14

In the middle ages, Muslims established some powerful empires.

They conquered vast land and shown considerable advancement in arts, science and culture.

There were lots of Muslim philosophers and scholars born.

What is the single most important reason that was responsible for the decline of their Golden Age?

In other words, why did they fail to sustain their Golden Age?

Edit N.B. Please emphasize on "Muslim Golden Age".

Improve this question
6
  • 1
    Your question is broad and ambiguous in terms of "powerful empire". There were multiple Islamic empires during the period you speak of.
    – talonx
    Apr 26, 2012 at 9:11
  • OK. I corrected. Also see the edit.
    – user806
    Apr 26, 2012 at 9:17
  • 2
    Which golden age? Rashidun? Abbasid? Mali/Songhai? Ottoman? Timurid? Ottoman Empire was extremely powerful and influential, and survived into the industrial era, but was weakened centuries before dissolution.
    – Muz
    Aug 27, 2013 at 8:13
  • @Muz ..... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age
    – user806
    Aug 28, 2013 at 5:58
  • 1
    Ah, Abbasid then. The accepted answer is probably off then, and the other answer about the pressure of invasions and internal politics/fragmentation is more accurate. Accepted answer is still good if you treat the Rashidun/Muhammad era as the golden age, like some scholars do.
    – Muz
    Aug 28, 2013 at 17:44

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
6

The decline of the "Muslim Golden Age" was due to multiple factors that are commonly associated with the decline of most major empires. Much of what was to blame for the decline was a condition referred to as imperial overreach. This is a condition where an empire which has undergone rapid expansion is unable to maintain control over the various territories it quickly acquired. This is typically because the political state in question has been unable to complete the long and costly process of incorporating a new group of peoples with their own culture and political customs.

This is definitely true of the Islamic empire which rapidly expanded during the reign of the first caliphs to succeed Muhammad, the Rashidun or "rightly guided caliphs". The meteoric rise of the Islamic empires can be seen in just the rule of one caliph, Umar ibn al-Khattab, who in a mere decade managed to conquer all of the Sassanid empire and two-thirds of the Byzantine empire. The very quick incorporation of sub-Saharan Africa, Arabia, Persia, and much of Spain left little time or ability for the caliphates to incorporate much of the very diverse territories they converted or conquered.

Another unique problem with the Islamic caliphates were their reliance on the figure of Muhammad. The farther removed from the prophet temporally, the less united the ummah was. This lead to a multiplication of sects such as the Shia Muslims, whose loyalty to the prophets offspring rather than the accepted caliphate (to whom the sunni, or traditionalists faction supported) only compounded the pressure on the caliphate by the strain of overreach. This overreach was also visible in its more traditional forms by the rise of the Mamluk slave armies to political prominence and the fracture of the Abassid caliphate into multiple dynasties of varying degrees of independence.

Improve this answer
3
  • 1
    Actually would say they weren't too reliant on Muhammad. Muhammad's conquests were split up into the Ridda Wars after his death, but the unification under Abu Bakr was proof that they could survive and thrive without Muhammad. The Abbasid Empire was also quite culturally stable, had incorporated its conquests into its customs, didn't suffer so much from overreach. I don't know what the term is, but Abbasid's collapse seems to be more because someone holding a lot of power for a long period of time will have many internal political entities trying to grab a share of that power.
    – Muz
    Aug 27, 2013 at 8:19
  • 2
    I kind of disagree with this analysis. Muhammad died in 632, and the "meteoric rise" happened during Umar's reign (634-644) but the Caliphate regained stability long after that, after incorporating all new territories. The Umayyad Caliphate lasted until 750, and the Islamic Golden Age (which the OP asked about) persisted until the Mongolian conquest in 1258.
    – Fitri
    Apr 16, 2014 at 6:16
  • Looking back on this, I'm surprised I didn't mention the conquest of Baghdad, which was the definitive turning point for the Muslim world, AS A WHOLE. However, I think my argument is somewhat valid, as I feel this was the height of the Muslim golden age, as a united religious community. I think that it should be pointed out that "muslim golden age" is an overly broad term as the qualities of the various caliphates vary tremendously, and continued to fragment over centuries and over a vast geographic expanse.
    – BrotherJack
    Oct 2, 2017 at 16:01
14

The biggest reason for the decline was the Mongol invasion. The Siege of Baghdad in 1258 effectively ended the 500 year old Caliphate. Many people were killed outright, estimated around 2 million, plus the entire area was laid to waste, notably destroying the irrigation and canal system, causing continuing hardship.

Improve this answer
7
  • 1
    How many other empires did the Mongols bring down?
    – user806
    Apr 26, 2012 at 13:03
  • 1
    Also most of the Islamic golden age was driven by Persians - so although the Abbasid empire stretched to Spain - the cultural elite were very focused on Baghdad.
    – none
    Apr 26, 2012 at 15:23
  • 1
    I don't think this answer is entirely correct. From my understanding the decline was already underway prior to the Mongol invasion. There was a great deal of internal strife between various actors, such as the Shia Muslims and the Mamluks. The way I see it the initial conquest and development of the Muslim empire was due to a powerful uniting force of Islam and a credible leadership in the "rightly guided caliphs". Over time the authority of the caliphs was weakened due to the distance from Muhammad and the development of regional power centers and movements to fill the vacuum.
    – BrotherJack
    Apr 27, 2012 at 18:49
  • 2
    @BrotherJack - The question was for the single most important reason. I agree that there was internal strife in the Islamic empire. These would have brought a gradual decline. The lack of leadership may have allowed the Mongols to invade and destroy the region as completely as they did.
    – jfrankcarr
    Apr 27, 2012 at 21:27
  • 1
    @BrotherJack - But the question wasn't about the caliphate, but about the period of Islamic cultural and scientific achievement. The locus of Islamic learning and culture had shifted east along with its power centers. The Khwarezmian Empire in particular - Samarkand and Bukhara were on a meteoric rise even as Baghdad was on the wane. The Mongols put an abrupt halt to all Eastern Islamic culture, where in the West, the Reconquista and the corrupt and militarized regimes replacing the Famamids in the wake of the Crusades snuffed out the lights in Andalus and the Maghreb.
    – RI Swamp Yankee
    Apr 7, 2015 at 12:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.