Di˜ering Perspectives on the Naming of the Arabian Gulf1999) The Gulf in Historic Maps 14782...

Differing Perspectives on the Naming of the Arabian Gulf

Dr. Bashir Zain El-Abidn

Differing Prespectives on the Naming of the Arabian Gulf

DR. BASHIR ZAIN EL-ABDIN

5 Differing perspectives on the naming of the Arabian Gulf

Dr. Bashir Zain El-Abdin

Introduction

The Iranian official position intermittently triggers a controversy in the media about the name of the "Arabian Gulf". The issue is not confined to insisting on marking the Gulf as Persian, but goes beyond the name to include nationalist dimensions and political implications centered on the pursuit of regional hegemony.

Accordingly, the Arab stance towards this dispute should not stop at the debate on the name of the Arabian Gulf, but must be based on the fact that that Arab identity of the Gulf constitutes an essential component of the regional identity of the population of the Arabian Gulf.

The scope of this study is beyond the heated debate about the differences in the name, and aims to discuss the geographical, historical, nationalist and political dimensions in the naming of the Arabian Gulf.

I. The geographical dimension

References to the Arabian Gulf in historical and geographical works across different eras:

The Gulf is a strip of water from the Arabian Sea that stretches from the Gulf of Oman in the south to Shatt Al Arab in the north. It is 965 kilometers long, from the Strait of Hormuz Mosul to the Gulf of Oman.

The Gulf has an area of about 233,000 square kilometers and has a width that varies between a maximum of 370 km and a minimum of 55 km in the Strait of Hormuz. Its depth exceeds 90 meters only in some areas.

The Arabian Gulf separates the Arabian Peninsula from south-western Iran, and borders eight countries: Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Iran.

The Gulf had been given s e veral names throughout the ages. The Assyrians, Babylonians and Chaldeans referred to it as the "South Sea" or "Lower Sea," in juxtaposition with the "Upper Sea", the Mediterranean Sea.

The Greek historian Herodotus referred to it as “the Red Sea" because the sunlight reflecting on the surface waters gave it a reddish color.


Bahrain Center for Strategic, International and Energy Studies

The name "Persian Gulf" appeared for the first time during the era of Alexander the Great, when the mil i tary commander Niarchos returned in 325 BC from his campaign against India and headed towards Iraq alongside the eastern coast of the Arabian Gulf.

He did not know the western coast and Ptolemy used the “Persian Gulf” designation. The term was subsequently transferred from the Greeks and Romans to European states and its use became common. It is the same term that some Arab geographers took from Ptolemy after they translated his book into Arabic.

Several geographers and historians in antiquity used the term "Arabian Gulf" based on the dominance of the Arabs on the ports and islands of the body of water. Among the most prominent geographers who used the name were Strabo (d. 19) and the Roman historian Pliny (d. 113), who said in his description of the Arabian Gulf that Charax (Muhammara) is a town located in the far end of the Arabian Gulf, where the most prominent part of Arabia Felix starts. It is founded on an artificial hill, with the Tigris River to its right and the Eulaeus River to its left.

The "Sea of Basra" designation could be traced to the Islamic conquests and appeared in several works by Arab geographers and historians such as Yaqout Al Hamawi, Khalifa bin Khayyat, and Khalil Bin Ahmed Al Farahidi.

During the Abbasid Caliphate, another name for the Arabian Gulf appeared and the "Gulf of Iraq" was used alongside the traditional name of “Arabian Gulf.”

Several other names for the Arabian Gulf appeared during the Islamic ages, such as "Gulf of Basra", "Gulf of Oman" and "Qatif Sea", as Islamic ships used these three areas as bases to embark on journeys towards the Arabian Sea and the

Indian Ocean. # All maps in this study have been acquired from: Sultan Al-Qasimi (1999) The Gulf in Historic Maps 14782 ,1861-nd Edition, Leicester, England.



As for the Ottoman sailors and geographers, they have traditionally referred to it as the "Basra Körfezi", meaning in Turkish "the Gulf of Basra.”

In the same period, the name “Qatif Sea” appeared in Western works and the name became widely used on European geographical maps and in workbooks until the end of the nineteenth century.

The conclusion that can be made by studying historical and geographical works is that there are more than ten names for the Arabian Gulf through different eras. Most of the names that geographers used, such as "Arabian Gulf", "Gulf of Iraq", "Gulf of Basra", "Gulf of Oman", "Sea of Basra," and "Qatif Sea", emphasize the Arab identity of the Gulf.

Names of the Gulf on historical and contemporary maps:

Shaikh Sultan bin Mohammed Al Qasimi, in his book, "Gulf on Historical Maps"1, displayed a set of Portuguese, Dutch, British and French maps of the Arabian Gulf during the period between 1478 and 1861. A study of those maps highlights the following facts:

1- The reference to the Arabian Gulf as the "Qatif Sea" was the most common in the 17th century. More than 20 maps in various European sources used this name.



2- In the 18th century, the name most commonly used on Western maps was "Gulf of Basra", based on the success of the Ottomans in extending their control over the provinces of Basra and Al Ahsa and on the eminence of maps and workbooks by leading Ottoman navigators and cartographers, such Piri Reis and Sidi Ali Reis, in Europe.

3- More than ten European maps with the "Arabian Gulf" term could be found in the same period, as could be found a larger number of maps that used three names of the Arabian Gulf at the same time. European historians often wrote the names of "Persian Gulf", "Qatif Sea" and "Gulf of Basra" at the same time on their maps when they indicated the Arabian Gulf.

This tendency has persisted with many Europeans in modern times and they continue to use the terms "Arabian Gulf" and “Persian Gulf "on their maps together as can be seen in many contemporary European atlases and geographical references. The Hachette Encyclopædia Universalis has since the second half of the 20th



century referred to the Gulf as the “Arab-Persian Gulf”. This naming was emulated by the "National Geographic Society" that publishes the "National Geographic" magazine and places "Arabian Gulf" alongside "Persian Gulf”.

However, some Western universities and institutions such as the Times Atlas and the Louvre Museum opted to use the "Gulf" without mentioning whether it is Arabian or Persian.

In 1990, Jean-Pierre Viennot, a professor at the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilizations in Paris, published a study in Le Monde Diplomatique confirming the “Arabian Gulf” term, based on a map dating to the end of the sixteenth century and bearing the Latin label "Sinus Arabicus", the Arab Sea.

He said: “We have found more than one document and more than one map in the National Library in Paris that prove conclusively the name of ‘Arabian Gulf’. They are all are opposed to the Iranian point of view. "

The author of the study supported his arguments by a map drawn by Johan Speed and published in 1956, “The Turkish Empire” that indicated the "Qatif Sea" and the "Arabian Gulf."

Jean-Pierre Viennot refuted the Iranian allegations and stressed that the "Persian Gulf" name used by European geographers was the result of political orientations among some colonial powers in the 19th century.



Accordingly, there is no justification for the official Iranian position to insist on the exclusive use of the "Persian Gulf" name, since both the Turkish and Western historical maps confirm the dominance of the Arab identity in the various designations given to the Arabian Gulf.

We find it astonishing that some Iranians - in their claims to anchor the “Persian Gulf” name - resort to texts by the United Nations that use the name on their maps, but at the same time use "Arabian Gulf" in their official documents.



II. The Historical Dimension

Questioning the Arab character of the Gulf is not confined to geographical references. It extends to the use of historical versions as a principal basis for those arguing for the dominance of the Persian identity in the Arabian Gulf. This indicates that the problematic naming also has dimensions of a nationalist nature.

Those who question the Arab identity of the Gulf resort to the narratives of the Sassanid campaigns in the Arab regions, but at the time they brush aside the most prominent attribute of the relationship between Persians and Arabs in the Sassanid period (226651-) during which the Arabs dominated the maritime traffic in the Arabian Gulf and near the coasts.

Hussain Moenes was among the first researchers to talk about how the Arab dimension was overlooked in the drafting of the Sassanid era history.

He stated that "there was an exaggeration in the texts portraying the expansion of Persia in modern Iran because Persia had never been in any era pre-dating Islam a state with fixed borders. Its frontiers expanded during the reign of strong rulers, but were constricted when those holding power were weak, which was the case most of the time." 2

French historian Jean-Francois3 Salles noted that the Sassanid sources on eastern Arabian Peninsula did not have any indication that the area was under their rule.

He stated that considering the Arabian Peninsula just a settlement of Seleucids, Parthians and Sassanids was a simplification of the matter. The most likely hypothesis is that the Arabian Peninsula was independent and was ruled by successive families that extended their influence on trade and on the sailors who constantly sailed across the gulf between the mouth of the Euphrates and India.4

The problem is that some contemporary history compilations have exaggerated the reference to the Sassanid campaigns against the territory of Bahrain during the rule of Ardashir and Shapur, without mentioning the campaigns waged by the Arabs on the Sassanids and the resulting outcome that allowed the Arab domination over the two shores of the Gulf since the early Sassanid rule until today.

The fact is that the campaigns by Ardashir in 230 and Shapur in 325 were limited in the scope of both their duration and their civilizing influence.

The Persians did not have the ability to impose their presence on the eastern part of the Arabian Peninsula and they had to rely on the Arab tribes to protect their state, and to prevent Bedouin raids on their country. Shapur, and the Sassanid rulers



who succeeded him, resorted to settling the Arab tribes in the eastern shores of the Arabian Gulf as the resettlement process meant security for them. They also relied on the intensification of the Arab presence in their western front to serve as a buffer zone that prevented the Romans from marching into their country. Some of the most important tribes encouraged by Emperor Shapur to settle were Tamim, Bakr bin Wael, Abdul Qais, Bani Taghlab and other Rabia tribes.

Arab domination of the eastern shores of the Arabian Gulf

After Alexander the Great began his invasion of the Persian Empire and killed Darius, the last king of the Achaemenid in the fourth century BC, he split Persia. Some Arab tribes took advantage of the internal conflicts and settled on the southwestern shores of the Arabian Gulf in the region of Kerman. They used Bahrain as a base for crossing towards the eastern coast of the Arabian Gulf.

The Arabs in eastern Arabian Peninsula had established several political entities before the Sassanid rule and achieved a high level of sophistication and civility. They established urban communities characterized by prosperity and development. They engaged in outstanding commercial activities for the five hundred years between the Achaemenid collapse and the Sassanid rule.

The urban development and commercial prosperity in the east of the Arabian Peninsula continued during the Sasanian rule. The Arab political entities have succeeded in expanding eastward and the Arab tribes in Bahrain invaded Persia and established communities on the eastern coast overlooking the Arabian Gulf.

Despite the progress of civilization and geographic expansion of the Arabs, many contemporary historical studies have made the mistake of drafting the pre-Islam history of the Arabs by referring to the Persian domination of their countries, but without referring to the Arab political entities that dominated the western coast of Persia.

A prominent political entity was the Lakhmids Muntherids (268-633) whose authority extended from Iraq and the Sham in the north to Oman in the south and included Bahrain, Hajar and the Arabian Gulf coast. Their capital was Al Hirah.

The Arab domination of the eastern shores of the Arabian Gulf dates to the early fourth century. In 309 Sassanid King Hormizd II died and had no heir to the throne.

The king of Lakhmids, Imru› Al Qais (288-328), encouraged the tribes of Bahrain, particularly Abdul Qais, Rabia, Tamim, Taghlab and Baker bin Wael to attack the coast of Persia. They crossed to Persia on a large fleet and occupied parts of land.



Sources indicate that Imru› Al Qais used in his campaign a large naval fleet and occupied large parts of Persia. He also threatened the peripheral lands of the Roman Empire, but he quickly reconciled with the kings of the Romans.5

In his chronicles of the Bahrain Arabs’ campaigns against Persia, Al Tabari said: "A large number of them crossed the water near the region of Abdul Qais and Kadhima until they reached Abarshahr and the coasts and overwhelmed the inhabitants, taking over the control of their livestock, lands and livelihoods."6

In 324, the Qadha’ tribe raided Persian towns and killed a number of relatives of King Shapur III (309-379) who retaliated by launching a campaign against the Arab kingdoms in 325.

Imru› Al Qais fled and Shapur occupied Al Hirah. He installed Aus ibn Qallam Al Amaliki in charge of the town and entrusted him with the task of stopping attacks by Arab tribes against his country. However, he was forced at a later time to hand power back to the Lakhmids at the limit of his state and to engage in an alliance with them to avert the threat of the Roman invasion of his country.

While contemporary historians overindulged in researching the campaigns by Ardashir and Shapur, no similar historic efforts were exerted to detail the role of the Arab alliance to end the Sassanid hegemony in the battle of Dhi Qar. There were only descriptions in Arab poetry of the Arab victory over the Sassanid armies and the narratives about the leadership role of the Anza tribe in the alliance that ended the Sassanid power in the east and set the stage for the movement of Islamic conquests.

Several Hadith books mentioned the Prophet, peace be upon him, referring to the victory of Anza tribe over the Persians in the Dhi Qar battle.7

History sources concur that the Arab presence in the eastern shores of the Arabian Gulf has been uninterrupted since the beginning of the fourth century until the present day. Western explorers have talked profusely about the prominence of the Arabs in shipping traffic in the Arabian Gulf, notably the German cartographer and explorer in the service of Denmark Carsten Niebuhr, who, when explaining the Arab identity of the Gulf in the eighteenth century, wrote:

"Our geographers were wrong in representing a part of Arabia as subject to the monarchs of Persia. So far is it from being so, on the contrary, the Arabs possess all the sea coast of the Persian Empire, from the mouths of the Euphrates, nearly to those of the Indus. These settlements upon the coast of Persia belong not, indeed, to Arabia properly so-called, but … they are independent of Persia, and use the same language, and exhibit the same manners as the native inhabitants of Arabia. [Niebuhr, 1792: II: 137].



He added that it was impossible to mark precisely the time the Arabs founded these settlements on the coast. Old narratives said that they were set up ages ago, but if we rely on the few glimpses that appeared in ancient history, it could be speculated that the settlements were made in the era of the first king of the Persians.8

The major difficulty for researchers in the ancient history of the Arabian Gulf lies in the scarcity of scientific works and studies that explore the roots of the Arab presence in the ports and on the islands of the Arabian Gulf. The truth is that there can be no consolidation of such a culture through political rhetoric and statements. Academic institutions should publish more serious historical and neutral studies and they should endeavor to consolidate them as part of the cultural building of the Gulf Cooperation Council.

III. The nationalist dimension

Finding examples to assert an identity of international waters through geographical names in order to achieve political objectives is not easy.

Such trends emerged in the official Iranian positions in a worrisome manner in 2004 when the National Geographic Magazine published a new edition of its National Geographic Atlas of the World using the term "Arabian Gulf" as an alternative name (in smaller type and in parentheses) for "Persian Gulf".

The magazine also pointed out the existence of a dispute over the three islands between Iran and the United Arab Emirates, labeling the islands of Lesser Tunb and Greater Tunb and Abu Musa as being "Occupied by Iran, Claimed by U.A.E."

The Iranian government banned the distribution of the magazine and its publications and maps in Iran. The then Iranian government spokesman government spokesman Abdollah Ramezanzadeh9 said: "The Iranian government has always vigorously defended the Persian Gulf›s identity as well as those of other historical places from any attempt at forgery. The government has issued appropriate warnings in this regard and the issue will be legally followed up.”

Iran’s parliament Speaker said that “the Persian Gulf is an integral part of the Iranian national identity."

At the same time, several articles were published in official newspapers that considered that the western coasts were settlements ruled by the Persians before Islam and that Iran had the right to control all the Arabian Gulf. The articles alleged that the "Persian Gulf" designation was the only one that could be used in reference to the Arabian Gulf and denied the existence of any other name at any time.



In May 2006, the Iranian authorities banned the sale of the Economist after a map in the magazine labeled the body of water as "Gulf" without adding "Persian".

In April 2008, hundreds of Iranians protested against Google Earth, the virtual globe programme of the US-based search engine, for using the "Arabian Gulf" designation to indicate the water body on its maps. Demonstrators carried banners that read “The Gulf is Persian. Can you say ‘No’? Try!” The rally was held on the official occasion of the National Persian Gulf Day, confirming that official Iran approached the issue of the Gulf name from a nationalist stance that endeavors to eliminate all other identities in the Arabian Gulf.

There is no doubt that this extremist hypothesis calls for presenting the irrefutable facts on the historical identity of the Arabian Gulf inhabitants.

The Arab identity of the Gulf residents

Historical sources confirm that the residents of the Arabian Gulf coast and islands have Arab origins and have migrated from the Arabian Peninsula to its shores in the pursuit of a living and to take up seafaring as an activity. The west coast of the



Gulf from Fao in the north to Ras Musandam in the south is about 1,357 kilometers long, while the total length of the Persian coast is 860 kilometers. This means that the coast of the Arabian Peninsula is three-fifths of the entire Gulf coastline. Persians have faced difficulties adapting to sea life as the Zagarus mountain range is not easy to cross. This geographical factor is the major reason that did not help the residents of Persia to settle by the sea.

As a result, the Arabs constituted the vast majority of the total population of the Arabian Gulf ports and islands. The Arabs also maintained maritime sovereignty in the Arabian Gulf throughout the period between the eighth century and the nineteenth century until Britain proceeded to curb the Arab naval forces. The Persians did not have berths in maritime navigation since they did not live near the coast which was inhabited by Arabs.

In fact, the Persians, even at the height of their grandeur, did not use the sea and in the rare historical attempts when they tried to have fleets, their sailors were non Persians. Persians have been known since ancient times for their fear of the sea.

This fact was confirmed by Sir Percy Sykes who said that the people in Iran tended to avoid the sea from which they were separated by high mountain barriers, in referrence to the Zagros Mountains between the Ahwaz region and Persia.

In the seventeenth century, the French envoy Carey visited the Arabian Gulf and noted that the residents in places located between Bandar Rig and Bandar Abbas were Arabs.

Carey concurred with many European travelers, including Carsten Niebuhr, who said in 1762 that the kings of Persia could never be masters of the sea coast in their own country, but endured, reluctantly, that the coast remained under the Arabs.

Niebuhr stated that the Arabs on the easern coast of the Arabian Gulf controlled the coasts from Bandar Abbas to Ras Baderstan and possessed all the ports there.

He profusely described Arab powers in Gambaroun (Bandar Abbas), Hormuz, and Larstan, Qishm, and other areas up to Hovaiza, which was under the control of Bani Kaab.10

In the same period, the Dutch Consul in a 1756 report provided more accurate details about the Arab domination of the shipping traffic in the Arabian Gulf and their influence in the port of Bushehr, describing it “an Arab zone”. He added that its residents were from the areas north of Muscat and called themselves Al Bu Muhair from the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula.



The Al Haram were among the Arab powers in the eastern coast of the Arabian Gulf who were mentioned by the Dutch Consul. They came from the coast of Oman and settled in the port of Aasloh. They had a seafaring fleet of forty ships and three hundred fighters.

The Al Nasoor tribe controlled Al Taheriya port and its surroundings and had fifty ships and nine hundred men. Half of them had arms.11

In the contemporary period, Researcher Dr. Ibrahim Khalaf Al Obeidi12 stated that modern scientific studies confirmed that terming the Arabian Gulf as Persian does not at all correspond to the reality on the ground.

He said that the Gulf has been Arabian since ancient times and that Iran’s domination during limited periods of time did not constitute evidence that it was Persian. He added that Arab tribes have lived on both sides of the Gulf since ancient times and that these tribes still resided in the eastern coast currently under Iran, in spite of the Persianization policy adopted by the authorities to alter their national identity.



Several contemporary European researchers as well have mentioned that it was wrong to use the “Persian Gulf” term. In his book, “The Golden Bubble: Arabian Gulf Documentary” published in the 1950s, British Historian Roderick Owen said that he visited the Arabian Gulf, believing it was the “Persian Gulf” because he had seen only this term on maps. However, he said that when he learned about it closely, he realized that more correct name should be "Arabian Gulf" because most of the people on the coasts were Arabs. He said that facts and fairness required it to be named the “Arabian Gulf."

The British historian Arnold Wilson shared Owen’s view and said that an effective control by the Persian Government was not established on the eastern shores and that the Arabs had the power since the era of Shapur II in the fourth century. He said that the situation remained unchanged after the establishment of the Islamic Nation and well into the present.

IV. The Political Dimension

The dispute over the name of the Arabian Gulf has been an issue that is more significant than a mere problematic use of the designation. Currently, it is being employed as part of numerous attempts by Iran to achieve its recognition as a major regional power.

This tendency stems from the geographic fact that Iran is a quasi-landlocked state surrounded by mountains and deserts in the north, east and west, and therefore it relies for its contacts with the outside world on the Gulf.

Moreover, the Arabian Gulf is the major route for Iran›s oil, which accounts for 80 percent of its revenue and is the main source of its foreign currency.

At the same time, most imports reach Iran through the Gulf, and therefore the Iranians are keen to extend their hegemony on the Arabian Gulf, especially that they do not want to provoke the ire of the major powers in Asia, such as India, China and Russia, through the adoption of an expansionist policy in the eastern or southern regions of the country.

In addition to the border dispute with Iraq and to its claims that the Gulf is Persian, Iran has ambitions that include establishing its influence on the islands in the Arabian Gulf and assuming a regional security role.

In the 1920s, the Persians were involved in a diplomatic conflict with the British authorities in the corridors of the League of Nations to demand control of the issue of security in the Arabian Gulf. However, Britain did not bow to the pressure and



continued its security cooperation with the United States in order to curb the Iranian expansionist tendencies.13

The fact is the Iranian claim that the Arabian Gulf was Persian was linked in the contemporary period with the foundation by Reza Khan of a new dynasty in Iran in 1925. The Iranian policy has since that time pursued a nationalist tendency that peaked in the period between the fifth and seventh decades of the twentieth century. Iran refused to recognize Iraq because the Baghdad regime at that time refused to give suitable guarantees to the Persians who lived on its soil. Consequently, the borders between Iraq and Iran - particularly along the Shatt al-Arab – remained a matter of dispute.

Furthermore, Arab revolutionary regimes opposed the Bagdad Pact, the pro-Western alliance between Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, and the United Kingdom, formed in 1955. The opposition resulted in a new challenge for the Iranian royal regime that began to lose the regional influence it aspired to achieve.

With the increase of the Iranian-US military cooperation, Arab countries, influenced by the leftist movement, labeled Iran as an imperialist state. The ruling Pahlavi family tried to distinguish Iran from the Arabs by highlighting the Sassanid glories and encouraging the Aryan trend within the Iranian culture.14

In his book, “Fronts and Frontiers”15, French geographer Michel Faucher said that naming the Gulf as “Persian Gulf” on the grounds of the strong and historical influence of Iran was supported by the U.S. strategy (during the reign of the Shah) based on endorsing the Shah and his army to achieve regional security for the protection of oil.

There is no doubt that the continuation of the Iranian regime to adopt this ultra-ethnic policy after the 1979 Revolution raises the ominous question on whether this nationalist approach concurred with the announced principles of the revolutionary regime. The contemporary Iranian focus on the Persian name of the Arabian Gulf and the rejection of any other term that reflects the Arab-Islamic identity of its residents is in direct contradiction with an Islamic regime.

On the other hand, the other ethnic groups who make up more than half of the contemporary Iranian society, such as Azeris, Baluchis, Kurds and Arabs, do not support the official policy of imposing Persianization and putting pressure on other nationalities, especially that the revolution has adopted the principle of "protecting the vulnerable.”

A fundamental part of the answer to those questions lies in the chaos that engulfed the ruling regime after the 2009 elections and the efforts by the authorities to raise the issue of the name of the Arabian Gulf as a way to relieve internal stress and tension.



In January 2010, the Islamic Solidarity Sports Federation refused to allow Iran to host the second Games because of its insistence on using the "Persian Gulf" term on the medals, logos and posters, as well as in brochures and map guides to be distributed to guests. The Secretary General of the Iranian Olympic Committee and Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Championship Bahram Afsharzadeh said that his country insisted on organizing the games under the "Persian Gulf" designation.

On February 24, 2010 news agencies reported that the Dutch coach of UAE club Al Ahly, Henk ten Cate, came under attack from Iranian journalists after he insisted on using “Arabian Gulf.” The journalists trespassed all norms to demand that the football manager correct the term and use “Persian” Gulf.



Conclusions

Notwithstanding the other political motives of the Iranian regime in raising the issue of the name of the Arabian Gulf, it must be recognized that the issue includes other dimensions that are beyond the scope of this scientific research that aims to refute Persian allegations about the Gulf from geographical, historical and nationalist perspectives.

It should be pointed out that raising this issue at the present time represents a great danger for Arab consciousness since the nationalist thought is receding. There is no doubt that both Islam and Arabism represent the two fundamental pillars for the components of the Gulf Cooperation Council national identity. Therefore, it is incumbent upon these countries to support serious scientific research that aims to consolidate the Arab identity, reinforce a culture of tolerance, promote respect for cultural diversity and maintain social peace in these states.

References

1 Sultan Al-Qasimi (1999) The Gulf in Historic Maps 14782 ,1861-nd Edition, Leicester, England.

2 Moenes H, ‘The Atlas of Islamic History’, Al Zahra for Arab Media’, Cairo (1987) P.49.

3 jean francois salles (2002) ‘Bahrain from the Alexander the Great to the Sassanid’s’, in Al-Khuza’I edt. (2002) Baqaya al-Firdaous, Bahrain, pp. 160 -197.

4 Salles J-F, ‘Bahrain from Alexander the Great to the Sassanids’, Translated by Al Khoazai M, (2002), ‘The Remains of Paradise’, Bahrain. PP 106107-.

5 Baru T, ‘The Ancient History of the Arabs’, Dar Al Fikr, Damascus and Beirut. PP 123 -140.

6 Al Tabari (1979), ‘The History of Nations and Kings’

7 Cited by Imam Ahmad

8 Niebuhr c. ‘Travels through Arabia, and other countries in the East, performed by M. Niebuhr’, P. 138 & P. 167.

9 Al-Sharq al-Awsat 30th April 2008.

10 Al Watheeqa, ‘The East Through the Eyes of Niebuhr’, Al Watheeqa Magazine. P.178

11 Siddiq A. M. (1993) ‘The Horse Rider’s Saddle in the History of Persia’s Arabs’, Al Maareth, Al Sharjah. PP.103 -105.



12 Ibrahim Khalaf Al-Ubaidi (1998) ‘Al-Tayyarat al-Siyassia Fi al-Khalij al-Arabi’, Arab Scientific Journal, vol. 45, part 2, p. 214

13 Kraig M.R. (2006) ‘Forging a New Security Order for the Persian Gulf’, Middle East Policy, Vol. 8. No 1, (spring 2006). P.86

14 Haliday F. (2004) Middle East Studies – Translated by Ahmad Ramu, Dar Alaeddine, Damascus. PP. 112 -114

15 Foucher, Michel (1991) Fronts et frontières. Un tour du monde géopolitique. 2nd edition, Fayard, Paris, p. 691

T: (+973) 17 754 757F: (+973) 17 754 678

P.O.BOX: 496, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrainwww.derasat.org.bh

www.derasat.org.bh

Di˜ering Perspectives on the Naming of the Arabian Gulf1999) The Gulf in Historic Maps 14782...

Documents

Transcript of Di˜ering Perspectives on the Naming of the Arabian Gulf1999) The Gulf in Historic Maps 14782...