I have posted on the Iberian Reconquista thread a list of Slavic ruled Kingdoms in Muslim Iberia and they are not few.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
mmm, brothers of my ancestors - chilling on the beaches of valencia. 
its amazing how much "official" history leaves out. these amazing stories of journey and adventure. you are born onto a small village somewhere in poland. needle trees, harsh winters and after decades you end up on the beaches of the med. enjoying oranges, a ruler of a small kingdom.
its always amazing to find out these "footnotes" of history. amazing human stories that were forgotten over time.
its amazing how much "official" history leaves out. these amazing stories of journey and adventure. you are born onto a small village somewhere in poland. needle trees, harsh winters and after decades you end up on the beaches of the med. enjoying oranges, a ruler of a small kingdom.
its always amazing to find out these "footnotes" of history. amazing human stories that were forgotten over time.
Dariusz Rozmus
(TO AVOID MISTAKES: MY TEXT IS IN CAPITALICS, THE REST IS POOR TRANSLATION)
http://www.ashervah.republika.pl/tekst8.htm
Arabic historic course of chronicler Al-Bakri (given to us thanks to monumental work of orientalist McGuckin de Slane, done in XIX century) is mainly description of northern Africa in XI century, it is showing that in early middle ages in Muslim countries of Maghred appeared groups of peoples called by Arabs "Saqaliba". People known under such names, known also from other medieval chronicles, had enormous political role on Iberian peninsula. I will allow myself to quote "History of Spain" edited in 1997: "in 1009-1031 Spain was in chaos... In Al-Andalus happened struggles between Slavs and Berbers". Who heard about that? I assure you, even not all orientalists.
Let's go back to chronicle of Al-Bakri. We know about him, that he was one of the best historians and geographs of Arabic world.
(BLAH BLAH BLAH about who was he and character of the chronicle)
Term Saqaliba used by him and other medieval chronicles is probably direct copy from latin words "sqlavus, sclavus, slaves". It would related then to Slavs or slaves. Other theory says that it's related to term "Sclaveni" used in Jordanes chronicle to describe one of part of Slavs. Other ones were called Ants.
Term sqlavus, sclavus - Slav and slave - was meant the same mainly because of the factm that Slavs were in Maghreb - and politically and economically tied with it Iberian peninsuale - mainly as result of slave trade. But was it the only possibility?
About scale and reach of Arabic-Jewish slave trade one can find out from many arabic money ni middle ages archeological sites in central Europe, and medieval sources, pointing to Prague as regional slave trade centre. But let's go to Maghreb.
Analysis of sources shows us, that despite connection in the name (Slav=slave) - medieval arabic chronicles present us Saqaliba as vigour and politically important group, which gave their sign to northern Africa. Region in which they had main role is massive Rifu in northern Morocco.
In IX and X century there was idnependent (or better, partially independent) state (emirat Nekur, Nakur, Nekor). Let's give voice to one of best Polish orientalist in XX century. As T.Lewicki wrote "on the court of little, but quite important Arabic-Berberic state called Nukur there was Slavic guard. From one of notes by Al-Bakri we know that this guard was fundament of local dynasty and was given many privileges by emirs. Such situation existed to the beginnings of XI century, when Saqaliba, taking fruits from hard situation of the little state demanded from sultan Sa'id
ibn Salih formal relief from their slave status. When they were refused, they - backed by other members of Nukur dynasty - withdrew to mountains near Nukur and founded fortified camp, called Qarjat as-Saqaliba (village of Slavs)."
The tiny addition by writing this words to the whole is precising the time and place of mentioned in quite revolt. Analysis of Arabic text showed that events tied with revolt as-Saqaliba can't happened later than in the beginning of X century ( surely not before 916). There is even possibility that it happened at very end of IX century.
Of course events described in quote chronicles pictured in very colourful manner. Slavs in emirat were kind of police, palace guards. They were influenced to revolt by other members of family of young emir. But their palace revolt have not succeed. They have to flee. Question is, were?
(BLAH BLAH BLAH ABOUT WERE IT COLD BE, ARCHEOLOGICAL FINDINGS AND PLANS ETC)
In the end we have to explain that many western historians doeas not see connection between Slavs and Saqalins. In their opinion Saqaliba is relevant to all northern Europeans with fair skin. I think this is wrong. Arabs are differentiating between Normans (al-Madzus) Franks (Farandza) Bizantians (ar-Rumi), Slavs (Saqaliba). (ETC ETC)
Of course it could happened that Arab called that blonde European (YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT IN POLISH TRADITION TYPICAL SLAV IS BLONDE AND BLUE_EYED) but in general it always were Slavs. One of the greatest wave of expansion in the history of human kind was just ending, which took over whole central and southern-eastern Europe (its scale can be compared
to modern settling of new world). Slavs reached Anatolia and Syria. They appeared even in Scandinavia. Arabic elite surely knew with whom they are dealing.
(DID YOU KNOW BTW THAT SLAVS WERE PLUNDERING VIKINGS AND WERE MAIN PIRATE PLAGUE AT BALTICS?)
Last edited:
Like 'Anglia Nova', a colony of Saxon exiles supposedly established in the Crimea around 1091
I do not agree at all with the notion of Slavs to mean fair skined people for the same reason you say plus the very fact that the Ibero-Roman poulation itself, together with the remaining Visigoths could show such characteristics on their own and surely such a trait would have not been so uncommon as to warrant a special naem for it (even more when we know that the Muslims had actual names for these groups szopen clearly shows). Even the own Arab rulling classes in Iberia has been shown in many ancient writing as "fair skined", red hair and talk about the Blue eyed Al-manzor, the powerful Caliph of Cordoba.
It is more likely that these Slavs were brought to Iberia as mercenaries from the east or as slaves that eventually gained power and liberty over some generations. Its clear that this group integrated into the muslim population and gained great power in time as to rule whole Kingdoms on their own.
It is more likely that these Slavs were brought to Iberia as mercenaries from the east or as slaves that eventually gained power and liberty over some generations. Its clear that this group integrated into the muslim population and gained great power in time as to rule whole Kingdoms on their own.
I agree, the North European groups that were the most dynamic at the time - Al-Madzu (Normans, Scandinavians) and Farandza (Franks) were already known.
As Ebusitanus wrote, there were blonde Spaniards and Visigoths. Moreover a significant proportion of the Berbers are blondes as can be easily observed in North Africa.
Obviously we have a parallel to the slave army of Egypt the Mamelucks, that came into power.
The Berbers and the Arabs probably bought Slav(e)s to swell their armies. When there were enough Slav(e)s, they could take control of parts of Muslim Spain. There is nothing odd about it. Concerning the volatile situation.
Even in Rome a certain slave became very powerful and could have destroyed Rome.
Do not read this text as devalorising the interest of the Slav kingdoms in Spain. It is very fascinating, surprising and I have something to discuss with my relatives in eastern Spain.
As Ebusitanus wrote, there were blonde Spaniards and Visigoths. Moreover a significant proportion of the Berbers are blondes as can be easily observed in North Africa.
Obviously we have a parallel to the slave army of Egypt the Mamelucks, that came into power.
The Berbers and the Arabs probably bought Slav(e)s to swell their armies. When there were enough Slav(e)s, they could take control of parts of Muslim Spain. There is nothing odd about it. Concerning the volatile situation.
Even in Rome a certain slave became very powerful and could have destroyed Rome.
Do not read this text as devalorising the interest of the Slav kingdoms in Spain. It is very fascinating, surprising and I have something to discuss with my relatives in eastern Spain.
http://www.nowe-panstwo.pl/10_2002_miesiecznik/10_2002_historia.htm
By Stanislaw Zajac.
ONE NICE QUOTE PRESENTING IGNORANCE OF WESTERN HISTORIANS:
Richard W. Southern in work "Creating of the Middle Ages" 1952 wrote valuating role of Slavs in Europe: "they were subject of trade, and were enalrging tiny amount of unaggressive working pool. To the end of X century they gave nothing to development of Europe".
(First paragraphs are about slaves, about Radanits (Arabic Jews) who were trading them, slave trade centres etc)
...Many went to army or Caliphs court. We kknow that Slavic guard of Caliphs was numbering 13.000 soldiers in the beginnign of X century.
....
Saqaliba were governors, army leaders; in some regions they created real aristocrcy. They were awakening jelousy amongst real muslims. THey were backing themselves. ... While being formal slaves, they quickly were achieveing wealth and great position - had even their own slaves and lands.
According to Lewicki, In Kordoba there were so many poets, writers and bibliophils of Slavic ancestry, that there was even separate book only for them, written by, of course, Slav, Habib as-Siqlabi.
BLAH BLAH ABOUT END OF SLAVE TRADE.