Muslim King Offa and his Muslim Kingdom in England
AD 773-96
Islamic Kalima" There is no God but Allah" inscribed on English coins of King Offa
Gold Islamic dinar of English Muslim King Offa.
http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/highlight_objects/cm/g/gold_imitation_dinar_of_offa.aspxhttp://nayzak.deviantart.com/art/Gold-coin-of-king-Offa-291219688
This unique gold coin of Offa, king of Mercia, is one of the most remarkable English coins of the Middle Ages. Its design is similar to a gold dinar of the caliph al-Mansur, ruler of the Islamic Abbasid dynasty.
Modern European scholars have shown their ingenuity in finding excuses to deny the obvious that Mercia was a Muslim kingdom. The same scholars very comfortably declare every seemingly human figure a figure of the Christ and any two lines crossing symbol of cross and sign of Christianity. Anyone looking at their excuses, explained below, to deny the obvious will find that they leave textbook standards of historical evaluation that they use everywhere for the special case of judging these coins of king Offa, just to deny the obvious that these coins present an evidence of Islam of Offa and of Islamic foundations of Mercia.
********************************************
British Museum Post with following wording indicates distortion of information:
"Gold imitation dinar of Offa
Kingdom of Mercia, England, AD 773-96
An Islamic inscription on an English coin
"Although the Arabic inscription is not copied perfectly, it is close enough that it is clear that the original from which it was copied was struck in the Islamic year AH 157 (AD 773-74). It seems that the engraver had no understanding of the Arabic script: the name and title OFFA REX has been inserted upside down in relation to the Arabic inscription.
The purpose of the coin is uncertain. It has been suggested that it was made as a gift for the pope (it was first recorded in Rome), but it is unlikely that any Christian king would have sent the pope a coin with and inscription stating that 'there is no God but Allah alone', however badly the Arabic had been copied. It is more likely that it was designed for use in trade; Islamic gold dinars were the most important coinage in the Mediterranean at the time. Offa's coin looked enough like the original that it would be readily accepted in southern Europe, while at the same time his own name was clearly visible."
****************************
The above mentioned British Museum Post about "Gold imitation dinar of Offa seems to be designed to distract people's attention from the obvious natural conclusions of any free open minded person to favorably consider the idea of the "Islamic Foundations of European Civilization". British Museum title uses the word imitation that characterizes counterfeit coins forged by unofficially without permission and have of no real market value. Wording tries to use irrelevant and far fetched excuses to argue that Islam and Arabic language could never have been familiar things in Mercia at that time. There is nothing unique or special with coins having same or similar design minted by different countries that can reduce association of such coins with those countries. The post is crafted to present the coin as unworthy of attention and to suggest that the whole project of its manufacture, related decision with investment of time and money and labor of minting of the new coin was done by Mercia without much serious and long term objectives.
It's clear the project included actually designing, manufacture of dies and minting is an evidence of a serious long term objective unless some clear evidence shows that Mercia king was somehow forced to complete that elaborate project or they have been doing such projects time to time for fun.
The comment that "engraver had no understanding of the Arabic" can only hold any element of truth if one knows the person engraving and his training or it is categorically refuted that the mutual orientation of the two language text elements is absolutely without any intentional plan for the design of the whole image. The design shows that the sacred Arabic words in this way envelop and stay above the English words while coin is held in any of the languages orientation. This could convey their reverence for the Arabic words.
British museum's phrase " purpose of the coin is uncertain" is most remarkable as such a question is only expected from only little innocent babies who have no idea of the purpose of god coins. This comment shows the British Museum's writers false confidence that he has proved the unworthiness trivial value of the coin.
British museum's phrase "It has been suggested that it was made as a gift for the pope (it was first recorded in Rome), but it is unlikely that any Christian king would have sent the pope a coin" takes it granted that Pope's establishment in a place named Rome at that time, AD 773-74, is an established fact. However the scholars who look at the related evidences and are not swayed by repeated propaganda do not believe Church had any reliable history of till around fifteenth century.
British museum includes their assertion about Offa being "Christian king" in the context of this coin shows their refusal to allow people review the alternate view of Offa being Muslim that is consistent with the evidence of this coin.
The coin supports Islamic foundations of European civilization that is an alternate to the Vatican church propaganda which has been destroying real evidences and forging fake literature and other items to suggest lies that Pre-Islamic civilization Europe had widespread Catholic Christianity.
Muslims arrival in Europe is detailed by Arab historians and it gives no evidence that early Muslims ever came across with Catholic Christians i.e. people believing in trinity having pope and using Crucifix or have stories of some founding saint dying on cross. What they encountered was the presence of some authorities and troops loyal to Constantinople, the real Rome. The earliest Christians they came across in Europe were the Christians of Nijrani i.e Najranite or Yeminite origin. They came from, Nijran/Najran, a city south of Makkah, and Yemen areas of Arabia in the wake of Arab arrival and establishment of new institutions and economic revival in Europe. Many of those Christians had first migrated from Nijran and Yemen to Kufa and Basara and Baghdad, Palestine and then to Europe in the wake of Muslims.
Quranic accounts of Trinitarin Christians who associated a son to God is all related to those Nijranite ang Yemenites. Makkah and those Christians had rivalry from the time immemorial. Constantinople, Romans, and Ethiopian Negas king had always friendly relations with Makka. Poems of the grandfather of Mihammad, Abdul Muttalib, who was the chief of Makkah when the Najranite yeminte King Abraha, invaded Makkah with Elephants are famous. Abdul prays to God for help against the invaders calling them as people of Cross, آل الصليب .
It is the time of the well known Year of the Elephant (Arabic: عام الفيل, ʿĀmu l-Fīl) 570 CE. when Abraha, the Christian ruler of Nijran and Yemen, marched upon the Kaaba with a large army, which included one or more war elephants.
The Constantinople visit of Imra-ul-Qais the famous pre-Islamic poet and help by Roman Emperor to restore his kingdom, Abu sufyan's meetings with Roman Emperor are just few examples of mutual relations of Makki elete with Constantinople. Similarly the great grandfather of prophet Mohammad's vist to Ethiopia and meeting with thr Nagus king Al Najashi (Negus). Roman emperor Constantine's conversion from Monotheism to Christian trinity is an early modern era forgery.
Constantinople, Romans, and Muslim shared monotheism and iconoclasm beliefs and traditions. Roman elite saw the loss of their special leadership status and resisted Islam however Roman population who did not have that issue quickly became allies of Muslims and accepted Islam without any considerable resistance.
Recently Gary Brown brought to light a peculiar instance. He mentioned that, Emperor Manuel I, who was contemplating a religious union with the western Church of Rome, the Patriarch said: “Let the Muslim be my master in outward things rather than the Latin dominate me in matters of the spirit. For if I am subject to the Muslim, at least he will not force me to share his faith. But if I have to be ... united with the [Latin] Roman Church, I may have to separate myself from my God.”
[Mutual Misperceptions: The Historical Context of Muslim-Western Relations, by Gary Brown, Department of the Parliamentary Library, Commonwealth of Australia, Current Issues Brief No. 7 2001–02, Foreign Affairs, ISSN 1440-2009] (http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2001-02/02cib07.pdf)
Constantinople is the Seat of Rome. "The term, “the Byzantine Empire”, is a misnomer."
There is no reason to continue to refer to the “Byzantine Empire” beyond the fact that this mistake has been made and (unjustifiably) endorsed for so long" "There never was a Byzantine Empire. It is a historical fallacy.
The empire that finally fell to Turks in 1453 was the Roman Empire. We should call it what it was and give it the credit that it has deserved for so long." After conquering Constantinople, Mehmet the Great became
Kayser-i Rūm “Caesar of Rome”
[Prof. Charles Collins, " There Was No Byzantine Empire", Volume 2, Issue 1, 2014 The Norman Levan Center for the Humanities]
http://www2.bakersfieldcollege.edu/lhr/2-1/CharlesCollins.html
No comments:
Post a Comment