Syrianized Arabic, Mekka and Quraysh

Submitted by gato branco (Lithuania), Feb 2, 2018 at 02:23

Dear dhimmi no more,

[With respect I doubt very much that you know Egyptian Arabic or al-Lugha al-Fusha al-Haditha]

I do not claim to speak either EA or fuSHa, but I know enough in order to read the books of prof. al-Jabry (the critique of the Arab mind) - only I do not know whether his fuSHa was Haditha or not - and I am sufficiently acquainted with the grammar of EA and know certain coloquial phrases although I have to admit that I do nor understand very much of Egyptian films they speak just too rapidly :)

Actually I have said that linguistically EA is not so distant from fuSHa than Italian is from Latin, and this is certainly true, but on the other hand I admit that sociolinguistically the diglossic situation of both pairs EA/fuSHa and LAT/IT(in medieval Itally) is quite similar.

It is absolutely certain that Tabari and other commentators were unable to understand certain words in Qur'an and this is exactly what I wanted to say and have said, you just have to read my text more attentively. In this case I completely agree with you.

Syrianized Arabic in which the initial Qur'an the most probably was conceived was spoken along all the semicircle starting with Madain al-Saleh(now in Saudi Arabia) through Palestine and Syrian through Norhern Mesopotamia as long as Hira. Where was exactly the Makka(or Bakka, mentioned in Qur'an several times) where Muhammed started his preaching is probably impossible to tell, at least with the current stand of scholarship. Of course the majority of scholars still think, often uncritically but not all(see bellow), that it is the current al-Makka in Hijaz, however some scholars found there are numerous difficulties with such an assumption. Some scholars (as Gerald Hawting or late Patricia Crone) were advancing a hypothesis(half-muted) that it can be somewhere in North-Western Saudi Arabia or Jordan (e.g. Petra). Gerald Hawting was also advancing a hypothesis that the "Mekkans", the adversaries of Muhammad were not "pagans" but rather monotheists (with the syncretism of pagan elements of course) and this would also point to Jordan or Syria which were fairly christianized by 600. However this is only on the level of hypothesis. Patricia Crone has not completely excluded the possibility that it can be the actual Mekka of Hijaz, but she has said it is impossible to prove or disprove until archeological excavations are allowed there. And this is not likely to happen any time soon. Recently prof Aziz al-Azmeh has written a book in which he endeavors substantiate the traditional opinion about Mekka and the paganism of Quraysh by scholarly arguments.

Concerning why Egyptians do not speak Egyptian anymore and Persians speak Persian you have given an answer yourself (Egyptian lost they rebellion against Umayyad, Egyptians were unable or unwilling to do "if you cannot beat them then join them") so I have nothing to add there.

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".