StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I have always wondered about this. When the Muslims overran most of the Eastern Roman Empire they took to water in the Med pretty quickly. As they claimed the Middle East and North Africa their fleets shut down quite a bit of the trade in the Med and made travel/trade quite difficult.

This enticed some enterprising and geography challenged people in various Christian countries to find other routes to the Far East for trade.

It makes sense that what motivated Chris Columbus would not motivate the Caliphate. They had direct trade with India and China and needed no long sea route.

Eventually the Muslim world through trade had to learn that Europeans had discovered two new continents full of resources to exploit and natives to convert. By this point Muslims had been pushed out of Spain but still controlled North Africa.

Why was there never any attempts by Islam to send ships to the New World. A trip from the Atlantic coast of North Africa from Muslim controlled Morocco would have been a fairly short trip to the Brazil region of South America. Yet as far as I know this was never attempted.

Why?

Bilbo wrote:I have always wondered about this. When the Muslims overran most of the Eastern Roman Empire they took to water in the Med pretty quickly. As they claimed the Middle East and North Africa their fleets shut down quite a bit of the trade in the Med and made travel/trade quite difficult.

No, they did not. At least not when they overran the Empire, that only happened after the fall of constantinople.

This enticed some enterprising and geography challenged people in various Christian countries to find other routes to the Far East for trade.

Screw you for that dig at people who were far smarter than you.

It makes sense that what motivated Chris Columbus would not motivate the Caliphate. They had direct trade with India and China and needed no long sea route.

Eventually the Muslim world through trade had to learn that Europeans had discovered two new continents full of resources to exploit and natives to convert. By this point Muslims had been pushed out of Spain but still controlled North Africa.

Why was there never any attempts by Islam to send ships to the New World.

It was not technologically feasible, nor was it in any way possible for the Muslim world to send ships to the new world because the greatest empire in Europe blocked their way.

Really. this should be a non-brainer. Even for you.

A trip from the Atlantic coast of North Africa from Muslim controlled Morocco would have been a fairly short trip to the Brazil region of South America. Yet as far as I know this was never attempted.

Why?

Why don't you explain how in your idea the muslims could built ocean-going ships (with what)? Also, you neglect to mention that the West African coast of Northern Africa was controlled by the Portugese, who destroyed the Muslim ports there, and later on by Spain. Since 1560, that area was part of spain.

Thanas wrote:
Screw you for that dig at people who were far smarter than you.

Screw you back asshole. I was making a casual reference to Columbus who figured the distance around the planet worng and then refused to accept that fact when others pointed out the mistakes he was making. If North and South America had not been in the way Columbus and the crews of his 3 ships would have fucking starved to death long before they hit the eastern coast of Asia.

Bilbo wrote:

Thanas wrote:
Screw you for that dig at people who were far smarter than you.

Screw you back asshole. I was making a casual reference to Columbus who figured the distance around the planet worng and then refused to accept that fact when others pointed out the mistakes he was making. If North and South America had not been in the way Columbus and the crews of his 3 ships would have fucking starved to death long before they hit the eastern coast of Asia.

No, you did not just talk about Columbus. You spoke in the plurality,

Bilbo wrote:This enticed some enterprising and geography challenged people in various Christian countries to find other routes to the Far East for trade.

indicating you meant far more people than columbus.

Bilbo wrote:I have always wondered about this. When the Muslims overran most of the Eastern Roman Empire they took to water in the Med pretty quickly. As they claimed the Middle East and North Africa their fleets shut down quite a bit of the trade in the Med and made travel/trade quite difficult.

This enticed some enterprising and geography challenged people in various Christian countries to find other routes to the Far East for trade.

It makes sense that what motivated Chris Columbus would not motivate the Caliphate. They had direct trade with India and China and needed no long sea route.

Eventually the Muslim world through trade had to learn that Europeans had discovered two new continents full of resources to exploit and natives to convert. By this point Muslims had been pushed out of Spain but still controlled North Africa.

Why was there never any attempts by Islam to send ships to the New World. A trip from the Atlantic coast of North Africa from Muslim controlled Morocco would have been a fairly short trip to the Brazil region of South America. Yet as far as I know this was never attempted.

Why?

Well, you assume everyone thought of America as full of resources. But in Colombus' time, the really profitable crops such as sugar and tobacco hadn't been grown in quantity. Sure, America had land to exploit and plenty of fur and timber, but that isn't really the kind of wealth that stirs the greed of Kings.

Also, most of that land was held by Spain, the superpower of Europe at the time. Whether the Islamic powers would Spanish territories or settle elsewhere, they still had to contend with the Spanish armies and fleets. Only in Europe they didn't have the logistical difficulties of a cross-Atlantic military campaign against an entrenched enemy.

I think another important point is that the Muslim states of North Africa were fairly minor affairs- nominally controlled by the Ottoman Empire (mostly), but not all that powerful and not all that well integrated into the Ottoman system the way that Egypt, the Levant, or the European provinces were.

They may not have had the resource base to go founding colonies in the New World on a meaningful scale, any more than the German princes or the Italian city-states did. Any long distance ships capable of sailing the Atlantic the North African Muslims had would have been used more for piracy than colonization (there are documented cases of pirates from the Barbary Coast raiding as far north as Iceland, so they had the ships).

The Ottomans might have had the strength to do so in principle, but nothing would be keeping the Spanish from sweeping up minor Ottoman colonies in the event of war (which was common). So the naval assets needed to create and secure Atlantic colonies would have been much better used defending Ottoman interests at home.

As they claimed the Middle East and North Africa their fleets shut down quite a bit of the trade in the Med and made travel/trade quite difficult.

This is one of those myths by Samuel Morrison that just never goes away. The Muslims didn't halt or hinder shipping in the Mediterranean, they lived off of it. One of the main sources of money for the Ottoman Empire was the taxes the collected on shipping.

Elfdart wrote:

As they claimed the Middle East and North Africa their fleets shut down quite a bit of the trade in the Med and made travel/trade quite difficult.

This is one of those myths by Samuel Morrison that just never goes away. The Muslims didn't halt or hinder shipping in the Mediterranean, they lived off of it. One of the main sources of money for the Ottoman Empire was the taxes the collected on shipping.

No, it is actually a well-known historical theory by Perrine, which is still being discussed today. He is talking about the events following the initial arab sweep, not the later Ottoman Empire.

Portugal and Spain would never have allowed an Islamic colony to sit unmolested even if a Muslim state managed to send a successful expedition. Remember that during this time period Spain expelled all the Muslim Moors and basically funded the counter-reformation with American gold and that a King of Portugal died in battle after personally leading a suicidal anti-Muslim adventure into Morocco. The Iberian kingdoms were ultra-Catholic and utterly opposed to Islam.

Simon_Jester wrote:(there are documented cases of pirates from the Barbary Coast raiding as far north as Iceland, so they had the ships).

Which cases? Can you give me a source?

The Icelandic raid in question occurred in July 1627. I haven't found any really good sources on it with a quick Google, but since Muslim pirates did manage to hit Ireland in the same time period it sounds plausible. Of course there's a big difference between sustaining a colonial venture and raiding a coastal town.

Thanas wrote:

Bilbo wrote:

Thanas wrote:
Screw you for that dig at people who were far smarter than you.

Screw you back asshole. I was making a casual reference to Columbus who figured the distance around the planet worng and then refused to accept that fact when others pointed out the mistakes he was making. If North and South America had not been in the way Columbus and the crews of his 3 ships would have fucking starved to death long before they hit the eastern coast of Asia.

No, you did not just talk about Columbus. You spoke in the plurality,

Bilbo wrote:This enticed some enterprising and geography challenged people in various Christian countries to find other routes to the Far East for trade.

indicating you meant far more people than columbus.

Your right. He was from Italy, unless he was the only Italian on the trip he must have convinced then. Then he also convinced the King, Queen, Court, and advisors of the court of Spain that his incorrect measurements were in fact correct.

Wasn't there a surprising lack of interest by the Ottoman Empire in western advances? I didn't totally agree with his conclusions but Bernard Lewis' "What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East" pointed towards a tremendous lack of awareness in Europe's exploration of the New World, with very little written about it in the Muslim world.

This could well have been due to, as was pointed out, an inability of the Muslims to reach the New World.

In any case, the whole fucking point of Columbus going west was to find a quicker route to Asia which Muslims already have easy access to, nothing was really seen as valuable from the Americas until the Conquistadors sacked the shit out of the Mesoamerican Empires, so why the hell would they care about it?

Bilbo wrote:Your right. He was from Italy, unless he was the only Italian on the trip he must have convinced then. Then he also convinced the King, Queen, Court, and advisors of the court of Spain that his incorrect measurements were in fact correct.

Ignoring the laughable idea that "Italy" or even "Spain" existed as countries just to make your statement correct, no other explorer expected to find Asia within sailing distance before Columbus found America. There were always rumors of islands beyond the Azores and the ancient geographers claimed they were there. And you can't pretend you meant his crew was also "geographically challenged" because Columbus lied to them about total distance traveled. Ironically, his fake records were more accurate due to him already overestimating underestimating.

It was only on his second voyage, after he found suspiciously large landmasses, that Columbus got a proper exploration fleet. After that second voyage found nothing Asiatic, no one really believed Columbus had reached Asia expect Columbus.

Skylon wrote:Wasn't there a surprising lack of interest by the Ottoman Empire in western advances? I didn't totally agree with his conclusions but Bernard Lewis' "What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East" pointed towards a tremendous lack of awareness in Europe's exploration of the New World, with very little written about it in the Muslim world.

This could well have been due to, as was pointed out, an inability of the Muslims to reach the New World.

Piri Reis map - 1513

The Ottomans knew about America and quite soon after its discovery. What's surprising about a lack of further interest? Look at how awful European maps of Asia were until Europeans started sailing there. The Ottomans had to devote the majority of its naval strength to control of the Mediterranean and they never conquered Malta or the bigger Venetian islands west of Crete. Turks were never going to pass Gibraltar so there was no reason to pay attention to events beyond.

Remember, that the Vikings discovered North America even earlier, and found it full of nothing but trees and asshole natives that kept killing off their colony attempts. So, since they already had access to trees at home, they saw North America as "not worth the effort". So as mentioned above, there really wasn't much interest in the Americas at the time, and folks felt they had all the interesting stuff they needed back home.

Coyote wrote:Remember, that the Vikings discovered North America even earlier, and found it full of nothing but trees and asshole natives that kept killing off their colony attempts. So, since they already had access to trees at home, they saw North America as "not worth the effort". So as mentioned above, there really wasn't much interest in the Americas at the time, and folks felt they had all the interesting stuff they needed back home.

American lumber would have been very useful in the Greenland colonies and possibly Iceland. I'm curious if there are any other sources describing travel to America for just that reason.

As for "asshole" natives, I don't think it's fair to assume that the Vikings of all civilizations were always civil to the natives they encountered.

As for "asshole" natives, I don't think it's fair to assume that the Vikings of all civilizations were always civil to the natives they encountered.

If I remember correctly first contact was the Vikings finding some natives hiding and then stabbing them to discover that they bleed the same color they do. The natives took such actions... poorly.

History Channel said they tried to trade milk for goods to the Greenland natives.
"You stabbed my brother, gave my family a cold, and now I have the green death from drinking this stuff. Go back home already."

Thanas wrote:

Simon_Jester wrote:(there are documented cases of pirates from the Barbary Coast raiding as far north as Iceland, so they had the ships).

Which cases? Can you give me a source?

Since this subject interested me at some point I'll but in and reply.

Only a reference in the Wikipedia leading to two Icelandic sources which I can't read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_Abductions

But raids on the English and Irish coast are better documented. I've read Des Ekin’s "The Stolen Village: Baltimore and the Barbary Pirates" which lists many of them (I don't recall if Iceland was mentioned there as well, but it lists a number of raids on the south coasts of Ireland and Cornwall/England). Since a lot of Barbary raiders were European, it makes sense that they'd go back to familiar waters for their slave raids.

StarshipTitanic wrote:[
American lumber would have been very useful in the Greenland colonies and possibly Iceland. I'm curious if there are any other sources describing travel to America for just that reason.

While Iceland and Greenland lacked timber, Scandinavia overall was a timber exporter and much closer to the European markets where the money (because there were lots of people as opposed to a tiny handful of colonists) was.

Thanas wrote: Which cases? Can you give me a source?

"Sovereignty of the Seas" and "Command of the Oceans" by N.A.M. Rogers. Rogers is probably the best and most reputable pre-steel naval historian out there and has written a series of books which are all must-reads for anybody interested in naval history.

Rogers goes into Moorish pirate raiding in considerable depth and relates how the pirates were striking at the UK and Ireland. Much of the decline of Cornwall and the Lizard is attributed to the losses caused by Moorish pirates raiding for slaves. Several prospering ports along the Lizard fell into decline and eventual disuse due to losses caused by such raids. Most of Rogers emphasis is on raids on the UK and Ireland because the two books that discuss the issue are Royal navy histories but he does mention Moorish raids elsewhere.

Stuart wrote:

Thanas wrote: Which cases? Can you give me a source?

"Sovereignty of the Seas" and "Command of the Oceans" by N.A.M. Rogers. Rogers is probably the best and most reputable pre-steel naval historian out there and has written a series of books which are all must-reads for anybody interested in naval history.

Rogers goes into Moorish pirate raiding in considerable depth and relates how the pirates were striking at the UK and Ireland. Much of the decline of Cornwall and the Lizard is attributed to the losses caused by Moorish pirates raiding for slaves. Several prospering ports along the Lizard fell into decline and eventual disuse due to losses caused by such raids. Most of Rogers emphasis is on raids on the UK and Ireland because the two books that discuss the issue are Royal navy histories but he does mention Moorish raids elsewhere.

Stuart, maybe it's a different edition, different title thing but do you mean 'Safeguard of the Sea' instead of 'Sovereignty...' ?
I devoured these books, and hope Rodgers publishes a third volume soon.

Safeguard of the Seas, Sorry And its N.A.M. Rodger with a "d"

They really are splendid books. I understand the third volume is coming. Also, I recommend "The Wooden World" which dispells a lot of myths about the Georgian Navy.

StarshipTitanic wrote: The Ottomans knew about America and quite soon after its discovery. What's surprising about a lack of further interest? Look at how awful European maps of Asia were until Europeans started sailing there. The Ottomans had to devote the majority of its naval strength to control of the Mediterranean and they never conquered Malta or the bigger Venetian islands west of Crete. Turks were never going to pass Gibraltar so there was no reason to pay attention to events beyond.

Even if they could get past Gibraltar, the sailing ships suitable for the Atlantic were very different than those optimized for the Med. Northern europe specialized in ocean going vessels while the Islamic states focused on those ships that could let them dominate the Black, Aegean, and Medditerrean Seas. The Islamic states also lacked the massive timber supply needed to produce significant numbers of ocean going ships.

The natives would certainly be "assholes" from the point of view of the Vikings! They'd go home and say, "Brunhilda, I went to the new world and these little guys wouldn't stand still for me to stab them! Then when I finally stabbed them, they freaked out and threw spears and rocks... They broke the horns off that new helmet you gave me for our anniversary. To hell with that place."