The Origins of Universities: From Madrasa to the Church

From Al-Qarawiyyin to Salamanca: Who Invented the University?

The modern university was not invented by a single people or religion. This obvious fact is precisely what is debated when forums get tangled in who founded the first universities. The answer doesn't fit in a headline: it's a dispute between the madrasa and the European university of ecclesiastical origin. And, incidentally, between two ways of telling history depending on who you want to center.

The First Center of Higher Learning: A Woman and a Mosque

Some argue that the first university was founded by a woman. Those who hold this narrative add a nuance that undermines easy praise: women were not allowed to study at this center until the 1950s. The paradox serves both those who want to promote medieval pogre and those who want to promote the opposite.

Against this version, another participant argues that European universities are institutions founded and led by the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. That they teach the scientific method and Roman law, both of European origin. And that nothing discovered by an Arab has ever been learned there, according to this version.

Where Does the Concept of University Come From?

Another participant points further afield and further east: if anything, the concept of university would come from Syria or Mesopotamia, not Segarro. Regarding cultural plunder, another version holds that ancient culture survived despite the Jovenlandeses, who would have only collected what was useful to them and burned the rest. The fate of libraries like those in Alexandria or Constantinople is used as evidence. This is a real historiographical discussion, with little unanimity and a great desire to assign blame.

The Background Noise: Migration Grievances

The origin of universities doesn't stay in the spotlight for long. The conversation quickly shifts to the migratory arena, where grievances against different groups intersect, with proposals that some participants raise, such as undermining borders or expelling entire groups, and comparisons about who commits more crimes. These are opinions, not data: none are accompanied by sources. What the tone reveals is how an academic issue ends up becoming a thermometer of social unrest.

It is predictable that the question will continue to be mixed with immigration policy long before it is mixed with archives. And that in twenty years someone will raise it again elsewhere, with the same disorder and the same certainties.