Talk:Adnan
| WikiProject Arab world | (Rated Stub-class) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||
| WikiProject Anthroponymy | (Rated Start-class, Low-importance) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] South vs North
The use of north vs south is currently inaccurate; currently it is used to describe Arabs, but I think that Arabia would be more appropriate. Jayvdb 03:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
- Done Jayvdb 02:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Southern Arabs (Qahtani) moved to the North from 3rd cenury AD. and in many times they became the northern most of the Arabs. (Ghassanids, Lakhmids) it remained that way until Islam
- Also keep in Mind:
- Yement = South, Yameen = Right, Youmn = Good fortune. (Good fortune due to peace and wealth in ancient times)
- Shoum = North, Shimal = Left, Shoum = Bad fortune. (Bad fortune due to the wars that haunted the Sham in ancient times)
The origin of which word was derived from the other can go either way--Skatewalk 04:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- It's probably too late now. But just for the record, the previous statement is wrong in more than 1 way!!--Xevorim (talk) 11:19, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Adnan vs. Qahtan/ South vs. North
I'll be frank, North/South dichotomy is easier for non-Arabic speaking people. North implying speakers of Old North Arabian (from which Classical Arabic descends) descended from the Adnanites and South referring to Old South Arabian speakers of Qahtani descent.
Second, whoever wrote the following(see below) has no idea what the difference is between Arab, Arabic, Arabian, North Arabian and South Arabian.
- The Qahtanites spoke a different Arabic than the Adnanites. Other genealogists claimed that Ishmael married a woman from the Qahtani tribes and learned Arabic. Other sources said that Arab tribes from the south migrated to Mecca and saw Ishmael and his mother Hagar and asked for water. They settled there and Ishmael learnt Arabic from them. Such claims are the reason why Adnani Arabs are described as Arabized Arabs. Qahtanites were in fact different Arabs than the Adnanis. Qahtanites are descended to Saba bin Ismael and this has been said by Muhammed to the Ansar who were Qahtani Arabs and he also said "Armo Bani Ismail. Your father (Ismail) was an Aromian". This states that Qahtanites are descendants of Ismael bin Ibrahim. This will also mean that Qahtani and Adnani Arabs are cousins. Adnani Arabs descends from Nabit bin Ismael and Qahtani Arabs descends from Saba bin Ismael.
Al-Zaidi (talk) 03:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
[edit] Adnani Arabs = The Akkadians
what I want to say ..that Adnani Arabs People Belonging to The Akkadians —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.2.135 (talk) 00:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Mythology presented as fact
There seems to be fairly scant referencing here for there being 40 generations of descent between Abraham, a figure whose existance is not proven, and Adnan. Shouldn't the information presented here be presented as a mythological explanation, or at least as one possible explanation, rather than as genealogical fact? ++Lar: t/c 14:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- I actually think this edit by User:Skatewalk (before) is suspicious -
smells too much like potentialis copyvio, and the user is listed as a sockpuppet of Serenesoulnyc. Accordingly, I've reverted to the version of the article from prior to this edit. --Random832 (contribs) 19:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
- Note that the group is probably also notable - we have an article Qahtanite. Inbound links will also need to be sorted out, since this stood for the better part of a year. --Random832 (contribs) 19:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] to whom edited this article
i want to ask about the thing he said concerning that those named adnan are called "g'hab" what does that mean and can he provide that word in arabic —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.112.192.20 (talk) 22:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Added NPOV & unreferenced tabs
The second and third paragraphs of the Origins section express disagreement (e.g. "false claims") with a given POV (that Adnanites are "Arabized Arabs" - which tbh, I don't understand, should be explained what the issue is) with no references or support. If there are genuinely different opinions on this subject then all the different opinions should be explained, with references to the most recognised sources for those opinions. Helvetius (talk) 10:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)