Edit: you've unfortunately been posting a lot of unsubstantive comments to HN. Could you please not do that? We're trying for something a bit different here.
Go to the one with most descendants, then keep visiting the descendant with most descendants.
See how the flags start changing. From Islamic scholars to Italian to other European countries to American.
Did we learn anything today? What does this mean?
It means the only reason you have a computer today is because the Islamic civilization passed the torch of knowledge to the West. Then they got invaded by Mongols and we kept the flame alive.
It is not just math. Just because you hate a group of people does not automatically erase their contributions to humanity.
When you say "westernized", you should analyze better what that really means. What you call "western" starts in Al-Andalus.
Oxford and Cambridge in Britain would not exist if it wasn't for Saint Albertus Magnus, whose life work was bootstrapping the British higher education system from Arabic translations to Latin.
Without translations from Toledo there would be no Albertus Magnus, no Saint Thomas Aquinas, no Isaac Barrow, no Isaac Newton, no Michael Faraday. You would likely not be using a computer today.
And in fact, it is likely that you, yourself, would not exist. Because the reason you exist is due to a series a scientific breakthroughs that made it possible to sustain population in your area.
By the way I found it hilarious how you assume I hate Muslims. I guess hate is pointing out a simple fact the most religion is rooted in Sexism and Violence, especially your religion. I know it is such a hard pill to swallow. Probably harder than the feelings your prophet has for 12 year olds.
I never said it was my religion. I just acknowledge history and give credit where it is due.
What I say is rooted in solid and verifiable historical facts.
The Islamic culture defeated by the mongols was different to the one that developed after. What came later was much more militaristic and less tolerant of science.
Without the Ottoman Empire standing between Europe and trade with Asia, there wasn't going to be much of a motivation for exploring new trade roots.
In fact, had the Ottomans just built proper toll roads, they may have held back the Reformation _and_ Renaissance for a 100 or so years. So, even if the preservation of mathematical and scientific knowledge during the dark ages were not a factor, the world would have ended up a rather different place.
I know in European and American histories the existence of the Ottoman Empire and it's impact is not considered when evaluating the external forces that were nudging societies one way or another, but that does not mean there was just a void in the Eastern Mediterranean.
>> It wasn’t until the 11th century that paper arrived in Europe, with the Arab conquest of Sicily and Spain. However, paper was quickly considered an inferior-quality material compared to parchment, so much so that, in 1221, Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II prohibited its use for public documents. Rice starch, in fact, was an attractive food source for insects, which meant sheets of paper did not last long.
The history of paper owes much to the paper makers of Fabriano, a small town in the Marche region of Italy, who started producing paper using linen and hemp in the 12th century. <<
It is not an either/or: First, there was knowledge preservation. But, without the incentive to apply that knowledge to solve problems created by the fact that major European powers could not freely travel East without circumnavigating Africa, a lot of that knowledge would have remained in the books.
> In fact, had the Ottomans just built proper toll roads, they may have held back the Reformation _and_ Renaissance for a 100 or so years.
Now sure I follow. The Reformation in my view was not an inevitable advancement but an unnecessary disastrous event (involving a good deal of looting by protestantizing princes lusting after Church property) that plunged Europe into disastrous religious wars. Why would toll roads have slowed the arrival of this revolt against the Church?
The Renaissance, pace the tidy myths we're taught in schools, was not some clean break from the Middle Ages or even a revolt, but a transition that was heavily indebted to the Middle Ages (actually, in terms of philosophy, it was kind of a mediocre period of history, save for perhaps some exceptions). Are you claiming that exploration was essential to the Renaissance? I'm not sure I buy that.
> I know in European and American histories the existence of the Ottoman Empire and it's impact is not considered when evaluating the external forces that were nudging societies one way or another,
I wouldn't generalize. Had the Ottomans conquered Vienna, it is argued that this breach through the Alps would have allowed the Ottomans to conquer the rest of Europe. Or at least tried to. That much is taught in some European countries.
If trade through Ottoman rules lands and seas had just been a matter of "pay the fee and get through", a lot of the pressures that defined the boundaries of European life would not have been there.
Now, the fact that the Ottoman Empire could not capitalize on its quick successes is a symptom of the limits of how far one can go with feudal+warlord structures. Do bear in mind that the "empire" was still a going concern for 400 years after that.
Had the Portuguese not had an incentive to circumnavigate Africa and had Columbus not had an incentive to try to get to India by traveling West, would the settlement of the Americas have happened at the pace it did?
