Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα athens. Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων
Εμφάνιση αναρτήσεων με ετικέτα athens. Εμφάνιση όλων των αναρτήσεων

Τετάρτη 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012

The Greek Writers who Influenced the Oriental World

The Greek writers who influenced the oriental world were not the poets ,historians, or orators, but exclusively the scientists who wrote on medicine, astronomy,mathematics, and philosophy, the type of scientific thought which does not always come foremost when we speak about classical literature. In the days when the Arabs inherited the culture of ancient Greece, Greek thought was chiefly interested in science, Athens was replaced by Alexandria, and Hellenism had an entirely “modem “outlook. This was an attitude with which Alexandria and its scholars were directly connected, but it was by no means confined toAlexandria. It was a logical outcome of the influence of Aristotle who before all else was a patient observer of nature, and was in fact the founder of modern science. It had its germs in older thought, no doubt, in the speculations of quite early philosophers about the origin and world and its inhabitants, animals as well as men, but it was Aristotle who introduced what may be called the scientific method.In entering upon this inquiry it may be premised that there are at least three threads very closely interwoven.

In the first place there are Greek scientific writers whose books were translated into Arabic, studied by Arab scholars, and made the subject of commentaries and summaries: in such cases the line of transmission is clear. Then there are conclusions and scientific principles assumed and developed by Arabic writers who do not say whence they were derived, but which can only be explained by reference to a Greek (Alexandrian) source. Yet again, there are questions and problems raised which the Arabs dealt with in their own way, but which never would have occurred to them unless they had been suggested by earlier Greek thinkers who hadtried to solve similar difficulties, but approached their solution in a different way.Greek scientific thought had been in the world for a long time before it reached the Arabs, and during that period it had already spread abroad in various directions. So it is not surprising that it reached the Arabs by more than one route. It came first and in the plainest line through Christian Syriac writers, scholars, and scientists. Then the Arabs applied themselves directly to the original Greek sources and learned over again all they had already learned, correcting andv erifying their earlier knowledge. Then there came a second channel of transmission in directly through India, mathematical and astronomical work, all a good deal developed by Indian scholars, but certainly developed from material obtained from Alexandria in the first place.This material had passed to India by the sea route which connected Alexandria with north-west India.

Then there was also another line of passage through India which seems to have had its beginning in the Greek kingdom of Bactria, one of the Asiatic states founded by Alexander theGreat, and a land route long kept open between the Greek world and Central Asia, especiallywith the city of Marw, and this perhaps connects with a Buddhist medium which at one time promoted intercourse between east and west, though Buddhism as a religion was withdrawingto the Far East when the Arabs reached Central Asia. Further, there were some scattered minor sources, unfortunately little known, such as the city of Harran, an obstinately pagan Greek colony planted in the middle of a Christian area, which probably made its contribution, thoughon a smaller scale.The term "Arabs”must be taken in a broad sense. It is not here used strictly to denote those of Arab blood, but includes all those who were politically under Arab rule, who used the Arabiclanguage and followed the religion of the Arabs. Some, like the Persians under the early'Abbasids in the eighth century, were very definitely anti-Arab, but they lived under Arab rule,wrote in Arabic, and at least professed to follow the religion of Muhammad. Such being thecase, they and their Arab rulers shared a common life which coloured their literature, education,and interests generally; even though Persian literature and religion diverged in its owndirection, it moved from an Arabic starting-point. Neither culture nor language run on lines precisely identical with race. Conquest, superior civilization, economic needs have oftencaused communities to adopt new languages and new cultures. Yet there was sufficientcoherence in the community gathered under the rule of the KhaHf to justify its being treated asa unit, even though not all its members recognized the same khalifi The 'Umayyads in Andalustook their cue from the rinces ruling in Baghdad. The schismatic Shi'ites agreed with theorthodox Sunnis that their leader on earth should be the heir of the Prophet Muhammad, thoughthey differed as to the individual who was the lawful heir. The no less heretical Kharijites had akhaff of their owm, freely elected on a democratic basis, but so elected because it was believedthat this best followed Muhanunad's precedent.

More important than political, racial or religious unity is the fact that those here classed asArabs shared the same cultural history and all participated in the scientific heritage derivedfrom the Hellenistic world. At first the city of Baghdad was the distributing centre where Greek material was brought together from different parts, Syria, Bactria, India, Persia, and other, andfrom Baghdad this material spread out in an Arabic form to all those social groups which wereheld together by the religion of Islam. Later on, when political and economic disturbanceschecked the cultural life of Baghdad and the empire of the khalifs began a process of devolution, or disintegration, very siriiilar to that experienced by the empire of the Karlings inthe west, the leadership passed from Baghdad to Aleppo, Damascus, Cairo, Cordova, and Samarqand. But before that happened Greek scientific literature had made itself at homeamongst the Arabs and had begun a new and independent life in an Arabic atmosphere.The Greek material received by the Arabs was not simply passed on by them to others whocame after, it had a very real life and development in its Arabic surroundings. In astronomy andmathematics the work of Greek and Indian scientists was coordinated, and thence a very realadvance was made. It may be stated that algebra and both plane and spherical trigonometrywere Arab developments.

The Arabs were diligent in making and recording astronomicalobservations, and these not only extended what they had received from the Greeks, but checkedand corrected older records. The Arabs perceived the weakness in the Ptolemaic cosmologyand the new astronomy “of the thirteenth century tried to correct it, but in vain. It was not untilCopernicus that the solution was found. Not all Muslims approved of astrology. There were many who held that, as all events happen by the will of God, they could not be controlled by the stars. This was admitted, and by it camea modification of astrological theory in Orthodox Islam: the stars were no longer regarded as“rulers” as in pagan astrology, but simply as “indicators” showing beforehand what God hasdecreed. Still some theological purists objected, and astrologers produced apologetical worksto defend their science. But the Jews frankly recognized the stars as “rulers “on the ground of Genesis i, 14-16, which seems to teach that God set the lights of heaven to rule the earth, and inthis were followed by the Christians.In medicine the Arab physicians were careful observers, and their clinical records added muchto what they learned from the Greeks. They invented some new instruments and in all branches, except surgery, advanced medical knowledge. Surgery was hindered by theuncleanness contracted by touching a dead body, though that impurity could be removed by thegreater ablution. But there was a prevalent belief that the soul did not immediately leave the body at death, but remained in it for a period, and this caused dissection to be regarded as inhuman and cruel. From Aristotle, however, the Arabs learned the similarity in human andanimal physiology, and a certain degree of progress was made in comparative anatomy. But inmedicine, as in astronomy, much of their work was made obsolete by discoveries which theynever knew. Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood, and the knowledge obtained bythe use of the microscope, opened a new range of thought which threw Arab achievements intothe shade.

Yet for several centuries the Arab physicians were in the forefront of medical work and, as scientific progress has been continuous, their live work made its contribution not only by passing on what others had done, but by a very real development which enabled them to giveto succeeding generations more than they had themselves received.Arabic science flourished most in the atmosphere of courts. Scientists usually depended uponwealthy and powerful patrons. They appealed little to the average man, and this chiefly becausescientific and especially philosophical speculation was regarded as tending towards free-thinking in religion, and so "philosophers”were classed as a species of heretics. Ultimately the philosophers themselves partially acquiesced in this judgment, and adopted the view that theinspired Qur'an was well adapted for the spiritual life of the unlettered and simple, but the illuminated saw beneath the written word and grasped an inner truth which it was not expedientto disclose to the simple.Meanwhile, Islam generally had its own wise men, men learned in jurisprudence, tradition, andQur'an. These were universally respected witb, ungrudging esteem, such as was never renderedto the scientists who were only tolerated because they were under state protection. It very muchtempers our estimate of Arabic leaming to remember that scientific and philosophicalscholarship was confined to one privileged coterie.


Τρίτη 1 Μαΐου 2012

The Persian Wars

With mainland Greece free from foreign interference, Athens grew large enough to fight off attacks from Sparta, its primary rival. It continued its experiment with representative forms of government.This was a time when other Greek city-states were losing their independence.The island of Sicily, which was home to several city-states, endured many attacks from the Phoenician city-state of Carthage, located just across the Mediterranean in North Africa. To the east,Ionian Greek city-states came under the rule of the Lydians, until all of Anatolia fell to Persia’s king Darius I. Darius’s Persian Empire was centered in the Near East and stretched from Egypt to present-day Afghanistan.Athens became his target early in the fifth century b.c.e. Ionian Greeks rebelled against the Persian Empire in 499 b.c.e. Athens and Eretria sent military aid. Darius quickly regained control of Ionia, and now had a good excuse to invade mainland Greece and add it to his empire.It appeared to be an easy task. The Greek world was very small compared to the Persian Empire. Although Darius sent only 20,000 to 30,000 soldiers—a relatively small force—it was still more than double the number of Greeks who eventually faced them. The Persian army arrived first at Eretria on the island of Euboea in 490 b.c.e. They burned the city-state as punishment for helping in the Ionian revolt.From there, Marathon offered a good landing spot on the Greek mainland,because it was flat and was close to Athens. An Athenian army of 10,000 hoplites marched to the coast to meet the Persians. They were joined by 1,000 hoplites from the small city-state of Plataea. When the Persians appeared to be ready for battle, Athenian general Miltiades (ca. 554– ca. 489 b.c.e.) encouraged the Greeks to make the first move.

The hoplites marched in phalanxes into the Persians’ formation. Although they were greatly outnumbered,
the Athenians maneuvered their troops to trap the Persians between a swamp and the sea. Their heavy armor protected them from Persian arrows and they fought with their long spears.Expecting an attack on Athens to follow, the Greek army quickly marched more than 20 miles from Marathon back to Athens. But the Persians turned for home. The Greek historian Herodotus reported that the Persians lost 6,400 men, while the Athenians counted 192 dead and the Plataeans had even fewer. Although those figures may be exaggerated,they demonstrate the effectiveness of hoplite warfare.Darius planned another attack, but he died in 486 b.c.e., leaving his son Xerxes (ca. 519–465 b.c.e.) to take revenge for the defeat. It took several more years for the Persian Empire to return. This time they brought 75,000 to 100,000 soldiers. However, the Persians faced a more united Greece. The Greek infantry, led by Spartan king Leonidas (d. 480 b.c.e.), numbered about 70,000 hoplites and about as many lightarmed troops. As Xerxes’ army made its way around the Aegean Sea in 480 b.c.e., the king correctly assumed that the smaller Greek citystates would surrender without a fight. The Greeks planned to meet the Persians with a big force in east-central Greece at a 50-foot-wide pass called Thermopylae.

Thermopylae was squeezed between cliffs and the sea. The Greek hoplites delayed the huge Persian army at this narrow pass for two days.Then a Greek traitor showed the Persians a little-known way around the pass and the Greeks were surprised from behind. Knowing they were now beaten, Leonidas and a force of slightly more than 300 hoplites,mostly Spartans, remained at Thermopylae to fight. Their plan was to delay the Persians while the rest of the Greek army retreated to defend the city-states to the south. Leonidas and his men were greatly outnumbered and had no hope of winning the battle. But if they could delay the Persians long enough, their main force could move into a better position to protect the rest of Greece. These brave Spartans, including Leonidas,fought until the last man was dead. They have an honored place in Greek
legend and military history for continuing to delay an army many times their number.The Athenians expected an attack and abandoned their city. The Persians then destroyed it—even the temples atop the Acropolis. Then another narrow pass, this time at sea, led to the Persians’ defeat. Athens had the advantage because they had a large fleet of warships. Just before the Persians’ second trip to Athens in 480 b.c.e., a rich deposit of silver had been discovered at Laurium in southern Attica. The Athenians used this wealth to build a fleet of several hundred triremes.The Athenian warship, the trireme, was developed about the same time the hoplite soldier became common, around 600 b.c.e. It was most likely based on ship designs of the Phoenicians, who were expert sailors. The boat was long and narrow so it could move quickly and was easy to maneuver. The ships weighed up to 2,200 pounds and were powered by 170 oarsmen arranged in three rows, which is how the ship got its name—treis is Greek for “three.” The oarsmen rowed together,using the beat of a gong or a drum to keep the rhythm. The oarsmen rowed at a speed of up to 18 beats per minute.

The trireme had a ramming “beak”—a battering ram made of oak and reinforced with a bronze cap that stuck out from the bow at water level. (A battering ram is a heavy object swung or rammed against
something to break it down.) The rowers sent the trireme into an enemy ship, making a hole in the hull.
At the time the trireme was developed, the Greeks fought primarily on land and naval warfare was rare. Under the leadership of Themistocles (ca. 524–459 b.c.e.), the Athenian fleet faced 400 to 500 Persian ships off the Greek coast just north of Athens. The triremes proved to be the better ships and much of Xerxes’ fleet was destroyed. The Persian ships then turned around,leaving a still-large army behind in Boeotia. The Spartans led a successful defense effort there at Plataea, while Athens continued to chase the
Persian fleet. The Persians were forced home. Once again, they were defeated by an enemy they greatly underestimated.The key to this military victory was Greek unity. When they were faced with the threat of being ruled by a foreign power, 31 independent Greek city-states came together to fight a common enemy. It was the first time in their history that they acted as a united group.

Even more remarkable was the cooperation between Athens and Sparta, each of which normally viewed the other as an enemy. Athens and Sparta continued their alliance long enough to drive out the remaining Persians from Ionia, Anatolia, and northern Greece.Athenian leaders were now convinced of the effectiveness of trireme warfare. They proposed forming and leading a league of city-states to build an even stronger navy, because everyone in Greece assumed the Persians would eventually return. The Greek historian Thucydides (d. ca. 401 b.c.e.) wrote in his History of the Peloponnesian War that the leaders of Sparta were glad to let the Athenians take on that responsibility.The naval alliance was organized and dominated by Athens.It consisted of the city-states that were most in danger of Persian attack: those in Ionia and on the islands in the Aegean Sea. Larger citystates contributed triremes and their crews, while smaller ones combined their resources to provide wealth or one ship. The alliance was called the Delian League, because the money was kept at the temple of Apollo on the island of Delos. (City and other treasuries often were kept at a temple where, it was believed, the god would protect them.)