EB and the West

[Tellos Athenaios]

as a belgium (if that is indeed what you are) are you not of mixed celtic/germainic roots?

No. Just like being Dutch doesn't mean that you're of mixed Celtic-Germanic roots. (Belgian tribes did live in the Netherlands, if you did not know.)

But the local Celts were all supplanted / wiped out by 'German' migrants.

[The Persian Cataphract]

I think Europa Barbarorum is clear with the intentions; We endeavour and dedicate ourselves accordingly to historical outlines within reasonable lines of esoterica, and "fill-in-the-blanks"-work. In other words, if there is a faction or a culture which has some "barbarous" or "antagonistic" innuendo, such as Roman mentality reminding of fascism (Which existed, to varying extent, among all cultures of this time), EB is not there to cater or censor history. History is a mixed bag of good, bad and the ugly; Sometimes almost predominantly the very ugly. Only by appreciating all aspects of history, while remaining intellectually honest could ever hope to understand history at the most rudimentary plane. EB does not accomodate itself to cultural relativism by any means, but we'd like to let historical evidence provide the pieces of the puzzle. We don't make any judgement by saying "this" or "that" is "barbaric" or "civilized", even if it sometimes is blatant. It's still all very much "Everyone is a barbarian to someone".

A pointer though, I loathe the terms "Islamic Science", "Islamic Art", and "Islamic Medicine"; Many of those achievements were accomplished by Iranian scholars and geniuses, and other works, among those of Averroës (Ibn Rushd) and the Iranian physician and philosopher Zakaria Ar-Razi were heretics, with the former discussing the "Omnipotence-paradox" very extensively and while the latter constantly made a mockery of the Qur'an by simple logical queries. Making use of the term "Islamic Science" equals cultural theft. It would be like calling Galileo's discoveries and support for the heliocentric worldly view a "Christian achievement" and that is a far cry from reality. Algebra, as formalized by Al-Khwarazmi, is a refined Iranian product based on previous Greek, Indian and Near Eastern mathematical influences. The Qur'an does not teach math, in fact in several instances it contains blatantly faulty math which fails basic addition and subtraction. Authorities such as the distinguished Iranologist Dr. Shojaedin Shafa (Formerly one of the Shah's historians and custodian of the royal libraries, on par with the late Prof. Shapur Shahbazi and the late Dr. Zarrinqub who wrote extensively on the fall of the Sassanian Iran in his "Two Centuries of Silence") have also lamented the usage of "Islamic Science".

The only reason why this concept formally exists is because Orientalists such as that sack of lard Bernard Lewis orgasm over the thought of a "Second Islamic Golden Age" in the Middle East in a most futile manner. They believe Islam was a catalyst and bolstered the progress. That alone is chauvinism. It implies that the Near East had no sophistication whatsoever when there is enough evidence proving the contrary. Conceptions such as the Parthian battery (Falsely dubbed the "Baghdad battery") pre-date the Voltaic pile by more than a thousand years. Yet by no means do we refer to Ancient Iranian science, non-religious literati (Or fragments rather) or architecture "Zoroastrian science".

So for the sake of everyone's sanity people, give credit where it is due. You may discuss "Anti-Westernism" until your throats go all dry, but I'm going to go all mad cataphract on people who rely on generalized designations. You have been warned.

Edit: I'm speaking in general terms here, not in any accusatory intent or manner. Point well taken, Oudysseos.

[oudysseos]

Persian Cataphract- Sorry if I wasn't clear, and I didn't mean to label anything as 'Islamic Science'.
In fact the point that I was trying to make is that such labels are meaningless: modern algebra derives from al-Kwarizmi, who built on previous Greek work, which itself built on Babylonian methods of calculation. To claim that algebra (or anything of that nature- the same argument applies to medicine, architecture, engineering etc) is a unique defining characteristic of western culture is plain pig ignorance. And I mentioned Avicenna and Averroes precisely because as non-westerners they (in The World According to SigniferOne) should not have been involved in things like medicine, philosophy, science etc. In fact they didn't seem to care that Aristotle was a westerner and they weren't, because of course the distinction (at least as Signifer puts it) is totally meaningless. Ideas, developments and culture flow back and forth across whatever invisible boundary between 'westernism' and 'easternism' Signifer has imagined to exist. Hell, it says in wikipedia that Averroes (not, I think, a westerner according to Signifer, even though he was born in Spain) is regarded as the founding father of secular thought in western europe.

Pre-empt number one: it would contradict his own criteria for Signifer to claim that Ibn Rushd, al-Kwarizmi and Ibn Sina are westerners and get out of the hole he dug himself into that way. To him that means Roman/Greek, and not just people who actually happen to live in western europe. See his (somewhat bizarre) comments on Celts and Germans.

Pre-empt number two: I do believe that 'Western Culture' does have meaning and value: it's just nothing like what Signifer thinks it is.