krieger
Banned
We could see something weird, maybe like that norse catholicism other tl do...
It's definitely a possibility.
We could see something weird, maybe like that norse catholicism other tl do...
Rise of the Carolingians (c. 732–768)
Though Charles Martel chose not to take the title king (as his son Pepin III would, or emperor, as his grandson Charlemagne) he was absolute ruler of virtually all of today's continental Western Europe north of the Pyrenees. Only the remaining Saxon realms, which he partly conquered, Lombardy, and the Marca Hispanica south of the Pyrenees were significant additions to the Frankish realms after his death.
Martel was also the founder of the feudal system and that marked the Carolingian Empire, and Europe in general during the Middle Ages, though his son and grandson would gain credit for his innovations. Further, Martel cemented his place in history with his defense of Christian Europe against a Muslim army at the Battle of Tours in 732. The Iberian Saracens had incorporated Berber light horse cavalry with the heavy Arab cavalry to create a formidable army that had almost never been defeated. Christian European forces, meanwhile, lacked the powerful tool of the stirrup. In this victory, Charles earned the surname Martel ("the Hammer").[4] Edward Gibbon, the historian of Rome and its aftermath, called Charles Martel "the paramount prince of his age".
Pepin III accepted the nomination as king by Pope Zachary in about 741. Charlemagne's rule began in 768 at Pepin's death. He proceeded to take control of the kingdom following his brother Carloman's death, as the two brothers co-inherited their father's kingdom. Charlemagne was crowned Roman Emperor in the year 800.[5]
During the reign of Charlemagne (768–814)
The Carolingian Empire during the reign of Charlemagne covered most of Western Europe, as the Roman Empire once had. Unlike the Romans, who ventured to Germania beyond the Rhine only for vengeance after the disaster at Teutoburg Forest (9 AD), Charlemagne decisively crushed all Germanic resistance and extended his realm to the Elbe, influencing events almost to the Russian Steppes.
Charlemagne's reign was one of near-constant warfare, personally leading many of his campaigns. He seized the Lombard Kingdom in 774, led a failed campaign into Spain in 778, extended his domain into Bavaria in 788, ordered his son Pepin to campaign against the Avars in 795, and conquered Saxon territories in wars and rebellions fought from 772 to 804.[4][6]
Prior to the death of Charlemagne, the Empire was divided among various members of the Carolingian dynasty. These included King Charles the Younger, son of Charlemagne, who received Neustria; King Louis the Pious, who received Aquitaine; and King Pepin, who received Italy. Pepin died with an illegitimate son, Bernard, in 810, and Charles died without heirs in 811. Although Bernard succeeded Pepin as King of Italy, Louis was made co-Emperor in 813, and the entire Empire passed to him with Charlemagne's death in the winter of 814.[7]
Eudes (also Oto, Odo, Odon) of Metz (742–814) was an architect who lived during Charlemagne's reign in the Carolingian Empire, and is the earliest known architect born north of the Alps. He was possibly of Armenian origin.[1][2][3][4]
His Carolingian architecture with polygonal plans and elaborate elevations of the buildings he created are a reminiscence of the Basilica of San Vitale of Ravenna and late Roman architecture with Byzantine style. It is unknown whether he saw these buildings himself, or only drawings of them.
There must be strong anti Umayyad and anti Abbasid sentiment in the Netherlands thats to the conquest, and the rebellious rhetoric of the Zaydi was probably quite attractive to many new converts, and also some christians who wanted a more effective ruler then the weak Emir of Faransa.The Zaydi madhab emerged in reverence of Zayd's failed uprising against the Ummayad Caliph, Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik (ruling 724–743 AD), which set a precedent for revolution against corrupt rulers. It might be said that Zaydis find it difficult to remain passive in an unjust world, or in the words of a modern influential Zaydi leader, Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi, to "sit in their houses".[4] Zaydis are the oldest branch of the Shia and are currently the second largest group after Twelvers. Zaidis do not believe in the infallibility of Imāms, but promote their leadership and divine inspiration.[5] Zaydis believe that Zayd ibn Ali in his last hour was betrayed by the people in Kufa.
In matters of Islamic jurisprudence, the Zaydis follow Zayd ibn ’Ali's teachings which are documented in his book Majmu’ al-Fiqh (Arabic: مجموع الفِقه). Zaydi fiqh is similar to the Hanafi school of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence.[6] Abu Hanifa, a Sunni madhab shaykh, was favorable and even donated towards the Zaydi cause.[7] Zaidis dismiss religious dissimulation (taqiyya).[1]
In matters of theology, the Zaydis are close to the Mu'tazili school, though they are not exactly Mu'tazilite. There are a few issues between both schools, most notably the Zaydi doctrine of the Imamate, which is rejected by the Mu'tazilites. Of the Shi'a, Zaydis are most similar to Sunnis[8] since Zaydism shares similar doctrines and jurisprudential opinions with Sunni scholars.[how?][9]
Zaydis’ theological literature puts an emphasis on justice and human responsibility, and its political implications, i.e. Muslims have an ethical and legal obligation by their religion to rise up and depose unjust leaders including unrighteous sultans and caliphs.[10]
In the context of the Shi'a belief in spiritual leadership or Imamate, Zaydis believe that the leader of the Ummah or Muslim community must be Fatimids: descendants of Muhammad through his only surviving daughter Fatimah, whose sons were Hasan ibn ʻAlī and Husayn ibn ʻAlī. These Shi'a called themselves Zaydi to differentiate themselves from other Shias who refused to take up arms with Zayd ibn Ali.
Zaydis believe Zayd ibn Ali was the rightful successor to the Imamate because he led a rebellion against the Umayyad Caliphate, who he believed were tyrannical and corrupt. Muhammad al-Baqir did not engage in political action and the followers of Zayd believed that a true Imām must fight against corrupt rulers.[11] The renowned Muslim jurist Abu Hanifa who is credited for the Hanafi school of Sunni Islam, delivered a fatwā or legal statement in favour of Zayd in his rebellion against the Umayyad ruler. He also urged people in secret to join the uprising and delivered funds to Zayd.[12]
Unlike the Twelver and Isma'ili Shia, Zaydis do not believe in the infallibility of Imāms[5][13][14] and do not believe that the Imāmate must pass from father to son but believe it can be held by any descendant of Hasan ibn ʻAlī or Husayn ibn ʻAlī.
In technology, the Abbasids adopted papermaking from China.[78] The use of paper spread from China into the caliphate in the 8th century CE, arriving in al-Andalus (Islamic Spain) and then the rest of Europe in the 10th century. It was easier to manufacture than parchment, less likely to crack than papyrus, and could absorb ink, making it ideal for making records and making copies of the Qur'an. "Islamic paper makers devised assembly-line methods of hand-copying manuscripts to turn out editions far larger than any available in Europe for centuries."[79] It was from the Abbasids that the rest of the world learned to make paper from linen.[80] The knowledge of gunpowder was also transmitted from China via the caliphate, where the formulas for pure potassium nitrate and an explosive gunpowder effect were first developed.[81]
Advances were made in irrigation and farming, using new technology such as the windmill. Crops such as almonds and citrus fruit were brought to Europe through al-Andalus, and sugar cultivation was gradually adopted by the Europeans. Apart from the Nile, Tigris and Euphrates, navigable rivers were uncommon, so transport by sea was very important. Navigational sciences were highly developed, making use of a rudimentary sextant (known as a kamal). When combined with detailed maps of the period, sailors were able to sail across oceans rather than skirt along the coast. Abbasid sailors were also responsible for reintroducing large three masted merchant vessels to the Mediterranean. The name caravel may derive from an earlier Arab ship known as the qārib.[82] Arab merchants dominated trade in the Indian Ocean until the arrival of the Portuguese in the 16th century. Hormuz was an important center for this trade. There was also a dense network of trade routes in the Mediterranean, along which Muslim countries traded with each other and with European powers such as Venice or Genoa. The Silk Road crossing Central Asia passed through Abbasid caliphate between China and Europe.
Windmills were among Abbasid inventions in technology.[83]
Engineers in the Abbasid caliphate made a number of innovative industrial uses of hydropower, and early industrial uses of tidal power, wind power, and petroleum (notably by distillation into kerosene). The industrial uses of watermills in the Islamic world date back to the 7th century, while horizontal-wheeled and vertical-wheeled water mills were both in widespread use since at least the 9th century. By the time of the Crusades, every province throughout the Islamic world had mills in operation, from al-Andalus and North Africa to the Middle East and Central Asia. These mills performed a variety of agricultural and industrial tasks.[78] Abbasid engineers also developed machines (such as pumps) incorporating crankshafts, employed gears in mills and water-raising machines, and used dams to provide additional power to watermills and water-raising machines.[84] Such advances made it possible for many industrial tasks that were previously driven by manual labour in ancient times to be mechanizedand driven by machinery instead in the medieval Islamic world. It has been argued that the industrial use of waterpower had spread from Islamic to Christian Spain, where fulling mills, paper mills, and forge mills were recorded for the first time in Catalonia.[85]
A number of industries were generated during the Arab Agricultural Revolution, including early industries for textiles, sugar, rope-making, matting, silk, and paper. Latin translations of the 12th century passed on knowledge of chemistry and instrument making in particular.[86] The agricultural and handicraft industries also experienced high levels of growth during this period.[87]
I seriously doubt the chances of a pagan reformation. What made hinduism so strong in resisting conversion to islam was its strong social structure aka the caste system. Only in the regions where the caste system was at it's weakest (west Punjab and east Bangladesh) did we see region wide conversion. It other regions we saw whole villages and cities convert and there muslim became big minorities like in karela and Delhi. But never threatened the hindu majority. The slavs don't have such a social structure and can't invent it out of nowhere. It took millennia in India, that's why it was so strong (heck even muslim Indias created their own parallel muslim caste system, such was the strength of the caste social system).That's why I stated "at least" - with Byzantines weakened and islam with it's eating restrictions not suitable for a harsh climate of the north, paganism has it's chance to survive. Who knows, maybe sort of "reformed paganism" (like prince Vladimir tried to form before he converted to Christianity) could emerge and become main rival for islam. It could be Slavo-Nordic-Baltic analog of hinduism.
I seriously doubt the chances of a pagan reformation. What made hinduism so strong in resisting conversion to islam was its strong social structure aka the caste system. Only in the regions where the caste system was at it's weakest (west Punjab and east Bangladesh) did we see region wide conversion. It other regions we saw whole villages and cities convert and there muslim became big minorities like in karela and Delhi. But never threatened the hindu majority. The slavs don't have such a social structure and can't invent it out of nowhere. It took millennia in India, that's why it was so strong (heck even muslim Indias created their own parallel muslim caste system, such was the strength of the caste social system).
Also India was a far denser a nd bigger society. A world of it's own just by it's demographic dimensions. All of Europe in it's own can compare, much less sparsely populated Eastern Europe.
I seriously doubt the chances of a pagan reformation. What made hinduism so strong in resisting conversion to islam was its strong social structure aka the caste system. Only in the regions where the caste system was at it's weakest (west Punjab and east Bangladesh) did we see region wide conversion. It other regions we saw whole villages and cities convert and there muslim became big minorities like in karela and Delhi. But never threatened the hindu majority. The slavs don't have such a social structure and can't invent it out of nowhere. It took millennia in India, that's why it was so strong (heck even muslim Indias created their own parallel muslim caste system, such was the strength of the caste social system).
Also India was a far denser a nd bigger society. A world of it's own just by it's demographic dimensions. All of Europe in it's own can compare, much less sparsely populated Eastern Europe.
We're too early to call about it, those snow/white pirates are still farmers up there and i doubt would be much issue, again if Al-Faransa did develop Faris/Knight on schedule or even early...those pirates would not stood a chance...maybe the worst will be the magyar-slavics...But islam is impossible to maintain in harsh climate conditions of Eastern Europe. Pork is most reliable source of meat in EE's forests. Do you think that Eastern Europeans would like to die from famine in the name of some foreign God? Also al-Faransa is a lot more vulnerable to Viking/Magyar/Slavic raids than Francia IOTL.
So we could see/hear something more occitan-meditternean, like an arab like Catalan-esque language?French" it's worth noting that in the early Middle Ages the most prestigious French dialect was an Occitan one (from Toulouse, I think) and it was the language of poetry and courts. It was only after the cathar crusades were the power of local rulers of occitania was crushed and the parisian king rises above the rest of feudal rulers that the parisian variant became the most prestigious one, and eventually the only language of the elite in France, just like tuscan Italian in Italy.
We're too early to call about it, those snow/white pirates are still farmers up there and i doubt would be much issue, again if Al-Faransa did develop Faris/Knight on schedule or even early...those pirates would not stood a chance...maybe the worst will be the magyar-slavics...
Yeah there a lot to talk before the updateHay here give me some time that i'll reply to all this information
Frank Stuff
German Stuff
Dutch Stuff
Technology Stuff
I seriously doubt the chances of a pagan reformation. What made hinduism so strong in resisting conversion to islam was its strong social structure aka the caste system. Only in the regions where the caste system was at it's weakest (west Punjab and east Bangladesh) did we see region wide conversion. It other regions we saw whole villages and cities convert and there muslim became big minorities like in karela and Delhi. But never threatened the hindu majority. The slavs don't have such a social structure and can't invent it out of nowhere. It took millennia in India, that's why it was so strong (heck even muslim Indias created their own parallel muslim caste system, such was the strength of the caste social system).
Also India was a far denser a nd bigger society. A world of it's own just by it's demographic dimensions. All of Europe in it's own can compare, much less sparsely populated Eastern Europe.
But islam is impossible to maintain in harsh climate conditions of Eastern Europe. Pork is most reliable source of meat in EE's forests. Do you think that Eastern Europeans would like to die from famine in the name of some foreign God? Also al-Faransa is a lot more vulnerable to Viking/Magyar/Slavic raids than Francia IOTL.
We're too early to call about it, those snow/white pirates are still farmers up there and i doubt would be much issue, again if Al-Faransa did develop Faris/Knight on schedule or even early...those pirates would not stood a chance...maybe the worst will be the magyar-slavics...
well i will like to see how saxony figths off the Al-Faransains , still here saxony could be a regional power
AFAIK, Russia and Poland (at least) will be a non-issue, because in Russia and Poland, pork isn't really as that necessary than at Germany, and apart from the new-jurisprudency-school solution, we have the Hanafī school that takes in part the customs and practices of the community (heh, exactly because of that the Ottomans - and a lot of the early turk dynasties, actually - supported this school to be the official fiqh or, jurisprudence, of the country, so they can change the little details (like alcohol on wheat) for that.
In Germany (and i think that in Central Europe east of Poland in general) things get hard tough, because pork then turns into a real problem. But the islamic jurists have a way to escape! In the text of the Quran that talks about the prohibition of eat pork, also it's talked that if you really need to eat, isn't unlawful, so...eh, "if y'all forest pagans doesn't have any options, ye can eat that Allah will give mercy for your sins". Ah, other thing, the slavs and the germans already have the heavy plough, what makes it all a non-issue in itself.
About the raiders (especially the vikings), it really depends on the situation of Faransa in the moment they appear, because actually, Faransa has a shield against first-contact nomadic peoples, Bavaria is to the west, Bakhyia to the north, and beyond the Rhine are the other germans. So, unless slavic migration goes unexplainably wild, Faransa has a pretty good position in relations of "do not be invaded by foreigners". And Francia OTL was in truth more exposed to these raids, Faransa just have to bother with what happens in the Rhine, OTL Francia had to bother with like...all of Northwestern Europe? They literally fought the andalusians and the magyars at the same time
Saxony isn't a threat for Faransa, but certainly is one for Bakhyia, the bigger problem with the saxons are the slavic expansion along the Elbe, but i think that if Bakhyia do not go for try the conquest (i'm not saying that would be easy for the bakhyians to conquer them, nooooooo, just that if the bakhyians try it, their position against the slavs can be threatened much more), they can fare pretty well against the slavs, at least enough to maintain their position.
Saxony isn't a threat for Faransa, but certainly is one for Bakhyia, the bigger problem with the saxons are the slavic expansion along the Elbe, but i think that if Bakhyia do not go for try the conquest (i'm not saying that would be easy for the bakhyians to conquer them, nooooooo, just that if the bakhyians try it, their position against the slavs can be threatened much more), they can fare pretty well against the slavs, at least enough to maintain their position.
There not still Aurochs in Europe? muslim could push to breed those as those are cows and thus halal.It is really as necessary as in Germany. Poland literally does have the same climate as most of Germany. The same counts for a forest core of Russia (lands around Moscow and Novogorod), the only part of Russia where pork isn't needed is steppe part, but in Xth century it wasn't even Russia. The point about Faransa not having to fight off Andalusians and sometimes having their support is fully valid, however.
There not still Aurochs in Europe? muslim could push to breed those as those are cows and thus halal
Also the Slavs moving to the elbe ?
Ah well, still the muslim would breed them too, still a shame, the rest the rest of europe would evolve very uniquely(when a vegetarian diet is possible..is hard in europe winters)There are still aurochs, but they weren't numerous enough to make whole diet out of them.
Cool, taker your time. Happy new year.Just coming to say that, the Al-Andalus episode is coming, but probably will be delayed for tomorrow (or after tomorrow) because i want to give y'all again the taste of detailed battles (and now with maps!).
Any comments or questions will be gladly received and answered.
Cool, taker your time. Happy new year.
The Qur'an in several verses admonishes the consumption of alcohol khamr :
They question thee about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: In both is great sin, and (some) utility for men; but the sin of them is greater than their usefulness. And they ask thee what they ought to spend. Say: that which is superfluous. Thus God maketh plain to you (His) revelations, that haply ye may reflect. (Al-Quran 2:219)
O ye who believe! Draw not near unto prayer when ye are drunken, till ye know that which ye utter, nor when ye are polluted, save when journeying upon the road, till ye have bathed. And if ye be ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have touched women, and ye find not water, then go to high clean soil and rub your faces and your hands (therewith). Lo! Allah is Benign, Forgiving. (Al-Quran 4:43)
O ye who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave it aside in order that ye may succeed. (Al-Quran 5:90)
At first, it was forbidden for Muslims to attend prayers while intoxicated. In addition to this, most observant Muslims refrain from consuming food products that contain pure vanilla extract or soy sauce, as these food products may contain alcohol. There is some debate about whether the prohibition extends to dishes in which the alcohol would be cooked off or if it would be practically impossible to consume enough of the food to become intoxicated.[1][2]
Substances which are intoxicants are not prohibited as such, although their consumption is.[3] For example, alcohol can be used as a disinfectant[4][5] or for cleaning, but not as a beverage.
The Alevi Muslims of Turkey permit alcohol, unlike many other denominations.[6] Ismaili Muslims are also noted for discouraging, rather than prohibiting, alcohol.[7] The Zaidi and Mutazili sects believe that the use of alcohol has always been forbidden and refer to the Qur'an Ayah (4:43) as feeling of sleepiness and not to be awake.
A fatwa issued in November 2015 permitted the consumption of low-alcohol and non-alcoholic beverages provided that the given beverage contains an amount of 0.5% or the like of alcohol does not entail deeming its consumption unlawful as long as there is no effect of the alcohol upon consumption of the beverage and it does not intoxicate in large quantities.
This is not even getting into consumption of alcohol by muslims in places where it was allowed to christian but forbidden to muslims like the ottoman and Persian empires. After all, it was lawful to eat at christian taverns "Food slaughtered by an idolater is forbidden, but food that is acceptable to Jews and Christians is allowed to Muslims as well", so people took advantage of that to drink there.Khamr (Arabic: خمر) is an Arabic word for wine; (the plural form, Khumūr (Arabic: خمور), is defined as alcoholic beverages, liquor).[1][unreliable source?] In Islamic jurisprudence, it refers to certain forbidden substances, and its technical definition depends on the legal school. Jurists from the Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali legal schools have traditionally viewed it as general term for any intoxicating beverage made from grapes, dates, and similar substances.[2] Hanafi jurists restricted the term to a narrower range of beverages.[2] Over time, some jurists classified other intoxicants, such as opium and qat, as khamr, based on a hadith stating:
The Holy Prophet said: every intoxicant is khamr, and every khamr is forbidden.[2][3]
Traditions of the Islamic prophet Muhammad indicated that khamr may be made from two plants, the grape-vine and the date palm.[4]
There are some Muslim jurists (particularly of the Hanafi school) who take the concept of khamr literally and forbid only grape-based (or date-based) alcoholic beverages, allowing those made with other fruits, grains, or honey. This is, however, a minority opinion.[5][6]
All alcohol or only wine?
Like Mu'tazila, Hanafi scholars uphold the unlawfulness of khamr, but restrict its definition to fermented juice of grapes[18] or grapes and dates.[19] As a result, alcohol derived by means of honey, barley, wheat and millet such as whisky, beer and vodka are permitted according to Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf, although all forms of grape alcohol are banned absolutely.[20] This is in stark contrast to other schools of Islamic jurisprudence which prohibit consumption of alcohol in all its forms. Though Hanafis trace their liberal view on intoxicants back to Umar ibn al-Khattab and Ibn Mas'ud,[21][need quotation to verify] but, in essence, this conclusion has its roots in the early Basric and Kufic traditions of Islamic legal thinking with its hermeneutic preference for rational reasoning.[citation needed] Ibn Rushd al-Qurtubi explains it thus in his encyclopedia of comparative Islamic jurisprudence,
“In their argument by way of reasoning they said that the Koran has explicitly laid down that the Illa (underlying cause) of prohibition of khamr (wine) is that it prevents the remembrance of God and breeds enmity and hatred…[this is] found only in a certain quantity of the intoxicating liquor not in what is less than that; it follows therefore that only this quantity be prohibited..” [22]
This distinction between the legal status of wine and non-grape alcoholic beverages trickled down to Hanafi legal code. Hanafi jurists delineated drinking-related offences into two categories:
As the second category of punishment is specific to the Hanafis (other schools punish drinking regardless of intoxication), they had to come with a legal definition of drunkenness. These definitions ranged from Ibn Qutayba’s ,
- Drinking grape-derived wine (punishment applicable on drinking “even a drop”).[23]
- Intoxication from non-grape intoxicants (certainly prohibited from a religious-moral perspective, but may or may not qualify for criminal punishment).[24][need quotation to verify]
“[a drunk is he] whose intellect has left him so he does not understand a little or much (anything at all)” to Ibn Nujaym’s ,“[a drunk is he who] does not know (the difference) between a man and a woman or the earth from the sky”.
Hanafi understanding of Shariah not only permitted adherents to indulge in alcoholic beverages but they could do so up to a near point of total "annihilation".[25]
Punishment
The Quran does not prescribe a penalty for consuming alcohol. Among ahadith, the only reference for punishment comes from one by Anas ibn Malik, (according to Murtaza Haider of Dawn.com in Pakistan) who is reported to have stated that Muhammad prescribed 40 lashes "administered with two palm branches ... for someone accused of consuming alcohol".[14] Saudi Arabian scholar Saalih al-Munajjid also states that a hadith report narrated by Sahih Muslim (3281) from Anas reports that Muhammad flogged someone who had drunk wine with palm branches stripped of their leaves and with shoes.[15][16]
There is clearly no punishment and even a clear exception to the rule so I guess lack of attempts to rule lawyering or ignore the prohibition in otl historical muslim lands had more to do with the fact that in those placed pork wasn't wanted or needed anyway:Consumption of pork and products made from pork is strictly forbidden in Islam. The origin of this prohibition is in Surat al-Baqarah:
He has only forbidden you what dies of itself, and blood, and flesh of swine, and that over which any other (name) than (that of) God has been invoked; but whoever is driven to necessity, not desiring, nor exceeding the limit, no sin shall be upon him; surely Allah is most-Forgiving, most-Merciful.
— Qurʼan, Sura 2 (Al-Baqara), ayat 173
Also there is the Pontic Caspian steppe, which has good climate and land for both agriculture and pasture "It is a part of the Palearctic temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands ecoregion of the temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands biome.":The cultural materialistic anthropologist Marvin Harris thinks that the main reason for prohibiting consumption of pork was ecological-economical.[10] Pigs require water and shady woods with seeds, but those conditions are scarce in the Middle East. Unlike many other forms of livestock, pigs are omnivorous scavengers, eating virtually anything they come across, including carrion and refuse. This was deemed unclean; and a Middle Eastern society keeping large stocks of pigs would destroy their ecosystem.
It is speculated that chickens supplanted pigs as a more portable and efficient source of meat, leading to the religious restrictions.[11]
Maimonides, the Jewish philosopher and legal codifier, who was also court physician to the Muslim sultan Saladin in the 12th century, understands the dietary laws chiefly as a means of keeping the body healthy. He argued that the meat of the forbidden animals, birds, and fish is unwholesome and indigestible. According to Maimonides, at first glance, this does not apply to pork, which does not appear to be harmful. Yet, Maimonides observes, the pig is a filthy animal and if swine were used for food, marketplaces and even houses would be dirtier than latrines.[12]