swords of Mohammed, but what about...

Rivkin · 3rd January 2005, 02:41 PM

Well, Ottoman empire did more or less control Mecca till late XVIII century..

M.carter · 3rd January 2005, 03:00 PM

Yes but Mecca was independant in rule from the Ottomans, the Bani Hashim (Sharifs) ruled it since the fall of the Abbasid Empire until Ibn Saud banished Sharif Hussein from Mecca, but that still doesnt explain why these swords shouldnt be found in Mecca, which is the holiest site for Muslims, not Istanbul.

Andrew · 3rd January 2005, 04:24 PM

Spoils of war, I'd guess.

Rivkin · 3rd January 2005, 05:09 PM

Well, still the title "Caliph of Mecca" was not an arabic one, and while independent on domestic issues, it did not mean the full independance.

Concerning the place - well, the spear of destiny is not in jerusalem either, so it's more of a privilage of powerful to control the religious artifacts.

3rd January 2005, 02:41 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Well, Ottoman empire did more or less control Mecca till late XVIII century..

3rd January 2005, 03:00 PM	#2
M.carter Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 176	Yes but Mecca was independant in rule from the Ottomans, the Bani Hashim (Sharifs) ruled it since the fall of the Abbasid Empire until Ibn Saud banished Sharif Hussein from Mecca, but that still doesnt explain why these swords shouldnt be found in Mecca, which is the holiest site for Muslims, not Istanbul.

3rd January 2005, 04:24 PM	#3
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Spoils of war, I'd guess.

3rd January 2005, 05:09 PM	#4
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Well, still the title "Caliph of Mecca" was not an arabic one, and while independent on domestic issues, it did not mean the full independance. Concerning the place - well, the spear of destiny is not in jerusalem either, so it's more of a privilage of powerful to control the religious artifacts.