byzantium to Renaissance Italy. Following Copernicus and the discussions regarding the heliocentric view of the universe verses the geocentric with Tycho Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo. The 'scientific revolution' and Newton. Islamic science which was supposedly peaked two centuries after the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258 with the Ottoman Turks in Persia, Samarkand and Istanbul. Ending with the modern rediscovery of lost Archimedes and the Antikythera mechanism which revealed how much had been lost over the centuries and is still being re-discovered.
As I said, a lot of information but a bit boring at the beginning. As interesting as it was, the encyclopedic style in the first half made me consider stopping a couple times but by looking ahead, I could see that it did get better.
2022-292
What science? Well, astronomy, astrology, medicine, philosophy, geography, engineering, herbal remedies, automatons, mathematics and geometry, ethics, logic, religious philosophy and far more.
But, for the first half, it read more like an encyclopedia by location and time period rather than alphabetical. For example: Georg of Corinth (he's made up) wrote commentaries, manuscripts, theses, or original works about such and such about an earlier scientist or their topic. Short description of Georg's theories and/or philosophy (and whether it was factual or not) and if there is a full manuscript available. Some scientists and their academics are only known by being referred to by other writers. Their travels, who they may have been mentored by or a famous student and a general idea of when they lived. NEXT!
Starting at ancient Ionia on the Turkish coast and the city states of Greece through Alexandria and its fabled library to Damascus, Constantinople, Baghdad and it's House of Wisdom, Cairo, and Jundishaper. The spread of Islam, the conquest of al-Andalus, Spain and Cordoba which eventually lead to the outward spread into Bologna, Italy, Paris, Oxford and the European universities. Byzantium to Renaissance Italy. Following Copernicus and the discussions regarding the heliocentric view of the universe verses the geocentric with Tycho Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo. The 'scientific revolution' and Newton. Islamic science which was supposedly peaked two centuries after the Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258 with the Ottoman Turks in Persia, Samarkand and Istanbul. Ending with the modern rediscovery of lost Archimedes and the Antikythera mechanism which revealed how much had been lost over the centuries and is still being re-discovered.
As I said, a lot of information but a bit boring at the beginning. As interesting as it was, the encyclopedic style in the first half made me consider stopping a couple times but by looking ahead, I could see that it did get better.
2022-292
March 21, 2015
Buku Aladdin's Lamp ini mengisahkan perjalanan proses pemindahan ilmu sains Greek ke Eropah melalui dunia islam. Penulis, John Freely merupakan pemegang PhD bidang fizik dari NYU sebelum melanjutkan pengajian pasca kedoktoran di Oxford dlm bidang sejarah sains.
Kenapa aku cerita panjang pasal biodata penulis? Kerana buku ini sangat mirip dgn perjalanan akademik beliau. Buku ini kalau dibaca dengan sub-title nya "How Greek Sciemce Came to Europe through Islamic World" tentu akan membawakan gambaran bahawa pembaca akan dibawa masuk ke dalam satu pengembaraan epik akan perkembangan sejarah sains yg merangkumi fizik, matematik, geografi, perubatan, alchemy, astrology, biologi dll bermula di Miletus, Greek kemudian ke Athens, Iskandariah, Rome, Istanbul, Jumdishapur, Baghdad, Kaherah dan Damsyik, ke Cordoba, Toledo dan seterusnya ke Palermo, ke Oxford, ke Paris akhirnya berkemuncak dgn Revolusi Saintifik pada abad 15 dan 16.
Hakikat yg sebenar tidaklah mcm tu sangat.
Kisah perpindahan ilmu sains Greek ke dunia Islam kemungkinan mengambil ruang kurang dari 50% dari isi buku ini. Bab2 yg selebihnya banyak menceritakan bagaimana proses penterjemahan karya ilmuan Islam dan ilmuan Greek oleh penterjemah Barat berjalan bermula dari abad 11 dan berlanjutan sehingga abad 14. Kemudian bersambung dengan runtuhnya paradigma lama dalam ilmu sains lalu berkemuncak dengan pembaharuan radikal oleh Copernicus, Keppler, Galileo yang seterusnya diteruskam oleh Descartes, Robert Hooke, Christian Huygens, dan akhirnya Leibniz dan Newton.
Tambahan daripada itu, topik 'sains' yg disentuh penulis pula banyak tertumpu dalam bidang sains fizik khususnya sains pergerakan (motion) yg melibatkan pergerakan bintang2 dan planet2 di angkasa. Perbincangan kebanyakannya terungkai lewat perdebatan antara teori kosmologi Ptolemy-Copernican. Cara penyampaian penulis tidak membantu dalam hal ini. Beliau dgn selambanya bercakap tentang stellar parallax, retrograde motion of planets, epicycles, deferent, spherical trigonometry, trepidation theory, precession of equinoxes dsb seolah pembaca buku ini adalah pelajar2 beliau.
Masalahnya konsep2 tadi adalah begitu sentral untuk pembaca memahami kenapa kosmologi Ptolemy umpamanya, mampu bertahan lama. Walaupun by the time ia sampai di tangan ilmuan islam, terdapat beberapa fenomena angkasa yg gagal dijelaskan dgn baik oleh paradigma Ptolemy, tetapi astrologis2 islam tetap setia dgn idea geocentric Ptolemy dan sebaliknya mereka hanya mencadangkan pembaharuan2 dan pembaikian sahaja terhadap perkiraan2 asal Ptolemy. Jadi sekiranya pembaca jenis orang yg tidak mudah sabar, kalian mungkin akan berputus asa apabila mula membaca the second half of this book.
Pun begitu, ada juga part yg aku suka dalam buku ini antaranya kontroversi Galileo dan institusi gereja. Penulis berjaya memberikan konteks sudut-pandang sains dlm bab ini. Menurut penulis, gereja katolik telah menginstitusikan kosmologi Aristotle menjadi doktrin utama mereka. Aristotle berkata antaranya, bumi adalah pusat alam dan ia tidak bergerak. Dan matahari dan planet lain bergerak mengelilingi bumi. Serta bintang2 lain adalah tetap dan tidak berubah, berada di celestial region. Seperti yg kita tahu, penemuan Galileo jauh sekali bertentangan dgn idea ini.
Tapi jangan terlalu mengharap. Penulis spt yg aku cakap tadi masih lagi datang daripada latarbelakang hard-science. Penjelasan beliau tidak terlalu historikal atau philosophical tetapi lebih kepada matter-in-fact. Penulis pun aku perhati tidak begitu rigid dalam menulis. Menuju bab2 terakhir, penulis bercerita tentang pengalaman beliau mengajar subjek sejarah sains kepada pelajar2, penemuan2 baru manuskrip Archimedes dan juga pengembaraan beliau di sempadan Turki-Iraq-Syria.
Kenapa aku cerita panjang pasal biodata penulis? Kerana buku ini sangat mirip dgn perjalanan akademik beliau. Buku ini kalau dibaca dengan sub-title nya "How Greek Sciemce Came to Europe through Islamic World" tentu akan membawakan gambaran bahawa pembaca akan dibawa masuk ke dalam satu pengembaraan epik akan perkembangan sejarah sains yg merangkumi fizik, matematik, geografi, perubatan, alchemy, astrology, biologi dll bermula di Miletus, Greek kemudian ke Athens, Iskandariah, Rome, Istanbul, Jumdishapur, Baghdad, Kaherah dan Damsyik, ke Cordoba, Toledo dan seterusnya ke Palermo, ke Oxford, ke Paris akhirnya berkemuncak dgn Revolusi Saintifik pada abad 15 dan 16.
Hakikat yg sebenar tidaklah mcm tu sangat.
Kisah perpindahan ilmu sains Greek ke dunia Islam kemungkinan mengambil ruang kurang dari 50% dari isi buku ini. Bab2 yg selebihnya banyak menceritakan bagaimana proses penterjemahan karya ilmuan Islam dan ilmuan Greek oleh penterjemah Barat berjalan bermula dari abad 11 dan berlanjutan sehingga abad 14. Kemudian bersambung dengan runtuhnya paradigma lama dalam ilmu sains lalu berkemuncak dengan pembaharuan radikal oleh Copernicus, Keppler, Galileo yang seterusnya diteruskam oleh Descartes, Robert Hooke, Christian Huygens, dan akhirnya Leibniz dan Newton.
Tambahan daripada itu, topik 'sains' yg disentuh penulis pula banyak tertumpu dalam bidang sains fizik khususnya sains pergerakan (motion) yg melibatkan pergerakan bintang2 dan planet2 di angkasa. Perbincangan kebanyakannya terungkai lewat perdebatan antara teori kosmologi Ptolemy-Copernican. Cara penyampaian penulis tidak membantu dalam hal ini. Beliau dgn selambanya bercakap tentang stellar parallax, retrograde motion of planets, epicycles, deferent, spherical trigonometry, trepidation theory, precession of equinoxes dsb seolah pembaca buku ini adalah pelajar2 beliau.
Masalahnya konsep2 tadi adalah begitu sentral untuk pembaca memahami kenapa kosmologi Ptolemy umpamanya, mampu bertahan lama. Walaupun by the time ia sampai di tangan ilmuan islam, terdapat beberapa fenomena angkasa yg gagal dijelaskan dgn baik oleh paradigma Ptolemy, tetapi astrologis2 islam tetap setia dgn idea geocentric Ptolemy dan sebaliknya mereka hanya mencadangkan pembaharuan2 dan pembaikian sahaja terhadap perkiraan2 asal Ptolemy. Jadi sekiranya pembaca jenis orang yg tidak mudah sabar, kalian mungkin akan berputus asa apabila mula membaca the second half of this book.
Pun begitu, ada juga part yg aku suka dalam buku ini antaranya kontroversi Galileo dan institusi gereja. Penulis berjaya memberikan konteks sudut-pandang sains dlm bab ini. Menurut penulis, gereja katolik telah menginstitusikan kosmologi Aristotle menjadi doktrin utama mereka. Aristotle berkata antaranya, bumi adalah pusat alam dan ia tidak bergerak. Dan matahari dan planet lain bergerak mengelilingi bumi. Serta bintang2 lain adalah tetap dan tidak berubah, berada di celestial region. Seperti yg kita tahu, penemuan Galileo jauh sekali bertentangan dgn idea ini.
Tapi jangan terlalu mengharap. Penulis spt yg aku cakap tadi masih lagi datang daripada latarbelakang hard-science. Penjelasan beliau tidak terlalu historikal atau philosophical tetapi lebih kepada matter-in-fact. Penulis pun aku perhati tidak begitu rigid dalam menulis. Menuju bab2 terakhir, penulis bercerita tentang pengalaman beliau mengajar subjek sejarah sains kepada pelajar2, penemuan2 baru manuskrip Archimedes dan juga pengembaraan beliau di sempadan Turki-Iraq-Syria.
January 31, 2016
This book was a huge disappointment.
It was simply a comprehensive history of science which happened to include the Islamic world, the author made no analyses concerning how/why the Arab world held on to the knowledge and simply presented it in a linear fashion.
Despite that, this book could still have been extremely enjoyable if the writing was not so dry. It seemed as if he had a timeline with dates and names (and nothing else) and simply put them into sentence forms.
The introduction and conclusion both made attempts at being interesting and it did manage to both begin and end the book on a more engaging note.
It also had sooo much information in it, this book would be awesome for someone who needed the facts, the amount of research put into it was obviously extreme.
It was simply a comprehensive history of science which happened to include the Islamic world, the author made no analyses concerning how/why the Arab world held on to the knowledge and simply presented it in a linear fashion.
Despite that, this book could still have been extremely enjoyable if the writing was not so dry. It seemed as if he had a timeline with dates and names (and nothing else) and simply put them into sentence forms.
The introduction and conclusion both made attempts at being interesting and it did manage to both begin and end the book on a more engaging note.
It also had sooo much information in it, this book would be awesome for someone who needed the facts, the amount of research put into it was obviously extreme.
August 5, 2012
The first third of this book told how the Arabs and other mid-eastern people translated, preserved and expanded Greek Scientific texts. Most of the rest of the book is an encyclopeidic compilation of the achievements of rennaisance science, a little odry and formulaic. The last chapter tell of the further achievements of the Turks and Arabs in the past five hundred years. Perhaps reading another book on medieval arab science would be more helpful if this is your interest.
March 11, 2011
الكتاب جيد كمدخل للحقل ، فهو لا يقدم جديدا. وفيه كثير من التصحيف في الأسماء والمواضع ، ولكن لعل هذا مستساغ من مؤلف أجنبي
January 6, 2013
It started off really good but after a couple if chapters I felt like ge was just listing suentists and the books they wrote in paragraph form.
January 10, 2014
Redundancy at its best!
August 24, 2013
كان يمكن تلخيصه بمائة صفحة
December 4, 2019
The first ever book I’ve read by John Freely and enjoyed a lot while reading it. Although I faced a lot of trouble while reading this book (Took me a month and a half to read it), but that’s on my part and due to my lack of knowledge of Science, Physics, Geography and Astronomy. In my opinion, readers like me were not the intended readers by the author.
The writer has carried out the main subject throughout the book in a sequential and amazingly well mannered way. As a “wise man� has said “chronology helps in converting the data into information'', it comes out John Freely knew this too. Absolutely Impressed by his extensive knowledge of the history of science and this extraordinary narrative spanning almost twenty five centuries. The author has written this book without being biased towards Muslims (One can think of biasedness by the subhead of the book), he has given credit to Greeks, Jews, Christians and Muslims equally wherever it’s due.
Freely has made it very easy for the readers to understand the subject and catch up with the book, he has mentioned the era, inspirations, contributions and region of each scientist along with their names, also whenever and wherever the name of any ruler or emperor comes up in the book he has mentioned their reigns and dynasties to keep the reader attached to the book. The author has divided the book into 18 chapters, the edition I’ve has 255 pages (excluding acknowledgements, illustration credits and notes etc). Before reading the book, I was wondering why the author has divided the book into so many chapters, but after reading it, I realized how easy the author has made it for the readers to read the book and grasp the subject by doing so.
I personally got a lot to learn from Aladdin’s Lamp, as before reading this book I didn’t even know a bit about the science of Ancient Greek and medieval period.
One thing that I found missing in the book is contributions of Hindus from Indus Valley civilization and Vedas to Modern times, Freely has mentioned a few in the book though, but again they are very few. While everyone knows about the major contributions (introduction of decimal system as well as the invention of zero) made by Hindus especially in Mathematics and trigonometry. Perhaps Freely deliberately did this just to be precise on the targeted subject or maybe due to lack of research or unavailability of resources. Anyways, the book does justice to its title and that’s more important.
A few recommendations for the readers:
1. Keep checking the names of places/locations from maps especially if you don’t have much knowledge of Geography of Europe, the Middle Earth (East) and North Africa (Mediterranean world, you can say).
2. Try to note down or highlight the names, research/contributions, treatises and books of the famous scientists and philosophers as they are repeated and mentioned over and over again in the next chapters for references.
3. You may not keep track in the beginning (not necessary depending on your knowledge, but I found it difficult to) and the pace can be slow, but keep going, once you’ve read through the first 2 chapters you’ll start enjoying the book in its real essence.
Definitely going to read the book for 2nd and maybe 3rd time, because I couldn’t understand and can’t digest this much load of information in a single read :D
Will surely read more books by John Freely.
Totally recommended, happy reading.
Thank you John Freely for writing this master piece.
The writer has carried out the main subject throughout the book in a sequential and amazingly well mannered way. As a “wise man� has said “chronology helps in converting the data into information'', it comes out John Freely knew this too. Absolutely Impressed by his extensive knowledge of the history of science and this extraordinary narrative spanning almost twenty five centuries. The author has written this book without being biased towards Muslims (One can think of biasedness by the subhead of the book), he has given credit to Greeks, Jews, Christians and Muslims equally wherever it’s due.
Freely has made it very easy for the readers to understand the subject and catch up with the book, he has mentioned the era, inspirations, contributions and region of each scientist along with their names, also whenever and wherever the name of any ruler or emperor comes up in the book he has mentioned their reigns and dynasties to keep the reader attached to the book. The author has divided the book into 18 chapters, the edition I’ve has 255 pages (excluding acknowledgements, illustration credits and notes etc). Before reading the book, I was wondering why the author has divided the book into so many chapters, but after reading it, I realized how easy the author has made it for the readers to read the book and grasp the subject by doing so.
I personally got a lot to learn from Aladdin’s Lamp, as before reading this book I didn’t even know a bit about the science of Ancient Greek and medieval period.
One thing that I found missing in the book is contributions of Hindus from Indus Valley civilization and Vedas to Modern times, Freely has mentioned a few in the book though, but again they are very few. While everyone knows about the major contributions (introduction of decimal system as well as the invention of zero) made by Hindus especially in Mathematics and trigonometry. Perhaps Freely deliberately did this just to be precise on the targeted subject or maybe due to lack of research or unavailability of resources. Anyways, the book does justice to its title and that’s more important.
A few recommendations for the readers:
1. Keep checking the names of places/locations from maps especially if you don’t have much knowledge of Geography of Europe, the Middle Earth (East) and North Africa (Mediterranean world, you can say).
2. Try to note down or highlight the names, research/contributions, treatises and books of the famous scientists and philosophers as they are repeated and mentioned over and over again in the next chapters for references.
3. You may not keep track in the beginning (not necessary depending on your knowledge, but I found it difficult to) and the pace can be slow, but keep going, once you’ve read through the first 2 chapters you’ll start enjoying the book in its real essence.
Definitely going to read the book for 2nd and maybe 3rd time, because I couldn’t understand and can’t digest this much load of information in a single read :D
Will surely read more books by John Freely.
Totally recommended, happy reading.
Thank you John Freely for writing this master piece.
June 29, 2021
Κριτική στα Ελληνικά πιο κάτω...
I liked this book in general but I'm a bit fed up with blurbs that are misleading! I chose this book because it was supposed to focus on how the Muslim scholars and scientists on Middle Ages translated and spread throughout the Islamic world the ideas and knowledge of the Ancient Greeks/Grecoroman world, they flourished these ideas and knowledge further and then how on the 12th century these texts by Islamic scholars were translated from Arabic to Latin, thus greatly contributing towards modern science at the dawn of Renaissance -and consequently to the "Scientific Revolution" of the 17th century.
In reality thought, all the above are only a part of the book which is a history of science and philosophy from antiquity till today, mentioning and analysing many important personalities and their work, which is a different subject matter than how this work was saved and transmitted. I'm not sure how an author would completely separate the two topics, but still...
Some chapters were weaker than others. I personally enjoyed the dusting of my knowledge about the Ancient World, Byzantium, Renaissance Europe, but I mostly appreciated the chapters about the Middle East, Maghreb, Andalusia 's history and people, some of which stuff I was familiar with, much of it not! Towards the end, the author adopts a more personal tone and the book derails even more and I got a feeling that John Freely didn't know how to write an epilogue.
Maybe this is a somehow heavy read to indulge in one go and it's not flawless, but for sure it's very interesting!
Μου άρεσε το βιβλίο σε γενικές γραμμές, αλλά έχω βαρεθεί να διαβάζω περιγραφές στο οπισθόφυλλο που παραπλανούν. Υποτίθεται ότι η εστίαση του βιβλίου θα ήταν στο πως οι Μουσουλμάνοι επιστήμονες και λόγιοι τον Μεσαίωνα μετέφρασαν τα έργα των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων και άλλων στα Αραβικά, διαδώσαν και επεξεργαστήκαν ιδέες και γνώσεις, τις εξελίξαν και από τον 12ο αιώνα και μετά η μετάφραση από τα Αραβικά στα Λατινικά πυροδότησε την χαραυγή της σύγχρονης επιστήμης που κορυφώθηκε σε μία Επιστημονική Επανάσταση τον 17ο αιώνα.
Στην πραγματικότητα τα παραπάνω αποτελούν ένα μόνο μέρος του βιβλίου, το οποίο είναι μια αναδρομή στην επιστήμη και την φιλοσοφία από την αρχαιότητα μέχρι σήμερα, με αναφορές και περιγραφές σε πολλές διαφορετικές προσωπικότητες και επεξήγηση του έργου τους, που είναι διαφορετικό πράγμα από το πώς διαδόθηκε το έργο τους. Βέβαια δεν είμαι σίγουρη για το πως θα διαχωριζόντουσαν εντελώς αυτά τα θέματα, αλλά και πάλι.
Κάποια κεφάλαια είναι πιο "δυνατά" από άλλα, βρήκα ωραίο ξεσκόνισμα στις γνώσεις μου τα περι αρχαιότητας, Βυζαντίου, Ευρωπαϊκής Αναγέννησης, ενώ ευχαριστήθηκα πιο πολύ τα περι Μέσης Ανατολής, Μάγκρεμπ, Ανδαλουσίας κτλ, καθώς αρκετά γεγονότα και πρόσωπα μου ήταν οικεία, πολλά όμως όχι. Προς το τέλος το βιβλίο αποκτά έναν πολύ πιο προσωπικό τόνο και θεωρώ ότι ίσως ο συγγραφέας να μην ήξερε πως να γράψει έναν επίλογο.
Ίσως είναι λιγάκι "βαρύ" για να το διαβάσει κανείς σε μία "καθισιά", ωστόσο συνολικά είναι πολύ ενδιαφέρον -πιο πολύ σαν εγκυκλοπαιδικές γνώσεις ή αν έχει κανείς πιο ειδικό λόγο να το διαβάσει, παρά σαν ανάγνωσμα γενικού ενδιαφέροντος.
I liked this book in general but I'm a bit fed up with blurbs that are misleading! I chose this book because it was supposed to focus on how the Muslim scholars and scientists on Middle Ages translated and spread throughout the Islamic world the ideas and knowledge of the Ancient Greeks/Grecoroman world, they flourished these ideas and knowledge further and then how on the 12th century these texts by Islamic scholars were translated from Arabic to Latin, thus greatly contributing towards modern science at the dawn of Renaissance -and consequently to the "Scientific Revolution" of the 17th century.
In reality thought, all the above are only a part of the book which is a history of science and philosophy from antiquity till today, mentioning and analysing many important personalities and their work, which is a different subject matter than how this work was saved and transmitted. I'm not sure how an author would completely separate the two topics, but still...
Some chapters were weaker than others. I personally enjoyed the dusting of my knowledge about the Ancient World, Byzantium, Renaissance Europe, but I mostly appreciated the chapters about the Middle East, Maghreb, Andalusia 's history and people, some of which stuff I was familiar with, much of it not! Towards the end, the author adopts a more personal tone and the book derails even more and I got a feeling that John Freely didn't know how to write an epilogue.
Maybe this is a somehow heavy read to indulge in one go and it's not flawless, but for sure it's very interesting!
Μου άρεσε το βιβλίο σε γενικές γραμμές, αλλά έχω βαρεθεί να διαβάζω περιγραφές στο οπισθόφυλλο που παραπλανούν. Υποτίθεται ότι η εστίαση του βιβλίου θα ήταν στο πως οι Μουσουλμάνοι επιστήμονες και λόγιοι τον Μεσαίωνα μετέφρασαν τα έργα των Αρχαίων Ελλήνων και άλλων στα Αραβικά, διαδώσαν και επεξεργαστήκαν ιδέες και γνώσεις, τις εξελίξαν και από τον 12ο αιώνα και μετά η μετάφραση από τα Αραβικά στα Λατινικά πυροδότησε την χαραυγή της σύγχρονης επιστήμης που κορυφώθηκε σε μία Επιστημονική Επανάσταση τον 17ο αιώνα.
Στην πραγματικότητα τα παραπάνω αποτελούν ένα μόνο μέρος του βιβλίου, το οποίο είναι μια αναδρομή στην επιστήμη και την φιλοσοφία από την αρχαιότητα μέχρι σήμερα, με αναφορές και περιγραφές σε πολλές διαφορετικές προσωπικότητες και επεξήγηση του έργου τους, που είναι διαφορετικό πράγμα από το πώς διαδόθηκε το έργο τους. Βέβαια δεν είμαι σίγουρη για το πως θα διαχωριζόντουσαν εντελώς αυτά τα θέματα, αλλά και πάλι.
Κάποια κεφάλαια είναι πιο "δυνατά" από άλλα, βρήκα ωραίο ξεσκόνισμα στις γνώσεις μου τα περι αρχαιότητας, Βυζαντίου, Ευρωπαϊκής Αναγέννησης, ενώ ευχαριστήθηκα πιο πολύ τα περι Μέσης Ανατολής, Μάγκρεμπ, Ανδαλουσίας κτλ, καθώς αρκετά γεγονότα και πρόσωπα μου ήταν οικεία, πολλά όμως όχι. Προς το τέλος το βιβλίο αποκτά έναν πολύ πιο προσωπικό τόνο και θεωρώ ότι ίσως ο συγγραφέας να μην ήξερε πως να γράψει έναν επίλογο.
Ίσως είναι λιγάκι "βαρύ" για να το διαβάσει κανείς σε μία "καθισιά", ωστόσο συνολικά είναι πολύ ενδιαφέρον -πιο πολύ σαν εγκυκλοπαιδικές γνώσεις ή αν έχει κανείς πιο ειδικό λόγο να το διαβάσει, παρά σαν ανάγνωσμα γενικού ενδιαφέροντος.
March 8, 2022
A tribute to the ancient discoveries and the sacred art of passing the knowledge. The work of so many great Thinkers into Science and Pseudo-science areas and how it was kept alive between the different cities and civilizations, sometimes due to the great work of pure translations between languages. It enabled the migration of ideas and knowledge from the old Greeks into Rome and Islamic cities only to be picked up again my medieval and renaissance Europe. For a considerable part of the book the same is not so interesting, just having a descriptive concept, enumerating the thinkers of the time and the areas and books that they worked on and the ones that were "saved" or that translations were luckily made. Several less know Thinkers but that had a key role in the past. The book does become more attraction when it is able to give more details on some of the Men that are globally acclaimed with their scientific discoveries or confirmations of previous notions.
September 6, 2022
John Freely's book is highly informative containing rich information about the scholars and their treaties from the ancient Greeks, medieval Arabs and European. Moreover, it moves with a chronological order of the development of natural philosophy to its mature form as a modern science in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. It is a valuable source for those who seek general description of the history science. Nevertheless, the book lacks insights into reasons and never gives any explanation from the author perspective which makes it entirely descriptive and merely just a collection of historical facts without analyzing and interpreting its events. Unlike Stephen Weinberg's book (to explain the world) where the reader will understand the history of science from a prospective of a working Scientist. Although the author is a physicist, he disappointed me for not giving the reader such a prospective as Weinberg did.
February 7, 2023
The research and the scope of the book is vast, detailing how scientific knowledge from Greeks slowly migrated to Islamic civilisations in Spain, the Middle East and North Africa. The knowledge was then translated, improved upon and with the added wealth of new scientific inventions and innovations, trickled into Europe and spurred the Renaissance.
The amount of information is encyclopedic. Names, brief histories and notable works of eminent scientists are crammed together, making it for an extremely dry read.
It has the aesthetic of a rote historical textbook, bland and with hardly any personality - just a list of facts and dates arranged in a chronological order.
The amount of information is encyclopedic. Names, brief histories and notable works of eminent scientists are crammed together, making it for an extremely dry read.
It has the aesthetic of a rote historical textbook, bland and with hardly any personality - just a list of facts and dates arranged in a chronological order.
April 5, 2024
Anfangs war ich von diesem Buch leicht befremdet. Die schlichte, stichpunkthafte Aufzählung von antiken Promis, lediglich ein wenig chronologisch sortiert, erweckte den Eindruck uninspirierten name-droppings ohne erkennbaren Mehrwert. Und wenn man sich ein wenig durch die Beurteilungen dieses Buchs liest, erkennt man, dass sich zahlreiche Leser auch genau hieran störten. Doch nach einer Weile schluckte ich meinen Ärger hinunter und begann überraschenderweise mehr oder weniger Gefallen zu finden an den Bruchstücken und Mosaiksteinchen, die einem hier hingeworfen wurden.
Weiter geht's auf
Weiter geht's auf
May 29, 2017
Interesting, but very dry. A listing of scientists from antiquity until early modernity, with information about their live and works. But with too less context and explanations of e.g. how their research changed societies. Also, the book only focused on natural sciences - a separation that especially ancient Greek and Roman researchers never undertook - explains the occasionally very detailed findings not enough.
September 6, 2017
Viele haben es vor mir beschrieben: Freelys Buch ist zu großen Teilen eine uninspirierte Listung von Werken und Kurzbiographien. Es werden kaum Zusammenhänge hergestellt; so bekommt man als Laie keinen Überblick. Im Aufsatz wäre das ein klarer Fall von "Thema verfehlt". Ich habe als Leserin nicht bekommen, wonach ich suchte. Auch die Beschreibungen von Modellen und Experimenten sind dermaßen verknappt, dass sie kaum auch nur einen Überblick geben.
October 10, 2022
It's not quite what I was hoping to read. Instead of an analysis of the impact of Islamic scholarship and translation using ancient sources on the Dark Ages, it's more of a linear encyclopedia of philosophical and scientific history starting with the ancient Greeks. It's certainly informative for what it is, but I was looking for more...
September 3, 2021
Interesting story but poorly told especially in the ancient greek and medevil Islamic sections. At some points it feels like you are reading a dictionary of scientists rather than a narrative.
The scientific revolution and modern Turkey section are better.
The scientific revolution and modern Turkey section are better.
July 23, 2019
Fascinating. A bit stilted at times.
May 15, 2023
Ich hatte nicht erwartet auf so viel Wissenschaftsgeschichte zu treffen, deshalb hat das Lesen ewig gedauert.
September 3, 2023
Very insightful and worthwhile read.
September 25, 2023
This book traces the western renaissance to the Arabs who kept the old writings of the Greeks, translated them and added to them.
April 12, 2015
Yet another creation myth succumbs to a gradualist analysis. This time, it is the tree of science whose braided root meanders unbroken down into the rich soil of history, instead of birthing fully-formed from the forehead of Newton or Descartes.
One preconception often levelled against Islamic communication of classical science to the West is that the Muslims only transmitted and interpreted work that was established by the Hindus and pagan Greeks, not doing original work of their own. This book contains sufficient history of science to lay that myth to rest. Al-Haytham's work on optics and use of the camera obscura for studying imaging, an-Nafis' description of the minor circulation of the blood and al-Khazini's tantalisingly close pass to universal gravitation all indicate that important and original work was done in the House of Islam during the Middle Ages.
The question, then, which I felt that the book did not answer, is why the subsequent decline? From the time of Tycho Brahe onwards, science became a Western passion and went inexorably into eclipse in the Muslim world. This question is not really closed by Freely, but he gives us some clues. Moreover, he leaves no doubt that the banner was passed on, as Latin and Greek translations of Arabic science pepper the historical record and clearly provided much of the tinder that lit the fire in the Western mind.
The Scientific Revolution in Europe was not as purely rational as is sometimes alleged - Newton expended hundreds of thousands of words on alchemy - an Arabic derivation - and astronomy was not clearly demarcated from astrology for centuries. The same applied to the Arabic world - science in Islam concerned itself with matters that did not conflict with doctrine, such as using the heavens to fix religious dates and to forecast events by astrology. It may seem heretical to think of the roots of science as being found in astrology and other superstition, but the same applies to a greater or lesser extent all the way back to classical Greece. Even Socrates preferred a teleology over Anaxagoras' empiricism, for once putting himself on history's losing side.
Islam seems to have left science behind, or vice versa, at the time the divorce between science and superstition finally began to take shape. Where Hroswitha referred to Muslim Andalusia as the "Ornament of the World" and the Temurid dynasty opened centres of learning in Central Asian cities, today these are more associated with autocracy and fundamentalism while the Sephardic flowering of Andalusia is a sad tale in a history book. Whatever the real reasons, science moved on and at some point left the House of Islam becalmed.
One criticism I have of the book is that a large part of its bulk amounts to enumeration of endless names - Greek, then Muslim then Western contributors to the unbroken historical braid of science. More could have been said about the ideas and their philosophical weight rather than mere names. Science, above all things, has risen above the failings of scientists and the way it did this is surely one of the great themes of history. Nevertheless, Freely's writing is engaging and light, making the book a pleasure to read.
One preconception often levelled against Islamic communication of classical science to the West is that the Muslims only transmitted and interpreted work that was established by the Hindus and pagan Greeks, not doing original work of their own. This book contains sufficient history of science to lay that myth to rest. Al-Haytham's work on optics and use of the camera obscura for studying imaging, an-Nafis' description of the minor circulation of the blood and al-Khazini's tantalisingly close pass to universal gravitation all indicate that important and original work was done in the House of Islam during the Middle Ages.
The question, then, which I felt that the book did not answer, is why the subsequent decline? From the time of Tycho Brahe onwards, science became a Western passion and went inexorably into eclipse in the Muslim world. This question is not really closed by Freely, but he gives us some clues. Moreover, he leaves no doubt that the banner was passed on, as Latin and Greek translations of Arabic science pepper the historical record and clearly provided much of the tinder that lit the fire in the Western mind.
The Scientific Revolution in Europe was not as purely rational as is sometimes alleged - Newton expended hundreds of thousands of words on alchemy - an Arabic derivation - and astronomy was not clearly demarcated from astrology for centuries. The same applied to the Arabic world - science in Islam concerned itself with matters that did not conflict with doctrine, such as using the heavens to fix religious dates and to forecast events by astrology. It may seem heretical to think of the roots of science as being found in astrology and other superstition, but the same applies to a greater or lesser extent all the way back to classical Greece. Even Socrates preferred a teleology over Anaxagoras' empiricism, for once putting himself on history's losing side.
Islam seems to have left science behind, or vice versa, at the time the divorce between science and superstition finally began to take shape. Where Hroswitha referred to Muslim Andalusia as the "Ornament of the World" and the Temurid dynasty opened centres of learning in Central Asian cities, today these are more associated with autocracy and fundamentalism while the Sephardic flowering of Andalusia is a sad tale in a history book. Whatever the real reasons, science moved on and at some point left the House of Islam becalmed.
One criticism I have of the book is that a large part of its bulk amounts to enumeration of endless names - Greek, then Muslim then Western contributors to the unbroken historical braid of science. More could have been said about the ideas and their philosophical weight rather than mere names. Science, above all things, has risen above the failings of scientists and the way it did this is surely one of the great themes of history. Nevertheless, Freely's writing is engaging and light, making the book a pleasure to read.
April 27, 2016
This is a hard one to rate. One hand, Freely's book is a great general intro to the history of science and it ticks virtually every box on the way. It covers early Greek science through to the Arabic philosophers and scientists who translated those Greek works, whilst adding their own ideas and commentaries and then covers the Europeans who came after, such as Roger Bacon, Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, etc. However, it can mostly be a little too general. It sometimes felt like just a collection of names with a brief bio indicating what this historic figure's major work was. Copernicus and Newton got pretty much their own chapters but that's another problem I had. I was expecting this to be more focused on the Arabic and Islamic world of the Middle Ages but there are really only about 2-3 chapters dedicated to that period (of the 18 in the book) and they don't go into too much depth on the subject other than a few brief anecdotes.
The book is pretty enjoyable, to be fair, and I definitely learned a lot. It would be a great little index of science history to have but one can't help but feel that every chapter could have been it's own book. As a (very) general introduction to the history of science, it's solid. It's the kind of book that sent me down a Wiki rabbit hole every chapter.
The book is pretty enjoyable, to be fair, and I definitely learned a lot. It would be a great little index of science history to have but one can't help but feel that every chapter could have been it's own book. As a (very) general introduction to the history of science, it's solid. It's the kind of book that sent me down a Wiki rabbit hole every chapter.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 45 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.