Avicenna

[Elvain]

I told qorda not to continue in off-topic posting in KoH modding section. I don't want to be unfair and so I continue in the discussion here. The original discussion starts here:
http://forum.sunflowers.de/showthread.php?p=133885#post133885

btw this is again offtopic. If you want to continue in this topic, we have Webmaster's Inn or DMZ. Thanks :go:
"Abu Seena" is from what Avicenna originated from. :hello:

probably is. But Ibn Seena (Ibn Siina) is his correct last name :wink:

[qorda]

I told qorda not to continue in off-topic posting in KoH modding section. I don't want to be unfair and so I continue in the discussion here. The original discussion starts here:
http://forum.sunflowers.de/showthread.php?p=133885#post133885
probably is. But Ibn Seena (Ibn Siina) is his correct last name :wink:

:nono: Elvain you have already been unfair. If you were fair you would have not censored my main post, the transfer that you have done here is without any context and its later part removed. Your problem is you can't stand criticism of your "knowledge". :rofl: and you unfortunately have been given power thanks to the generosity of the webmaster that
Secondly if you were fair you would have also moved your own "irrelevent" posts 151, 155 in that thread here as well but it seems that you are treating this forum as your personal property and removing any one who disagrees with you while keeping your stuff there. Should I point out that of all your posts in the forum how many dozens of your posts are not strictly relevant to the thread they are in; if we all tolerate you why cant you tolerate other people.? That kind of attitude suits tinpot dictators not a democratic forum where every one has the same right to express his opinion as you. Now shall we give a clap to your fairness? :hello:

[Doux]

Well, it is Elvain's creation, the thread on HR1.6, and he is a mod, so he has to draw a line (allow this offtopic post or not) somewhere. Don't be too harsh about it.

True, but I'm talking about a time a little later than Alexander.
When the Greeks (or rather, the Macedonians), faced the Romans in battle.
Earlier in history, the phalanx had been more adaptable, but by that time, the phalanx was much more compact, could hardly turn, and bad terrain could mess it up badly. The Greek hoplite had a total of 3 feet space, while the Roman soldier had a total of 3 feet on either side of him.

Moreover, by that time, the Greeks had some rather "honourable" ideas about battle. The two Greek armies would form up on a nice level field facing each other, no boulders, elevations to break the formation, and they'd charge each other.
After the battle, the defeated would ask the victor to bury it's dead, and the victor would gentlemanly give them permission.

Now, when the Greeks came up against the Romans, the Romans didn't play by these rules. The Romans chose broken ground often, and the phalanx couldn't keep together very well.
In fact, in one battle, where the Greeks had drawn up on a nice level slope, the Romans marched clear around them, and took without a fight the city the Greeks were supposed to be defending!
Not to mention, with their superior organization, flexibility, and other mentioned above, it's really no wonder that the Romans beat the Greeks.

Of course, if the Greek phalanx had been a little more adaptable, as it had been in the past, they might have stood a chance, but by that time, the phalanx was so unflexible that they were badly "whupped", even with the elephants that the Macedonians brought to bear on the Romans.

And also, although the Macedonians under Alexander expanded way faster than the Romans, remember whose empire lasted several hundred years longer intact?
Also, Alexander was a military genius.
The Romans didn't have too many of those. Mostly, the Roman generals would use their usually better training, organization, and flexibility of the legion to conquer their foes, than by pure superior generalship (and so, when they faced Hannibal, the Roman army was beaten three times, but the Romans adapted, and at the final battle before Carthage, the Romans won a stunning victory).Assassinss are assassins. In all (english) sources I red about crusades they are mentioned as Assassins so I found this term correct.
:nono: Assassins are hasheeshins if you go for the authentic term but are assassins if you refer to distorted european versions just as Abu Ali Seena becomes Avicenna in European versions. :biggrin:
in Europe (and in historiography of European provenience) they are called Assassins.
in muslim world they are called hashisheens, right. We also say Saladin(instead of Salah ad-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub), Cairo(instead of Al Qairah), Koran instead of Al-Qur'an etc :wink:

By Abu Ali Seena you probably mean Abu 'Ali Ibn Seena (when someone mentions him only by "last name" he's called Ibn Seena, just like when Antoine de Saint-Exupéry is called Saint-Exupéry rather than Antoine de Exupéry :biggrin: if you don't know :biggrin:)

btw this is again offtopic. If you want to continue in this topic, we have Webmaster's Inn or DMZ. Thanks :go:"Abu Seena" is from what Avicenna originated from.
A squire modder should have patience and tolerance for the view of others. If a person makes a comment which is incorrect in the view of others then the reply to that has to be given in the same thread. More over I find it ironic that you make a lengthy comment to disagree originally with traveller and myself and then at the end try to block the views of the other by adding "BTW" comments.

[Elvain]

I did not open this thread for personal falws, I opened it to discuss some topic. That's why I eliminated personal part of the post and pout here only the on-topic part. It seems that someone here has problem to stay on topic that is dïscussed.
I know that my knowledge is very limited, but when someone who has even worse knowledge than I claims that he's absolutely right, I have problem with such guy. That's true and them maybe I am not very fair (as I found someone's lies that are interpreted as truth unfair too).

There was problem of assassins. If you look into any bibliography on this topic, you will find books about Assassins in both English and Czech languages instead of books about Hashisheens.. I don't know how many books about this topic did you have in your hands, I had 3 with long bibliographies mostly in english and french. Not a single book from those long bibliographies mentioned hashisheens, all mentioned assassins. That's why I am so "strict" and I don't tolerate your claims that they are called hashisheens in historical literature.

Though I don't doubt about fact that in other languages they are still called as they originaly were - hashisheens (maybe bulgarian? I have no clue)

and about Avicenna. True is that his european name probably is based from Abu Seena(Abú Sína), but that has no influence on fact that arabian names are mostly use last 2 names as the "last name", so we have Ibn Rushd, Ibn Khaldoun, Muhammad Ali and Ibn Sína(Seena). And I will repeat my objection. Calling Ibn Seena Abu Seena is like calling Saint-Exupéry "Antoine Exupéry" I suppose you as teacher know who's author of The Little Prince.

PS: if personal flaws in this thread will get over on-topic discussion, I would like to ask some other mods to close this thread (as someone could find my slosing of this thread "unfair"). Especialy from my side as I can't be very objective

PPS: the quotation was imperfect not because of my attempt to cut something from context but due to lack of time. I just needed to delete the post from Holy Rome 1.6 thread because I knew I wouldn't be online for 2 days and that could possibly throw the thread completely off-topic. But I had only about 5 minutes to do it all

[qorda]

Well, it is Elvain's creation, the thread on HR1.6, and he is a mod, so he has to draw a line (allow this offtopic post or not) somewhere. Don't be too harsh about it.
Doux I hate to be harsh but you see the forum is meant for all of us to share our views around this game and make understanding of this game more enjoyable for all of us. We should all therefore be able to discuss things positively without getting angry at disagreement. Elvain may have started the thread but that doesn't make it his property to direct it the way he likes and truncate the discussion if it goes against his opinion.
I think that the discussion of what are historically correct names of person and places etc is very relevant to modding but if he felt that correctness in modding is irrelevant then to be fair he should have removed all the posts from the thread from I think 142 onwards that discussed what should be the correct term to use in the mod; assassin or hashisheens and put it here in full.
Initially Traveller and angryminer disagreed with him with good reasoning and then myself at which point he decided that he would not tolerate any challenge to his thought and gave me a warning (to which I protested). My protest post that had only one line of dissent was then exiled while his 7/8 line long explanation stayed; why?
Even if he did not wish to move several posts to the new page, the polite way to stop discussion would have been to declare that: "this discussion is getting too long so I am putting My reply to qorda on this new page so that we may all continue there" but it is plainly rude and childish to write a long post on the same page and at the bottom of that issue a gagging order to the other members that they are not allowed to speak here any longer; isn't this what dictators do?
As far as the main issue is concerned I am pleased that at last he has little bit acknowledged that Avicenna is derived from Abu Seena/Sina. I wasn't talking about the adressing etiquettes of Arabic names and I know that Ibn Sina is the right way but the people who in middle ages translated these names were not very knowledgable and made mistakes thus using Abu Seena rather than Ibn Seena. That supports the point put forward by my two other forum colleagues that Hashisheen is the right word; assassins being a centuries old incorrect transformation put into various books with out any context to the roots of the word as explained by traveller in his post.

[Elvain]

the problem is thatwhen the discussion was concerning Assassins or hashisheens issue, it was reasonable and shuold belong to the thread. Everyone here knows that I moved only those posts which have nothing to do with assassins.

When you started to discuss ancient tactic of roman legions/greek phalanx, I told you to stop it or continue somewhere else. You disrespected it and continued.

Then you started to discuss issue of Avicenna which has no connection to the topic of the thread. I told you again not to continue there and to chose some other place to continue the discussion.

I explained why the deletion of your last post was done withut full explanation (I had not enough time to do it and I knew that is I don't delete it immediately I may be forced to delete much more than one post as I knew I won't be online for several days.
Another thing to say. I knew that the correct term is Assassins, not hashisheens. The opinions that support hashisheens are all " I think they are known as" I heard abuot them also as..." etc. I KNOW the correct answer to the issue and you started to argue because you THOUGHT something else and didn't back your opinion by nothing more than other your ideas. Then you started to become more and more off-topic.

And to go back to the topic of Assassins.
Hashisheens is name that derived from peyorative name given them by sunni muslims. Assassins called themselves asasiyun (sorry for my unprofesional transcrpition of arabic word) what is derived from name of imam Asas, one of the first imams respected by ismailite shi'a which is ideological base of nizarian shi'a which is ideological base of assassins.
FYI imam is leader of shi'a muslims, there can't be more than one imam at the moment. The first is Ali, second Hussein. Various sects of shi'a differ in diferent (number of) imams they respect.

Sunnis usualy called them hashasheeyun (as there is a myth that they smoked hashish) or also hallajun what is based on muslim mystic Hallaj (at the moment I don't know the exact english spelling)

This is based on university scripts and lectures of Rudolf Veselý, profesor is islamic history at University of Western Bohemia in Pilsen and Charles university in Prague( who also taught long time at university of Cairo)

With no disrespect to you nor even Traveller and Angryminer I rather believe to proofs given to me by profesor of islamic history than your impressions (that you have once red something where they are called hashisheens)

Also I am now reading book abut templar and Assassins and there is again said that they are sometimes called hashisheens by sunni muslims (who are their pooonent). And there is always used word Assassin if speaking abuot the sect.
What more do you need to prove that my knowledge is more than your impressions? do you want a citation of all the books which call them assassins instead of hashisheens?

I'm looking forward to see at least one argument that proves me wrong. Please, gimme more than "i think that... :rofl: :lol: "

PS: here is the entire discussion from the Holy Rome1.6 thread concerning assassin's name origin issue:
The assassins are (aka) the Hashishins, right? Or I got it wrong... :scratch:
And too bad I haven't installed KoH (and I probably won't install it soon - too few time and if I install it - less than no time at all), otherwise I would immediately try out you mod, Elvain! And btw, thanks for the mail! :wink:
:angel: That's right; hasheeshin is the correct term. They worked as murderers but them as a military unit is a far shot. There wasn't any significant battle in which they took part apart from few occasions when their hideout was under siege. They were hated by muslims more than they were hated by any one else. :yuck:
Assassinss are assassins. In all (english) sources I red about crusades they are mentioned as Assassins so I found this term correct.

In bibliographies to their topic I have never seen any bood about hasheeshins, but always about Assassins. But yes, they are the same and yes, muslims didn't like them much (just like Templars were not very popular in the Catholic world)
I've read about them here also as Hashishins (and sometimes as Assassins). IIRC, they were called Hashishins, because before sending someone to an assassination mission (the word "assassin" actually comes from them), their ruler (I don't know his title) gave them hashish to "taste Heaven". After that, the assassin, who has already tasted the Heaven, wasn't so unwilling to die, while performing his duty, which made them formidable assassins. I don't know how far this is true, but at least as a story it's nice...
Yes, my knowledge about Hashishins/Assassins backs up what you said, Traveller.

Angryminer
yes yes, I know this all, but all of english historiography I know uses term Assassins so I use this term.

I know they were also called Hashisheens, that it is based on hashish.

The the leader was called "The Oldmand of the Mountain" (probably no the best translation into english, I know), it was probably a myth based on leader of Syrian Assassins Sinaan ibn Salmaan ibn Muhammad (leader of syrian assassins in 1162-1192)

btw the story is said to be a myth which has origins in Persia and through several christian travellers and crusader chronicles it became the most known information about assassins :lol:... just another of examples how myths are one of main information sources for us about muslims :sad:
Also, the Assasins feared the Knights Hostpitaller.
The Hospitaller had a famous castle near the hideout of the Assasins (can't remember the name of the castle right now, it's a French name), from which they would keep an eye on the Assasins. After the fall of Jerusalem, the headquarter of the Hospitaller relocated to this castle, and it was their headquarters for quite a while.
The strength of this castle was such that while at full strength it could hold something like 5000 men, only 60 men were absolutely necessary to hold it.

Anyway, maybe the Hospitallers could have a bonus against Assasins? It could help to counter that bonus the Assasins have against the Marshall you're planning on.
"The Oldman of the Mountain"? Hah, so it was true! I read it a week or two ago in one Bulgarian historical novel, where they mentioned for a little exactly this story about the hashish and "The Oldman of the Mountain"... :biggrin:
We're going little offtopic, but I don't care much as this version of HR mod is gonna be replaced by the new one..

anyway. The castle you meant, Shane, is Crac des chevaliers, the biggest jewel of crusader castle architecture in Syropalestine. This amazing stronghold fall to mameluk sultan Baibars, and yes it was not far from the base of Assassins. But I wouldn't say Assassins feared Hospitaliers comparably more than other crusaders. I'd say that Assassins feared sunni muslims more than crusaders...

And the myth came to Europe when Henry of Champagne said he was in Assassin stronghold and met there "The Oldman from the Mountain" who told him he doesn't believe that crusaders are not as faithfull to their lords as Oldman's men to the Oldman. And then he ordered 2 young men to jump from 300meters high rock and they did it.

There are many comparable stories in Europe history, but we consider them as myths. Why do we believe such myths when they come from other culture? :scratch:
btw it was definitely inaan ibn Salmaan ibn Muhammad as in 1192, after a death of Conrad of Monferrat (at the time when Henri of Champagne "visited him" he was very close to own death - very old



PS: anyone has any suggestoins or notes o the 1.7 beta?

[Elvain]

well, here is the second part as I can include only 10 quotations in one post

:nono: Assassins are hasheeshins if you go for the authentic term but are assassins if you refer to distorted european versions just as Abu Ali Seena becomes Avicenna in European versions. :biggrin:
Assassinss are assassins. In all (english) sources I red about crusades they are mentioned as Assassins so I found this term correct.

:nono: Assassins are hasheeshins if you go for the authentic term but are assassins if you refer to distorted european versions just as Abu Ali Seena becomes Avicenna in European versions. :biggrin:
in Europe (and in historiography of European provenience) they are called Assassins.
in muslim world they are called hashisheens, right. We also say Saladin(instead of Salah ad-Din Yusuf ibn Ayyub), Cairo(instead of Al Qairah), Koran instead of Al-Qur'an etc :wink:

By Abu Ali Seena you probably mean Abu 'Ali Ibn Seena (when someone mentions him only by "last name" he's called Ibn Seena, just like when Antoine de Saint-Exupéry is called Saint-Exupéry rather than Antoine de Exupéry :biggrin: if you don't know :biggrin:)

btw this is again offtopic. If you want to continue in this topic, we have Webmaster's Inn or DMZ. Thanks :go:
this message was then deleted and caused opening ot his thread:
"Abu Seena" is from what Avicenna originated from. :hello:
A squire modder should have patience and tolerance for the view of others. If a person makes a comment which is incorrect in the view of others then the reply to that has to be given in the same thread. More over I find it ironic that you make a lengthy comment to disagree originally with traveller and myself and then at the end try to block the views of the other by adding "BTW" comments. :angel:

PS: forgot to say: usage of the terms hashisheen/assassin is comparable to terms Obeydids/Fatimids
hashisheens are used by sunni enemies of Assassins to blame them, while shi'a muslims and european/western historiography uses term Assassins
Obeydids is term used mostly by Abbasid official propaganda=Fatimid sunni enemies, while Fatmimids themselves and European historiography as well as most of modern muslim historiography use term Fatimids

I didn't thought you are sunni muslim...but if you ask me to use hashisheens instead of assassins you shuold also ask me to rename Fatimids to Obeydids.