NO PROOFS WHATSOEVER HERE.

Submitted by IamJoseph (Australia), May 7, 2010 at 22:03

dear iamjoseph does not seem to know or care to admit that many Arabs lived in the Syrian desert and Mesopotamia "from time immemorial" and i inlcude here the Lakhmids and the Ghassanids and the likes of the kingdom of the Hira and how come you did not know that our dear iam?

# Why don't you also include Noah and Adam and Eve to your list? We have proof of those older nations you listed - we have no nproof of an Arab nation. All you are admiting, by default, is there was Syrian and Meso and Lakhmids - which is not disputed, but it does not translate to also Arabs as an identfiable ethnic group or race pre-500 BCE. You need to prove Arab kings, cities, language, writings, wars, monuments, relics, other nations verifications and back-ups, as with the Syrians and Mesos you exploit. You cannot do that, which marks the difference of those groups and the Arab one pre-500 BCE.

--------------------------------------------

Strike up the band our dear iam knows how to google and he discovered wikipedia and that there were really Arabs in the Syrian desert called al-lakhmids wa al-ghasaneeds and mamlakit al-hira. Sobhanallah and go and tell them at Hebrew University that the inscriptions at Qaryat al-Faw (BCE) and 3ayn Abdot (88-150CE) and al-Hijr (267CE) are all fakes they will laugh at you.

# Why don't you strike up your band and show us where the term Arab appears anywhere in your links? To prempt, please dont show us why you believe those links connect to today's Arabs, but show us instead anything Arab contained therein, instead of using other older names to manipulate them as Arab. Is there a problem here? We see the term Hebrew and Jewish mentioned in ancient, older links - why not Arab - were the Arabs exiled to a foreign land - were their cities destroyed and their writings forbidden?

--------------------------------------------

>The Namara inscription was carved on a large block of basalt which had
originally ... 7 Kaslul (December) of the year 223 in the Nabataean era of
Bostra (=328 C.E.).The first inscription in a language that may be recognized as Arabic is the
inscription from al-Namara in Syria (328 c.e.)[http://www.archive.org/stream/NewEncyclopediaOfIslam/encyclopedia_of_islam_djvu.txt]

# Knock-knock! The term 'MAY BE RECOGNISED AS ARABIC' is unacceptable. There is no Arab or Arabic therein. Not to mention those percieved Arabic alphabets are only 70 years from 400 CE.

----------------------------------------------------

Wrong it is not the first inscription in Arabic and for this see Pierre Lachere's "Pre-Islamic Arabic" the first dated one is from Qaryat al-Faw and go ask them at Hebrew University

# I respnded to this. There is no Arab or Arabic in that link. Please produce the verse you rely on?

-------------------------------------------

Then I wrote

Well let us check the first line iin epigraphy that was found in Namara and in Arabic and it is dated 328CE right?

># The Namara relic proves my case, not yours. This is the first sign of what later became Arabic. It is described as a set of words in one sentence - that is not 'writings'!

Hello: did you read it? How could you judge a text that you cannot read in its primary language ?

>It is dated around 328 CE - close to what I said was the first Arabic writings.

For the readers: the namara epigraphy is dated 328CE and it is the tomb of an Arab king

># No Arab king at this date. Read the links provided.

he is described as MALIK AL-3Arab

How dare you tell us what a text says and in this case a text that you cannot even read in its primary language?

# I invite you to post the original verse describing an Arab king in that link. Its very simple. Truth is, it just does not exist. There was no Arab king or Arab city or Arab subjects pre-500 BCE, and no Arabic writings pre-400 CE.

----------------------------------------------------

Then I wrote

(something that our dear iam told us that there were no Arab kings) and it is written in Arabic with one Syriac word and notice that our dear iam the demagogue told us that there were really no Arabs before 400CE and when he was reminded of Herodotus and Periplus Arabs (he had no clue that is really the periplus) he told us that he meant that there were no Arabs before 500BCE and that there was no Arabic language texts before 400CE!

# I stand by my claim. Also, I fully responded to your references of Syriac, Periplus and Herodotus, yet you repeat the same jargon and accuse me of not knowing about Periplus - which itself is a new term. Herodotus is also post-500 BCE and does not mention any Arabs pre-500 BCE.

------------------------------------------------

># I have already responded to your Herodotus claim adequately. Re: Periplus Arabs, the author is unknown [not Arab]

Careless reader: where did I say that the author of the Periplus was an Arab?what a careless reader

# You tried to connect this with Arab and I reminded you this was not the case and that Periplus is itself a new term

---------------------------------------------------------

> and the date disputed -

Right and this is what history is all about GREY! except in the minds of people like you

# No, there is not even any grey areas here. There is only a total vacuum of Arabic writings pre-400 CE, and of Arabs pre-500 BCE. Grey infers there are actual imprints - this is not the case.

--------------------------------------------------------

>even then it does not relate to anything claimed by you :

So what did i claim that? Enlighten ya ayuha al-falyasoof al-kabeer! And did you read the Periplus? Let me guess you did not.

# I read all your proposed references and answered them adequately and repeatedly. It seems you have run out of steam and you keep repeating the same things.

----------------------------------------------------------------

>Periplus of the Erythraean SeaFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaThe Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (Greek: Περίπλους τὴς Ἐρυθράς Θαλάσσης, Latin: Periplus Maris Erythraei) is a Greek periplus, describing navigation and trading opportunities from Roman Egyptian ports like Berenice along the coast of the Red Sea, and others along Northeast Africa and India. The text has been ascribed to different dates between the 1st and 3rd centuries AD, but a mid-1st century date is now the most commonly accepted. Although the author is unknown.

Sohanallah he discovered the periplus so did you also read about the Arabs in the Periplus? Oh you can google it or check wikipedia! Oh let me guess you did but you are not man enough to admit that the authors of the Periplus tell us much about the Arabs of their time

# Periplus, by your own link, says 3rd Century. And I read it - there is no Arabic writings therein.

---------------------------------------------

# Do you see - the above is a Greek writings, not refering to Arabs and is of recent vintage anyway. There were no Arabs in Arabia before the Greeks invaded around 300 BCE.

Did you read the Periplus? Let me guess you did not right?

# I did. It refers to the Greeks, not to Arabs.

-------------------------------------------------------

And then I wrote

Now you either put up or you must pardon me shut up# I did put up. You must put up. Please put up any Arabic books pre-400 CE or any Arab king pre-500 BCE. Easy for those claiming TIME IMMOMORIAL - an Arafat term no less!No this comes from a poor book by an ignorant woman whose name is Joan Peters!!And let me repeat: you either put up or shut up

># I did put up. Joan Peters is not an ignorant woman - unlike you, she gives factual, historical refers for all her assertions. In contrast, the ignorant Arabs call the Jerusalem Temple a myth and that Jews are aliens. I have posted numerous links, and they are not limited to Joan Peters.

Joan Peters' book is no more than poor quality hasbara and it is an insult for anyone who cares about israel

# Joan Peters is a very respected writer, who gives factual, hstorical proofs in her index to all she wrote. Her book of TIME IMMORIAL is very dfferent from the islamic parading the Jewish temple is a Zionist myth, but the blood libels and the Protocols are truthful history. 'ALL' Muslims who remained silent of such falsehoods are guilty and stained. Freedom fighters start at home.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".