![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
For correct images of Moors playing chess look in book: The Golden Age of the Moors, Ivan van Sertima PG29
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Moors were Africa voyagers who travelled the world educating other races on math, health, hygiene, fighting techniques, music, agriculture, fashion architecture and helping them restore order to their land. 2605:6000:101E:99DB:84A1:D399:C977:467A ( talk) 04:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The following can be added the popular culture section:
In the seventh episode of the forth season of the popular 90's sitcom Seinfeld, the Moors are referenced in a game of trivial pursuit. George has an argument with a boy in a quarantine bubble because the answer to one of the questions is "The Moors", but there is a typo on the game card which stats the answer is actually "The Moops". Matthewberends ( talk) 00:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
The above answer is extremely misleading. There were in fact Moors of different “colors”, including “white”. The Berbers of North Africa and other, earlier African groups were also derived from various populations. To suggest the Berbers are “black” is as incorrect as stating “Puerto Ricans” are “black”. Certainly some are darker than others, and some are lighter than others, just as you’d expect from a group of mixed descent. Or in the case of the Berbers, mixed Eurasian and North African descent. Modern North Africans are about 13% more sub-Saharan African today than they were. Going all the way back to antiquity, there was a “white” population jumping between Iberia and North Africa, as connected to the indigenous Canary Is,anders and very European Libyans depicted by various Egyptian dynasties.
What it originally meant to be a “Moor” was an invader from “Mauritania” into Iberia. Invaders that came in various skin tones including both “white” and “brown”. Perhaps in part derived from a North African population that had been heavily effected over the years by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Goths, Greeks and Romans all conquering and intermixing in parts of North Africa at least 1500 years before the term “Moor” was coined. Certainly, later on, the word Moor was used more exclusively with brown skinned Muslims, because the population that made up North African Muslims had changed over time to include more Sub-Saharan admixture.
I really don’t care what “color” they were, my only interest is academic and historic honesty in terms of population migration, settlement and genetic descent. Either way, the North African populations that were referred to as Moors have no connection to modern African Americans or other sub-Saharan groups pushing an illegitimate Afrocentric narrative on vast, totally unrelated historical populations, trying to connect them to unrelated modern populations based only on a theorized similarity in skin tone. It would be no more accurate to call these original Moors “black” in its modern context, meaning Sub-Saharan in origin, than it would be calling them “modern Europeans” or connecting them to modern European groups just because some had a similar “skin tone”.
Beware both Afrocentric and Eurocentric narratives, being forced upon historical populations that have little to nothing to do with modern concepts of “race” or even “ethnicity”. This would be like a modern Vietnamese person claiming all the glory of the Mongols for the modern Vietnamese population just because they both might share some similar aesthetic features. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JarbeeChesschi ( talk • contribs) 09:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2A02:1811:3480:5500:C07:1071:E435:DB71 ( talk) 00:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC) in the etymology section under the first paragraph : However, some believe that the term may have a local origin, with "Mahurim" meaning "Westerners" in Punic for the people living west of Carthage. Mahurim could have given rise to the Latin Mauri. Al-Maghrib the arab name of the region still mean The West
According to Salluste, the Moors are part of the army of Hercules from the Iberian peninsula , composed of Persians, Armenians and Medes. They mingle with the indigenous --Gaetuli (zeneta) --- populations of Maghreb. They settled in the mountains in Morocco, in the Aurès in Algeria and in Libya. The majority of the Aurès population is composed of Gaetuli (Zeneta).
ive got all the sources
I need to add an explanation about the etymology of Moor made by Gabriel Camps, the french expert of the berbers. Here what I wrote :
According to Gabriel Camps, and referring to Pliny (V, 17), "among the tribes of Mauretania Tingitana, the main one was formerly that of the Mauri, whom wars would have reduced to a few families." Moors, derived from Mauri, would therefore have a local origin, that is, the name of a tribe. He adds: "The Spaniards of the Reconquista, and subsequently the Europeans, retained this name by giving it an even wider acceptance since it was used to refer to the Maghrebis or North Africans. [...] But the memories of classical antiquity, to which was added the connotation "dark" given by the Greek adjective "μανρος" (mauros), revived, in colonial times, the name of the Mauri and Mauritania (instead of Mauretania) to designate the nomadic populations, largely Arabized, and the country south of Morocco, the former Mauretania Tingitana".
Book ISBN : 978-2-7427-6922-3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suksu7 ( talk • contribs) 19:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
The page on the Moors is very misleading in that it is trying to whitewash the true history of the Moors. I visited Morrocco and none of the artwork depicted fair-skinned moors only dark-skinned because that is how they looked. I would like to add the correct images to the page but it is locked from edits. This is how history is changed with lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guineverejackson ( talk • contribs) 11:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Hyacinte de Icarus ( talk) 22:59, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Guineverejackson, if you are referring to the Muslims of Spain, then you are wrong. Most of them were native Spanish converts to Islam therefore most of the so-called “Moors” of Spain and Portugal were indeed white. Keep in mind that the term “Moor” was never used by Andalusian Muslims but rather by the northern Christians. TheNewLetters ( talk) 17:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I noticed a mistake in Section 6. In Heraldry. The Aragon flag is wrong as it should look like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg/800px-Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg.png
So I am proposing we change the flag to the one provided above. Bjmadsopk0806 ( talk) 17:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Flag in Section 6.1 is wrong. We need to change it to this file: /info/en/?search=Aragon#/media/File:Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg Bjmadsopk0806 ( talk) 11:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under "Notable Persons," the first entry, Tariq ibn Ziyad, lacks a hyperlink to his own page, which is particularly jarring because pretty much every other person and proper noun in this section possess one. Thanks! Hthundercroft ( talk) 03:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
This paragraph should be deleted, as it is completely wrong, and the Arabs were not Syrians and Yemenis, but rather there were what are known as the Qaysiya tribes and the Qahtani tribes, and they are not Yemenis and Syrians !! As for most of them were Berbers, Mali and Morocco, this is also Not true. This paragraph needs to be deleted, just as Abd al-Rahman inside is not a berber, but rather an Arab only, as well as the placement of wars and the use of Moors name to make it a civilization or culture and architecture, this is also wrong. The article must be made clearer, as this name is what was used by Muslims, regardless of their ethnicity, before the word "Muslim" entered the English language Sarazxs123 ( talk) 04:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
We say:
I have not traced the development of the last sentence, but I imagine it could be a watered down version of a statement about Othello being played blackface. As it stands, it is a pointless statement - it could be said about any character in any often performed play. Should we simply remove it - or should we venture into a statement of the troublesome facts (requiring someone to find suitable sources)?-- Nø ( talk) 09:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE Not All the Knights of the Round Table Were White - The storytellers assumed we’d be sharp enough to pick up on their hints that Sir Morien was black. Turns out, we’re not: "He was all black, even as I tell ye: his head, his body, and his hands were all black, saving only his teeth. His shield and his armour were even those of a Moor, and black as a raven…"
"Had they not heard him call upon God no man had dared face him, deeming that he was the devil or one of his fellows out of hell, for that his steed was so great, and he was taller even than Sir Lancelot, and black withal, as I said afore…"
"When the Moor heard these words he laughed with heart and mouth (his teeth were white as chalk, otherwise was he altogether black)…" 2001:1C00:1E31:5F00:EC1C:118F:D2FA:95F8 ( talk) 03:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
@ Flesek: With regard to this revert:
We say, e.g.,
Considering the inaccuracy of the term Moor, I think we should refrain from using the term this way. We can quote examples of sources that do, but in a sentence in Wikipedia that intends to say that certain people did certain things, we should identify those people as accurately as possible, and not as "Moors" (but possibly as "people identified by contemporary European sources as Moors", or the like).-- Nø ( talk) 17:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Europeans did not give that name & this article is spreading that misconception. Our name did not come from nor was it given to us by Europeans. 63.143.116.123 ( talk) 15:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
COnsidering the dubiousness of this word as a deignation of a specific group of people, I don't think this article should contain statements like
We can quote sources saying thing like that; we can say "according to so-and-so mostly formed by moors", etc. but writing as if it is a well-defined group makes no sense.
My example of improper use from the article is just one of many.-- Nø ( talk) 11:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
The assumption that the sicilians were mere slaves in italy is wrong,plus some sources are Wrong and are Talking about the Slavery of sub-saharan Africans not the moors from Sicily and tunisia Osmar.aka ( talk) 10:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
The term stems from more than one word, and for at least two of those: Firstly, the Berbers are from the Northern African region. They were there, long before some of them were moved (spiritually & culturally) by Islam. They represent an advanced, educated, and highly skilled culture that has had both strong and fragmented alliances and/or reunions with various notable (and acclaimed) empires. Instead of the precarious North African description, the Berbers are simply from the Highlands or Lowlands. These people spanned from East to West throughout the Northern region, and as such Berbers had conflicting alliances (or simply, autonomously chose their own opportunities). By Spain's account, Moors were Tariq-led Berbers who had become Muslims (the purveyors of Count Julian's payback). One has to deliberately, creatively, and deceptively misconstrue the complexion of who the people of Spain were identifying as Moors. Secondly, the Berbers are descendants of the people of Canaan. It's ridiculous when artifacts depict one thing, yet it is either conveniently passed-over, subtly not shared/promoted, and/or generously altered. The "Vanquished Libyan" is an Egyptian statuette of a Berber. Considering the prominence of both the pre-Islamic and Islamic Berber people in the descriptive term - Moors; the selection of images either ignores the empowering and noble depictions (that I have seen) by accident or purposely contributes to an agenda.
ASIDE:
Does Religion & History suffer if the physical features and complexion inconsistencies are somewhat resolved?
155.135.55.231 (
talk)
02:14, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Who was moors 58.181.103.85 ( talk) 11:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I have (for now) deleted this item:
I'm not sure how to rewrite it in an appropriate way. We should not propagate the identification of anyone as "a moor". Nø ( talk) 12:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
For correct images of Moors playing chess look in book: The Golden Age of the Moors, Ivan van Sertima PG29
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Moors were Africa voyagers who travelled the world educating other races on math, health, hygiene, fighting techniques, music, agriculture, fashion architecture and helping them restore order to their land. 2605:6000:101E:99DB:84A1:D399:C977:467A ( talk) 04:35, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The following can be added the popular culture section:
In the seventh episode of the forth season of the popular 90's sitcom Seinfeld, the Moors are referenced in a game of trivial pursuit. George has an argument with a boy in a quarantine bubble because the answer to one of the questions is "The Moors", but there is a typo on the game card which stats the answer is actually "The Moops". Matthewberends ( talk) 00:56, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
The above answer is extremely misleading. There were in fact Moors of different “colors”, including “white”. The Berbers of North Africa and other, earlier African groups were also derived from various populations. To suggest the Berbers are “black” is as incorrect as stating “Puerto Ricans” are “black”. Certainly some are darker than others, and some are lighter than others, just as you’d expect from a group of mixed descent. Or in the case of the Berbers, mixed Eurasian and North African descent. Modern North Africans are about 13% more sub-Saharan African today than they were. Going all the way back to antiquity, there was a “white” population jumping between Iberia and North Africa, as connected to the indigenous Canary Is,anders and very European Libyans depicted by various Egyptian dynasties.
What it originally meant to be a “Moor” was an invader from “Mauritania” into Iberia. Invaders that came in various skin tones including both “white” and “brown”. Perhaps in part derived from a North African population that had been heavily effected over the years by Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Goths, Greeks and Romans all conquering and intermixing in parts of North Africa at least 1500 years before the term “Moor” was coined. Certainly, later on, the word Moor was used more exclusively with brown skinned Muslims, because the population that made up North African Muslims had changed over time to include more Sub-Saharan admixture.
I really don’t care what “color” they were, my only interest is academic and historic honesty in terms of population migration, settlement and genetic descent. Either way, the North African populations that were referred to as Moors have no connection to modern African Americans or other sub-Saharan groups pushing an illegitimate Afrocentric narrative on vast, totally unrelated historical populations, trying to connect them to unrelated modern populations based only on a theorized similarity in skin tone. It would be no more accurate to call these original Moors “black” in its modern context, meaning Sub-Saharan in origin, than it would be calling them “modern Europeans” or connecting them to modern European groups just because some had a similar “skin tone”.
Beware both Afrocentric and Eurocentric narratives, being forced upon historical populations that have little to nothing to do with modern concepts of “race” or even “ethnicity”. This would be like a modern Vietnamese person claiming all the glory of the Mongols for the modern Vietnamese population just because they both might share some similar aesthetic features. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JarbeeChesschi ( talk • contribs) 09:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2A02:1811:3480:5500:C07:1071:E435:DB71 ( talk) 00:31, 9 December 2020 (UTC) in the etymology section under the first paragraph : However, some believe that the term may have a local origin, with "Mahurim" meaning "Westerners" in Punic for the people living west of Carthage. Mahurim could have given rise to the Latin Mauri. Al-Maghrib the arab name of the region still mean The West
According to Salluste, the Moors are part of the army of Hercules from the Iberian peninsula , composed of Persians, Armenians and Medes. They mingle with the indigenous --Gaetuli (zeneta) --- populations of Maghreb. They settled in the mountains in Morocco, in the Aurès in Algeria and in Libya. The majority of the Aurès population is composed of Gaetuli (Zeneta).
ive got all the sources
I need to add an explanation about the etymology of Moor made by Gabriel Camps, the french expert of the berbers. Here what I wrote :
According to Gabriel Camps, and referring to Pliny (V, 17), "among the tribes of Mauretania Tingitana, the main one was formerly that of the Mauri, whom wars would have reduced to a few families." Moors, derived from Mauri, would therefore have a local origin, that is, the name of a tribe. He adds: "The Spaniards of the Reconquista, and subsequently the Europeans, retained this name by giving it an even wider acceptance since it was used to refer to the Maghrebis or North Africans. [...] But the memories of classical antiquity, to which was added the connotation "dark" given by the Greek adjective "μανρος" (mauros), revived, in colonial times, the name of the Mauri and Mauritania (instead of Mauretania) to designate the nomadic populations, largely Arabized, and the country south of Morocco, the former Mauretania Tingitana".
Book ISBN : 978-2-7427-6922-3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suksu7 ( talk • contribs) 19:21, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
The page on the Moors is very misleading in that it is trying to whitewash the true history of the Moors. I visited Morrocco and none of the artwork depicted fair-skinned moors only dark-skinned because that is how they looked. I would like to add the correct images to the page but it is locked from edits. This is how history is changed with lies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guineverejackson ( talk • contribs) 11:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Hyacinte de Icarus ( talk) 22:59, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
Guineverejackson, if you are referring to the Muslims of Spain, then you are wrong. Most of them were native Spanish converts to Islam therefore most of the so-called “Moors” of Spain and Portugal were indeed white. Keep in mind that the term “Moor” was never used by Andalusian Muslims but rather by the northern Christians. TheNewLetters ( talk) 17:39, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I noticed a mistake in Section 6. In Heraldry. The Aragon flag is wrong as it should look like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b2/Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg/800px-Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg.png
So I am proposing we change the flag to the one provided above. Bjmadsopk0806 ( talk) 17:36, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Flag in Section 6.1 is wrong. We need to change it to this file: /info/en/?search=Aragon#/media/File:Escudo_de_Arag%C3%B3n.svg Bjmadsopk0806 ( talk) 11:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Under "Notable Persons," the first entry, Tariq ibn Ziyad, lacks a hyperlink to his own page, which is particularly jarring because pretty much every other person and proper noun in this section possess one. Thanks! Hthundercroft ( talk) 03:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
This paragraph should be deleted, as it is completely wrong, and the Arabs were not Syrians and Yemenis, but rather there were what are known as the Qaysiya tribes and the Qahtani tribes, and they are not Yemenis and Syrians !! As for most of them were Berbers, Mali and Morocco, this is also Not true. This paragraph needs to be deleted, just as Abd al-Rahman inside is not a berber, but rather an Arab only, as well as the placement of wars and the use of Moors name to make it a civilization or culture and architecture, this is also wrong. The article must be made clearer, as this name is what was used by Muslims, regardless of their ethnicity, before the word "Muslim" entered the English language Sarazxs123 ( talk) 04:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
We say:
I have not traced the development of the last sentence, but I imagine it could be a watered down version of a statement about Othello being played blackface. As it stands, it is a pointless statement - it could be said about any character in any often performed play. Should we simply remove it - or should we venture into a statement of the troublesome facts (requiring someone to find suitable sources)?-- Nø ( talk) 09:58, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE Not All the Knights of the Round Table Were White - The storytellers assumed we’d be sharp enough to pick up on their hints that Sir Morien was black. Turns out, we’re not: "He was all black, even as I tell ye: his head, his body, and his hands were all black, saving only his teeth. His shield and his armour were even those of a Moor, and black as a raven…"
"Had they not heard him call upon God no man had dared face him, deeming that he was the devil or one of his fellows out of hell, for that his steed was so great, and he was taller even than Sir Lancelot, and black withal, as I said afore…"
"When the Moor heard these words he laughed with heart and mouth (his teeth were white as chalk, otherwise was he altogether black)…" 2001:1C00:1E31:5F00:EC1C:118F:D2FA:95F8 ( talk) 03:32, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
@ Flesek: With regard to this revert:
We say, e.g.,
Considering the inaccuracy of the term Moor, I think we should refrain from using the term this way. We can quote examples of sources that do, but in a sentence in Wikipedia that intends to say that certain people did certain things, we should identify those people as accurately as possible, and not as "Moors" (but possibly as "people identified by contemporary European sources as Moors", or the like).-- Nø ( talk) 17:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Moors has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The Europeans did not give that name & this article is spreading that misconception. Our name did not come from nor was it given to us by Europeans. 63.143.116.123 ( talk) 15:27, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
COnsidering the dubiousness of this word as a deignation of a specific group of people, I don't think this article should contain statements like
We can quote sources saying thing like that; we can say "according to so-and-so mostly formed by moors", etc. but writing as if it is a well-defined group makes no sense.
My example of improper use from the article is just one of many.-- Nø ( talk) 11:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
The assumption that the sicilians were mere slaves in italy is wrong,plus some sources are Wrong and are Talking about the Slavery of sub-saharan Africans not the moors from Sicily and tunisia Osmar.aka ( talk) 10:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
The term stems from more than one word, and for at least two of those: Firstly, the Berbers are from the Northern African region. They were there, long before some of them were moved (spiritually & culturally) by Islam. They represent an advanced, educated, and highly skilled culture that has had both strong and fragmented alliances and/or reunions with various notable (and acclaimed) empires. Instead of the precarious North African description, the Berbers are simply from the Highlands or Lowlands. These people spanned from East to West throughout the Northern region, and as such Berbers had conflicting alliances (or simply, autonomously chose their own opportunities). By Spain's account, Moors were Tariq-led Berbers who had become Muslims (the purveyors of Count Julian's payback). One has to deliberately, creatively, and deceptively misconstrue the complexion of who the people of Spain were identifying as Moors. Secondly, the Berbers are descendants of the people of Canaan. It's ridiculous when artifacts depict one thing, yet it is either conveniently passed-over, subtly not shared/promoted, and/or generously altered. The "Vanquished Libyan" is an Egyptian statuette of a Berber. Considering the prominence of both the pre-Islamic and Islamic Berber people in the descriptive term - Moors; the selection of images either ignores the empowering and noble depictions (that I have seen) by accident or purposely contributes to an agenda.
ASIDE:
Does Religion & History suffer if the physical features and complexion inconsistencies are somewhat resolved?
155.135.55.231 (
talk)
02:14, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Who was moors 58.181.103.85 ( talk) 11:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
I have (for now) deleted this item:
I'm not sure how to rewrite it in an appropriate way. We should not propagate the identification of anyone as "a moor". Nø ( talk) 12:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)