Print Page | Close Window

Umayyids - Iranian Arabs?

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: Post-Classical Middle East
Forum Description: SW Asia, the Middle East and Islamic civilizations from 600s - 1900 AD
Moderators: Sparten, Azimuth, es_bih
URL: http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=25392
Printed Date: 16-Aug-2018 at 15:42
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Umayyids - Iranian Arabs?
Posted By: Ardashir
Subject: Umayyids - Iranian Arabs?
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 09:59
I found these articles in the great "chubine" blog and until now I've read them twice:
 
http://chubin.net/?p=435#more-435 - http://chubin.net/?p=435#more-435
 
http://chubin.net/?p=434#more-434 - http://chubin.net/?p=434#more-434
 
Main conclusions:
 
1- Sassanid power collapsed after suffering defeats from Byzantines in 620s.
 
2- Byzantines also were so weakened that they counldn't regain control over Syria, Palestine, Israel and Mesopotamia. Thus, local Arabs took over these lands.
 
3- In Iran, local Christians took power and formed the Umayyid dynasty.
 
 
The writte has stated that his articles are to be continued, so let see what will be his final judgments.
 
Regards
 
 


-------------
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com



Replies:
Posted By: Asawar Hazaraspa
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 10:56
Very interesting Ardashir. it will be more benefecial if someone could translate those into english.


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 13:09
Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa Asawar Hazaraspa wrote:

Very interesting Ardashir. it will be more benefecial if someone could translate those into english.
 
Thanks. Regarding your suggestion, my English is not that fluent to do the job, so you might consider another option.
 
Also interesting would be to asking Greek/Western members to verify one of the claims made in the articles:
 
There is NO mention of Persian-Arab wars in the Byzantine historical records.
 
Is this true?


-------------
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com


Posted By: Suren
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 13:41
So you mean the whole Conquest of Persia is a myth ?Tongue


Posted By: Hassan-i Sabbah
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 13:58
Originally posted by Ardashir Ardashir wrote:

Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa Asawar Hazaraspa wrote:

Very interesting Ardashir. it will be more benefecial if someone could translate those into english.
 
Thanks. Regarding your suggestion, my English is not that fluent to do the job, so you might consider another option.
 
My Farsi is not that great to do that, will take me couple of weeks depending on my work load to get it translated.
 


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 14:10

It is an obvious fact that Sassanids and Byzantines had weakened each other by numerous wars, so Arabs could easily conquer parts of their both lands but what does it relate to Bani-Umayya? An arab clan who lived in Mecca even before Islam, was Abu Sufyan an Iranian?!!



Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 14:31
I really want a translation for this piece before I could judge it. However one thing is for sure, there are enough documents from that era to prove without any doubt that the Ummayyads were Arabs and that the conquests were real, for example money minted in Iraq and Syria, treaties and other documents that agree with later historical accounts etc.
 
Al-Jassas


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 11-Sep-2008 at 19:12
Originally posted by Al Jassas Al Jassas wrote:

I really want a translation for this piece before I could judge it. However one thing is for sure, there are enough documents from that era to prove without any doubt that the Ummayyads were Arabs and that the conquests were real, for example money minted in Iraq and Syria, treaties and other documents that agree with later historical accounts etc.
 
Al-Jassas
 
I agree that you should read the translation before you provide us your judgement Tongue


-------------
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com


Posted By: Asawar Hazaraspa
Date 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)


Posted By: Soren Svendsen
Date Posted: 09-Oct-2008 at 11:15
Originally posted by Asawar Hazaraspa Asawar Hazaraspa wrote:

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 ( http://www.antiqillum.org/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh032.htm - 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.


Posted By: kaznder
Date 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...................


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 18-Jan-2009 at 08:58
Originally posted by kaznder kaznder wrote:

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


Posted By: kaznder
Date 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.............



Posted By: kaznder
Date 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.


Posted By: Ardashir
Date 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


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 04-Apr-2009 at 15:44
< ="-" ="text/; =utf-8">< name="ProgId" ="Word.">< name="Generator" ="Microsoft Word 11">< name="Originator" ="Microsoft Word 11"> file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Csarv%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml - file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5Csarv%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_editdata.mso - st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }

- 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


Posted By: Ardashir
Date 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


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date 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.

-------------
"O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give the pledge to this Prophet"
~ Heraclius, Roman Emperor


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 14:53
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

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


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date 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 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijri_year  (The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijra_%28Islam%29 - Hijra (هِجْرَة), or withdrawal, is the emigration of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad - Muhammad and his followers to the city of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medina - Medina in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/622 - 622 , and marks the start of the Hijri year of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_calendar - 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:
 
http://andreas.irmer.org/gadara/gadara.html - http://andreas.irmer.org/gadara/gadara.html
 
"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."


Posted By: Al Jassas
Date 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


Posted By: chubin
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 21:42

 

 
 
http


Posted By: Northman
Date Posted: 05-Apr-2009 at 22:07
Originally posted by chubin chubin wrote:

برای اطلاع از جنگ های ایران و اعراب، قادسیه و نهاوند، نگاه کنید به:

http://chubin.net/?p=728#respond - http://chubin.net/?p=728#respond
و
http://chubin.net/?p=727#more-727 - http://chubin.net/?p=727#more-727
 
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.
 
 


-------------


Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 05:32
Originally posted by Ardashir Ardashir wrote:

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

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!

-------------
"O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give the pledge to this Prophet"
~ Heraclius, Roman Emperor


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 09:40
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

Originally posted by Ardashir Ardashir wrote:

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:

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


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date 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.


Posted By: Ardashir
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 17:20

42nd year, not 24th year



-------------
http://khakokhoon.blogfa.com


Posted By: Cyrus Shahmiri
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2009 at 19:03
Originally posted by Ardashir Ardashir wrote:

42nd year, not 24th year

As I said according to the German translation of it: http://andreas.irmer.org/gadara/gadara.html - http://andreas.irmer.org/gadara/gadara.html that is 24th not 42nd, furthermore, about the Arab-Sassanian coins, you probably know that the earliest ones are attributed to Uthman and Ali, several years before the caliphate of Mu'awiyah, you can read more about them here: http://www.grifterrec.com/coins/islam/arab_sas/arabsasanian.html - http://www.grifterrec.com/coins/islam/arab_sas/arabsasanian.html  


Posted By: chubin
Date Posted: 21-May-2009 at 08:36
"I found these articles in the great "chubine"
 
http://chubin.net/?p=728 - http://chubin.net/?p=728
 
http://chubin.net/?p=634 - http://chubin.net/?p=634
 
chubin



Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net