لا يمكن الدمج لان تأريخ العرب قبل الاسلام خاص بالعرب فقط لانهم عنصر من العناصر
Dear Concerned,
To Which Arabs do you refer, the Mixed Arabs or the so-called True Arabs?
Notwithstanding, both are neglected in the Ancient historical Period or B.C.
The True Arabs or South Arabians, have numerous sources, but it is Chronology that is a problem. For example, when did a certain King or Queen live. In Chronological and Genealogical data one faces the circumstance of "son of" or "ibn el" or "bn...", in all genealogocal data not only South Arabian history.
We must determine if it really was the 'son of' any given name or personage or if there are great gaps in the data, which may have been presented in a concise manner.
I myself in my research on South Arabian history deal with a number of periods. And deal with the earlier period from 3000 - 1700 B.C. But we ought to combine, Historical, Linguistic, Philological and Archaeological data; and although the latter is available elsewhere (on other soil) to evidence this period, we need it in South Arabia itself.
This period of course begins for South Arabians proper, with Kahtan. Who may be found in South Arabian, Arabic (el Tabari, for example), Hebrew sources, Ancient Aegyptian sources, Aethiopic sources and so on...
But the periods after this from 1600 - 200 B.C. need serious research to be done on it. For the ancient history of any nation or people, helps to bring clarity to other people with whom they had exchange, thus one evidences the other.
This is my understanding of the matter and a quick overview.
Most Sincerely,
Rev. Deacon Gabra AGZIAABHIR JR
التاريخ القديم هو محصلة أو مجموع أحداث سابقة بدأت مع بداية تسجيل وكتابة تاريخ البشرية، وامتدت حتى العصور القديمة المتأخرة.وتأريخ العرب قبل الاسلام هى الفترة التى سبقت الاسلام وتعرف بالجاهلية
Arab culture was ancient and made up of several ethnic groups. Funeral regions, marking out routes and territories, are evident from 7000 years ago. Parts of Arabia effected history, especially in the east. The migration of Arabs began c3000 years ago, entering the Near East.
Dear Stanley,
I speak of both Identity and populating.
For in the indigenous history of the True Arabs or South Arabians, descendants of Kahtan, as well as other histories, it is stated that the Kahtanites entered South Arabia circa 2713 B.C.
The Archaeology supports this, which begins, circe, 1985 B.C. and thereafter.
The sons of Kahtan who entered South Arabia were no less than 5 of his 12 sons. The Hebrew sources record that he had 13 sons, however one of these was not his actual son, but a grandchild.
I know sources are not here named but it is hoped that this elaborates further.
Most Sincerely,
Dear Stanley,
Just to follow up, the Arabs trace their heritage from Mesopotamia (Babylon), of this all the histories agree. South Arabian, Hebrew and Aethiopic...
The Arabs proper, came in the Third Millenium B.C. to Yeman; however, they came from Mesopotamia, their heritage was there and their Semitic ties.
The actual migration began c. 2713 B.C., and some of them moved into Africa 1985 B.C. and thereafter Syria and Phoenicia. These being the descendants of Kahtan and his 12 sons and their offspring.
Consequently, in relation to the original question of Raed about "Is it possible to integrate the history of the Arabs ...with the stage of ancient history?" yes, but we need to do a lot of philological, linguistic as well as historical and archaeological work; and archaeology is only the last stage in this process.
In relation to the first sovereigns or the the sons of Kahtan, consult Perceval hereafter, for one reference (of which there are not few):
'Essai sur l'histoire des Arabes avant l'Islamisme', par A. P. Causin Perceval, Tome I. p.47 ff. Paris: 1847
Most Sincerely,
Rev. Deacon Gabra AGZIAABHIR JR
السلام عليكم في حقيقة الامر اغلب الدراسات الحديثة بدأت تتناسا موضوع عرب قبل الاسلام وتدمج هذه الحقبة تحت مسمى التاريخ القديم باعتبار ان العرب انفسهم كانوا موجودين في الحقبة الاشورية التي تدرج ضمن التاريخ القديم وبالتالي فهذه التسمية هي الاعم والاشمل بل حاليا اغلب المؤلفات تسير نحو هذا المنحى
نعم، يمكن دمج تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام مع مرحلة التاريخ القديم، حيث أن تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام يُعتبر جزءًا من التاريخ القديم للمنطقة. العرب قبل الإسلام كانوا جزءًا من الشعوب السامية التي استوطنت شبه الجزيرة العربية، وكان لهم تأثير كبير على الحضارات المجاورة مثل الحضارة الآشورية والبابلية والفارسية.
تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام يشمل العديد من الممالك والحضارات مثل مملكة سبأ، مملكة حضرموت، ومملكة معين، بالإضافة إلى القبائل العربية المختلفة التي كانت تعيش في مناطق متعددة من شبه الجزيرة العربية. هذه الفترات التاريخية تُظهر تطور الحياة الاجتماعية والسياسية والدينية للعرب قبل الإسلام، مما يجعل دمجها مع مرحلة التاريخ القديم أمرًا منطقيًا ومفيدًا لفهم السياق التاريخي الكامل للمنطقة.
Am fascinated about learning what is never taught in Ireland and it would benefit everyone. As an MA in Irish History graduate but with modules in the study of Northern Africa and the Middle East, I want to learn more, for example I never heard of Gertrude Bell or the British involvement in Mesopotamia, so please send me more information please
Dear Concerned,
In general, your statment is correct, as one has aforsaid.
Notwithstanding however, as I have also stated above:
"I myself in my research on South Arabian history deal with a number of periods. And deal with the earlier period from 3000 - 1700 B.C. But we ought to combine, Historical, Linguistic, Philological and Archaeological data; and although the latter is available elsewhere (on other soil) to evidence this period, we need it in South Arabia itself.
This period of course begins for South Arabians proper, with Kahtan. Who may be found in South Arabian, Arabic (el Tabari, for example), Hebrew sources, Ancient Aegyptian sources, Aethiopic sources and so on...
But the periods after this from 1600 - 200 B.C. need serious research to be done on it. For the ancient history of any nation or people, helps to bring clarity to other people with whom they had exchange, thus one evidences the other.
This is my understanding of the matter and a quick overview."
One may reiterate that the history of the True Arabian or South Arabians begins with Kahtan and the Kahtanites. Thereafter the Sabeans (>and Kahlanites), and well as the Himyarites, these as the two chief tribes.
I also deal with less known parts of the history from 1 - 7th century AD. And some of the history of this period is known however, but not fully.
...
That "The history of the pre-Islamic period is an unknown field of discovery." is nontheless a true statement, as it needs scholars to piece to gether and research on the history. As I have stated my research is unique, and yet largely unpublished. And in my investigations, I also deal with ancient Greek or Classical Sources for South Arabian History.
Thus there is much to be gleaned.
And one will find that this history in intertwined with that of all the countries national histories that sound the South Arabians including that of India at an ancient period.
Most Sincerely,
Rev. Deacon Gabra AGZIAABHIR JR
La historia de los árabes preislámicos está muy vinculada con la provincia romana de Arabia Pétrea y con el heredero de Roma en la región, el Imperio romano de Oriente o Bizancio.
Hola, Juan Luis Posadas,
Exactamente!
For the period of 1st - 6th century in particular. South Arabia and Arabia Petra had relations with Rome and Byzantium. But also with Aethiopia. Thus this period of history is better documented.
Nonetheless, many sources are not being used or analysed, which can give us a much better understanding to this period.
Of course the early 6th century (525 AD), prior to Islam, saw Byzantine Emperor Justin I asked and made King of Kings Kaleb, Emperor of Aethiopia to go to South Arabia to protect the Christians from persecution there.
And in 7th century, Aethiopia sheilded and protected the family and early followers of Mahamad, from the Koresh or Quraysh, hence without the Aethiopian Nagashi or rather Ngus (King), today there perhaps would be no Islam.
In the 1st - 2nd century Christianity was Estabished in South Arabia and also Arabia Petra. In Arabia Petra in the 1st century in part by the Apostle St. Paul: "Neither went I to Jerusalem, to the apostles who were before me: but I went into Arabia, and again I returned to Damascus." (I Cor. i.17). In Arabia Felix also in the 1st century by Apostles St. Bartholomew, St. Matthew, and by the Ethiopian Eunuch, and later in the 2nd and 3rd century by noted Ecclesiastics.
The Christian history of Arabia is not written-on proper however, only in the later period around the 6th century.
I myself am writing and do lecture on this 1st century period:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-or5ZP95JE&t=1176s
But also on the period from 3000 - 1600 B.C.
Most Sincerely
Raed Rahim Khuder Yeah, it should be possible. While it is often treated separately, integrating the history of the Arabs before Islam into ancient history could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the interconnectedness and cultural continuity within the ancient world.
The history of Arab Islam must necessarily explain what the Arab was before Islam in order to understand the radical change brought about by the Prophet Muhammad.
the Question should be the other way around, how you can understand the history of the region without studying the History of Arabia and the Arabs? They contributed & participated in all events: politically: economically: socially ...
hello Before the Islamic rule, the Arabs were the peoples who protected the borders of Iran and Rome. They played an important role in strengthening or weakening Rome and Iran. They had an independent script and an independent language. It is possible to investigate the establishment of the Islamic government and the overthrow of the kingdom of Iran and cooperation with the Roman Empire. The Kingdom of Abyssinia, which was one of the Roman colonies, can be examined in support of the emergence of the Islamic religion and government against Iran.
Dear Hosein,
In relation to your latter statements, which must me reconsidered, viz.
"The Kingdom of Abyssinia, which was one of the Roman colonies, can be examined in support of the emergence of the Islamic religion and government against Iran."
One must say, that the 'Empire of Aethiopia (Abyssinia)', was certainly not a colony of Rome!!! But to the contrary, Aethiopia was from time immemorial, and certainly in the time of the 1 - 7th century AD, one of the greatest Empires of the world.
Mani says of this, to cited Prof. Hans Jakob Polotsky (the notable Russian-German-Hebrew scholar, Semiticist and founder of the Department of Linguistics, and the Department of Egyptian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem), citing him from Munro-Hay (scholar of Ethiopian Studies):
"The Persian religious leader Mani, founder of Manichaean Religion, who died in 276 or 277 AD, is reported by his followers, to have discribed the Four most important Kingdoms of the world as comprising Persia, Rome, Aksum and Sileos, the later possibly China (Polotsky, 1940: 188-9). This remark shows that Aksum's repute was...in the contemporary world". (Stuart Munro-Hay, 'Aksum: an African Civilization of Late Antiquity', p.17, 1991)
Accordingly, Aethiopia was infact one of the Great Civilizations of the world, even prior to Rome (depite the title of Munro-Hays book). And as shewn here in the 3rd century AD, was one of the Four Great Independant Empires of the so-called known world.
In Munro-Hay's introduction, one may add, that he also rightly says: "Most important, Aksum was sufficiently remote never to have come into open conflict with either Rome or Persia, and was neither conquered by these contemporary super-powers, nor suffered from punitive expeditions like Egypt, South Arabia or..."
...
One would also add, that Persia (id est, Iran), was Orthodox Christian prior to Islamic conquest. And although the 'Nagashi' or Ngusa Nagst (Emperor) of Aethiopia protectedd the family and followers of Mahumad (the Prophet of a New Religion), the Emperor/Negashi was Orthodox Christian, and was following the precepts of the scripture that states: "John answered him, saying: Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, who followeth not us, and we forbade him. But JESUS said: Do not forbid him. For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name, and can soon speak ill of me. For he that is not against you, is for you." (St. Mark ix.38 - 40).
Therefore the Nagashi, allowed the followers to continue, as at that time, they came for protection and in peace (that is before the Conquests begining in the second quarter of the 7th century), and spoke well of a Virgin birth of JESUS the CHRIST.
...
And before Islam, South Arabia was an Aethiopian territory, but Persia and Rome also had interests in Arabia Magna as it was a Great Trading Post, and for reasons related to Christianity.
Most Sincerely
Rev Deacon Gabra AGZIAABHIR JR
آیا مطمئن هستید که ایران در آن زمان ارتدکس بودند ؟؟؟؟؟؟؟
درباره حبشه نیز باید گفت که حمله حبشه به یمن در قرن ششم میلادی به دستور یوستینیوس اول ،امپراتور روم صورت گرفت . واین نشان میدهد که تحت نفوذ وسیطره روم بوده اند.
ارادتمند
احمدی
Dear Hosein Amhadi
You have added: آیا مطمئن هستید که ایران در آن زمان ارتدکس بودند ؟؟؟؟؟؟؟
درباره حبشه نیز باید گفت که حمله حبشه به یمن در قرن ششم میلادی به دستور یوستینیوس اول ،امپراتور روم صورت گرفت . واین نشان میدهد که تحت نفوذ وسیطره روم بوده اند.
ارادتمند
احمدی
...
If you note, first, that I have revised the initial wording of my last reply to be more accomodating, my statment however remains.
...
The Persian Apostolic Church was founded in the 1st century AD, it was connected to the Church in Babylon in its roots. Which is to say, that both the Church in Persia and Babylon were established by the Apostles Qdus Simeon and Qdus Yahuda (St. Simon and Jude), who were brothers. They established these Churches and diocean areas of evangelization in approx. 52 AD.
St. Simon and St. Jude were also martyred in Persia, by the instigation of two magi (enchanters/necromancers), the were called, as preserved in the Latin text of this history, Zoroes and Arfaxad.
These Magi were first in Aethiopia, fled from the Apostle St. Matthew, where they fed to Babylon. Thereafter on the arrival of the Apostles Simon and Jude, these Magi further fled to Persia, where Simon and Jude later also went to bear witness of the Truth and evangelise. This history is Preserved in Latin, which initself was a translation from Greek, but was written in Hebrew/Aramaic originally; it is commonly known as the 'Historia Apostolica', by Abdias 1st century Bishop of Babylon.
I have written a research article on this subject, and have had Persian colleagues whom I know well, on one of their return trips back home to Persia (Iran), to also investigate some things for me, and to ask there colleagues at the University they are associated with to see if they could find out anything from the Persian side. And I armed them with my article for reference.
It is entitled:
'Brief Analysis of the Nomenclature in the Vitae et Passio Sancti Simonis et Judae'
It is unpublished, but I believe I cite it in one of my lectures on the Aposle St. Matthew (at Esderos University/Seminary Washingto DC, USA), which are the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKJT36f8Pcs&ab_channel=AETHIOPSOC
Or in the following:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-or5ZP95JE&t=5s
My article on Sts Simon and Jude is unpublished (compliled in 2021), but speaks on all the personages mentioned in the historical text of the original founding of the Apostolic Church and Foundation.
The Persian and Babyonian Churches were founded in part with the sanction of the Emperor Xerxes (Artasches the King of the Persians).
...
The Persian Church had association with the Indian Church (which was established in the 1st century by the Apostle Thomas) before and around the 4th century. And also was in Sri Lanka; Sri Lankan Christianity was established in the 1st century by the Aethiopian Orthodox Church.
Persians were also in South Arabia.
Most of the Persians later accepted Nostorianism (a sect which is considered Heretical in its belief).
But not all https://indianorthodoxuk.org/the-church/church-history
Today there remains Armenian Orthodox Christians in Persia (Iran), which are still Oriental Orthodox Christians.
...
In relation to your point about the Roman Emperor of the Justin I (observe that it was not Justinian, an understandable confusion); who reigned 518 - 527. Aethiopian Emperor Kaleb went to South Arabia in 525 to save the Aethiopian Christians who were being Persicuted by 'Jews' of South Arabia.
The Roman Emperor Justin informed the Papa of the Coptic Church who contacted Emperor Kaleb of Aethiopia by letter, and made him aware of the situation in Arabia Felix (vid. 'The Throne of Adulis: Red Sea Wars on the Eve of Islam', p.97, 2013). This, as South Arabia was manfestly a territory of Aethiopia, although 'many cooks were in that broth'.
Emperor Kaleb, being a Righteous and Zealous Christian, on hearing of this Persecution, acted upon the news in his own right.
Most Sincerely
در غرب ایران ما مناطق کوچک و اقلیت مسیحی داشتیم .ولی این به منزله مسیحی بودن امپراتوری ایران نیست.امپراتوری ایران و مردم ایران دین زرتشت را دین رسمی خود می پنداشتند .آتشکدهها و کعبه های زرتشت گواه بر این مدعاست که هم اکنون نیز دین زرتشت در ایران پا برجاست ،البته اکنون بعنوان اقلیت دینی .هجوم اسلام به پهنه ایران زمین بنا به دلایل متعدد باعث شد دین زرتشت جایگاه خود را از دست بدهد . بدعت گذاران در تمام ادیان دیگر هم بوده اند ولی در ایران تسلط دینی با مغان یا رهبران دینی زرتشت بوده است .وسعت و گستردگی امپراتوری ایران ناگزیر میبایستی دیگر ادیان را نیز در بر میگرفت . واتفاقا یکی از دلایل و ضعف شاهنشاهی کبیر ایران وجود مسیحیت و عامل نفوذ بودن آنها در سرحدات مرز غربی ایران میباشد که روم از آن بهره میبرد. و شاهان ایران از این امر بخوبی آگاه بودند ودر تعللها و دوران ضعف از همین راه ضربه میخوردند . در پایان مجددا متذکر میشوم که مسیحیان در ایران در دوران باستان نیز اقلیتی بیش نبوده اند .
Dear Hosein Ahmadi
As aforementioned, the Persian Church was established in the 1st century AD. However, as I have written in my 'Ecclesiastical History of the Aethiopian/Early Church', which remains unpublished, which is to say: due to the 'Historia Ecclessiastica' of Eusebius, considered the first the Church historian proper, he nonetheless, omitted in essense, the early Church history of Aethiopia, Persia, and India for example. This as he mainly spoke only about the Church in the Roman Empire, thus little is known generally about these Churches from ordinary scholarship, especially outside of these regions.
Sebastian Brock, in relation to the Persian Church, states the same saying "Eusebius passes over the history of the Church to the east of the Roman Empire in almost total silence” (“The Church of the East in the Sasanian Empire up to the Sixth Century and its Absence from the Councils in the Roman Empire,” in Syriac Dialogue: First Non-Official Consultation on Dialogue within the Syrian Tradition, with focus on the Theology of the Church of the East (Vienna: Pro Oriente, 1996): 70.).
There are many articles and books one can however read on Persian Christianity in the context that you has commented upon, in relation to Persian Christianity, but you state that it was a Minority in Persia.
I agree with many of your points in your last coresspondance, in relation to Zoroastrianism. I would add to your statement of "the invasion of Islam into Persia territory caused Zoroastrianism to loose its position for many reasons", is a statement also applied to Persian Christianity, and not only of Persia, and Persian Christianity, but it was the same in Aegypt, for Coptic Christianity when Islam invaded Aegypt approx 635 AD.
An interesting article on the Persian Christianity from the 4th century, is:
“The Universality of the Church of the East:: How Persian was Persian Christianity?” (in 'Journal of the Assyrian Accademic Society', 1996), with the following citation from its 'Abstract':
"Persian Christianity was perhaps the first great non-Roman form of Christianity. The “Church of the East” was ecclesiastically “Persian” in that it was, with minor exceptions, the officially recognized Church of the Sasanian empire. The Church was politically “Persian” due to the role of Sasanian kings in the eleven Synods from 410 to 775 C.E. The Church was geographically “Persian” in that it was coextensive with, but not limited to the orbit of the Sasanian empire. The Church of the East was only secondarily “Persian” in terms of ethnicity. Yet the presence of ethnic Persians vividly illustrates why the Church of the East became the world’s most successful missionary church until modern times."
By the way, this latter article is available in full at Research Gate:
Article The Universality of the Church of the East: How Persian was ...
We need more Persian (Iranian) scholars to research on the history of the Persian Church in the first and second centuries (as well as thereafter), from indiginous sources. I have cited some Eastern writers in my aforementioned article, but more research is certainly needed in all its facets.
In the 1st century, one of the Persian (& Babylonian) Emperor's sons was an Archdeacon, later he left for Europe and became a Bishop and Martyr. So although later kings did not always show favour to the Persian Church, as in the case with the early Roman Church, in the 1st century the Emperor of Persia and Royal house were favourable to Christianity, albeit not all regional kings, or a number of the later Emperors.
Most Sincerely
Yes, Arab history before Islam is an integral part of ancient history, and integrating it involves recognizing its regional interactions, cultural developments, and its role within the larger ancient Near Eastern context. Such integration enriches our understanding of the interconnectedness of ancient civilizations and the unique pathways of Arab societies.
The history of Arabs before Islam, often referred to as the Jahiliyyah ("Age of Ignorance"), covers a diverse region with various tribes, cultures, and social structures. This period spans roughly from early antiquity until the 7th century CE, when Islam emerged.
Arabia was a crossroads of trade and cultural exchange, situated between Africa, Asia, and the Levant. Its inhabitants included Bedouin nomads, settled agricultural communities in the oases, and trading cities like Mecca and Medina.
While Arabs were often on the periphery of great ancient civilizations (Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, Byzantium), they had interactions through trade, warfare, and cultural exchanges. Some Arab groups, such as the Nabateans and Lihyanites, played significant roles in regional history.
Arab history prior to Islam can be seen as part of the broader Near Eastern and African historical processes. Their development was distinct in many aspects—social organization, language, and religion—but also interconnected with neighboring civilizations.
The rise of Islam marks a significant turning point, but the pre-Islamic period provides crucial background for understanding the cultural and social landscape into which Islam emerged.
Hope, this clarifies some points of your query Raed Rahim Khuder
Best: stephen
Yes, it is possible to integrate the history of the Arabs before Islam with the stage of ancient history. Pre-Islamic Arab societies had their own political, economic, and cultural systems that existed contemporaneously with other ancient civilizations. While the scarcity of written sources and the dominance of Islamic historiography may complicate this integration, a critical and archaeological approach shows that pre-Islamic Arabia deserves recognition as part of the broader ancient historical narrative.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science
- International History and Politics
- Globalization