By Adnan Rashid
Renaissance is the terminology used to explain the scientific revolution which took place in the result of the rediscovery of the classical Greek knowledge. When and how, this Greek knowledge was rediscovered, is the question which will be looked upon in this presentation. Scholars and Historians are of two opinions about the time and origin of the renaissance. One group of scholars argue that, the renaissance took place in the 15th or 16th century, while the other group observes that the renaissance actually took its form and shape in the Middle Ages.
The supporters of the 12th century renaissance theory argue that the Europeans encountered the Greek knowledge through Arabs, who themselves acquired it from the Byzantines. They reject the view that the Greek knowledge was lost for 10 centuries (dark ages), and they have the opinion that the Greek knowledge was available and actually being studied, criticised and corrected in Medieval Spain, Sicily and Byzantium.
The supporters of the 15th or the 16th century renaissance theory also argue their case from a number of angles. They argue that the Greek legacy was rediscovered in Florence, triggering the renaissance, and it was the learning of the works of Aristotle, Euclid, Archimedes, Plato, Galen, Hippocrates, Socrates and Ptolemy that actually caused the scientific awakening in Italy. They assert that the medieval scholars like Averoes, Alhazen, Maimonides, Avicena, Abulcasis and Arzachel were mere transmitters of the Greek knowledge, without making any changes to it. They also claim that the Greek works were lost after the destruction of the Alexandrian Library and closure of the Athenian schools of Greek sciences by the emperor Justinian in the year 529. Therefore the modern science is of Greek origin or if there was any progress made, it was made by the 15th Century scholars.
Those who say the Greek knowledge was lost have to answer these questions: why Caliph Mamun (813-33) of Baghdad, sent a deputation to the Byzantine emperor, Leo the Isaurian, to obtain scientific works of Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Archimedes and why some were accordingly translated into Arabic? Also, for what reason, in the following century did the emperor of Constantinople offer a copy of Dioscoride (1st century treatise on plants) to the caliph of Cordova, Abdul Rahman III (912-61). [1]
The supporters of the 15th/16th century theory do have a point when they assert that one of the causes for the loss of Greek knowledge was the destruction of the Alexandrian Library by Christian zealots. They have, however, overlooked the richness of Byzantine archives, Cordovan collections, as well as Sicilian Libraries, where Greek Manuscripts and there interpretations, criticisms and corrections were available in the forms of independent written works by the medieval scholars.
In the light of historical evidences available it seems that medieval Europe was experiencing a scientific revolution. In Spain magnificent libraries had been established and Cordova alone had 70 public libraries. The library of Hakam II (961-1008) consisted of 400,000 volumes of books alone. [2] These libraries attracted scholars from all over Europe to study the ancient sciences and the same was also taking place in other cities like Toledo, Seville, Valencia and Barcelona. One such scholar who visited Toledo was Daniel of Morley. When the Christians took Toledo in 1085, a school of translation was established in which Arabic works of Jewish and Islamic scholars were translated into Latin. In Sicily, Galen’s medicine was revolutionised; in Lorraine breakthroughs were made in mathematics and astronomy; the south of France advanced in medicine; the Italian cities (like Pisa, Florence and Venice) made commercial advances; England’s exchequer is an example of administrative organisation, and Normans introduced the gothic architecture of castles and cathedrals.
Medieval scholars based their studies on the correction and criticism of the Greek sciences, for example, Arzachel (1029-1087) amended Ptolemy’s exaggerated estimate of the length of the Mediterranean sea from 62° to nearer the correct value of 42°; Albitruji (d.1204) modified Ptolemy’s system of planetary motions; it was jabir ibn Aflah’s astronomical treatise ‘Islah al-majisti (refutation of Almagest)’, which was valued for centuries in its Latin and Hebrew versions by both Christians and Jews; Alrazi (d.925) in his encyclopaedic work (The Continens) rejected the work of Hippocrates and Galen through experiments and observations, he also refuted the texts of the De Demonstrationes exposing Galen’s inadequate theory of vision; Alhazen (965-1039), who via experiments, demolished Aristotelian and Euclidian optics to setup the modern foundation for this science; Albiruni and Al-Khwarizimi (d.1123) pioneered in the determining of specific weights and the list is endless. [3]
To resolve this Greek question, and see where the revival of science and civilisation arose from, it is necessary to compare the like by the like, for example:
- Galen/Hippocrates and Avecena and Rahzes (medicine)
- Greek optics, and Ibn Al-Haytham’s optics
- Euclid’s mathematics and that of Al-Khwarizimi
- Ptolemy’s geography vs. medieval Spanish geography
- Aristotle’s science vs. Arab Science
- Greek Astronomy and that of Ibn shatir
And so on and so forth… and in the end assert which of Greek or 12th century science is:
- Nearest to modern science.
- Has a wider reach in terms of facts, subjects and scientific breakthroughs.
Scholars of the 15th and 16th Century actually used the works of their medieval predecessors, not of Greeks. Vesalius, Copernicus, Galileoa and Newton were the happy inheritors who cashed in. The Latin translations of Alhazen’s (965-1020) works on optics remained the standard optical textbooks in western Europe until 17th Century.
The observations of the sky were made and put on paper by the medieval scholars, centuries before Galileo and the translations were available before he was born.
Copernicus’s planetary theory was identical to that of his medieval predecessor, Ibn Shatar. Witelo (b. 1230) composed an exhaustive 10 volume treatise on optics, which remained a classic until the time of Kepler, and he relied heavily upon Alhazen’s works. Ibn Al-Nafis discovered the lesser circulation of blood before 1288, anticipating the Spaniard Micheal Servetus (1511-53) by more than 265 years. A Latin translation of Ibn Al-Nafis’ work from Arabic was made in Venice in 1547, a few years later the same theory was published by Micheal Servetus in 1553. Other scholars like Realdus Columbus, Carlo Ruini, Andrea Cesalpino and Francois Rabelaies claimed the same results. [4]
A comparison of the Lunar theory of Ibn Shatir and that of Copernicus shows that not only is that the general structure of the two models is the same, but the geometrical parameters are also identical. Thomas Aquinas also had used the writing of the Arab philosopher Averoes, to justify the clear separation of faith and reason. Averoes himself appears in Raphael’s classic renaissance painting of great western thinkers, alongside Plato and Aristotle, as a vivid reminder of the debt the world owes to the medieval scholarship.
A special feature of the 12th century scholarship is the use of instruments which is not be found in the Greek sciences. Astrolabe, surgical instruments, quadrants, sundials, and Armillary spheres are the inventions of the same period. Experimental methods were also in use, Greeks seem to be interested only in theories, not experiments. The medieval scholars were actually making experiments upon Greek theories, and in the majority of instances, found them to be in error. There were other discoveries made in the Middle Ages which had no Greek origin. For example paper, windmills, perfume, water mills, glass, the cheque, pendulum, numerals and the compass. Some of these achievements are still in use by the modern scholarship. Abulcasis’ (Abul Qasim Az-Zahrawi) surgical instruments were still in use until the 19th century. Medieval mathematics, Algebra, is still in use in universities today and medicine also owes a debt to the 12th century scholars like Maimonides and Abenouefit.
In conclusion, I find it painful that people hop straight from the ‘Periclean or the Augustan ages to the times of Medici and Louis XIV’. Continuity of history rejects such sharp and violent contrast between successive periods, both continuity and change is characteristic of the Middle Ages, as indeed of all great epochs of history. The fourteenth century grows out of the thirteenth as the thirteenth grows out of the twelfth, so that there is no real break between the medieval renaissance and the Quattro cento. The middle ages were pregnant with many ideas which could not be delivered until much later. When the birth of the modern science is granted to the 15th or 16th century, how can then such science be conceived without the new numerals from Spain, the concept of zero, algebraic notions, medicine of Maimonides, or how can one conceive Galileo without the pendulum?
Once it is established that the Greek knowledge was not lost, then one can see that it was not the Greek knowledge (allegedly found all of sudden in Florence) which triggered the renaissance. It was the works of medieval scholars discovered by 15/16th century scholars which consequently sparked a scientific revolution in Europe. Therefore, renaissance has its deep roots in the Middle Ages.
[1] The Hidden Debt to Islamic Civilisation, S.E. Al-Djazairi, Bayt Al-Hikma Press, p.92
[2] Arabic writing and Arab libraries, S. M. Imamuddin, Ta-ha publishers, p. 51
[3] The Hidden Debt to Islamic Civilisation, S.E. Al-Djazairi, Bayt Al-Hikma Press, p. 141-47
[4] The Hidden Debt to Islamic Civilisation, S.E. Al-Djazairi, Bayt Al-Hikma Press, p. 148
No Responses to “12th Century Renaissance?”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks