 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Feb 2008 : 22:37:28
|
<Topic split from http://www.gambia.dk/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3190 by Admin>
SANTANFARA, SOMETHING IS ALIEN WHEN IT IS NOT INDIGENIOUS TO THE LOCAL 'POPULUS'. I WILL DEAL WITH THE ISSUES YOU'VE RAISED POINT BY POINT. BUT FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ONE POINT: WHEN I TALK ABOUT PRAISE SINGING, I WAS NOT REFERRING TO TYON SECKA OR BABA MAAL. THESE TWO ARE PROFESSIONAL ARTIST JUST LIKE ANY PROFESSIONAL ARTIST AROUND THE WORLD. TRUE, THEY DO PERFORM PRAISE SINGING, BUT THEY ARE NOT THE TYPE OF PRAISE SINGING AM TALKING ABOUT. I AM TALKING ABOUT TRADITIONAL GEWEELS OR JALIS. I EVEN CLEARIFIED MYSELF WHEN I MENTIONED THOSE WHO RECITE ANCIENT HISTORY, CULTURE AND FAMILY GENEALOGIES. FOR THE RECORD, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT RECITING GENEALOGY FOR TWO OR TREE GENERATIONS AS THESE ARTIST TEND TO DO I AM TALKING ABOUT THOSE WHO GO DEEP INTO THE FAMILY OF A PERSON. THAT SETTLED, I NOW MOVE ON TO THE OTHER ISSUES YOU'VE RAISED.
1.YES! ANCIENT AFRICANS DID BELIEF IN GOD, BUT THEIR GOD WAS NOT ALLAH. BESIDES THEY HAVE DIFFERENT GODS AS WAS COMMON THROUGH OUT AFRICA. THEY WERE ANIMISTS AND BELIEVED IN ANCESTOR WORSHIP.
2. YOU SEEM TO BE ASSUMING THAT, AFRICAN HISTORY STARTED WITH ISLAM. THIS IS WRONG AND DANGEROUS. CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT, HUMANITY EVOLVE OUT OF AFRICA [A SCIENTIFIC FACT]AND THE PROPHET MOHAMMAD WAS BORN IN 570 AD AND DIED AROUND 630 AD, I WILL LET YOU DO THE MATHS.
3. THE ALMORAVIDS FORCED ISLAM TO THE AFRICANS. THIS WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR REASONS WHY THE ANCIENT GHANIAN EMPIRE FELL TO ITS KNEES IN 1087. THE ALMORAVIDS DID NOT ONLY FORCED IT TO THE AFRICANS BUT TO SPAIN AS WELL - HENCE THE ADVENT OF ISLAM IN THAT COUNTRY. THIS IS DOCUMENTED AND I SUGGEST YOU READ THE WRITINGS OF CHAMPONGNOU, CADA MOSTO, IBN BATUTA, AL-UMARI, ETC.
AS A RESULT OF THAT FORCE CONVERSION, SOME CONVERTED TO ISLAM BUT MOST DIDN'T. TOTAL ISLAMISATION WOULD COME LATER IN THE MID 19TH CENTURY. I WILL ADDRESS THAT POINT LATER, BUT CONTINUING WITH WHAT I WAS SAYING, THOSE WHO CONVERTED DID NOT ABANDON THEIR ANCIENT BELIEFS. YOU MENTIONED MANSA MUSA AND THE EMPERIAL COURT OF MALI. EVEN IN THAT FAMILY, THE MAJORITY WERE NOT MUSLIMS. KON FATA [THE FATHER OF SUNJATA KEITA] WAS CERTAINLY NOT A MUSLIM. ALTHOUGH MANSA MUSA MADE THE PILGRIMAGE TO MECCA IN 1324, YOU SEEM TO FORGET THAT, MANSA MUSA WAS NOT THE FIRST EMPEROR OF MALI.
4. I NOW TURN TO 'TOTAL' CONVERSION TO ISLAM - THE MID 19TH CENTURY ISLAMIC PHENOMENON. THAT HAPPENED AS A BY-PRODUCT OF COLONISATION. THE AFRICAN ROYAL FAMILIES WERE CRUSHED BY THE EUROPEAN INVADERS. THAT CREATED ANARCHY. ALL SENSE OF ORDER AND FAMILIARITY WAS NOW IN JEOPARDY. AT THAT TIME, OUR ANCESTORS WHO HAVE STAYED TRUTHFUL TO THEIR ANCIENT GODS,GODDESSES AND RELIGION FELT THAT THEIR RELIGION DID NOT PROTECT THEM FROM EUROPEAN BRUTALITY - EXCEPT THE SEREERS WHO HANGED ON TO THEIR ANCIENT BELIEFS AND USED IT TO RE-INFORCE THEIR POWER, HENCE THE GENERAL BELIEF THAT THE SEREERS AND POSSIBILY THE JOLAS ARE THE INDIGENOUS AFRICANS WHOSE RELIGION HAS NOT BEEN TAINTED BY NEITHER CHRISTIANITY NOR ISLAM. THE OTHER TRIBES COULD NOT CONVERT TO CHRISTIANITY BECAUSE CHRISTIANITY WAS TOO CLOSE TO THE EUROPEANS. THAT LEFT ISLAM. AT THAT TIME, ISLAMIC JIHADIST SUCH AS TAFSIR ALHAJI OMAR TAAL AND HIS PROTEGE TAFSIR MAHABA JAHOU BAH [COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS MABA JAHOU BAH] PROMISED THE PEOPLE TO CONVERT IN ORDER TO FIGHT AGAINST THE EUROPEAN INVADERS. ISLAM WAS NOT JUST VIEWED AS A RELIGION BUT A FORM OF 'TOGETHERNESS' IN ORDER TO FIGHT THE INVADERS. I EMPHASISE THE WORD 'TOGETHERNESS' - IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH TOGEHERNESS, BUT A WAY OF THOSE ISLAMIC FANATICS ACHIEVING THEIR GOAL - 'CONVERSION AND POWER'. AFTER ALL, TAFSIR MAHABA TRIED AND INDEED SUCCEEDED TO THE THRONE OF SALOUM [A PEGAN SEREER KINGDOM]- THOUGH HE WAS UNABLE TO CONVERT THE SEREERS. HE WAS DEFEATED AND KILLED AT THE BATTLE OF SOMB IN 1867 BY KING OF SINE BUUR KUMBA NDOFFEN JOOF [THE SEREER AND GELWAR KING]. HIS SON SAIT MATTI BAH, TRIED TO REIGNITE HIS FATHER'S WISH BUT HE WAS DEFEATED BY ANOTHER SEREER KING BUUR GEDAL MBOOJ OF SALOUM, AND HE FLED TO ALBREDA [THE GAMBIA] WERE HE DIED. AFTER THE DEMISED OF THE JIHADIST AND THE FALL OF THE JOLOF ROYAL FAMILY IN 1900 [THE LAST WOLOF KINGDOM TO FAAL], MOST PEOPLE JOINED SHEICK AMADOU BAMBA [WHO DIED IN 1927] AND BECAME MUSLIMS. THIS IS THE ADVENT OF TOTAL ISLAMISATION OF SENEGAMBIA - SOME OF COURSE CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY BUT NEITHER CONVERTS ESPECIALLY THE MUSLIM CONVERTS ABANDONNED THEIR ANCIENT RELIGIOUS RITES EVEN TODAY. YES SANTANFARA, SOME OF MY ANCESTORS WERE INDEED MUSLIMS. IN FACT, MY GREAT GREAT GREAT GRANDMOTHER WAS THE AUNTY OF SAIT MATTI BAH [PATERNAL SISTER OF HIS MOTHER MAM MATTI NJIE]- SHE WAS A MUSLIM AND SO WAS HER FATHER AND FAMILY. SO YOU SEE SANTANFARA, I AM NOT ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO SPEAK WITHOUT KNOWING THE FACTS. PEACE.
|
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
Momodou
Denmark
11644 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2008 : 19:29:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by tamsier
... HIS SON SAIT MATTI BAH, TRIED TO REIGNITE HIS FATHER'S WISH BUT HE WAS DEFEATED BY ANOTHER SEREER KING BUUR GEDAL MBOOJ OF SALOUM, AND HE FLED TO ALBREDA [THE GAMBIA] WERE HE DIED...
Hi Tamsir, you knowledge of our history is very much appreciated and I hope you will share more with us whenever you have time.
I want to make a correction with regards to Saer (Sait) Mati Bah. He stayed his last days in Bakau where he died in 1897 and is burried at cape point inside Sunwing Hotel (now called Sunbeach Hotel). |
A clear conscience fears no accusation - proverb from Sierra Leone |
 |
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2008 : 21:26:41
|
| momodou, as an intelligencia of our history, i hold your opinion in high regard. your account of the date sait matti died, where he died and were he is buried is absolutely correct. my wording of were said matti died should have been more explainatory. when he was defeated by gedal mbooj, he indeed fled to albreda. bakau [in the gambia]was the last place he settled before his death. when i was giving my account of his death - which was merely condensed because his death was not the main point of my argument, it was merely to elaborate my point, i bracket the noun 'gambia' this was to show that he indeed died in the gambia. nevertheless i take you point, i should have given more information about his death. |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
Sibo
Denmark
231 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2008 : 11:15:59
|
| Great posting Tamsier, very interesting |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2008 : 11:46:53
|
tamsier. wow. you responded to a posting i made since march 2007 now! ok ,your historical account are full of holes.
firstly ,the moor did conquere spain and rule it for 8oo years. but if there intentions was to force convert and kill ,don't you think no one should have remain in spain who wasn't a moor?
secondly ,muslims rule india for over 600 years ,what is the pouplation of muslims as conpared to hindus? if indeed the inaccurate historical account written by christain writers to distort the image of islam was true ,shouldn't the fanatic muslims force islam on all indians and spanish? come on. you didn't know many wetern historian did a clear indept study of those incorrect accounts written by mainly missionary historians to give an oppossite account of what was actually the style of muslims rule in spain and other places they conquere.
the historain oleiray ,stated that ''the must fantastically historical account ever reppeated by western historians is the statements that fanatical muslims swept the through the world forcing islam at the point of a sword.'' this are all lies. battles were fough yes. just like the serere you claim rule over the fulas ,do you think that was by chids glove? don't be misinforming tamsier. yes ,africa did have some muslims who took arms to revolt again the rule of pagan kings, but that is very insignificant as compared to what the pagan rulers themself did before any muslim even thought of attacking the kings. remember the north african who invade the songahai empaire did that purposely for wealth seeking. that was the norm of the day. just like today countries can use democracy to invade other oil rich nations. that is human nature tamsier. it has nothing to do with religion. people use religion to misrepresent and to do selfish things. but read the bible ,read the quran see whether you will find any thing against the peace and stability of mandkind.
some sufi sheik like Omar futi ,foday kabba ,others ,started wars aginst against pagan rulers ,but there main reason was power. foday kabba even use to attack muslims settlements. this men use the name of islam to do what they wanted to do. the pagan kings of africa overwelmely actively took part in slavery. this practice was conducted by some othe earlier marabout leaders. which is against the islamic teachings. i suggest you read the book written by Professor Thomas Arnold on how islam was spread in the world. that professor went of his way to collect data in many parts of the world,his account is accepted by both muslims and non-muslims alike. the spreadibng of untruth about islam was a big business. so search for the serere history ,i have no problem with that but don't present inaccurate facts. islam is not an arab culture .some arab culture are imcompatable with islam ,like belly dancing ,smoking,and many more. even they the arabs have to adjust to the faith of islam. many ultra-african historians try to portray islam in a negative light because they thought ,it was islam that took away our traditions. that is not true. people came to believe in God as is preach in islam ,that is not unique to africa. no muslims army landed in malaysia or indonesia the larges muslims country on earth. they accept islam without any army or conquest. i will elaborate later.ishallah
|
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
Edited by - Santanfara on 20 Feb 2008 11:54:04 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2008 : 11:59:33
|
tamsier, i just show your response to a posting i made in march 2007. wow! i am beweldered. the historical accounts you gave about the moors conquest of spain is very incorrect. again the moor were not responsible for the fall of the ghana empire. the narration you gave were factually and correectly dispusted by many historians notably professor thomas arnold. who did an indept study of how islam was spread across the globe. and your account are typical of the chatolic writers who were overwelmed by the rapid spread of islam in many parts of the world. there historians did what was called misinterpretation of events just to misinform many western historians to give a bad image to islam and muslims. you may not be a cahtolic to believe in those inaccurate history. you can be an african who is angry with his fellow africans embrassing other culture's civilisation. that is understandable. what you fail to understand is that ,religion is not about culture or colore. it is about the message. tell me one region in the world that don't use to believe like we the africans? even european use to worship the sun and other images. but the worship of those images is seen as a way of getting to the untimate one God. the prophets of god came to distance mandkind from that style of worship .like other parts of the world some accept the words of the prophets and others did not. that is not unique to the jolas or manjakos or some serere. read the history of the world in terms of faith and religion you find that similar events took place every were. in south america people claim to catholics but they combine their native believes with christain believes.
the moors did conquere spain ,but if they wre after force conversation and violence don't you think in 800 years they should have been able to force convert every person in the iberain penusular? muslims rule india for over 600 years but what is the population of the muslims there? let us not read inaccurate history and spread the untruth. the historian oreiley ,stated that '' the must fantastically inaccurate history ever reppeated by wetsern historicains is the statement that fanatical muslims were forcing there faith of others at the point of the sword.'' this is the western response to islamic advancement. yet many student of history believe this lies. as for our traditions ,i am a strong advocate of that .any of our culture that is is line with islam, i support it. i do not take an arab culture over and above our senegambian culture. islam is not an arab culture. it is a universal religion that was preach across the world. islam reach malaysia and indonesia ,which muslim army went to those countries? the key method islam was spread in africa is trade. later run ,some rulers in north africa learnt of the riches in africa ,then they set-off for the gold and trade routes. there intentions was not primarily to convert people into islam.
many senegambians and other afrcan sufi scholars did started jihad wars. but if one anlayse carefully the real motives of the marabout leaders ,one will find a close link with the aspiration to rule. thus ,the likes of foday kabba attacking even muslim towns. the must famous one is sheik omar futi who was a tijaniya sufi scholars. he came back from his travel to start a war. the gadiriya brotherhood also have members who show the weaken powers of the soninke or pagan rulers and they took advantage of the power vacuum to take control. but in later the part the wetern colonialist were on hand to stop any muslim advancement ,thus the capturing of many leaders. among them almamy samouri. religion cannot be forced upon any one. the person will later go back to his/her old faith with the passge of time. the european did similar thing to the jews ,forcing them to convert ,but after some time ,the jews were secretly practicing their faith. many of them died but the remaing generation stick with their religion.the almoravid were blame for many things which are incorrect. tamsier. there are many versions of history. you trying to place the serere power base into history is not a problem. the historians you mention are not infallable to making incorrect statements.
we will continue later. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
Edited by - Santanfara on 20 Feb 2008 12:10:57 |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 13:57:54
|
Santanfar! get ready, because this will be a long one. i hope you are sitting comfortably. first of all i have been on business trips for almost a year hence the reason why i haven't been contributing lately. further, i was browsing through the old postings when i saw your venomous attack on a posting i made on 01/03/2007. i had no choice but to write back and defend myself. 'sometimes' it is not how long you take to do something as long as you do it. most importantly, i had to write back to correct the historical accounts you gave.
my motif for writing is purely academic and to exchange ideas based on historical evidence. i have no hidden agenda - religion or otherwise. an intelligent person like yourself, you should be able to ascertain that from all my postings. you on the other-hand, your primary motif is to give false account of islam. i can appreciate the fact that you are a devout muslim. there is no harm in defending your religion and i'm not just talking about islam here, but all religions. however,it is dangerous to bend the truth - you always get caught in the end. for the record, not that it is material, but it may be to you, i am the son of devout muslims. both my parents are devout muslims, both made the hajj to mecca on several occations and my father was well versed in the quran. i myself was brought up the in the islamic faith. furthermore, as i stated before, some of my forefathers, were devout muslims. in fact, on both my father and mother's line, i have 2 well known ancestors [whose name i will not give for obvious reasons] who were 'pioneers' of islam in the senegambia during their time. they were founder - members of the muslim elders which would latter became known as the committe of the the muslim elders. they made great contribution during the building of the 1st permanent mosque in banjul [then called bathurst] - not just financial contribution, but giving away part of their land for the building of the mosque [1854]. so please dont accuse me of coming from a 'kafir/yefarr' family. that all said, i now demolish your argument one by one.
you said and i quote - 'the moors did conquere spain and rule it for 800 years. but if there intentions was to force convert and kill, dont't you think no one should have remain in spain who wasn't a moor?'
i would like to tackle this issue because it is linked to your arguments about india, malaysia and indonesia. therefore, i would tackle it as a whole. 'the almoravids did not only force islam to africans but to spain as well - hence the advent of islam in that country'. this was what i said, and as you should be able to ascertain, the spain argument was to elaborate on how far the almoravids would go and indeed went in order to achieve their aim. since you made spain and other none african states an issue, i would like to introduce you to a word called 'jihad'. the word takes its origin from the old arabic word 'jihada' - which means struggle. but as a general rule, only someone who feels discriminated or an act of abomination is being committed against them should use the word struggle - in the sence of this context. someone who leaves his kingdom, go to another person's kingdom to cause havac does not earn the right to claim struggle. certainly not in my book perhaps in yours. therefore, the word jihad should be used with caution.
the almoravids in their lust for power [which by the way you agreed with me] and their lust to spread islam encountered varying degrees of resistence in their formidable history of rampage in europe, asia and africa. they first started their rampage in the 7th century against non muslims e.g. the zoroastrian persians and the byzantine christians. this is documented and a well acknowledged historical evident. the muslim wanted to destroy their enemies while the persians and byzantines only wanted to defeat and avert muslim invasion in order to continue their religion in peace. as you can see, the 'battle objectives' were very different and it was in that 'war strategy/objective' the muslims were able to gain the upper hand. the zoroastrian persians perished and disappeared from the face of the earth. the christians on the other hand responded differently. afrter 4oo years of savagery, the blood thirsty vampires commonly know as the almoravids overran the christian nations in the middle east. today, we call them syria, turkey, pastine and jordan. so you see santafara, even in the arab world, the muslims rampaged the lands of non muslims in order to accomplish their wish. in europe, they reigned in spain for 800 years [another christian nation] as you so rightly stated, 30 years in france and 8 years in italy. the christians feed-up with these savages, decided enough was enough and responded with even greater babarism coupled with their desire to liberate their holy land. the christian crusaders defeated the muslims with even greater savagery - they slaughtered them, barbecued them and ate them. that act of cannibalism is referred to in history as 'recycling the adversary'. i make it clear from the outset, i am no christian and will never ever be one. the christian religion just like islam has a lot to answer for.
you cited malaysia and indonesia. i can tell you right now, before islam these 2 countries were hindus and buddhists mixed with paganism -, as well as one culture until the 15th century. they did not view themselves as different countries. most of malaysia at that time used to be part of the kingdom of siam [modern day thailand]. therefore, it was common for these 2 countries to be ruled by one single dynasty e.g. sri vijaya, mataram and majapahit. these 2 countries did not adopt islam for the love of it. it was a matter of 'islam or die' - this is termed 'taqiya'. many in fact died. the buddhist monks were enialated - who choose death rather than conversion, but many of the civilians converted. this is well acknowledged in malaysian and indonesian history - your so called muslim countries. in fact, their first ruler who converted to islam was king parameswara. he did not accept islam out of the goodness of his little heart, he was a victim of circumstance - which would be used by the muslims to achieve their end goal. in 1402, malaysia, thailand and their neighbours were at war for independence and dominance. king parameswara [of modern day malaysia]was tricked by the arabs. they promised to give him military assistance against thailand if he marries a 'muslim damsel' and converts to islam. he refused the offer at first but as the war with thailand and majapahit went on, his situation was desperate. he agreed to the offer and the arabs gave him a princess of pasai. she was a mix breed - decendant from an arab and idonesia from a "nikah mu-tah" marriage. as a muslim, you should know what "nikah mu-tah" means. just in case you didn't, it is a temporary marriage permitted by the quran - and the arabs have used this for centuries - another one of their scheming strategy to accomplish their aim. pasai [originally called samudera-pasai] would later become known as samudera-darusalaam. it was a wealthy kingdom from the 13th to the 15th century. because of its wealth, it at attracted vampires [the arabs]whose obejectives were two fold: to conquere and to convert the locals by force - 'islam or die' - you should be familiar with that phrase. they also used the nikah mu-tah as permitted by the quran to breed with the local community. the offsprings of these mix marriages were brought up as muslims thereby creating a muslim community. women who refused marriage were raped and put to death. so please bear me your retoric and dont dishonour the memories of those great women. indeed the malaysians as we call them today resisted islam in the 15th century, but as a result of the 16th century heavy- savage jihads, they had no choice but to adopt islam. santafara, if you wish to admire the work of islamic fundamentalists like ahmet kamah, go ahead and be my guest. the man is so fanatical even the decent people of the muslim world thinks he is a joke. he does not earn the right to call himself an islamic historian. i dont know whether you have read his literature or not but you seem to share the same views. please dont misrepresent me, i am not saying you are fanatical, but i am commenting on your postings.
i now move on to africa and in particular ancient ghana and songhai. yes! the old pagan african kings did use force to put a stop on islamic funtamentalism. the sereer you speak of whom you seem to think i am trying to defend [god knows why]were one of the worst if not the worst. they were as brutal in some instances even worst than the muslims jihadist during their time. abdou bah [brother of tafsir mahaba jahou bah] accompanied his brother at the battle of somb in 1867 - against the sereer king kumba ndoffene joof. abdou was not only killed by the sereers but he was ripped to pieces in a babaric fashion after having been killed. as i said before, the sereers did indeed use their ancient religion to re-inforce their power. the mbooj and in particular the joof royal families well known for that. nevertheless, when they attacked, they directed their attack against the jihadists and not at the civilian muslims. the jihadists on the other hand did not merely attacked the pagan kings and their armies, but the civilian population as well - [one of the reasons why damel lat jor jobe - king of kajoor, wanted to crush islamic rebellion, before his conversion, he was later criticized for this by amadou bamba]. the muslims also raided villages and enslaved innocent people. before you jump on the band - wagon, i acknowledge and in deed accept that the african kings also enlaved people. however, you seem to be implying that the muslims were innocent - as if butter wouldn't melt. i tell you right now, they weren't. even tafsir alhaji omar taal kept slaves.
when kumba ndoffene joof gave an audience to tafsir alhaji omar taal, alhaji omar was so touched by the generousity of the king and the people of sine, that he personally ordered his protege - tafsir mahaba 'to leave the people of sine alone to their ancient pangools [spirit worship/animism]. if they want to convert, they will convert when they are ready'. tafsir mahaba was however in no mood for gentle persuation. he wanted conversion then and their and decided to enter the battle field against the king. that victory was one of the biggest deciding victory in the western sudan. even governor faidherb of france was shocked because he himself had tried to get rid of mahaba for years, but even he with the military might of france couldn't do it.
santafara, as i said before which you even agreed with me to an extend, power and conversion to islam were the 2 objectives of the muslims. they went hand in hand - it does not take a brain surgeon to work that out.
you said the almoravids did not cuase the destruction of the ancient ghanian empire, how ill informed you are. i draw your attention to the writings of al -bakri. for the record, he was a muslim geographer - chronologist. in his book: kitab fi masalik wal mamalik [the book of roads and kingdoms], he described ancient ghana of 1068 as 'highly advance, economically, politically and legally'. in the 11th century, tarsina, a lam tuna leader made the hajj to mecca. on his return, he proclaimed jihad on the pegan sereers of senegal. he was butchered to death by the pagans in 1023. yahya, his successor also made the pilgrimate and brought back with him a lunatic called abdallah bin yasin. this lunatic began to preach islam. when yahya died, the lunatic felt unsafe . he settled in a ribat [monastery] and trained preachers for spreading islam among the berbers. now having planned his strategy to the max, he launched jihad against african royal families and in particular againt the ghanian royal family. as i said before, jihad through out history had 2 main objectives - 'power and conversion'. in this case, the power these maniacs wanted was the awdaghost post. for your information, ghana of that time was not the ghana we know today, it was extremely wealthy and powerful. the empire was referred to as wagadou. the name 'ghana' was the title of the king and every new king would have that title - 'ghana' - which preceeded his name. ghana means emperor/king - from the wagadou bloodline. in fact, the mother of king of kajoor - damel amari ngoneh sobel faal 1549 was a direct decendant of that royal family through the maternal line. her name was ngoneh sobel njie - of wagadou maternal blood.
ghana tankaminin [one of the last of that great noble bloodline who earn the right to call himself ghana] will regain the awdaghost post from those vampires and refused conversion. however, the royal family could not maintain ther man power and finances as a result of those vampires early savagery. 'the almoravids ravaged their villages and pilege their land' [source al-bakri]. ghana fell to its knees and it was mali who succeded it.
as regards to askia muhamad [of songhai empire] -, he had no right to rule in the first place. the dia dynasty had ruled since the 11th century. they too were subdued by the vampires in their lust for power and conversion. the dynasty was renamed 'sunni' under a new leader - sunni ali around 1464 -1492. even he could not stand islam though he was one and blended it with traditional beliefs. when the scholar al-maghilli called him a pegan, al-maghilli was brutally punished for his remark. when sunni ali died and was succeded by sunni barou, he was called before the public to make a public declaration of his loyalty to islam [by general mohamad touray - a former servant of the royal court]. sunni barou refused and was outsted by the former general with the help of the muslim establishment. mohamad touray established a new dynasty in his own name - hence askia mohamad touray. this maniac, as maniacs before him made the pilgrimage to meca in 1497 and wore the tile alhaji with pride. in his dealings with the arab king, he was given a sword and proclaimed khalifa of the western sudan. according to uthman dan fadio's work on 'jihad', he was reported of asking his friend mohamad al-maghilli - 'who is a true muslim and who is a pagan?' when he got his answer, he pilaged lands just like the babarians before him. this is the same askia mohamad you spatted at me when you made your first venomous attack.
you accused me of going along with the historical accounts provided by the christian historians - whose desire you said were to try and distort islamic facts. yet, the 2 sources you gave in order to justify you ill informed argument are both christians. you are a hypocrite. at least with me i cited the works of both christians and muslims even known aethiests. some of these in addition to the above include: spread of islam in west african by professor A. rahman, jihad in the west by paul fregosi, why i am not a muslim by ibn warraq [whom by the way used be an arab muslim], the appraoch of armageddeon by mohammad hisham kabbani, the famous 8th and 10th century arab scholars: ibn munabba and al-masudi as well as ibn battuta [1352].
santanfara, religion is something dinned into people's psychy. if a person professes to belong to one religion then they'tend' to hold on to it irrespective of whether they are devout or not. in most cases they would fight to protect something they view as sacred handed down through the ages from their ancestors. sometimes 'forces for whatever reason' may make someone abandon the relegion of their ancestors. one of these forces was the jihads of the almoravids - a skill they handed down to their african converts. when this force was so great and there was no easy way out, people had to 2 choices for the sake of their survival: total conversion [e.g. devout muslims] or mixing of the new with the old [a phenomenon trough out african and possible other parts of the world]. as time passes, these practices become so entrined into their physchy and habit they dont know any other way. hence how it is handed down through the generations. it does not take a brain surgeon to work out that the spread of islam was not without the sword. again, i refer to that old maxim - 'islam or die' - and many did indeed die.
i give you 2 advice santanfara:
1. when it comes to history, learn the facts and try to remember them.
2. dont only learn african history, but other people's history as well [history is history]. as my father used to say - 'one of the best weapons to defeat a racist is to make sure you know your history as well as their own. you never know when they might pop their head. by knowning both histories, it makes your argument stronger - because they wouldn't expect it.
peace |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 14:36:28
|
| tamsier, you seen to believe that your version of history is the only accurate one. i am telling you even ibn batuta have his own baises. he was a muslim ,don't you think he may favour islam more than other religions when it comes to giving his narrations. no single historians have an absolute authority on any historical account. they assume to be an athourity. i will analsye your posting later. don't go over the top. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 14:49:23
|
if you dont believe ibn battuta and you dont believe ancient scholars as well as modern historians, at least believe what the geweels/jalis are saying, because they all seem to be saying virtually the same thing. if you dont believe the geweels/jalis, then whom do you believe? all these historians are the only ones we got in which to base our judgement on. unless you come up with something better - god knows how since you dont seem to accept none of the sources, i am drawying a line on this topic. i have said what i needed to say. whether you accept it or not, that is for you to decide.
lots of love, my african brother. |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 16:54:54
|
| tamsier, i guess you know the difference between being skeptcal of one and not believing that person. there are some facts in many historical accounts .but we cannot take every narration as true and accurate. even scienctific evidences some times get revised let alone a subject as subjective and contentcious as history. i do believe some version of the jeli's stories but remeber the jalis sing for a batufa (patron) they some times avoid hurting the big ego of the batufa. your versions are not all wrong. what i am saying is that ,the evidences you are relying heavy on are not all accurate. take it or leave. take for instance the historical accounts recorded about the nazi's or hitler. there are many books giving different accounts. some even defending hitlers actions. the historians who are part and percil of the western establishment give accounts that are more or less inline with acceptable norms. we have to look wider than few historians to pump-up our stories. most portugise historians were found to be master masons doing what the king oredered them to do. they wrote about things some times to defend there decisions. do you know the scholarly circle of the west in the olden days never look at africans has a complete human beings? this goes with many professionals. including poets,artist,scientist,educationist etc. with time i will porduce the books of this people.the accounts you even gave of the serere ruling the fulas is not wholesome. it may be some fulas in parts were we find sereres. where else do we find serere's in africa? |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 17:32:34
|
santanfara, i agree with what you are saying about evidence. however, in situations like that, the only thing you can do is look at most of the sources available, find the commonalities and based an opinion on that. it is good that you are skeptical. i have the great amount of respect for people who quesion. it is a quality i respect dearly - rather than those who believe in what they are told without doing their own research. the moment you publish your book about our history, i will be one of the first to buy it - and i am serious.
i wish you all the best. |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 18:33:03
|
| brother tamseir, thanks for that but i will leave that to you. you are more historically knowledgeable than me. history is an interest to me but my speciality is finance. i will be waiting for more of your postings. if you check the religious section you will find some oral history by me and kondorong posted on the soninkes. in there, i wrote a bit about oral history. i do once in a while listen to different senegambian and malian jalis on oral history. i have the narration of sori kandia kuayateh on samouri touray and keme buramah ,i have the history of janki wali sanneh, kelefa sanneh,seik mafouji hydara, sundiajata and some versions of the serere early settelers in numi. infact i bought a new book on the ancient history of senegambia dealing mainly with the mandingos and there relationship with other tribes. all gambian tribes. the book is called the mandingo kingdoms of senegambia .the author caution readers on heavy relaince on oral sources. i like the jali narrations but i like the fina ( poets) narrations more. i hope momodou will transfer our historical exchanges to history section. please provide us with the history of the serere. i try my best to find as many serere family name as possible but no one contribute on that. we need to properly know our family traditions then we can combine them and find a common ground. i want to know what joof means, mboge etc, why are they called what they are called? this little piece of information can go a long way in educating young people about our history. brother sisay is very much verse in jali tradition he can help us by verifing the urtencity of jali narrations. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2008 : 20:18:40
|
satanfara, the name 'joof' as far as i know comes from the black bull - the emblem of the joof noble family. the praise 'joofa niokhobai samba' means joofs of the great nobles. they trace their decend to niokhobai mane niane joof king of sine in the middle ages (i will check for you the exact date). his father was king patar kholleh joof - the high born who conquered baol. patar kholleh joof was the son of laman ndah njemeh joof. the word laman is an ancient title meaning king/ruler. they trace their paternal decent to laman djigan joof of ancient tukar (now called futa toro).
the name mbooj comes from bo. what it means i cannot tell you right now but i will try and find out for you. all i can tell you is that, they trace their decent to king barka mbooj of ancient wallo. barka mbooj was maternal half brother of njajan njie (amadou fatoumata njie) - around 1350 AD. barka mbooj was the son of mbarik bo (second husband of fatoumata sallah). mbooj is an extention of bo. fatoumata sallah was the daughter of abraham sallah - he was a tukuloor. the njie noble family ruled jolof [buur ba jolof = king of jolof]. they are decendants of maram doye gaye (first wife of njajan njie). maram doye gaye was the daughter of amar gaye (sixth lieutenant general of laman jaw's army 1287) and sister of demba gaye. the mbooj family ruled wallo (the brak of wallo = king/queen of wallo) they also later ruled in saloum because of their gelwar maternal blood.
and yes, there were indeed queens of wallo some of the most notable include fatoumata yumaiga, nyombot mbooj - who caused the french to panic and waged war agaist her and her 'husband to be' (emir of trazar)- when she married the king of trazar in 1833. a war that lasted two years. she was so powerful, she managed to convince the seb - ak baor (council of electors) in secret to elect 2 kings of her choice (one after the other). that was unprecidented, considering the seb ak boar were extremely tough on their election and have told kings and queens before her - were to go when they tried to meddle in the their affairs. another notable queen: ndateh yalla (sister of nyombot). ndateh yalla is the most famous of them all. even abou boilat made a potrait of her. she was famous for 3 things: her political wit against the french, her marriages and her son - sidia ndatteh jobe. her reign was rather short though - (hence the reason she is really cited as brak) because it coincide with the arrival of governor faidherb of france, whom she entered the battle field with in other to liberate her kingdom. she was defeated by the french though it was not as easy as the french thought it was going to be. they had to bring in the algerians in order to suppliment the french forces as well as new weaponary. having been defeated, the queen was giving asylum by the royal family of kajoor - her blood relatives. the french commanded the royal family of kajoor to hand her over, they refused. she remained their until her death in the 1900s.
the joof family ruled both in sine and saloum. they extablished three noble houses called 'kerr'. they were the only royal family of senegambia that i know of who have ever done that. these were referred to as:
1. kerr boury gnilane - (the first one after the arrival of the gelwars)
2. kerr bouka siga
3. kerr semou njekeh
peace |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
Edited by - tamsier on 21 Feb 2008 21:47:06 |
|
|
|
Santanfara
3460 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2008 : 17:52:21
|
| very interesting tamsier. in your next installment please translate some of the wollof and serere words for us. this is the first time here to my knowledge some body as verse as you is deeply discussing jollof history for us. thanks brother.i will ask momodou to transfer that last posting of yours to the gambain family names section. i hope others will benefit from that history. |
Surah- Ar-Rum 30-22
"And among His signs is the creation of heavens and the earth, and the difference of your languages and colours. verily, in that are indeed signs for men of sound knowledge." Qu'ran
www.suntoumana.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2008 : 18:05:21
|
| which wolof and sereer words do you need translating? i'll help if i can. |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
tamsier
United Kingdom
556 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2008 : 14:17:31
|
santanfara, i must correct one mistake - regarding the genealogy of the joof clan [joofene], before the members of the joof family bite my head off. king patar kholleh joof was the grand son of laman ndah njemeh joof and not his son. the father of patar kholleh joof was laman niokhobai godane joof [whom he named his eldest son niokhobai mane niane joof]. laman niokhobai godoane joof was the sone of laman ndah njemeh joof [sometimes referred to as buur ndah njemeh joof].
peace |
Tamsier
Serere heritage. Serere religion. Serere to the end.
Roog a fa ha. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| Bantaba in Cyberspace |
© 2005-2024 Nijii |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
