by
Damien F. Mackey
“… Haaretz reported that during a dig in Tiberias, archaeologist Moshe Hartal “noticed a mysterious phenomenon: Alongside a layer of earth from the time of the Umayyad era (638-750), and at the same depth, the archaeologists found a layer of earth from the Ancient Roman era (37 B.C.E.-132). ‘I encountered a situation for which I had no explanation — two layers of earth from hundreds of years apart lying side by side,’ says Hartal. ‘I was simply dumbfounded”.”
Gunnar Heinsohn
The major Caliphates of Islam are listed as these five (1-5):
- 1 Rashidun Caliphate (632–661)
- 2 Umayyad Caliphate (661–750)
- 3 Abbasid Caliphate (750–1258)
- 4 Mamluk Abbasid dynasty (1261–1517)
- 5 Ottoman Caliphate (1517–1924)
It will be my purpose here – abstracting from the immense problems already associated with the Qur’an (Koran) itself (e.g.):
Dr Günter Lüling: Christian hymns underlie Koranic poetry
(2) Dr Günter Lüling: Christian hymns underlie Koranic poetry | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Islam according to Jay Smith
(6) Islam according to Jay Smith | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Durie’s verdict on Prophet Mohammed
(DOC) Durie’s verdict on Prophet Mohammed | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Sven Kalisch out to expose true nature of Islam
(6) Sven Kalisch out to expose true nature of Islam | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
– to show that virtually none (if any at all) of this presumed history of the successive Caliphates is properly historical, and, hence, underpinned by a reliable archaeology.
Abbasid Caliphate
Aiming right at the centre, the middle one (No. 3 above), the famed Abbasid Caliphate: “The Abbasid caliphs established the city of Baghdad in 762 CE. It became a center of learning and the hub of what is known as the Golden Age of Islam”:
I have already disposed of this supposedly the most glorious age of Islam by arguing that early Baghdad (not the modern city of that name), known as Madinat-al-Salam, “City of Peace”, was actually Jerusalem, meaning just that, “City of Peace”:
Original Baghdad was Jerusalem
(6) Original Baghdad was Jerusalem | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
In the same article I noted that the imagined early Baghdad had, unsurprisingly, left no discernible archaeological trace. There I wrote:
The first thing to notice about ancient Baghdad is that it has left “no tangible traces”:
“Built of the baked brick, the city’s walls have long since crumbled,
leaving no trace of Madinat-al-Salam today”.
“While no tangible traces have yet been discovered of the eighth-century
Madinat-al-Salam, and as it is currently impossible to conduct excavations in Baghdad, one can only hope that one day material evidence may be discovered”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Baghdad
“The Round City was partially ruined during the siege of 812–813, when
Caliph al-Amin was killed by his brother,[a] who then became the new caliph.
It never recovered;[b] its walls were destroyed by 912,[c] nothing of
them remains,[d][6] there is no agreement as to where it was located.[7]”
[End of quotes]
And just as I have shown, time and time again, that the Prophet Mohammed was a fictitious, largely biblical, composite, so, too, basically, I believe, were the luminaries of the so-called Abbasid Golden Age.
Thus, for instance, the fairytale (Arabian Nights), Hārūn al-Rashīd, who is said to have built the House of Wisdom in Baghdad, is an appropriation of the great king, Hiram, ally of Solomon, who helped the wise king of Israel build the Temple of Yahweh and Solomon’s Palace in Jerusalem, “City of Peace”.
And in the names of a handful of presumed Islamic scholars of the Golden Age, the polymathic Al-Kindi (c. 800); Al-Farabi (c. 900); Avicenna (c. 1000); and Averroes (c. 1150), I found what I would consider to be elements of Ahikar’s (Tobit’s nephew) Assyro-Babylonian names: respectively, Aba-enlil-dari and Esagil-kinni-ubba.
Thus:
Al-Kindi – Esagil-Kinni;
Al-Farabi – Enlil-Dar-Ab(i);
Avicenna – Ubb-kinni(a);
Averroes – Aba-(d)ar(i)
In these famous names is largely encompassed Islamic philosophy, science, astronomy, cosmology, history, demography, medicine and music for the Golden Age.
Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism
(8) Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
If the glorious and lengthy Abbasid Caliphate can be thus expunged from history, and the very originator of Islam, Mohammed, found to have been an artificial construct – not to mention Loqmân and Abu Lahab (see below) – then we appear to have no firm archaeological foundations upon which to erect a plausible history of the Caliphate.
And things, apparently, do not get much better.
Rashidun Caliphate
Let us go back for a moment to Mohammed and his presumed era, more than a century before the so-called Abbasids.
Not only has Mohammed been shown to have been a non-historical entity, a fictitious composite based upon real historical (biblical) characters:
Mohammed, a composite of Old Testament figures, also based upon Jesus Christ
but the historicity of some of Mohammed’s supposed contemporaries, too, is highly suspect.
Mohammed’s very uncle, Abu Lahab, for instance, has been found to have had suspiciously (biblical) Ahab-like traits, as, correspondingly, does Abu-Lahab’s unbelieving wife, Umm Jamīl, somewhat resemble Queen Jezebel:
Abu Lahab, Lab’ayu, Ahab
(8) Abu Lahab, Lab’ayu, Ahab | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
And Mohammed’s supposed contemporary, Nehemiah ben Hushiel, would seem to be a direct pinch from the biblical Nehemiah:
Two Supposed Nehemiahs: BC time and AD time
(3) Two Supposed Nehemiahs: BC time and AD time | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
And their (Mohammed and Nehemiah’s) contemporary, the Byzantine emperor, Heraclius, is a most bizarre character, somewhat like a frog in a blender, whom I have described as being “a composite of all composites”:
Heraclius and the Battle of Nineveh
(3) Heraclius and the Battle of Nineveh | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Again, there is the Islamic sage Loqmân (Luqman) of the Qur’an (31st sura), who quotes from the wisdom of Ahikar, an Israelite nephew of the biblical Tobit:
Ahiqar, Aesop and Loqmân
(2) Ahiqar, Aesop and Loqmân | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Ahikar’s influence, as we read above, also permeates the Abbasids.
But Loqmân has been compared as well with the venal biblical seer, Balaam, more than half a millennium before Ahikar:
Islam’s Loqmân based on biblical Balaam
(3) Islam’s Loqmân based on biblical Balaam | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
Oh yes, of course, the story of Mohammed also has (like Balaam) a talking donkey:
A funny thing happened on the way to Mecca
(2) A funny thing happened on the way to Mecca | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
With so insecure an archaeologico-historical base, beginning with Mohammed himself, the entire Caliphate period, from, say, 650-1250 AD (Rashidun to Abbasid), must needs be looking very shaky indeed.
At this stage I have not analysed the four caliphs closely associated with Mohammed (the Rashidun Caliphate), Abū Bakr (reigned 632–634), ʿUmar (reigned 634–644), ʿUthmān (reigned 644–656), and ʿAlī (reigned 656–661). But, based on the cases of Mohammed and Abu Lahab, I would strongly suspect that these four, too, can be identifiable with one or more biblical characters ranging from, say, Moses to Tobit (possibly also embracing the New Testament).
Let us switch now to the Umayyads (661-750 AD).
Umayyad Caliphate
As with the 1 Rashidun Caliphate (632–661), so, too, in the case of the 2 Umayyad Caliphate (661–750), I have not yet analysed the various caliphs with an eye to biblical comparisons.
But the great shock about the Umayyads came at the very beginning of this article, with archaeologist Moshe Hartal’s observation that the Umayyads existed on the same stratigraphical level as the Romans of the period approximating to Jesus Christ.
How shattering!
According to professor Gunnar Heinsohn’s interpretation of the Umayyads, these were none other than the Nabataeans (era of Maccabees and Jesus Christ):
Professor Heinsohn is followed in this by The First Millennium Revisionist (2021) https://stolenhistory.net/threads/revision-in-islamic-chronology-and-geography-unz-review.5581/
I do not necessarily agree with every detail (e.g. date) of the following.
….
“Archeologists have no way of distinguishing Roman and Byzantium buildings from Umayyad buildings, because “8th-10th Cent. Umayyads built in 2nd Cent. technology” and followed Roman models”.
The First Millennium Revisionist
In Heinsohn’s SC chronology, the rise of Christianity in the first three centuries AD and the rise of Islam from the 7th to the 10th century are roughly contemporary. Their six-century chasm is a fiction resulting from the fact that the rise of Christianity is dated in Imperial Antiquity while the rise of Islam is dated in the Early Middle Ages, two time-blocks that are in reality contemporary. The resynchronizing of Imperial Antiquity and Early Middle Ages provides a solution to some troublesome archeological anomalies. One of them concerns the Nabataeans.
During Imperial Antiquity, the Nabataean Arabs dominated long distance trade. Their city of Petra was a major center of trade for silk, spice and other goods on the caravan routes that linked China, India and southern Arabia with Egypt, Syria, Greece and Rome.
In 106 AD, the Nabataean Kingdom was officially annexed to the Roman Empire by Trajan (whose father had been governor of Syria) and became the province of Arabia Petraea. Hadrian visited Petra around 130 AD and gave it the name of Hadriane Petra Metropolis, imprinted on his coins. Petra reached its urban flowering in the Severan period (190s-230s AD).[18]
Mackey’s comment: I actually date the Trajan-Hadrian period to the Maccabean age, not c. 106 AD:
Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian
(5) Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
And yet, incredibly, these Arab long-distance merchants “are supposed to have forgotten the issuing of coins and the art of writing (Aramaic) after the 1st century AD and only learned it again in the 7th/8th century AD (Umayyad Muslims).
” …. It is assumed that Arabs fell out of civilization after Hadrian, and only emerged back into it under Islam, with an incomprehensible scientific advancement. The extreme primitivism in which pre-Islamic Arabs are supposed to have wallowed, with no writing and no money of they own, “stands in stark contrast to the Islamic Arabs who thrive from the 8th century, [whose] coins are not only found in Poland but from Norway all the way to India and beyond at a time when the rest of the known world was trying to crawl out of the darkness of the Early Middle Ages.”…. Moreover, Arab coins dated to the 8th and 9th centuries are found in the same layers as imperial Roman coins. “The coin finds of Raqqa, for example, which stratigraphically belong to the Early Middle Ages (8th-10th century), also contain imperial Roman coins from Imperial Antiquity (1st-3rd century) and Late Antiquity (4th-7th century).” …. “Thus, we have an impressive trove of post-7th c. Arab coins lumped together with pre-7th c. Roman coins of pre-7th c. Roman times. But we have no pre-7th c. Arab coins from the centuries of their close alliance with Rome in the pre-7th c. periods.”
….
The first Islamic Umayyad coins, issued in Jerusalem, “continue supposedly 700 years earlier Nabataean coins.”
….
Often displaying Jewish menorahs with Arabic lettering, they differ very little from Jewish coins dated seven centuries earlier; we are dealing here with an evolution “requiring only years or decades, but not seven centuries.”
….
Architecture raises similar problems. Archeologists have no way of distinguishing Roman and Byzantium buildings from Umayyad buildings, because “8th-10th Cent. Umayyads built in 2nd Cent. technology” and followed Roman models. …. “How could the Umayyads in the 8th c. AD perfectly imitate late Hellenistic styles,” Heinsohn asks, “when there were no specialists left to teach them such sophisticated skills?”
….
Moreover, “Umayyad structures were built right on top of Late-Hellenistic structures of the 1st c. BCE/CE.” …. One example is “the second most famous Umayyad building, their mosque in Damascus. The octagonal structure of the so-called Dome of the Treasury stands on perfect Roman columns of the 1st/2nd century. They are supposed to be spolia, but . . . there are no known razed buildings from which they could have been taken. Even more puzzling are the enormous monolithic columns inside the building from the 8th/9th c. AD, which also belong to the 1st/2nd century. No one knows the massive structure that would have had to be demolished to obtain them.”
….
Far from rejecting the Umayyads’ servile “imitation” of Roman Antiquity, their Abbasid enemies resumed it: “8th-10th c. Abbasids bewilder historians for copying, right down to the chemical fingerprint, Roman glass.”
Heinsohn quotes from The David Collection: Islamic Art / Glass, 2014:
The millefiori technique, which takes its name from the Italian word meaning “thousand flowers”, reached a culmination in the Roman period. . . .
The technique seems to have been rediscovered by Islamic glassmakers in the 9th century, since examples of millefiori glass, including tiles, have been excavated in the Abbasid capital of Samarra. ….
I included in “How Long Was the First Millennium?” one of Heinsohn’s illustrations of identical millefiori glass bowls ascribed respectively to the 1st-2nd century Romans and to the 8th-9th century Abbasids. Here is another puzzling comparison: ….
Heinsohn concludes that, “the culture of the Umayyads is as Roman as the culture of early medieval Franks.
Their 9th/10th century architecture is a direct continuation of the 2nd c. AD. The 700 years in between do not exist in reality.” …. “The Arabs did not walk in ignorance without coinage and writing for some 700 years. Those 700 years represent phantom centuries. Thus, it is not true that Arabs were backward in comparison with their immediate Roman and Greek neighbours who, interestingly enough, are not on record for having ever claimed any Arab backwardness. . . . the caliphs now dated from the 690s to the 930s are actually the caliphs of the period from Augustus to the 230s.”
….
This explains why archeologists often find themselves puzzled by the stratigraphy. For example, Haaretz reported that during a dig in Tiberias, archaeologist Moshe Hartal “noticed a mysterious phenomenon: Alongside a layer of earth from the time of the Umayyad era (638-750), and at the same depth, the archaeologists found a layer of earth from the Ancient Roman era (37 B.C.E.-132). ‘I encountered a situation for which I had no explanation — two layers of earth from hundreds of years apart lying side by side,’ says Hartal. ‘I was simply dumbfounded.’”
….
Heinsohn argues that the Umayyads of the Early Middle Ages are not only identical with the Nabataeans of Imperial Antiquity, but are also documented in the intermediate time-block of Late Antiquity under the name of the Ghassanids. “Nabataeans and Umayyads not only shared the same art, the same metropolis Damascus, and the same stratigraphy, but also a common territory that was home to yet another famous Arab ethnicity that also held Damascus: the Ghassanids. They served as Christian allies of the Byzantines during Late Antiquity (3rd/4th to 6th c. AD). Yet, they were already active during Imperial Antiquity (1st to 3rd c. AD). Diodorus Siculus (90-30 BC) knew them as Gasandoi, Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD) as Casani, and Claudius Ptolemy (100-170 AD) as Kassanitai.” …. In the Byzantine period, the Ghassanid caliphs had “the same reputation for anti-trinitarian monotheism as the Abbasid Caliphs now dated to 8th /9th centuries.” …. They also, like the Islamic Arabs, preserved some Bedouin customs such as polygamy. ….
[End of quotes]
In a most interesting twist, Taycan Sapmaz identifies:
THE NABATAEANS AND LYCIANS
(6) THE NABATAEANS AND LYCIANS | taycan sapmaz – Academia.edu
Who could argue against the Nabataeans and Lycians at least sharing commonalities?
Ottoman Caliphate
For further apparent anachronisms, this time with the early (only) Ottoman Caliphate, I simply refer the reader to my article:
King Solomon and Suleiman
(6) King Solomon and Suleiman | Damien Mackey – Academia.edu
with more, hopefully, to be written on this subject in the future.
Conclusions
The Prophet Mohammed is clearly a non-historical, composite entity based on a bunch of real historical figures from a vast range of eras.
Mohammed’s relatives, contemporaries, likewise are biblico-historically-based, e.g. uncle Lahab as Ahab; Nehemiah ben Hushiel as the biblical Nehemiah; emperor Heraclius as possibly literature’s most composite of composites.
This necessitates that the closely associated Rashidun Caliphate could have no real historical reality in AD time. This view being totally reinforced by the next Caliphate,
The Umayyad as belonging archaeologically to a Roman period, some six centuries prior to the supposed era of Mohammed. This being totally reinforced by the next Caliphate,
The Abbasid, as having no archaeological trace for its epicentre, ancient Baghdad, Madinat al-Salam, which is really ancient Jerusalem.
Parallel Lives, Also BC Afterglows In AD 