Islam? Here’s an excerpt from the middle of a very long book review of  Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization by John O’Neill at Europe News:

Until the first quarter of the seventh century Classical Civilization was alive and well in the Middle East and North Africa — even more so than in Europe. City life flourished, as did the economy and the arts. Literacy was widespread, and the works of the Classical historians, as well as the philosophers, mathematicians, and physicians, were readily available and discussed in the academies and libraries located throughout the Near East, North Africa, and Europe. In Egypt, during the sixth century, renowned philosophers such as Olympiodorus (died 570) presided over the Alexandrian academy which possessed a well-stocked and funded library packed with probably thousands of volumes. The Alexandrian academy of this time was the most illustrious institute of learning in the known world; and it is beyond doubt that its library matched, if indeed it did not surpass, the original Library founded by Ptolemy II. The writings of Olympiodorus and his contemporaries demonstrate intimate familiarity with the great works of classical antiquity — very often quoting obscure philosophers and historians whose works have long since disappeared. Among the general population of the time literacy was the norm, and the appetite for reading was fed by a large class of professional writers who composed plays, poems and short stories — the latter taking the form of mini-novels. In Egypt, the works of Greek writers such as Herodotus and Diodorus were familiar and widely quoted. Both the latter, as well as native Egyptian writers such as Manetho, had composed extensive histories of Egypt of the time of the pharaohs. These works provided, for the citizens of Egypt and other parts of the Empire, a direct link with the pharaohnic past. Here the educated citizen encountered the name of the pharaoh (Kheops) who built the Great Pyramid, as well as that of his son (Khephren), who built the second pyramid at Giza, and that of his grandson Mykerinos, who raised the third and smallest structure. These Hellenized versions of the names were extremely accurate transcriptions of the actual Egyptian names (Khufu, Khafre, and Menkaure). In the history of the country written by Manetho, the educated citizen of the Empire would have had a detailed description of Egypt’s past, complete with an in-depth account of the deeds of the pharaohs as well as descriptions of the various monuments and the kings who built them.

The change that came over Egypt and the other regions of the Middle East following the Arab Conquest can only be described as catastrophic. Almost all knowledge of these countries’ histories disappears, and does so almost overnight. Consider the account of the Giza Pyramids and their construction written by the Arab historian Al Masudi (regarded as the “Arab Herodotus”), apparently in the tenth century:

“Surid, Ben Shaluk, Ben Sermuni, Ben Termidun, Ben Tedresan, Ben Sal, one of the kings of Egypt before the flood, built two great pyramids; and, notwithstanding, they were subsequently named after a person called Shaddad Ben Ad … they were not built by the Adites, who could not conquer Egypt, on account of their powers, which the Egyptians possessed by means of enchantment … the reason for the building of the pyramids was the following dream, which happened to Surid three hundred years previous to the flood. It appeared to him that the earth was overthrown, and that the inhabitants were laid prostrate upon it, that the stars wandered confusedly from their courses, and clashed together with tremendous noise. The king though greatly affected by this vision, did not disclose it to any person, but was conscious that some great event was about to take place.” (From L. Cottrell, The Mountains of Pharaoh (London, 1956)).

This was what passed for “history” in Egypt after the Arab conquest — little more than a collection of Arab fables. Egypt, effectively, had lost her history. Other Arab writers display the same ignorance. Take for example the comments of Ibn Jubayr, who worked as a secretary to the Moorish governor of Granada, and who visited Cairo in 1182. He commented on “the ancient pyramids, of miraculous construction and wonderful to look upon, [which looked] like huge pavilions rearing to the skies; two in particular shock the firmament …” He wondered whether they might be the tombs of early prophets mention in the Koran, or whether they were granaries of the biblical patriarch Joseph, but in the end came to the conclusion, “To be short, none but the Great and Glorious God can know their story.” (Andrew Beattie, Cairo: A Cultural History (Oxford University Press, 2005) p. 50)

via How Islam Destroyed the Literary Inheritance of the Classical World | EuropeNews.

… but are there no writers who get it right? I’m sure every period has their share of shoddy historians (by whatever definition you want to apply to ‘historian’). Whatever the case,  it appears that Mr O’Neill has missed Warwick’s Podcast on Graeco-Arabic Studies (and probably much else). Perhaps it’s not surprising that this book appears to be self-published?

A very interesting series of items from Jonah Goldberg popped up at the National Review Online this week. First:

A slew of readers are outraged, perplexed, confabulated and gobsmacked by the claim made below by another reader that there’s no Latin word for “volcano.”

I agree it is bizarre. After all you would think that after Pompeii was covered in lava and hot ash by Mount Vesuvius, someone would have said “Hey, you know what? We could really use a word for that thing.”

Meanwhile, a friend informs me that Mons ignifer (fire-bearing mountain) is the Latin neologism for volcano.

Better late than never, I suppose.

via: No Latin For Volcano

Followed quickly by:

This is awesome, from a reader:

Hi, Jonah,

I discovered this a few years ago, after I’d read Robert Harris’ excellent novel, _Pompeii_. It’s told from the point of view of a hydraulic engineer in AD 79, sent to figure out why the aqueduct around Pompeii is running dry. I kept wondering why the characters weren’t thinking about the possibility of the volcano erupting, and I finally tried to look up the word in my Latin dictionary, without success. It’s the Chambers & Murray—considered the best 1-volume Latin dictionary out there—so it wouldn’t have accidentally missed the word.

That really surprised me. But I reckon Vesuvius really surprised the Romans, too. I thought this might have been the first eruption of a volcano their civilization had known, but that’s not the case, since even Vergil refers to an eruption of Etna in the Aeneid. So…even weirder they didn’t have a word, since they knew about these things. Huh.

via: No Latin for Volcano Cont’d

Then:

The controversy won’t go dormant. From a reader:

Mr. Goldberg,

There may not be a single word for a volcano, but there is a Latin phrase for it:

mons flammas eructans (“mountain belching fire”)

Thanks.

And:

Aren’t you being more than a trifle gullible? The Romans employed ample terminology for volcanoes; even more for the sort of eruptions of stupidity evidenced by your reader. I suggest you consign his email to the mouth of a mons flammas eructans. While you’re at it, utter a prayer to Volcanus.

And:

good heavens — anyone who saw the doctor who episode “the fires of
pompeii” (2008) knows there was no latin word for “volcano.” also,
that as bad as volcanic eruptions are, they prevent the pyrovile rock
people from becoming our new alien overlords. sheesh.

And:

According to the episode “The Fires of Pompeii” they simply didn’t have one.

THE DOCTOR (subdued, to Donna)
They don’t know what it is. Vesuvius is just a mountain to them, the top hasn’t blown off yet. The Romans haven’t even got a word for volcano. Not until tomorrow.

[…]

via: More Volcanic Latin

I’m not sure saying “they didn’t have a word for it” gives the right impression. As some of the commentators about are implying, it seems more accurate to say that the Romans didn’t really distinguish between mountains that ‘burned’ and mountains that didn’t ‘burn’ except with the addition of adjectives. Here, e.g., is what Pliny the Elder has in a section describing ‘flagrant mountains’ (2.110 via Lacus Curtius):

verum in montium miraculis ardet Aetna noctibus semper tantoque aevo materia ignium sufficit, nivalis hibernis temporibus egestumque cinerem pruinis operiens. nec in illo tantum natura saevit exustionem terris denuntians: flagrat in Phaselitis mons Chimaera, et quidem inmortali diebus ac noctibus flamma; ignem eius accendi aqua, extingui vero terra aut fimo Cnidius Ctesias tradit. eadem in Lycia Hephaesti montes taeda flammante tacti flagrant, et adeo ut lapides quoque rivorum et harenae in ipsis aquis ardeant, aliturque ignis ille pluviis; baculo si quis ex iis accenso traxerit sulcum, rivos ignium sequi narrant. flagrat in Bactris Cophanti noctibus vertex.

Here’s the incipit … not sure if I blogged this already:

Many historians agree that the world’s most well-known epic poet, Homer, lived in the Aegean city of İzmir, but several mayors are eager to have their towns recognized as his home.

The ancient Greek poet Homer, traditionally considered the author of the epic poems “The Iliad” and “The Odyssey,” is believed to have lived in ancient Smyrna, today’s İzmir, in the eighth century B.C. Seven different locations claim to be home to Homer, with Bornova and Gaziemir on the brink of a tough battle.

Gaziemir Mayor Halil İbrahim Şenol, a member of the main opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, argued that Homer was born in Gaziemir. “The history books say Homer was born where the Meles River starts, and it starts in Gaziemir,” said Şenol. “It is not true that Homer lived in Bornova, and our research will support and reveal the truth.”

Bornova, another town in İzmir, also claims it is the hometown of the Greek poet. Bornova Mayor Kamil Okyay Sındır, also a member of the CHP, earlier said the town should be proud of being Homer’s hometown and cited the Meles River reference to strengthen his argument.

“Homer wrote about the Meles River in his works, which is why it is believed he lived around here,” Sındır said. “All findings indicate Homer lived in Bornova. There are seven locations in the Aegean and the Greek Islands claiming to be Homer’s hometown, but Bornova is the strongest candidate.”

Bornova was quick to take advantage of its links and last year opened the “Homeros Valley,” an attraction center built between the Bornova district center and Kayadibi village by the İzmir Metropolitan Municipality.

Şenol appointed archeologist Ercan Çokbankir as the Gaziemir Municipality Culture Coordinator after last year’s local elections, and he has been focused on the issue ever since.

“It makes more sense that Homer was a Gaziemir local,” said Çokbankir, adding that no argument is 100 percent certain. “Many history books name the river from Çatalkaya as Homer or Homeros. Bornova does not have such a record,”

“The Homeros Valley project has been built in the wrong location,” he said. “The right place would be Gaziemir.”

The Gaziemir mayor noted that the municipality will soon organize an international conference on Homer. “After all, Homer is a world-renowned poet, and the most important thing is that most historians agree he lived in İzmir,” said Şenol. “I’m aware that there is not much point in arguing about whether he lived in Bornova or Gaziemir, but we just want the truth to be known.”

More:  This is Homer’s real home, says mayor | Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review.