Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

[muqawwee123]

“We Muslims, set Europe up for the Enlightenment and became stupid ourselves”.

Spreading Islam in Europe – The Express Tribune

They gather on Fridays, after prayers, at London’s Regent’s Park Mosque. Trousers pulled up a few inches above the ankles, beards prominent, carrying black flags with the kalma written in white, there are women among them also, shrouded in black, top to toe, and converts, both black and white, bearded to fit in, the keffiyeh dangling rebelliously around their necks. Manifestly angry and intimidating, they rally to instil fear in the hearts of the infidels who surround them.

It is a vicious cycle. The English Defence League, every bit as rabid as the Muslims they take on, shouts anti-Islam and anti-immigrant slogans, while groups like Muslims Against Crusades burn poppies on Armistice Day or threaten to disrupt the royal wedding. Disgruntled and primarily under 40, these young Muslims across Europe use scare tactics. Waving sticks to call for Sharia in Britain is either delusional dawaa or payback for the racism suffered by their older generations.

To be fair, the Crusades are not a figment of the Muslim imagination. In fact, it was in fighting the Muslims that Europe consolidated its identity. In a fascinating Channel 4 documentary entitled, “When the Moors Ruled in Europe”, Bettany Hughes reveals that nearly 700 years of history, the time that Spain was an Islamic society, has been written out of European textbooks, “its legacy virtually erased from western history”.

As someone who has visited Andalucian heritage sites several times, it does not surprise me in the least that Queen Isabella and her husband Ferdinand chose to be buried at the Alhambra, surrounded by Quranic verses, in one of the most architecturally pleasing and serene spots created by man, even as they fought off the last 70,000 Muslims of Granada. Although 300,000 Muslims had been expelled, a million Arabic books burned, and all of Alhambra’s archives incinerated during the Spanish Inquisition, the beautiful buildings were not destroyed. These include those in Granada, Sevilla and the grand mosque of Cordoba that now serves as a church.

What is far more important, however, are the recent archaeological findings that reveal, contrary to previous belief, that there was hardly any evidence of violence in the four-year period that it took for the Muslims to gain control of all of modern-day Spain (then Andalucia).** Instead, the Visigoths, who then inhabited the area, were so impressed by the superior ways of the Muslims that they welcomed their rule. The Muslims, in turn, turned Cordoba, the capital, into the largest, most civilised and cosmopolitan city in Europe, where Jews and Christians lived
peacefully alongside their Muslim rulers.

**Greek texts translated and built upon by Muslim scholars were brought to the rest of Europe via Andalucia. Trade thrived and paper was introduced to Europe by the Muslims, replacing parchment, an innovation akin to the internet of today. The Muslim doctors of the time performed surgeries that were not seen in the rest of Europe till a few centuries later. Algebra, alchemy and advanced astronomy were Muslim inventions. Muslim laws were far sophisticated, providing contracts for ploughing, giving rights to those who did not own the land. And in the year 859 AD, the first university in the world was founded by a Muslim woman by the name of Fatima al Fihri, which still exists as the University of Al-Karaouine in modern-day Fes, Morocco. Even the city of Madrid was founded by a Muslim.

Islam, in its early years, was thus spread by reason and intellect, and not by the sword. After the death of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) in 632 AD, expansion in the seventh century was so rapid that by 711 AD, the Muslims, having already gained control of North Africa, crossed the straits of Gibraltar into Spain, which they ruled for centuries, until in 1492, coincidentally, the same year that Christopher Columbus set sail and discovered America, the last Muslim ruler in Spain, Boabdil, surrendered the Emirate of Granada. Going over this history, I cannot help but be reminded of what an African American convert to Islam who is writing a book on how Hazrat Khadija’s (RA) Christian relatives nurtured the Holy Prophet (pbuh) told me once. “We Muslims,” he said, “set Europe up for the Enlightenment and became stupid ourselves”.

[Faris_Udeen]

Re: Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

Strangley long before the Crusades there have been Arab links in Britian.

In the Roman times around AD50 the City of Hull was known as Arab Town becuase of the huge amount of Arabian trading vessels there which bought slaves and raw materials from beyond the Roman empire.

Islam reached Europe principally from three directions.

The first was the Moors invasions of Spainand later France which swept away all resistance and liberated many of the old world people of Spain from outside yolk such as the Latins and Goths. This tide was eventually halted at Tours.

The other was through trade routes into the Mediteranean especially Italy and Greece where many Masjids were built to accomadate traders and artisans within Italy and the surrounding areas.

Oddly enough the first sight some Crusaders saw was not Muslims in the Holy land but in Italian sea ports, however these Muslims were granted protection and guest rights by the Italian nobility who needed them and thier services.

Many European armies even actively recruited Arab Mercenaries and especially Turks (Saracens) and Roger of Sicily was known to have had at least one detachment of Arab Archers helping him fight the Bizantines.

The third entry point and probably the last major entry of Muslims into Europe in force was the Turkish Invasions of the former Byzantine regions and Balkans which was mostly done by force of arms.

The most lasty effect one would note here is that the areas Muslim armies siezed by force would eventually be lost, but right up till the Industrial era Muslims in Italy and Greece were doing well in trade.

Point to note here is the sword alas does not always solve everything. :D

[muqawwee123]

Re: Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

But what happened to Muslim army in France? I mean how, they can't move forward to Tours?

[Faris_Udeen]

Re: Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

There was a crucial battle at Tours between the King of the Franks Charles Martel and Abdur Rehaman the leader of the Moors.

It was an interesting battle becuase it was a bit of a culture shock for both sides. Martel's Army was primarily infantry armed with the classic Fransisca battle axe (from which the Franks got thier name) And spears, swords and axes.

The french took up the dark ages formation of a Shield Wall upon a hill, much simmilar to the Saxon formation at the battle of Hastings which most people in the West can understand.

The franks had heavy infantry arranged in close formation and well aremd and diciplined troops.

The Ummayad Army of Adul Rehaman was mostly light cavalry and the dicipline of these troops was not one that allowed them to fight in close order formations but rather they swept an enemy en masse like a tidal wave.

The Franks had the advantage of high ground and good dicipline and the battle took place over two days although the actual fighting only happened over one day.

The Ummayads opened up with an arrow storm and then charged headlong up the slope towards the Franks. This was bad for the horse as they would tire on the uphill charge and horses will not break a strong formation of diciplined troops.

The Arabs lacked heavy infantry of thier own and were ill suited to this type of combat. Strategy of the generals was also very different and can be seen from the resulting battle. Abdur Rehman lead from the front and so as his troops rushed into the enemy he would have been right at the front of the fight, in those dark times men would be crushed to death in the front ranks by the sheer press of numbers.

While Charles Martel conducted his military from the middle of his formation giving him better picture of the battle and also keeping himself in a safer place. We know from various accounts that the opening hour or so of combat was pretty decisive as the Arab cavalry did break the first few ranks of Frankish troops but as the horses and men fell Abdur Rehaman was cut down in the vicous close fight.

This disheartened his troops some of whom actually turned round and fled. In some accounts the French sent scouts into the Ummayad camp to cause dissaray and send thier troops back to defend the booty.

The result of the first day was the French formations had been shaken, but not broken and the Ummayad army had suffered heavy losses. By the second day the Ummayads could have continued and fought on, by perhaps bombarding the enemy from a distance with arrows and grinding them down. However the Ummayad army chose to pull back and take its booty instead. Perhaps there was a leadership crisis as well becuase the death of a brave man such as Abdur Rehman might have left no suitable subordinate to take over the role.

In any case the Franks succeeded in stopping the Moors from flooding across Europe but were not suffiecently strong enough to drive the Moors away... it became a bogged down conflict which the Europeans won over time. The numbers were probably even during this battle with both sides numbering between 15 and 20 thousand men each. Which were large armies for that time considering the date is given as 732AD.

It is a very significant battle in World History as some have said were the Moors to have won the battle at Tours it could have ended Christian Europe.

It is interesting to note that later versions get mixed up and make the battle sound like it was between Knights and Saracens with both sides being heavily armoured.

My personal view is that this battle is far too early for knights and probably as few as 1 in 10 men on both sides wore Armour. The armour would have most likely been chainmail and even that would have been very rare indeed theres a good chance that many of the Franks had shields for thier defensive formation which would have saved them from much of the arrow storm and helped in close quarters. While the Arab armies of the Ummayads certianly had shields most of these would be for Infantry and there are very few depictions of Umayad cavalry being armed with shields. Even if Ummayad cavalry possesed shields they would have been smaller buckler types and not much use and protecting the horses as well. Tactically speaking both sides could have won the fight depending on many factors but the Ummayads put too much reliance on thier cavalry.

[muqawwee123]

Re: Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

:k: Great information Faris Bhai

But what lead Muslims to fight Frenchs in their land, if it was not for expansion. How do we justify that Muslims were not behind imperialism and expansion?

[Faris_Udeen]

Re: Islam In Europe - Past and Presnt

In those days the Ummayad Caliphate was a ruthless war machine and saw some of the most rapid expansion ever seen in World History. The Ummayad dynasty was one which was particulalrly ruthless and the familiar case of Karbala is one which marrs the entire dynasty.

Islamically speaking there was no justification for the rampant imperilaism of the Ummayads but they were helped in thier rapid expansion by the rapid decline of the Roman Empire (Byzantine Romans).

Also many of the people they conquered, saw them as liberators at first, both the natives of North Africa and Spain were liberated from the years of Roman influence. The people had been ill treated under previous regimes and they saw the Arab expansion as a good thing.

The Ummayads in some sense did well to expand Islam but they conquered lower France and the Pyrenees by brute force alone and if some of the early Christian chronicles are to be taken at face value it seems the invaders were not as strict Muslims as one might think.

Personally the I think the Ummayads used too much force and failed to negotiate terms with thier opponents, there was no need to attack Constantinople which at that time was the heart of the Eastern Roman empire and well defended. They could have simply aquired most of the Roman territories by a treaty the same way the Romans had aquired it from the Persians.

The Ummayads suffered two millitary setbacks. One was Tours and the other was Constantinople. Here the Navy which had first been established by Hazrat Amir Mauwiya was sent into battle to besiege Constantinople, however the timely arriver of the Greek Kalinikos and his invention of Greek fire. Saved the Romans from losing thier empire outright. The Byzantines would actually outlive the Ummayads by some centuries.