![]() |
![]() |
|||||||||||
|
Here is part two of Fjordman's essay on Islam and the Greek heritage. Part one is here.
According to scholar Lynda Shaffer, "Francis Bacon (1561-1626), an early advocate of the empirical method, upon which the scientific revolution was based, attributed Western Europe's early modern take-off to three things in particular: printing, the compass, and gunpowder. Bacon had no idea where these things had come from, but historians now know that all three were invented in China. Since, unlike Europe, China did not take off onto a path leading from the scientific to the Industrial Revolution, some historians are now asking why these inventions were so revolutionary in Western Europe and, apparently, so unrevolutionary in China."The Song dynasty, from the tenth to the thirteenth century, was arguably the most dynamic period in Chinese history. Although printing "was invented by Buddhist monks in China, and at first benefited Buddhism, by the middle of the tenth century printers were turning out innumerable copies of the classical Confucian corpus."
According to Shaffer, "The origin of the civil service examination system in China can be traced back to the Han dynasty, but in the Song dynasty government-administered examinations became the most important route to political power in China. For almost a thousand years (except the early period of Mongol rule), China was governed by men who had come to power simply because they had done exceedingly well in examinations on the Neo-Confucian canon. At any one time thousands of students were studying for the exams, and thousands of inexpensive books were required. Without printing, such a system would not have been possible."
As she explains, "China developed the world's largest and most technologically sophisticated merchant marine and navy." The Chinese "could have made the arduous journey around the tip of Africa and sail into Portuguese ports; however, they had no reason to do so. Although the Western European economy was prospering, it offered nothing that China could not acquire much closer to home at much less cost."
In contrast, the Portuguese, the Spanish and other Europeans were trying to reach the Spice Islands, what is now Indonesia. "It was this spice market that lured Columbus westward from Spain and drew Vasco da Gama around Africa and across the Indian Ocean." In Shaffer's view, technologies such as gunpowder and the compass had a different impact in China than they had in Europe, and it is "unfair to ask why the
Chinese did not accidentally bump into the Western Hemisphere while sailing east across the Pacific to find the wool markets of Spain."Yes, Asia was the most prosperous region on the planet at this time. Europeans embarked on their Age of Exploration of the seas precisely out of a desire to reach the wealthy Asian lands (and bypass Muslim middlemen), which is why Christopher Columbus and his men mistakenly believed they had arrived in India when they reached the Americas. Asians did not possess a similar desire to reach Europe. But this still doesn't explain why the Chinese didn't embark on the final and most crucial stage of the Industrial Revolution in the West: Harnessing the force of steam and the use of fossil fuels to build stronger, more efficient machinery, faster ships and eventually railways, cars and airplanes.
Printing and literacy greatly expanded during Song times; the world's first printed paper money (bank notes) was introduced and a system of canals and roads was built, all facilitating an unprecedented population growth. Iron smelting and the use of coal multiplied several times over as China reached a stage sometimes called "proto-industrial." And yet China produced no Thomas Savery, Thomas Newcomen or James Watt to develop successful steam engines, nor a George Stephenson to build railway lines or a Karl Benz to make the first gasoline-powered automobile. Although experiments with flying had been undertaken in many nations around the world, the airplane was made possible only with the invention of modern engines, which is why China didn't produce the Wright brothers.
For thousands of years, human beings were limited by their ability to harness muscle power, of men and animals. This was later supplemented with windmills, watermills and similar inventions, which could be important, but in a limited fashion. The harnessing of steam power for engines and machinery was a revolution which provided the basis for enormous improvements in output and efficiency. For some reason, China never did take this final step, and although the country remained prosperous for centuries, later dynasties never quite matched the dynamism under Song times. Emphasis was on cultural continuity, and China experienced no great cultural flowing or event similar to the Renaissance, the Reformation and the Enlightenment in Europe. China was in its own eyes the Middle Kingdom. It had some annoying barbarians at its frontiers, but no immediate neighbors to rival its size and power, and thus little incentive for improvement. The result was relative (though not necessarily absolute) scientific stagnation. China could afford to grow self-satisfied, and she did. In contrast, Europeans, who were divided into numerous smaller states in a constant state of rivalry instead of one, large unified state, had stronger incentives for innovation, including in weapons technology.
The Mongol invasion, which ended the Song dynasty, is sometimes blamed for this loss of impetus. After the conquest of Beijing in 1215 the soil was greasy with human fat for months. According to Genghis Khan, "The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters." He believed in practicing what you preach. DNA studies indicate that he may have as many as 16 million descendants living today.
The Mongols were notorious for their brutality, but they had a particular dislike for Muslims. Hulagu Khan led the Mongol forces as they completely destroyed Baghdad in 1258, thus ending what remained of the Abbasid Caliphate. The Christian community was largely spared, allegedly thanks to the intercession of Hulagu's Nestorian Christian wife.
The irony is that many Mongols soon adopted Islam as their preferred creed. Maybe the warlike nature of this religion appealed to them. It is possible to make a comparison between Muhammad and Genghis Khan. Temüjin, who gained the title Khan when he founded the Mongol Empire in 1206, did believe he had received a divine mandate to conquer the world, and he created an impressive military force out of nothing by uniting scattered tribes and directing their aggressive energies outwards. He created a Mongolian nation where no nation had existed before, similar to what Muhammad did with the Arabs. The difference is that the Mongols didn't establish a religion of their own throughout their empire which outlasted their rule. We should probably be grateful for that, otherwise the Organization of the Mongolian Conference would be the largest voting bloc at the United Nations today, our schools would teach us about the glories of Mongol science and tolerance and our media would constantly warn us against the dangers of Genghisophobia.
In Europe, the Mongol conquests had the most lasting impact in the Ukraine and Russia. The city of Kiev was devastated while a new Russian state slowly grew out of Moscow. Ivan the Great in the 1400s expanded the Russian state and defeated the Tatar yoke, as the now Islamized Turko-Mongols of the Golden Horde were called. The Mongols invaded Eastern Europe and in the course of a few years attacked Hungary, Poland, Lithuania, Bulgaria and Serbia. They had reached as far as Vienna in 1241 when the Great Khan suddenly died and the commanders had to return to elect a new leader.
The Black Death, the great Eurasian plague pandemic, swept from Central Asia along the Silk Road through the Mongol Empire, reaching the Mediterranean and the Middle East in the 1340s. The disease, which killed at least a third of the population and more than 70% in some regions, probably reached Europe after the Golden Horde used biological warfare during a siege of the Black Sea port of Caffa, catapulting plague-infested corpses into the city. It was then carried to the European continent with fleeing Genoese traders. The Mongols thus didn't invade Western Europe, but at least they gave us the plague.
Many historians place great macrohistorical importance on the Mongol conquest. It certainly had a disruptive impact, and the trail of devastation it left behind severely depopulated regions from China and Korea via Iran and Iraq to Eastern Europe. It ended the dynamic Song dynasty, yet even before the Mongol conquest, there were few indications that a development towards modern machinery was about to take place in China. Japan, which has always learned a lot from China, escaped unscathed. A series of typhoons, dubbed kamikaze or "divine wind" by the Japanese, saved the country from the Mongol fleets in 1274 and 1281, but they, too, didn't develop a fully fledged industry until they adopted a Western model during the Meiji Restoration in the late nineteenth century.
Moreover, even if Western Europe escaped the Mongols, we should remember that Western Europeans had recently experienced centuries of political disintegration and population decline, longer than in any period in Chinese history for several thousand years. Europe also had to face a much more prolonged assault by Islam. Belgian scholar Henri Pirenne in his work Mohammed and Charlemagne asserted that the definitive break between the Classical world and the Middle Ages in the West was not the downfall of the Western Roman Empire following the partition in 395, but the Islamic conquests in the seventh century.
In Pirenne's view, although the Germanic tribes caused imperial authority to collapse in the fifth century, Western Europe was not totally cut off from the Eastern Roman Empire. The Mediterranean, Mare Nostrum or "Our Sea" as the Romans called it, still remained a Christian lake. This changed decisively during the seventh century when North Africa came under Islamic rule, as did the Iberian Peninsula. Although the Arab conquest was halted by the forces of Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in France in 732, arguably the most important battle in Western history, Islamic attacks continued for centuries since Jihad is a permanent obligation and should be carried out on regular intervals. Jihad piracy, slave trade and looting across the Mediterranean accompanied by inland raids, occasionally as far north as the Alps in Switzerland, made normal communication between the Christian West and the Christian East extremely difficult. In fact, Jihad piracy and slavery from North Africa remained a serious threat to Europeans for more than a thousand years, even into the nineteenth century. As historian Ibn Khaldun, a devout Muslim and therefore anti-Christian, proclaimed: "The Christian could no longer float a plank upon the sea."This was certainly true in the West, though the Byzantines still held their ground in the Aegean Sea. The Eastern Roman Empire was attacked by Arab Muslims in the 630s and quickly lost Syria, Palestine and Egypt, but managed to survive. Only a few years earlier the official language had been changed from Latin to Greek. It is custom to call the remaining, smaller and Hellenized state the Byzantine Empire.
The Carolingian Empire, named after Charles Martel (Carolus in Latin), was the "scaffold of the Middle Ages." Although it didn't survive for long, the structures put in place by Charles Martel and his grandson Charlemagne were to shape Western Europe for centuries. While civilization in Europe had always been centered on the Mediterranean, the center of power in the West was now north of the Alps. The Carolingian capital was established in Aachen in present-day Germany, as Muslims made access to the sea difficult. Charlemagne held his imperial coronation by Pope Leo III in Saint Peter's Basilica in the year 800, yet already in the year 846 Muslims sacked Rome and stole every piece of gold and silver in Saint Peter's. Arabs also occupied Sicily for several centuries, and attacked Naples, Capua, Calabria and Sardinia repeatedly. As Pirenne says, "the coast from the Gulf of Lyons and the Riviera to the mouth of the Tiber, ravaged by war and the pirates, whom the Christians, having no fleet, were powerless to resist, was now merely a solitude and a prey to piracy. The ports and the cities were deserted. The link with the Orient was severed, and there was no communication with the Saracen [Muslim] coasts. There was nothing but death. The Carolingian Empire presented the most striking contrast with the Byzantine. It was purely an inland power, for it had no outlets. The Mediterranean territories, formerly the most active portions of the Empire, which supported the life of the whole, were now the poorest, the most desolate, the most constantly menaced. For the first time in history the axis of Occidental civilization was displaced towards the North, and for many centuries it remained between the Seine and the Rhine. And the Germanic peoples, which had hitherto played only the negative part of destroyers, were now called upon to play a positive part in the reconstruction of European civilization."
Pirenne's thesis has been debated for generations, and new archaeological evidence has been uncovered since it was published in the 1930s. I personally think he underestimated the extent to which civilization collapsed in the West after the Germanic raids, but he is right that the Mediterranean was still open for communication, and that this changed dramatically after the Arab conquest. Though contacts between the Byzantines and Western Europe were limited during this time period, we should remember that they were never zero. Findings from Viking graves indicate that there was trade between the Baltic Sea and Constantinople even at this point, but trade was greatly diminished compared to what it had been previously.
The reason why the Christian West for centuries didn't have easy access to the Classical learning of the Christian East was because Muslims and Jihad had made the Mediterranean unsafe. It has to be the height of absurdity to block access to something and then take credit for transmitting it, yet that is precisely what Arabs do. As stronger states slowly grew up in the West, regular contact with their Eastern cousins was gradually re-established, starting with the Italian city-states. And as soon as direct contact was established, Western Europeans gained access to the original Greco-Roman manuscripts preserved in Constantinople. They didn't need to rely on limited translations in Arabic, which were anyway made from the same Byzantine manuscripts in the first place, and frequently by Christians. Moreover, Muslims have spent more than one thousand years systematically wiping out Greek culture in the Mediterranean region, a process which continues at Cyprus even into the twenty-first century, which makes it patently ridiculous when they now brag about how much we owe them for their efforts at "preserving the Greek heritage." The efforts of Arabs are, in my view, as overrated as those by the Byzantine Empire are underrated.
John Argyropoulos, who was born in 1415 in Constantinople and died in 1487 in Italy, was a Byzantine expert on Greek history who played an important role in the revival of Classical learning in the West. He lectured at the universities of Florence and Rome. Among his students was Lorenzo the Magnificent from the influential Medici family, who sponsored Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo and others. Sandro Botticelli was working under the patronage of the Medicis when he in the 1480s painted The Birth of Venus. Pagan motifs inspired by the mythology of ancient Greece and Rome were widely popular at this time. Apparently, Leonardo da Vinci, too, attended the lectures of Argyropoulos. The universal genius was passionately interested in Classical learning, perhaps especially in science and mechanical engineering, a field in which he created numerous inventions. He was certainly familiar with the Ten Books on Architecture by the Roman engineer Vitruvius, the only major work on architecture and technology to survive from the Greco-Roman world, which was also a vital inspiration for Renaissance architects Brunelleschi and Alberti. Leonardo's famous drawing the Vitruvian Man was inspired by Vitruvius' writings about architecture and its relations to the proportions of the human body.
In the words of Deno Geanakoplos, Professor of Byzantine History, "We know that until the ninth century the patron saint of Venice was not Mark but the Greek Theodore, and that in the eleventh century Byzantine workmen were summoned by the Doge in order to embellish, perhaps entirely to construct, the church of St. Mark. Venetian-Byzantine contacts became more frequent in the twelfth century as a result of the growth of the large Venetian commercial colony in Constantinople." These contacts continued to grow during the High Middle Ages and into the Renaissance, and "In the half century or so before Constantinople's fall in 1453, a gradually increasing number of refugees from the East poured into the West. Venice, as lord of important territories in the Greek East, especially the island of Crete, and as the chief port of debarkation in Italy, received the major part of these refugees. This stream quickened rapidly after 1453."
He stresses that it is a mistake to believe that all Greek texts were transported out after the fall of Constantinople. Most of the refugees fleeing the Turkish Jihad could carry few possessions with them. The process of transferring Classical knowledge to the West took generations, even centuries, but was now greatly aided by Johannes Gutenberg's movable type printing press, introduced around the year 1450 in Mainz, Germany.
It was a major stroke of historical luck – a religious person would probably say divine providence - that printing was reinvented in Europe at exactly the same time as the last vestige of the ancient Roman Empire fell to Muslims. The texts that had been preserved by the Byzantines for a thousand years after Rome collapsed could now be rescued forever instead of quietly disappearing. This ensured that the Renaissance marked a permanent infusion of Greco-Roman knowledge into Western thought, not just a temporary one.
As historian Elizabeth L. Eisenstein says in her celebrated book The Printing Press as an Agent of Change: "The classical editions, dictionaries, grammar and reference guides issued from print shops made it possible to achieve an unprecedented mastery of Alexandrian learning even while laying the basis for a new kind of permanent Greek revival in the West. (...) We now tend to take for granted that the study of Greek would continue to flourish after the main Greek manuscript centers had fallen into alien hands and hence fail to appreciate how remarkable it was to find that Homer and Plato had not been buried anew but had, on the contrary, been disinterred forever more. Surely Ottoman advances would have been catastrophic before the advent of printing. Texts and scholars scattered in nearby regions might have prolonged the study of Greek but only in a temporary way."
According to Deno Geanakoplos, in the late fifteenth century "only one city in Italy, Venice, could fulfil all the complex requirements of a Greek press. Venice possessed a class sufficiently wealthy to buy, and the leisure to read, the printed classics. Venice was less subject to papal pressures than other Italian cities. Important too in [printer] Aldus' thinking must have been Venetian possession of the precious collection of Greek manuscripts bequeathed by Bessarion — manuscripts which could serve as paradigms for his books. And hardly less significant for him must have been the presence in Venice of a large, thriving Greek community. (…) By the time of Aldus' death in 1515, his press had given to the world practically all the major Greek authors of classical antiquity."
Historian Bernard Lewis writes in his book What Went Wrong?: "In the vast bibliography of works translated in the Middle Ages from Greek into Arabic, we find no poets, no dramatists, not even historians. These were not useful and they were of no interest; they did not figure in the translation programs. This was clearly a cultural rejection: you take what is useful from the infidel; but you don't need to look at his absurd ideas or to try and understand his inferior literature, or to study his meaningless history."
Muslims who wanted translations of Greek or other non-Islamic works were primarily concerned with topics of medicine, astronomy, mathematics, and philosophy. As Lewis says, they usually ignored playwrights and dramatists such as Sophocles and Euripides, historians such as Thucydides and Herodotus and poets such as Homer. This entire corpus of literature could only be saved from the Greek originals preserved in Constantinople. Moreover, in addition to being selective about Greek works, Muslims showed little interest in Latin writers, for instance Cicero. There was thus a large body of Greco-Roman learning and valuable literature that was never available in Arabic in the first place.
It is true that a number of Greek works were translated to Arabic, especially in the ninth century when a group called Mu'tazilites attempted, without lasting success, to reconcile Islamic with logic. As Ibn Warraq writes about them:
"However, it is clear now that the Mu'tazilites were first and foremost Muslims, living in the circle of Islamic ideas, and were motivated by religious concerns. There was no sign of absolute liberated thinking, or a desire, as [Hungarian orientalist] Goldziher put it, 'to throw off chafing shackles, to the detriment of the rigorously orthodox view of life.' Furthermore, far from being 'liberal,' they turned out to be exceedingly intolerant, and were involved in the Mihna, the Muslim Inquisition under the Abbasids. However, the Mu'tazilites are important for having introduced Greek philosophical ideas into the discussion of Islamic dogmas."
According to writer Patrick Poole, "Western Christianity's rational tradition developed in the Medieval era precisely as a result of the outright rejection of the irrationalism inherent in Islamic philosophy, not the embracing of it." As he states, "a rationalist philosophy had begun to develop under the Mu'tazilite school of interpretation, which advocated for a created, as opposed to an uncreated, Quran. But Caliph al-Mutawakkil [reign 847-861] condemned the Mu'tazilite school, which opened the door for the rival Ash'arite interpretation, founded by al-Ash'ari (d. 935), to eventually take preeminence within Sunni Islam." Rationalism also faced an uphill battle because of the view of Allah as an
unpredictable and whimsical deity, since "only Allah truly acts with real effect; all seemingly natural observances of causation are merely manifestations of Allah's habits, for Allah simultaneously creates both the cause and the effect according to his arbitrary will. This view is best expressed by one of the Islamic philosophers cited by [Tariq] Ramadan, al-Ghazali (1059-1111), in his book, The Incoherence of the Philosophers."
The Koran is, structurally speaking, deeply inconsistent and almost incomprehensible to an average reader. One verse says one thing, the next verse contradicts this. The notion that Allah as incomprehensible and provides no correlation between cause and effect had a serious impact on the development of empirical sciences in the Islamic world. In contrast, for Jews and Christians, God has created the universe according to a certain logic, which can be described and predicted. Kepler firmly believed the solar system was created according to God's plan, which he attempted to unlock. Sir Isaac Newton was passionately interested in religion and wrote extensively about it. Even Albert Einstein, who was certainly not an orthodox, religious Jew, still retained some residue of the idea that the universe was created according to a logic which is, to a certain extent, comprehensible and accessible to human reason: "I believe in Spinoza's God, Who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."The Caliph al-Ma'mun (reign 813 - 833), who was influenced by the Mu'tazilite movement, created the House of Wisdom, a library and translation office. The Baghdad-centered Abbasid dynasty, which replaced the Damascus-centered Umayyad dynasty in 750, was closer to Persian culture and was probably inspired by the Sassanid practice of translating works and creating great libraries. Alkindus (Al-Kindi) was appointed to participate in the undertaking. Philosophical and scientific texts were translated into Arabic from Persian and Indian (Sanskrit) sources, but above all from Greek ones. Great efforts were made to collect and buy important Greek works and manuscripts from the Byzantines and have them translated.
In the book How Greek Science Passed to the Arabs, De Lacy O'Leary states that "Aristotelian study proper began with Abu Yusuf Ya'qub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi (d. after 873), commonly known as 'the Philosopher of the Arabs.' It is significant that almost all the great scientists and philosophers of the Arabs were classed as Aristotelians tracing their intellectual descent from al-Kindi and al-Farabi."
At the heart of these efforts was a Nestorian (Assyrian) Christian named Johannitius (Hunayn ibn Ishaq). He had studied Greek by living in Greek lands, presumably in the Byzantine Empire, and was put in charge of translations at the House of Wisdom. Soon, he, his son and his nephew had made available in Arabic and Syriac Galen's medical treatises as well as Hippocrates and texts by Aristotle, Plato and others. In some cases, he apparently translated a work into Syriac and his son Ishaq translated this further into Arabic. All senior medical doctors in the Islamic world, including Avicenna and Rhazes, were later influenced by these translations of Greek medicine.In 431 Nestorius, a Christian Patriarch, was expelled from Constantinople for heresy. The so-called Assyrian Church of the East thus split from the Byzantine Church. Their followers found a new home in the Syriac-speaking world and were welcomed in the Sassanid Persian Empire, the rival of Byzantium. They brought with them a collection of Greek texts, among them medical works of Galen and Hippocrates. It was these texts, aided by other manuscripts acquired and bought from Constantinople later, which provided the basis for translations of Greek texts into Arabic. The followers of this Eastern church, usually called Nestorians in the West, had communities spread out across much of Iraq, Iran and Central Asia, and were respected for their medical skills.
According to scholar Thomas T. Allsen, "Nestorians in the East were closely associated with the medical profession. A considerable body of Syriac medical literature, some in the original and some in translation, has been recovered in central Asia. This is hardly surprising, because Eastern Christians were an important fixture in West Asian medicine." Western medicine in Yuan (Mongol ruled) China, often characterized as "Muslim," was almost always in the hands of Nestorians, a situation that Western travelers found worthy of note.
Syriac is a dialect of Aramaic, the language spoken by Jesus. It was once the lingua franca of the Middle East and was widely used among Christians and also Arabs and to some extent Persians. It had a major impact on the development of Arabic, which later replaced it following the Islamic conquests. The Nabataeans, a Semitic people associated with the famous rock city of Petra close to the Dead Sea in present-day Jordan, were greatly influenced by Aramaic, and the Arabic alphabet developed out of their alphabet. The most unorthodox scholars even suggest that the Islamic religion itself may have developed closer to this region, at the northern fringes of Arabia, than around Mecca in central Arabia.
Some researchers believe that Syriac, or Syro-Aramaic, was also the root of the Koran. When it was composed, Arabic was not fully developed as a written language. Syriac, however, was widely used in the region at the time. Ibn Warraq estimates that up to 20% of the Koran is incomprehensible even to educated Arabs because segments of it were originally written in another, related language before Muhammad was born. A German professor of ancient Semitic and Arabic languages writes about the subject under the pseudonym Christoph Luxenberg. If you believe Luxenberg, the chapters or suras of the Koran usually ascribed to the Mecca period, which are also the most tolerant and non-violent ones as opposed to the much harsher and more violent chapters from Medina, are not "Islamic" at all, but Christian:
"In its origin, the Koran is a Syro-Aramaic liturgical book, with hymns and extracts from Scriptures which might have been used in sacred Christian services. (…) Its socio-political sections, which are not especially related to the original Koran, were added later in Medina. At its beginning, the Koran was not conceived as the foundation of a new religion. It presupposes belief in the Scriptures, and thus functioned merely as an inroad into Arabic society."
Monte Cassino is a monastery in southern Italy, founded by Saint Benedict in the sixth century, which was sacked and burned and its monks killed in 883 by Arabs in one of their countless Jihad raids in Western Europe. It was later rebuilt, and from here the monk Constantine the African in the eleventh century translated medical texts from Arabic into Latin, including those of Hippocrates and Galen done by Johannitius in Baghdad. Constantine also translated medical treatises written in Arabic by the Egyptian Jew Isaac Israeli ben Solomon. He was influenced by Hippocrates, Galen, Aristotle and Plato.It is easy to track how Arabic translations of Greek texts from Byzantine manuscripts, often done by Christians, made their way from the Islamic East and ended up in the Iberian Peninsula in the Islamic West, where some of them were translated by Christians, for instance in the multilingual city of Toledo in central Spain, back to Latin. It is thus true that some Greek texts were reintroduced in the West via Arabic, sometimes passing via Syriac or Hebrew along the way, but this was always based, in the end, on manuscripts from the Byzantine Empire.
The work led by Johannitius in Baghdad preserved via the Arabic translation some of Galen's works lost in the Greek original. The Greek physician Galen worked in the second century A.D., systematized medical knowledge in the Greco-Roman world and supplied this with his own research. He lamented the fact that he couldn't perform dissection of human corpses, but this wasn't allowed during Roman times so he based his studies of human anatomy on dissections of animals such as dogs, apes and pigs. This is funny if you are familiar with the low status dogs, apes and pigs have in Islam, and know that all subsequent medicine in the Muslim world was inspired by Galen. Since dissection of human corpses was taboo in the Islamic world, too, Galen's errors remained unchallenged for centuries, until the Renaissance in Christian Europe. Leonardo da Vinci made numerous accurate anatomical drawings but didn't share this knowledge much at his time. The final breakthrough came with the anatomist Andreas Vesalius from Brussels, who published his book On the Workings of the Human Body in 1543 based on observation through autopsy. He is considered the father of modern anatomy in the Western world.
Posted by Robert at September 27, 2007 6:15 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
...school children are not taught such important history....instead, they are instructed in the theories of diversity and multiculturalism....both of which are driven to extremes causing turmoil and pandemonium today...
.....if Islam has its way, the students will learn all about death and misery as described in great detail in the Qur'an and will be forced to live it...
Ban Muslim Immigration...
Posted by: exsgtbrown
at September 27, 2007 7:05 AM
Fjordman poses the question why science or the scientific method, did not take root in China or other civilisations other then in the West. The same question can be put to Greek civilisation. Why did this not occur in Greece and those regions where Greek culture prevailed. After all the Greeks, at their zenith, had all of Greek mathematics and thought available to them. Yet despite their original mathematical theorems, they took no ventures into science, i.e., the investigation of nature in a systematic and organised manner.
The reality is that science only takes off in Christendom, and only after Christianity had become the dominant religion in Europe. All of the great scientists, i.e., those who changed the very way in we look at our world or the universe, were Christians. This cannot be merely a coincidence. Even the few Jewish scientists of that stature, Einstein for instance, were operating in Christendom, educated and filled with the prevailing Christian ethos of Europe.
Posted by: DP111
at September 27, 2007 7:45 AM
DP, there are many Jewish scientists also and I would attribute this Judeo-Christian scientific domination to their religious Scriptures. Bible is consistent and systematic. Take for example, Genesis account - sounds almost like a scientific paper. On the other side, Qur'an is completely without form, time-line and context.
Posted by: LazarOfSerbia
at September 27, 2007 9:42 AM
Excellent essays (parts 1&2).
Any comment on China's inefficient language limiting the link between discovery and applications?
Also, I'd appreciate any help in understanding the Sicilian psyche after a few hundred years of Muslim invasion and occupation. Did that lead to the violent Sicilian mobs?
Thanks again.
Posted by: LoneRanger
at September 27, 2007 11:27 AM
Excellent Essay.Doubt that majority of Muslims in
Third World Countries-most of 'em are except those
with Oil or hardworking Dhimmis-have read Korans
except by rote in Arabic[language they don't understand]. No wonder ISLAM is SUBMISSION,any sensible,rational person asking questions is immediately COWED by THREATS or being married off
at an early age if one is unlucky enough to be Female-soon learns to submit to Allah, no matter
how ridiculous the Demands such as clearing your
nose from the Devil [or Djinns-what about bogies??]. Or not being able to shit in the direction of Mecca-how would any of Stone Age Muslims in Somalia know or have a compass??
In other words Islam is a mish mash of ridiculous
rituals which appeal to Perverts, the weak minded who like dressing up & occasional middleclass white woman who cherishes a romantic dream of being 'carried off' by a handsome Desert Sheik for
Dessert in his Tent...Hollywood has a lot to answer for!
at September 27, 2007 11:58 AM
Regarding Christianity and the scientific revolution, H.G. Wells in his History of the World pointed out that Christians, unlike the Greeks, condemned slavery.
A scientifically talented Greek among the numerous individuals who had the misfortune of being a slave thus did not have the leisure required to do scientific work.
Presupposing that intelligence had a fairly uniform distribution across the classes, the liberation of the individual increased the pool of talented minds with the possibility of evolving.
at September 27, 2007 12:23 PM
Excellent work by Fjordman, this information should be tought in school instead of the usual multiculturalist apologist drivel. I was taught a lot of this stuff in school so many years ago. When I see how ignorant people in the West are of their culture's great acomplishments it almost makes me want to cry.
No wonder so many pinheads in the West believe all this multicultural rot.
Posted by: Proud Infidel
at September 27, 2007 12:39 PM
a group called Mu'tazilites attempted, without success, to reconcile Islamic with logic
Summs it all up right there.
Posted by: JadeDragoness
at September 27, 2007 2:07 PM
I have a theory, only partly formulated and only partly articulated. I'll give it a shot. It is that climate influences the need for humans to be innovative. Ancient people who lived in warm, mild, even climates had no need to worry about freezing to death and preserving food. They did not invent ways to heat their homes or buildings, and there was therefore no impetus to find ways to do this more efficiently than the last generation.
In cold climates, there was a need to erect buildings that could maximize the heat distribution and efficiency. Romans invented central heating plants, and methods to heat water on large scales. We can thank Muslims for destroying this knowledge. Even in the early twentieth century, explorers found stone-age people in temperate climates of Borneo, Philippines, and South America. In these warm climates, these people did not have the ability to tan leather because there was no need to preserve animal skins to keep warm. In these climates, life was good, and there was no need to progress beyond what they had. The Iron Age passed them by, and they took no notice.
People in climates where winters were harsh and game animals became scarce and food could not be grown, were forced to find ways to survive during the long winters. Finding ways to preserve food became an imortant quest, and that led to other discoveries. The ability to solve problems is cumulative, the knowledge gained in problem solving methodology can be applied to other tasks.
Similarly, Muslims also had no need to learn anything; every thing was appropriated from the conquered. They used it and the conquered people were used to keep the machinery running. Their problem solving methodology was to conqure and steal the answer.
Posted by: Pelayo
at September 27, 2007 2:38 PM
LazarOfSerbia
I have the same question for Jewish culture and science. How is that science and the scientific method did not emerge among the Jews as a people. Jewish contributions to science only took place in a culture that was predominantly Christian in ethos.
The reality is that Greeks failed to develop the scientific method even though they had all the advantages.
It is hard to believe that the only culture that invented science and then developed its method, Christianity, had no role to play in it, and it was just coincidence that it so happened.
Posted by: DP111
at September 27, 2007 2:47 PM
According to writer Patrick Poole, "Western Christianity's rational tradition developed in the Medieval era precisely as a result of the outright rejection of the irrationalism inherent in Islamic philosophy, not the embracing of it." As he states, "a rationalist philosophy had begun to develop under the Mu'tazilite school of interpretation, which advocated for a created, as opposed to an uncreated, Quran. But Caliph al-Mutawakkil [reign 847-861] condemned the Mu'tazilite school, which opened the door for the rival Ash'arite interpretation, founded by al-Ash'ari (d. 935), to eventually take preeminence within Sunni Islam." Rationalism also faced an uphill battle because of the view of Allah as an unpredictable and whimsical deity, since "only Allah truly acts with real effect; all seemingly natural observances of causation are merely manifestations of Allah's habits, for Allah simultaneously creates both the cause and the effect according to his arbitrary will. --per Fjordman
It appears the 9th century was the apex of Islamic philosophy when it almost went rational, but then rejected it in favor of a whimsical deity, of the ‘uncreated’ Quran. On this point Islam parted company with the rest of humanity’s development. Why am I not so surprised to see this?
After the Battle of Tours (Charles Martel, 8th century), Islam began a retreat from European Christian civlization, and then a long decline, all the way down until today’s jihadic suicide bombings, bombing music stores, stoning or hanging homosexuals, repression of dress, cartoon riots, down down, to killing children (suicide vests, clearing minefields) for Allah. How low can it go? Give Iran the bomb and you will see…
A philosophy of life devoid of rationality is superstition, and in Islam’s case it is a crude enslaving superstition that drags down humanity to the lowest levels possible. Cruel is Allah’s cult, with little redemption for the soul, but kills it instead. Did Arab scholarship save Europe from the dark Middle Ages? When reason died more than a millennium ago, hardly... not unless "Allah wills it"... intellectual death and slavery.
Thanks Fjordman for this excellent piece, really impressive and enlightening.
Posted by: Battle_of_Tours
at September 27, 2007 3:33 PM
This page is a philosophical feast, creating the space to discuss one of my favorite questions: what in the history of ideas caused people to act as they did?
I would like to comment on some varied points.
First of all, regarding the efficiency of Chinese - Chinese is actually one of the simplest languages in the world. It employs virtually no inflection, either declension or conjugation. The verb "to be" is not used in sentences that use a predicate adjective. The atomic structure of the characters makes it easy to assemble new concepts out of old. While people are dismayed by the number of characters (over 50,000 total), their 214 elements (radicals) are pictographic or ideographic and easily learned; 3,000 characters are considered sufficient to read a newspaper; and the most frequently occuring 200 characters (roughly) account for about half of the total characters in an average text. I know between 100 and 200 characters, and am striving to learn more. These characters are used today in Japan, and used to be used in Korea and Vietnam; in all of these countries, the meaning of a character is the same. Finally, I observe that the number of Asian scientists is rapidly catching up with America - not just in total numbers, but even in per capita terms.
As to the Jewish absence from the Scientific Revolution, I'd just have to wonder how many Jews were admitted to study at Oxford, Cambridge and the Sorbonne? How many were able to travel freely out of the ghetto and practice their chosen livelihood? Looking, on the other hand, at lists of Nobel Prize winners, we can see what a difference freedom makes.
Nor can we establish an equivalence between Christian civilization and the rise of science. How much scientific discovery took place during the first millennium-and-a-half of Christendom? The Renaissance took place in a Europe which was searching for new natural resources, having deforested much of the landscape for firewood. The revolution of learning made possible by Gutenberg accelerated in a continent where religious freedom was on the rise because of the Reformation, ending the intellectual monopoly of one Church. Newton's Principia Mathematica, and the trinity of philosophers who laid the foundation for the American Revolution - Locke, Smith, and Burke - arose in a nation that had declared religious independence from the Continent.
No one can dispute the observation about the enormous intellectual explosion in Europe in the second half of the last millennium being intimately connected with the fact that Europe was (I almost said is) the major Christian civilization. Comparable developments did not take place anywhere else in the world. But neither did they take place universally within Christendom.
The decisive question is this: why is it that the conditions that made this intellectual explosion possible were conditions that could have been most easily achieved in Europe/Christendom?
Posted by: Surak
at September 27, 2007 4:45 PM
Like Churchill said:
"…and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."
--Sir Winston Churchill, from The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).
So, the task we face is to convince as many infidels as possible to understand and take seriously the threat of Islam and Sharia to our freedom. Take it seriously while we have this scientific, technological, and economic lead. Take it seriously before the world of Islam can obtain more finished "physics packages" or duplicate too many of our other key technologies (since it's always easier to steal someone else's work than do original work). And, if the umma will not to take reform to heart in a convincing and demonstrable way, put a decisive end to the threat while we can.
at September 27, 2007 5:45 PM
Fjordman,
Since you have an interest in these issues, you should read Joseph Needham's "The Great Titration." This is a classic of the genre from the late 60ies. Still a great read and very illuminating. It is specifically about the question of why the ancient Chinese civilization did not develop science the way the West did. The short answer: because the West developed the idea of the laws of nature that goes all the way back to antiquity but received a fresh impetus starting from the late Medieval period. He explains in detail how it went together with giving a very interesting account of China's cultural history. Needham cites an amusing example. In the 15th century Basel, a rooster was burned at the stake for the heinous and unnatural act of laying an egg.
Posted by: Mimi
at September 27, 2007 5:48 PM
Any study of this period should not ignore the contribution of John Philoponus (ca. 490 - ca 566) of Alexandria, described by one writer as "not only the greatest theoretical physicist in antiquity, but the greatest before Isaac Newton." (Harold Turner "The Roots of Science" 1998).
He was a Greek Christian in Alexandria, a city that later "was captured by the Persians in 616, and then by the Arabs in 646. Through them its literary treasures were transported east, away from Europe to the Arab centres of learning, the ancient Damascus and later the new Baghdad; here they were translated from the Greek, first into Syriac and then into Arabic, and so lost to the Latin scholars of the West for some seven centuries. [...]
"[Philoponus] exhibited the method of scientific experiment and observation that would have corrected much Greek science had he not been lost for nearly a thousand years.
"First of all, he was one of the greatest exponents of Aristotle in antiquity, with commentaries on almost all of his works, and he adopted much of Aristotle's system for the orderly classification of nature. Although there were other and pagan critics of Aristotle, Philoponus was the first to mount such a devastating critique of the deductive method and much of the content of Aristotle's physics and cosmology - there was no rival to its thoroughness until Galileo...Much of his work amounted to the sort of basic 'paradigm change' that T S Kuhn finds at critical points in the history of science."
He has been portrayed as representing "the value of philosophical and scientific thought freely pursuing truth without explicit theological controls, whether Christian or Greek, although the basic implicit assumptions of a Christian worldview are still fruitfully at work."
More can be found via google though ignore the trivial wikipedia entry. These few comments and quotes here do not undermine Fjordman's main points, but rather buttress and extend them, and should make us increasingly cynical of the Islamic claim to have saved so much ancient knowledge for later mankind.
at September 27, 2007 8:20 PM
Any study of this period should not ignore the contribution of John Philoponus (ca. 490 - ca 566) of Alexandria, described by one writer as "not only the greatest theoretical physicist in antiquity, but the greatest before Isaac Newton." (Harold Turner "The Roots of Science" 1998).
He was a Greek Christian in Alexandria, a city that later "was captured by the Persians in 616, and then by the Arabs in 646. Through them its literary treasures were transported east, away from Europe to the Arab centres of learning, the ancient Damascus and later the new Baghdad; here they were translated from the Greek, first into Syriac and then into Arabic, and so lost to the Latin scholars of the West for some seven centuries. [...]
"[Philoponus] exhibited the method of scientific experiment and observation that would have corrected much Greek science had he not been lost for nearly a thousand years.
"First of all, he was one of the greatest exponents of Aristotle in antiquity, with commentaries on almost all of his works, and he adopted much of Aristotle's system for the orderly classification of nature. Although there were other and pagan critics of Aristotle, Philoponus was the first to mount such a devastating critique of the deductive method and much of the content of Aristotle's physics and cosmology - there was no rival to its thoroughness until Galileo...Much of his work amounted to the sort of basic 'paradigm change' that T S Kuhn finds at critical points in the history of science."
He has been portrayed as representing "the value of philosophical and scientific thought freely pursuing truth without explicit theological controls, whether Christian or Greek, although the basic implicit assumptions of a Christian worldview are still fruitfully at work."
More can be found via google though ignore the trivial wikipedia entry. These few comments and quotes here do not undermine Fjordman's main points, but rather buttress and extend them, and should make us increasingly cynical of the Islamic claim to have saved so much ancient knowledge for later mankind.
at September 27, 2007 8:25 PM
A great book I'm reading for a university class is 'Soul Made Flesh: The Discovery of the Brain--and How it Changed the World' by Carl Zimmer. It is a chronological journey in the Western quest for scientific knowledge; medical knowledge in particular. It is fascinating.
Posted by: lafn
at September 28, 2007 12:57 AM
A very impressive and admirable effort to cover an immense panorama. I'd like to share some information with your readers on the question about why The West alone and not China, or India, developed the knowledge based and labor-leveraging industry that characterizes Modernity.
Chinese inventors and entrepreneurs anticipated Europe, not only in the printing press, paper money, gunpowder, and the compass, but also invented water-powered weaving machines in the Sung Dynasty.
An aspect of Chinese innovation that remains largely unappreciated is that the world owes them a debt of gratitude(?) for their genius towards developing essential aspects of Big Government: systemic record keeping, standardized forms and applications, taxes, fees, licenses, double-entry bookkeeping, government budgets, sinking funds, collateralized debt obligations, and a bureaucrat regulated economy.
One of the earlier commentators mentions Joseph Needham, the prodigious scholar of Chinese science, technology, and history. In one of the volumes of his monumental work, Science and Civilization in China, he discusses the history of weaving machines in China which never caught on. Over time, the efforts at innovation for later models were focused on design innovations for reducing the cost of investment by reducing the need for parts and the substitution of cheaper materials in construction. (The contemporary equivalent: reducing the carbon footprint.) The machines disappeared after several decades, unable to compete with human weavers.
The critical difference between The Orient and The West at that time appears to be that in the Orient, human labor was, and is, excruciatingly cheap. Labor saving devices, as Needham observed, do not make sense in a world of teeming millions and raw material scarcity. I would conjecture the critical difference that impelled the West towards its technological economy was that gift from the Mongols at Caffa, the Plague that depopulated Europe at the beginning of the Renaissance. The survivors inherited a relative abundance of things from their deceased relations and the economy experienced a scarcity of human labor. Investment in labor-saving machinery makes sense in such a situation. Another crucial gift of the Chinese to Europe about that time, was double-entry book-keeping and the basic systems of financial record keeping. First adopted by the Norman Kingdom of Sicily, these innovations have been long recognized as laying the foundations for a more financially efficient government. What is less recognized is that they also improved and extended the security of property rights, especially in the world of finance, and made modern banking possible.
Sung China, as Needham notes, had a well developed and large scale iron industry, producing an estimated 50,000 tons of finished iron yearly. A possible answer to why this most creative and inventive of Chinese Dynasties, seemingly posed at the edge of Modernity, did not enter it appears to be relevant to our situation. The Sung Dynasty adopted fiat money and the Government borrowed way beyond its means to repay its debts. It also taxed and regulated too much, which may have been the proximal causes of the stillborn Chinese Modernity.
Posted by: daryl
at September 28, 2007 2:43 AM
DP111:
I have the same question for Jewish culture and science. How is that science and the scientific method did not emerge among the Jews as a people. Jewish contributions to science only took place in a culture that was predominantly Christian in ethos.
How could it? It would've been extremely difficult for a diasporic people to instigate or even contribute to the events leading to the scientific revolution 500 years before the beginning of their emancipation. Charles Murray, a researcher cited by Fjordman in his "Could the Ancient Greeks Have Created the Scientific Revolution?" essay explained in an article entitled "Jewish Genius":
"The sparse representation of Jews during the flowering of the European arts and sciences is not hard to explain. They were systematically excluded, both by legal restrictions on the occupations they could enter and by savage social discrimination. Then came legal emancipation, beginning in the late 1700’s in a few countries and completed in Western Europe by the 1870’s, and with it one of the most extraordinary stories of any ethnic group at any point in human history.
As soon as Jewish children born under legal emancipation had time to grow to adulthood, they started appearing in the first ranks of the arts and sciences. During the four decades from 1830 to 1870, when the first Jews to live under emancipation reached their forties, 16 significant Jewish figures appear. In the next four decades, from 1870 to 1910, the number jumps to 40. During the next four decades, 1910–1950, despite the contemporaneous devastation of European Jewry, the number of significant figures almost triples, to 114."
This isn't to say that Jews would have began the scientific revolution, but had they been given their freedom sooner, I don't see why individual Jews couldn't have.
The entire Murray article is here: http://www.commentarymagazine.com/cm/main/viewArticle.html?id=10855
Posted by: Ashtarak
at September 28, 2007 6:39 AM
Let's not forget those early founders of Western science, like Xenophanes, who theorized about the origins of fossil fish and plant impressions found in deep rock quarries, and Leucippus and Democritus, the fathers of the atomic theory.
If not for local religious superstitions, a cultural contempt for "working with their hands", and constant warfare among themselves (Sparta v. Athens), the Greeks could have been developing the experimental method by 300 B.C. and learning the nature, at least, of the lens -which was available, right in front of humanity's blind eyes, for 4,000 years before Roger Bacon (in "Perpsectiva") and his contemporaries... studied through, instead of merely looking though it.
Which would have resulted in eyeglasses, microscopes and telescopes, and opened the worlds.
Posted by: profitsbeard
at September 28, 2007 12:22 PM
Re the Mongols their conquests were very similar to the various Islamic conquests. However, no historian would presume to write about the “brilliant Mongol civilization”. It was under the Mongols, however, that a Jewish convert to Islam, Rashid al-Din compiled a universal history at the behest of the khans Ghazan and Oljetu. According to Lewis, “He assembled a team of collaborators, including two Chinese scholars, a Buddhist hermit … a Mongol specialist in tribal tradition, and a Frankish monk, as well as some Persian scholars, and with their aid, he wrote a vast history of the world from England to China.” In addition to the importance of non-Muslims and recent converts, this shows how, once peace was established, the Mongol empire also promoted intellectual advance through cross fertilization of ideas from its many conquered territories. Lewis notes that “the Mongols united, for the first time under one dynasty, the civilizations of the Middle East and of the Far East, with immediate and beneficial effects both for trade and culture.” No one, however, attributes these achievements to Mongols or to Mongol culture or ideology.
Furthermore, the vaunted Muslim “tolerance” pales in comparison with that of the bloody-minded Mongol rulers. Historian of Judaism Norman Stillman notes that “Jewish and Christian officials served in the Mongol administration. The apogee … came during the reign of Arghun Khan (1284-91). … Only a few years before … the Jewish oculist and philosopher Sa’d b. Kammuna had written a comparative study of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam … The publication of such a book in Arabic would have been unthinkable when Islam was the ruling faith.”
Mongol tolerance could survive their savage conquests. But one thing it could not survive was their conversion to Islam. The Jews and Christians of Iraq and Iran returned to their traditional dhimmi status when the Ilkhanid dynasty became Muslim in 1295.
at September 28, 2007 6:09 PM
Funny that you should mention Genghis Khan. Last year, John Kerry wanted to erect a statue to Genghis Khan's 800th anniversary in Washington, DC. I take it that John Kerry apologized to Genghis Khan for comparing him with fellow soldiers in Vietnam, back in the seventies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100501534.html
A statue of the warmonger in Washington might be "controversial," Fitzhugh said. But Genghis Khan is credited with a host of reforms and progressive actions, he said. Among other things, he was an early champion of religious tolerance and women's rights, allowing women to spea
k in public and express opinions. He also was an early supporter of diplomacy, offering protection to envoys from other lands.
The Mongolian Embassy and the Mongolian Community in Washington D.C. Area association are leading the effort to erect a Genghis Khan statue. "All the talks are at the initial stage," said Consul General Gonchig Ganbold, emphasizing that neither a potential location nor source of funding has been identified. "The land issue is also very delicate and is not finalized yet."
Michael Johnson of the D.C. Office on Planning said that the groups, like any others wishing to erect a statue on city land, must apply to the agency's Commemorative Works Committee with detailed plans and designs. He said "greater weight" usually is given to honorees with a local connection but declined to comment on Genghis Khan. Approval must come from the U.S. Park Service to place a statue on federal land.
at September 29, 2007 8:55 AM
DP and Lazar,
as a matter of fact many ancient Greek writers gave credit to ancient Oriental [Middle Eastern] peoples for being philosophical and/or bringing to the Greeks advances in civilization. Herodotos credited Phoenicians with bringing the alphabet to the Greeks, for example. Aristotle gave credit to the Egyptians for developing mathematics before the Greeks. Several Greek writers, in particular, credited the ancient Jews with being a philosophical people and/or with influencing philosophers like Pythagoras. See Theophrastos [Aristotle's leading pupil], Megasthenes, Clearchos of Soli and Hermippos. I believe that there is evidence for Jewish influence on Thales --called the "first philosopher"-- and Pythagoras. There are also certain Greek parallels between Biblical stories and Greek stories. For example, Jephtha's daughter and Iphigenia; Jonah and Jason, etc. I don't exclude possible influence by the ancient Greeks on the Jews. Martin Bernal did much to open up this area of study, but Bernal also lied in such as way as to deprecate the possibility of any Jewish influence.
To summarize the main point, the ancient Levant, then called the Orient, was a center of civilization(s). The Arab conquests wrecked the Ancient East and its civilizations. The Levant has never recovered from the Arab/Muslim invasions. The Oriental Antiquities Dept at the Louvre seems to agree with Pirenne that the Arab invasions marked the end of ancient times. See link:
http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2007/05/arab-conquests-finished-off-ancient.html
This is one of the things that make edward said's writings so outrageous. Rather than elevate the Arabs/Muslims by identifying them with the East, the Orient, he should have understood and asserted that they were the wreckers of the ancient Orient. Hence, it was unjust for him to identify them with it.
Posted by: Eliyahu
at September 30, 2007 2:12 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.


(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)