The origins of Islam
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-03-2018, 01:49 PM
RE: The origins of Islam
(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Islam began in the 7th century within Byzantium. What I am referring to is the part of the Roman Empire which eventually extended into eastern Europe and north Africa and Spain. The western part of the Roman Empire went into decline and eventually became the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne.
Thats a gross oversimplification, and thats quite an understatement. Western Roman Empire i mean.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What I am suggesting is that Islam eventually extended to occupy those parts of the Roman Empire in the east, excluding the Holy Roman Empire.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What the video suggests is that Islam arose as an internal revolt within the eastern Roman Empire and the Koran was written up as a manifesto for conquest of the whole of the empire.
Based on what documents do you/he conclude this? I am sure a revolt within the byzantine empire was well documented, or at least mentioned....somewhere....anywhere.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  If you talk to Turks, which I have the dubious honour of doing every day, their frame of reference is that Istambul is/was the most important city on earth because it is "was" Rome. They consider themselves to be the inheritors of the Roman Empire.
Well i dont know how that is related to the origin of Islam, but the Ottomans can righfully make this claim based on what territory it occupied, at least more than the Holy Roman empire i have to admit. Of course thats the only criterion they meet. The Holy Roman empire meets more of the religious and cultural criteria than the Ottomans. As far as Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) goes speccifically, i guess noone can claim inheritance.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2018, 12:28 PM
RE: The origins of Islam
(05-03-2018 01:49 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Islam began in the 7th century within Byzantium. What I am referring to is the part of the Roman Empire which eventually extended into eastern Europe and north Africa and Spain. The western part of the Roman Empire went into decline and eventually became the Holy Roman Empire under Charlemagne.
Thats a gross oversimplification, and thats quite an understatement. Western Roman Empire i mean.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What I am suggesting is that Islam eventually extended to occupy those parts of the Roman Empire in the east, excluding the Holy Roman Empire.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What the video suggests is that Islam arose as an internal revolt within the eastern Roman Empire and the Koran was written up as a manifesto for conquest of the whole of the empire.
Based on what documents do you/he conclude this? I am sure a revolt within the byzantine empire was well documented, or at least mentioned....somewhere....anywhere.

(05-03-2018 01:04 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  If you talk to Turks, which I have the dubious honour of doing every day, their frame of reference is that Istambul is/was the most important city on earth because it is "was" Rome. They consider themselves to be the inheritors of the Roman Empire.
Well i dont know how that is related to the origin of Islam, but the Ottomans can righfully make this claim based on what territory it occupied, at least more than the Holy Roman empire i have to admit. Of course thats the only criterion they meet. The Holy Roman empire meets more of the religious and cultural criteria than the Ottomans. As far as Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium) goes speccifically, i guess noone can claim inheritance.

The Byzantine Empire generally refers to the Eastern Roman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire

Islam arose within the Arabic regions of the Byzantine Empire and spread along the north coast of Africa and eventually occupied most of what was the Eastern Roman Empire.

The video I posted suggests a new theory so I would not be able to show any evidence that this was an Arabic revolt which predated Islam. I watched the video and that is the point he is making, that the history has been misrepresented by Islamic scholars. He reconstructs it by reference to comments in the Koran and the Old Testament about where Mecca was, which is around the region of the south end of the Dead Sea.

I think he is saying that Mecca, which was known as Bakkah, is in the same place as what is referred to as the Valley of Baca in the Book of Psalms, Chapter 84 as described in Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakkah

What he points out in the video is there is simply no archaeological evidence of anything existing in the area of modern Mecca. Nada! So, the Mecca or Baccah of the Koran could not have been in Arabia and must therefore, have been someplace else.
I think one would have to read his book to find other references.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-03-2018, 05:20 PM
RE: The origins of Islam
(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The Byzantine Empire generally refers to the Eastern Roman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire
Is that a reply to my remark about the Western Roman empire? Hobo I see no other reason you mention this, and by the way: yes, i knew this already.


(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Islam arose within the Arabic regions of the Byzantine Empire and spread along the north coast of Africa and eventually occupied most of what was the Eastern Roman Empire.
Christianity arose in the eastern part of the Roman empire, and the Roman Empire did document the existence of christianity.
You failed to adress my remark about the romans talking about what (major stuff) was happening within their empire. Why do you think the roman empire documented a jewish revolt, the existence of christianity, but failed to mention islam rising within its limits, occupying "most of what was the Eastern Roman Empire" and an islamic revolt?
Shouldnt there be even independent archeaological evidence for the presence of islam at the time and in the area you are talking about, like there is for the existence of christianity, like in burial sites?

(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The video I posted suggests a new theory so I would not be able to show any evidence that this was an Arabic revolt which predated Islam. I watched the video and that is the point he is making, that the history has been misrepresented by Islamic scholars. He reconstructs it by reference to comments in the Koran and the Old Testament about where Mecca was, which is around the region of the south end of the Dead Sea.
Sure, sometimes there is no evidence (yet) about new theories in history. From what i see, you suggest the only evidence so far is the Koran and the Old Testament itself. I consider that to be rather thin to be honest.
Still am am surprised of the suggestion that there was a revolt, yet there is absolutely no mentioning of a revolt. Revolts usually get mentioned: The jewish revolt, Arminius, Boudica, Spartacus, ext.

(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What he points out in the video is there is simply no archaeological evidence of anything existing in the area of modern Mecca. Nada! So, the Mecca or Baccah of the Koran could not have been in Arabia and must therefore, have been someplace else.
I think one would have to read his book to find other references.
The fact that there is no archaeological evidence in modern Mecca is quite irrelevant to the veracity of his specific theory.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2018, 01:46 PM
RE: The origins of Islam
(12-03-2018 05:20 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The Byzantine Empire generally refers to the Eastern Roman Empire: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire
Is that a reply to my remark about the Western Roman empire? Hobo I see no other reason you mention this, and by the way: yes, i knew this already.


(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Islam arose within the Arabic regions of the Byzantine Empire and spread along the north coast of Africa and eventually occupied most of what was the Eastern Roman Empire.
Christianity arose in the eastern part of the Roman empire, and the Roman Empire did document the existence of christianity.
You failed to adress my remark about the romans talking about what (major stuff) was happening within their empire. Why do you think the roman empire documented a jewish revolt, the existence of christianity, but failed to mention islam rising within its limits, occupying "most of what was the Eastern Roman Empire" and an islamic revolt?
Shouldnt there be even independent archeaological evidence for the presence of islam at the time and in the area you are talking about, like there is for the existence of christianity, like in burial sites?

(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The video I posted suggests a new theory so I would not be able to show any evidence that this was an Arabic revolt which predated Islam. I watched the video and that is the point he is making, that the history has been misrepresented by Islamic scholars. He reconstructs it by reference to comments in the Koran and the Old Testament about where Mecca was, which is around the region of the south end of the Dead Sea.
Sure, sometimes there is no evidence (yet) about new theories in history. From what i see, you suggest the only evidence so far is the Koran and the Old Testament itself. I consider that to be rather thin to be honest.
Still am am surprised of the suggestion that there was a revolt, yet there is absolutely no mentioning of a revolt. Revolts usually get mentioned: The jewish revolt, Arminius, Boudica, Spartacus, ext.

(12-03-2018 12:28 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  What he points out in the video is there is simply no archaeological evidence of anything existing in the area of modern Mecca. Nada! So, the Mecca or Baccah of the Koran could not have been in Arabia and must therefore, have been someplace else.
I think one would have to read his book to find other references.
The fact that there is no archaeological evidence in modern Mecca is quite irrelevant to the veracity of his specific theory.

What you have said illustrates, in my opinion, how history has been shaped rather than recorded. Written history is what those who wrote it up tell us it is. It's not the case that in the Christianised world after Christianity was adopted as the religion of Rome that historians were self-employed writers. History was written by historians who were educated and wrote within the confines of the Christian church. Similarly, in Islam, history outside the Koran is considered to be of no importance since what is in the Koran is the word of god and the rest can be disregarded.

I'm not a historian but I wonder how anyone writing about events in the Near East at the time of Mohammed could have known or recorded much about what was actually going on. The rate of literacy was negligible in the general public. I don't even know if one can sensibly speak about a literacy rate. I would guess that no one wrote or read apart from scholars employed by whoever ruled a region and whatever they wrote was for a purpose, not to sell history books to the public.

I don't know the answers to this at all. I live in the Near East and what I have found is that this place is not at all like what i had expected it to be. I'm constantly surprised when I find that, for instance, we have been told that the Aramaic language and people no longer exist but, in fact, a few hundred miles away from here, there are still Aramaic people speaking Aramaic, or that there is a Maronite Christian village about 15 miles from where I live with people still living there who are descendants of the first Maronites. There are all sorts of traditions here which speak of older cultures and traditions which we in the West don't even know about because we accept a Westernised version of what the Near and Middle East is like.

I think the problem is that Islam and the Ottomans tried to suppress any public record of the real history of the people other than the Islamic history and the Ottoman Empire only came to an end in the 1920's. Following that we've had two major wars and we've focused our attention on events in the rest of the world and largely neglected this area. The change in the climate which changed this area in to a dry and arid wasteland in many parts has left us thinking that it's inhabited by bedouins who aren't that interesting. It's only recently that modern archaeology is bringing the "real" history of the place back into the world's attention, but even now the Muslim world is not that interested in pre-Islamic history since it's a record of other religions.

I've not got the time to look into this any further so I can't really help with this. I just wanted to give it some attention because it's a novel theory. It's interesting to me because I live here and I'm both puzzled and affected by the culture of this area and I've struggled to figure out why there seems to be such a difference in the civic culture of the Islamic society in which I live and the West, and how it came about. What it seems to me to point to is that Christianity did not "take" in the East and that after a few hundred years of having it imposed on them, people who did not agree with it reverted back to their pre-Christian culture and threw off the rule by Christians. You can now see the same pattern emerging in reverse with a divisions between what we are told are Islamic sects, which are, in fact, suppressed religions which pre-date Islam.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: