Pre Islamic Arabia thread

it was a rhetorical question, poltard, because arabs are white
>wewuz aztec though
damn impressive

>because arabs are white
Lol what? What's next, australian aboriginals are white?

Fucking stupidest post ever.

i can see you are new
im sure you'll find your aboriginals there

I wasn't calling Aztecs white. I was saying they had a god with white skin, even though they were mostly tan.

I know this is bad bait but I'll bite.
>Literally expand through warfarev since day one
>Be the only to do this since at least Sumerian times
>Peaceful

tens of thousands of pagan artifacts and historical sites all over the MENA still exist, over the course of a thousand years various islamic empires have had free reign to destroy all of it and yet most of it has remained. europe and latin america on the other hand?

inb4 ISIS
>1400 years of history cannot be reduced to 3 years of ISIS

>more tolerant of pre-Islamic pagan religions than Christians.

It's not completely true but not false either.

There had been many instances where the product of Islamic influence has destroyed historical artifacts.

See areas of Pakistan, India, Egypt and even old Persian lands. Islam, just as Christianty did, used methods of convert or die in the early years of it's initial expansion.

The reason much of the history has survived where Islam is today is because History has just simply been there longer. We are talking about 10000 years of history in the Middle East and Asian minor. The middle East was a hub of culture and even to this day, people fight for the theory that all major civilizations began in the middle east.

To counter your argument that Christianity did more damage to pre Christian religious civilizations, The church, both Catholic, Protestant, and orthodox have the vast majority of their influence in Europe and the Americas. Two or three places where History was not very well documented up until just the last 2000 year's or so.

Now let's look at the reasons why Christianity and Islam had done such things.

Islam's intial spread was through warfare and conversion of ideals and faith. (700s-1000's) these types of destruction were directly from sultans and empires that had claims to Muhammed, for example the fatimids who looted and destroyed old remenace of Egyptian history.

Christianity however had no direct claims to Christ, and rather only uses Christ as a justification at best to destroy any historical pagan artifacts. Spain for example expanded in what is today Latin and South America by using superior arms to overcome the Inca and Aztec. Where their relics and such were destroyed or looted, Christ was not the main reason, and little attempt to convert the natives was made, later in the 18th 19th century.

am i wrong in thinking that aside from the occasional craze, you were ok if you were christian or pagan or soemthing else in the islamic theocracy as long as you payed your tax

as compared to medieval europe and its pagans

asking because lebanon is like half christian and christian minorities survived in a lot of places

A higher tax bracket was installed in certain domains. Many places where religion was a formal part of governance often used this as a form of still gaining income while keeping the possibility of rebellion down.

The middle ages was not as bloody as it may be portrayed to be. Values and custom were still on par with what they are today, of course that's a whole other point to be made and discussion.

What I think is trying to say is that Christiany was way more destructive to history than Islam was, which is highly false.

it's really sad how modernity came and christians basically disappeared from the middle east, when they were so numerous before the 20th century
there's tens of millions of arabs in the americas, mostly christians who left after the world wars

it's been especially bad the last few decades
after 2003 a million christians fled iraq - almost the entire community

you should look at a map user. The Arabian penn is mostly desert and has been for thousands of years.

If you mean to say places under the domain of the old Persian Empires or Egyptian Pharros then I'll bring to the table some very interesting points.

The Cariot was a heavy Cavalry weapon that in it's time could resemble what would be the fundamental idea of what Tanks are used for. During it's time, people used to tremble the spinning bladed wheels and rumbling chargers mounted on them.

What made the chariot obselet and when? What was the best defence against s chariot and where did it's use originate or under which civilization of antiquity?

Also. Let's talk about the Achaemenid Empire. What allowed them to conquer and make all of the Levant and even the Balkans bow down to them? What was the average day like for a Persian in the greatest city of its time, Babylon.

Nearly all Iraqi Christians are "Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs" or just Assyrians for short, not Arabs. Although there were Arab Christians there too centuries ago. Arabic-speaking Christian groups in other places sometimes don't consider themselves Arabs either.

The reason why there is not many thread about pre-Islamic arabia is because they were boring.
They still had all the autistic Arab/Islamic customs except they found a way to make it even more autistic . The only thing interesting about them was their lack of belief in the afterlife made it so that everything they did revolved around attaining honor and glory in this life- similar to the greek concept of kleos

Any good books on these topics?

well you know actual arabs don't really exist outside the peninsula they just 'consider themselves'

Not really. The early Muslims basically conquered, collected tribute, and let things go on. Forced conversions were pretty rare; at least in the initial arab conquests

The South Arabian kingdom of Saba has always interested me because of its interactions with Ethiopia. A small group of them arrived in Ethiopia around 2.8k years ago and basically influenced them substantially. Centuries later, the Aksumites would later regularly politically interact with South Arabia and even conquer for a period of time. The Ethiopian-Saba relations must have been fascinating.

More of a YouTuber and podcast kinda guy.

But check out Eric H. Cline. He has some very good books and videos of himself teaching. His very intuitive on bronze age history which is right where you should be looking for this kind of information.

Some YouTube channels to look at are: documentary films, world of discovery, ncas, archeo atlas.

Just to add, South Arabia had multiple kingdoms vying for supremacy. Off top, I remember Saba and Himyar (Himyarites are who the Aksumites invaded). North Arabia had the Nabatean kingdom. The idea that Arabia had no kingdoms prior to Islam isn't really completely true

>Decline and Fall
>Gibbon
>Modern Library Classics (Condensed)
>Description of Arabia and Its Inhabitants

>>i'm making my own paragraph breaks

Many ages before Mohammed, their [the Arabs] intrepid valor had been severely felt by their neighbors in offensive and defensive war.

The patient and active virtues of a soldier are insensibly nursed in the habits and discipline of a pastoral life. The care of the sheep and camels is abandoned to the women of the tribe, but the martial youth, under the banner of the emir, is ever on horseback and in the field, to practice the exercise of the bow, the javelin, and the cimeter.

The long memory of their independence is the firmest pledge of its perpetuity, and succeeding generations are animated to prove their descent and to maintain their inheritance...

I remember Saba from rome total war extended cultures mod
they had trade benefits because of spices, but were a little hard to play i remember
hmmm almost want to download the game again

"Bronze man" found in Al-Baydā' (ancient Nashqum, Kingdom of Saba'). 6th–5th century BCE. Louvre Museum

i notice this guy has the same styles on his beard and hair as babylonian statues

>continued

Their service in the field was speedy and vigoros, but their friendship was venal, their faith inconstant, their enmity capricious: it was an easer task to excite than to disarm these roving Barbarians; and in the familiar intercourse of war, they learned to see and despise the splendid weakness both of Rome and of Persia.

>Gibbon wrote this in 1776; there exists an obvious bias in his writing.

The slaves of domestic tyranny may vainly exult in their national independence: but the Arab is personally free... In private life every man, at least every family, was the judge and avenger of his own cause.

>I'm stopping right here
>I'm going to type out a whole chapter of gibbon when I fully know well its on the internet

Nice, here is Dhamar Ali Yahbur. Himyarite king; 3rd-4th century AD

Forgot pic

>Forced conversions were pretty rare

What is Jihad? What was the rapid decline of Hindu significantly adjacent to the expansion of Islam in Pakistan and India?
What was the entirety of Egypt being conquered and mass concerted?

Inb4 "the people of the book were protected"

They were not protected. See the mass killings of Christians in the Holy Land from the 10th to late 11th century that added to the initial call to crusade.

You also are changing your argument from Islam was not destructive to Islam was not forced. Both are true, stop making yourself look like a fool, read some more and come back. Islam is not the good guy in History, if you truly knew your History you'll know there is no good guy so stop baiting and stop trying to make the whole Christian vs Islam thing work here. Fact is they both were the bad guys.

T. Catholic, and perusing historical academic.

i see some sort of runes down at the bottom in both pictures
at first glance it looks to me like greek from right to left aka phoenician

what is that

You're confused about what he's talking about. He's referring to the initial conquests, like, Rashidun period.

Most of the early massacres of Christians were instigated by Jews and were retaliation for bad Byzantine behavior. Early Muslims considered other followers of Abrahamic religions Muslims as well, and the policies of the Rashidun and Umayyad caliphates pretty much reflected that.

oh i found it
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_South_Arabian_script

the last character before the inverted K here , the one that looks like a dumbbell is the theta one

never heard of this before

wewed out loud lad.

Here is that script used by the Aksumites too

Funny enough, the most important landmark in Arabia before Islam would still be the "House of God" - Yes, that cubic house in Mecca. It was first built by Abraham and Ismail according to the Arabs. Of course, throughout time, the Abrahamic faith of monotheism was shrugged to the side for polytheism. And that's how you get those 3 once-worshipped figures in your pic related. Muhammad re-established the "house of God".

Another notable account is that of the Year of the Elephant - where the Yemeni King down south wanted to invade Mecca and destroy "The house of god" in order for his other "house" that he built in Yemen to be the main attraction of the pilgrims. He failed terribly. According to the accounts, him and his army were burnt acrisp by some types of birds that rained upon them with fiery-type stones.

Dude Egypt was not mass converted. They didn't become majority Muslim for another like 200 years. (below is defend excerpt from askhistorians).

Initially the Arabs (a very small minority at the time) separated themselves from the Coptic Egyptians and allowed Egyptians to manage their own affairs and practice their form of Christianity without any interference. But they were required to pay a head tax (in addition to regular land tax). The tax collection was actually done by Coptic Egyptians, so there a good chance that many people never interacted with Arabs at all. During this initial period there were few conversions because there were very Muslims in Egypt and there was no incentive of any kind to push people towards conversion. And odds are people who converted would have been cut off from their community. There is even some evidence that Arabs discouraged new converts because they wanted to guard their own privileged status.

In the 730’s Arabs settlers started to arrive in Egypt from Arabia. These settlers included members from all aspects of society (rich, poor, merchant, laborers etc….) and changed the nature of the Arab population (which was made mostly of soldiers and nobles). These new settlers lived among the Coptic Egyptians but were given higher social status because of their religion. At this point intermarriage started to happen and this further increased the number of Muslims. Coptic men had to convert in order to marry a Muslim girl and a Muslim man married a Copt girl the children were automatically Muslims. Arabic was made the only legitimate language for the administration in 706 and as Arabic spread it blurred the difference between Arab and Egyptian. This further made it easier for people to convert and fit in with the new religion.

>defend
decent

>tfw your ancient army is destroyed by bird shit and you cover it up with a "fiery stone" story.

>According to the accounts, him and his army were burnt acrisp by some types of birds that rained upon them with fiery-type stones.

lol even the Quraishi/Meccans are witnesses to the same story. The Yemeni army was defeated by birds.

NO YOU DONT UNDERSTAND THEY HAD FIRE AND ROCKS N SHIT ;_; we wuz arabz

>It was first built by Abraham and Ismail according to the Arabs. Of course, throughout time, the Abrahamic faith of monotheism was shrugged to the side for polytheism. And that's how you get those 3 once-worshipped figures in your pic related. Muhammad re-established the "house of God".
This bit is likely fanciful tradition.

>200 years

It was probably at least 500.

This information is found in Islamic literature. And also from the non-Muslim Quraishi's - even before Muhammad, you had Quraishis/Meccans who would isolate themselves and perform Monotheistic rituals.

Not only that, but the fact is we still to this day the same Abraham Spot that the Pre-Muslim Meccans had infront of the House of God.

So while the Arabs were mainly polytheists, very few were monotheists but all believed that Abraham built the house.

The religious justification the Christians used to do all that was pretty doctrinally sound.

It wasn't directly from Christ's words but that's because Christ has a bit of a different role in Christianity than Muhammad. He wasn't really the living canon of Christianity the way Muhammad and his Companions and family were so much as the deity and core of it.
A closer equivalent to Jesus is the Qur'an itself. The word and essence of God. And a closer equivalent to the Sunna in Christianity is canon law and doctrine as agreed on by the Church fathers.

They both had it down right in their religion. Christianity was absolutely the reason Christians did those things just as Islam was the reason Muslims did.

Pic related is Maqam-Ibrahim, or the Place of Abraham. This was before Muhammad came and still exist today. So the Abraham building The House of God is a narrative that existed far before Muhammad came into the picture.

Even if there's was a pre-Islamic monotheism, there is no way there it can go back to Abraham who would have lived over a thousand years earlier. Abraham's very existence is an open question amongst serious historians, let alone Islamic accounts of the man that were created over a millennia later. If you're a serious reader of history, you can't take fanciful traditions at face value. I'm not singling Islamic tradition out; all cultures do this. I'm Ethiopian and we have plenty of religious narratives that I admire but I don't take them to be completely accurate history by any stretch.

Even if the Maqam-Ibrahim existed prior to Muhammad, the tradition concerning Abraham is almost certainly a retcon.

They didnt expand through warfare alone

Why would there be "no way" of it going back to Abraham? The Meccans were aware of such an individual and related to him the House of God. (The same Meccans before Muhammad)

If the House of God was established for pilgrimage by Abraham, why is there "no way" for it to "go back"? The same place has survived for over 1500+ years - and that's what is recorded.

I think given it's nature of being a place of worship, and it's desolate location where most large armies and biggest civilizations never dare to enter into the Arabian desert - I think it's easy for the House of God to have been there for thousands and thousands of years.

A retcon of what exactly?

>The same Meccans before Muhammad
No contemporary evidence

>The same place has survived for over 1500+ years - and that's what is recorded.
Recorded in later tradition. No contemporary evidence.

>I think it's easy for the House of God to have been there for thousands and thousands of years.
No way. Structures do not last anywhere near that long in that condition undisturbed . Look at the scant archeological evidence we have of Aksum or Arabian kingdoms like Saba or the Himyarites.

>Islam was more tolerant of pre-Islamic pagan religions than Christians.
kek I don't even care if it's bait

When Muhammad spoke of Abraham, the Meccans were not introduced to some new figure, they were already aware. This is a basic fact.

So you're saying that we don't know for sure if the House of God was there or not when Muhammad arrived? You can't be serious

Of course, the house was destroyed a few times. But it's also been rebuilt time and time again. And has it's own special caretakers.

Al-'Uzzá a qt

...

>you were ok if you were christian or pagan or soemthing else in the islamic theocracy as long as you payed your tax
Wrong
The tax is for people of the book (jews and christians)
Pagans were put to death no matter what

>Pagans were put to death no matter what

That's not true. In most cases, they were allowed to continue to be pagans if they paid jizya.

Are you literally retarded?

The people of d'mt (Ethiopia) had contacts with the people of Saba (Yemen), their architecture looks pretty impressive, it's the first SSA civilization

It's not so simple. There was always back and forth migration. There is a reason why all the non-arabic languages found there today has east African Cushitic substrate (socotra, mehri, etc...)

The available archeological shows a cultural diffusion but not demographic shift from Semitic speakers in Arabia to Ethiopia.