Talk:Muslim conquest of the Maghreb

Untitled

The military history is all very well, but it would be useful to have other material, eg on the progress of Islam among the population. 88.111.232.130 14:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Renaming

I renamed the article for two reasons:

• It talks about the Magrheb islamisation (Not the all North Africa - including Egypt)
• The islamisation lasted more than the Umayyads in the Maghreb so the word islamisation is more appropriate

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Muslim conquest of the Maghreb. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070202083455/http://www.bethel.edu/~letnie/AfricanChristianity/WesternNorthAfricaHomepage.html to http://www.bethel.edu/~letnie/AfricanChristianity/WesternNorthAfricaHomepage.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050721060321/http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/g/gibbon/edward/g43d/chapter51.html to http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/g/gibbon/edward/g43d/chapter51.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Resistance

Although the area was under control of the caliphate, there were still some sections of the population that would resist the spread of Islam. The Berber people were thought of as inferior and made to convert to Islam and join the Arab army, receiving less pay than an Arab would have. This led to much dissatisfaction and ultimately the death of Mahgreb's Arab governor, Yazid ibn Abi at the hands of one of his bodyguards after ordering them to tattoo his name on their arms to signal his ownership. Another rebellion was prompted by the enslavement of the Berbers. This occurred in southern Morocco, in 739 lasting through to 740. However, this rebellion would be suppressed by an Arab expedition, which seized both prisoners and gold in the process.

One of the unifying forces of these rebellions were the teachings of Arab Kharijite missionaries who had worked as merchants. They were able to convert some sections to their way of thinking and this provided a "unifying discipline and revolutionary zeal that powered the Berber rebellion of 739"

All of this is already covered in the Great Berber Revolt article, in quite some detail. Links should be made to it. Walrasiad (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

May 2019

Regarding this edit:

I removed the section because a) it is irrelevant to the primary topic, which is about the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb (643-709), and b) it's mentioned in other articles such as Christianity in Africa and Catholic Church in Africa. Should the impact the conquest had on Christianity be mentioned, then properly sourced content linking the two subjects could go in the aftermath section. M.Bitton (talk) 00:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

I have no problem since you didn't pick and choose anything to retain. I had a similar thought as this article will stray its topic if we talk about Christianity in any manner. But please do not try to remove Christianity existing after Arab conquests under excuse of "irrelevant" if any impact is mentioned like you do on other articles. IRGCfan (talk) 00:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Opening paragraph

Historyoftheworldchris (talk) 05:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

I believe that the opening paragraph should be reworded as it refers to the conquest concluding in 709, but suggests that it concluded under the command of Caliph Muʿāwiya ibn Abī Sufyān who died in 680.

Is the word "jihad" ever used to label this?

When scholars discuss the Muslim conquest of the Maghreb, is the word "jihad" used by some"? Pete unseth (talk) 17:57, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Overuse of Gibbon, other available references

There is no reason for this article to be repeatedly quoting Gibbon as it does; he is quoted no less than 9 times, mostly without accompanying citations (which in itself makes it legitimate to simply remove these). His text may be public domain, but an 18th century writer is obviously not a high-quality source to represent current scholarly views of this history when there are plenty of recent and more specialized works on a subject that also happens to have a difficult historiography. Some useful examples include Hugh N. Kennedy's The Great Arab Conquests (chapter 6) and Fenwick's Early Islamic North Africa, as well as more briefly Hoyland's In God's Path (see especially p.142-146) and Abun-Nasr's A History of the Maghrib in the Islamic Period (mostly pp.28-32), and so on. R Prazeres (talk) 03:20, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

More generally, an 18th-century write-up of historical events is a terrible framework for a page. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Launched men in a catapult?

Supposedly Khalid ibn al Walid launched men to the top of a wall in Cyrene (Barqa) using a catapult and cotton sacks. This claim is to be believed? I think it's one to be investigated at the very least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1a30:ef0:4e87:8355:cdb7:9056 (talk) 22:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Indeed, I just looked and that all or most of that section is not based on reliable sources, so I imagine it may be reporting legendary material rather than information offered by historians. It obviously should be rewritten with better sources. R Prazeres (talk) 22:34, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Pipes quote

@48f, You've been around long enough I think to know when you are reverted, follow WP:BRD and explain yourself on the talk page and seek consensus. While you're at it, read WP:UNDUE and MOS:QUOTE. You've provided no reason why there should be a lengthy quote from one specific author which is already paraphrased in the article, which is clearly redundant and excessivce. The onus is on you to explain why, not on other editors. I'm restoring the pre-edit war version. Don't repeat your edit until you've gained some consensus. R Prazeres (talk) 17:54, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

PS: You also haven't even provided a citation for this quote ([1]). R Prazeres (talk) 17:59, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

WOW....now even offenses.....I have read that you like to fight continuously...ADIEU.--48f (talk) 18:13, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Copy-pasting the same sarcastic non-response ([2], [3]) does not address the issue. Please explain yourself properly. R Prazeres (talk) 18:18, 11 September 2024 (UTC)