Talk:Almoravid dynasty
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Morocco, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Morocco on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Spain which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the history, languages, and cultures of Spain. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details. |
 |
Almoravid dynasty is part of WikiProject Portugal, a project to improve all Portugal-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Portugal-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
|
Portugal To-do:
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of the Africa WikiProject, a collaborative effort to build a more detailed guide on Wikipedia's coverage of the continent of Africa. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. |
Contents |
[edit] Name
Category:History of the Maghreb okke . i'm ready to read how you know that it is correct.Aziri 13:45, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Okay, please enlighten me...Maghreb is the name commonly used for the northwestern part of Africa, roughly comprising Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia...and the Almoravids were a dynasty from what is today Morocco. So unless I am totally missing the point here, how can Almoravid history not be a part of Maghreb history? -- Ferkelparade 13:52, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
mostly,we learen what everybody say if that is frenquenly saied. i know that almoraviedes were in north africa before the arabic influence in morokko. if you will know that there was no Maghreb untill the eightindth century . but Barbary. tell me why ? or do you think that the history must honoure the politic names even if it is new names to say that ? the name Maghreb is born with the arabic ideology and it was not in north africa untill the eightendth century . therefor we can not say the history of the Maghreb . but the history of Lybie. and that was the name.Aziri 14:04, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't quite see the point...to the best of my knowledge, Maghreb in everyday language is generally used as a geographical term without any political implications, the term meaning roughly "West". So regardless of when the term came into use, everything that happened in the region that is today called "Maghreb" is a part of that region's history...for comparison, in antiquity, the term "Europa" was used by the Greeks to describe their own world (Modern-day Greece and parts of Italy) as opposed to "Asia" (Persian territory in modern-day Turkey). Over the centuries, the meanings of these (purely geographical) terms have expanded to include the whole continents we call Europe and Asia today, and of course early Chinese history is a part of Asian history, as well as early Germanic history is a part of European history, even though an ancient Greek would probably have laughed about that usage of the words. -- Ferkelparade 14:18, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
i think that maghreb is realy not accepted , you can see this scholars not accepte it.[1] . Maghreb is an arabic word and the berber don't use the arabic words. like i saied, this name is born with the arab ideology. and it is important with mustafaa to wikipedia . and that the reason why i don't see Lybie or North afrika or berber . but arabic words. (the arab are not north africans , they were just in the arab's peninsula .Aziri 14:25, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry Aziri, I don't speak Arabic , so your link is not really helpful for me...is there any evidence that Maghreb is such a politically loaded term in common English usage? After all, our own entry at Maghreb also defines the term as purely geographical... -- Ferkelparade 14:37, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
you don't have to feel sorry. i did that just to see that is not accepted. the important reason is : Maghrib is the name of the arab countries wehereas the history of north africa more than the arab countries like ; the canary island and the not-arabised africans countries. example is Mali, senegal ,niger bourkinafasou ..., it is not very nice to say the "the history of maghrib" because the arab want to delite the history of the berber . Aziri 14:47, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC) and further you can use teh name Maghrib , but you can not say : the history of the Maghrib as the history of the berber. if anybody want to write about the history of the Maghrib , it must to be older than the history of Barbary. after the barbary cames the Maghrib.Aziri 14:54, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Maghrib is the name of the arab countries
- That's exactly the point I'm wondering about; according to all references i could find, the English term Maghreb refers not to the modern Arabic countries but to the geographical region where these countries are located (see my Europe example above). Ah well, maybe we're just splitting hairs here; does anybody else have an opinion? -- Ferkelparade 15:01, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Aziri is incorrect, and is engaged in a politically motivated crusade against the use of Arabic terms in North Africa. "Maghreb" is used by the earliest Arabic-speaking geographers - from the seventh century onwards, judging by the Hadith - and is a geographical term, not a political one. - Mustafaa 17:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
that name is at leats disputed . and it has never been. there is no maghreb in the reality. and it mean never the the area of the bereber. Maghreb mean just the five arab counties. so, where are the guanches ,the siwas , the Malians ....?. further is the name of the berber area is barbary and Lybie .Aziri 11:25, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Hmm, despite your vigorous claims that Maghreb means the modern Arabic countries, you haven't provided a single shred of evidence that this is so...I just dug around for some references:
- The American Heritage Dictionary defines Maghreb as "a region of northwest Africa comprising the coastlands and the Atlas Mountains of Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia"
- The Encyclopedia Britannica Article starts with "region of North Africa bordering the Mediterranean Sea". Britannica also has an Article on "Maghreb under the Almoravids".
So...can we agree that the term Maghreb, in common English usage, in fact describes the geographical region and nothing more, or is there any evidence to the contrary? -- Ferkelparade 11:43, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)
buhhh..is maghrib a english word or an arabic word , to late read that, you did say that you don't understand arabic. if you want to learn you to look more than you belive. firstly is this Maghrib disputed. and you did seen the source. maghreb : wat mean it ? maghreb like mustafaa saied mean the west. west of what? west of midden easte . this want say it's a party of midden oosten and it get its definition from the arab angles. is this a history of north africa? maghrib as north africa? how can this ? north afrika exepts egypt is not maghreb. why ? siwa is not egypt in the history or geografy but political. when is this maghreb born? to answer this question you have to read more about the countries of maghreb. (do it with succes). the arab countries were untill the eighttendth secury a part of the turkian imperium. and maghreb was not arab. (for more information see the histry of the berber countries ) . now we kan speak about the maghrib countries. the maghrib countries were not independent untill the second half of the twintist secury . morocco was a coloned by spain a frensh and algeria by the france... untill now is maghrib not arab. there are many cities wiche are not arab , but spanisch , like as : ceuta and melilla. now we will sppeak about the the meaning of maghreb in the political angles : maghreb are the countries of the maghreb arabic (that is political , and even is dead born ) , so this meaning want to say that siwa not maghreb , and the canary island is not maghreb and the other countries of the berber are not maghreb. so where is the factuality of this one (maghrib). if it even political dead how can it be an historian person . further i have some notes about your answer. why do you tell me the meaning of maghreb in english? do you think that maghreb an english word? and did you say that i don't have proofs ? do you think it is diffecultb to say it ? and where are your source ? finly tell me how did you answer my question ? wasn't it more helpfull to give an answer in place to say that i don't have source? do it !Aziri 12:46, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I'm getting a bit tired of this discussion, but let me restate my position: Nobody is denying that Maghreb is an Arabic word, but that doesn't change the fact that the word, in common English usage, is used to describe the geographic region of Northwestern Africa. I have already listed some sources for this, whereas you haven't provided any source at all to show where, how and by whom this common usage is disuted. What you seem to be attacking is the Arab Maghreb Union which is a sort of political entity using the name Maghreb, but that's something entirely different... -- Ferkelparade 12:14, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
i'm aslo tired of some answers : such as "bourguiba" and "couscous" ; therefor this dicussion is not needed.Aziri 11:42, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Subheads needed
This article could probably use some sub-dividing.
Dvyost 19:38, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Article title - "Almoravides"?
So why is this article titled "Almoravides" instead of "Almoravid", or even "Almoravids"? Why not follow the examples of Umayyad and Almohad? What's the reasoning here? --Skoosh 02:31, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Translation of "Amir"
The commonly used modern translation of Amir is "Commander," not "Prince." Yusuf's title should more appropriately be rendered as "Commander of the Muslims."
[edit] Almoravides are not Morroco
Almoravides are a different country ,with are different dinasty .But if someone is racist ,can write Almoravid is the four dynasty of Morroco -User:Bokpasa (Moi 12:39, 5 March 2006 (UTC)).
[edit] Origens Almoravides
There has been a lot of research into the origens of the Mourabiteen in the last 25 years. The main points of this article are not up to date. Encyclopedia Britannica from the fifies/or sixties is not a good soure.S710 14:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Source?
"Three years afterwards, under Yusef's son and successor, Ali ibn Yusuf, Madrid, Lisbon and Porto were added, and Spain was again invaded in 1119 and 1121, but the tide had turned; the French having assisted the Aragonese to recover Zaragoza."
I know that Almoravids took Lisbon, but I don't sure in the cases of Porto and Madrid, this is the first notice to me about a suppose almiravid conquest of both cities. Porto is a very northern city in Portugal, if it was taken all the country may be fall under muslim rule. Madrid (only a town in the Middle Ages) is north of Toledo, the de facto capital of the Crown of Castile; Toledo never fell to Muslim hands since the Castilian conquest of 1085. Why the almoravids could conquest Madrid with the strongest fortress of Toledo in their way?--Menah the Great 23:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
Al moravid or Al morabitoon in arabic language means the faithful muslims who committed theirselves for Jihad against the eneimes of Islam . unsigned comment by 62.139.206.139
- Do you have any source for that? -- Szvest Ω Wiki Me Up ® 12:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
