Quote:Firstly, neither Iraq or Iran or Egypt had been centres of great civilization for hundreds if not thousands of years before Islam came. The wars of the Byzantines and the Persians had largely decimated both populations and economies of the once great Mesopotamia, and it was Islam that rebuilt it. As for Egypt, it was the breadbasket of the East Roman Empire until the muslims conquered it. Yet despite its importance for the East Romans, their energy output was still lower than what the muslims produced during the caliphate. Again, this is from the Morris data.
The center of western civilisation only moved out of the area covered by the Caliphate when it was in Rome. None of this makes sense as an explanation for why the Muslims could not rebuild an even better empire. It is not like they were the Aztecs stuck on the other side of the world, not even aware of what came before. The center of western civilisation had moved around plenty of times before, and the Caliphate covered all of them except Rome. The Muslims either had it all, or it was right on their doorstep.
Quote:And no, the places the muslims conquered didn't include the heart of the previous Roman Empire
Did I say they captured Rome? And so what? The Muslims depopulated a lot of the Italian coastline catching slaves. Was there something special about the geographic location of Rome that prevented the Muslims from making something better out of an even bigger empire that happened to exclude it?
Are you arguing that Muslims are only capable of having advanced civilisation if they take it from someone else? Did inheriting the fragments of the old Roman Empire somehow condemn the Muslims to 1400 years of stagnation? Why were the Muslims unable to repeat the feats of empires that came previously, that existed at the same time in the east, or that came later, other than imposing themselves on people?