Talk:Tariq ibn Ziyad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:


[edit] Comment by Aziri

the pure history does not have concerning the arabic speesh of Tariq ibn-Ziyad, as tarik ibn ziyad have burned no ships. because its army could not understand arabic, because they were berber, the Arabs have crossed with moussa ibn nusayr in 712 to Spain, therefore why do you thinks that a berber will speak a arabic with army of berber-speaking in the time of the war.i will improve it later.Aziri 13:56, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The european couldn't comprehend that an army of 12,000 can defeat an army of the 100,000 warriors, so they invented this story in order to underestimate the victory of muslims in Andalusia.
Kindly reveiw the reasons below and hopefully to mention the both side of story on the article as I believe that this is a free encyclopedia, I didn't delete any part of the european version of the story, please retain our side of story.

There is no mentioning of this accident of burning the ships in Muslim books, the only mentioning of this claimed accident is in European books.

Number of reasons that Tariq ibn Ziyad couldn't burn the ships:
1- Not all of the ships were Muslims owned (the leader of port septe owned ships which sailed with Muslims in exchange of lands in Andalusia).
2- The consequences of burning the ships should be thanked or punished by Calipha. (also no books mentioned that Calipha either thanked or punished Tariq).
3- It is forbidden to destroy public property in Islam (he could simply send the ships away home)
4- Musa ibn Nusair sent enforcements to Tariq ibn Zyad (how could he sent these enforcement while the ships were burnt).
The dilemma of burning the ships stayed in dispute between Muslims and the west.

no leader in his right sense would cut off his back lines with the capital city or the nearest stronghold in Africa which could send him reinforcements when he needs it. So that makes us conclude that this event is fake story.

Um, you know it doesn't say or even imply in the article that he was speaking in Arabic, Berber, Russian, Chinese, or anything? - Mustafaa 05:36, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

While no implications were made, it is curious that this is much the same story as attached to Ferdinand Cortez upon landing in South America. It would be nice to have a source on this.

I have linked a source. DigiBullet 20:35, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

i have never seen that someone knows the amazighs or berberes beter than themselves i am berbere and amazigh and i speak arabic can you just explain this to me and 90% of the berbers speak arabic as you said it is written in the european story do you speak arabic to say that it is not written in the arabic book finally i have never seen a man that he knows arabic better than the arabic themselves and their book.you know our story better than us.i think you should go to study more and more.by the way do you know that there is someone who is called translater to translate from arabic to berbere.

[edit] Requested move

The right arabic pronunciation of the name is Tarik bin Ziyad, rather than Tarik ibn Ziyad.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Zozo2kx (talkcontribs) 18:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

This is English Wikipedia, so we should not take in consideration the pronunciation in other languages when deciding the names of the articles. That being said, we must consider that the spelling "Tarik ibn Ziyad" is the standard one in English, so to speak; it has been adopted broadly in English usage, so it should not be changed. And if you compare with other Wikipedias in Western languages, they all use the form "ibn". Rsazevedo msg 18:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
  • The Classical Arabic word for "son" was bnu (where the -u is a Classical Arabic case ending), made pronounceable by prefixing an i- if the previous word did not end in a vowel. Modern colloquial Arabic dialects (which have dropped the case endings) often intrude an i and make it into bin. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
    • E.g. for "Zayd the son of Muħammad", Classical Arabic Zaydu bnu Muħammadin became modern Arabic Zayd ibn/bin Muħammad; compare Classical Arabic Zaydun ibnu Muħammadin = "Zayd is the son of Muħammad". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:49, 23 May 2008 (UTC)