Talk:Byzantine science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

POV bias[edit]

A concern: This article seems to want to paint the Byzantines in a positive light rather than simply trying to be objective. An important aspect of Byzantine science is how science was viewed and how it went through stagnant periods. Among other things one can argue (actually scholars agree) that after the 6th or 7th centuries there was little real innovation in the theoretical sciences in the Empire. There were accomplishments in the applied sciences although even at that it seems the Empire never quite achieved the same engineering prowess (or maybe ambition) that it had in its early period (e.g. they never again produced a structure as magnificent as the Hagia Sophia). Apart from those general observations the period of stagnation following the Arab onslaught and the Renaissance around the turn of the millenium are interesting to bring out in more detail as well as some of the general societal reasons that scientific discovery slowed and some scientific works were suppressed.

--Mcorazao (talk) 20:55, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Greek Fire[edit]

An article on Byzantine sciences should make mention of naphtha, or Greek Fire —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)


One significant section that is missing is the work of Byzantine thinkers, such as Eustathius of Thessalonica, on the development of magnetism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Astrohoundy (talkcontribs) 02:05, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I can not find any material relevant to Eustathius of Thessalonica and his contributions to magnetism. See also the relevant article on Eustathius of Thessalonica.Koassim (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2015 (UTC)