The Berber/Moors are a group of North African population which conquered and ruled Spain and parts of Portugal for more than 700 beginning in 711 AD and ending in 1492 AD. It appears from research that even before this period going back into antiquity, this North African tribe has been synonymous with Iberia. The word Ibero-Maurisian culture used by archaeologists and historians to describe a group of pre-historic people that populated Iberia would underline this linkage.
Not many people know that the Moors are Black Africans of Libya, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria and Senegalese origins. This is due to the deliberate misinformation produced by the Euro-American power establishment, which delights in obfuscating Africa’s contribution to the history of mankind, preferring instead to appropriate to itself the glorious attainment of Africans throughout history. By the strategic control of vocabulary, semantics, nomenclature and grammatical acrobatics the academic establishment of Euro-America perpetrates its mendacity.
The greatest sort of disempowerment is the loss of cultural and historical perspective by a people. A lack of knowledge of one’s history implies an absence of knowledge about ones place in the universe. The erasure (or obfuscation) of African history and culture is the greatest tool employed by this Euro-American power structure to control Africans at home and in the diaspora.
In this series on the Berber/Moors, we are taken on an excursion through history back to the Moorish kingdom of Spain, to ascertain who those Africans were, what they did and their subsequent significance in European history…no…world history.
The Moors
The term Moor has been put to diverse use, but its roots are still traceable. The word Moor originates from the Roman word Marues, which is a derivate of the Greek adjective Mauros (i.e. black or dark). In the year 46BC the Roman army entered NorthWest Africa where they encountered black Africans whom they called “Maures”. During the European Renaissance explorers, writers and scholars began to apply the term Moor to Africans in general.
Consequently, the names of African countries such as Mauritania and Morocco mean nothing other than “the land of Black people” the same meaning denoted in the names Khem (ancient Egypt), Cush (ancient Sudan), Sudan, Ethiopia and Nigeria.
The term Berber which is another name for the Moors may have been derived from a Latin corruption of one of the ethnic names of the indigenous nations of North West Africa although some have argued that it implies “barbarians”. The Moorish people referred to as Berbers describe themselves as the Amazigh. It roughly translates into free or noble people.
The Berber language is called Tamazight of which there are many dialects including Tarifit or Riffi (northern Morocco), Kabyle (Algeria) and Tashelhiyt (central Morocco), Tamasheq(Niger). Tamazight has been a written language, on and off, for almost 3000 years. It was first written in the Tifinagh alphabet, still used by the Tuaregs of Libya, Niger, Nigeria, Mali and Senegal. .....................
posted
Certainly the Saharan west Afrasan speakers, like the Tuaregs and others in Niger, Mali and Mauritanian region, mainly from the latter, i.e. Mauritanian region, conquered North Africa, and eventually did the same in Spain. Thus the earliest Berber colonizers of Spain, were the Almoravids, who were then succeeded by their more northern west Afrasan speakers, in coastal North Africa. The latter were Almohads.
The Almoravids were more akin physically to tropical Africans than the coastal northern African counterparts. Even so, notwithstanding higher frequency of light-skin west Afrasan speakers in coastal North African areas, there are still relatively heavily pigmented west Afrasan groups among them, as demonstrated earlier in the groups in Tunisia. Recalling on...
Female gene pools of Berber and Arab neighboring communities in central Tunisia: microstructure of mtDNA variation in North Africa.
Cherni L, Loueslati BY, Pereira L, Ennafaa H, Amorim A, El Gaaied AB.
Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, Immunology, and Biotechnology, Faculty of Sciences of Tunis, University of Tunis, El Manar II 1060, Tunisia.
North African populations are considered genetically closer to Eurasians than to sub-Saharans. However, they display a considerably high mtDNA heterogeneity among them, namely in the frequencies of the U6, East African, and sub-Saharan haplogroups. In this study, we describe and compare the female gene pools of two neighboring Tunisian populations, Kesra (Berber) and Zriba (non-Berber), which have contrasting historical backgrounds. Both populations presented lower diversity values than those observed for other North African populations, and they were the only populations not showing significant negative Fu's F(S) values.
Kesra displayed a much higher proportion of typical sub-Saharan haplotypes (49%, including 4.2% of M1 haplogroup) than Zriba (8%). With respect to U6 sequences, frequencies were low (2% in Kesra and 8% in Zriba), and all belonged to the subhaplogroup U6a. An analysis of these data in the context of North Africa reveals that the emerging picture is complex, because Zriba would match the profile of a Berber Moroccan population, whereas Kesra, which shows twice the frequency of sub-Saharan lineages normally observed in northern coastal populations, would match a western Saharan population except for the low U6 frequency.
The North African patchy mtDNA landscape has no parallel in other regions of the world and increasing the number of sampled populations has not been accompanied by any substantial increase in our understanding of its phylogeography. Available data up to now rely on sampling small, scattered populations, although they are carefully characterized in terms of their ethnic, linguistic, and historical backgrounds.
It is therefore doubtful that this picture truly represents the complex historical demography of the region rather than being just the result of the type of samplings performed so far.
Elsewhere...
“The medieval Priego sample showed greater affinities to North-Africa than other Iberian Peninsula samples including that of present day Priego. Haplotype analysis revealed that some African heliotypes detected in Medieval Priego have matches with samples of precise north African origin as Tunisia, west-Sahara or the Canary Islands point to well documented historic connections with this area. However, medieval Priego L1b lineages carrying the 16175 transition have their most related counterparts in Europe instead of Africa. The coalescence age for these L1b lineages is compatible with a minor prehistoric African influence on Priego that also reached other European areas.” - A. Gonzalez et al., 2006
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Almoravids were more akin physically to tropical Africans than the coastal northern African counterparts...
From notes of Arab scholars:
And Yusuf ibn Tashfin, leader of the Almoravid forces, was "a brown man with wooly hair", according to the Arab chronicler Al-Fasi. (per DeCosta)
Pics of some contemporary West Saharan groups, derived from Sanhaja "Berbers":
"Islamicized Africans (Moors) invade Spain, and rule it unti1 1492. The Moors brought agriculture, engineering, mining, industry, manufacturing, architecture, and scholarship, developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years until the fall of Granada in 1492."
posted
Though the abstract listed states the results, the key words central Tunisia do not mesh with North Africa. Tunisia (central) is North Africa but the sample size from the specific area is where the emphasis should be. As contrast the same North African geographical area (specifically Morocco-Kasra-has twice the sub-Saharan DNA than central Tunisia) has a different profile.
When I used to teach my Marines about Marine Corps history, there were many references to the Barbary Coast and Tripoli with references to the Muslims who were 'black' but not necessarily what we know today as 'sub-Saharan'! just a note.
The Sanhaja (Sanhadja) and their origins-modern view. The Kabyles Berbers are stated to be a branch of this tribe. It seems in whatever location they stayed, they established a local 'branch'.
posted
Additional link: These were done based on the fact that the naming convention of the Western worlds confused the issues of language association and tribal identity regarding Arab and Berber despite the medieval descriptives of the foreigner as being Moor (another generic term) The main point was that the Moor was non white and abviously not European! The Muslim world comes in all colours!
posted
The Moors are an aspect of Spanish history but they are not the foundation of modern Spain or even remotely close to it. Keep in mind that in the struggle for Spain they lost.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^LOL What part do you not understand, Hore??
Islamicized Africans (Moors) invade Spain, and rule it unti1 1492. The Moors brought agriculture, engineering, mining, industry, manufacturing, architecture, and scholarship, developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years until the fall of Granada in 1492.
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: When I used to teach my Marines about Marine Corps history, there were many references to the Barbary Coast and Tripoli with references to the Muslims who were 'black' but not necessarily what we know today as 'sub-Saharan'! just a note.
Exactly what do you mean, Yazid??
"Sub-Sahara" is a geographic term in reference to regions south of the Saharan so of course the peoples in the areas mentioned were not Sub-Saharan. That these were black peoples and indigenous Africans can only be implied that they are still related to other black indigenous Africans including those in "Sub-Sahara".
Be aware that the Sahara desert did not always exist and that during Neolithic times there was no division between North Africa and regions south of the Sahara.
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
Though the abstract listed states the results, the key words central Tunisia do not mesh with North Africa. Tunisia (central) is North Africa but the sample size from the specific area is where the emphasis should be. As contrast the same North African geographical area (specifically Morocco-Kasra-has twice the sub-Saharan DNA than central Tunisia) has a different profile.
When I used to teach my Marines about Marine Corps history, there were many references to the Barbary Coast and Tripoli with references to the Muslims who were 'black' but not necessarily what we know today as 'sub-Saharan'! just a note.
The Sanhaja (Sanhadja) and their origins-modern view. The Kabyles Berbers are stated to be a branch of this tribe. It seems in whatever location they stayed, they established a local 'branch'.
Yazid, I am not sure what bearings this has to do with the study cited. Are you denying that Kesra, as mentioned, is in Tunisia?
The significance of the study was laid out:
1)The Kesra (group that strongly indentifies with its "Berber" or "west Afrasan" base) showed higher frequencies of what the study dubs as "typical" sub-Saharan mtDNA lineages; higher than that of the Zriba (the Arabized "west Afrasan" group). This is interesting, since some try to claim that usually the "typical" sub-Saharan lineages are predominant in the "Arabized" Berber groups of North Africa than those "Berber" groups that identify strongly with their indigenous West Afrasan base, and that this may be due to possible "Arab" interactions with Sahelian/Sub-Saharan regions and their subsequent taking in of "sub-Saharan" African concubines; some go as far as saying these were the remnants of "slaves" that Africans sold to "Arabs'. Well, the "Kesra" example shows how flimsy such rationale are, i.e. by revealing the opposite of the so-called Arabized groups having higher frequencies of the so-called "typical" sub-Saharan lineages over their "Berber" counterparts.
2) Another point to be taken home is that, Samplings done in the past on Northern African populations have been scattered, and hence, not showing the broader picture of patterns in the gene pools of North African groups.
Additional link: These were done based on the fact that the naming convention of the Western worlds confused the issues of language association and tribal identity regarding Arab and Berber despite the medieval descriptives of the foreigner as being Moor (another generic term) The main point was that the Moor was non white and abviously not European! The Muslim world comes in all colours!
Nope. The main point is that, "Moors" was initially applied to "black" folks of Sahelian and North Africa. This then changed to indiscriminately apply to non-white "foreigners" you speak of. This is the point, the intro article makes.
Besides, the specific "Moors" that the article is referring to, are "two" identifiable African groups, which I had already spelt out: The Almoravids, originating from the Sahelian/Sub-Saharan regions, and then the Almohads, originating in coastal North Africa. The Almoravids were largely heavily pigmented west-Afrasan groups, ranging from medium to dark skin tones. The Almohads, needless to say, though not exclusively, were more akin to the lighter-skin coastal African groups.
"Pictured above is a veiled Berber Moibt Themin warrior; typical of the Almoravid types which dominated Spain in the 11th Century."
And once again:
"Islamicized Africans (Moors) invade Spain, and rule it unti1 1492. The Moors brought agriculture, engineering, mining, industry, manufacturing, architecture, and scholarship, developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years until the fall of Granada in 1492."
posted
The Celtic populations which ruled Spain before the arrival of the moors and afterwards did not become absorbed by Moorish invaders but rather retreated towards the north as the muslims took the country. The events of 1492 were simply the culmination of a long process of reconquest. Further the Spainish Europeans who reconquered the country never mixed to any appreciable degree with the muslims. Keep in mind Djehuti that these people were, for the most part, enemies. You may be confusing the injection of ancient Greek writing into Spain facilitated by the arabs beginning around the year 1100 with the overall thrust of the culture. The fact is that with the reconquista Spain was European, not Moorish and certanily not muslim. That is what I mean when I say that the Moors were an aspect of Spainsh history but that is all. Spain is a European nation made up of European people. once again we have another example of people on this board taking a valid idea and going way too far with it.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hello Jide. Here are more pictures related to the subject. I appreciate the good job you did with your research. The discussions are interesting as well.
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: The Celtic populations which ruled Spain before the arrival of the moors and afterwards did not become absorbed by Moorish invaders but rather retreated towards the north as the muslims took the country. The events of 1492 were simply the culmination of a long process of reconquest. Further the Spainish Europeans who reconquered the country never mixed to any appreciable degree with the muslims. Keep in mind Djehuti that these people were, for the most part, enemies.
What are you talking about Hore??
First off, I don't think there were any Celtic speaking peoples since by that time everyone in the Iberian Peninsula (except the Basques) were speaking Latin derived languages.
Second, your racial purist fantasies aside, the white populations didn't move anywhere but were just ruled by the African Muslim elite. Of course they did not become "absorbed" by the invaders since they were the majority but it was the other way around-- those Moors who were not expelled became absorbed by the native Spanish population! There are even records of Spanish royalty bragging about how they were able to wash white the remaining Moors through intermarriage!
quote:You may be confusing the injection of ancient Greek writing into Spain facilitated by the arabs beginning around the year 1100 with the overall thrust of the culture. The fact is that with the reconquista Spain was European, not Moorish and certanily not muslim. That is what I mean when I say that the Moors were an aspect of Spainsh history but that is all. Spain is a European nation made up of European people. once again we have another example of people on this board taking a valid idea and going way too far with it.
LOL These comments above are pointless. No one ever said Spain was somehow non-European after or even during Moorish Muslim rule!! This is like saying Bulgaria and the rest of the Balkans is no longer European because it was conquered many times by peoples from the Near-East. The point was that it was ruled by Muslim Africans and that FACT is what you are desperately trying to run away from.
What's more is that not only did some of these Muslim African mix with the local population, but we have evidence of Africans migrating into the Iberian Peninsula since the Neolithic!!
So, European? Of course,.. but not all white! Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lord of the Nile: You guys are all great. I learnt a lot from this discussion.
Marc, thanks for your good work. Keep it up.
Uhh.. Marc isn't really the best person to learn from. Seriously, he isn't!
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No I am giving you basic scholarship Djehuti. You have no idea what you are talking about. What does the fact that they were speaking latin derived languages have to do with anything? Muslim culture was 400 years past its zenith by the end of the reconquest. That some moors, a small number relative to the population, married into the native population does not change the character of the culture.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
First off, I don't think there were any Celtic speaking peoples since by that time everyone in the Iberian Peninsula (except the Basques) were speaking Latin derived languages.
Lol. Certainly the "elusive" Celts were not responsible for the developments the citation from the college website was referring to. What was "Spain" before African "Moorish" invasions? Nothing...certainly nothing like it became, during and after the African "Moorish" conquests and colonization. Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I thought that the people who occupied much of Spain before the Moors were the Germanic tribes like the Visigoths,Ostragoths and Vandals?
The Iberian peninsula had a foreign pressence since the Phonecians. The first city ever established was done so by Phonecians. Carthigenians also often settled in Spain.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is coorect ausar but celtic tribes moved into the area prior to the groups you mentioned. Keep in mind that the celts staddled much of europe during Roman times. Muslim movement in Spain differed greatly from that in the Balkans. For one thing Muslims maintained an active converted population in the Balkans to the present day, this was not the case in Spain in any numbers. It is simply idiotic to say that the foundation of modern Spain was Moorish. Spain has a european culture, a european population and speaks a european language.
Super Car,What spain is today is much more tied to the Dual monarchy of Ferdinand and Isabella than a muslim culture that had been in decline for 400 years by the time of the reconquest.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Islamicized Africans (Moors) invade Spain, and rule it unti1 1492. The Moors brought agriculture, engineering, mining, industry, manufacturing, architecture, and scholarship, developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years until the fall of Granada in 1492."
^^"Facts", which are obviously taught in "western" schools, for a change.
Certainly the "elusive" Celts were not responsible for the developments the citation from the college website was referring to. What was "Spain" before African "Moorish" invasions? Nothing...certainly nothing like it became, during and after the African "Moorish" conquests and colonization.
Other notes to be reiterated:
“The medieval Priego sample showed greater affinities to North-Africa than other Iberian Peninsula samples including that of present day Priego. Haplotype analysis revealed that some African heliotypes detected in Medieval Priego have matches with samples of precise north African origin as Tunisia, west-Sahara or the Canary Islands point to well documented historic connections with this area. However, medieval Priego L1b lineages carrying the 16175 transition have their most related counterparts in Europe instead of Africa. The coalescence age for these L1b lineages is compatible with a minor prehistoric African influence on Priego that also reached other European areas.” - A. Gonzalez et al., 2006
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
SC, that is overly simplistic. France and Spain developed in much the same way through those years and muslims had nothing to do with France. Additionally muslims did not rule Spain until 1492. By the 15th century they controled only a small portion of the country. Keep in mind that the Spanish always had independent kingdoms NOT controled by the Muslims and it was those kingdoms that led the reconquest.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
here are the facts SC. The pope called a crusade to rid Spain of muslims. In 1118 (long before 1492) Alfonsio I of Aragon captured Saragossa. By 1212 they had pretty much wiped out the Almohad army at Las Navas de Tolosa. The victory was decisive and moorish resistance broke down. SC, this in turn led to the fall of Cordova (1236) valencia (1238) Seville (1248) Cadiz (1250) this pushed the Muslims to the southern tip of Spain and two hundred years later F&I threw them out of Europe for good.
Those are the FACTS you spoke of.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No its not because you obviously are clueless about spanish history. First you stated that the moors ruled till 1492. That was totally incorrect and they had lost almost all of the country over 250 tears before that. Secondly, the muslims were the hated enemy by the spainish kingdoms and the Popes in Rome. You are up to your old tricks of spinning a little fact here and there into complete utter nonsense.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: No its not because you obviously are clueless about spanish history. First you stated that the moors ruled till 1492.
You are illiterate. I didn't state it; that is what the "college" website states. All you can do, is to simply cry about it like a toddler, but incapable of countering it.
quote: That was totally incorrect and they had lost almost all of the country over 250 tears before that.
Apparently, they didn't hold onto the country forever, just as European invaders didn't hold onto various African countries. But hey, this is supposed to have bearings on the fact that Almoravids, Almohads, and Nasrids ruled the said European region, right? Lol.
quote: Secondly, the muslims were the hated enemy by the spainish kingdoms and the Popes in Rome. You are up to your old tricks of spinning a little fact here and there into complete utter nonsense.
Africans hated those barbarian Europeans who invaded their lands. Again, I suppose this has any bearings on the fact that the said Africans ruled Spain, and brought about advances that were not there before they arrived. You are a lost case. Lol. Continue to cry.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Super car, the objection that i posted was the nutty idea that started the thread that there was some sort of 'African Foundation' to modern Spain, this is simply nutty talk. Was there interaction between scholars, yes. Did Europe rediscover much of what was lost classical knowledge through the arabs in spain, yes. That said, to say that Muslims jump started Spainish culture is silly. Spainish culture is European and Muslims made contributions but they were light years away from what anyone would call foundational.
Keep in mind that the zenith of muslim civilization was around the year 1000. They went into a steady decline after that that corresponded with an upswing in European power. By the end of the reconquest Europe has regained its footing and poured the foundation for the creation of the modern world we live in today. The arab contribution to this process was the reintroduction of ancient knowledge into Europe that we could say jump started the process.
Another thing to keep in mind is that after 1000 the muslim empire began to grow very conservative. As the fundamentalist Muslims grew in power much of what we know as arab scholarship moved away from the centers of power. We also need to remember that while the Moors were very involved in the initial Spainish invasion other arab groups became dominant during most of those years. In short, there is no African foundation in Spain, there is a european foundation.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: In short, there is no African foundation in Spain, there is a european foundation.
They're so desperate to cling to false facts in order to alleviate themselves from their inferiority complex.
Posts: 94 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: The Iberian peninsula had a foreign pressence since the Phonecians. The first city ever established was done so by Phonecians. Carthigenians also often settled in Spain.
posted
Thats all well and good rasol, nobody disputes that but the man's statement that Spain had an African foundation was nuts. There are some on this board who find a black man living somewhere and just go off a cliff.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
When Tariq entered Spain in 711, Germanic tribes controlled that area. Although the original inhabitants were stated to be celti-iberos, it mean the Celts journeyed to Spain and merged with the Iberian people (possible from Carthage? who is sure) hence the term celti-iberos. The Celts have maintained their homeland in Northern Spain and Portugal and it seems that although they may have been part of the southern part, they were ultimately driven north (Galicia) by the Visigoths and the Ostrogoths.
Carthage is Africa and 700 years of history is a foundation. Words, place names in Arabic (gibraltar=rock of tariq), guadalquivie=wadi al quiber?) have been localized in local language. The Alhambra is not a Celtic sronghold! It is Arabic culture itself though built on th remain o a Christian church but nonethless a tribute to a past glory! It is obvious Spain is a European country and it is apparent that the mozarabes who were native Spaniards (a loaded word here meaning born in Spain) who were such in skin hue only because they dressed, behaved, etc with Arabic (correctly Berber/Moor) customs. If 700 years of Roman influence is good enough for Africa and non European locations, why is 700 years of North African presence in Europe the exact opposite? Is 300 years of European hegemony in North America more important than 1000 years of Native American presence? It always depends on who writes history?
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
they did not have 700 years of influence yazid and the influence was limited to contact between scholars and the liberalism of a small number of nobles on both sides. The European kingdoms who kicked them out of the country were never a part of the muslim occupation. 700 years of Roman influence in Africa has nothing to do with Spain, that was an emotional comment with no real meaning. I never said that 700 years of Roman presence in Africa was good or bad. Further, the native american cultures in America were destroyed, they do not exist today so what kind of statement was that? Iberian celts had been a part of Spain for centuries.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hore, I don't know why you keep bringing up 'Celtic' tribes. If you recall, Many of the Celtic peoples of Iberia/Gaul were Latinized by the Romans which was how the Spanish and Portuguese languages came about. And yes there were Germanic and Aryan tribes that were in the mix but by then they were all Spanish.
The Moors brought a kind of renaisance to Spain long before the actual Ranaisaince of Italy, due to their advanced Islamic culture and scholarship. The Moors were a minority but yes there was intermarriage. So give it a rest!
Posts: 26236 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
The Visigoth king (Ulric, if I recall correctly) called Tariq (the Berber) to help him fight the unruly enemies (Eastern Goths?. For Tariq to come to the aid of A Germanic king tells me there was friendly (commercial/trade? I was not there so I am guessing) contact between Sapin and North Africa. That date was 711AD. The offical last date (official historical record) that the last remnants of Muslim control was defeated was stated to be 1492. That to me is at least 700 years. Do the math!
No doubt during that period of conquest, Arab, Muslim and Berber (generally called Moro/Moor) integrated into the society and the opposite took place where Spaniards (be they be Germanic, Celtic, Frank, Alani, etc) became Muslim by virtue of status, dynastic connection (Almohad/Almoravides/etc) and the like. It is the same that takes place when various groups get together. No different.
Check on the status of the mozarabes in Spain! In today's American language jargon, they may be called wannabees, going native, but this was their social milieu.
Ojala que pase un buen dia!
Ojaja from the expression 'Inshallah-if god wills it'
The architecture of Southern Spain, Sicily, Sardinia, etc and the women dressed in black is a modern expression of those days of Muslin control! Cultural borrowing, no mas!
I am not talking black or any reference to race because I detest that level of discourse! The group collectively known as Moro (moor) have their origin in Africa and there are therefore African. African and black are not necessarily the same but I can see how people can be deceived into thinking this because this was what was/is being taught despite the truth.
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Super car, the objection that i posted was the nutty idea that started the thread that there was some sort of 'African Foundation' to modern Spain, this is simply nutty talk.
^This is what I call a nutty irrelevant talk, that doesn't even remotely come to address the 'facts' of African rule in Spain, already posted herein. Only a tiny cliche of crackpot Eurocentrists, with "inferiority complex" will deny these facts, that are so apparent to everyone else. Apparently, not even some "western" colleges will go as far as denying these facts.
quote: Was there interaction between scholars, yes.
They ruled the place; man, you are just too dense. That doesn't happen wihout interaction.
quote: Did Europe rediscover much of what was lost classical knowledge through the arabs in spain, yes.
How can you rediscover something that you never had? Your "Germanic" tribes certainly did not build those things in Spain, as that college website put it. These things were not in Spain prior to the African "Moorish" control. The "Germanic" tribes were not civilized enough to even control the place.
Again, how do you just so happen to "rediscover" what you never had?
quote: That said, to say that Muslims jump started Spainish culture is silly.
Lol. What was "Spanish culture" before the African "Moors" ruled it? What was it when African "Moors" ruled it...and what is it now?
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The african moors did not rule Spanish culture. The level of basic historical ignorance on this board is astounding. First of all moors were involved in the early stages of the conquest of Spain. They were later displaced by other arab groups. Secondly the Kingdoms that led the reconquest were NEVER under the control of the Muslims. They were pushed back into northern Spain and regrouped, retaking most of Spain by the early 12th century.
Djehuti, I mentioned the iberian Celts as one of a number of european groups in the area, they had simply been there longer than some of the others. They had agriculture and a cohesive society and were not developed by moors or arabs. actually, what was introduced into spain was not so much advanced arab scholarship but rather the works of ancient Greece starting in about the year 1000. Islam began a slow steady decline after 1000 and ancient learning was already being supressed by a rise in fundamentalism among the muslims. because of the reintroduction of ancient greek scholarship Peter Abelard and others were able to start a debate which led to the changes that occured in europe through the reformation.
Yazid, By the early 1100's most of spain was back under european control. Only the southern tip remained to the muslims and in fact muslims never controled the entire nation. Control of most of Spain actually lasted around 450 years, several centuries short of 700. that is the math.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
...what next; a male is not a male, a female is not a female, you are not yourself, or planet earth doesn't exist. Lol.
quote:
The level of basic historical ignorance on this board is astounding. First of all moors were involved in the early stages of the conquest of Spain. They were later displaced by other arab groups.
I agree, get psychological help. We are talking about African "Moors" not Arabs. No African "Moor" has been displaced by your imaginary "Arabs", in your "imaginary" world where the African "Moors" never ruled Spain. An 'imaginary' world, where even the "Neolithic" expansion from extra-European regions to Europe never occurred. An 'imaginary' world, where Europeans "rediscovered" things that Europeans never had in the first place, before their introduction into Europe by non-Europeans. Lol.
There is nothing worse than a 'lone' Eurocentric crackpot, who is so 'nutty' that he'd deny things that even other extremist "Eurocentrists" will never deny. Lol.
"Islamicized Africans (Moors) invade Spain, and rule it unti1 1492. The Moors brought agriculture, engineering, mining, industry, manufacturing, architecture, and scholarship, developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years until the fall of Granada in 1492."
^^Taught in "western" Schools? A dose of some "reality" for once, instead of Eurocentric propaganda...strange but true.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
Moros (moors) were never displaced by other Arab groups. All Arab group were grouped under the term Moor! The group know as Moors encompassed Arabs (language), Egyptians, Turks, Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, Mauritania, Mali, etc. All have origins in the continent of Africa. They were at best 'multiethnic' as they are now depending on the tribal affiliation. They wer not European, if that is what you were attempting to imply. They are/were African!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
Moros (moors) were never displaced by other Arab groups. All Arab group were grouped under the term Moor! The group know as Moors encompassed Arabs (language), Egyptians, Turks, Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, Mauritania, Mali, etc. All have origins in the continent of Africa. They were at best 'multiethnic' as they are now depending on the tribal affiliation. They wer not European, if that is what you were attempting to imply. They are/were African!
There is no need to "mystify" the "Moors" as mentioned in the intro article. The "African" rulers of Spain were referred to in specific terms which are not "ambiguous," or to allow confusion of "African" groups with the "non-African" groups. These were the "Almoravids" - Africans, "Almohads" and their subsequent offshoots - again Africans, and Nasrids - possibly Africans as well.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
It is obvious Spanish culture is as it is today! Spanish culture is heterogenous as opposed to homogenous. Basques (Euzkadi-language) in the North with Galicia (language closer to Portuguese, Catalunya(ian) language similar to French. No one has stated Moorish culture is Spanish culture. It is one influence that is visible in architecture, language, and place name. As in SW USA, Spanish (the conqueror) influence is a major influence despite Anglo-Saxon control over the century. It can be said the the native American groups were the majority along with Mexicans living in the conquered areas. It does not make the native American or the Mexican a Spaniard, but the language goes a long way in colonization and assimilation. Spain was the same way. Ask the various ethnicities of Hispanic? heritage and they will assert a Spanish identity despite their native American/African mixture. That is assimilation but it does not absolve the conqueror of his past mistakes!
As a soccer fan, France beat Brazil yesterday. The face of the French soccer team was a far cry from we know as French as social construct and they are all legitimately French as citizens of the French republic. Even Zidane (Algerian?) looked more French than the stereotype!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Boy oh boy. Talk about missing the point. Instead of wasting time debating Hore on nonsense points.
How about this:
quote: Al-Hakam (796-822 A.D.) was a tolerant ruler who respected the counsel of his advisers and who loved learning. He not only extended the great mosque of Cordoba, but was also responsible for instituting the first university in Andalusia:
Thus when the first truly modern universities would grow up in the rest of Europe, even though they might not be aware of their intellectual heritage, it is none the less certain that they had their forerunners in the Nizamiyyah University and the Bayt al-Hikmah of Baghdad and the Academy of Cordoba and the Qarawiyan of Fes.
Cordoba thus became the greatest centre of learning in Europe at a time when the rest of the continent was plunged in ignorance, and in its flowering Cordoba was clearly one of the wonders of the world. Quoting an earlier writer Lane-Poole wrote:
To Cordoba belong all the beauty and ornaments that delight the eye or dazzle the sight. Her long line of Sultans form her crown of glory; her necklace is strung with the pearls which her poets have gathered from the ocean of language; her dress is of the banners of learning, well-knit together by her men of science; and the masters of every art and industry are the hem of her garments.
When Cordoba was at the height of its flowering (Ninth and Tenth Century) there were over 200,000 houses in the city along with six hundred mosques, nine hundred public baths, fifty hospitals and several large markets which catered for all branches of trade and commerce, including 15,000 weavers:
You could walk through her streets for ten miles in one direction at night, and always have the light of lamps to guide your way. Seven hundred years later this would still be an innovation in London or Paris, as would paved streets.
(Even though the website does try to obscure the fact that when Cordoba was the capital of Europe it was under MOORISH control, not European Spanish control.)
It is from the remnants of these centers of learning that Columbus and the leaders of Spain got the knowledge of seafaring that they needed to sail to the Americas. THAT is the point. If it wasnt for the Moors, their universities and the struggle against the Moors by the Spanish, Columbus would NOT have gone to America.
Let us not forget that the tragedy of the fall of Moorish Spain is that it began the enslavement of Moorish Africans in Africa by Portuguese, even though the Arabs were enslaving Moorish Africans before that.
The key points here are that under the Moors, Spain reached heights in math, arts, science, culture and learning that was UNKNOWN in Europe prior to their arrival. The architecture of Andalus had NO parallel anywhere in Europe at the time. Baths were a prominent fixture in Andalus when most of Europe did not bathe regularly. Schools and Universities were prominent when most of Europe was illiterate. Ideas of navigation and map making were improved upon based on the studies of the Muslims.
Andalus was made up of mixed ethnicities, but Africans and BLACK Africans were a large part of this mixture.
NOTE: It should be obvious at this point that Islam and the Islamic culture did NOT originate in Africa. However, that does not change the fact that at the time of the Moorish conquest, many black African Muslims participated in the invasion and or were actually ruling in Al Andalus at certain periods. The point is that the word MOOR is a reference to the black skin of many of the Islamic invaders, regardless of whether ALL of them were black or not. There are many Moors that could still be seen in North Africa and the Sahara at the turn of the century, who we often see in photos from the period. Today, Moors (as in BLACK African moors) are still in North Africa, however their numbers are greatly diminished since even the 1900s (see the book I posted earlier about morocco). It is hard to tell who is and isnt an indigenous North African Moor today, with all the descendants of slaves (African and European) as well as Arab, Jewish and other bloodlines in the area. In my opinion, the Tuaregs are a close link to the classical Moorish tradition.
posted
yazid, As a matter of fact the beginning of the thread did claim that spanish culture had an african foundation, which is absurd. Secondly, the moors were displaced by other arabs after the initial invasion though the term Moor continued to be used by the spainish. You need to go read the history of the period before you crawl out on these limbs. Further, the inqusition followed the reconquest and resulted in the burning and killing of jews ,conversos, Muslims and some christians as well. European immigrants were brought in to take the lands formerly occupied by muslims. As for the southwest, I live in Texas and we have always had some Mexican flavor to our culture but it is an anglo culture and mexicans who move here become part of the dominant culture in a generation or two just as other immigrants do. You may be interested to know that the vast majority of third generation Mexicans who live here no longer even speak Spanish. You are making assumptions about spain that are simply incorrect. While many scholars of jewish, christian and muslim faiths did work together to reignite ancient knowledge in Europe the general Spanish European culture was hostile to Muslims as evidenced by the fact that they were eventually killed and expelled from the country.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hore, you are the one going out on a limb. You are trying to find flaws in the posts on this board to act as if post Moorish Europe was NOT different as a result of the Moorish invasion. It WAS and that is the point. Prior to the Moors, Spain and Europe had no civilized culture as we now define it. After the Moors, Europe was considered civilized. It is retarted to act as if the glory of Al Analus and its universities, paved streets and architecture did NOT influence later generations of Europeans, whether they gave CREDIT to this period in history or not. I would not expect them to, especially since Europe now wants to lay claim to everything good and decent in civilization, of course they wont talk about how backwards they were prior to the Moorish invasion. And this point has NOTHING to do with whether the Moors were ALL black, somewhat black, or mostly black. The term Moor was originally a reference to the black islamic Africans who were part of the Islamic occupation of Spain. There is AMPLE evidence to this fact throughout Europe. Of course the Islamic Empire was not African, but it just so happens that Spain was closer to the MAIN branch of Islam in Africa, who sent their troops to Spain under orders from elsewhere. Islamic culture and civilization is the bridge between ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome and Europe. Europe was in the dark ages when the Islamic Empire was reaching its greatest extent, allowing it to absorb all sorts of knowledge, culture and learning. All of this was made available to Europe in Al Andalus and was the precursor to the European desire for Empire. Prior to this the Western Europeans HAD NO Empire or culture. Give credit where credit is due and stop using someone's errors to justify your own nonsense.
As a matter of fact, I would not even call the Islamic Empires or those of Europe after the Moors as even civilized, since they used EXPLOITATION and OPPRESSION as a tool of Empire. So, even in this respect, Europeans got their ideas about savage imperialism from elsewhere.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: When you think of European culture, one of the first things that comes to mind is the renaissance. Many of the roots of European culture can be traced back to that glorious time of art, science, commerce and architecture. But, long before the renaissance there was a place of humanistic beauty in Muslim Spain. Not only was it artistic, scientific and commercial but also tolerant and poetic. Moors, as the Spaniards call the Muslims, populated Spain for nearly 700 years. As you'll see, it was their civilization that brought Europe out of the dark ages and ushered in the renaissance. Their influences still live with us today.
Back during the eighth century, Europe was still knee-deep in the Medieval period. That's not the only thing they were knee-deep in. In his book, "The Day The Universe Changed," the historian James Burke describes how the typical European townspeople lived:
"The inhabitants threw all their refuse into the drains in the center of the narrow streets. The stench must have been overwhelming, though it appears to have gone virtually unnoticed. Mixed with excrement and urine would be the soiled reeds and straw used to cover the dirt floors. (p. 32)
This squalid society was organized under a feudal system and had little that would resemble a commercial economy. Along with other restrictions, the Catholic Church forbade the lending of money - which didn't help get things booming much. "Anti-Semitism, previously rare, began to increase. Money lending, which was forbidden by the Church, was permitted under Jewish law." (Burke, 1985, p. 32) Jews worked to develop a currency although they were heavily persecuted for it. Medieval Europe was a miserable lot, which ran high in illiteracy, superstition, barbarism and filth.
During this same time, Arabs entered Europe from the south. ABD AL-RAHMAN I, a survivor of a family of caliphs of the Arab empire, reached Spain in the mid-700's. He became the first Caliph of Al-Andalus, the Moorish part of Spain. He also set up the UMAYYAD Dynasty that ruled Al-Andalus for over three-hundred years. (Grolier, History of Spain). Al Andalus means, "the land of the vandals," from which comes the modern name Andalusia.
At first, the land resembled the rest of Europe in all its squalor. But within two-hundred years the Moors had turned Al-Andalus into a bastion of culture, commerce and beauty. "Irrigation systems imported from Syria and Arabia turned the dry plains... into an agricultural cornucopia. Olives and wheat had always grown there. The Arabs added pomegranates, oranges, lemons, aubergines, artichokes, cumin, coriander, bananas, almonds, pams, henna, woad, madder, saffron, sugar-cane, cotton, rice, figs, grapes, peaches, apricots and rice." (Burke, 1985, p. 37)
By the beginning of the ninth century, Moorish Spain was the gem of Europe with its capital city, Cordova. With the establishment of Abdurrahman III - "the great caliphate of Cordova" - came the golden age of Al-Andalus. Cordova, in southern Spain, was the intellectual center of Europe.
At a time when London was a tiny mud-hut village that "could not boast of a single streetlamp" (Digest, 1973, p. 622), in Cordova "there were half a million inhabitants, living in 113,000 houses. There were 700 mosques and 300 public baths spread throughout the city and its twenty-one suburbs. The streets were paved and lit." (Burke, 1985, p. 38) The houses had marble balconies for summer and hot-air ducts under the mosaic floors for the winter. They were adorned with gardens with artificial fountains and orchards". (Digest, 1973, p. 622) "Paper, a material still unknown to the west, was everywhere. There were bookshops and more than seventy libraries." (Burke, 1985, p. 38).
In his book titled, "Spain In The Modern World," James Cleuge explains the significance of Cordova in Medieval Europe:
"For there was nothing like it, at that epoch, in the rest of Europe. The best minds in that continent looked to Spain for everything which most clearly differentiates a human being from a tiger." (Cleugh, 1953, p. 70)
During the end of the first millennium, Cordova was the intellectual well from which European humanity came to drink. Students from France and England traveled there to sit at the feet of Muslim, Christian and Jewish scholars, to learn philosophy, science and medicine (Digest, 1973, p. 622). In the great library of Cordova alone, there were some 600,000 manuscripts (Burke, 1978, p. 122).
This rich and sophisticated society took a tolerant view towards other faiths. Tolerance was unheard of in the rest of Europe. But in Moorish Spain, "thousands of Jews and Christians lived in peace and harmony with their Muslim overlords." (Burke, 1985, p. 38) The society had a literary rather than religious base. Economically their prosperity was unparalleled for centuries. The aristocracy promoted private land ownership and encouraged Jews in banking. There was little or no Muslim prostelyting. Instead, non-believers simply paid an extra tax!
"Their society had become too sophisticated to be fanatical. Christians and Moslems, with Jews as their intermediaries and interpreters, lived side by side and fought, not each other, but other mixed communities." (Cleugh, 1953, p. 71)
Unfortunately, this period of intellectual and economic prosperity began to decline. Shifting away from the rule of law, there began to be internal rifts in the Arab power structure. The Moorish harmony began to break up into warring factions. Finally, the caliphs were eliminated and Cordova fell to other Arab forces. "In 1013 the great library in Cordova was destroyed. True to their Islamic traditions however, the new rulers permitted the books to be dispersed, together with the Cordovan scholars to the capital towns of small emirates." (Burke, 1985, p. 40) The intellectual properties of the once great Al-Andalus were divided among small towns.
As the Moors built mini-alliances and fought amongst themselves, the Christians to the North were doing just the opposite. In Northern Spain the various Christian kingdoms united to expel the Moors from the European continent. (Grolier, History of Spain) This set the stage for the final act of the Medieval period.
In another of James Burke's works titled "Connections," he describes how the Moors thawed out Europe from the Dark Ages. "But the event that must have done more for the intellectual and scientific revival of Europe was the fall of Toledo in Spain to the Christians, in 1105." In Toledo the Arabs had huge libraries containing the lost (to Christian Europe) works of the Greeks and Romans along with Arab philosophy and mathematics. "The Spanish libraries were opened, revealing a store of classics and Arab works that staggered Christian Europeans." (Burke, 1978, p. 123)
The intellectual plunder of Toledo brought the scholars of northern Europe like moths to a candle. The Christians set up a giant translating program in Toledo. Using the Jews as interpreters, they translated the Arabic books into Latin. These books included "most of the major works of Greek science and philosophy... along with many original Arab works of scholarship." (Digest, p. 622) "The intellectual community which the northern scholars found in Spain was so far superior to what they had at home that it left a lasting jealousy of Arab culture, which was to color Western opinions for centuries" (Burke, 1985, p. 41)
"The subjects covered by the texts included medicine, astrology, astronomy pharmacology, psychology, physiology, zoology, biology, botany, mineralogy, optics, chemistry, physics, mathematics, algebra, geometry, trigonometry, music, meteorology, geography, mechanics, hydrostatics, navigation and history." (Burke, 1985, p. 42) These works alone however, didn't kindle the fire that would lead to the renaissance. They added to Europe's knowledge, but much of it was unappreciated without a change in the way Europeans viewed the world.
Remember, Medieval Europe was superstitious and irrational. "What caused the intellectual bombshell to explode, however, was the philosophy that came with (the books). This included Aristotle's system of nature and the logic of argument." (Burke, 1985, p. 42) Found among the works were even Arab philosophers' commentaries of Aristotle's views. This "shocked the West by giving religion and philosophy equal status as systems for explaining the cosmos." (Burke, 1985, p. 42) This questioning and the use of logic revolutionized the definition of truth and sparked the renaissance.
Christians continued to reconquer Spain, leaving a wake of death and destruction in their path. The books were spared, but Moor culture was destroyed and their civilization disintegrated. Ironically, it wasn't just the strength of the Christians that defeated the Arabs but the disharmony among the Moor's own ranks. Like Greece and Rome that proceeded them, the Moors of Al-Andalus fell into moral decay and wandered from the intellect that had made them great.
The translations continued as each Moorish haven fell to the Christians. In 1492, the same year Columbus discovered the New World, Granada, the last Muslim enclave, was taken. Captors of the knowledge were not keepers of its wisdom. Sadly, all Jews and Muslims that would not abandon their beliefs were either killed or exiled (Grolier, History of Spain). Thus ended an epoch of tolerance and all that would remain of the Moors would be their books.
It's fascinating to realize just how much Europe learned from the Moorish texts and even greater to see how much that knowledge has endured. Because of the flood of knowledge, the first Universities started to appear. College and University degrees were developed (Burke, 1985, p. 48). Directly from the Arabs came the numerals we use today. Even the concept of Zero (an Arabic word) came from the translations (Castillo & Bond, 1987, p. 27) . Along with texts, Arabic music spread throughout Europe, giving us the keyboard, the flute and the concept of harmony. It's also fair to say that renaissance architectural concepts came from the Moorish libraries. Mathematics and architecture explained in the Arab texts along with Arab works on optics led to the perspective paintings of the renaissance period (Burke, 1985 p. 72). The first lawyers began their craft using the new translated knowledge as their guide. Even the food utencils we use today come from the Cordova kitchen! (Burke, 1985 p. 44) All of these examples show just some of the ways Europe transformed.
Much of what we are today can find it's roots in the once great Moorish culture of Spain.
And keep in mind that the first universities of Europe were modelled on those of Cordova, which were the first in Europe.
Posts: 8889 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
you stated that "You may be interested to know that the vast majority of third generation Mexicans who live here no longer even speak Spanish" but why should they? The land was taken and is now North American so they speak English. It does not mean they become Anglo. Those same people opposed the illegals in USA? Why? Their present brethren did not wait in line like the rest (myself included)! YEs, the illegals have help, business and elected officials within the status quo. God Bless America.
That is their social milieu. Same as when the Moors were in Spain! Their ethnicity did not change but they intermarried and became more phenotypically 'Spanish' as evidenced by the DNA studies showing some affinity to the respective areas of Africa.
quote:Supercar:...what next; a male is not a male, a female is not a female, you are not yourself, or planet earth doesn't exist. Lol.
......I agree, get psychological help. We are talking about African "Moors" not Arabs. No African "Moor" has been displaced by your imaginary "Arabs", in your "imaginary" world where the African "Moors" never ruled Spain.
lol. Of course that's why Horemheb tried to weasel out of his blatant lie by qualifying as....didn't rule spanish 'culture'.
Which means exactly, what (???)
We will never know.
That's the point.
Horemheb always uses weasel words and evades specifics whenever he wants to assert a lie or deny the truth.
Which is pretty much whenever he opens his mouth. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rasol: lol. Of course that's why Horemheb tried to weasel out of his blatant lie by qualifying as....didn't rule spanish 'culture'.
Which means exactly, what (???)
We will never know.
That's the point.
Horemheb always uses weasel words and evades specifics whenever he wants to assert a lie or deny the truth.
Which is pretty much whenever he opens his mouth.
He slides in the term "culture", because in his mind, this is a possible way through which he can evade the 'fact' of African rule in Spain. In that the Islamic rule [which was made possible as a result of military cooperation with African converts ("Moors")], of which the African Moorish rule was a continuation, turned Spain into a center of "culture" and "learning" in Europe [as the college website appropriately puts it], then the "Moorish" presence had a profound effect on Spanish culture and subsequently, on the so-called European cultural "renaissance".
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hi Doug and Jida. You might have some insight into this. The past is connected to the present but my question is in 3) below:
1) It was from Fribourg in Switzerland that came the population that would invade Gallic / i.e. African Britain and lead to the end of African and beginning of Anglo-Saxon dominion of that land. However, that Africans themselves acquainted the Fribourg population with knowledge of and seafaring assistance to get to Britain.
2) The name Finland is the Germanic name for fish scales taken from the Finnish name for its own country, Suomo, meaning scales. And in those days, it was the indigenous population which was African that was involved in fishing and the hunting of fur-bearing animals that would become a big business in Medieval Europe. Finland, itself, captures another meaning of the word of "scales" in the name "fin": and land of the fins, Finland. Don't worry. I am soon going to upload a web page showing Scandinavian African roots called WHEN SCANDINAVIA WAS AFRICAN.
3) That leads me to the question: The past connected to the present might find some expression in the name WESTMORELAND: in Sweden, VASTERMORRLAND, and found in the name of General Westmoreland who stopped the Vietnam offensive in 1968. The question is, IN VASTERMORRLAND DO WE FIND "WEST MOOR LAND" AND IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THIS LAND WHICH HISTORY RECORDS HAD AFRICANS, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT THIS WAS THE "WEST LAND OF THE MOORS?"
Thanks,
Marc W.
.
-------------------- The nature of homelife is the fate of the nation. Posts: 2334 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: they did not have 700 years of influence yazid and the influence was limited to contact between scholars and the liberalism of a small number of nobles on both sides. The European kingdoms who kicked them out of the country were never a part of the muslim occupation. 700 years of Roman influence in Africa has nothing to do with Spain, that was an emotional comment with no real meaning. I never said that 700 years of Roman presence in Africa was good or bad. Further, the native american cultures in America were destroyed, they do not exist today so what kind of statement was that? Iberian celts had been a part of Spain for centuries.
Hore, you have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not going to get into it right now since I'm about to go to sleep.
Posts: 1219 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
yazid, Moors were not involved in any but the early stages of the Muslim invasion of spain. Most arabs were driven out of the country or killed. The problem is that you are vastly 'overstating' the degree in intermarriage between Europeans and Muslims.
Secondly, there is an excellent new book on the illumination of the dark ages through Spain. 'Aristotle's children' by Richard Rubenstein outlines how intellectuals of muslim, jewish and catholic faiths worked together to revive much of the old scholarship and change european thinking and lead to the renaissance. This was an effort of intellectuals and not the result of any broader interaction of peoples. It was not even accepted by catholic leadership at large until the 14th centuries.
The thing to keep formost in your thinking is that relationships between Muslims and europeans in Spain was confrontational. You cannot take the exceptions to the rule and offer that as standard history. There are many great books on the reconquest aside from the one I mentioned, all of them support the view I have outlined.
-------------------- God Bless President Bush Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
These comments above are pointless. No one ever said Spain was somehow non-European after or even during Moorish Muslim rule!! This is like saying Bulgaria and the rest of the Balkans is no longer European because it was conquered many times by peoples from the Near-East. The point was that it was ruled by Muslim Africans and that FACT is what you are desperately trying to run away from.![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Uhh.. Marc isn't really the best person to learn from. Seriously, he isn't!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic