Re: Early Amerind assimilation (Was: Re: Romans in the New World?)

Thomas L. Billings (itsd1@teleport.com)
Tue, 13 Aug 1996 21:17:38 -0800

In article <4uq8fk$fjh@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, rg10003@cus.cam.ac.uk (R.
Gaenssmantel) wrote:

> Hmm, me thinks someone hasn't read a proper history book - and only some
> knowledge about European history.
>
> Peter Bromfield (peter@ren.er.usgs.gov) wrote:
> : Stella Nemeth wrote:
> : >

In case you didn't know, The
> : > >> >so-called Moors ruled Portugal and Spain for about 500 years,
they were
>
> : > >> >the ruling class there at that time. There is also reason for me to
> : > >> >believe that these Moors also ruled other parts of Europe as well.
>

There were several shortlived enclaves on the mainland as far north as
Nice, on the French riviera, but they were never too extensive. The major
influential lands inside Europe and outside of Hispania, that muslims
ruled until 1030 and 1071 were the islands of Sardinia and Sicily. Sicily
was nearly as advanced and wealthy as any state in the rest of Islam at
the time. It got in the way of a norman, Roger de Hauteville, related to
Robert "Guiscard", conqueror of Byzantine territories in southern Italy a
few years earlier.

By 1130 Roger the 2nd had founded the "Kingdom of Sicily" on the power of
his muslim mercenaries. In spite of the fact that he was well educated in
Islamic knowledge, and was said to keep a harem, he ruled as a christian
king, allied with several popes, and opposed by several others. Through
1260 this was an important European state. After the de Hautevilles lost
it, Sicily rapidly was sucked dry by a series of european governments.

> : > >> >where near the 11th century, the Moors were conquered by Germanic
> people from
>
> No, the nothern Spanish kings of Leon started the reconquista from the north
> (I'm not sure when the reconquista started, but it took quite a while). The
> defeat by the French was a bit of a trigger though. One important name
to start
> a searchin a lexika/enzyclopedia on would be El-sid (or El-cid), a hero
of the
> reconquista (or Al-andalus - the Arabic name for the Arab occupied part of
> Spain- or Andalisia the present day Spanish province which derives it's name
> from Al-andalus).
>
> There were no Germanic people involved in the reconquista.

Not quite true. There were many "crusaders" who joined from France, and
elsewhere, especially under the spanish "Military Orders" the Church and
the Crown established after crusading became popular from 1096 onwards.
But the directing policy was given by the Kings of Leon and Castile. They
claimed descent from the old aristocracy of the pre-islamic Visigothic
Kings of Hispania, the successors to roman rule. Visigoths were one of
the germanic tribes that comprised the "folkwanderung" at the end of the
westen roman empire.

The declared aim
> of the reconquista was to make Spain catholic again. Hence the pope
officially
> gave the royal couple (Isabella and ??) who finished off the reconquista (by
> taking Granada [more prcicely the Alhambra in Granada] ) the byname 'the
> catholic kings' (los reyos catholicos).

I believe that this title (catholic meaning "united") was actually given
when Ferdinand and Isabella successfully united Castile with Aragon, just
before they started the final advance against Granada, in 1482, or
thereabouts. Lots of long sieges till 1492.

None of this proves that sub-saharan african peoples participated in the
rule of Europe. Just a few points for clarity in the discussion.

By the way! How did we get from Amerind assimilation to Spain, Africans
and Islam?

Regards,

Tom Billings

-- 

Institute for Teleoperated Space Development

itsd1@teleport.com(Tom Billings)

ITSD's web site is at,  http://www.teleport.com/~itsd1/index.html