The study of the history of Islamic science at Manchester

Abstract

There are two principal reasons for studying the History of Science: it has its own intrinsic interest, and it deepens understanding of modern science. Teachers study the History of Science for much the same reasons as the scientists themselves, for it is obviously easier to explain a scientific concept if the circumstances that gave rise to it are known. With these two reasons in mind, it is interesting to compare the History of Science with Economic, Social, and Political, History, which, considered as one subject or three, has a large following both within and without the universities. If in any period of history we are instructed by studying the results of economic policy, the development of institutions, or the machinations of princes, we shall gain at least as much from an acquaintance with the best minds of the period, and, of all the products of these minds, the attempt to understand the outside world must be rated among the highest. Yet historians have generally neglected this vital aspect of history, important as it is in the shaping of Western civilization, and it remains for the historian of science to fill the gap. It is arguable that the scientist has as much need of the history of his specialism as the diplomat has of the history of the country he is sent to. The analogy may be extended to less specialized aspects of the histories of science and politics. A historical approach gives the student an invaluable perspective of his subject, and in some cases even helps him to understand the doctrines, or to acquire the techniques, of his chosen science. For this reason the differential calculus, for instance, is often taught from a historical standpoint. The contribution to science of the Arabic-speaking peoples is largely unknown. The old cliche about the unimaginative transmission of Greek learning to the resurgent West in the twelfth century has had to be drastically altered. For instance, we now know that astronomy between the times of Ptolemy and Copernicus was enriched by more than the odd observation. Not only were there improvements in mathematical techniquel and penetrating critiques of both the details2 and the general philosophy3 of the Ptolemaic system in the intervening period, but it has recently been discovered that some of the technical devices used by Copernicus, such as the double epicycle, and even the hypothesis of the Earth's motion5 are to be found in medieval Arabic treatises on astronomy. What has been said of astronomy could be matched by similar remarks about mathematics, medicine (particularly surgery), practical chemistry, and optics.v Furthermore, there can be little doubt that there is an enormous quantity of information to be gathered on Arabic science, just for the trouble of looking at the manuscripts. On the whole, philosophy has fared better than science,7 and a serious discussion of the Arab philosophers and their influence on their Christian successors is quite usual in histories of medieval philosophy. But there is still much to be learnt, for example, of the philosophers' approach to astronomy8 or the concept of infinity. Much, too, remains to be known of the details of translation of Greek works into Arabic--via Syriac or direct--and of Arabic works into Latin.9 When more is known about the