The History and Achievements of the Islamic Golden Age

by Eamonn Gearon

11 hours 58 mins

The study of Western Civilization traditionally follows a well-known but incomplete arc: the grand achievements of Greece and Rome, several hundred years of the Dark Ages, and then the bright emergence of the European Renaissance. But amid the "dark" Middle Ages, the Abbasid Empire, which ruled the Middle East as well as much of Northern Africa and Central Asia from 750 to 1258, serves as a vitally important but often overlooked bridge between the ancient and modern worlds.

The History and Achievements of the Islamic Golden Age is your opportunity to get to know the story and the accomplishments of this great period in human civilization. Taught by acclaimed lecturer Eamonn Gearon, these 24 remarkable lectures offer brilliant insights into an era too often overlooked by traditional history textbooks. You'll meet a wealth of scholars, scientists, poets, and philosophers who paved the way for the Renaissance and continue to affect our world in surprising ways.

For instance, gain insights into:

- The origins of the scientific method, along with the development of algebra, chemistry, physics, and astronomy as discrete fields of inquiry
- The invention of the modern "teaching hospital" and a medical encyclopedia that served Europe for the next 600 years
- The preservation and translation of the world's great literature, from the Hadith (or sayings of Muhammad) to the master works of Greece and Rome
- Ontological philosophy that served future Jewish, Christian, and Muslim theologians concerned with the nature of God and the relationship between faith and reason

It is nearly impossible to overstate the power and importance of this crucial 500-year history, headquartered in Baghdad but stretching around the world. While much of Europe was quietly passing the time, the Abbasid Empire was an international, multicultural hub of trade, travel, education, art, science, and much more.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Audiobook, Middle East, Religion, Islam, Science

12 pages, Audible Audio

First published February 3, 2017

Reviews

[Doris · Rating 4 out of 5]

I very much enjoyed this course. However, the lectures are presented as discrete units and so jump around in time and geography, from 12th century to 10th or Baghdad to Cordoba. As a result, I don't get a sense of the overall history of the era. A timeline would have helped!

[Thomas Walker-Werth · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic overview of this often-overlooked period of history. My only negative would be Gearon's frequent misuse of the word "rationalism" when he means "rational philosophy."

[Shawn · Rating 5 out of 5]

These lectures are a captivating tour of the Islamic world from the 8th to the 13th centuries. Eamonn Gearon is a great storyteller and each lecture in this series could stand on its own as fascinating and engaging. His deep knowledge of the history and ideas of the Islamic world is evident throughout all the lectures.

The breadth of Gearon’s discussion shows that the Islamic Golden Age produced achievements in nearly all branches of science, philosophy, mathematics, and technology. The achievements during the Islamic Golden Age across all areas of human thought and life is unparalleled until the European Enlightenment – which owes no small influence to the Islamic Golden Age. There is much in our modern world that has its roots in the Islamic Golden Age. Gearon makes a point to underline that these intellectual and practical achievements are not necessarily religious or particularly tied to or driven by Islam. The achievements came from all kinds of people, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Arab, European, African, Persian, and so on. What makes it the Islamic Golden Age is that this a period ruled by Muslims, by states that had Islam has the state religion.

One of the most interesting questions that runs throughout the lectures is why was there so much progress during this period and then why did it come to an end? The thread one gets from these lectures is that with regional stability from the Abbasid Empire came the relatively free movement of goods, peoples, and ideas. This along with the relative toleration and interaction of ideas and people set the ground for the flourishing of human thought and achievement. As the Abbasid Empire weakened, the stability, tolerance, and trade weakened as well. And as a consequence, as Gearon says, the Golden Age become silver and then the bronze.

So why did the Abbasids weaken? Gearon explores this a bit but not in great detail. Essentially a combination of foreign invasions (Christians and Mongols), internal divisions (the Fatmids, the Almohads), and the natural complacency of the ruling class contributed to the Abbasids fall and with it the Islamic Golden Age.

There are remarkable parallels to the Roman and English empires. In all these, there was a general correspondence of (relatively) liberal trade and immigration policies, (relative) tolerance of ideas, and the health of the culture and achievement of people under the empires. This is not to say that there were not awful problems, people excluded and dominated, and so on, but compared to other periods and other regions, there was remarkable growth and achievement. And when these more liberal and tolerant policies ebbed, so do the achievement and progress, and then the empires themselves. Important lessons for our times.

[Lee · Rating 2 out of 5]

There was some interesting information in this series of lectures, but, overall, it was marred by several factors.

First, the foundation of this course is flawed because Gearon has trouble explaining what his goal for the course is. The title is History and Achievements of the Islamic Golden Age, but there was remarkably little history in this course. The course is apparently structured around different thinkers from the Islamic Golden Age. That is not really a problem, but to explain these thinkers, Gearon has to explain their historical context, but often times he explains as little as he can, which left me feeling lost. A better series of lectures would have spent more time systematically going through the history of the Islamic Golden Age rather than just tacking that history on when he had to explain these figures.

Gearon has trouble with storytelling. There were numerous times when I felt like Gearon was just going off on an unrelated tangent that did not contribute to the course. He begins the course by defining what a Golden Age is...like, he spends five minutes explaining this elementary concept of how a golden age is a period when things are great. I was flummoxed...did anyone who got this course need that? At one point, he spent another five minutes talking about what a utopia is, explaining the European history of the concept (which is completely unconnected to the Arab concepts he was discussing).

Finally, Gearon was defensively repeative. He repeatedly stated that not everything with Islam was bad...a point that probably is not necessary if people are already there to learn about the Islamic Golden Age. It felt very defensive, with him mentioning this every other lecture. He also repeated other points, stressing that just because he is calling it an Islamic Golden Age does not mean that all who contributed to it were Muslims.

[Illiterate · Rating 2 out of 5]

Focuses on individuals. More historiographical arguments are often asserted rather than made. Unduly repetitive.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Appreciated this overview of some of the most remarkable Islamic thinkers and artists of this period of history. I'm really appreciating a broader perspective of my western-world identity and how it includes and is influenced by Islam.

[Riq Hoelle · Rating 4 out of 5]

The chapter on Al-Jahiz, makes the claim that the formation of the Islamic empire needed writing in order to keep records and write down what the laws were, and that this in turn led a great literary flowering. While not denying the writing needs of empire, I question this. After all, the Parthian empire, in much the same region, had the same kinds of needs, but this did not lead to a literary flowering. I suspect historians need to look elsewhere for the causes behind this development. In particular, they ought to take a look at the influence of the Caliphs, and how they wanted to present themselves and their empires, both to the empire and without.

[David]

I really like this course in every way except one, which I will detail, as I believe it deserves examination not just for the course but for its larger implications. That aside, I highly recommend this to anyone.
“Aren’t we lucky that we live in far more enlightened times.”

The arrogance of that statement is striking coming from someone who has spent his career studying history. How many people, in how many places and at how many times, have believed the same thing about themselves, only to have people in the future cast the same judgment upon them?

It is ironic that this was at the end of an extended critique of Petrarch that is demonstrably false and also, demonstrably, a product of his own less-than-enlightened times. Enlightened to whom, Professor? Do you not see that future ages will judge you just as casually and lazily as you have judged Petrarch?

What concerns me is that this is not the first time I have encountered this tendency among professors, whether in Great Courses lectures or scholarly books. The professor quotes Croce about historians inevitably seeing the past through the concerns of their own age, then applies that insight to Petrarch without seeming to recognize that it applies equally to himself.

More importantly, he discusses Petrarch at some length while barely mentioning the central project of Petrarch’s life, which was a revolt against the scholastic culture of the medieval universities.
This omission matters enormously.

When Petrarch lived, scholasticism reigned supreme. It had become rigid, with its hair-splitting logic, sterile disputation, excessive reverence for authority, and confinement within Aristotle. He wanted to escape this and recover the other classics, such as Cicero, Plato, and more, and use those for moral and intellectual renewal. This goes hand in hand with his second project, which was hunting old, lost manuscripts. And this directly relates to the professor’s accusation that he was filled with fear of Islamic civilization and could not escape the events of his time, much like the professor cannot escape our times, with our fears and prejudices.

What is left out is that the scholastic world Petrarch was attacking was profoundly shaped by Arabic and Islamic scholarship. Averroes, or Ibn Rushd, was so significant to this world that he was often referred to simply as “the Commentator.” Avicenna was a significant authority on many things, but especially medicine. Petrarch repeatedly encountered these thinkers not primarily as representatives of another civilization or “diverse people who were different from his own,” but as major authorities within the intellectual establishment, in a world very much his own, against which he was rebelling.

AND....this matters because it changes the interpretation considerably.

When Petrarch attacks Averroes, the doctors devoted to Avicenna, or the Arabs, he is attacking reigning authorities in the establishment he was trying to overthrow. It’s not that he did not have contemptuous views of another civilization, which he may have had, but that was not why he was attacking them. It is incredibly misleading, bordering on intellectual malpractice, to suggest this, especially when you do not mention the central thrusts of the person’s life.

Again, he had disputes with physicians, Aristotelians, logicians, university scholars, and even the Pope over his adherence to scholasticism. After advising the Pope against reliance on those devoted to Avicenna, he became involved in a controversy that led to him publishing Invectives Against a Physician. Later, Venetian Aristotelians who said he was good but ignorant caused him to answer with a book called something like On His Own Ignorance and That of Many Others. These were part of a lifelong struggle. Now, is that the case, or was he also anti-Venetian?

Petrarch was vehemently against anyone who he believed stood between him and the intellectual and moral world of antiquity: scholastics of all kinds, but especially logicians, physicians, lawyers, Aristotelians, and more. His attacks on Arab authorities are part of this larger struggle and revolt and must be presented in that light. This is why the missing context matters.

If this man is trying to break Europe out of what he regarded as an intense dogmatic slumber of scholasticism, AND some of the most prestigious and influential authorities of that same scholasticism happen to be Avicenna and Averroes, then his attacks cannot be treated as evidence of fear or hostility toward diverse peoples whose world is different from his own. Even if there is some prejudice, it does not explain the intellectual battle being waged or why. And if you are a professor, what else is your job but to discover and transmit truths?
Fear and hostility are so much simpler than intellectual revolt but, sadly, much less complete and much less true.
The larger context for our era is that every age has its dominant lens. Academia and that class in the West today seem to operate with a lens of unmasking. First, one must say the right things to be on the right side, but then we must find prejudice, expose it, and label it. These professors can barely escape this desire. It’s almost like they have to add this just to prove to their colleagues and members of their social circles how virtuous and en vogue they are.

But I submit to you that the purpose of scholarship is knowledge and truth, come what may. So it’s deeply troubling that a professor at Oxford, no less, would discuss a person without either having read about him adequately or would engage in intellectual malpractice to make a point about him that is false.
The larger point is that each era, with its lens, builds on the previous ages, just as the professor outlines with the House of Wisdom and all the scholars in this course. You take, interpret, and expand upon knowledge. But what is left out is that this emphasis always leads to this sort of work, where we are so caught up in our dominant lens that, trying to do right by it, we lose sight of what is most important, which is the truth. We cannot arrive at the truth unless we tell the whole story.

The world of scholars, of all places, should be about the pursuit of truth, come what may. You cannot be enlightened, truly enlightened, unless you can present ALL knowledge and ALL context you find in your studies. For a professor at Oxford to discuss Petrarch’s hostility toward Arab intellectual authorities without explaining his larger revolt and what he dedicated his life to provides a distorted and misleading picture.

No one will read this, but for my own purposes, here is the context that was left out:
Petrarch’s intellectual project involved a major revolt against medieval scholasticism and the university culture of rigid dialectical argument built heavily around Aristotle. Medieval Europeans encountered Aristotle partly through a centuries-long transmission and commentary tradition in which Arabic-speaking scholars played an enormous role. Averroes was known simply as “the Commentator,” while Avicenna remained one of the great authorities of medieval medicine.

When Petrarch sneers at these authorities, therefore, he is not merely commenting on foreigners. He is attacking major pillars of the intellectual establishment he wants to overthrow. Two of the major pillars happened to be from the Islamic world. If anything, it is a compliment to them that he felt the need to attack them so forcefully.
His controversies with physicians and Averroists make this particularly clear. His manuscript hunting, his recovery of Cicero, and his attempt to return directly to classical texts were all part of an effort to get around inherited authorities and recover sources he believed had been neglected.

His project became one of the foundations of Renaissance humanism, which was, of course, later attacked and overthrown when it, too, became rigid and sterile.

Once that context is restored, the claim that Petrarch’s remarks are simply fear and hostility toward people different from himself is much harder to sustain.

[Magen - Inquiring Professional Dog Trainer · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars This was fine. There was a decent amount of repetition as the lectures did not build on themselves and each one was written as though previous ones wouldn't have been listened to. Thus, the same historical figures show up constantly and their achievements repeated. There was a heavy focus on people, not theories or inventions, which was disappointing as a talk with Eamonn Gearon about this course focused on inventions. Overall, I didn't find the structure of the course or each lecture to be well done and I found my mind wandering in most lectures.

A minor thing, but the lecturer is British and thus nearly all his references are to British places, people, etc. He assumed these references were well known, and while they are likely known to British listeners, they aren't well known in the US, causing the example to not better explain a point he was trying to make.

[Sharon · Rating 2 out of 5]

One of the lesser Great Courses offerings. The lecturer is repetitive and often hits the same facts again and again instead of going into nuances or detail. The lectures are also very much aimed at the Western Listener, with a lot of fairly pointless digressions that center British history or pop culture.

[Bruce Wiley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing contributions that are so unknown by the western world.

[Brett Williams · Rating 3 out of 5]

This series of 24 lectures by adventurer and author Eamonn Gearon of Johns Hopkins University is a real eye opener in how far ahead the nations of Islam were to those in Europe in terms of inventions, economics, literature, mathematics, and what sounds a lot like Galileo’s “breakthrough” science of experimentation. Sometimes ahead by 800 years, while in Europe, as physicist Steven Weinberg said, “King Charlamagne was practicing the art of writing his name.”

The names of people sound so… well… foreign, I had a hard time keeping track of who was who, but the new and improved course guidebook really helped. The guides are packed with additional info, from a summary of the topics in each lecture to maps, timelines, and glossary. The guide notes summarize the project nicely: “The Islamic Golden Age was one of the most remarkable periods of scholarly achievement and cultural flourishing in human history. Covering the years from approximately 750–1250, the advancements made during this period are akin to the blossoming of wisdom in ancient Greece or the later European Renaissance. Like ancient Greece and the European Renaissance, the Islamic Golden Age was made possible by a happy coincidence of politics, patronage, and great minds.”

Some mention is made of why Islam vanished as a power and cultural engine—plague, gunpowder employed by the Moguls, consequent political upheaval, and financial decline—but I would have liked a bit more on that. How does the cultural beacon of the world crater so hard for so long? Especially of interest is the contribution from radical religious fundamentalism, which, despite all the progress, appeared by these lectures to have always been a backward force in Islam.

[Steve Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

This TTC lecture easily registers as one of the best I've listened to. Professor Gearon is a lecturer at Johns Hopkins (and other institutions), an author, and consultant who specializes in Arab studies. His lecture style is precise, measured, easy to follow. I sped the audio up by 15% and found that to be a perfect speed.

He takes the listener though the Islamic Golden Age (750-1250) and the intellectual, scientific, engineering, and architectural accomplishments of era. Western civilization benefited indirectly from these advancements when the knowledge ensconced in the East, North Africa and Iberia filtered into the West.

I'm going to go so far as to say I found nothing wrong with the work, and I have every intention of listening to it again, but while taking notes and reviewing the study guide. I listened to it via my Audible account, and was able to access and download the study guide. )If it is available on other streaming services like library apps like Libby and Hoopla, I don't think the study guide is available).

It's an intellectual adventure and a real treat.

[Said · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great but could be better

Surprisingly great coverage of the Islamic Golden Age (b/w 750 and 1258). I personally found it helpful that Eamonn Gearon separated each unit to separate subjects but as some other reviewers noted, it sometimes gets a bit confusing to jump between different timelines and geographies. I think Eamonn Gearon used a very interesting and open-minded approach but I felt like some of his narrative regarding some of the respected historical figures could be a bit more respectful. I would definitely recommend this course/audiobook to anyone interested in history.

[Nick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Gearon does a good job of breaking down the Islamic Golden Age and it's contributions to modernity in an accessible but appropriately intellectual manner. He's also frequently quite funny, which makes this series of lectures move quickly (which can't be said of all of Great Courses' lecturers). While not as in-depth as other works on this period, this course is a fantastic introduction or refresher for those interested in this incredible time and its fascinating historical figures.

[Chista · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first quarter was very exciting for me because there were a great deal of information that I didn’t know. After that, the repetition and the jumping became annoying. If you open any random history book, which you haven’t studied its subject era and area, there would be a great deal of info new to you. One can read random wikipedia pages and get the same result. Plus, sometimes I felt that the lecturer forced some matters and characters in, which their relevance were not convincing to me.

[Nell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Disappointed that there is not a single mention of women in this his-story of the Islamic world. Muslim women rose to leadership positions in the Golden Age and were essential to the early Islamic religious thought.
With financial backing from Khadija, prophet Mohammed.
There is no Islam without women.

[Denise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Highly enjoyable course - fascinating, informative, and very engaging. As I listened to the entire course over a couple of sessions, I'd have appreciated less jumping back and forth in time from one lecture to the next, though.

[Rolf · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very informative, albeit a bit dry. The Great Courses fall in a couple different categories, one of which is the very traditional, “we’re going to cover a huge chunk of regional history” variety. This is one of those.

[Enrico · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really good course about a period in history I didn't really know much about before this course. I learned a lot and it showed me that the topic is actually really interesting. It was easy going through this course and it didn't feel like a chore at all.

[Andrea · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really lovely lecture series about a pivotal point in world history. I left with a list of books and people to learn more about. I'd happily relisten to this one and pick up more from Dr. Gearon.

[Nicholas Martin · Rating 5 out of 5]

This also doubles as a history 101 for the Arabian & Islamic empire(s), a History of the Western Tradition for the Middle East.

[Mohamed Haniffa · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book gives a complete different view of the Islamic golden Era.

[Mehran Reza · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very informative

Esp about cordoba, Persia and Baghdad

[Brendan Brink-Halloran · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good exploration of great thinkers in the Islamic Golden Age, going deep into the lives, ideas and discoveries of individuals and the broader scope of innovation in this time and place.

[Carl Palmateer · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very excellent overview that is neither triumphalist nor denigrating of the era. Rather it places it within the continuum of knowledge and discovery of man.

[Bennett Graff · Rating 5 out of 5]

5/5

Definitely one of the better Great Courses, would highly recommend.

[Alina Belascu · Rating 5 out of 5]

An eye-opener