Dark Side History: Dihya, The Berber "Sorceress" Queen (680-703 AD)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 вер 2024
- Dihya (full true name: Daya Ult Yenfaq Tajrawt), also called Al-Kahina (the priestess, the witch/sorceress/seer), was a Berber Queen active in North Africa in between 680-703 AD. She is most famous for her resistance against the Umayyad caliphate’s advance (which was so successful that she was described as using sorcery) in the region and though she ultimately died and the Umayyads succeeded in their conquest, her legacy continued on and she is today known as an icon of resistance and of great local female leadership. This video aims to bring some light to her.
Please don't be afraid to comment or voice any questions as I love interacting with you my dear viewers and I will try to respond as quickly as possible to you. Also, please like, subscribe & click the bell icon as those actions helps this channel grow!
Other videos of interest:
As-Sayyida al-Hurra, The "Islamic" Pirate Queen!: • Dark Side History: As-...
This video is part of the dark side history series: • Dark Side History
And can also be seen in the all history playlist: • All history
Also, this video is part of the videos connected to Middle Eastern, North African and "Islamic" history • Middle Eastern & "Isla...
Sources and further reading:
Boudraa, Nabil & Krause, Joseph (red.) (2022). Women and resistance in the Maghreb: remembering Kahina. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Ibn Khaldun, Kitāb al-ʻIbar wa-Dīwān al-Mubtadaʼ wa-l-Khabar fī Taʼrīkh al-ʻArab wa-l-Barbar wa-Man ʻĀṣarahum min Dhawī ash-Shaʼn al-Akbār
Hannoum, Abdelmajid. (2001). Post-Colonial Memories: The Legend of the Dihyā, a North African Heroine, Studies in African Literature.
Hirschberg, H.Z. (November 1963). "The Problem of the Judaized Berbers". The Journal of African History. 4 (3): 313-33
Hirschberg, H.Z. (1974). A History of the Jews in North Africa. Vol. 1 From Antiquity to the Sixteenth Century (2nd ed., Eng. trans. ed.). Brill
Kūnī, Ibrāhīm (2022). The night will have its say. Kairo: Hoopoe (a fictionalized account of the history regarding the Umayyad takeover of North Africa and Dihya fighting back )
al-Mālikī, Riyād an-Nufūs.
Modéran, Yves (2005). "Kahena". Encyclopédie berbère. Edisud. pp. 4102-4111
Naylor, Phillip C. (2009). North Africa: A History from Antiquity to the Present. University of Texas
At-tabari, History of the Prophets and Kings ,Vol. 22-23
Talbi, Mohammed. (1971). Un nouveau fragment de l'histoire de l'Occident musulman (62-196/682-812) : l'épopée d'al Kahina. (Cahiers de Tunisie vol. 19 pp. 19-52).
#Kaahina #dihya #HistoricQueen #History #berber #amazigh #FemaleRuler #berberhistory #Africanhistory #Africa #NorthAfrica #NorthafricanHistory
I hope you liked this video about this queen that was said to practice sorcery. Please, don't be afraid to comment or voice any questions as I love interacting with you my dear viewers and I will try to respond as quickly as possible to you (though currently due to internet issues this might take a while). Also, please like, subscribe & push the bell icon as those actions do help this channel to grow!
Reminds me of Sajah bint Al-Harith al-Tamimi, the self-proclaimed "prophetess" during the Riddah wars. While I have known of the Ummayad struggle in Northern Africa and their huge trouble in subjugating the berbers (the Barghawata confederation especially in Morocco), I never knew about this Queen.
Yes, now that you mention it, it is very similar. Maybe even the claims of Sajah bint Al-Harith al-Tamimi being a self proclaimed prophetess could also have been a sort of a propaganda against her in later writings. I generally think the Riddah wars were a lot more different that mostly portrayed in the more classical Islamic narrative. This is due to a lot of contradictions both in between the sources (saying that some groups were apostates and others claiming that they were simply never under Islam until Abu Bakr conqured them) & in pure reasonable likelihood. It would not surprise me if the narrative around Sajah could have been a construct to fill a certain narrative. Maybe this could be a future video.
The Barghawata are a bit later but they certainly were also a very large thorn in the Umayyads' side and also to the later Fatimids and Al-muraabiTuun, I might actually make a video about them too as they are an important yet pretty unknown hence "dark" group.
You gave me some ideas for future videos!👍
Pure speculation here: what if Dihya was just a mystic of the time and her gifts included some kind of induced meditative state that granted her foresight which was interpreted as her being pagan
👍
You do have a point that there could have been elements of this, as certain Jewish & christian mystic groups have practiced various types of meditations under even the influence of drugs and thus get mystic visions, that sometimes were even sought by others and that others not of the faith practice could have interpreted as being Pagan practices.
I never considered this so it was a very good speculative hypothesis on your part, though I would probably still think it was mostly due to propagandist purposes that she was portrayed as a magic practicing pagan.
Going to watch this video before Genshin players complaining this character
👍
The biggest problem in the field of history is that every scholar has his own view and each one of them tries to interpret historical events based on their own understanding which might be pure speculation or guess the sad thing is oridnary people who are intrested into historical events believe in these pure speculations and guess works blindly instead of looking at the actual evidence at face value for example ordinary people use Bart Ehrman view on the historical jesus which is just pure speculation and accept it as literal history its just sad.
As I have not read Bart Ehrman I cannot comment upon him, but I can say that while I agree that a lot of history is guess work (though it should be based upon qualified and reasonable argumentation and fact and not pure speculation without any reasonable backing), a lot of it is also based in evaluating which sources to believe or not (and even clearly biased sources can have valuable parts in them that can be used due to various circumstances and not everything in a biased source need to be affected by the bias either) and you have a lot of different theories and views on this. With this said, I do find it problematic how certain historians do take extreme leaps without due backing in fact or reasonable logic and that this later spreads causing misunderstanding and false destructive ideas to spread. Yet instead of trying to silence or censor bad views or information, I am of the opinion that the best way to counteract bad information is to do so with spreading good information with good arguments generally. So I and others will just have to take the load and do our part in order to spread good information (and hopefully avoiding spreading incorrect or badly argued information in the process but it is always a risk in these processes).
Not have to emphasis on the ع when you say حسن بن النعمان
True, I did overdo it there.😅
Im sure that the Quranic corpus does not mention Muhammad who was born in 7th century Arabia infact Muhammad who was the head of the newly founded state in Arabia may have no connection with the Quranic corpus. The Muhammad metioned in the Quranic corpus is likely the Manichaen prophet Mani.
Quran 3:144; 33:40; 47:2 & 48:29 do mention Mohammed by name, so the Quranic corpus does mention him (and there are probably some old Quranic manuscript part that can attest to this) and there are also early stone inscriptions that are very near in time mentioning him too if I am not mistaken, I thus think that Mohammed did exist and was not another person.
@@theculturedjinni I acknowledge that Muhammad did exist, however, his mention in the Quranic corpus is ambiguous and vague. It is speculated that the figure referred to in the Quranic corpus is prophet Mani, the founder of Manicheanism, mentioned as the "Praiseworthy" or "Muhammad." Meanwhile, it is a fact that Muhammad of Arabia, son of Abdullah, did exist. I never denied his existence; it's just that the Muhammad we believe to be a historical figure is different from the one mentioned in the Quranic corpus. Do you understand what I mean?
@@DomainofKnowlegdia Yes, though I still think considering Ockham's razor (also ,considering the later sources and statements that say they are the same) that it is more likely that they are the same person than someone else being the prophet who there exist very little indication of.
Hello Cultured Jinni how are you note that my current understanding on the origins of Islam may change in future if there is new evidence I personally believe that Muhammad's life In mecca from his birth to the hijra to Yathrib may have been later fabricated by later muslims who for some unkown reason tried to connct Muhammad to Mecca and the polytheist shrine which is Kaaba it is possible that Muhammad was born in Yathrib and later in 622 CE formed his own state unitng all the tribes in Yathrib and later conquered all of Arabia later on around the 690s to 750s Muslims in the Abbasid and Ummayad period being inspired from the Manichaen prophet Mani made the unamed person known as Muhammad as the seal of all prophets in an attempt to erase Manichaenism and for some unknown reason they connected this new prophets story to the shrine in Mecca.
I am good 👍, I have just been very busy lately! I actually do think Mohammed existed in some sense, even if not exactly as the Islamic narrative would have it (though I still think parts of it is true), and I doubt the link to Mani and Manicheanism that some have proposed and I might actually make a future video about this some time in the future where I go more in depth into Mohammed as a historical figure.
@@theculturedjinni As I said before I am not denying the figure of Muhammad bin Abdullah's existence he was a historical figure we have so many sources that prove his existence I also reject the theory that Petra was the original Mecca in fact I believe that Mecca existed before the time of Muhammad Bin Abdullah its just that Muhammad's life in Mecca is not very clear and we know very little we have more information after the hijra event according to the Islamic tradition it could be that Muhammad was from Yathrib and had no connection to Mecca and never claimed to be a prophet or apostle of God he was a warrior, military commander and head of a state. Who spent whole of his life in Yathrib he was no merchent or business man he was possibily born in Yathrib.
@@DomainofKnowlegdia Here i can agree that there are a lot of ambiguity and murkiness in the history that makes it hard to know exactly who Mohammed was and what he did.
@@DomainofKnowlegdia Mohammed is certainly a historic character that is very hard to pin down due to the state of the sources being later, possibly biased, and contradictory.
@@DomainofKnowlegdia extraordinary claims require extraordinary sources. What are your sources for any of this? From what I understand you are basing your argument on the lack of historical information of his(Sallah Alaih Wasalm) time in Mecca and similarities to another religious figure. I admit huge amount of bias on the topic as a Muslim but considering how much Muslims were attacked and how few of them could read/write in Mecca, there is a reason for not having records before the Battle of Badr.
4:50 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 you do it hard to yourself do not emphasis on the ع
Yeah, it kind of happens a lot especially when I shift back and forth between English and Arabic (I do not really do this when I just speak Arabic alone for a time), as I kind of keep trying to reboot my brain for the new foreign language (neither English or Arabic are my native languages and switching between them is harder than switch between them and my Swedish mother tongue )
@theculturedjinni I know is a heart for non Arabs to pronounce the harsh letter in Arabic specifically the ع but the big problem turn on Arabic speaker when they want to pronounce the letter ع they go hard to and they Force themselves to go back there throat just to pronounce the ع that is painful just for advice for you go easy when you say the ع and try to pronounce this like the Swedish Ja