What's new

Arabian Gulf: the Cradle of Civilisation?

The article put a the northern boundary of the newly created Gulf at Mesopotamia, there was no Persia then o be called after, the Arabs at that time were Semites who spoke Aramaic, so the Gulf at that time should be called the Aramaic Gulf according to the context of that time.. perhaps after the arrival of the Persian empire it was named the Persian Sea or Gulf at the same time as there was a Roman sea_most likely the actual Mediterranean sea..
So, please do not be lost in conjunctures and lose the essence of the article.. since its historical meanings are more important than its title _that I wouldn't have used myself_
@Salman Zahidi
In his post# 83 has linked the Indian ocean flooding of that area to the biblical event known as Noah flood..
Which is rather an interesting perspective.. much more to the point and much more interesting than debating the name of the Gulf which is irrelevant for the rest of the article..

Some scholars believe that Caspian sea and Dead sea were huge fresh water lakes before the flood event. But with the Noah flood event, sea water poured into the lakes from Mediterranean side and possibly from the South as well to form these lakes into seas. Scientific study around their basins does indicates about the mega flooding occurred around 7000-6000 BC.
 
.
If you name the Arabian Sea the Persian Sea, I don't think that Arabs would care much. It is your language at the end of the day, and you could use it the way you like. When we say Al Khaleej Al Arabi, it is simply our own business, and the more Persians get loud about it, the more we insist.
Nobody give a sh!t about what you name it but don't try to change history like many arabs say the gulf is arab and iran is trying to change while its the opposite

You can tell them that the only people call it arab are the arabs but the rest of the world call it persian
 
.
Arabs did expand into Europe

Maan2.jpg



It was actually a wonderful state.

As for the Crusades we all know what Arabs did to those guys.


sddefault.jpg



We all know what Egyptian Arabs did to the Mongols

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
The mamluks were not arabs so are the Egyptians

The only reason the mongol lost it was because of the death of their emperor

It's actually now called the Gulf of Omar ibn Al khattab.
Actually it's pirouz nahavandi gulf
Shah ismail gulf
Babak khorramddin gulf
Shapur zo al aktaf gulf(your nightmare lol)
Abu muslim gulf
Yezdagerd gulf
Rustam gulf

what is the hell arabian gulf no such thing ? whole world knows it as persian gulf . Lets start calling arabian sea as pakistani sea because we border it lol
Pakistani indian sea since most of it is in the Indian Ocean

It is really naive for Persians to think that, by crying loud, the Arabs will somehow use the name "Persian Gulf". This is just almost a mathematical impossibility. They should save their time and effort for other business.
 
.
The mamluks were not arabs so are the Egyptians

The only reason the mongol lost it was because of the death of their emperor


Actually it's pirouz nahavandi gulf
Shah ismail gulf
Babak khorramddin gulf
Shapur zo al aktaf gulf(your nightmare lol)
Abu muslim gulf
Yezdagerd gulf
Rustam gulf

Their armies were.

Not a single Arab or even Muslim knows who the hell most of those irrelevant figures were. Nor have they anything to do with modern-day KSA or Arabia.

Anyway Sumer and all the earliest civilizations in Iraq (99% of them being Semitic) were founded by people originally from Arabia next door. Even the Sumerians considered Dilmun as a holy land and as their ancestral lands. One of the most popular theories of the origin of the Sumerians is them being part of the Arabian bifacial culture. (Ubaid period).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubaid_period

Sargon of Akkad for instance was an Amorite (Semites) originating from Arabia.

"It is believed that the Amorites originated in Arabia, coming to Mesopotamia as occupants, and within a century or so continuing further into Syria. During the same era, another emigration wave followed the path south of the Syrian desert, the Amorites emerge as the people to the east of the Hebrews, in Canaan.
t.gif

While Amorite intrusion to Mesopotamia came by the force of the sword, they appear to have entered thinly populated lands in Canaan."​

"History
2300 BCE: Jericho is settled by the Amorites.
21st century BCE: Heavy immigration of Amorites from Arabia, into the lands of Assyria in the north and Canaan and Lebanon in the west."​

http://i-cias.com/e.o/amorites.htm

Your beloved so-called "Aryan" Persians/Iranians were still roaming the steppes and deserts of Kazakhstan (Andronovo) back then leaving absolutely nothing of worth. Their first encounter with civilization itself was when they met our ancestors. So-called pre-Islamic Iranian culture is to a large degree a copy/heavily influenced by ancient Semitic civilizations and culture. This is evident for every historian.
 
Last edited:
. .
The mamluks were not arabs so are the Egyptians

The only reason the mongol lost it was because of the death of their emperor


Actually it's pirouz nahavandi gulf
Shah ismail gulf
Babak khorramddin gulf
Shapur zo al aktaf gulf(your nightmare lol)
Abu muslim gulf
Yezdagerd gulf
Rustam gulf


Pakistani indian sea since most of it is in the Indian Ocean
Do you know what the word Mamluks mean in Arabic?
Those were young slaves bought by the Arab Muslims and given freedom, trained in the art of warfare and democratically selected as heads of Muslim nations based on personal character and merits, Islam's democracy practice by the Muslim Arabs was the only one to allow that in history.. So by all means they were adopted sons of Arabs, hence Arabs..By the way the Arab expansion into Europe was done by the Arabs themselves..Tariq Ibn Ziad invaded the Iberian peninsula on the call from oppressed Europeans..

As for the Egyptians:

Genetic
analysis of modern Egyptians reveals that they have paternal lineages common to indigenous other Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations in Northeast and Northwest Africa (Maghreb and Horn of Africa), and to Middle Eastern peoples to a lesser extent—these lineages would have spread during the Neolithic and were maintained by the predynastic period."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt

And since Northeast Africa as well as Northwest African and the Middle Eastern origins can be traced to Yemen and other parts of the Arabian peninsula linked to Mesopotamia and the fertile crescent.. The Egyptians _genetically wise_ have a lot in common with the Arabs..


The Mongols never lost a war in their entire existence, death of an emperor or not, they were defeated this time after destroying Baghdad and Damascus, by the remaining Muslims who could not tolerate that.. it is important to know that without an allied Muslim army coming from the South, the Mongols would have never been allowed to conquer any Arab Muslim land, there were these Arabs who saw the Khalifate as decadent who has helped the Mongols invade and destroy its capitals.. I won't go to that extent, but the Arabs had the Ninja-like Hashashins (Assassins) who were specialized in stealth and assassinations through poison or weapons and they might have assassinated the Mongol emperor by poison, since he was close to some Muslim Arabs.. anyway it is just a theory, but good enough in that context of war with Arabs and against Arabs..

All this is of course off topic, but since these important facts were raised, it was equally important to answer them..

AS for the Pakistani who asked for the Arabian sea to be called Pakistani sea, there is a better compromise, we can call it Arabistan Sea..What you say?
 
Last edited:
.
Their armies were.

Not a single Arab or even Muslim knows who the hell most of those irrelevant figures were. Nor have they anything to do with modern-day KSA or Arabia.

Anyway Sumer and all the earliest civilizations in Iraq (99% of them being Semitic) were founded by people originally from Arabia next door. Even the Sumerians considered Dilmun as a holy land and as their ancestral lands. One of the most popular theories of the origin of the Sumerians is them being part of the Arabian bifacial culture. (Ubaid period).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubaid_period

Sargon of Akkad for instance was an Amorite (Semites) originating from Arabia.

"It is believed that the Amorites originated in Arabia, coming to Mesopotamia as occupants, and within a century or so continuing further into Syria. During the same era, another emigration wave followed the path south of the Syrian desert, the Amorites emerge as the people to the east of the Hebrews, in Canaan.
t.gif

While Amorite intrusion to Mesopotamia came by the force of the sword, they appear to have entered thinly populated lands in Canaan."​

"History
2300 BCE: Jericho is settled by the Amorites.
21st century BCE: Heavy immigration of Amorites from Arabia, into the lands of Assyria in the north and Canaan and Lebanon in the west."​

http://i-cias.com/e.o/amorites.htm

Your beloved so-called "Aryan" Persians/Iranians were still roaming the steppes and deserts of Kazakhstan (Andronovo) back then leaving absolutely nothing of worth. Their first encounter with civilization itself was when they met our ancestors. So-called pre-Islamic Iranian culture is to a large degree a copy/heavily influenced by ancient Semitic civilizations and culture. This is evident for every historian.
Yes you know these figures very well otherwise why you call iranians slurs because of them specially abu lulu and shah ismail

Weren't they mercenary Turks??:(
Cuman and pecheneg turks with Georgian and Circassian warriors as well

Do you know what the word Mamluks mean in Arabic?
Those were young slaves bought by the Arab Muslims and given freedom, trained in the art of warfare and democratically selected as heads of Muslim nations based on personal character and merits, Islam's democracy practice by the Muslim Arabs was the only one to allow that in history.. So by all means they were adopted sons of Arabs, hence Arabs..By the way the Arab expansion into Europe was done by the Arabs themselves..Tariq Ibn Ziad invaded the Iberian peninsula on the call from oppressed Europeans..

As for the Egyptians:

Genetic
analysis of modern Egyptians reveals that they have paternal lineages common to indigenous other Afro-Asiatic-speaking populations in Northeast and Northwest Africa (Maghreb and Horn of Africa), and to Middle Eastern peoples to a lesser extent—these lineages would have spread during the Neolithic and were maintained by the predynastic period."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt

And since Northeast Africa as well as Northwest African and the Middle Eastern origins can be traced to Yemen and other parts of the Arabian peninsula linked to Mesopotamia and the fertile crescent.. The Egyptians _genetically wise_ have a lot in common with the Arabs..


The Mongols never lost a war in their entire existence, death of an emperor or not, they were defeated this time after destroying Baghdad and Damascus, by the remaining Muslims who could not tolerate that.. it is important to know that without an allied Muslim army coming from the South, the Mongols would have never been allowed to conquer any Arab Muslim land, there were these Arabs who saw the Khalifate as decadent who has helped the Mongols invade and destroy its capitals.. I won't go to that extent, but the Arabs had the Ninja-like Hashashins (Assassins) who were specialized in stealth and assassinations through poison or weapons and they might have assassinated the Mongol emperor by poison, since he was close to some Muslim Arabs.. anyway it is just a theory, but good enough in that context of war with Arabs and against Arabs..

All this is of course off topic, but since these important facts were raised, it was equally important to answer them..

AS for the Pakistani who asked for the Arabian sea to be called Pakistani sea, there is a better compromise, we can call it Arabistan Sea..What you say?
I would call it the Somalian sea
 
. . .
Please do not argue too much on the name, it just derails the thread.. the main point here is that whatever it was called it was the cradle of civilisation..
 
.
Bro, Iran Körfezi (Iran Gulf), Fars Körfezi (Persian Gulf), Arap Körfezi (Arabian Gulf), Acem Körfezi. Is also used.

But the most commonly used term in Turkey is Basra Körfezi (Gulf of Basra). I think we are the only ones to call it Gulf of Basra.

We name a gulf by the most populous city/town inside the Gulf area.

All of the Gulfs in Turkey also named in such a manner.
View attachment 382703
The problem is that Basra is not even at the shore of Persian gulf . its 110km away from Persian gulf

What about the Arabic name of the Gulf of Abū-Lū‘lū‘ah
 
.
It is really naive for Persians to think that, by crying loud, the Arabs will somehow use the name "Persian Gulf". This is just almost a mathematical impossibility. They should save their time and effort for other business.
Nobody care about what some Arabs will call it but don't lie and stop saying that iran try to change the gulf name because its already have the right name which is PERSIAN GULF

The problem is that Basra is not even at the shore of Persian gulf . its 110km away from Persian gulf


What about the Arabic name of the Gulf of Abū-Lū‘lū‘ah
Peace be upon him
 
.
To be fair, it should remain Persian Gulf. There's already an Arabian Sea, so both sides should be happy with the status quo.
 
.
Weren't they mercenary Turks??:(

Mamluks in both Egypt and Hindustan were Turks.

Coincidentally, both Mamluks had crowned some of the earliest Muslim female monarchs:

Razia Sultana in Hindustan:
3-Tamar-of-Georgia.jpg



Shajar al-Durr in Egypt:
shajarr.jpg


:smitten:
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom