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. .....................
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
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
From spain:
quote:Originally posted by Supercar:
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."
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'.
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!
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.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^^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.
Keep in mind that although they lost Spain, they improved it. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Yazid:
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."
^^"Facts", which are obviously taught in "western" schools, for a change. Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
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.
You guys are all great. I learnt a lot from this discussion.
Marc, thanks for your good work. Keep it up.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
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! Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
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!
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
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. Posted by ausar (Member # 1797) on :
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.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
"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
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Facts stand by themselves as posted. Cry about it; I care not.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
^That is an irrelevant spam YOU "spoke" of; here is what I "spoke" of:
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: Facts stand by themselves as posted. Cry about it; I care not.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
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.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by MichaelFromQuebec (Member # 10907) on :
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.
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
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.
Correct.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
Horemheb,
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?
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
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!
Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
Horemheb,
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb:
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?
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb:
The african moors did not rule Spanish culture.
...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.
Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
Horemheb,
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!
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by yazid904: Horemheb,
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.
Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
Horemheb,
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!
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
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.
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.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
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.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: ...wasting time debating Hore...
That is a point I can certainly agree with. Can't help but yawn, after silencing the guy on these same issues time and again...
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.
Wow!
Posted by rasol (Member # 4592) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb:
The african moors did not rule Spanish culture.
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. Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
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".
Posted by Marc Washington (Member # 10979) on :
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.
.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
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.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
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.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Hey, knock yourself out with all kinds of crackpot nattering; better yet, why not go to stormfront for therapy sessions, where all these "make-feel-good" pseudo-objective jibberish can be spewed unimpeded while having no bearings on the past/facts, as stated herein. Lol.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: 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.
Hore, you are not making any sense.
Why did the European leadership SUDDENLY start accepting the Christian intellectualism in the 14th century, which, by the way was LONG after the glory days of the Moorish civilization in Europe? How come you dont see how you are contradicting yourself, when you DONT admit that PART of the reason for this acceptance was PRECISELY partly influenced by the reconquest of Spain from the Moors. But what EVERYONE is missing here is that the Moors were but a small part of what was the clash of East versus West, the Crusades. The Crusades introduced Europe to far more ancient cultures in the Mediterranean and Levant. The crusades led the Europeans into Islamic run Egypt and the Mediterranean. The crusades are what allowed the Spanish to become experienced and organized enough to defeat the Muslims. Therefore, you are right in a sense that it wasnt the Moors ALONE who introduced the Europeans to the ancient cultures and knowledge THAT THEY KNEW NOTHING ABOUT. The Islamic world Empire that spread from Europe to India in the late 8th century is what gave Moorish architecture its looks, inheriting greatly from the traditions embodied in the Taj Majal. It is no doubt that the Grandeur of Islamic civilization and culture DWARFED anything Europe had to offer.
But lets not forget that this culture was obtained from the spread of Islam through the lands of many ancient civilizations including Persia, Babylon, Egypt and India. This was the height of Islam and there is nothing intellectual or culturally superior about Christianity and Europe compared to Islamic religion, culture and science of the time. Again, calling the Islamic Empire civilized is definitely a STRETCH of the facts. The Islamic Empire was a imperial one, ruling through brute force, subgation, slavery and oppression. I have no love for it. But to say that the light of intellect, science and culture shown brightly in Europe at in the late 8th century is NONSENSE. Europe came into the realization of intellect, science and culture LATE in the game, long after Babylon, Egypt, Greece and Rome, and AFTER the Islamic empires. And the reconquest of Spain was NOTHING in terms of damaging the world of Islam at the time, since by the time the last Islamic people were removed from Spain, the Islamic Empire had almost TRIPLED in size.
Likewise, the early Moors were most likely NOT black West Africans in 700AD, unless there was a large contingent of black Africans in North Africa. The Islamic Empire of 700AD had not REACHED the western African countries of Mali and Timbuktu yet. The following maps will clue you in to the relative size and scope of the Islamic Empire.
From this you can see that Europe was in the INFANCY of Empire compared to Islam and that the torch of so called civilization, but better called Empire was passed from Islam to Europe, as the Christian church became the central focus for study and education, political and military power much the same as those things were under Islam. The threat and power of the Islamic Empire is what UNIFIED Europe, gave the Church its power and let to the introduction of culture and ancient knowledge to Europe. The torch of Empire passed from Egypt, Bablyon and India to Greece to Rome to Islam THEN Europe. Of course European historians being ethnocentric AND nationalistic would rather that you believe that the torch went from Babylon to Greece then Rome and finally Europe, but unfortunately this is NOT real history. Not only does it diminish Egypt as the origin of what we call civilization, but it omits the role of Islam in the periods between the fall of the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire and the rise of Islam. It is almost funny to think about how people talk of the so-called feats of navigation and travel by the Portuguese and Spanish after looking at the map of the Islamic world in the 16th century. The point here is that since Europe has DOMINATED the world as an Empire since the 1800s, it has ALTERED history to OVER EMPHASIZE Europe as the home of everything good and decent in civilization, ignoring those who deserve credit and ignoring their OWN savagery and barbarity, especially as an EMPIRE.
Oh and by the way, even AFRICA had Universities prior to Europe:
quote:Originally posted by MichaelFromQuebec: They're so desperate to cling to false facts in order to alleviate themselves from their inferiority complex.
You mean things like non-black Janjaweed and non-black Arab Sudanese in general?? Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Fact is NOTHING mentioned herein, comes across as anything new, as they have all been touched before:
Certainly, none has been mentioned that has any bearings on developments like:
Recalling....
As a matter of record, scholar Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi's name was applied to what is now referred to as algorithm, and the term "algebra" is suppose to have come from al-jabr, 'the beginning of the name of one of his publications in which he developed a system of solving quadratic equations, thus beginning Al-gebra.'(courtesy of encyclopedia of history)
More quotes from various scholars...
Robert Briffault, in the "Making of Humanity":
"It was under the influence of the arabs and Moorish revival of culture and not in the 15th century, that a real renaissance took place. North Africa, the Middle East and Islamic Spain, not Italy, was the cradle of the rebirth of Europe. After steadily sinking lower and lower into barbarism, Europe had reached the darkest depths of ignorance and degradation when cities of the Islamic world; Baghdad, Damascus, Cairo, Cordova, and Toledo, were growing centers of civilization and intellectual activity. It was there that this new life; science - arose; a life that was to grow into a new phase of human evolution."
"While Science is the most momentous contribution of Arab civilization to the modern world, its fruits were slow in ripening and unfortunately did not directly benefit its inventors. Not until long after Moorish culture had sunk back into its pre-Islamic twilight did the giant (Science), which it had given birth to, began to rise in its might. It was not science only which brought Europe back to life. Other and manifold influences from the civilization of Islam communicated its first glow to European Life.”
George Sarton in the "Introduction to the History of Science" :
"During the reign of Caliph Al-Mamun (813-33 A.D.), the new concept of learning reached its climax. The monarch created in Baghdad a regular university called the 'House of Wisdom' for translation & research. It was equipped with a vast library and several laboratories. It was in these laboratories that the scientific method was born.
"The first mathematical transformation from the Greek conception of a static universe to the Islamic one of a dynamic, expanding universe was made by Al-Khwarizmi (780-850), the founder of modern Algebra as well as of the ‘Arab’ numerals the west uses today. He enhanced the purely arithmetical character of numbers as finite magnitudes by demonstrating their possibilities as elements of infinite manipulations and investigations of properties and relations".
"The importance of Khwarizmi's algebra was recognized, in the twelfth century, by the West, - when Girard of Cremona translated Khwarizmi’s theses into Latin. Until the sixteenth century this version was used in almost all European universities as the principal mathematical text book. But Khwarizmi's influence reached far beyond the universities. We find it reflected in the mathematical works of Leonardo Fibinacci of Pissa, Master Jacob of Florence, and of Leonardo da Vinci."
"One of the most famous exponents of Muslim universalism and an eminent figure in Islamic learning was Ibn Sina, known in the West as Avicenna (981-1037). For a thousand years he has retained his original renown as one of the greatest thinkers and medical scholars in history. His most important medical works are the Qanun (Canon) and a treatise on Cardiac drugs. The 'Qanun fil-Tibb' is an immense encyclopedia of medicine".
"We know that when, during the crusades, Europe at last began to establish hospitals, they were inspired by the Arabs of the near East, who had had hospitals for centuries....The first hospital in Paris, Les Quinze-vingt, was founded by Louis IX after his return from the crusade in 1254-1260."
"And then there was Al_kindi. (800-873 C.E.). In mathematics, he wrote four books on the number system and laid the foundation of a large part of modern arithmetic. He also contributed to spherical geometry to assist him in astronomical studies".
"Very little was known on the scientific aspects of music in his time. He was the first man in history to understand and write books on the role of mathematics in sound and in music. He was a prolific writer, the total number of books written by him was 241, the prominent among which were divided as follows: Astronomy 16, Arithmetic 11, Geometry 32, Medicine 22, Physics 12, Philosophy 22, Logic 9, Psychology 5, and Music 7.
He was known as Alkindus in Latin and a large number of his books were translated into Latin by Gherard of Cremona. Al-Kindi's influence on development of science and philosophy was significant in the revival of sciences in that period. In the Middle Ages, Cardano considered him as one of the twelve greatest minds on earth. His works, in fact, lead to further development of various subjects for centuries, notably physics, mathematics, medicine and music".
French Orientalist Dr. Gustav Lebon:
"It must be remembered that no science, either of Chemistry, Physics or any other, was discovered all of a sudden. The Arabs had established over one thousand years ago their laboratories in which they used to conduct experiments, called al-chemy, and published their discoveries, without which lavoisier (erroneously accredited by some westerners as being the founder of chemistry) would not have been able to produce anything in this field. It can be said without fear of contradiction that owing to the researches and experimentation of Muslim scientists, modern chemistry came into being and that it produced great results in the form of modern scientific inventions.
Joseph Hell in the "Arab Civilization":
"In the domain of trigonometry, the theory of Sine, Cosine and tangent is an heirloom of the Arabs. The brilliant epochs of Peurbach, of Regiomontanus, of Copernicus, cannot be recalled without reminding us of the fundamental labor of the Arab Mathematician Al-Battani, (858-929 A.D.)." (END)
The Arabs were accomplished in mathematics, chemistry, physics, medicine, philosophy, and most notably astronomy. Most Westerners think instantly of Copernicus, Galileo, or of the early Greek philosophers who worked to advance astronomical knowledge, but the contributions made by the Arabs are largely either overlooked or falsely assigned to later European astronomers. In reality, the golden era of Islamic astronomy that took place during the middle ages is of immense importance to the development of modern astronomy. Not only did the Arabs keep alive the works of the Greek and Indian astronomers before them, but they also improved upon and added to this knowledge in various significant ways. In addition, their translated works paved the way for the Copernican revolution.
Although there is no exact date for the beginning of the era of Arabic dominance in the realm of astronomy, it is generally agreed upon that by the end of the eighth century A.D. Islamic scholars had assimilated most of both Greek and Indian astronomy into their body of knowledge. They had translated many Greek texts and incorporated Greek theories into their own texts, all by the early 9th century A.D. It is hard to give an exact explanation of just how the Arabic interest in astronomy developed at this point, but there are many identifiable contributing factors. First of all, the sudden rise in astronomical interest occurred shortly after the remarkable expansion of the Islamic empire. This meant, among other things, that the invading Arabs had increased access to Greek astronomical texts which they could more easily translate. Secondly, a "renaissance of culture" is said to have occurred, starting in the beginning of the ninth century A.D. after the overthrow of the Umayyads by the Abbasids. This cultural rebirth is characterized mainly by an increased interest in the sciences (especially astronomy and chemistry) on behalf of the government. Rulers began to sponsor astronomical research through such activities as building observatories and funding scholars. Thus, the phenomenon may be at least partially explained by this conjunction of a succession of rulers who actively supported astronomical research and the increased availability of both Greek and Indian astronomical data, theories, and observations.
There are also numerous factors that must be looked at in order to understand why astronomy was so important to the people and rulers of the Islamic empire. The factor that is the most significant would be the connection between astronomy and the religion of Islam. Astronomy was imperative to the calculation of the Islamic calendar, which is lunar; it was the muslim arabs who developed the first correct lunar calendar in the world at this time. Astronomy was also necessary in the calculation of the correct times of prayer during the day, as well as the qibla, the direction to Mecca.
Luckily, this sudden burst in astronomical interest occurred at a time when astronomy was declining in Europe. The Roman empire was dissolving, and societies were beginning to focus more and more on Christianity and less and less on the works of the pagan Greeks. It is the prevailing opinion of most scholars that were it not for the assimilation of Greek astronomy by the Arabs, much of it would have been lost or at least forgotten. However, instead of having the extensive work of the Greeks and Indians stay static and unused throughout the middle ages, it was not only kept in use but significantly improved upon.
There are those who seem to be under the impression that all the Arabs ever contributed to astronomy was to have preserved the knowledge and observations of the Greeks during Europe's "Dark Ages", only to hand this information back to them at a later date so that the Europeans could continue advancing the science of astronomy. This, however, is entirely untrue. The Arabs advanced astronomy significantly during the middle ages. Not only did they take pre-existing theories and instruments and improve upon them, but they also invented entirely new theories and made their own discoveries. For example, although both the astrolabe and celestial globe were first invented by the Greeks in their original crude forms, far more sophisticated instruments were developed in medieval Islam. The astrolabe was ameliorated and fine-tuned so considerably that by the beginning of the tenth century it had been developed to the point that it could be used for approximately 300 problems in geography, spherical trigonometry, and mathematical astronomy, and to be "sophisticated enough to be useful for any latitude" [Anon.]. From this ongoing improvement of the astrolabe, the Arabs later developed an instrument called the quadrant. This instrument was sophisticated to the point that it was said to be useable to solve "all standard problems of spherical astronomy" [Anon.]. They also developed other new instruments as well, such as ones that could be used to determine the time of both day and night as well as the pendulum clock.
On a more theoretical basis, numerous inventions and discoveries were made in medieval Islam. We owe our current numerical system to them, as do we owe them most of our current knowledge of trigonometry. One great Islamic scientist alone, Abu'l-Wafa Muhammad al-Buzjani, is credited with introducing many new concepts into the field of trigonometry, the most important being the identification of the secant and cosecant. Scientists such as Abu al-Rayhan Muhammad Ahmad al-Biruni wrote many treatises on new mathematical and astronomical methods. This important Islamic astronomer, mathematician, and geographer who lived from 974 to 1048 A.D. invented several methods of representing the surface of a sphere on a plane, namely azimuthal equidistant projection and globular projection. Many others worked on making detailed observations of the heavens and using this data to develop mathematical equations and rules on the movements of celestial bodies, paying special attention to the movements of the moon. Other astronomers, such as Nasir al-Din al Tusi, undertook the task of reforming Ptolemaic astronomy. Overall, during the entire span of the middle ages there were many entirely new concepts introduced by the Arabs. By the end of the middle ages they had contributed immensely to the body of astronomical and mathematical knowledge.
A new school of thought emerged in the late 13th century that in itself constitutes a revolution. It is referred to as the Maragha Revolution, and it has been described as "an essential link to Copernican astronomy without which Copernican astronomy will be hard to explain" [Anon.]. The Maragha Revolution was, to put it simply, a rejection of many of Ptolemy's statements, and a sudden surge of new ideas and theories to replace incorrect Ptolemaic assertions. Thus, it turns out that the Arabs had come to many of the same conclusions as Copernicus well before Copernicus' time, although the astronomers of the Arabic Maragha school were still working within the confines of a geocentric model. Nonetheless, these astronomers were the ones who corrected many of Ptolemy's mistakes and made the first real moves towards the final realization of the true workings of the solar system. It is for this reason that many have firmly declared that Copernicus was influenced by the Arabic Maragha school.
In conclusion, the contributions made by the Arabs during the middle ages to the field of astronomy are not only great in number, but also in importance. This period served to enrich humanity's level of scientific understanding of the world. Medieval Islam accomplished very much in way of science and astronomy, from the beginning period of translation of Greek and Indian texts, through the golden era of new discoveries and refinement of pre-existing knowledge, right up until the time of the great European renaissance. Although we may tend to overlook and underemphasize this period in the evolution of humanity's knowledge, it nevertheless remains true that it was an era of huge importance..."
----
Dr. Salah Zaimeche BA, MA, PhD;
Research Assistant, UMIST, Manchester, UK and Researcher at FSTC
First and foremost, the learning recovered, or found, or available, at that Renaissance of 16th-17th (another illogically based notion of western history) bears no resemblance to anything left by the Greeks. The mathematics, the medicine, the optics, the chemistry, the astronomy, geography, mechanics etc, of the 16th is centuries ahead of that left by the Greeks. Any person with the faintest knowledge of any such subjects can check this by looking at what was left by the Greeks and compare it with what was available in the 16th century, and even with what was available centuries up to the 14th. Anyone can thus question this notion of Greek learning recovered during the Renaissance.
*Furthermore, even supposing the Greeks had made some contribution in some of the sciences cited, what is the Greek contribution to the invention of paper, printing, farming techniques, irrigation, windmills, the compass, industrial production, glass making, cotton production, the system of numerals, trade mechanisms, paper money, the cheque? Modern finance as a whole, gardens, flowers, art of living, urban design, personal hygiene, and many more manifestations that compose our modern civilization?*
As for the notion that Greek learning had disappeared, this is another preposterous point repeatedly made by western ‘historians’. Greek learning was available throughout the so-called Dark Ages in Byzantium and even in the ‘west’. Western historians never fail to insist that Muslims sought that Greek learning from Byzantine sources, and yet say that it has disappeared, which is impossible to square. Now, if such learning was available all along, why did ‘western scholars’ have to wait until they conquered Islamic lands in Sicily (11th), Toledo (Spain) (in the 11th) and in the east during the Crusades (11th -12th) before they started acquiring such ‘Greek’ learning? Why wait? And above all, why did Western translators of the 12th century, to whom we will return further on, chose to translate such sources? This is never explained by those historians who select miniscule or fragmentary pieces of evidence, often concoctions of their own, to build extensive theories [b](i.e. the Pirenne theory, the burning of the Alexandria library)
The Evidence
The real evidence from history shows that where the Greeks had left off, the Muslims had continued thus setting up the foundations of modern science and civilization. Before looking, albeit briefly, at some aspects of Muslim decisive influences, this author, like other Muslim historians, first and foremost, never ceases to acknowledge that, although the Muslims had made such contributions, the Islamic mind and soul that science and civilization are God given gifts to all people of equal abilities. The reason why the Muslims excelled at the time they did, and played the part they did is not due to any special status (as others appear to recognize as their own), but simply to circumstances current then, i.e., spur of Islamic values, which were very strong; driven by faith, Muslims were able to accomplish what they could never achieve under other circumstances as history has shown. Moreover, the Muslims had their own contributions but never denied their inheritance from other civilizations; particularly from the Chinese with whom they always had excellent relations…
…amongst the Muslims, only a number of such scientists were Arabs; most were instead Turks, Iranians, Spanish Muslims, Berbers, Kurds...thus a myriad of people and origins brought under the mantel of Islam, a religion open to all who sought to, and excelled in learning. And that was the first, and by far, the most multienthnic culture and civilisation that had ever existed, and not equalled in many respects, even today, not even in countires and institutions which keep adverstising their equal opportunity status. ..
Such observations are not conjured up by the present author to pursue his own agenda. They can be found amidst some of the best but often inaccessible and thus obscure ‘western historians’, or men of renown. Thus, Glubb states:
“ The indebtedness of Western Christendom to Arab civilization was systematically played down, if not completely denied. A tradition was built up, by censorhip and propaganda, that the Muslim imperialists had been mere barbarians and that the rebirth of learning in the West was derived directly from Roman and Greek sources alone, without any Arab intervention.”…
To go through Islamic impact on modern science and civilization in detail demands so vast a book that nobody has written yet, and it is much beyond the capability of this author to address this issue as extensively as he would wish. Notwithstanding, just some overall observations and points are raised here.
In order to highlight the true scale of Islamic impact, its crucial to look, however briefly, at the condition of western Christendom during those so-called Dark Ages, when, such were the contrasts, and such was the envy of western Christians of life in the Muslim world, that for Europeans, as Menocal puts it, ‘It must have at times appeared that wealth and comfort went hand in hand with the ability to read Arabic.’
Whilst universality of learning was a fundamental element in Islamic civilization, science was the ‘hobby of the masses, with paupers and kings competing to obtain knowledge…’ Whereas in western Christendom, as Haskins observes, ‘….relatively few could read and write, these being chiefly ecclesiastics and, save for the very moderate attainments of an individual parish priest, men of education were concentrated in certain definite groups separated from one another by wide stretches or rural ignorance. ‘
As Draper puts it, ‘Europe was hardly more enlightened than Caffraria is now, the Saracens were cultivating and even creating science. Their triumphs in philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine, proved to be more glorious, more durable and therefore more important than their military actions had been.’ Draper goes on to say that whilst ‘the Christian peasant, fever stricken or overtaken by accident, journeyed to the nearest saint’s shrine and expected a miracle; a knife of his surgeon.’ ‘The spurious medicine of ignorant and mercenary ecclesiastical charlatans. These operated by means of chants, relics, and incense; and their enormous gains were one of the chief sources of revenue to the parish and the monastery, and a corresponding burden on the people.’
Urbanity and wealth also belonged to the Muslims, at that time. In tenth century Cordova, there were 200,000 houses, 600 mosques, 900 public baths, the streets were paved with stones, and were cleaned, policed, and illuminated at night, water was brought to the public squares and to many of the houses by conduits, Islamic cities, as a whole with their mosque and madrassas, their churches, synagogues, and schools, their bathhouses, and other amenities, contained all that was needed for leading a religious and cultured life. Such Islamic cities boasted huge expanses of gardens.
Basra in Iraq was described by the early geographers as a veritable Venice, with mile after mile of canals criss-crossing the garden and orchards; Damascus with its 110,000 gardens, and in Turkey, Ettinghausen says flowers were a ‘devotion, if not mania.’ Whilst in Islamic towns and cities, trade flourished in all directions, and the wealth of its land were the objective of the preying and attacks of Christian pirates, the view from Western Christendom was hardly flattering. So big was the contrast, as Scott puts it, that the magnificent architectural works of ‘Arab genius were attributed to an infernal agency, as beyond the efforts of unaided human power,’ an opinion still enlightened by the Spanish peasantry, who firmly believe that the Muslim palaces ‘were constructed by evil spirits.’ This account by Draper tells that:
“As late as 16th century England, there were highwaymen on the roads, pirates on the rivers, vermin in abundance in the clothing and beds…The population, sparse as it was, was perpetually thinned by pestilence and want…” - Draper
As similar state of wretchedness prevailed everywhere else. Scott tells how:
“ In Paris there were no pavements until the thirteenth century; in London none until the fourteenth; the streets of both capitals were receptacles of filth, and often impassable; at night shrouded with inky darkness; at all times dominated by outlaws; the haunt of the footpad, the nursery of the pestilence, the source of every disease, the scene of every crime” - Scott
In the Spanish Asturias at the time of the Muslim arrival (early 8th century), Scott states that,
“The dwellings were rude hovels constructed of stones and unhewn timber, thatched with straw floored with rushes and provided with a hole in the roof to enable the smoke to escape; their walls and ceilings were smeared with soot and grease, and every corner reeked with filth and with vermin. The owners of these habitations were, in appearance and intelligence, scarcely removed from the condition of savages. They dressed in sheepskins and the hides of wild beasts, which unchanged, remained in one family for many generations. The salutary habit of ablution was never practiced by them. Their garments were never cleansed, and were worn as long as their tattered fragments held together.” - Scott
From this alone, it seems extremely odd how, instead of gratitude, western historians, including Albornoz and Spanish historians of his ilk, deny the Islamic influence. -
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: It depends on what you mean by Islamic influence. The title of the thread, and what I responded to was "the African foundation of modern Spain" as there was no african foundation for modern Spain...
Point blank: The African Moors ruled Spain. The fruits of this Moorish and Islamic rule in Spain, is incalculable, as presented in relative detail in my last post, but nicely summed up by this college website as:
"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."
The keywords above: developing Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe for almost 800 years
…facilitating the so-called “renaissance” all over Europe, and you know this, but all can do about it, is to whimper in agony.
You can always rely on stormfront on the other hand, as a safe haven for make-feel-good crackpot gatherings [of your kind], where you can convince yourself that your self-delusions are real. Lol.
Here though, crackpot weeds are not allowed to bloom. Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: It depends on what you mean by Islamic influence. The title of the thread, and what I responded to was "the African foundation of modern Spain" as there was no african foundation for modern Spain. This thread has started to run off in all directions as they ususally do. The math advances some try to attribute to arab civilization actually came from India. There is general agreement from all historians on that. Nobody has said that the Muslim empire did not enjoy a golden age from the 8th century to the 11th. Nobody has said that they did not have excellent scholars who made solid contributions. What all historians say , and the historical account accounts all maintain is that the Muslims in Spain were defeated and expelled from the country by an obviously superior European society. What the reconquest didn't finish the inqusition damn sure did. Obviously it would be foolish to say they had no impact on Spain but they were hardly the dominant force in Spainish history.....the catholic church and European culture certanily were.
Hore you insist on spreading nonsense. The ONLY reason that the Europeans were ABLE to defeat the Moors is because of the LARGER picture of how the Church was able to organize the otherwise UNORGANIZED leadership of Europe to DEFEAT the Muslims. When the Spanish reconquered Spain, the achievement was INSIGNIFIGANT compared to the size of the Islamic Empire of the time. No matter how you try and make it seem that Europe SUDDENLY rose to dominance in a vaccum, that was NOT the case. The Church and the European kings who SUPPORTED the Church became powerful as a result of their Crusades. On top of that, in that time, Europe HAD NO CULTURE to offer to the rest of the world. So what did EUROPE give the world in 800-1100AD. NOTHING. That is the point. All the significant advances of culture and science were NOT coming from Europe at this time. India is not Europe, the Levant is not Europe, Baghdad is not Europe and Timbuktu is NOT EUROPE. The University of Timbuktu existed BEFORE there was a University outside of Moorish Spain. So why do you keep trying to give Europe credit for something they did not ORIGINATE. The actions of the Church and the Kings under the church were only MIMICKING what the Muslims had done prior, unifying political power, education and religion into a force of EMPIRE. Of course this imperial perspective is what led them to go on and CONQUER other parts of the world, in competition with each other AND the Islamic Empires and other Empires that had gone before. All of the history of the "great" cultures of Europe begin during the crusades and about the time of the decline and end of the Moorish empire in Spain. All of the great kings of this time were HOLY Knights in the service of the Church AGAINST the Muslims in one way or another. These things PROVE that the Islamic influence on Europe was GREAT.
The musical legacy of Spain, was introduced by the Moors, this is fact. The first Universities in Europe were built by the Moors. The first Hospitals, built by the Moors. So what if the Spanish reconquered Spain? That doesnt mean that European culture was MORE civilized than the Islamic cultures OR superior to it. How can that be when the Islamic world of 1500AD was almost 10 times the size of ALL Spain,France, Portugal, Britain and Germany combined? Stop talking nonsense. Stop trying to act as if Europe outside of Moorish Spain HAD any sort of civilized culture, because they DID NOT. It wasnt until the reconquest of Spain and the call to arms spurred on by the advance of the Islamic Empire, that Europe began to become "civilized". THOSE are the facts. And talking of the Inquisition, how is that and the subsequent turmoil of the various reformations in Europe a sign of "civilization"? Keep in mind that it was this INTOLERANCE that begat the American Empire. All of this is related.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: 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.
Spain is very much a country with many little influences...the Moors being just one of them. But the effect the Moors had on Spain itself would be practically transparent in today's world (seeing as how it's been over 500 years since they ruled just a portion of Spain). There are many reasons for this...mainly because while the Moors were the invaders, they didn't force their culture on the natives. As many have already stated, Andalusia was a very acceptant society. I'll give you THAT much, but what you're doing is playing down the impact the Moors and the Islamic Empire as a whole had on Europe.
Following the separation of Rome into two Empires...Europe was quickly swept into a dark age. Though, I think a lot of people take for granted Rome itself. The vast majority of people who lived under the Romans were still illiterate and unlearned. Rome was very much a slave society...I think many people forget that while their glorifying it.
Horemheb, you say all the Moors and Arabs did was translate...well this is where you're DEAD wrong! Translations weren't the only things going on in the halls of the great cities of Toledo and Cordova. Did you know the Moors were the first to introduce Calculus and Trigonometry? For many years prior to the fall of the last Moorish city, even as early as Alfonso X (13th Century) and Archbishop Raimundo a century before him (whose name was really Raimont de Sauvetat, 1125-1152, he was actually a french catholic who settled in Andalus)....there were European "schools" of translators dedicated to re-writing the MOORISH sciences! The sciences of arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music (otherwise known by the Latin-European academy as the quadrivium).
This was going on for centuries...up until 1492 when the new conquerers came in and burned most of the scrolls. As a matter of fact, it's THESE Latin translations that we even know anything about what the Moors knew themselves.
What you Horemheb are doing is what many Western scholars have done for so many years...deny the influence Africa and Asia had on European society. Instead, you opt to create this illusion that you thought it all up yourselves. Aside from Timbuktu, there was the Cairo House of Wisdom built in 1005 with a grant from the Fatimid Caliphs who ruled North Africa. The very word Algebra is an Arabic word, adopted in Europe to describe some of the new mathematics that the Moors had brought INTO Europe. The very word for algorithm, a mathematical procedure, is a corruption of the name of Al-Khowarizmi, the Persian author of the algebra book that took Europe by storm!
Another example of what came out of the Cairo House of Wisdom is Ibn al-Haytham (aka Alhazen in Europe). He wrote a book on Optics that dealt with the important discoveries on the physiology of vision and the theory of reflection and refraction of light...it had a great influence on the development of optics in medieval Europe. Sp advanced was his work that it's translation into Latin and publication in Europe, over 500 years after his death, had a great influence on Roger Bacon and Johann Kepler. Ibn al-Haytham was also the first to obtain a formula for the 4th powers of the first n natural numbers...this was unknown in the earlier Greek period and was not rediscovered in Europe until the 17th century. Ibn al-Haytham also layed the groundwork for the modern non-Euclidean geometries. Haytham used a method utilized by J.H. Lambert in the 18th Century.
I can go on and on (giving examples about music as well as poetry), there are tons of examples in the book Golden Age of the Moor, I suggest you go pick it up.
I'm going to leave you with this one quote (something I also posted on Wikipedia...don't know if it's still there though).
Moorish Spain excelled in city planning; the sophistication of their cities was astonishing. According to one historian, Cordova "had 471 mosques and 300 public baths … the number of houses of the great and noble were 63,000 and 200,077 of the common people. There were … upwards of 80,000 shops. Water from the mountain was distributed through every corner and quarter of the city by means of leaden pipes into basins of different shapes, made of the purest gold, the finest silver, or plated brass as well into vast lakes, curios tanks, amazing reservoirs and fountains of Grecian marble." The houses of Cordova were air conditioned in the summer by "ingeniously arranged draughts of fresh air drawn from the garden over beds of flowers, chosen for their perfume, warmed in winter by hot air conveyed through pipes bedded in the walls." This list of impressive works appears endless; it includes lamp posts that lit their streets at night to grand palaces, such as the one called Azzahra with its 15,000 doors. Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
I was going to post this as an edit to the above post, but it kept messing up for some reason...so I'm just posting it separately. This is my third time writing this damn post...lol. What I'm about to write comes straight out of The Golden Age of the Moor. It's a section within a chapter, the section deals with the Moorish impact on Italian kingdoms.
"Al-Idrisi, often labeled by westerners as "the strabo of the Arabic peoples," was a famed geographer and cartographer of the 12th century. Al-Idrisi was Moroccan born in the city of Ceuta in 1100, and he was educated at Cordova in Andalus. Al-Idrisi later travelled to Sicily to enter the service of the Norman ruler Roger II. Roger II was known for his great enthusiasm for Moorish and Arab culture, particulary their sciences. Idrisi was commissioned by Roger II to construct a great silver globe. Completed in 1154, Idrisi's globe listed countries, seas, rivers, deserts, and major cities and even roads. Idrisi partitioned his globe into Seven Zones of the world. In addition, Idrisi wrote a companion geography book later to be known as The Book of Roger II. The section of the book dealing with the African continent dwelt upon the customs of various African peoples, including their commercial activities, agricultural products, and the fabric of their cultures.
Like his grandfather Roger II (both of whom are refered to as "the two baptized sultans"), the Holy Roman Emporer, Frederick II of Sicily, was also infatuated with the culture and wisdom of the Moors. Frederick II who ruled from 1215-1250, surrounded himself with Muslim scholars and vassals. So intense was his interest in Islamic cultures, that he was popularly believed to be a closet Muslim. Frederick II founded the University of Naples in 1224, and there he established a curriculum which emphasized Moorish scholarship. In fact, under Frederick II, theological studies at ALL Italian universities under his dominion ceased completely! Moorish medicine and law became the sovereign disciplines. No theological faculty would be seen at Naples until 1363. Prior to his ascension to the Spanish kingship, Alfonso X of Castile even established academic relationships with his imperial contemporary Frederick II. After Frederick's death, he continued to send his Toledan-based scholars to the Sicilian kingdom as ambassadors of Andalusian Moorish scholarship. One such ambassador was John of Cremona, a gifted European student of Moorish erudition. The learned Europeans of Frederick II's court were frequently educated outside of Catholic Europe. The most famous Italian mathematician of the period, Leonard of Pisa, was in Frederick's court, and he was educated in Africa. Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
Super car, If you are math challenged you can still get help. Again, the Muslims did not rule Spain until 1492. Almost all of it was lost 250 years before. 1492 was simply the date when they lost their last foothold on the the extreme southern tip. King, you are spinning again. How many times do we have to agree that Muslims made a solid contribution to middle age scholarship. Its a mistake however to take that idea and simply go crazy with it. Muslim culture was destroyed in spain by the reconquest and the Inqusition.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Super car, If you are math challenged you can still get help.
Nope, but you certainly are mentally challenged in every possible way. Being as it is, that you are not in touch with reality, take my early advice:
You can always rely on stormfront on the other hand, as a safe haven for make-feel-good crackpot gatherings [of your kind], where you can convince yourself that your self-delusions are real. Lol.
Here though, crackpot weeds are not allowed to bloom.
In the real world, these facts are taught in colleges:
"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."
^^LOL @ Hore futilely trying to run away from the FACTS.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Super car, If you are math challenged you can still get help. Again, the Muslims did not rule Spain until 1492. Almost all of it was lost 250 years before. 1492 was simply the date when they lost their last foothold on the the extreme southern tip. King, you are spinning again. How many times do we have to agree that Muslims made a solid contribution to middle age scholarship. Its a mistake however to take that idea and simply go crazy with it. Muslim culture was destroyed in spain by the reconquest and the Inqusition.
I'm spinning? How am I spinning? I'm providing you with names, dates, and examples...something you're NOT doing. And you're wrong again, Moorish civilization didn't go into decline until the late 13th century...not 1000 AD. You're acting as if the zenith of Al-Andalusia lasted for only a hiccup...lol. You keep talking about this "reconquest" as if it happened under ONE King, ONE war, and in a few years. Moorish society went into decline because of internal problems...and the constant change in power structure, not because of anything the Europeans did.
And again Horemheb, you're playing down the influence...pretty much saying it was "nothing special." (as if creating Calculus and Trig isn't "all that")
I gave you the example of Frederick II above, but if you look at the period in which most of Europe's oldest and finest universities were established, one cannot be struck by the proximity in time to the scientific flowering of the Moorish world and the establishment of European centers for the translation of Moorish documents...
We already know what was going on in Italy around this time...so there's really no point arguing the Moorish impact on those universities. Odds are though, seeing as how there was no where else in Europe OTHER than Andalusia to learn modern knowledge...odds are, ALL of those universities were heavily influenced by the Moors. The people who founded them were most likely taught in some Islamic institution as well. And two of those schools like Oxford and Cambridge are part of some of the biggest schools in the world TODAY!
Another example is from a man named Abulcasis who wrote an encyclopedia of medicine and surgury entitled al-Tasrif. One of Alfonso's translators, and Italian named Gerard of Cremona, tranlated the text into Latin and it became the standard text for the instruction of European surgeons. New editions of the work were still being published and utilized centuries later at Venice in 1497, Basel in 1541, and Oxford in 1778.
So you see Horemheb, the Moorish influence on Western society went farther than just the Middle Ages.
"When we consider the political and socio-spiritual threat which the Moors posed on Catholic Europe, it is not hard to understand the respect and/or envy which many Europeans had for the Moorish culture and learning. While many Catholics resisted the cultural intrusion of the Moors, several Europeans mimicked Moorish customs and manners. Even the 11th century Spanish Catholic king Alfonso VI dressed in Moorish attire, and had five wives (one of whom was a Moor: Zubaydah, daughter of Seville's Moorish ruler, Mu'tamid). There was even an entire socio-political group born of European interest in Moorish culture. The Mozarabs were Catholic Iberians (Spanish) who had adopted many customs of the African Islamic peoples, including their Arabic language. These Arabic-speaking Catholics proved to be very significant in the transference of Moorish culture to Christian Europe." Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: you are the racist here super car, you always have been.
Lol. Panic-stricken Hore, about facts he can do nothing about. Why should anyone take a stormfront crackpot like yourself seriously, thinking that you are in touch with the real world? Posted by yazid904 (Member # 7708) on :
Horemheb,
Arab unity is a new term and it is solidified by by Islam (in most cases). From the historical perspective, some are more Arab than others? for dubious reason.
Here are some Arab dynasties in Spain. Keep in mind they were the client of larger dynasties in North and West Africa. a. Abbasid b. Umayyad c. Almoravid(es) d. Almohad(es) e. Nasrid (the last dynasty) very small contigent
The Berbers and Taureg amongst, others by tribal affiliation were considerd as mawali, though their leaders tended to be Arabized or Arabs themselves (a small minority). When the Almoravides left their roots in Senegal/Morocco, they instituded a revolt to be equal to those of the Umayyad. Others mawali took note and over the Umayyad. Please look up the word mawali and its asociations as I do not want to deprive you of knowledge so check to your hearts content!
ANother word to check is yeniseri. These were captured Europeans (usually Slavs) who either joined as a way to join a civil service (something like the Army Reserve but full time with benefits, way to see or try to overtake the Muslim/Turkish empire and a potential change to establish their own dynasty in Yugoslavia or Egypt!!) Many were forced but eventually appeared to like it! In the early dynasties, it is said "it was a rare Caliph who did not have a Persian, Turk, and in later dynasties a Greek or Slavic mother".
just thought I would a few notes! enjoy
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
I am not sure why this discussion has been allowed to go this far.
Fact: Moors ruled Spain, spanning until about 1492.
It is obvious that nobody in their right mind will deny this much, save for crackpot clown, Hore. Why waste time.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb:
Every piece of legit scholarship known to man agrees with what I said.
Lol...for example, like that college website. Yeah...right. Well, now you may go back to your 'make-feel-good' cocoon for crackpots - stormfront.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: King, You are taking good information and running way too far with it. The information that was injected into europe through spain did not have an immediate impact. the book I mentioned, 'Aristotle's Children' deals directly with that subject and you really need to read it. Keep in mind also by the dates you mentioned the Muslims had been pushed back to the bottom quarter of Spain. The interaction of Jews, Christians and Muslims occured on one primary level and that was intellectual. You can get a good start on the subject by reading up on Peter Abelard. He was involved in the firat part of the 12th century in trying to liberalize the Catholic church. You can probably pull up a good deal about him on the net. Beware of the radical voodoo scholarship that some would like to thrust upon you. Islam had a role in the middle ages but it was only a role. if I told you that Europe had a foundational impact on Islam because the crusaders occupied the Holy Land for a hundred years you would think I was nuts. Thats the kind of thing some of these nit wits try to do.
It may not have had an immediate impact, but just for the simple fact that there was so much interest in Moorish studies...so many translations for LATER people (centuries later sometimes) to discover...the impact the Moors (and other Islamic entities) had on MODERN Western society SHOULD be unchallenged. They layed the foundations for Calculus and Trigonometry, aren't those two mathematic principles still taught in schools? Now yes, I'm sure there has been more learned since 900 years ago...but THEY started it.
You are continueing the age-old excuse...the Moors discovered things that NO ONE else knew. It was then translated to Latin for Europeans to use for centuries afterward. A lot of these discoveries still being utilized far into the Colonial period! Is this not a huge impact? If not, I'd really like to know what you're version of a huge impact is.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: turn your head sideways Super car so all of the saw dust will spill out your ear. Every piece of legit scholarship known to man agrees with what I said. The Moors were displaced by arab groups after 1000 and muslims had lost most of the nation 250 years begore the fall of Grenada. Is there anything you know anything about?
*sigh* Again Horemheb, you are wrong.
There were Arab rulers in Moorish Spain I'm sure, but there was not a unified Arab "takeover" after 1000 (why do you stick to this date so much?)
You're forgetting about the Almoravid and Almorahad (sp?) Dynasties that ruled Spain. The Almoravid Dynasty came into power after Alfonso VI took Toledo in the early 11th Century (the same Alfonso VI who wanted all the Moorish knowledge...it seems there was a lot of that half-assed friendship going on). The Almoravids were led by Yusuf ibn Tashifin...who was a black African. In 1082, hundreds of Moors and Arabs fled Spain and flocked back to Africa to escape the tyranny of Alfonso and the persucution by the Christians. Finally, a year later in 1083, the Governor of Seville came and begged his assistance against the Christians. Yusuf agreed and amassed an army unlike any other seen by Arab or Moor. "It is stated that when Yusuf crossed to Spain, there was no tribe of the western desert that was not represented in his army, and it was the first time that the people of Spain saw camels used for the purpose of mounting calvary...forming the army which fought at Zalakah in 1086...were thousands of blacks armed with Indian swords...this battle drove the Christians forces out of southern Spain and laid the foundation for Yusuf's Spanish Empire (the Almoravids)."
Yusuf ruled both Spain and Africa until his death in 1106, when he was succeeded by his son. Thus, the Almoravid dynasty continued to reign with a double court, one in Africa and one in Spain. Though the Almoravid dynasty was short-lived as Yusuf's son was inexperienced and the Spanish dominion was lost in 1145. This gave rise to the second great African dynasty and the fourth and last Moorish dynasty - The Almohade...who ruled into the 13th century. Again, like I said, the decline began in the late 13th century after the fall of the Almohades.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: where are you getting this stuff king?
Tell me, in your stormfront environment, do you clowns even believe the earth exists? Lol.
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
*sigh* Again Horemheb, you are wrong.
Is he ever not wrong? That must be news. lol
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: where are you getting this stuff king? read Aristotle's Children. Its the newest definitive work on the subject and will help you. You can order it through amazon, trust me on this.
Yea, and you read Golden Age of the Moor.
I can already see from the summary of your book, and it's title what it's going to be about. And I'm sure it'll mimick what you've said here...that the Moors didn't contribute anything new to science and were simply translaters of older knowledge. That about right? The book seems to position Artistotle as the be-all, end-all of the scientific revival of the Middle Ages...maybe I'm wrong though since I haven't read it.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
King_Scorpion, don't let the clown wiggle its way away from...
Fact: Moors ruled Spain, spanning until about 1492.
...by focusing on trivial matters about "Aristotle" and what have you.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Hore wants to ignore the fact that Europe was a backwater of civilization from 500-1300 AD and the Islamic Empire was the civilized culture of the western world. No amount of nit picking and arguing over insignificant facts can change this. Hore wants the history of Europe to skip over the periods of the dark ages and act as if Europe, especially western Europe was ALWAYS the bastion of intellectual achievement. First western Europe was not Greece or Rome. Second, western Europe did not inherit the knowledge of the Greeks and Romans directly from them. Third, many of the early achievements of the European world in 1400 were MIMICKING or PIGGYBACKING on the accomplishments of others: sailing around Africa, using advanced instruments in navigation, building universities, using slaves and subjugating people in the name of religion. ALL of these things were being done by people LONG before Europe ever became "civilized". So the issue here is about Europe trying to claim greatness for things it did NOT originate and was NOT the first to practice.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Well no King and I also never said they did not make a contribution. If you read my posts on this thread I said that over and over and we agree on that point. The only area where we are not connecting is dates. There is a tendacy , especially on this board, to take a piece of information and take it too far. Spain is a European , catholic nation. It is not an african , Islamic nation. Historians want to know two things when looking at any event. As a result of that event what changed and what remained the same? That is what the study history is, nothing more, nothing less. And yes, Aristotle was huge in the revival of Europe, much more important that the muslim invasion of Spain. he was important because his material ignited the debate within the catholic church about whether there was room for rational scientific thought within the church and society as a whole. When Islam ran into the catholic church it hit a brick wall. When Aristotle's work ran into the catholic church it started a revolution.
Guys, let's not stoop to the level of pissing on Europe...and I know I'm no moderator, but let's try to cut down on the name-calling...it's kinda childish (that includes you Horemheb).
Anyway, Horemheb...we don't agree on the contributions, at least not on the same level. I see the impact of the Islamic Empires as something greater than you do. You even said yourself that you believe they simply played a "role" that was limited to the Middle Ages. So you're basically saying the scientific achievements of the Moors and others like them had no effect on the modern world. I've given examples above as to why this is wrong. Aristotle was a great man, I'm not trying to deny that...but he was NOT the sole origin of Western thought. Western Civilization has many roots, many of which sprout from non-Western cultures...the Moors being one of them.
About the dates, well you said the Arabs controlled Spain AFTER 1000. I showed you how this was wrong as you forgot about the Almoravid and Almorahade Dynasties (both with West African roots) that ruled into the early 13th Century. This is documented fact! Yusuf ibn Tashifin repelled the Spanish attack in a battle against Alfonso VI in October of 1086 at Zalakah. This is recorded. The Arabs didn't take over until AFTER the Almohade (the last Moorish Dynasty to rule Spain) dynasty fell. Maybe we disagree when it comes to the beginning of the decline.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
Guys, let's not stoop to the level of pissing on Europe...
Cite where herein, anything posted suggests this, aside from the presentation of facts on "Moorish" rule in Spain. Could it be that stating the fact, is what you see as "pissing" on Europe; if so, how?
Posted by Yom (Member # 11256) on :
@Doug M:
Your second map is incorrect regarding Ethiopia. The entirety of Eritrea was controlled and only the Dahlak Islands was Muslim and some of the inhabitants of Mitsiwa and Hergigo aka Arkiko at that time. Also the Somali coast wasn't all controlled by Arabs or Muslims, as Adal in 1500 was still a vassal to the Ethiopian Emperor, so I don't know how far to trust your maps.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Fact: Moors ruled Spain, spanning until about 1492.
Facts taught in colleges:
"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 Horemheb: Doug, your post was another example of taking a good idea and going to far with it. Europe started coming out of the dark ages by the year 1000. You may be aware that the first crusade, which began in 1095, resultued in Europeans holding the Holy Land for a century. It is absurd to contend that Europe revived because of some Moorish tribes. The Rubenstein book is outstanding history and covers the topic well. Lets also remeber that the Muslim 'Golden Age' did not last all that long. By the year 1000 it was clearly on the defensive.
Yea, the Muslim golden age lasted all of almost a millenium...not long at all .
And there you go with that 1000 again. Why do you stick to this date as the turning point of everything? Can you be a bit more precise..give us some examples from the Aristotle book. Tell us HOW by the year 1000 the Islamic Empire was on the defense (other than being attacked by the Knights Templar ad nauseum). Was there something going on in Europe that we are not aware of that was not connected with the advancements made by the Muslims? If so, please share...by all means.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Doug, your post was another example of taking a good idea and going to far with it. Europe started coming out of the dark ages by the year 1000. You may be aware that the first crusade, which began in 1095, resultued in Europeans holding the Holy Land for a century. It is absurd to contend that Europe revived because of some Moorish tribes. The Rubenstein book is outstanding history and covers the topic well. Lets also remeber that the Muslim 'Golden Age' did not last all that long. By the year 1000 it was clearly on the defensive.
WHAT am I taking too far? Are you saying that in 1000AD, when the crusades started, that western Europe was the pinnacle of culture, civilization and science in the world? Of course not, because they werent. The point is that the Moors were PART of the spread of the Islamic Empire. Of course the Moors would have had brought civilization to Europe because the Islamic World spanned so much of the known world, from Europe and Africa to China, giving it access to some of the OLDEST cultures in the world. Therefore, the influence would have HAD to come from places OUTSIDE of Europe, since Europe did not HAVE anything in the way of culture or civilization that was SUPERIOR to those cultures they encountered. Therefore, the start of the crusades was the START of the process that would lead to Europe becoming "civilized". The crusades and the Moorish invasion were therefore CRUCIAL factors that helped spring Europe out of the doldrums of the dark ages into the Rennaissance. And so what if the Spanish kicked the Muslims out of Europe, does that mean that the achievements of the Moors in Europe dont COUNT? Are you trying to say that this therefore allows Europe to all of a sudden claim a heritage to civilization and culture that was NOT there before the Moors as if it came FROM Europe? No, it is not me taking anything to far, it is YOU trying to put Europe in the 11th and 12th century above those cultures that were FAR superior to it at the time.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Hore, this is ridiculous. Europeans have ALWAYS defined the hallmarks of civilization as being science, math, architecture and philosophy. Therefore, if Western Europe HAD none of this in 700 AD, then HOW was it civilized? The Greeks and Romans BOTH called Western Europe savages and backward (and almost everyone else to wit). So what in the world are you talking about. THIS is the point I am trying to make. You want to elevate Western Europe in the 9th century OUTSIDE Moorish Spain to the status of "civilized", when MANY would disagree completely with calling the conditions in western Europe anything more than crude. This time period is NOT called the dark ages for nothing Hore. AND, philosophy was NOT reintroduced to Western Europe, since philosophy, math, science and culture did not COME from Western Europe. For Western Europe, this was the NAISSANCE of learning and culture. This is idea of renaissance can only apply to Greece and Italy, countries of Rome and Hellenic Greece. Again, you are trying to tie Western Europe to a tradition of CIVILIZATION that was FOREIGN to Western Europe and came LATE even to Mediterranean Europe. Therefore, Europe was LATE to the game of "civilization" and this game of civilization was nothing more than babaric savagery in the name of Empire, religion and the throne. And in that sense Europe was only MIMICKING the prior activities of the Greeks, Romans ans Muslims that came before, in trying to conquer the known world in the name of the European "Empire". Sure, Europe did go on to surpass the Muslim world, but that was a direct result of influence from Islam and other cultures that came before it. Europe did not SUDDENLY start the path to civilization in a vaccuum with NO outside influence. This is a farce.
The Islamic Empire was 5 times bigger than it was when the Moors first took Spain when they were kicked out in 1492. Hardly a civilization on a decline. The decline did come, but it wasnt in 1100.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Horemheb,
If it wasn't for the Muslims in Spain who translated Aristotle and other Greek scholars, Augustine's name would not echo in history books.
and pay attention how Spaniards today gradually appreciating their Islamic legacy.
This is not a biased film, listen to what Spaniards selfs are saying.
BTW, wasn't Augustine a North African?
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
An extract from Cedric J. Robinson's book:
Europe's Formation
The social basis of European civilization was 'among those whom the Romans called the "barbarians" '
more,
William C. Bark, Origins of the Medieval world, ' ... for neither Greeks nor Romans did Europe mean much. Fear of Persia lent colour to the Greek attitude to continents, but the empire of Alexander the Great was in Asia, not Europe, while the remnants of this were conquered by a Rome
( sorry I have to go, more later today, and I'll edit this post)
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Horemheb,
If it wasn't for the Muslims in Spain who translated Aristotle and other Greek scholars, Augustine's name would not echo in history books.
and pay attention how Spaniards today gradually appreciating their Islamic legacy.
This is not a biased film, listen to what Spaniards selfs are saying.
BTW, wasn't Augustine a North African?
WOW!! Thanks for the vid!!
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: If it wasn't for the Muslims in Spain who translated Aristotle and other Greek scholars, Augustine's name would not echo in history books.
and pay attention how Spaniards today gradually appreciating their Islamic legacy.
This is not a biased film, listen to what Spaniards selfs are saying.
BTW, wasn't Augustine a North African?
This video should be the end all right here!
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Whenever trolls are given easy access to wiggle their way out of facts pointed out, using terms like "rediscovered", "revived", "dark age", and intentionally focusing on supposed translations of "Aristotle", or "Moors didn't rule Spanish culture," "Moors got displaced by Arabs" and so forth, it is time for somebody to bring the discussion back to the real point of the topic, which again was:
Fact: Visible Moorish involvment in the earlier Pan-Islamic rule and subsequent Moorish rulership of Spain, spans until about 1492.
A brief summation of Moorish influence as taught in colleges:
"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."
...while just a dose of a few specific examples among the many, on Arab and Moorish influence in mathematics and other sciences have been already provided, that would turn:
Spain into the center for culture and learning throughout Europe
...which Europeans from elsewhere [particularly northwestern Europe], would take advantage of, to make social advances that they never had before. Trolls can obviously [futilely] try to evade or obscure these facts through examples of none-issue distractive antics as just provided above [which some might fall for], but of course cannot refute it. The trolls themselves know that these are facts, and all they can hope to do, is to have others fall for their distractive antics and hence, guide or control the discussants into the direction they wish the discussion to go. However, while some discussants are obviously easy prey, thankfully there are always a few of us who don't make life easy for trolls, by reminding and "tormenting" them with the real issues of the topic, and the established facts therein. Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
Case in point:
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Super car does not have enough basic education to frame the question, much less offer an answer.
Trolls don't have the mental capacity to refute anything, except fill threads with spineless none-issue spams, like the above. It would be in your best interest to go back to stormfront. Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Whenever trolls are given easy access to wiggle their way out of facts pointed out, using terms like "rediscovered", "revived", "dark age", and intentionally focusing on supposed translations of "Aristotle", or "Moors didn't rule Spanish culture," "Moors got displaced by Arabs" and so forth, it is time for somebody to bring the discussion back to the real point of the topic, which again was...
Well, the Moors did translate Aristotle...to be more precise, it was a Moor named Ibn Rushd ( also called Averroes). The problem is when Horemheb says things like it was solely the rediscovering of Aristotle's work that brought about the Rennassiance...while totally ignoring everything the Moors did that ALSO revolutionized Europe forever (things I've mentioned ad nauseum already). The Moors had just as much to do with the Rennassiance as Aristotle...and if it weren't for the Moors there may have never been a translation anyway. Where do you think the Christians and Jews went to school at? Cordova and Toledo most likely.
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
quote:Whenever trolls are given easy access to wiggle their way out of facts pointed out, using terms like "rediscovered", "revived", "dark age", and intentionally focusing on supposed translations of "Aristotle", or "Moors didn't rule Spanish culture," "Moors got displaced by Arabs" and so forth, it is time for somebody to bring the discussion back to the real point of the topic, which again was...
Well, the Moors did translate Aristotle...to be more precise, it was a Moor named Ibn Rushd ( also called Averroes).
And...? Read what you are responding to carefully, before you respond.
quote:King_Scorpion:
The problem is when Horemheb says things like it was solely the rediscovering of Aristotle's work that brought about the Rennassiance...while totally ignoring everything the Moors did that ALSO revolutionized Europe forever (things I've mentioned ad nauseum already).
Bingo! I wasn't sure when that point would be taken home.
quote:King_Scorpion:
The Moors had just as much to do with the Rennassiance as Aristotle...and if it weren't for the Moors there may have never been a translation anyway. Where do you think the Christians and Jews went to school at? Cordova and Toledo most likely
The last question should be posed to trolls in denial, not those who already know better, but I believe Dr Salah Zaimeche put it best; though redundancy of repetition can be annoying, it is something I found to be necessary on discussion boards:
Dr. Salah Zaimeche BA, MA, PhD;
Research Assistant, UMIST, Manchester, UK and Researcher at FSTC
First and foremost, the learning recovered, or found, or available, at that Renaissance of 16th-17th (another illogically based notion of western history) bears no resemblance to anything left by the Greeks. The mathematics, the medicine, the optics, the chemistry, the astronomy, geography, mechanics etc, of the 16th is centuries ahead of that left by the Greeks. Any person with the faintest knowledge of any such subjects can check this by looking at what was left by the Greeks and compare it with what was available in the 16th century, and even with what was available centuries up to the 14th. Anyone can thus question this notion of Greek learning recovered during the Renaissance.
**Furthermore, even supposing the Greeks had made some contribution in some of the sciences cited, what is the Greek contribution to the invention of paper, printing, farming techniques, irrigation, windmills, the compass, industrial production, glass making, cotton production, the system of numerals, trade mechanisms, paper money, the cheque? Modern finance as a whole, gardens, flowers, art of living, urban design, personal hygiene, and many more manifestations that compose our modern civilization?**
As for the notion that Greek learning had disappeared, this is another preposterous point repeatedly made by western ‘historians’.
Greek learning was available throughout the so-called Dark Ages in Byzantium and even in the ‘west’. Western historians never fail to insist that Muslims sought that Greek learning from Byzantine sources, and yet say that it has disappeared, which is impossible to square. Now, if such learning was available all along, why did ‘western scholars’ have to wait until they conquered Islamic lands in Sicily (11th), Toledo (Spain) (in the 11th) and in the east during the Crusades (11th -12th) before they started acquiring such ‘Greek’ learning? Why wait? And above all, why did Western translators of the 12th century, to whom we will return further on, chose to translate such sources? This is never explained by those historians who select miniscule or fragmentary pieces of evidence, often concoctions of their own, to build extensive theories (i.e. the Pirenne theory, the burning of the Alexandria library)
The Evidence
The real evidence from history shows that where the Greeks had left off, the Muslims had continued thus setting up the foundations of modern science and civilization. Before looking, albeit briefly, at some aspects of Muslim decisive influences, this author, like other Muslim historians, first and foremost, never ceases to acknowledge that, although the Muslims had made such contributions, the Islamic mind and soul that science and civilization are God given gifts to all people of equal abilities. The reason why the Muslims excelled at the time they did, and played the part they did is not due to any special status (as others appear to recognize as their own), but simply to circumstances current then, i.e., spur of Islamic values, which were very strong; driven by faith, Muslims were able to accomplish what they could never achieve under other circumstances as history has shown. Moreover, the Muslims had their own contributions but never denied their inheritance from other civilizations; particularly from the Chinese with whom they always had excellent relations…
…amongst the Muslims, only a number of such scientists were Arabs; most were instead Turks, Iranians, Spanish Muslims, Berbers, Kurds...thus a myriad of people and origins brought under the mantel of Islam, a religion open to all who sought to, and excelled in learning. And that was the first, and by far, the most multienthnic culture and civilisation that had ever existed, and not equalled in many respects, even today, not even in countires and institutions which keep adverstising their equal opportunity status. ..
Such observations are not conjured up by the present author to pursue his own agenda. They can be found amidst some of the best but often inaccessible and thus obscure ‘western historians’, or men of renown. Thus, Glubb states:
“ The indebtedness of Western Christendom to Arab civilization was systematically played down, if not completely denied. A tradition was built up, by censorhip and propaganda, that the Muslim imperialists had been mere barbarians and that the rebirth of learning in the West was derived directly from Roman and Greek sources alone, without any Arab intervention.”…
To go through Islamic impact on modern science and civilization in detail demands so vast a book that nobody has written yet, and it is much beyond the capability of this author to address this issue as extensively as he would wish. Notwithstanding, just some overall observations and points are raised here.
In order to highlight the true scale of Islamic impact, its crucial to look, however briefly, at the condition of western Christendom during those so-called Dark Ages, when, such were the contrasts, and such was the envy of western Christians of life in the Muslim world, that for Europeans, as Menocal puts it, ‘It must have at times appeared that wealth and comfort went hand in hand with the ability to read Arabic.’
Whilst universality of learning was a fundamental element in Islamic civilization, science was the ‘hobby of the masses, with paupers and kings competing to obtain knowledge…’ Whereas in western Christendom, as Haskins observes, ‘….relatively few could read and write, these being chiefly ecclesiastics and, save for the very moderate attainments of an individual parish priest, men of education were concentrated in certain definite groups separated from one another by wide stretches or rural ignorance. ‘
As Draper puts it, ‘Europe was hardly more enlightened than Caffraria is now, the Saracens were cultivating and even creating science. Their triumphs in philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine, proved to be more glorious, more durable and therefore more important than their military actions had been.’ Draper goes on to say that whilst ‘the Christian peasant, fever stricken or overtaken by accident, journeyed to the nearest saint’s shrine and expected a miracle; a knife of his surgeon.’ ‘The spurious medicine of ignorant and mercenary ecclesiastical charlatans. These operated by means of chants, relics, and incense; and their enormous gains were one of the chief sources of revenue to the parish and the monastery, and a corresponding burden on the people.’
Urbanity and wealth also belonged to the Muslims, at that time. In tenth century Cordova, there were 200,000 houses, 600 mosques, 900 public baths, the streets were paved with stones, and were cleaned, policed, and illuminated at night, water was brought to the public squares and to many of the houses by conduits, Islamic cities, as a whole with their mosque and madrassas, their churches, synagogues, and schools, their bathhouses, and other amenities, contained all that was needed for leading a religious and cultured life. Such Islamic cities boasted huge expanses of gardens.
Basra in Iraq was described by the early geographers as a veritable Venice, with mile after mile of canals criss-crossing the garden and orchards; Damascus with its 110,000 gardens, and in Turkey, Ettinghausen says flowers were a ‘devotion, if not mania.’ Whilst in Islamic towns and cities, trade flourished in all directions, and the wealth of its land were the objective of the preying and attacks of Christian pirates, the view from Western Christendom was hardly flattering. So big was the contrast, as Scott puts it, that the magnificent architectural works of ‘Arab genius were attributed to an infernal agency, as beyond the efforts of unaided human power,’ an opinion still enlightened by the Spanish peasantry, who firmly believe that the Muslim palaces ‘were constructed by evil spirits.’ This account by Draper tells that:
“As late as 16th century England, there were highwaymen on the roads, pirates on the rivers, vermin in abundance in the clothing and beds…The population, sparse as it was, was perpetually thinned by pestilence and want…” - Draper
As similar state of wretchedness prevailed everywhere else. Scott tells how:
“ In Paris there were no pavements until the thirteenth century; in London none until the fourteenth; the streets of both capitals were receptacles of filth, and often impassable; at night shrouded with inky darkness; at all times dominated by outlaws; the haunt of the footpad, the nursery of the pestilence, the source of every disease, the scene of every crime” - Scott
In the Spanish Asturias at the time of the Muslim arrival (early 8th century), Scott states that,
“The dwellings were rude hovels constructed of stones and unhewn timber, thatched with straw floored with rushes and provided with a hole in the roof to enable the smoke to escape; their walls and ceilings were smeared with soot and grease, and every corner reeked with filth and with vermin. The owners of these habitations were, in appearance and intelligence, scarcely removed from the condition of savages. They dressed in sheepskins and the hides of wild beasts, which unchanged, remained in one family for many generations. The salutary habit of ablution was never practiced by them. Their garments were never cleansed, and were worn as long as their tattered fragments held together.” - Scott
From this alone, it seems extremely odd how, instead of gratitude, western historians, including Albornoz and Spanish historians of his ilk, deny the Islamic influence. -
---
Of note, Dr Salah Zaimeche says:
learning recovered, or found, or available, at that Renaissance of 16th-17th (another illogically based notion of western history) bears no resemblance to anything left by the Greeks.
The mathematics, the medicine, the optics, the chemistry, the astronomy, geography, mechanics etc, of the 16th is centuries ahead of that left by the Greeks.
Joseph Hell provides an example of this in his publication:
"A new school of thought emerged in the late 13th century that in itself constitutes a revolution. It is referred to as the Maragha Revolution, and it has been described as "an essential link to Copernican astronomy without which Copernican astronomy will be hard to explain" [Anon.]. The Maragha Revolution was, to put it simply, a rejection of many of Ptolemy's statements, and a sudden surge of new ideas and theories to replace incorrect Ptolemaic assertions. Thus, it turns out that the Arabs had come to many of the same conclusions as Copernicus well before Copernicus' time, although the astronomers of the Arabic Maragha school were still working within the confines of a geocentric model.
Nonetheless, these astronomers were the ones who corrected many of Ptolemy's mistakes and made the first real moves towards the final realization of the true workings of the solar system. It is for this reason that many have firmly declared that Copernicus was influenced by the Arabic Maragha school."
Ps - I for one, think it is misleading to equate "Moor" with "Arab", though the Moorish rule in Spain is directly linked to the expansion of Islam in North Africa. I tend to use "Moor" within its original context, i.e. corresponding to North Africans, particularly west Africans.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: the film does not say that Islam is the foundation of modern spain, nor does any sane person or european historian.
Do I sense any bias and I dare say prejudice against Muslims??
Remember, Islamic civilizations were at its peak in both scholarship and science while Europe was at its low during its "Dark Ages".
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Supercar:
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
quote:Whenever trolls are given easy access to wiggle their way out of facts pointed out, using terms like "rediscovered", "revived", "dark age", and intentionally focusing on supposed translations of "Aristotle", or "Moors didn't rule Spanish culture," "Moors got displaced by Arabs" and so forth, it is time for somebody to bring the discussion back to the real point of the topic, which again was...
Well, the Moors did translate Aristotle...to be more precise, it was a Moor named Ibn Rushd ( also called Averroes).
And...? Read what you are responding to carefully, before you respond.
quote:King_Scorpion:
The problem is when Horemheb says things like it was solely the rediscovering of Aristotle's work that brought about the Rennassiance...while totally ignoring everything the Moors did that ALSO revolutionized Europe forever (things I've mentioned ad nauseum already).
Bingo! I wasn't sure when that point would be taken home.
quote:King_Scorpion:
The Moors had just as much to do with the Rennassiance as Aristotle...and if it weren't for the Moors there may have never been a translation anyway. Where do you think the Christians and Jews went to school at? Cordova and Toledo most likely
The last question should be posed to trolls in denial, not those who already know better, but I believe Dr Salah Zaimeche put it best; though redundancy of repetition can be annoying, it is something I found to be necessary on discussion boards:
Dr. Salah Zaimeche BA, MA, PhD;
Research Assistant, UMIST, Manchester, UK and Researcher at FSTC
First and foremost, the learning recovered, or found, or available, at that Renaissance of 16th-17th (another illogically based notion of western history) bears no resemblance to anything left by the Greeks. The mathematics, the medicine, the optics, the chemistry, the astronomy, geography, mechanics etc, of the 16th is centuries ahead of that left by the Greeks. Any person with the faintest knowledge of any such subjects can check this by looking at what was left by the Greeks and compare it with what was available in the 16th century, and even with what was available centuries up to the 14th. Anyone can thus question this notion of Greek learning recovered during the Renaissance.
**Furthermore, even supposing the Greeks had made some contribution in some of the sciences cited, what is the Greek contribution to the invention of paper, printing, farming techniques, irrigation, windmills, the compass, industrial production, glass making, cotton production, the system of numerals, trade mechanisms, paper money, the cheque? Modern finance as a whole, gardens, flowers, art of living, urban design, personal hygiene, and many more manifestations that compose our modern civilization?**
As for the notion that Greek learning had disappeared, this is another preposterous point repeatedly made by western ‘historians’.
Greek learning was available throughout the so-called Dark Ages in Byzantium and even in the ‘west’. Western historians never fail to insist that Muslims sought that Greek learning from Byzantine sources, and yet say that it has disappeared, which is impossible to square. Now, if such learning was available all along, why did ‘western scholars’ have to wait until they conquered Islamic lands in Sicily (11th), Toledo (Spain) (in the 11th) and in the east during the Crusades (11th -12th) before they started acquiring such ‘Greek’ learning? Why wait? And above all, why did Western translators of the 12th century, to whom we will return further on, chose to translate such sources? This is never explained by those historians who select miniscule or fragmentary pieces of evidence, often concoctions of their own, to build extensive theories (i.e. the Pirenne theory, the burning of the Alexandria library)
The Evidence
The real evidence from history shows that where the Greeks had left off, the Muslims had continued thus setting up the foundations of modern science and civilization. Before looking, albeit briefly, at some aspects of Muslim decisive influences, this author, like other Muslim historians, first and foremost, never ceases to acknowledge that, although the Muslims had made such contributions, the Islamic mind and soul that science and civilization are God given gifts to all people of equal abilities. The reason why the Muslims excelled at the time they did, and played the part they did is not due to any special status (as others appear to recognize as their own), but simply to circumstances current then, i.e., spur of Islamic values, which were very strong; driven by faith, Muslims were able to accomplish what they could never achieve under other circumstances as history has shown. Moreover, the Muslims had their own contributions but never denied their inheritance from other civilizations; particularly from the Chinese with whom they always had excellent relations…
…amongst the Muslims, only a number of such scientists were Arabs; most were instead Turks, Iranians, Spanish Muslims, Berbers, Kurds...thus a myriad of people and origins brought under the mantel of Islam, a religion open to all who sought to, and excelled in learning. And that was the first, and by far, the most multienthnic culture and civilisation that had ever existed, and not equalled in many respects, even today, not even in countires and institutions which keep adverstising their equal opportunity status. ..
Such observations are not conjured up by the present author to pursue his own agenda. They can be found amidst some of the best but often inaccessible and thus obscure ‘western historians’, or men of renown. Thus, Glubb states:
“ The indebtedness of Western Christendom to Arab civilization was systematically played down, if not completely denied. A tradition was built up, by censorhip and propaganda, that the Muslim imperialists had been mere barbarians and that the rebirth of learning in the West was derived directly from Roman and Greek sources alone, without any Arab intervention.”…
To go through Islamic impact on modern science and civilization in detail demands so vast a book that nobody has written yet, and it is much beyond the capability of this author to address this issue as extensively as he would wish. Notwithstanding, just some overall observations and points are raised here.
In order to highlight the true scale of Islamic impact, its crucial to look, however briefly, at the condition of western Christendom during those so-called Dark Ages, when, such were the contrasts, and such was the envy of western Christians of life in the Muslim world, that for Europeans, as Menocal puts it, ‘It must have at times appeared that wealth and comfort went hand in hand with the ability to read Arabic.’
Whilst universality of learning was a fundamental element in Islamic civilization, science was the ‘hobby of the masses, with paupers and kings competing to obtain knowledge…’ Whereas in western Christendom, as Haskins observes, ‘….relatively few could read and write, these being chiefly ecclesiastics and, save for the very moderate attainments of an individual parish priest, men of education were concentrated in certain definite groups separated from one another by wide stretches or rural ignorance. ‘
As Draper puts it, ‘Europe was hardly more enlightened than Caffraria is now, the Saracens were cultivating and even creating science. Their triumphs in philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, medicine, proved to be more glorious, more durable and therefore more important than their military actions had been.’ Draper goes on to say that whilst ‘the Christian peasant, fever stricken or overtaken by accident, journeyed to the nearest saint’s shrine and expected a miracle; a knife of his surgeon.’ ‘The spurious medicine of ignorant and mercenary ecclesiastical charlatans. These operated by means of chants, relics, and incense; and their enormous gains were one of the chief sources of revenue to the parish and the monastery, and a corresponding burden on the people.’
Urbanity and wealth also belonged to the Muslims, at that time. In tenth century Cordova, there were 200,000 houses, 600 mosques, 900 public baths, the streets were paved with stones, and were cleaned, policed, and illuminated at night, water was brought to the public squares and to many of the houses by conduits, Islamic cities, as a whole with their mosque and madrassas, their churches, synagogues, and schools, their bathhouses, and other amenities, contained all that was needed for leading a religious and cultured life. Such Islamic cities boasted huge expanses of gardens.
Basra in Iraq was described by the early geographers as a veritable Venice, with mile after mile of canals criss-crossing the garden and orchards; Damascus with its 110,000 gardens, and in Turkey, Ettinghausen says flowers were a ‘devotion, if not mania.’ Whilst in Islamic towns and cities, trade flourished in all directions, and the wealth of its land were the objective of the preying and attacks of Christian pirates, the view from Western Christendom was hardly flattering. So big was the contrast, as Scott puts it, that the magnificent architectural works of ‘Arab genius were attributed to an infernal agency, as beyond the efforts of unaided human power,’ an opinion still enlightened by the Spanish peasantry, who firmly believe that the Muslim palaces ‘were constructed by evil spirits.’ This account by Draper tells that:
“As late as 16th century England, there were highwaymen on the roads, pirates on the rivers, vermin in abundance in the clothing and beds…The population, sparse as it was, was perpetually thinned by pestilence and want…” - Draper
As similar state of wretchedness prevailed everywhere else. Scott tells how:
“ In Paris there were no pavements until the thirteenth century; in London none until the fourteenth; the streets of both capitals were receptacles of filth, and often impassable; at night shrouded with inky darkness; at all times dominated by outlaws; the haunt of the footpad, the nursery of the pestilence, the source of every disease, the scene of every crime” - Scott
In the Spanish Asturias at the time of the Muslim arrival (early 8th century), Scott states that,
“The dwellings were rude hovels constructed of stones and unhewn timber, thatched with straw floored with rushes and provided with a hole in the roof to enable the smoke to escape; their walls and ceilings were smeared with soot and grease, and every corner reeked with filth and with vermin. The owners of these habitations were, in appearance and intelligence, scarcely removed from the condition of savages. They dressed in sheepskins and the hides of wild beasts, which unchanged, remained in one family for many generations. The salutary habit of ablution was never practiced by them. Their garments were never cleansed, and were worn as long as their tattered fragments held together.” - Scott
From this alone, it seems extremely odd how, instead of gratitude, western historians, including Albornoz and Spanish historians of his ilk, deny the Islamic influence. -
---
Of note, Dr Salah Zaimeche says:
learning recovered, or found, or available, at that Renaissance of 16th-17th (another illogically based notion of western history) bears no resemblance to anything left by the Greeks.
The mathematics, the medicine, the optics, the chemistry, the astronomy, geography, mechanics etc, of the 16th is centuries ahead of that left by the Greeks.
Joseph Hell provides an example of this in his publication:
"A new school of thought emerged in the late 13th century that in itself constitutes a revolution. It is referred to as the Maragha Revolution, and it has been described as "an essential link to Copernican astronomy without which Copernican astronomy will be hard to explain" [Anon.]. The Maragha Revolution was, to put it simply, a rejection of many of Ptolemy's statements, and a sudden surge of new ideas and theories to replace incorrect Ptolemaic assertions. Thus, it turns out that the Arabs had come to many of the same conclusions as Copernicus well before Copernicus' time, although the astronomers of the Arabic Maragha school were still working within the confines of a geocentric model.
Nonetheless, these astronomers were the ones who corrected many of Ptolemy's mistakes and made the first real moves towards the final realization of the true workings of the solar system. It is for this reason that many have firmly declared that Copernicus was influenced by the Arabic Maragha school."
Ps - I for one, think it is misleading to equate "Moor" with "Arab", though the Moorish rule in Spain is directly linked to the expansion of Islam in North Africa. I tend to use "Moor" within its original context, i.e. corresponding to North Africans, particularly west Africans.
Great post Supercar! And by the way, my whole post wasn't aimed at you...it was really just that first sentence. My point was because you said "supposed translations" of Aristotle as if it didn't happen. Maybe I just misunderstood you. But we are in agreement on this issue 100% though.
Posted by Horemheb (Member # 3361) on :
King, This is voodoo scholarship. Nobody is going to accept these wacked out radical revisionist views of history. Western civilization (all of it) is based on the greeks and romans. You see it right in front of your nose all over the west. Islam had a great era and their golden age (700-1000) should be admired but we should not be irresponsible in looking at the events of history. I have given you some excellent tools to get you started, whether you use them is up to you.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: King, This is voodoo scholarship. Nobody is going to accept these wacked out radical revisionist views of history.Western civilization (all of it) is based on the greeks and romans. You see it right in front of your nose all over the west. Islam had a great era and their golden age (700-1000) should be admired but we should not be irresponsible in looking at the events of history. I have given you some excellent tools to get you started, whether you use them is up to you.
No...it isn't.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
Great post, Supercar. I wanted to add more, but so far you said it best.
Horemheb
I see, that you have made up your mind . Fair enough.
But do us a favour next you come up with a statement; voodoo scholarship remember to provide evidence, ok?
trivia question: Where did Greece and Rome get their stuffs from ?
All right, the facts are settled. Since we all know that the Professor has made up his mind, let's continue on with any more possible contributions to Topic of discussion.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
A note:
quote: By the twelfth century, Santiago de Compostela, patron saint of the Catholic fight against Islam in Spain, had won the mighty masculine epithet "Matamoros," or "Killer of Moors." No documentation exists anywhere of a medieval feminine equivalent, presumably because female Muslims were included in that collective honorific. However, some dispute whether Christians might have borrowed the word mata (kill) from the Arabic language to honor Santiago. Thus, mata might not be from matar (or, earlier, from mattus, a Latin root), but really from the Arabic verb mata, which means not to kill, but to die.3 Spanish Christians, hybrid to their medieval core, were actually allowing their saintly slayer to say "Death to the Muslims" at least partially in the enemy tongue. If this derivation is correct, then it represents a hybridized Christian linguistic acquisition, which must have been doubly effective against an enemy who heard the battle cry and understood the Arabic component to herald their violent demise. The appropriation of a Spanish patron saint's militaristic power as a symbol, and the contorted route Matamoras took in the United States as a result of the nationalist celebration of the defeat of Mexico, is what makes their naming significant.
The Spanish word moros, as a collective noun, is a Latin derivative in Spanish, but for Muslims it was merely an insult about their foreignness, a collective noun for those people who came from North Africa, and also a reference to black skin. The Muslims of Spain included people of various ethnicities. Individual tribes of Berbers from North Africa had their own distinct tribal names, and ethnic Arabs took pride in their genealogical tribal heritage as well. None of these members of the Islamic faith referred to themselves by the pejorative term Moros, or Moors. In parallel fashion, Spanish conquerors in the Americas also perceived all Indigenous peoples as barbarians. Thus, the generic term Indios followed the pejorative categorization Moros as a marker of Spanish superiority, a token of the eradication of difference among the conquered Other on both sides of the Atlantic. Misrepresentation, theft, and invention accompanied the process of conquest, both in Spain and the Americas. The potent symbolic power to name and eradicate the identity of the conquered is the ultimate prize of military conquest, a victorious trophy that would be reflected in place names on both side of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Source: A Journal of Women Studies 25.1 (2004) 148-164
Inventing Matamoras Gender and the Forgotten Islamic Past in the United States of America
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: Great post, Supercar. I wanted to add more, but so far you said it best.
Horemheb
I see, that you have made up your mind . Fair enough.
But do us a favour next you come up with a statement; voodoo scholarship remember to provide evidence, ok?
Jesus, that book is thick!!!
Posted by Supercar (Member # 6477) on :
quote:Originally posted by Arwa:
Great post, Supercar. I wanted to add more, but so far you said it best.
Horemheb
I see, that you have made up your mind . Fair enough.
But do us a favour next you come up with a statement; voodoo scholarship remember to provide evidence, ok?
It is my pleasure to lay the facts out there, and let the perceptive take understanding from there. Who cares what a stormfront nut thinks? That is their goal; to spread information contrary to what they, themselves, actually believe deep down.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion: Jesus, that book is thick!!!
The book got very good review. Besides, I don't need to pay, I have ordered from my library
Le's see and wait if it turns out to be a good book.
Posted by Arwa (Member # 11172) on :
quote:Originally posted by Supercar: It is my pleasure to lay the facts out there, and let the perceptive take understanding from there. Who cares what a stormfront nut thinks? That is their goal; to spread information contrary to what they, themselves, actually believe deep down.
Well said!
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: If it wasn't for the Muslims in Spain who translated Aristotle and other Greek scholars, Augustine's name would not echo in history books.
and pay attention how Spaniards today gradually appreciating their Islamic legacy.
This is not a biased film, listen to what Spaniards selfs are saying.
BTW, wasn't Augustine a North African?
This video should be the end all right here!
One thing I don't like about it though is how it trys to portray ALL Moors prior to the Almoravids as Arabs. Leaving out the fact that the majority of the invading force of Muslims came from Africa.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti:
quote:Originally posted by Arwa: If it wasn't for the Muslims in Spain who translated Aristotle and other Greek scholars, Augustine's name would not echo in history books.
and pay attention how Spaniards today gradually appreciating their Islamic legacy.
This is not a biased film, listen to what Spaniards selfs are saying.
BTW, wasn't Augustine a North African?
This video should be the end all right here!
One thing I don't like about it though is how it trys to portray ALL Moors prior to the Almoravids as Arabs. Leaving out the fact that the majority of the invading force of Muslims came from Africa.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion: One thing I don't like about it though is how it trys to portray ALL Moors prior to the Almoravids as Arabs. Leaving out the fact that the majority of the invading force of Muslims came from Africa.
Hello King,
Yes, I do agree with you, but I think it's a giant steep that they named the film " When the Moors Ruled in Europe"
Posted by Alive-(What Box) (Member # 10819) on :
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
Lets not forget that if not for the Moors Spain as we know it would not exist. Spain gained not only intellectually from the reconquest of the Moorish Empires but economically, it was the Moors that made Spain an important location in the established trading routes of the time. first with Abd Rahman who virtually brought Spain known as Al Andalusia at the time from nothing more than a decayed province of Rome to an independent nation state with established trade routes and advanced trade routed and agriculture. The so called Celto Iberians had ample time to establish something of significance in the Iberian region, what they did is bow to the Roman Emperors, So when Rome fell the so called Celto Iberians FELL also into backward Ignorance. The Moors EFFECTIVELY made Spain a region that could hold its own both economically and intellectually...PERIOD. The fact that the Rahmans were able to hold off the dominant Abbasids as well as internal threat to usher in a Zenith of Al-Andalus and the fact that the ame so called Celto Iberians converted to Islam is DROVES shows how effective the Moors were and how influential they were to the indigenous white European population.
This is why I laugh when people fight over the Moors color of skin. That is like asking what color of skin Christians are...lol. The Moors in Al Andalus were of African origin, they were people of swarthy hue....When they invaded Iberia they ruled over people Paler and whiter in skin. No matter if the said ruling class were Lighter skinned or Saharan Berbers they were Darker than the population they controlled. The fact is that the majority of the Moors during its height were nothing but indigenous Iberians(Whites) who were now muslims. They fought for the Moorish cause, prayed to allah, revered Mecca, and more importantly...ILL REPEAT...FOUGHT FOR THE MOORISH CAUSE!!! This is why on that site that Doug posted they are images where whites out number black moors. Most of the Moors were whites by the time of the reconquest!!! These moors were allowed to convert back to christianity while the Arab, African, and Jewish Moors were expulsed out of Spain.
There is a famous fresco with a Bishop converting the Moors....It basically shows the White Iberians converting to Christianity to avoid persecution and to fit in with the new dominant culture.!!!
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
Eurocentrics can not handle the fact that for most of human history they were the toilet paper of civilization, nothing more than barbaric, discusting, hoorid people. Even into the Modern age they STILL are Barbaric, even with the knowledge and wisdom they stole from Asia, African, and Arabic cultures they STILL ARE BARBARIC.
The fact that people that threw sewage into their own drinking supplies(during the so called modern era), created cities like London that were nothing but Garbage filled, rat infested, dirty, disease stricken dumps shows just how ironic the Eurocentric doctrine is. These are the same people that Maintain that their culture it the Blessed and right culture. They believe that they some how rose up to created a Modern civilization....and if anyone dares show how wrong they are they label them as Afro or Ethnocentric. The facts are that Europe was NOT the cradle of civilization, Europe was not a major played in the Early stages of civilization, and therefore was not needed to bring man kind into the Industrial , Technology and Space age. Rome was even a ass corrupt civilization that did nothing but steal and tax the culturally advanced nations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Whore of Babylon that sits on many waters translates to nothing more that Rome was nothing more than a corrupt version of Babylon...meaning Rome modeled itself after Mesopotamian cultures and ruled by harnessing its military might.
Moorish Spain and the Islamic Intellectuals show just how the world could have went on with out Europe. The Moors had advanced Medical, Mechanical, and intellectual advances.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun: Lets not forget that if not for the Moors Spain as we know it would not exist. Spain gained not only intellectually from the reconquest of the Moorish Empires but economically, it was the Moors that made Spain an important location in the established trading routes of the time. first with Abd Rahman who virtually brought Spain known as Al Andalusia at the time from nothing more than a decayed province of Rome to an independent nation state with established trade routes and advanced trade routed and agriculture. The so called Celto Iberians had ample time to establish something of significance in the Iberian region, what they did is bow to the Roman Emperors, So when Rome fell the so called Celto Iberians FELL also into backward Ignorance. The Moors EFFECTIVELY made Spain a region that could hold its own both economically and intellectually...PERIOD. The fact that the Rahmans were able to hold off the dominant Abbasids as well as internal threat to usher in a Zenith of Al-Andalus and the fact that the ame so called Celto Iberians converted to Islam is DROVES shows how effective the Moors were and how influential they were to the indigenous white European population.
This is why I laugh when people fight over the Moors color of skin. That is like asking what color of skin Christians are...lol. The Moors in Al Andalus were of African origin, they were people of swarthy hue....When they invaded Iberia they ruled over people Paler and whiter in skin. No matter if the said ruling class were Lighter skinned or Saharan Berbers they were Darker than the population they controlled. The fact is that the majority of the Moors during its height were nothing but indigenous Iberians(Whites) who were now muslims. They fought for the Moorish cause, prayed to allah, revered Mecca, and more importantly...ILL REPEAT...FOUGHT FOR THE MOORISH CAUSE!!! This is why on that site that Doug posted they are images where whites out number black moors. Most of the Moors were whites by the time of the reconquest!!! These moors were allowed to convert back to christianity while the Arab, African, and Jewish Moors were expulsed out of Spain.
There is a famous fresco with a Bishop converting the Moors....It basically shows the White Iberians converting to Christianity to avoid persecution and to fit in with the new dominant culture.!!!
You're right. There was never a mass migration of Africans and Arabs to totally change the complexion of Spain. There was some migration, but there was also a lot of intermarriage between the native Iberian population and Moors.
Posted by argyle104 (Member # 14634) on :
King_Scorpion wrote: ----------------------------------- You're right. There was never a mass migration of Africans and Arabs to totally change the complexion of Spain. There was some migration, but there was also a lot of intermarriage between the native Iberian population and Moors. -----------------------------------
On this forum those who do not back up their writings with facts and evidence are relegated as non-intellectuals who insanely believe if they repeat their "opinions" often enough, those with intelligence will become unintelligent enough to believe their wild claims.
This is a scholarly and intellectual forum. We do not accept wishful opinion here, just facts and evidence. So it is beholden upon you to provide said facts and evidence to support your statements.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
Many empires that existed prior to Islam had many nations, cultures and religions under their helm. This did not start with Islam. What Islam did is set the stage for religious imperialism, first under Islam and then under Christianity. Prior to that Empires were based purely on national and cultural identity and power not religion.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by argyle104: King_Scorpion wrote:
Shut up. I've been here since 2004 and everyone knows me (the usuals anyway). I've also been talking about this topic for a long time. But hey, no one is forcing you to believe me.
Posted by King_Scorpion (Member # 4818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
Many empires that existed prior to Islam had many nations, cultures and religions under their helm. This did not start with Islam. What Islam did is set the stage for religious imperialism, first under Islam and then under Christianity. Prior to that Empires were based purely on national and cultural identity and power not religion.
It's interesting isn't it. Because I think Islamic imperialism and Christian imperialism go hand in hand. I think Christian imperialism was a sort of response to Islamic imperialism. But that's just a general opinion...I'm not trying to give a scholarly fact here...lol.
Posted by Jari-Ankhamun (Member # 14451) on :
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
Many empires that existed prior to Islam had many nations, cultures and religions under their helm. This did not start with Islam. What Islam did is set the stage for religious imperialism, first under Islam and then under Christianity. Prior to that Empires were based purely on national and cultural identity and power not religion.
It's interesting isn't it. Because I think Islamic imperialism and Christian imperialism go hand in hand. I think Christian imperialism was a sort of response to Islamic imperialism. But that's just a general opinion...I'm not trying to give a scholarly fact here...lol.
Religion is imperalistic in nature...it started way before the Koran and Bible. The whole point of an organized religion is about control....
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by King_Scorpion:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M:
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
Many empires that existed prior to Islam had many nations, cultures and religions under their helm. This did not start with Islam. What Islam did is set the stage for religious imperialism, first under Islam and then under Christianity. Prior to that Empires were based purely on national and cultural identity and power not religion.
It's interesting isn't it. Because I think Islamic imperialism and Christian imperialism go hand in hand. I think Christian imperialism was a sort of response to Islamic imperialism. But that's just a general opinion...I'm not trying to give a scholarly fact here...lol.
Religion is imperalistic in nature...it started way before the Koran and Bible. The whole point of an organized religion is about control....
I would say religion is nationalistic/ethnic/personal in nature. All of the religions prior to Islam and Christianity were primarily local affairs which revolved around the local ruling elite and the local indigenous peoples and their relation to both the elite and the divine. As nations grew and conquered other peoples and beliefs, the religion went with them, but the religion was not the reason for the spread of the empire. With Islam and then Christianity, this idea that there was one "true" religion that ALL people HAD to believe in and should be living under came to the fore and it is this zealotry to convert EVERYONE that was part of the rise of the Islamic empires. But even with that zealotry, the fundamental core principle was still the same, which is that religion is primarily devoted to the power of the elite and the people of a certain region. In this case we are talking of Europeans and Arabs using Christianity and Islam to further their OWN empires.
Posted by Doug M (Member # 7650) on :
Some Moorish (Orientalist) art,in other words, artwork of actual Moorish people, dress and customs from Islamic Spain, North Africa and India:
A book on the travels of some Europeans through the Sahara in 1846. Some hand drawn images of Africans looking quite Jedi like (North and West African Islamic groups were very influential on the Star Wars story not to mention that restoring balance to the "force" is strikingly similar to the balance of Maat).
The pics slow up the god damn page and its such a turn off. Try cut and paste website instead. Jus cuz people cheer you on as image master don't mean you have to go messing up threads unnecessarily.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: The pics slow up the god damn page and its such a turn off. Try cut and paste website instead. Jus cuz people cheer you on as image master don't mean you have to go messing up threads unnecessarily.
I disagree - Bravo, Doug. These true-to life paintings recall a golden age of Moorish culture that was obviously and probably mainly African or Afro-Arab making. (Of course there was the problem of the slave trade at this time too, which brought large numbers of people into North Africa from Eurasia.)
Even I get taken aback by the number of pictures of Moors of undeniable black African appearance. I'm not Muslim but wish i could make a calendar out of such paintings or a book that could be sold on-line and given out to children everywhere.
Judging from the photograph of the Hawazin you posted many of these men were possibly pure Arabs.
True to life painting of a Hawazin Arabian bedouin by a European who traveled throughout the Near East
All I can say with this is OH MY G-D! This painting is fantastic. The portrayal of a Hawazin recalls the description of the related tribes of the Hejaz and central Arabia called Sulaym bin Mansur, Ka'ab ibn Rabiyah, Uqayl, Muntafiq, Namur ibn Qassit the original occupants of Central and North Arabia described as tall and muscular the color of Bishariin and "Galla Ethiopians". Here I thinking these people should look at least a little Ethiopian. As you can see there is little Hamitic about him.
His people also were those described by the Syrians visiting Hejaz and North Central Arabia, Nejd.
This is why im not giving up the heritage of the original Arabs for any one BLACK OR WHITE! These are the people Afrocentrics and Eurocentrics and ignorant European scholars are trying to take out of black history - these the LAST OF THE PURE ARABS.
For more on the Hawazin read my postings on this site on the Fear of Blackness and the Arabs and Yemenites in Spain.
Posted by Recovering-Afroholic (Member # 17517) on :
Uhn Hmmmmm
Preach Brother Preach!
Posted by Djehuti. (Member # 17581) on :
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche:
quote:Originally posted by anguishofbeing: The pics slow up the god damn page and its such a turn off. Try cut and paste website instead. Jus cuz people cheer you on as image master don't mean you have to go messing up threads unnecessarily.
I disagree - Bravo, Doug. These true-to life paintings recall a golden age of Moorish culture that was obviously and probably mainly African or Afro-Arab making. (Of course there was the problem of the slave trade at this time too, which brought large numbers of people into North Africa from Eurasia.)
Even I get taken aback by the number of pictures of Moors of undeniable black African appearance. I'm not Muslim but wish i could make a calendar out of such paintings or a book that could be sold on-line and given out to children everywhere.
Judging from the photograph of the Hawazin you posted many of these men were possibly pure Arabs.
True to life painting of a Hawazin Arabian bedouin by a European who traveled throughout the Near East
All I can say with this is OH MY G-D! This painting is fantastic. The portrayal of a Hawazin recalls the description of the related tribes of the Hejaz and central Arabia called Sulaym bin Mansur, Ka'ab ibn Rabiyah, Uqayl, Muntafiq, Namur ibn Qassit the original occupants of Central and North Arabia described as tall and muscular the color of Bishariin and "Galla Ethiopians". Here I thinking these people should look at least a little Ethiopian. As you can see there is little Hamitic about him.
His people also were those described by the Syrians visiting Hejaz and North Central Arabia, Nejd.
This is why im not giving up the heritage of the original Arabs for any one BLACK OR WHITE! These are the people Afrocentrics and Eurocentrics and ignorant European scholars are trying to take out of black history - these the LAST OF THE PURE ARABS.
For more on the Hawazin read my postings on this site on the Fear of Blackness and the Arabs and Yemenites in Spain.
Good Job Dana,
Now go kiss some "Black Arab Ass" and listen to the sound of the Abeed.
Did you know what "Sudan" means in Arabic?
Go Job Little Girl, now go get educated by the "White Man" and you'll do just fine. Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^ The tranny-lover above is just mad because the aboriginal peoples of Arabia were black and not the pale faced people like his Circassian-ass. But wait, apparently there were blacks in the Caucasus in ancient times according to Classical sources on the Colchians! Who knows, the pale Caucasian tranny-lover might have black ancestry, just like his black-hating (obsessed) KKK friends in northern Florida! LOL
Scratch a black-hater, and find black ancestry. Don't believe me, look at Mediterranean Europeans! LOL Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti.:
quote:Originally posted by dana marniche: [QUOTE]Originally posted by anguishofbeing: [qb]
Good Job Dana,
Now go kiss some "Black Arab Ass" and listen to the sound of the Abeed.
Did you know what "Sudan" means in Arabic?
Go Job Little Girl, now go get educated by the "White Man" and you'll do just fine.
First of all I think first you need to calm down your jealousy, and lets not get silly here as of course the only real Arabs were the black ones. Their ancestors were black nationalists.
As for the kissing idea well i don't go down there. I think you would agree that's more of a western or European fetish in fact since the time of the Greeks. You didn't even let me know what Abeed you meant. I take it your talking about these ones mentioned by "educated" "white men".
2003 - “From 1500 to 1650 when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy more Europeans were taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas. Written by Robert Davis in Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean, the Barbary Coast, and Italy, 1500-1800, MacMillan Publishers, published 2003.
Of course we have to include writings of some of the earlier educated ones :
14th century - “Red, in the speech of the people from the Hijaz, means fair-complexioned and this color is rare amongst the Arabs. This is the meaning of the saying, ‘…a red man as if he is one of the slaves’. The speaker meant that his color is like that of the slaves who were captured from the Christians of Syria, Rome and Persia.” From Al Dhahabi of Damascus Syria, in Seyar al Nubala’a.
“The Arabs used to take pride in their darkness and blackness and they had a distaste for a light complexion and they used to say that a light complexion was the complexion of the non-Arabs” Al Mubarrad, 9th century born in Basra, Iraq.
And here's another venerable educated person. His name is David Goldenberg and he has a very educated answer to your question about the word "Sudan" in his recent book the Curse of Ham p. 106.
"Ismail al Be'ily has shown that the term Sudan in early Arab writings was not restricted to the sub-Saharan black African but rather referred to various dark skinned people including the Copts, Fezzan, Zaghawa, Brbr, Indians, Arabs..."
So much for what the term "Sudan" among means today - how bout what it meant when Arabs were still Arabs.
Richmond Palmer another "white man" and colonial administrator said similarly the word Sudan by Syrians was used for the greater part of the Arabian peninsula in his Bornu Sahara and Sudan. Since that was where Arabs once predominated that fact should surprise noone.
I would rather listen to the poetry of Dawasir Sulaym, Khuza'a and Hawazin and other of the true remnants of the Arabs who first taught people like you the word "Abid".
9th century A.D. al Masudi of Baghdad, “ The Nabataeans founded the city of Babylon and were those descendants of Ham who settled in the same province under the leadership of Nmrod, the son of Cush, who was the son of Hamm…This took place at the time when Nimrod received the governship of Babylonia as the delegate of Dzhahhak.”
Men of the Haweitat of Jordan are among those claiming descent from the Nabataeans. Still near black after all these centuries years of taking "white" concubines, the Haweit'at stretch far to the south and the Tihama.
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
In case of those who missed it this is what Goldenberg has cited the 10th c. al Masudi of Iraq stating - " ...the Akkbar al Zaman, which lists the Nabit , among the children of Canaan… also said the word, ‘Nabit’ signifies ‘black’…” see p. 313 of The Curse of Ham.
Again, for Iraqis and Syrians of this period the people of the Arabian peninsula still epitomized blackness. And, the Canaaniyya i.e. Nabataeans and other Hejazis who had colonized the southern part of Syria were rightly or wrongly thought to have been the ancestors of many tribes across the African Sudan and Sahel extending into the Maghreb by fair-skinned people of the Middle East up until the Middle Ages.
Posted by HERU (Member # 6085) on :
quote:Originally posted by Supercar:
I uploaded this pic sometime ago, during a debate with somebody who in retrospect wasn't worth the trouble. Glad to see its still circulating ...
Posted by dana marniche (Member # 13149) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jari-Ankhamun:
quote:Originally posted by Doug M: History as practiced by most cultures, is propaganda. The Egyptians did it, the Babylonians did it and everyone else did it. The European propaganda machine that is history has purposely distorted world history and divided it up into chunks that make Europe seem great in comparison and somehow the first to make commerce and culture global. But in truth this is not the case. The Moors represents the true global world of commerce and culture that existed in the first millenium A.D. of which Western Europe was not a major player. From Africa to the Levant, South Asia and the Far East there were networks of trade, culture and commerce that laid the framework for a global exchange of ideas and technologies that the "west" had no idea of. But due to the propaganda that is European history, they always start off by saying they were the "first" to travel to the Far East, when the Moors and the rest of the Mediterranean, including some Europeans, had been trading with China and traveling there for hundreds of years! Not only that, but Marco Polo sailed east on ships that were TINY compared to those of the East, especially the huge war ships and treasure ships of the Chinese, many of which were river boats driven with paddles like later steam boats in the U.S.A. This is why digging and doing research on world history directly often gives tremendous rewards in discovering things purposely covered up.
But bottom line, yes there were many black Africans among the Moors in Spain and they were part of a wider world of civilization and culture that was introduced to Europe. But lets not over romanticize this time period, as there was as much blood thirsty war fare all over the world of the time even before Europe began its voyages of "discovery".
And again, there is no doubt among Europeans and within European culture about the meaning of the word Moor and the Moorish impact on European culture:
quote: The origin of the word 'Morris' is lost in obscurity. The earliest documentary references are mainly from Church accounts in the early 1500's - "Silver paper for the Mores-dawncers - 7d". "for VI peyre of shones for ye Mors dauncers - 4d" (1509/1510). It was certainly thriving in Shakespeare's time; Will Kemp's 'Nine Daies Wonder' was a Morris marathon from London to Norwich in 1600.
One popular theory is that when the original name and meaning of the rite were no longer remembered, the dance was called Moorish or Morris because the current word at that time, for black men, was Moor. One school of thought claims the dances came from Spain having been introduced by the invading Moors. Another theory points to evidence of similar dances in England, long before the Moors, derived from the Druids' Maris dances, in celebration of the god Maris.
The Morris dance or Moorish dance troops of Europe are one example of this legacy, which began the tradition of black face dance troupes and minstrels in Europe and America, all of which is based on the imitation of and/or mockery of black African culture.
And another example of the legacy of Moorish Islam's impact on Europe is the use of the Saber in military ritual, dress and custom, which is a DIRECT transmission from the Islamic cultures of the east. This includes wearing sabers, using sabers in ceremonial events and the use of sabers in military parades and drills.
The Moors were a diverse race of people as As Spain was linked in trade to places like Mali and even Ghana as early as the late 10th and def. the ealy 11th centuries...as some of the earliest references to Ghana claim the Nations capital clearly Muslim resorts. Also for Al Bakri to obtain so much information on Ghana means the two Nations of Al- Andalusia and Ghana were in friendly relations.
What baffles me is that people take offense to the idea of Moorish Spain being a part of African history,...when some of the key figures in Islam its self involved Black people as the same with Christianity and the Judaic faith its self. Islam and the spread of the said religion like Moorish Spain involved the unification and cooperation of many different races of people.
And yes, lets NOT over romanticize this era, The Muslims were part of blood baths and pillaging like Euros....but the fact we both can agree on is that Islamic nations were the first and maybe the only to be governed where people of different faiths, races, and origins were able to make a name for themselves. E.X...the Fatimids, Al-Andalusia, The Abbasids ..etc.
The word Moor was not the equivalent of "Muslim" Jari. The word Moor for nearly 1500 years meant a black man pagan, Christian, Muslim, or Jewish. Anyone who says otherwise is making up things. Mathilde search is on another link.
![[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)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
