posted
I am a arabic speaker i cant understand Magribi arabic that well they have there own slang just as Iraqeen have there slang but Magribi is the worst to understand from all other arabic speakers.
Mr. Berry u dont even know me to now what i dont know and what i do it seems u are the unknown arab trying to be known so please show me the names and tribal names of these unknown arab u speak about every shaab has a Qayama
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I believe by "unknown Arabs", he means Arab tribes not well known by common people throughout the world, especially non-Arab peoples including Westerners. The Arabian peninsula is a vast region with diverse populations and many tribes. I think Tariq and Dana's point is that many of these Arab tribes are much darker in appearance than many people realize.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Aswani. I said that there are many things that you don't understand only based on what you said yourself. You said that you have never heard of an Idrissi kingdom in Morocco. This surprises me because the Idrissi kingdom was the first Arab/Islamic kingdom in Morocco. You also said that you don't understand Moroccan Arabic. Because it's different from the Arabic you may know doesn't make it necessarily worse Arabic. Do you know anything about the origin of the Arabic words that they use? Do you know anything about the dialect to say that it's not Arabic? You said that Moroccans aren't Arabs because they don't speak Arabic. Do you mean that? Do you know anything about the Arab tribes of Morocco?
Concerning what I mean by the unknown Arabs, did you read my book to try to understand what I mean?
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: I am a arabic speaker i cant understand Magribi arabic that well they have there own slang just as Iraqeen have there slang but Magribi is the worst to understand from all other arabic speakers.
Mr. Berry u dont even know me to now what i dont know and what i do it seems u are the unknown arab trying to be known so please show me the names and tribal names of these unknown arab u speak about every shaab has a Qayama
I would like to state tht when I think of the Unknown Arabs I think of the ones that brought the Arab language and culture to the world. These Arabs are barely known becaue first of all most people calling themselves Arab are only Arab by nationality and language.
The true Arabs are the original African related people who called themselves "the blacks". They were for thousands of years the only people in the Arabian peninsula and for hundreds of years the only people speaking Arabic. Lastly they are the first people spreading Islam and responsible for the worship of god under the name "Allah".
The world does not know who the original Arabs were or what they were because they are thinking of the people who are now living in the world that are largely the result of Arab people mixing with non-Arabs and their culture.
Posts: 4226 | From: New Jersey, USA | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Berry i will read your book my friend i am not against anything u are saying.
I think u misunderstood me about Magribi first let me give u an example Nubians Mahas and Kanuz of southern egypt speak arabic but they are not true arabic speakers never ever have been. Beja whether Bishari or Ababda have become arabized meaning they were never arab speakers just like pakistani are not arab speakers but many pakistani claim Quiershi decent u tell me.
My family does the same thing we claim prophet muhammed decent threw Abu Amr Ibn Saidi ibn Abu Talib but we dont acknowledge our other heritage and lineage the same for Magribi,Sudanese and other north africans.
Im tired of fake lineages claiming decent as if arabs or jews have royal blood.
Magribi arabic is the hardest to understand ask any arab speaker from the arab world this does not mean that magribi are less arab i never said anything like that i just said many arabic speakers and islamic followers are really not original speakers of arabic just like the Mahra even egyptians of modern day egypt in yemen jamal in masri gamal why u think this is in alot of socalled arabs and arabic speakers who are not originally arab speakers.
U ask me Mr. Berry Do you know anything about the Arab tribes of Morocco.
Mr. Berry Do u Know anything about the Non-Arab Tribes of Morrocco.
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Mr. Berry i will read your book my friend i am not against anything u are saying.
I think u misunderstood me about Magribi first let me give u an example Nubians Mahas and Kanuz of southern egypt speak arabic but they are not true arabic speakers never ever have been. Beja whether Bishari or Ababda have become arabized meaning they were never arab speakers just like pakistani are not arab speakers but many pakistani claim Quiershi decent u tell me.
My family does the same thing we claim prophet muhammed decent threw Abu Amr Ibn Saidi ibn Abu Talib but we dont acknowledge our other heritage and lineage the same for Magribi,Sudanese and other north africans.
Im tired of fake lineages claiming decent as if arabs or jews have royal blood.
Magribi arabic is the hardest to understand ask any arab speaker from the arab world this does not mean that magribi are less arab i never said anything like that i just said many arabic speakers and islamic followers are really not original speakers of arabic just like the Mahra even egyptians of modern day egypt in yemen jamal in masri gamal why u think this is in alot of socalled arabs and arabic speakers who are not originally arab speakers.
U ask me Mr. Berry Do you know anything about the Arab tribes of Morocco.
Mr. Berry Do u Know anything about the Non-Arab Tribes of Morrocco.
Thank you Mr. Aswani. You said that the Mahas and Kanuz are not true Arabic speakers and never have been. What do you mean by that? You said that your family claims descent from the Prophet Mohamed (SAWS) through Abu Amr Ibn Saidi ibn Abu Talib. Who is this person and what's the relation between him and the Prophet Mohamed (SAWS)? I've never heard of him before. You said that you are tired of fake lineages. Which lineages are you calling fake and how do you know that they are fake? I agree with you when you say "many arabic speakers and islamic followers are really not original speakers of arabic". And yes, I know something about the Arab tribes of Morocco and the non-Arab tribes of Morocco.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: My family does the same thing we claim prophet muhammed decent threw Abu Amr Ibn Saidi ibn Abu Talib but we dont acknowledge our other heritage and lineage the same for Magribi,Sudanese and other north africans.
Im tired of fake lineages claiming decent as if arabs or jews have royal blood.
Magribi arabic is the hardest to understand ask any arab speaker from the arab world this does not mean that magribi are less arab i never said anything like that i just said many arabic speakers and islamic followers are really not original speakers of arabic just like the Mahra even egyptians of modern day egypt in yemen jamal in masri gamal why u think this is in alot of socalled arabs and arabic speakers who are not originally arab speakers.
Can you describe to me what you think the pure Arabs of the past looked like? And you have told me who you think ARE NOT Arabs. Can you tell me who you think ARE Arabs?
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
What i mean by that is socalled Nubians have there own language just like Beja are muslim and speak arabic now but they are originally Te-Bedawi speakers have nothing to do with arabic.
Abu Amr is related to Musa al-Quadim who is related to Abdullah bin Muhammed al-Bakir 5th in decent to the prophet Muhammed. maybe this can clear up for u.
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Berry u are the scholar so explain to me so i can understand who are the pure arabs if there are any.
To me arabs are consider those of Adnani and Qahtani meaning just a hand fool of tribes who could not of became the arabs of today without concubines from non arabs.
Actually to me the Children of Abu Jahl are the Arabs and Muslims of Today
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: What i mean by that is socalled Nubians have there own language just like Beja are muslim and speak arabic now but they are originally Te-Bedawi speakers have nothing to do with arabic.
Abu Amr is related to Musa al-Quadim who is related to Abdullah bin Muhammed al-Bakir 5th in decent to the prophet Muhammed. maybe this can clear up for u.
Musa al Kadim is the son of Jaafar al Sadiq who is the son of Mohamed al Baaqir who is the son of Ali Zein Al Abidin who is the son of al Husein who is the son of Ali the son of Abi Taalib.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
So Mr. Berry are Somali,Eritreans,Ethiopians,Djboutins,and Sudanese similar in appearance to those ancient arabs u speak about and could these tribes be related to Horn of Africans as well as North Africans
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: Mr. Berry u are the scholar so explain to me so i can understand who are the pure arabs if there are any.
To me arabs are consider those of Adnani and Qahtani meaning just a hand fool of tribes who could not of became the arabs of today without concubines from non arabs.
Actually to me the Children of Abu Jahl are the Arabs and Muslims of Today
Try to read my book brother.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
yes u are right awlaad but i dont know it as deep as u do im not very familar with my mothers side of the family who are jaalyin but her origin is Jeberti
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: So Mr. Berry are Somali,Eritreans,Ethiopians,Djboutins,and Sudanese similar in appearance to those ancient arabs u speak about and could these tribes be related to Horn of Africans as well as North Africans
Yes they are similar in appearance to the ancient Arabs.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
nice i see how magribi accent differs from egyptian and sudanese of course we all understand eachother when we speak Quranic arabic i have seen it between two pakistani imams who dont even speak arabic but they communicate with me threw quranic arabic thank you ya habub
Posts: 410 | From: Al-Ard | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by AswaniAswad: nice i see how magribi accent differs from egyptian and sudanese of course we all understand eachother when we speak Quranic arabic i have seen it between two pakistani imams who dont even speak arabic but they communicate with me threw quranic arabic thank you ya habub
Yeah. Quranic Arabic is the best of course. You're welcome akhi al faadil.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, Mr. Berry, Dana or anyone else just make this clear for me..
From what I understand, the Adnani (al Arab al Mustaribah) are the northern Arabs who were foreigners who became 'Arab' by mixing in with the original populations and that the Qahtani (al Arab al Aribah) were those original Arab populations, correct?
So then who are the 'perished Arabs'? I understand they were ancient Arabians also, but are largely no more. Are these peoples older than even the Qahtani and are therefore aboriginal??
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
These designations even get confused in the Arabian authors own works.
Today the majority of Arabs are al-'Arab ul-Musta'ribah, i.e., people settled in Arabia who have Arab language and Arab culture but no verifiable Arab clan lineage whether from Ishmael (mixed al-'Arab ul-Muta'aribah) or the pure al-'Arab ul-'Aribah South Arabian "Kushites" of the oldest civilization and blood line Qahtaan Arabs who did in fact disappear long ago leaving very few progeny that haven't been infused with either Adnan and/or Ishmael Arabs.
But then some say the "Perished Arabs" were even earlier than those of the Qahtaani claiming al-'Arab ul-'Aribah status.
Then what of Ad, Tamud, Himyar, etc. Do they make Qahtaan (Yaq*tan in the Torah?) out to be no more than Mustaribes who eventually became Mutaaribes?
Dare we mention Habashat?
Posts: 8014 | From: the Tekrur in the Western Sahel | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: Okay, Mr. Berry, Dana or anyone else just make this clear for me..
From what I understand, the Adnani (al Arab al Mustaribah) are the northern Arabs who were foreigners who became 'Arab' by mixing in with the original populations and that the Qahtani (al Arab al Aribah) were those original Arab populations, correct?
So then who are the 'perished Arabs'? I understand they were ancient Arabians also, but are largely no more. Are these peoples older than even the Qahtani and are therefore aboriginal??
Hi Djehuti. We shouldn't characterize the Northern Arabs as "foreignors". They were no less Arab than the Southern Arabs. They are simply a different type of Arab that formed later than the Southern Arabs. Concerning the "Extinct Arabs", they are the old Arabs who no longer exist as tribes like Aad and Thamud. Yes, they (the extinct Arabs) are older than the other types of Arabs. And all types of Arabs are desended from Sam the son of Noah (AS).
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These designations even get confused in the Arabian authors own works.
Today the majority of Arabs are al-'Arab ul-Musta'ribah, i.e., people settled in Arabia who have Arab language and Arab culture but no verifiable Arab clan lineage whether from Ishmael (mixed al-'Arab ul-Muta'aribah) or the pure al-'Arab ul-'Aribah South Arabian "Kushites" of the oldest civilization and blood line Qahtaan Arabs who did in fact disappear long ago leaving very few progeny that haven't been infused with either Adnan and/or Ishmael Arabs.
But then some say the "Perished Arabs" were even earlier than those of the Qahtaani claiming al-'Arab ul-'Aribah status.
Then what of Ad, Tamud, Himyar, etc. Do they make Qahtaan (Yaq*tan in the Torah?) out to be no more than Mustaribes who eventually became Mutaaribes?
Dare we mention Habashat?
Al Takruri. You say that the Arab Al Mustaariba don't have a verifiable Arab lineage. They do have an Arab lineage that goes back to Adnan and Ismail. You also said that the Qahtani Arabs have disappeared, but tthey haven't disappeared. They are the Southern Arabs. You also say "either Adnan and/or Ismaili Arabs" as if there is a difference between the two. The Adnani Arabs are Ismaili Arabs.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by markellion: But what I've been talking about is ethnic groups coming from Yemen as opposed to individuals marrying into royal families. Doesn't it make more sense that Africans traveled to Arabia more than the other way around? Especially before the Islamic period.
What about entire armies of Arabs entering what you call Africa? I'm sure you are aware of the fact that this happened. What about the tribes of Banu Sulaym and Banu Hilal entering the area? When you say "Doesn't it make more sense that Africans traveled to Arabia more than the other way around", do you mean like the Habash (Abyssinians) who entered Arabia? But those Habash (Abysinnians) themselves were originally from Arabia. And why do yu feel that that way makes more sense? Wouldn't you agree that the general movement in the area was from east to west. You know that none of the tribes in the area originated across the Atlantic Ocean. Right? BTW, what do you mean by "Africans"?
quote:Originally posted by markellion: But what I've been talking about is ethnic groups coming from Yemen as opposed to individuals marrying into royal families. Doesn't it make more sense that Africans traveled to Arabia more than the other way around? Especially before the Islamic period.
What about entire armies of Arabs entering what you call Africa? I'm sure you are aware of the fact that this happened. What about the tribes of Banu Sulaym and Banu Hilal entering the area? When you say "Doesn't it make more sense that Africans traveled to Arabia more than the other way around", do you mean like the Habash (Abyssinians) who entered Arabia? But those Habash (Abysinnians) themselves were originally from Arabia. And why do yu feel that that way makes more sense? Wouldn't you agree that the general movement in the area was from east to west. You know that none of the tribes in the area originated across the Atlantic Ocean. Right? BTW, what do you mean by "Africans"?
I really don't understand the point you are trying to make. And you still haven't explained to me what you mean by "Africans".
The Songhay, Wakore and Wangara are descendants of Taras ben Haroun from Yemen, who died and left his sons in the hands of their uncle. They emigrated, and the elder son, Wakoré-ben-Taras, became ancestor of the Wakore, while the second, Songai-ben-Taras, became ancestor of the Songhay, and the youngest son called Wangara-ben-Taras became ancestor of the Wangara.
The Tarikh al-Sudan says: "As for the first king Zai El-Aiman (the founding father of the Songhai tribe), the origin of the expression (Zai El-Aiman) is 'He has come from Yemen.' It is said that he and his brother left the Yemen and traveled about Allah's earth until destiny brought them to the ancient land of Songhai. This happened during the time of the Pharoahs."
The Journal of Negro History says:
"As an historical document the Tarik e Soudan is the only source from which we get an idea as to the origin of the Songhoi. The natives of this country inform the traveller that they came from the east. The Tarik e Soudan says: "The first king of the Songhoi was called Dialliaman," meaning, "He has come from Yemen." Dialliaman quitted Yemen in company with his brother. They travelled through the country of God until destiny brought them to the land of Kokia. Giving a more detailed account it says:
"Now Kokia was a town of the Songhoi people situated on the banks of a river, and was very ancient. It existed in the time of the Pharaohs, and it is said that one of them, during his dispute with Moses, sent thither for the magician whom he opposed to the Prophet.
"The two brothers reached the town in such a terrible state of distress that their appearance was scarcely human; their skins were cracked by the heat and dust of the desert, and they were almost naked. The inhabitants questioned them concerning the country of their origin, and their names have been forgotten in the surname with which their reply provided them, 'Dia min al Jemen'--'Come from Yemen,' And Dialliaman the elder settled in Kokia..."
Apparently you, for some reason, don't want to believe this, Markellion. I really don't know what to tell you. If you knew that the people who entered the region from Yemen were dark-skinned people (black), would it be easier for you to accept this?
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Concerning the Songhay the story is that a person from Yemen came and killed a god-fish and thus became a ruler of an already established people. The person came to the country dirty and hungry but he becomes a king, it is a rags to riches story
The author of "Timbuktu the Mysterious" wrote about this and admitted there was allot of confusion.
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whats interesting here is the emphasis on the Songhay being ancient.
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry:
quote:Originally posted by markellion:
But what I've been talking about is ethnic groups coming from Yemen as opposed to individuals marrying into royal families.
The Tarikh al-Sudan says: "As for the first king Zai El-Aiman (the founding father of the Songhai tribe), the origin of the expression (Zai El-Aiman) is 'He has come from Yemen.' It is said that he and his brother left the Yemen and traveled about Allah's earth until destiny brought them to the ancient land of Songhai.This happened during the time of the Pharoahs."
The Journal of Negro History says:
.... "Now Kokia was a town of the Songhoi people situated on the banks of a river, and was very ancient. It existed in the time of the Pharaohs, and it is said that one of them, during his dispute with Moses, sent thither for the magician whom he opposed to the Prophet.
"The two brothers reached the town in such a terrible state of distress that their appearance was scarcely human; their skins were cracked by the heat and dust of the desert, and they were almost naked. The inhabitants questioned them concerning the country of their origin, and their names have been forgotten in the surname with which their reply provided them, 'Dia min al Jemen'--'Come from Yemen,' And Dialliaman the elder settled in Kokia..."
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Concerning the Songhay the story is that a person from Yemen came and killed a god-fish and thus became a ruler of an already established people. The person came to the country dirty and hungry but he becomes a king, it is a rags to riches story
The author of "Timbuktu the Mysterious" wrote about this and admitted there was allot of confusion.
Markellion, this is the history of these people. They say that they come from Yemen. This is what is said in the sources of the history of the people and the region. We ARE talking about history, aren't we? You can't change the history of these people because you and/or Felix Dubois (author of Timbuktu the Mysterious) are confused. And if we are talking about history, can you please tell me what you mean by "African"?
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Other things I've read say that the Songhay claim themselves to be ancient on the Niger river and there is allot of material I need to digest. Maybe the culture has Egyptian/Nile origins as suggested by "Timbuktu the Mysterious" but I don't remember reading anything about Yemeni origins. The very material that you presented showed a handful a few brothers who came from Yemen to an already ancient and established culture
What if someone from the Democratic Republic of the Congo came to my town and became mayor?
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The author of "Timbuktu the Mysterious" when he is talking about this notice how he admittedly puts his own assumptions into the story and he does this to the point where it no longer seems that he is actually giving the Songhay's own account of their origin. Most of this seems to be interpretations
quote: The tranquillity of Egypt (which had lasted since the Roman conquest) was rudely disturbed in the seventh century by the lieutenants of the first Khalifs; and the country received a shock that would fully justify such an exodus. The conquerors were dazzled by the richness of these territories, as the letter sent by Amru to the Khalif Omar amply proves. It was a magnificent quarry to the starveling Arab, and the distress of the vanquished must have been in proportion to the enthusiasm of the conquerors. The Lower, Upper, and Middle Egypts were all overrun towards the year 640. Possibly the Songhois suffered more than others from this invasion. Perhaps they refused to receive Islamism. My learned friends, the marabuts, being the official representatives of Mohammedanism, would naturally not have admitted this reason, and the historical manuscripts are dumb upon the subject. Their compilers of three centuries ago were likewise marabuts, and the silence of both is very likely to have been actuated by the same motive. In any case, the habitual methods of the conquering Arabs, their brutality and cupidity, would in themselves sufficiently account for the flight of a people as peaceful and industrious as the Songhois have remained to this day.
...Was Dialliaman the promoter and leader of this emigration ? The character would harmonise with the picture the Tarik has drawn of the adventurer who raised himself to the throne of a country he had entered naked and hungry. His native land was Yemen, the recent birthplace and centre of the Mohammedan religion. He may have quarrelled with the early disciples of the Prophet, or he may have quitted Arabia in order to escape the violence of their propaganda. Finding himself once more face to face with the fanatics in the country of his adoption, he would naturally resolve upon a new exile to more remote countries, and would depart, accompanied not merely by his brother, but leading a whole people with him....
page 95:
...Finally, in the country of Bourrousu, near the city of Gao,1 local tradition preserves the arrival in these parts of an Egyptian Pharaoh, who is probably none other than Dialliaman, or the leader of the Songhoi emigration.
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Other things I've read say that the Songhay claim themselves to be ancient on the Niger river and there is allot of material I need to digest. Maybe the culture has Egyptian/Nile origins as suggested by "Timbuktu the Mysterious" but I don't remember reading anything about Yemeni origins. The very material that you presented showed a handful a few brothers who came from Yemen to an already ancient and established culture
What if someone from the Democratic Republic of the Congo came to my town and became mayor?
If he had many sons and and his sons' sons and their descendants multiplied and called themselves a certain name, the origin of those people with that name would be from Congo.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The very material that you presented refutes the idea that Songhay were founded by people from Yemen
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because these people were ancient and already established when the Yemeni guy arrived and killed the fish god
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by markellion: Because these people were ancient and already established when the Yemeni guy arrived and killed the fish god
I'm not speaking about the people who were there before the Yemenis arrived. I'm speaking about the people who were formed after the Yemenis arrived and who are from them. The people calling themselves Songhay, Wakore, and Wangara are descended from the Yemenis who arrived. Do you realize that any ethnic group - ancient or not ancient - is descended from someone? Since you don't want these people to be descended from Yemenis, tell me and tell them who they are descended from. Change their history for them. It won't be the first time it's happened.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem is paraphrasing of these stories so you make something new that wasn't intended by the author of the text. You've already said that we are at the mercy of translations
The author of "Timbuktu the Mysterious" was the person that came up with the exodus idea but there is nothing to indicate that there is anything to this except guessing, and he admitted that this was not part of the official story.
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by markellion: The problem is paraphrasing of these stories so you make something new that wasn't intended by the author of the text. You've already said that we are at the mercy of translations
The author of "Timbuktu the Mysterious" was the person that came up with the exodus idea but there is nothing to indicate that there is anything to this except guessing, and he admitted that this was not part of the official story.
Markellion, I have no idea of what you are saying.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are you saying that there were more than two brothers that arrived arrived at the city of Kokia? You make it sound like there were thousands but the story only accounts for two people. Am I missing something?
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is absurd you act like this is such concrete fact but there are several books that don't even mention this. This in itself is not the problem because it could still be very true, but it took you awhile to give a specific reference/quote as if you don't need to support your claims but you need to support your claims
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: You won't find these things translated into English by others. You won't even find them taught in Arabic.
posted
I've talked a great deal about overall history and showed that cultural similarities and everything can be more easily attributed to a sort of highway of ideas than to all these people coming from just one place. Ethnic groups are fluid. I would think that the post Islamic influence of these African empires would be significant because it would also show what it was like in Pre-Islamic times too
quote:Originally posted by markellion: This is absurd you act like this is such concrete fact but there are several books that don't even mention this. This in itself is not the problem because it could still be very true, but it took you awhile to give a specific reference/quote as if you don't need to support your claims but you need to support your claims
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: You won't find these things translated into English by others. You won't even find them taught in Arabic.
Markellion, the main sources for the history of the Songhai and the region are the Tarikh As-Sudan by Abdel Rahman As-Sa'adi and Tarikh Al-Fettash by Mahmoud Ka'ati. The story of the Yemeni origin of the Songhai, Wakore, and Wangara is found in these books. I read them in Arabic. I also read, in Arabic, letters written between Ahmed Mansur Al-Dhahabi, the 16th century Moroccan Sultan, and Askia Ishaq, a descendant of Askia Mohamed. In one of the letters, Ahmed Mansur Al-Dhahabi mentioned the fact that Askia Ishaq said that he was of Yemeni origin. This letter is found in a book written in Arabic by Mohamed Al-Gharbi.
I see here that you can find the book Tarikh As-Sudan in English:
Al-Sa'di's Ta'rikh Al-Sudan is a major source for the history of Timbuktu and the Songhay empire. This first English translation includes abundant annotation, and is followed by English translations of several other contemporary texts.
I have nothing further to say about the topic.
Posts: 895 | Registered: Feb 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by alTakruri: These designations even get confused in the Arabian authors own works.
How so?
quote:Today the majority of Arabs are al-'Arab ul-Musta'ribah, i.e., people settled in Arabia who have Arab language and Arab culture but no verifiable Arab clan lineage whether from Ishmael (mixed al-'Arab ul-Muta'aribah) or the pure al-'Arab ul-'Aribah South Arabian "Kushites" of the oldest civilization and blood line Qahtaan Arabs who did in fact disappear long ago leaving very few progeny that haven't been infused with either Adnan and/or Ishmael Arabs.
I thought the Qahtani still exist today, as is the point that Dana and Tariq are making. Also, I thought that the Ishmaelites were a branch of the Adnani at large.
quote:But then some say the "Perished Arabs" were even earlier than those of the Qahtaani claiming al-'Arab ul-'Aribah status.
This too is the impression that I am under.
quote:Then what of Ad, Tamud, Himyar, etc. Do they make Qahtaan (Yaq*tan in the Torah?) out to be no more than Mustaribes who eventually became Mutaaribes?
I thought that Ad and Thamud members of the 'perished Arabs', whereas Himyar were Qahtani. Also I hear a lot about descent from Qahtan (Yaqtan), but what about Biblical claims of descent from Kush? Are there any Arabs who make similar claims? And lastly what is the difference between Mustaribes and Mutaaribes??
quote:Dare we mention Habashat?
What about them? I know it seems like I'm asking too many questions, but I curiosity is on high now.
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: Hi Djehuti. We shouldn't characterize the Northern Arabs as "foreignors". They were no less Arab than the Southern Arabs. They are simply a different type of Arab that formed later than the Southern Arabs.
They were different in what way?
quote:Concerning the "Extinct Arabs", they are the old Arabs who no longer exist as tribes like Aad and Thamud. Yes, they (the extinct Arabs) are older than the other types of Arabs. And all types of Arabs are desended from Sam the son of Noah (AS).
If the "Extinct Arabs" are even older than the Qahtani, then exactly how are they descended from Sam (Shem)? Were there any Arabians who traced descent from any other son of Noah, particularly Kam (Ham)?
Posts: 26238 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by awlaadberry: [QUOTE]Originally posted by markellion: [QB] Whats interesting here is the emphasis on the Songhay being ancient.
[QUOTE]
Why do you find that interesting?
Ok two things
1. Were there more than two brothers who arrived in Kokia?
2. Did Songhay predate the arrival of these brothers?
Edit: If many Yemeni did come and live with these people that would make sense but did they predate the coming of the Yemeni according to the story?
Posts: 2642 | Registered: Sep 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic