Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Administrator
King of Kings
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Umayyids - Iranian Arabs? Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 19:03 |
Originally posted by Ardashir
42nd year, not 24th year |
|
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 17:20 |
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Administrator
King of Kings
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 10:58 |
I agree with Al Jassas, the author of the inscription is a Greek, not an Arab, Umar started to count the years in 639 AD, in the same year that he conquered Syria completely and appointed Mu'awiyah as governor of Damascus, so it says 24th year of Arab rule in that region.
|
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 09:40 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Originally posted by Ardashir
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Ardashir, distinguishing between history, propaganda, and fiction is an important skill that you should acquire before posting articles. |
Omar, speaking clearly is an even more important skill YOU should acquire before posting anything. What do you mean by that piece of crap? Which PROPAGANDA are you babbling about? |
I was trying for a more polite way of saying that article is pseudo-historical revisionism that barely conceals a anti-muslim agenda. The article is so far removed from the evidence that it isn't even worth refuting.
Overturning one of the most well documented periods of history just because a cross is in front of a Greek inscription is ludicrious! |
The problem is that you think it's biased against the Muslims or Arabs. It is simply not. It seems that I should translate the rest of the articles into English.
Regards
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 05:32 |
Originally posted by Ardashir
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Ardashir, distinguishing between history, propaganda, and fiction is an important skill that you should acquire before posting articles. |
Omar, speaking clearly is an even more important skill YOU should acquire before posting anything. What do you mean by that piece of crap? Which PROPAGANDA are you babbling about? |
I was trying for a more polite way of saying that article is pseudo-historical revisionism that barely conceals a anti-muslim agenda. The article is so far removed from the evidence that it isn't even worth refuting.
Overturning one of the most well documented periods of history just because a cross is in front of a Greek inscription is ludicrious!
|
|
Northman
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 30-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4262
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 22:07 |
Originally posted by chubin
برای اطلاع از جنگ های ایران و اعراب، قادسیه و نهاوند، نگاه کنید به:
و
|
Hello Chubin
This is an english forum, so please state what you want to say in english.
Also - leaving a couple of link as reference is fine, but should only be used to support your own statements in the post.
Welcome to All Empires.
|
|
chubin
Immortal Guard
Joined: 05-Apr-2009
Location: germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 21:42 |
http
Edited by chubin - 06-Apr-2009 at 10:16
|
|
Al Jassas
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 18:02 |
Hello to you all
About the stone above, this doesn't prove anything. The official language of the Ummayyads in the beginning was Greek and thus most government officials like Ioannes above were christians. Putting a cross doesn't prove that Ummayyads were christians and in any case anyone who thinks this is naive and doesn't know a thing about history.
There are more than enough inscriptions from that time period and before that proves the opposite and one inscription in a provincial town is not a proof. Also the term "Arab" was synonymous with muslims especially with none Arab peoples of the empire. From his name he is obviously a greek not an Arab because if he were an Arab he would have used his Arabic name Yuhanna.
Al-Jassas
|
|
Cyrus Shahmiri
Administrator
King of Kings
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6240
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 16:34 |
It seems the author of the article just wants to fool the readers, if I say 622 AD was the actual year of Hijra -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijri_year (The Hijra (هِجْرَة), or withdrawal, is the emigration of Muhammad and his followers to the city of Medina in 622, and marks the start of the Hijri year of the Islamic calendar.) you will say it is impossible becuase about 17 or 18 years later Muslims started to count the years, that is true because the author of the article has changed the places of two numbers on the text:
"In den Tagen des Abdullah Mu'awiyah, dem Kommandanten der Gläubigen wurden die heißen Bäder der ansässigen Bevölkerung übergeben, gesichert und wiederaufgebaut von Abdullah, des Sohnes von Abuasemos (Abu Haschem) des Kanzlers, am fünften Dezember, dem zweiten Tag des sechsten Jahres der Indikation, im Jahr 726 der Kolonie, im 24 Jahr der Araber, für die Heilung der Kranken, unter der Aufsicht des Joannes, des Vorstehers von Gadara."
|
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 14:53 |
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim
Ardashir, distinguishing between history, propaganda, and fiction is an important skill that you should acquire before posting articles. |
Omar, speaking clearly is an even more important skill YOU should acquire before posting anything. What do you mean by that piece of crap? Which PROPAGANDA are you babbling about?
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
Omar al Hashim
King
Suspended
Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 05:09 |
Ardashir, distinguishing between history, propaganda, and fiction is an important skill that you should acquire before posting articles.
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 04:43 |
Any interest from our Iranian members to continue the project? (Read the above post)
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 04-Apr-2009 at 15:44 |
< ="-" ="text/; =utf-8">< name="ProgId" ="Word.">< name="Generator" ="Microsoft Word 11">< name="Originator" ="Microsoft Word 11">
Today, I was informed
that these 2 articles are again present in Chubin blog:
http://chubin.net/?p=728
http://chubin.net/?p=727
Since these articles point out to a very critical
period in Iranian and Arabic history and since they present a completely new
and revolutionary theory about the Ummayids, I decided to begin the translation
of them into English, even though my English is not enough fluent. I
hope other Iranian members of AE who have better skills in translation continue
this project in the coming days. Here is the first half of the first part
of the articles:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the end, it is the historian who
reconstructs the past, now the question to be answered is whether the historian
does this task properly or improperly."
In the Azadegan website, the letter of the
second Islamic Caliph, Omar, to Yazdgerd III, the last Sassanid king and also
Yazdgerd's response to Omar's letter have been written. Undoubtedly, not Omar's
letter to Yazdgerd nor Yazdgerd's letter to Omar are in existence. They are
both imaginary and artificial, yet the website's author claims that they are
kept in a museum in London.
Tabari, the Iranian historian (death in 922
AD) informs us about the Arab missionaries who had suggested converting to
Islam to Yazdgerd by the order of Omar and also narrates the statements of
Yazdgerd about the Arabs. The Sassanid
king, according to Tabari, reminds that Arabs are the most bothersome and
obnoxious nation in the world (1). German Islamologist, Noth, has questioned
the narrations on the meetings between Yazdgerd with two missionaries:
"Undoubtedly no meetings have taken place between Yazdgerd and the
Muslims." (2) No inscription nor any coin have ever been found from Omar,
neither from the other 3 Caliphs (Abubakir, Ottoman and Ali). From the 7th
century AD (the century of Rashedin Caliphs' rule from 632 to 661 AD), no
inscription or document is at avail and in order to get informed about the
events of this century we should refer to coins and petrographs. Brandt, the
German historian, points out about the importance of coins in study of the Classic
history: "Because of the rarity of inscriptions from those times, coins
are the most important and authentic documents for reconstruction of the
Classic era. In the recent century, we have been able to gain new information
from the ancient times by a regular and systematic analysis of the old
coins." (3) Brandt adds that numismatology is divided into two sections:
"The first section analyzes the coins as a historical document,
intermingled with all of aspects of a society and for the second section coins are
important solely in regard to the economical aspects (currency) of a society.
The contemporary Islamologists so far haven't paid enough attention to the
sciences of numismatology and archaeology in order to gain a better view of the
Islam's history.
The first (found) coin of the Arab Caliphs,
belonging to Mu'awiyyah, dates back to 663 AD and has been coined in the Fars
province (Darab). From Mu'awiyyah also there is a petrograph from 663 AD with a
Cross sign on it in a bath of the ancient Greek city of Gadara (Umm Ghais in
Arabic) in Jordan. Engraving of this sign of Christianity (the Cross) by
Mu'awiyyah has been a source of shock and surprise among the Arab historians.
Mu'awiyyah's petrograph has been written in Greek. Three dates have been specified
the engraving time of this petrograph: Byzantine's fiscal year history,
Gadara's local history and Arabic history (42nd year of the Arabs).
A point worth of notice is that Mu'awiyyah's petrograph has mentioned the
"year of Arabs" not the "Islamic (Hijri) year". By
comparison of these three dates, the exact year for the engraving of this
document can be specified (663 AD). So, the first year of Arabs, in
Mu'awiyyah's eyes, is 622 AD. In this year, the army of Khosro II (590-628 AD)
was defeated by Byzantines and the Sassanid's rule over the Arabs ended.
Mu'awiyyah's petrograph with the Cross sign
on it in Gadara (Umm Ghais)
In the day of ‘Abd Allah Muawiya ‘, the
Commander of the faithful, the hot baths of the people there were saved
and rebuilt by Abd Allah son of Abuasemos (Abū Hāšim) the Counsellor , on
the fifth of the month of December , on the second day, in the 6th year of the
indiction, in the year 726 of colony, according to the Arabs the 42nd year, for
the healing of the sick, under the care of Ioannes , the official of
Gadara
( Israel Exploration Journal, Volume
32, 1982, Plate 11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 19:30 |
As you said, the writer has removed the posts from his blog. I think he's going to do the final examination before providing the whole research. If that's the case, I will translate the text into English.
Regards
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
kaznder
Knight
Joined: 23-May-2007
Location: Egypt
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 59
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 10:02 |
and the ummyeds weren't Christiane........if Christians took over the empire of Persia then what is the Islamic caliphates.
|
|
kaznder
Knight
Joined: 23-May-2007
Location: Egypt
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 59
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 10:00 |
hi Ardashir, when i tried to enter both the links you provided i didn't get anything......and i don't know Farsi... so please translate to us these texts you have read.............
|
|
Ardashir
Pretorian
Joined: 25-May-2005
Location: Iran
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 162
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 08:58 |
Originally posted by kaznder
i don't think his could be true.. since the ummayeds are an arabian clan from the noble clans of qurish ... the leader of this clan abu suffian was the leader of most of the battles between the prophet and qurish like uhud and the trench ... his son moayiah became the fifth caliph of the muslims and the was the one who started the ummyed dynasty after the fitna wars with ali the fourth caliph ....... he forced his son yazid on the muslims .... he by all means was an arab noble from quraish...................
|
The article doesn't claim Ummayids were NOT Arabs.
Regards
|
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com
|
|
kaznder
Knight
Joined: 23-May-2007
Location: Egypt
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 59
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 04:24 |
i don't think his could be true.. since the ummayeds are an arabian clan from the noble clans of qurish ... the leader of this clan abu suffian was the leader of most of the battles between the prophet and qurish like uhud and the trench ... his son moayiah became the fifth caliph of the muslims and the was the one who started the ummyed dynasty after the fitna wars with ali the fourth caliph ....... he forced his son yazid on the muslims .... he by all means was an arab noble from quraish...................
|
|
Soren Svendsen
Immortal Guard
Joined: 09-Oct-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 09-Oct-2008 at 11:15 |
Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa
You dont worry al jassas as the article main point is the probablity that the arabs resided in sasanian borders may have used the opportunity and seized the throne for themselves. (iranians through ages never tended to seize their neighbors prominent figures esp. arabs) |
I guess I'm not able to read the article either, but I guess that you just presented a short abstract. And I will comment on that.
The Iranian Arabs could be the Lakhmids, which Kusroe in the early 7th. century (around 602) dispatched as vasal-state. A group of "former" lakhmids enjoyed a victory over the persians in either 604 or 611 ( Dhu Qar), so one could imagine that the group could muster power to conquer, but as the sources goes this victory and the groups alliance was short-termed, and had no direclty impact on the following events.
The idea that such a group could have risen and taken control over the great part of the middle east is not completely fantasy, but the theory has to find some alternative answers for the archaeological evidences. For instance as mentioned minted coins, the use of the word Muhammad, etc. The theory at first hand sounds somewhat similar to Ohligs 'byzantine-theory'; that the byzantines after the victory over Persia retired to modern-day Turkey and gave over the control of the vast (re-)conquered areas to the Ghassanids. The idea in this context is Muhammad means "praised one" and is refering to Jesus not an arab prophet (or perhaps that there might have been a person called Muhammad but that the notion that he proclaimed to be a prophet was a later invention).
Personally I find these theories lacking strong arguments. Such a situation should somehow had presented itself in history. Are we to believe that arabs from the great expanses of the Umayyad-empire from the west to the east, had nothing to say about the development; the introduction of a new religion, a new doctrine. Now of course a great part of the islamic tradition is most likely myths, but there might still be a fundament which these myth was build upon; ie. there was a person called Muhammad, he proclaimed to be a prophet, some of what he said was edited to what we today know as the qur'an (though this book might also include several things which he never said, and alteration (developed orally) of the same story etc.).
But please do elaborate on what the article is theorizing.
Edited by Soren Svendsen - 09-Oct-2008 at 11:21
|
|
Asawar Hazaraspa
Samurai
Joined: 21-Apr-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 104
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2008 at 11:09 |
You dont worry al jassas as the article main point is the probablity that the arabs resided in sasanian borders may have used the opportunity and seized the throne for themselves. (iranians through ages never tended to seize their neighbors prominent figures esp. arabs)
|
|