Before the rise of the Safavid dynasty in the early 16th century, what were the religious affiliations of the populations in, Azerbaijan, iran and surrounding regions? 1. What sect of Islam did the majority of Iranians,azeris follow before the Safavids? Was it Sunni or Shia, and which madhab was most commonly adhered to? 2. What about Azerbaijan? Was the population predominantly Sunni or Shia before the Safavid conversion? And how did the rise of the Safavids affect the religious makeup of the region? 3. Were there any notable Shia communities before the Safavids? If so, where were they located, and what sect of Shia Islam did they follow? 4. How did the Safavids make it into shia majority when for long time originally it wasn’t?

I’ve learned a lot about 9/11 by watching archived news footage from US news sources. Much of it is readily available on YouTube. Is there archived footage of news reporting from Arabic language news sources, such as Al Jazeera Arabic? I’m fine with primary Arabic sources or English transcription/analysis. Thanks!

Did the Islamic World ever have any slave rebellion that deterred them from using slaves for agricultural work and mining in any great scale? Or was it something in the Islamic religion that said that it should be serfs (fellahs) instead of slaves that should farm and mine?

I was reading about the Parthenon and how it was converted to an Orthodox Church and subsequently a Mosque. Did something like this ever happen in the America’s, because as far as I know most/all the temples (in active use) where completely levelled and rebuilt.

If a muslim man from Albnia in 1700s gone to a trip to visit other places where muslim lives that far from albnia like Iran, India (the area with where muslim live), Indonesia, Russia (the area where muslim lives) ,Somlia or Oman what will he see? will he see muslims that live by the same islamic law as him? what kind of things he may see that will look weird to him? and will he react? Also will some laws or traditions will look not muslim to him? And will muslims in this places see him?

The GI Bill is quite well well regarded for the roles it played in furthering educational opportunities for servicemen returning to civilian life after World War II.

But were similar benefits extended to the servicewomen who had filled various non-combat roles in the various branches? If not, did they receive any sort of benefits that were comparable? If so, were there additional hurdles that women faced in attempting to make use of these opportunities?

Similarly, what about minorities who had served in segregated units such as the 442nd RCT or the 92nd? Did they receive GI Benefits? Some sort of curtailed version? Did they face additional hurdles in trying to make use of them?

I found a reference in the archives for deaths recorded in St Louis Sénégal in 1733 here:

http://anom.archivesnationales.culture.gouv.fr/caomec2/resultats.php?tri=&territoire=SENEGAL&commune=SAINT-LOUIS&typeacte=AC_DE&theme=&annee=1733&debut=&fin=&vue=&rpp=10

See section 140 and 141

I would love to know how this 30 year old Irish priest ended his days in the tropical sun. In all probability he came from Country Mayo in the west of Ireland where the Durkan name is most numerous.

As a French speaker he would have attended a college in France or Belgium but I can’t find any trace of him at:

https://irishineurope.maynoothuniversity.ie

.. or

https://clericus.ie

The French and Dutch nationals he was ministering to in Senegal were there to procure slaves to work on sugar plantations in the French West Indies. Would Father Maurice have been aware of this? Who would be paying his wages? Why an Irish priest as opposed to a French one?

Any information about his life before going to Africa will be welcome.

Non-Muslims, obviously, have the option of rejecting the claim that the Qur'an is perfectly preserved upon the Earth, and some Muslims, especially in more modern times, have rejected the Ahadith that claim that portions of the Qur'an were lost. But traditional Muslim scholars of Ahadith categorized multiple Ahadith that claim that portions of the Qur'an were lost upon the Earth as sahih - that is, authentic.

Such ahadith include: Sahih Muslim 1691a, in which Umar says the Verse of Stoning is missing from the Qur’an; Sahih Muslim 1050, which says that there are two Missing Surahs from the Qur’an; Sahih al-Bukhari 5005, in which Umar says that Ubayy was the best Quran reciter, but they left out some of what he recites from the Quran; Sahih al-Bukhari 6829, in which Umar says that the verse of stoning is missing from the Qur’an; Sahih Muslim 208a, in which Ibn Abbas says that a portion of Qur’an 26:214 is missing; Sahih Bukhari 4727, in which Ibn Abbas says that a portion of Qur’an 18:79 is missing; Sahih al-Bukhari 1770, in which Ibn Abbas says that a portion of Qur’an 2:198 is missing; Sahih Muslim 1452a, in which Aisha says that the verse of breastfeeding is missing from the Qur’an; Sahih Muslim 1050, in which Abu Musa al Ash’ari says that they have forgotten a surah as long as Surah Tawbah; and another sahih hadith exists [which I link to in lieu of citing: https://islamqa.info/en/answers/197942/soorat-al-ahzaab-was-as-long-as-soorat-al-baqarah-then-most-of-it-was-abrogated ] in which Ubayy ibn Ka’ab says that Surah Al-Ahzab used to be as long as Baqarah.

Given this, what is the history of the claim by Muslims that the Qu'ran has been perfectly preserved upon the Earth?

Not sure if text is required, so... gleep glorp or smth, idk.

If you go to a school gym you are likely to find a poster in the locker room with some version of the saying "It doesn't matter how many times you get knocked down. It matters how many times you get back up." This theme can be found throughout western culture and across huge expanses of time.

Likely this has its origins in Ancient Rome who famously would lose major battles only to come back again with an even greater army soon after a major defeat to fight their foe again. Losing the initial battle but winning the war. When you think about it this value is kind of crazy and not learning your lesson from a defeat but coming back for more could just as easily be considered a vice as a virtue. Does Eastern/Sino culture also have a long history of celebrating this extreme version of persistence or is this seen in a less favorable light in the history of their culture and writing?

I was watching Max Miller's episode on makshufa, and he mentioned that the Arabs got their sugar from Indonesia. IIRC the Abbasids had trade links with India as well - surely it would be easier to get it from India? India was famous for sugar, and it's also geographically much closer.

(Recipe is from Kitab-al-Tabih, written in 1226, for the specific timeframe)

Let’s talk about food/agriculture history.

For hundreds/thousands of years now, beef (cow), pork (pig), and chicken became the predominantly food staples that are being farmed in land until today. What were the factors that this did happen?

Was it only because it was easy to breed or something else?

Were these three staples really available around the world before or was it on brought on through colonization?

We can see that almost all cuisines around the world has these three land staples where they have culinary traditions for it for hundreds/thousands of years. (Except pork in Islam countries and would be replaced by lamb.)

I know lamb/sheep is another staple but I did not include it in the top 3 since it is not as widespread around the world as the other 3.

I am an Indian atheist.

My understanding is that the central figures of Christianity and Islam, Jesus of Nazareth and Muhammad were almost definitely real people who existed, even though they almost definitely didn't have any connection to the supposed creator of the universe.

It had been my understanding that this is not the case for the central figures of Hinduism, such as Krishna. I pick Krishna for the purposes of this post because it is my understanding that he is claimed to be the last Hindu god to be a historical figure (except Siddhartha Gautama whom some consider to be a Hindu god too) and hence his historicity should be the easiest to prove, if he was indeed a historical figure.

I have been told that there is credible archeological evidence for the existence of Krishna. A quick search reveals many sources that make this claim. One source even claims there is “astronomical evidence” for the historicity of Krishna, although I'm not sure what that means. (I would link that claim, but I'm not sure if that breaks any rules.)

What is the likelihood that Krishna was a historical figure who actually lived on earth?

At the point in history at which it is claimed that Krishna lived on earth, are there any historical figures, who almost definitely existed?

For reference, kindly also state the likelihood of: - Jesus of Nazareth being a historical figure - Muhammad being a historical figure

I've always been amazed at how fast Islam grew. I may be generalizing too much, but doesn't it usually take a long time before a new faith has a large following? The founders of other religions (Jesus, Zoroaster, the Buddha) never became succesful milititary and political leaders, so leaving aside his message, was Muhammad an esteemed member of society, or why would the powerful people of his time listen to him? Or is it that—and here I mean no offense—the beginnings of Islam were retconned?

Hi! I'm a mennonite and studied anabaptist history during the reformation era in college, but I'm realizing I don't remember anything being discussed about Muslim and Jewish communities during that time and I'm really interested in what those groups were up to and how they maneuvered the feudal Catholic systems across Europe??

My understanding of my mennonite heritage, boils down this way: once the printing press was invented and folks started reading the Bible for themselves, many groups cropped up across Europe who realized infant baptism doesn't exist in the Bible, and decided to start modeling baptism after Jesus' example... I.E. practicing adult baptism and re-baptizing as adults. This was considered treason to the state because suddenly these anabaptists were no longer going to bring their babies to the local Catholic Church for infant baptism, which is how the government ran the census, and that ultimately removed these folks from "known" society, and messed with tax systems and all sorts of government things. So they were burned at stakes and stuff and those are the testimonies compiled in the martyr's mirror which is a text that we mennonites like talking about.

BUT! So, I realize that Jews and Muslims also lived in Europe during those centuries between when Constantine did his mass European conversion and that reformation era that started schisming the Catholic Church into protestant denominations... I just didn't study any of the history of those groups during those years, and I would love to know whether there were systems in place to mark them in the census/social system without being baptized, or whether they were segregated out from feudal society somehow, or whether they paid taxes and participated in government stuff? I just feel like a blank slate about how any of that worked, and would love any insight and resources from folks who know about it. Thank you!

I’m interested in the apparent popularity of Shakespeare’s plays in the Old West frontier towns of that era (less so the big established cities back East). Various pieces of popular fiction media depict the apparent great entertainment value of various (seemingly?) nomadic theatre troupes rolling into a certain bustling (or not) town, being wildly popular, and occasionally even establishing themselves there at least for a time.

Popular movies like Tombstone, shows like Deadwood, games like Read Dead Redemption 2 all have a variation on this theme.

Shakespeare exploded in popularity after a re-appraisal in the preceding century especially and his plays were always written for mass appeal anyway, so I’m not generally surprised that his works - which can be quite amusing and relatively bawdy beyond their more “respectable” qualities - could appeal to pretty much anyone, and as they were performed, you needn’t necessarily even be literate or be terribly educated in general.

My question is what impact, if any, did it all have on general language use in those regions? While you hardly have to be a genius to find value in Shakespeare, there also does seem to me to be a baseline of knowledge of some sort to really appreciate him (even if to heavily criticize him), and not find it all, I suppose, very hoity-toity and dismissable. I ask this in part because I’m often struck by the lucidity and eloquence of the language in a lot of extant letters from the time, that weren’t necessarily written by, well, writers or even people with formal educations, but just “normal” folk writing back home or whatnot.

I know pop culture has given us a deeply misguided view of the typical frontiersman (and woman) of the time, but it’s still somewhat hard for me to reconcile it as the representation of frontiersman as roughly “land sailors” - people who often spent money they made (and often stole) instantly on boozing and whoring, and rinse and repeat - is so dominant in pop culture. Of course I suppose the boozing and whoring fellow who can barely stand up most days can still get something out of Hamlet.

The Wikipedia page on pre-islamic Arabia makes a solitary mention of the existence of "Dharmic religions such as Buddhism" there. However, further investigation on the Internet hasn't produced any evidence of any kind about this.

Just asking if there was any record of Muslim soldiers fasting during a campaign, from the early years of Islam to the present day.

This question was generated from reading the biography of Islamic scholar al-Husayn al-Baghawi (died 1124 CE). Despite his humble origins in the small city of al-Baghshoor in modern Afghanistan near the borders of Iran and Turkmenistan, at age 27 he moved to the much larger city of al-Marwarudh and quickly became a top student of the city's main religious authority, al-Qadhi al-Husayn, so much so that he was later buried next to him. But al-Qadhi al-Husayn died only 2 years after al-Baghawi arrived in al-Marwarudh, so al-Baghawi must have already been proficient in Arabic before he arrived. Furthermore, al-Baghawi wrote a number of enduring works that are still touchstones for Islamic scholarship today, all of which written in Arabic, which would indicate that his audience in al-Marwarudh and the surrounding region had a sufficiently high level of Arabic proficiency to utilize and preserve his Arabic language works.

But the question is broader than just al-Baghawi. In general, how common was Arabic proficiency in Khorasan around this time?

TLDR: How common was Arabic proficiency in Khorasan near the end of the 11th century?

We've heard of the medieval idea of Christendom, the notion of protecting Europe's borders from the Muslims invaders of Al-Andalus, the Mongols, the Ottomans. But when did Europe begin to conceive itself as a unitary Christian continent with a mission to defend and extend that religion's domain on earth? Did it start with the conversion of Constantine, Charlemagne's unification of Northern Europe, the late conversion of Lithuania? How did this idea form, where did it reach and when did take hold?

The Wikipedia article on Morsicos states:

[...] a journalistic investigation over the past years has uncovered existing communities in rural Spain (more specifically in the provinces of Murcia and Albacete) which seem to have maintained traces of their Islamic or Morisco identity, secretly practicing a debased form of Islam as late as the 20th century, as well as conserving Morisco customs and unusual Arabic vocabulary in their speech.

The source given is an article in La Vanguardia from 12 November 2006: "Los últimos de Al Andalus. En la sierra del Segura se mantiene el recuerdo de descendientes de moriscos que practicaban costumbres musulmanas". I found a copy of it in an old blog. It contains truly fascinating oral accounts about the elders within these communities who continued to practice a simple form of Islam which was mistaken as sun-worship by the others around them.

Unfortunately, this appears to be the only mention of these communities that I could find. Has any more research on them been conducted? In particular, I'd like to ask:

• How widespread were these communities?
• How did they evade detection?
• Why did they feel compelled to continue hiding their faith after the end of the Inquisition?
• When did these communities die out?

I came across a translated copy of the 1968 book at a flea market and it intrigued me. What I noticed immediately - the lack of sources(!) and some out of date concepts and statements, it's clear the author has a west european Christian outlook and is willing to, for example, downplay arabic contributions to science (geography in particular) and leads him to questionable conclusions (not to mention a quite positive view of colonialism). Is the author a known offender?

With that being said, the facts and chronology seem to be in order and the author offers quite the intriguing buildup to the age of exploration starting from the early middle ages and the travels in that period.

So obviously it can't be used as a source or in an academic setting, but seems to be a good introduction to the topic and an overview of early european exploration. What do you think?

I was reading Encyclopedia Britannica entry on caliphate and stumbled upon this:

Although the reigns of the first four caliphs—Abū Bakr, ʿUmar I, ʿUthmān, and ʿAlī—were marred by political upheaval, civil war, and assassination, the era was remembered by later generations of Muslims as a golden age of Islam, and the four caliphs were collectively known as the “rightly guided caliphs” because of their close personal associations with Muhammad.

Is it just plain wrong? (Islamic Golden Age seems to be generally considered to have started during Abbasid caliphate)