Talk:Martyrs of Córdoba

POV

What makes these guys martyrs? I've never seen this before in Wikipedia articles, the labeling of "martyrs". The executions section is also largely original research.Yuber^(talk) 03:28, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The executions section fairly closely matches every account I have come across about the martyrs of Cordoba. And while it is certainly possible to argue about the appropriateness of regarding them as martyrs, that is what they have been called by the Roman Catholic and other Christian churches for the last eleven centuries - and how they are generally referred to by historians. The only point that I'd regard as more than marginally POV in the entire article are the two links at the end to Asma bint Marwan and Abu 'Afak which arguably have some common thematic points but relate to a quite different period of the history of Islam. Otherwise, a good attempt at an NPOV article on a controversial, if somewhat obscure, topic. PWilkinson 20:48, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yuber has obviously never heard or read anything about this topic. That is why he is bewildered at the usage of the term "martyrs" in "Martyrs of Cordoba." How he can decide what is and what is not original research, without having any famaliarity with the topic? Furthermore, how does he know what a Neutral Point-of-View is, in this case, without having any famaliarity with the topic? Yuber is currently under ARBCOM investigation for his vandalism of dozens of Wikipedia articles relating to the Middle East and Islam. His protestations to the article are ridiculous - as pointed out, the "Martyrs of Cordoba" are referred as such by all academic historians, and the information in the article is completely factual historical information accompanied by four credable sources. Wikipedia editors famaliar with the subject matter have attested to the accuracy and neutrality of this short article. Yuber's constant and continued insertion of the NPOV tag is a case of vanadalism - his arguments against the article are ludicrous and his editing actions even more so. I am therefore removing the NPOV tag. I will also file Yuber's actions here as evidence against him in his currently open case before the Arbitration Committee [1]. --Zeno of Elea 14:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Zeno of Elea, is there any reason for your hostility and aggression? Yuber has a point, the term Martyr does not fit with NPOV, but NPOV is, essentially, irrelevent when it comes to naming conventions, and is why he have such loaded POV terms as Martyrs of Córdoba or the Great Leap Forward. --Irishpunktom\^talk July 5, 2005 12:15 (UTC)

I was only trying to explain why I removed the NPOV tag. Yuber seems to have given up on trying to insert the NPOV tag, so the discussion is concluded now. --Zeno of Elea 01:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Edits, 14 July 2005

So there was a lot to be straightened out, seeing as that Orthodox Church of England list is quite POV through and through. Replaced "Moorish" with "Muslim" or "Emirate" where appropriate. Replaced "martyred" with "executed" or "beheaded", if some source could be found to support being more specific. Provided more backstory to help distinguish the voluntary martyrs from the involuntary ones, to illuminate the family connections, and to provide a specific charge whenever possible. Added another reference link. Deleted all the redundant "in Spain"s. I may be forgetting something, but those are the biggies. --Skoosh 00:38, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Martyrs of Cordoba executed for Apostasy from Islam?

PWilkinson, you mentioned that some of the "martyrs" were executed for apostasy, including a Christian priest. How could this be? How does a Christian priest get executed for leaving Islam? --Zeno of Elea 14:31, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Rudericus, the Christian priest executed for apostasy, apparently had a brother who was a Muslim convert and alleged that Rudericus had also converted to Islam. The court seems to have believed the Muslim brother's evidence of the conversion - which meant that since Rudericus now insisted on remaining Christian, he had to be an apostate.

Aurea, a nun, had a Muslim father (a convert?) and a Christian mother. Her "apostasy" (which may simply have been a matter of remaining Christian when her father converted) had been several decades before, but was now brought to the attention of the authorities by some of her relatives.

Felix, a monk, was apparently born Muslim but had been to Asturias and converted there.

Note that two of the three cases rested on denunciations by Muslim relatives; and Felix also seems to have made a blasphemous declaration in front of magistrates.

For the above details, I'm relying on http://www.orthodoxengland.btinternet.co.uk/oecordob.htm, which paraphrases Eulogius's contemporary (if biased) account - which is, after all, our main source for the entire episode. PWilkinson 28 June 2005 13:43 (UTC)

Shouldn't this all be included within the article? --Irishpunktom\^talk July 5, 2005 13:25 (UTC)

You will note that Aesed has now added a detailed list - which, however, does disagree in a few places with both the external links from the article, which both state that Perfectus was the first of the Martyrs to die and Eulogius and Leocritia the last. The date of Pomposa's death looks like a transcription error - the Orthodox England external link gives it as September 19 853 CE (two days after Columba) rather than 835. Adolphus and John both seem to have been executed for apostasy, but possibly as early as the 820s and don't (for some reason) seem to be standardly counted among the Martyrs of Cordoba. I can't find Laura at all and she (along with Adolphus and John) seem to be additional to the traditional number of 48 Martyrs. I assume Aesed's source has details.

Also, both references give Isaac as the second Martyr - after Perfectus and two days before Sancho (3 June 851 CE, a year before the date given in the article) - and imply that it was he who set the example of denouncing Muhammad which most of the other martyrs followed.

There are also some other discrepancies (some names, for example): the only ones which I am absolutely certain are errors are the references to Abd Ar-Rahman II and Muhammad I as caliphs, and I'd prefer to investigate further on the rest (they may simply be a matter of different secondary texts) before editing the article. PWilkinson 15:38, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Muhammad I

In the piece "Rogellus and Servus-Dei Sept 16 852. A monk and his young disciple executed in Cordoba for publicly denouncing Islam inside a mosque. They were the first Christian martyrs executed under Muhammad I." the Muhammad I linked to lived 1389-1421 so it's not likely to have been him, can someone who knows their history fix it?

-Martyrs of Cordoba-

This matter is clearly a lie from catholics. The article says Muhammad I, when there wasnt one prince in the entire Iberian peninsula or the Ummayad dynasty named muhammad.

Actually, yes there was, and yes he was the Emir of Cordoba between 852 and 886. Please try to look things up next time before slandering contributors better informed than you. In fact there has been quite a few people called "Muhammad I", but the Muhammad I page was a brutal redirect to the Ottoman Mehmed I (arguably the best known bearer of the name). I have changed it into a disambiguation page, hopefully this should make things clearer.--Thomas Arelatensis 13:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Telephone directory

The list of "martyrs", which was formerly carefully arranged in chronological order, in order to permit a reader to detect the dequence and rhythm in the evolving nature of this radical Christianist movement, has been rearranged as an alphabetical directory, thwarting any thoughtful inspection. --Wetman 00:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Citations and sources

I'm not so keen on these nth party sources. And their should be some more citations for each of the individuals, no? Faro0485 (talk) 08:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

There is much doubt about the historicity of the individual martyrs. See the German parallel article (which resulted from a students projects'= for a better overall treatment and more sources -- not for the individual martyrs, as there are no more sources, but about the rôle and perception of this hagiography. --Pjacobi (talk) 08:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I particularly like the title "Alleged list of martyrs". I know one can't overdo the insistence on NPOV, but wouldn't "List of (alleged) martyrs" be a tad better? It looks like a perfectly good list to me, and it's unfair to impugn its essence as a list. I would prefer that "alleged" be taken out, but probably "List of those executed" would be rather better. Some are clearly "martyrs" in the Christian sense -- they were killed because they were Christian or because they were acting as Christians; others are not, or are so only debatably -- they were killed for blasphemy against Muhammad and Islam (which for them was an essential part of their Christianity, but for other, even contemporary, Christians was not). Hostiensis (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

their hagiography describes in detail their executions for capital violations of Muslim law in Al-Andalus

what does that mean? --Mostafa yousryyy (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Probably it is not a perfect sentence. Also, I find " the Christians invited execution" a bit NOPV. While some of them seem to have been gone clearly looking for execution, most seem to have been denounced by familiars and such. It reminds me to what happened with the inquisition centuries later.

Also, would it we possible to have some more historicist part somewhere? Medieval records of this sort tend to be not completely reliable. Maybe from the german wiki?

Leirus (talk) 12:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

How many martyrs?

The article talks of fourty-eight martyrs. But when you count the names, you get a total of fifty-five. What is the correct number? --FordPrefect42 (talk) 09:46, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Did Évariste Lévi-Provençal really say that?

hi, in wikipedia arabic they are so mad of the arabic copy of this article, they tried to delete it, changed its title and they were ready to do anything to shut it down, but when they found out there was no chance they started to get goofy on the article itself... anyways i just wanted to give you a background about the situation here, so they have added a line says Évariste Lévi-Provençal sees this executions are a normal thing as they deserved what they got because they denounced islam!!! i couldn't find that anywhere so could anyone please help me find if he really said that thing? god some people are unbelievably unbelievable! thanks --أبرهة العصبي (talk) 09:36, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Are Jews and Moslems prosecuted during reconquest and afterwards also Martyrs of Cordoba or Spain

Are Jews and Moslems prosecuted during reconquest and afterwards also Martyrs of Cordoba or Spain. I read lots were forced to convert or were slaughtered. It is a simple query.

Can we count modern day mass victims by any means of terrorism Martyrs(e.g. sep 2001)

Judaism und Islam have different concepts of martyrdom then Christianity. In Islam a Shahid is also someone who dies during Djihad or while killing others. Jews - afaik - dont know martyrdom as a religious concept. Btw In muslim Spain also many Jews were killed, enslaved or forced to exile, by the Almohads as well as the Almoravids. And the muslim aggression against Europe didnt ended when Spain was freed from islamic Imperialism, it still lasted for centuries. As did the muslim slave trade with Europeans and Africans. (read fe "Jihad in the West" Paul Fregosi, or the works of Tidiane N'Diaje or Dean King).-- 178.115.249.161 (talk) 18:47, 26 May 2012 (UTC)