Refuting the fabrications of the book “History of the Ancient World” by John of Nikiu, in which he slanders the conquest of Egypt
before we begin to refute the history of John of Nikiu , I
would like to mention noble prophetic hadiths about the Prophet’s (peace be
upon him) commandment to treat the people of Egypt in particular with kindness:
Authentic hadiths The Prophet’s (peace be upon him) commandment to treat the
people of Egypt with kindness before it was conquered:
Imam Muslim said in his Sahih:
Chapter on the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) commandment to treat the people of
Egypt with kindness
226 - (2543) Abu Al-Tahir told me, Ibn Wahb told us, Harmalah told me, and
Harun bin Saeed Al-Ayli told me, Ibn Wahb told us, Harmalah told me (and he is
Ibn Imran Al-Tujibi) on the authority of Abdul-Rahman bin Shamasah Al-Mahri,
who said: I heard Abu Dharr say: The Messenger of God (peace be upon him)
said: You will conquer a land in which the qirat is mentioned, so
treat its people with kindness , for they have a covenant and kinship.
227 - (2543) Zuhair bin Harb and Ubaidullah bin Saeed told me, they said:
Wahb bin Jarir told us My father told us, I heard Harmalah al-Masri narrating
on the authority of Abd al-Rahman ibn Shamasah on the authority of Abu Basrah
on the authority of Abu Dharr, who said: The Messenger of God, may God
bless him and grant him peace, said , “You will conquer Egypt, and it is a
land called the Qirat . So when you conquer it, be good to its
people , for they have a covenant and kinship, or he said, a covenant and
marriage.”
These two hadiths contain three points, which are:
1- The news of the conquest of the land of Egypt, and it has happened.
2- That it will not be conquered during his era, may God bless him and
grant him peace, as is understood from his saying, “ You will conquer
Egypt.”
3- His advice to treat the people of Egypt well and be good to them.
Refuting what Bishop John of Nikiu
said :
The response to that is from several aspects:
First: The credibility of Bishop John of Nikiu :
The first source: The History of the Patriarchs Book , p. 88: by
Saint Anba Youssef, Bishop of the city of Fuwah in the thirteenth
century :
He had asked the Bishop of Nikiu, who is the historian John of
Nikiu, to supervise the Monastery of Abu Macarius , and it happened
that a monk assaulted the chastity of a virgin in the desert, so this bishop
punished him by beating him and he died from the effects of this severe
punishment, so the bishops removed him from his bishopric for his
excessive severity in punishing the sinful monk and appointed another .
The second source: Father Mansa Youhanna mentions the same story in
his book , History of the Coptic Church, p. 302, saying about
Youhanna :
He was a bishop of the diocese of Nikiu in the second half of the seventh
century. Since he was an expert in the conditions of the monks, Pope
Simon, the 24th Patriarch, appointed him as head of the monasteries. It
happened that one of the monks who loved lusts took a virgin out of
her monastery and entered Wadi Habib with her and committed a sin
with her. When this became known among the monks, they were alarmed and
terrified, and the news reached the ears of Anba Youhanna. He
disciplined the monk and beat him severely until he died after ten days of
beating .
On page 86 of the book “History of the Patriarchs,” Saint Anba
Youssef says : “ When Anba Youhanna passed away , the
bishops and scribes met and agreed to nominate a deacon named Girga
to ordain him. They did not follow the will of the previous Pope
Anba Youhanna and said, ‘We are doing this
falsely without the permission of the governor Abdul Aziz. If we
asked him, we would tell him that the deceased patriarch was the one who recommended
this. Then they wrote a letter about it and made him a priest and ordained
him a monk, claiming that he was a monk .
” Father Mansa Youhanna mentions in his book “History of the
Coptic Church,” page 295, the names of the bishops who were at the
forefront of the forgers, saying: “At the forefront of them were Gregory,
Bishop of Qais, Jacob, Bishop of Arwat , and John, Bishop of
Nikos .”
If John of Nikiu had participated in forging the Pope’s will,
which is a serious matter, then what makes us feel reassured and
certain of his history, which he forged and fabricated? His forging
of the Pope’s will completely destroys his credibility, and this is in addition
to his excessive fanaticism for his nationality. It is natural that he would
see the Muslims as all other invaders, and he would not hesitate to fabricate
facts of killing and destruction of the Muslims, especially since he did not
see that with his own eyes. Perhaps he was a contemporary of the
events, but he saw the events with his own eyes, no, there is nothing to
support and back that up.
Second: The credibility of the book itself:
We cannot trust this book for the following reasons:
- The loss of the original copy: The book was written by its author in the
Coptic language (lost), then translated into Arabic (lost), then into Ethiopian
in 1602 (for political reasons), then into a European language in 1883
(French), then into Arabic. The book’s passage through all these translations,
along with the loss of the original copy, makes it subject to the translator’s
inclinations and motives, and even the loss of the original author’s intent,
for the original is the original, and the translation is a translation.
- Distortion in the manuscript copy: The individual admitted. J.
Butler in his book "The Arab Conquest of Egypt" (p. 51) that there
are places where the manuscript copy of "The Diwan of the News of Hanna,
Bishop of Nikiu" has been distorted, and that it contains errors, and
places that contradict the events that he mentions, so he said: " There
are places in it where the manuscript copy has been distorted, and it contains
a lot of errors, and there are places where what he mentions does not agree
with the rest of the events ."
- Contradictory events that cast doubt on the authenticity of the book, as
Alfred Butler admitted, and the Arab translator explained some of them in his
comments on the book.
- Clear tampering by the Ethiopian translator (Gabriel), and with the
existence of a conflict in the era in whichThe translator lived between
Christian Ethiopia and its Muslim neighbors (Arabs and Turks), which makes us
doubt, especially with the existence of a special soil for revenge against
Muslims by distorting the facts and historical truths of Muslims, especially
since the Ethiopian translation was done by political order from the queen and
the army commander.
Third: The Arab translator’s notes [the part on the Islamic conquest]
While reading the book “History of the Ancient World ”
by John of Nicosia, I saw that I should quote some of the translator’s comments
and notes in this part:
- Mixing up history, p. 204.
- Note that the Battle of Heliopolis was not the first battle, and doubts
about the existence of additions by the translator, p. 207,
- The French translator’s comment, and his surprise..... p. 208
- The inhabitants of the region pay tribute to the Muslims, and kill the
Roman soldiers they encounter, p. 212
- Contradiction on
p. 233 - Illogicality, p. 233
- Absurdity and imagination of the Ethiopian translator, p. 235
Mentioning the tolerance of Islam from Christian sources [Two sources
mentioned]:
The first source: The book “ The Nationalism of the Coptic
Church and Its History” by the monk Father Antonious Al-Antoni:
1- Appointing Al-Muqawqis as ruler of Alexandria:
The monk Father Antonious Al-Antoni mentioned in his book “ The
Nationalism of the Coptic Church and Its History” (p. 57):
“ It is worth mentioning that Amr ibn Al-Aas, after the Treaty of
Alexandria and its conquest, appointed Al-Muqawqis as ruler of Alexandria, and
Lower Egypt after appointing Abdullah ibn Saad ibn Abi Al-Sarh as ruler of
Upper Egypt.”
2- His Eminence the Rightly-Guided Caliph Omar bin Al-Khattab, may God be
pleased with him, mentioned: Then the monk Antonius Al-Antoni mentioned on
(pp. 58 and 59) five examples of the generosity of the Rightly-Guided Caliph.
But after that he mentioned matters that are not correct, and it appears that
they are fabricated. In general, the priest did not mention sources for them,
so his words are unsubstantiated.
3- The denunciation of the Rightly-Guided Caliph Othman bin Affan against
the governor Abdullah bin Saad bin Abi Al-Sarh for imposing new taxes (jizyah)
imposed by the governor (pp. 59 and 60).
4- Amr bin Al-Aas’s treatment of the Copts, as he guaranteed them freedom
of worship and control over their judicial, administrative and legal affairs,
and the cancellation of the heavy taxes imposed on them by the Romans. (p. 63)
He also mentioned that the Muslims fought with some leniency, unlike the
Persians who carried out acts of sabotage (p. 64), but he mentioned some bloody
incidents based on the history of John of Nikiu, whose credibility
we have undermined.
5- Then the monk Father Antonious Al-Antoni said on (p. 64), refuting the
claim of persecution: “Also, even if we mention the injustices of the Arab
conquerors, we must - in fairness to the truth - say that these
injustices were not general or comprehensive, especially in the first period of
the Arab conquest. Professor Grohmann discovered...Two papyrus
documents dating back to the year 22 AH - 642 AD, written in Greek, and
attached to them another text in Arabic:
- The
first document: A receipt issued by one of the army commanders called
Prince Abdullah stating that he had received sixty-five sheep to feed the
soldiers with him. It was issued by Deacon John , the registrar
of contracts, on the thirtieth day of the month of Baramuda of the first
mentioned year. The back of the paper reads as follows: “A certificate of
delivery of sheep to the warriors and others who came to the country, and
this is deducted from the first-time tax.”
- [COLOR=window####]As
for the second document: its text is: “In the name of God, I am Prince
Abdullah, writing to you, O trustees of the merchants of the city of
Psovtis, and I hope that you will sell to Omar bin Asla’, for the Gothic
division, fodder for three dirhams each (two dirhams) and to each soldier
food of three kinds.” Professor Grohmann comments on the two documents by
saying: [/COLOR] (This treatment towards a defeated people is rarely
seen from a victorious people)
6- Then he mentioned the return of Pope Benjamin to the papal throne, on
page 66 and after that he said: “It is worth mentioning that Amr ibn
al-Aas returned to Pope Benjamin the churches that the Romans had seized, and
he also allowed them to restore the churches that had been destroyed, and he
helped him build a new church in Alexandria, and more than that, Amr ibn al-Aas
organized the country in all administrative and civil aspects, and in general,
the Copts achieved in the days of Amr ibn al-Aas a comfort they had not seen
for a long time.”
7- He attributed the destruction of monasteries and the demolition of
churches to the Chalcedonians in the early seventh century on (p. 67).
8- He mentioned His Eminence Caliph Omar ibn al-Khattab in Jerusalem with
a Christian (p. 68).
The second source: The History of the Coptic Church by Father Mansi
Youhanna :
Father Mansi Youhanna says in his book The History of the
Coptic Church (p. 306):
“The Arab army at the beginning of this century was carrying the banner of
victory everywhere, and it continued to penetrate the plateaus and plains, and
roam the deserts and the country, until it reached the borders of Egypt under
the leadership of Amr ibn al-Aas, so it entered the city of al-Arish in the
year 639, and from there it reached Bilbeis and conquered it after a battle
that lasted about a month, and when it took control of it, it found
(Armanusa) the daughter of al-Muqawqis there, so it did not harm her, nor did
it harm her, but rather sent her to her father in the city of Memphis, honored
and respected, so al-Muqawqis considered this act beautiful and honorable from
Amr and considered it a good deed for him .”
Then Mansi continues saying (p. 307) - "So Al-Muqawqis gathered the men of
his government and went to negotiate with messengers from Amr. The Roman
delegation began by threatening and warning the Muslims to kill and annihilate
them and that there was no alternative for the Muslims except death or
departure. When the Muslim delegation began, he did not act like the
Crusader delegation, but rather presented three alternatives to them: the first
was Islam, the second was surrender with the payment of the jizya in exchange
for the Muslims running the affairs of the country, then there was the third
and final option, which was war and fighting, which the Roman
Crusader army occupying Egypt presented as an option with no alternative .
They agreed to prefer surrender and the jizya, and Amr and Al-Muqawqis met and
peace was decided between them with a document stating: that security would be
given to the Copts, and to those Romans who wanted to remain in Egypt, for
themselves, their money, and their churches, and in return for that every Copt
would pay "two dinars" except: the old man, the boy who reached 13
years of age, and the woman."
- Then Mansi continues saying - "Historians mentioned that after the Arabs
established power in Egypt, and while the Arab conqueror was busy managing his
interests in Alexandria, the monks of Wadi El Natrun and the desert of
Shehat heard that a new nation had taken over the country, so seventy thousand
of them marched to Amr barefoot, in torn clothes, each carrying a staff... They
approached him and asked him to grant them religious freedom and order the
return of their patriarch from exile. Amr answered their request and showed his
inclination towards them, so their trust in him increased and they inclined
towards him . "
- Father Mansi says: ( Especially when they saw him open their hearts to
them and allow them to establish churches and temples in the middle of (the
area of) Fustat, which he made the capital of the Egyptian lands and the center
of the emirate, while the Muslims did not have a temple, so they prayed and
preached in the open) .
Mansi continues, saying on page 209: “ThatHe brought the Copts closer to him,
and returned to them all their churches that had been usurped by the Romans .”Written
Yohanna Nikosi. He cannot be trusted to convey history impartially. He is suspended by the church and accused of forgery in church history books
. The church suspended him.
 | This image is in another size. Click here to view the image in its correct form. The image dimensions are 1032x495. |
http://st-takla.org/Full-Free-Coptic...na-Nokosy.html
- Participated in one of the fraud and forgery operations recorded in most Coptic history books
| This image is in another size. Click here to view the image in its correct form. The image dimensions are 967x434. |
http://st-takla.org/Saints/Coptic-Sy...pe-Isaac_.html
From the book History of the Coptic Church
and from the book History of the Patriarchs
, he forged the will of Bishop John about who is the bishop who follows him
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment