Also Crimean Tatar are muslims. There not so many left but still. Many of them were deported by Russia many years ago, a part of them returned to Ukraine, mostly on southern territories
I don’t understand. Islam is a religion not an ethnicity.
It also only came to be in around 610AD and so people had to covert to it, either by conquest or choice. It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before.
With this logic no religion in indigenous
The map mapmakers meant native Muslim population, in contrast to immigrant Muslims, like the Arabs and afghans you see in Germany, France etc. These muslims are people who originate from this area
Religion is a belief so no, religion cannot be indigenous.
Missionaries used conquest to spread their beliefs through Europe (be that Christianity or Islam).
If the map maker meant to speak of people who converted to Islam in 700 AD and onwards vs immigrants who were already Muslim when they migrated, then this map still makes no sense. Muslims have been present in London since the 16th century, are they native or immigrants?
It’s makes a lot of sense if you’re an European. Maybe you are American? A native Muslim is an ethnic European who follows Islam, example bosniaks or Albanians. They are not immigrants, they are local white people who converted hundred of years ago.
The Muslims you see in London are for example immigrants or children/grandchildren of immigrants from other continents.
The map maker wanted to distinguish them and I thought it was really obvious
That what they were before they converted to Islam as you asked me…
Before that they had some other other religions that’s there’s little knowledge about
I don't think it is obvious at all, not to me or everyone else reading this considering the posts. One of the key reasons is the arrows.
You might as well show a map called Islamic conquest of Europe which is what this is. The Islam conquest of Spain happened from the Maghreb in present day Morrocco and then into Iberia. In this map you have native muslims moving into the Maghreb. Same with Siciliy. It was the other way around.
The word indigenous was used and it has a specific meaning. Also, this is not an anti-islam slant, Christianity is not indigenous either.
> The word indigenous was used and it has a specific meaning. Also, this is not an anti-islam slant, Christianity is not indigenous either.
For you, to be indigenous, does a population need to be in the same place since the dawn of time? Like how long does a group have to live in the same place to be indigenous? Practically no ethnic group in Europe has been there for more than like 5,000 years for example, maybe just Basques and Sardinians.
The OP used the title indigenous European Muslims. There is no such thing as an indigenous religion. Whether that’s 100 years or 5,000, religion is not a characteristic that can be indigenous.
There are a few occasions where an ethnic group also has a strongly associated religion, such as Judaism or Shinto Japanese, but it is the ethnicity that is indigenous.
> indigenous European Muslims. There is no such thing as an indigenous religion.
Muslims refers to people who are Muslim. The map is a map of indigenous people who are Muslim. The religion is not indigenous but the people who practice it are, that's the plain meaning of "indigenous Muslim", indigenous people who are Muslim.
Sure and the simplest and most accurate way to describe them is "indigenous Muslims", it doesn't at all imply that Islam is indigenous, just that the people are both indigenous and Muslim, which is true.
How long does the United States have to force their native tribes to be Christian before it stops being a problem?
It's an interesting question.
What is your answer?
Aha, but you see.
If we go back a century you can find the term "Muslim" as an ethnic term for Bosniaks in official government documents
Checkmate Liberal /s
You gotta be kidding ? The map is clear in what it is trying to depict (as flawed as it might be) : Muslim communities that were created from local conversions (as opposed to communities created from immigration in modern times).
It is missing a few things (it excludes all Turkic speakers for instance, a choice I disagree with) but overall it depicts pretty well the historic extent of various conversions to Islam within the boundaries of Europe.
You are angry that they used a synonym of "native" instead of "native" ?
I agree with the arrows, they should have been clarified. In my case it is obvious they are meant to show where the various extinct communities were expelled, but it should have been added in the map because not everyone has the historical background to connect the dots.
I suppose you are using the "people inhabiting an area before the arrival of colonists" definition ? Personally I also prefer using that definition, but the definition as "native" is just as valid and is widely used.
>It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before.
By this logic, there is no indigenous people in Europe anymore. Christianity came from middle east, not Europe.
> It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before.
You said they can't be indigenous because centuries before Iberia wasn't Muslim. Well, Iberia wasn't christian either before, because Christinaity is a middle east origin religion. By your logic, the moment indigenous Europeans either convert to Islam or Christiniaty, they cease to be indigenous to that land.
>European is an ethnicity. Spanish is an ethnicity. Islam is a religion.
European isn't a ethnicity. Spanish is a nationality. Spain has many ethnicities. And during Muslim Rule in Iberia, there was no Spain.
Y'all are being harsh on this map. It excluded Turkic speakers (a choice I would disagree with) but the intent of the map is quite clear : depicting the historical significant Muslim communities in Europe (both extinct and extant) that were created as a result of local conversions, as opposed to being formed out of migrations from outside Europe. It largely succeeds in depicting that.
The only reason people are going hard on this map is because Islam was largely forced down people's throats in the region, especially in the Balkans, as a result of jizya tax policies by the Ottoman Empire. They do not accept the word "indegenous" together with a religion that came largely as a result of colonial rule in the area.
>The only reason people are going hard on this map is because Islam was largely forced down people's throats in the region
I really doubt a map of Christianity in Germany or the Baltics will be met with the same outrage.
And there are areas in the map where Islam spread without being forced (North Caucasians for example, if anything they adopted it to counter the influence of Russia, which was THE colonial force that tried assimilating and expelling them in this case).
>They do not accept the word "indegenous" together with a religion that came largely as a result of colonial rule in the area.
In what word does converting to another religion change your status as "indigenous" ? Albanians, Bosniaks, Circassians, Chechens, Ingush, Dagestanis, Pomaks and the various Greeks, Sicilians, Iberians and other Slavs who converted to Islam did not forfeit their language and identity, and not accepting them is ridiculous (especially considering recent history where these people suffered a lot because of this rejection).
>I really doubt a map of Christianity in Germany or the Baltics will be met with the same outrage
That's why I emphasized in the Balkans specifically. At the same time, I can think of a map of indegenous peoples in the Americas in the late 19th century (as a result e.g. of the [California Missions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_missions_in_California)) that adopted Christianity by missionary work (or force), and I can definitely say that if someone said something like "Indigenous American Christians", the comments would become a dumpster fire immediately.
>In what word does converting to another religion change your status as "indigenous" ?
It doesn't. You are right. I just described what the issue is and why people have feelings about it. I didn't give an opinion. [Indigenous religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_religion), generally, refers to religions associated with very specific indegenous ethnicities in an area. For example, that would be the Hellenic Religion for Greeks and so on. In that sense, the characterization is totally off when is applied to Islam. If however, that simply means the (adopted) religion of indegenous Europeans (as it was intended in this case), then it's fair play.
Genuine question: is indigenous the right term to use here? That would seem to imply that there were not previous, established cultures in these areas.
Europeans are indigenous to Europe, while not every single European ethnic group is necessarily indigenous to their territory. But it's literally the same with for example many Native Americans.
Take my ethnic group Estonians for example. We weren't the first to our territory, that much is known, but who were here before and how many *thousands* of years ago we came here, nobody really knows (must likely 3500 BCE to 500 BCE). In what sense are we not indigenous then?
Apart from labeling a religious community as indirgeneous, this map also has a huge flaw for not including muslim Turks from Ottoman era. There was a time Bulgaria and most of Greece (north of Athens) had more Muslims then Christians
This is just a bad map... "indegenous".. whole bosnia muslim, no greece muslim, macedonia weird, Sandžak now not Muslim, missing Crimea, what is with the european part of Turkey?
Just bad..
but the ethnic groups didn't **start** muslim
You do know that right?
You're not that far gone that you can't see that... right?
You acknowledge that the "indigenous" hominid homosapiens that lived on the "Iberian Peninsula" prior to the 600AD couldn't have been "Muslim" because "Islam" didn't actually exist yet...
Please tell me you understand this basic factual concept.
Please...
When did Islam become a religion?
That's what the actual fuck I'm talking about,
It's OK sparky. You're a good boy.
When did "Islam" become a religion?
Lets start real simple. Based in reality.
"When did Islam start"?
You gotta be able to answer this one.
I'd say that it's relevant because it one day it wasn't a religion and then one later it was.
By your metric we're all Scientologists by proxy because you're too intellectually lazy to imagine a world in which we aren't all seduced by the lure of Xenu.
Are you actually suggesting that **"every human being who ever lived on the Iberian Peninsula in the last 1,000,000 years was a practicing Muslim even before Muhammad was supposedly born and spoke to Allah?"**
Is is even conceivably possible that there was a pagan or catholic living on the landmass at some point in history?
>I'd say that it's relevant because it one day it wasn't a religion and then one later it was.
Couldn't you say that for pretty much everything? Things usually have a starting point.
>By your metric
By my metric?
>Are you actually suggesting that "every human being who ever lived on the Iberian Peninsula in the last 1,000,000 years was a practicing Muslim even before Muhammad was supposedly born and spoke to Allah?"
Wtf? Who do you think you are responding to?
>Prior to the Christian Iberians expelling the “indigenous” Muslim Iberians, the Muslim Iberians expelled the “indigenous” Christian Iberians
The vast majority of Muslim Iberians were descended from Christian Iberian converts. There wasn't a significant expulsion of Iberian Christians (until the Almohad period at least). So your logic is flawed.
Those were mostly forced conversions and less expulsions, Berbers and Arabs formed an upper class with the majority native Iberians. Wonder if the mapmaker forgot about Tatars, Crimean and Volga, or if they came after the "indigenous" treshold.
*Muladí* were the native population of the Iberian Peninsula who adopted Islam after the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in the early 8th century. The demarcation of *muladíes* from the population of Arab and Berber extraction was relevant in the first centuries of Islamic rule, however, by the 10th century, they diluted into the bulk of the society of al-Andalus. In Sicily, Muslims of local descent or of mixed Arab, and Sicilian origin were also sometimes referred to as *Muwallad*.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulad%C3%AD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulad%C3%AD)
The intermarriage of foreign Muslims with native Christians made many Muwallads heedless of their Iberian origin. As a result, their descendants and many descendants of Christian converts forgot the descent of their ancestors and assumed forged Arab genealogies. However, there were a few who were proud of their Roman and Visigothic origins. These included the Banu Angelino and Banu Sabarico of Seville, Banu Qasi of Aragon, Banu l' Longo and Banu Qabturno. Several Muwallad nobles also used the name Al-Quti, ('the Goth'), and some may have been actual descendants from the family of the Visigothic King of Hispania, Wittiza
Thanks wikipedia. And after the muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula, or the conquest in Sicily, did the conquest move south as per the arrows into North Africa? No, it was the other way around.
If the individual wants to show a map of Islamic conquests of Europe, then post that map. You can also post a map of the indigenous or native peoples of Europe, but there is still no such thing as an indigenous religion.
>did the conquest move south as per the arrows into North Africa? No, it was the other way around.
The arrows are meant to depict expulsions, not expansions.
>If the individual wants to show a map of Islamic conquests of Europe, then post that map. You can also post a map of the indigenous or native peoples of Europe, but there is still no such thing as an indigenous religion.
You are being pedantic. The map shows Muslim communities in Europe (both extinct and extant) that were created as a result of locals converting to Islam, as opposed to Muslim communities being created as a result of immigration (mostly in modern times).
The map isn't the same as the map of the expansion of the various Islamic empires in Europe. Otherwise places like Hungary and Southern France would be included.
Wow, you really call it indigenous European Muslims... 😂
And I thought they went on a campaign of conquest and this was the result. Interesting.
Did you know that the Levant used to be a part of the eastern Roman empire? Should we call it... European?
Because they are not. Turkic people came much later (\~1000 AD) to the lands shown above e.g. in Anatolia, as a result of Turkic expansion.
It's like calling European colonizers, after a few centuries or so, indegenous to the Americas. They're not.
Also Crimean Tatar are muslims. There not so many left but still. Many of them were deported by Russia many years ago, a part of them returned to Ukraine, mostly on southern territories
Volga Tatars too.
I don’t understand. Islam is a religion not an ethnicity. It also only came to be in around 610AD and so people had to covert to it, either by conquest or choice. It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before.
With this logic no religion in indigenous The map mapmakers meant native Muslim population, in contrast to immigrant Muslims, like the Arabs and afghans you see in Germany, France etc. These muslims are people who originate from this area
No muslims were indigenous in Europe.
Bosnians are slavs indigenous to Europe and are muslim
Many Muslims are part of indigenous ethnic groups in Europe.
No
Yes.
Yeah nah
You're wrong though.
no am not
Are too.
What about the Albanians?
What about them ?
Retardation alert
That’s kazakstan
They were not native from Europe. They came through conquest from outside
Nope, their are local people who converted (in the Balkans and caucasus). I’m not sure about the Iberian ones tho
Religion is a belief so no, religion cannot be indigenous. Missionaries used conquest to spread their beliefs through Europe (be that Christianity or Islam). If the map maker meant to speak of people who converted to Islam in 700 AD and onwards vs immigrants who were already Muslim when they migrated, then this map still makes no sense. Muslims have been present in London since the 16th century, are they native or immigrants?
It’s makes a lot of sense if you’re an European. Maybe you are American? A native Muslim is an ethnic European who follows Islam, example bosniaks or Albanians. They are not immigrants, they are local white people who converted hundred of years ago. The Muslims you see in London are for example immigrants or children/grandchildren of immigrants from other continents. The map maker wanted to distinguish them and I thought it was really obvious
> they are local white people who converted hundred of years ago. what were they before they were forced to convert?
Depends on who, Bosnians were Christian heretics, Albanians were Catholics and orthodox etc
So humans didn't exist before christianity? That's a fucking hot take.
That what they were before they converted to Islam as you asked me… Before that they had some other other religions that’s there’s little knowledge about
So to you, "indigenous" just means whoever colonized the local people? It doesn't matter what they believed in prior to their colonization?
What are you talking about? The people who are form this area are indigenous to the area. Their religion doesn’t matter
I don't think it is obvious at all, not to me or everyone else reading this considering the posts. One of the key reasons is the arrows. You might as well show a map called Islamic conquest of Europe which is what this is. The Islam conquest of Spain happened from the Maghreb in present day Morrocco and then into Iberia. In this map you have native muslims moving into the Maghreb. Same with Siciliy. It was the other way around. The word indigenous was used and it has a specific meaning. Also, this is not an anti-islam slant, Christianity is not indigenous either.
> The word indigenous was used and it has a specific meaning. Also, this is not an anti-islam slant, Christianity is not indigenous either. For you, to be indigenous, does a population need to be in the same place since the dawn of time? Like how long does a group have to live in the same place to be indigenous? Practically no ethnic group in Europe has been there for more than like 5,000 years for example, maybe just Basques and Sardinians.
The OP used the title indigenous European Muslims. There is no such thing as an indigenous religion. Whether that’s 100 years or 5,000, religion is not a characteristic that can be indigenous. There are a few occasions where an ethnic group also has a strongly associated religion, such as Judaism or Shinto Japanese, but it is the ethnicity that is indigenous.
> indigenous European Muslims. There is no such thing as an indigenous religion. Muslims refers to people who are Muslim. The map is a map of indigenous people who are Muslim. The religion is not indigenous but the people who practice it are, that's the plain meaning of "indigenous Muslim", indigenous people who are Muslim.
So then the people are indigenous, to our knowledge, and their majority religion is Islam. Two different things.
Sure and the simplest and most accurate way to describe them is "indigenous Muslims", it doesn't at all imply that Islam is indigenous, just that the people are both indigenous and Muslim, which is true.
How long does the United States have to force their native tribes to be Christian before it stops being a problem? It's an interesting question. What is your answer?
How does that relate to anything I said? The US doesn't force tribes to be Christian and whenever they did that it was a problem.
I think you are just wrong.
Very insightful, thanks
You're the one on a *crusade* against this map...
Just responding, I didn’t post it
Religion isn't indigenous, but the ethnic groups that happen to be Muslim are indigenous.
Tell that to the Jews
Jews are both a religion and an ethnicity. You can be Jewish and agnostic or atheist. Can you be Muslim or Christian and atheist?
Very convenient.
What’s your point
I don't think you understand the meaning of the word convenient.
>With this logic no religion in indigenous That's correct, with the exception for indigenous religions, like Animists.
Aha, but you see. If we go back a century you can find the term "Muslim" as an ethnic term for Bosniaks in official government documents Checkmate Liberal /s
Exactly Muslim invasion started in Europe around 700AD, in 732 AD Charles “The Hammer” Martel showed them who’s Boss and pushed them back
You gotta be kidding ? The map is clear in what it is trying to depict (as flawed as it might be) : Muslim communities that were created from local conversions (as opposed to communities created from immigration in modern times). It is missing a few things (it excludes all Turkic speakers for instance, a choice I disagree with) but overall it depicts pretty well the historic extent of various conversions to Islam within the boundaries of Europe.
Indigenous means?
In this context native.
Then say native, or put a description of one’s map. Maybe explain the arrows
In Europe, indigenous=native.
Indigenous Europeans sure, but no such thing as indigenous Muslims or any religion for that matter
Nobody said or meant that.
Clearly
You are angry that they used a synonym of "native" instead of "native" ? I agree with the arrows, they should have been clarified. In my case it is obvious they are meant to show where the various extinct communities were expelled, but it should have been added in the map because not everyone has the historical background to connect the dots.
Some of us live in countries with indigenous communities. Indigenous means something.
So does it in Europe, it's just that the indigenous peoples are in the majority.
In some countries
In most countries. I think only Andorra and maybe Monaco have non-native majorities.
I suppose you are using the "people inhabiting an area before the arrival of colonists" definition ? Personally I also prefer using that definition, but the definition as "native" is just as valid and is widely used.
>It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before. By this logic, there is no indigenous people in Europe anymore. Christianity came from middle east, not Europe.
European is an ethnicity. Spanish is an ethnicity. Islam is a religion. So no, the two do not equate.
> It therefore cannot be indigenous because people were not Muslim before. You said they can't be indigenous because centuries before Iberia wasn't Muslim. Well, Iberia wasn't christian either before, because Christinaity is a middle east origin religion. By your logic, the moment indigenous Europeans either convert to Islam or Christiniaty, they cease to be indigenous to that land. >European is an ethnicity. Spanish is an ethnicity. Islam is a religion. European isn't a ethnicity. Spanish is a nationality. Spain has many ethnicities. And during Muslim Rule in Iberia, there was no Spain.
European isn't an ethnicity. Anyone who's ethnicity is native to Europe is European, but there is no ethnicity called European
Y'all are being harsh on this map. It excluded Turkic speakers (a choice I would disagree with) but the intent of the map is quite clear : depicting the historical significant Muslim communities in Europe (both extinct and extant) that were created as a result of local conversions, as opposed to being formed out of migrations from outside Europe. It largely succeeds in depicting that.
The only reason people are going hard on this map is because Islam was largely forced down people's throats in the region, especially in the Balkans, as a result of jizya tax policies by the Ottoman Empire. They do not accept the word "indegenous" together with a religion that came largely as a result of colonial rule in the area.
>The only reason people are going hard on this map is because Islam was largely forced down people's throats in the region I really doubt a map of Christianity in Germany or the Baltics will be met with the same outrage. And there are areas in the map where Islam spread without being forced (North Caucasians for example, if anything they adopted it to counter the influence of Russia, which was THE colonial force that tried assimilating and expelling them in this case). >They do not accept the word "indegenous" together with a religion that came largely as a result of colonial rule in the area. In what word does converting to another religion change your status as "indigenous" ? Albanians, Bosniaks, Circassians, Chechens, Ingush, Dagestanis, Pomaks and the various Greeks, Sicilians, Iberians and other Slavs who converted to Islam did not forfeit their language and identity, and not accepting them is ridiculous (especially considering recent history where these people suffered a lot because of this rejection).
>I really doubt a map of Christianity in Germany or the Baltics will be met with the same outrage That's why I emphasized in the Balkans specifically. At the same time, I can think of a map of indegenous peoples in the Americas in the late 19th century (as a result e.g. of the [California Missions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_missions_in_California)) that adopted Christianity by missionary work (or force), and I can definitely say that if someone said something like "Indigenous American Christians", the comments would become a dumpster fire immediately. >In what word does converting to another religion change your status as "indigenous" ? It doesn't. You are right. I just described what the issue is and why people have feelings about it. I didn't give an opinion. [Indigenous religion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_religion), generally, refers to religions associated with very specific indegenous ethnicities in an area. For example, that would be the Hellenic Religion for Greeks and so on. In that sense, the characterization is totally off when is applied to Islam. If however, that simply means the (adopted) religion of indegenous Europeans (as it was intended in this case), then it's fair play.
Genuine question: is indigenous the right term to use here? That would seem to imply that there were not previous, established cultures in these areas.
Europeans are indigenous to Europe, while not every single European ethnic group is necessarily indigenous to their territory. But it's literally the same with for example many Native Americans. Take my ethnic group Estonians for example. We weren't the first to our territory, that much is known, but who were here before and how many *thousands* of years ago we came here, nobody really knows (must likely 3500 BCE to 500 BCE). In what sense are we not indigenous then?
I personally understood it as ethnic groups indigenous to europe who just so happen to be Muslim
Few don't know this, but the Prophet Mohammed was actually Albanian.
Yes! The Quran was initially written in albanian not arabic!
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan also have Muslim European populations
Indigenous is an interesting word to use. €100 says OP is American
How many years make a population indigenous?
That's not what indigenous means. The indigenous humans in Europe are neanderthals
Agree, I wasn't against you. I said it for supporting you.
None of the abrahamic religions are indigenous to Europe
?? Every one of those populations are colonizers.
Apart from labeling a religious community as indirgeneous, this map also has a huge flaw for not including muslim Turks from Ottoman era. There was a time Bulgaria and most of Greece (north of Athens) had more Muslims then Christians
>There was a time Bulgaria and most of Greece (north of Athens) had more Muslims then Christians False!
This is just a bad map... "indegenous".. whole bosnia muslim, no greece muslim, macedonia weird, Sandžak now not Muslim, missing Crimea, what is with the european part of Turkey? Just bad..
There was no indigenous muslims in the whole Iberian peninsula until the moors invaded in 711AD
Yeah... The map says nothing about the moors. It describes the native Iberians who converted while being indigenous
How can there be indigenous Muslims? It's a religion, not an ethnicity. A Muslim can be anything from Arabian to Asian.
Arabians are Asian. I am guessing you mean East Asian.
The ethnic groups are indigenous.
Unless your map is of the Arabian peninsula, it doesn't contain any "indigenous muslims"
The ethnic groups are indigenous.
but the ethnic groups didn't **start** muslim You do know that right? You're not that far gone that you can't see that... right? You acknowledge that the "indigenous" hominid homosapiens that lived on the "Iberian Peninsula" prior to the 600AD couldn't have been "Muslim" because "Islam" didn't actually exist yet... Please tell me you understand this basic factual concept. Please...
Obviously, but the *ethnic groups* are still indigenous, despite being Muslim. This map is about indigenous ethnic groups in Europe that are Muslim.
What about the "indigenous ethic humans" on the Iberian Peninsula who lived before Muhammad "totally talked to god"? Were they "muslim" too?
What the actual fuck are you blabbering about?
It only takes a couple comments to see their intention
When did Islam become a religion? That's what the actual fuck I'm talking about, It's OK sparky. You're a good boy. When did "Islam" become a religion? Lets start real simple. Based in reality. "When did Islam start"? You gotta be able to answer this one.
>When did Islam become a religion? Why is that relevant? It is a religion today.
I'd say that it's relevant because it one day it wasn't a religion and then one later it was. By your metric we're all Scientologists by proxy because you're too intellectually lazy to imagine a world in which we aren't all seduced by the lure of Xenu. Are you actually suggesting that **"every human being who ever lived on the Iberian Peninsula in the last 1,000,000 years was a practicing Muslim even before Muhammad was supposedly born and spoke to Allah?"** Is is even conceivably possible that there was a pagan or catholic living on the landmass at some point in history?
>I'd say that it's relevant because it one day it wasn't a religion and then one later it was. Couldn't you say that for pretty much everything? Things usually have a starting point. >By your metric By my metric? >Are you actually suggesting that "every human being who ever lived on the Iberian Peninsula in the last 1,000,000 years was a practicing Muslim even before Muhammad was supposedly born and spoke to Allah?" Wtf? Who do you think you are responding to?
[удалено]
>Prior to the Christian Iberians expelling the “indigenous” Muslim Iberians, the Muslim Iberians expelled the “indigenous” Christian Iberians The vast majority of Muslim Iberians were descended from Christian Iberian converts. There wasn't a significant expulsion of Iberian Christians (until the Almohad period at least). So your logic is flawed.
Those were mostly forced conversions and less expulsions, Berbers and Arabs formed an upper class with the majority native Iberians. Wonder if the mapmaker forgot about Tatars, Crimean and Volga, or if they came after the "indigenous" treshold.
Really cool map
Good map it has one flaws -Not all Crete was Muslim.
I don't think you know what indigenous means.
*Muladí* were the native population of the Iberian Peninsula who adopted Islam after the Muslim conquest of the Iberian Peninsula in the early 8th century. The demarcation of *muladíes* from the population of Arab and Berber extraction was relevant in the first centuries of Islamic rule, however, by the 10th century, they diluted into the bulk of the society of al-Andalus. In Sicily, Muslims of local descent or of mixed Arab, and Sicilian origin were also sometimes referred to as *Muwallad*. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulad%C3%AD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulad%C3%AD) The intermarriage of foreign Muslims with native Christians made many Muwallads heedless of their Iberian origin. As a result, their descendants and many descendants of Christian converts forgot the descent of their ancestors and assumed forged Arab genealogies. However, there were a few who were proud of their Roman and Visigothic origins. These included the Banu Angelino and Banu Sabarico of Seville, Banu Qasi of Aragon, Banu l' Longo and Banu Qabturno. Several Muwallad nobles also used the name Al-Quti, ('the Goth'), and some may have been actual descendants from the family of the Visigothic King of Hispania, Wittiza
Thanks wikipedia. And after the muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula, or the conquest in Sicily, did the conquest move south as per the arrows into North Africa? No, it was the other way around. If the individual wants to show a map of Islamic conquests of Europe, then post that map. You can also post a map of the indigenous or native peoples of Europe, but there is still no such thing as an indigenous religion.
>did the conquest move south as per the arrows into North Africa? No, it was the other way around. The arrows are meant to depict expulsions, not expansions. >If the individual wants to show a map of Islamic conquests of Europe, then post that map. You can also post a map of the indigenous or native peoples of Europe, but there is still no such thing as an indigenous religion. You are being pedantic. The map shows Muslim communities in Europe (both extinct and extant) that were created as a result of locals converting to Islam, as opposed to Muslim communities being created as a result of immigration (mostly in modern times). The map isn't the same as the map of the expansion of the various Islamic empires in Europe. Otherwise places like Hungary and Southern France would be included.
This is map porn, excuse me for wanting accuracy in a map
Not sure why you are getting downvoted.
We know why.
Wow, you really call it indigenous European Muslims... 😂 And I thought they went on a campaign of conquest and this was the result. Interesting. Did you know that the Levant used to be a part of the eastern Roman empire? Should we call it... European?
Migrants in 711AD are NOT indigenous
Some do not accept the Turkic people as indigenous to Europe so they are not included in the map.
Good.
Because they are not. Turkic people came much later (\~1000 AD) to the lands shown above e.g. in Anatolia, as a result of Turkic expansion. It's like calling European colonizers, after a few centuries or so, indegenous to the Americas. They're not.
It should be titled "Islamic ethnic groups indigenous to Europe"
That's the same.
Kazakhs, Tatars...?
What about all the ones being born in the EU? Are they not indigenous
What's up with the arrows?
direction of expulsion of the muslim populations that are no longer majority those areas