[HN Gopher] Stealing from the Saracens
___________________________________________________________________
Stealing from the Saracens
Author : teleforce
Score : 10 points
Date : 2023-08-11 02:53 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.hurstpublishers.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.hurstpublishers.com)
| [deleted]
| the_lego wrote:
| > Against a backdrop of Islamophobia, Europeans are increasingly
| airbrushing from history their cultural debt to the Muslim world.
|
| It is all so tiresome. A discussion of Arabic influences in
| European culture would certainly be interesting. Too bad she
| tries to frame the history of Muslim colonization of Europe [0-4]
| and kidnapping of its people into slavery [5,6] as something
| where Europeans are the villains, and that what little benefit
| they managed to extract (or _steal_ , as she put it) from these
| hostile interactions _indebted_ them to their colonial masters.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople
|
| [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Vienna_(1529)
|
| [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna
|
| [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbary_slave_trade
|
| [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme
| pipes wrote:
| Agree. What's actually been airbrushed from history is the
| extent of the islamic slave trade. It was a serious threat to
| coastal populations of western Europe. Western governments were
| paying protection money to islamic governments to prevent
| raids. It wasnt just piracy, it was state sanctioned. So much
| so there was a permanent slavers base established on an island
| off England's coast:
|
| https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Barba...
|
| There was also a religious element that is conviently ignored,
| Islam did not allow enslaving of Muslims, but enslaving anyone
| else was fine. Hence Christian countries were targeted.
| the-printer wrote:
| I suppose that the reason that it's spoken about less is
| because there isn't as much as an incentive to do so outside
| of discussions such as this, especially when compared to the
| Trans-Atlantic slave trade for example.
|
| The Western world, in particular the United States, bears the
| burden of their relationship with slavery being more well-
| documented and its effects are paid more attention to than
| other parts of the world. This is likely a consequence of
| their predominance. There may just not be much for most
| people to talk about with regards to the effects that the
| slave trade in historically Islamic countries had on England
| because they _traded slaves too_. Even if the Trans-Atlantic
| method didn 't involve piracy (it appears that "Adam Smith's
| invisible hand" was more effective), the modern view of
| slavery for most is that all forms of it are terrible. Not
| only that, but at a glance, the Western world has virtually
| shorn itself of its history as an enslaved people, save a few
| beautiful buildings left in their formally subjugated
| territories according to _Stealing from the Saracens_ .
|
| Anyhow, slavery as a human institution is something that just
| about every society has both experienced and facilitated. The
| institution itself is more broadly associated with the West
| as _slavers_ rather than the enslaved and most people are
| likely unaware or are indifferent to their history as the
| latter due to how well-know their involvement is as the
| former.
|
| On second thought, maybe the book from the article is worth a
| read after all. Authors usually have no control over press
| releases on their book. She deserves a fair shake.
| the-printer wrote:
| You know, I don't share your antipathy toward the Islamic
| conquests of Europe in the least, but your response indicates
| to me that the angle taken by the author (which reeks of the
| kind of cultural self-flagellation that is en vogue these days)
| could do less to "challenge Islamophobia" as the press release
| says, than it can to embolden it _or_ at least disturb people
| who would have otherwise benefited from the history without
| being force-fed a narrative that could be expressed differently
| (I'm not accusing you of Islamophobia, by the way).
|
| My knee-jerk impression is that this book is using Islamic
| history as a pawn in today's "culture wars". It will enlighten
| few, and serve as material for the in-group who is most likely
| to purchase it to pontificate over at cocktail parties.
| pipes wrote:
| Can someone explain why the parent post has been flagged?
| pvg wrote:
| Yes, it's mentioned in the site guidelines:
|
| _Please don 't pick the most provocative thing in an
| article or post to complain about in the thread. Find
| something interesting to respond to instead._
|
| The comment picks a word out, then claims the book is
| 'framed as' that (it's not) and then pirouettes to exactly
| the sort of culture flamewar rehearsed talking point it
| wrongly accuses the book of engaging in, complete with the
| URL barrage such comments often include. Absolutely none of
| it has anything to do with Islamic architecture's influence
| in Europe - the topic of the book. As a first comment, it
| successfully kills any chance we'd get an interesting
| thread.
|
| The people who flagged it were right and the people who
| vouched for it were mistaken.
| the_lego wrote:
| > The comment picks a word out
|
| The _title_ is "Stealing from the Saracens".
|
| But in principle you are right. However, coming from a
| country that was directly in the path of Ottoman
| invasions, I have only so much patience for nearly every
| single historical article not only omitting Islamic
| colonization, but implying the reverse happened. If it
| was about more recent history, with the many US/Western
| led wars in the Middle East, the article would have had a
| valid point and I would have kept my mouth shut. But it
| wasn't, and the topic is already mostly erased from the
| collective consciousness.
|
| Should I have allowed the lie to proliferate, for the
| sake of the interesting discussion that might come about?
|
| > the URL barrage such comments often include
|
| Go with the narrative, and your words get accepted
| unquestioningly. Go against it, and you have to prove
| every syllable with "trustworthy" sources.
| pvg wrote:
| Again, none of this has anything to do with what the book
| is about. You picked a word or two and went on a tangent
| completely unrelated to the topic at hand.
|
| _However, coming from a country that was directly in the
| path of Ottoman invasions_
|
| Well, I come from a country that was part of the Ottoman
| empire for half a millennium. I don't feel it gives me
| license to poop in every forum I participate in.
|
| _Should I have allowed the lie to proliferate, for the
| sake of the interesting discussion that might come
| about?_
|
| You can't make up umbrage to derail discussions into your
| personal hobbyhorse discussions, at least not here or the
| place gets worse. It's one of the basic conventions of
| the site.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| Do you think predominantly Muslim ethnicities such as
| Bosnians or Albanians or Lipka/Crimean Tatars have a
| place in Europe then?
| the_lego wrote:
| What does that have to do with allowing casual lies about
| history to go unchallenged? Let's say they do have a
| place - does that mean we have to whitewash the history
| of Muslim conquest? In other cases of descendants of
| invasions, they're made to call themselves 'settlers' and
| give land acknowledgments. The least we can do here is
| not tell lies.
| [deleted]
| the_lego wrote:
| > your antipathy toward the Islamic conquests of Europe
|
| While I'm certainly not a fan of them, I'm not particularly
| outraged about them either. Wars of naked conquest were
| simply the way back then, and the Islamic world was not
| _exceptionally_ brutal compared to others, including Europe.
|
| My antipathy is towards those that seek to erase or twist
| this history. I realize the main point is architectural
| influences, but that only makes the lie more insidious - a
| casual statement most won't pay much attention to, and simply
| assume it accurate, like the presence of kilts in Braveheart.
| [deleted]
| paganel wrote:
| > and kidnapping of its people into slavery
|
| Genoa and Venice are still highly praised in the Western world
| even though they did the same thing, I haven't heard any
| tourist complaining that the Basilica San Marco is basically
| built on pillage and rape [1204].
|
| > On September 19, 1363, a ten-year-old Tatar boy named Jaqmaq
| was sold as a slave in the Black Sea port of Tana. His first
| owner had probably been a Christian, as he had already been
| baptized with the name Antonio. His second owner was a local
| Muslim named Aqbugha, the son of Shams al-Din. Aqbugha sold
| Jaqmaq/Antonio to his third owner, Niccolo Baxeio of the parish
| of St. Patermanus in Venice, for 400 aspers. Niccolo also
| bought a fifteen-year-old Tatar girl from Aqbugha and a twelve-
| year-old Tatar boy from another local man.
|
| [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv16t6ckk
|
| [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sack_of_Constantinople
| GloomyBoots wrote:
| You're talking about a drop of water in an ocean. The Islamic
| slave trade is the most massive and brutal such enterprise
| that has ever existed. And the Crusades were a direct
| response to Islamic invasions of Europe.
|
| Islamic culture is definitely highly influential on Europe
| and in turn was highly influenced by European culture, and
| that _kinship_ is worth acknowledging unlike this whiny
| _confrontational_ Islamophobia narrative which holds no water
| when you actually look into the historical context. But this
| whole self-flagellation thing never been about actual mutual
| appreciation of different cultures.
| paganel wrote:
| > And the Crusades were a direct response to Islamic
| invasions of Europe.
|
| In 1204 there was no Islamic invasion in these parts of
| Eastern Europe which the Westerners sacked and pilfered at
| will.
|
| > But this whole self-flagellation thing never been about
| actual mutual appreciation of different cultures.
|
| All I see it's an inferiority complex (on the Westerners'
| part) that is oftentimes transformed into some sort of
| cultural colonialism, there's no self-flagelation in saying
| that, yes, for hundreds of years the West was culturally
| inferior to the Islamic civilisation (and to civilisations
| located further East more generally speaking). Fernand
| Braudel's works are a good introduction into that subject.
| mustafa_pasi wrote:
| The point she is making is nonetheless correct. Nobody wants to
| associate themselves with Arabic/Muslim identities in today's
| Europe (except for those who have no choice), because of the
| many negative connotations.
|
| I don't know exactly where it all went wrong, but in the post-
| WWII period Europe decided they were going to import millions
| of Muslims, some Turkish, some Arabic, a few even Iranian, and
| then somehow turned them into the new enemy.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-08-13 23:02 UTC)