Talk:Atlantic voyage of the predecessor of Mansa Musa

message: When Taharqa corrected the hair-rising nonsense that I dared to write about the doubtful existence of Abubakari he/she certainly knew better than the bunch of professional historians who refute al-Umari's story about this prince as a fabrication, and lengthy books written by respectable scholars like Nehemia Levtzion can be thrown onto the rubbish dump because scholarly scrutiny can never substitute stout credulity. For a certain type of people Abubakari II must have existed because they obviously need to be confirmed of his existence as it is good for them. When I wrote "allegedly", I left the door open for a controversial view, as the sources are thin and contradictory evidence might be discovered (but it has not yet). If you, however, claim that Abubakari did exist at any rate, then you know more than anybody else (apart from Ivan Van Sertima and Gwaouru Diawara). I reckon you shook his hand. Peter Kremer 10:16, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Allegedly?

message: Dang I remember when this was barely a stub.  it seems to have grown quickly.  no suprise on the controversy.  god forbid black people do anything on their own, lol.  that would be afrocentric (j/k).  there do seem to be some good references in this article.  I'll focus more of my attention here at least in organization.  This article looks like one big high school essay instead of a respectible article.  Maybe ppl should spend less time arguing and more time making the article readable.
Scott Free 13:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wow 

message: I think we are forgetting that Mansa Musa himself said that a KING reigning before him undertook an expedition to the sea (Atlantic).  This coupled with the Dioma tradition of a king named Bata Mande Bory/Abubakari II (from the area where the capital of the mali empire stood, no less) point directly to this figure existing and existing as an emperor. Does anyone here (and no this is not a rhetorical question) think both these accounts should be dismissed out of hand?Scott Free 15:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: One last note

message: What an unpleasant talk page.  
Anyway -- on the talk page for Pre-Columbian Islamic contact theoriesI have added this, which is extremely relevant here and may lead to edits of the main article here unless someone can show me where I'm wrong:
There seems to be a major problem with all the articles about Abubakari  and Sultan Mansa Musa -- I have tried hard to find a reliable source for the story, and the closest I have come is this Echos of What Lies Behind the 'Ocean of Fogs' in Muslim Historical Narratives which is indeed the source of at least some of the quotes. (The article is a bit odd, last I heard the Amazon wasn't in the midst of the ocean, but fringe writers do tend to cherry pick).
The  quote from Ibn Fadlullah al-Umari which seems so crucial: "its French translation by Gaudefroy-Demombynes says: "In the North of Mali there live white Berbers under their ruler. Their tribes are Antasar, Yantar'aras, Meddusa and Lemtuna ... I asked their ruler Sultan Musa Ibn Amir Hajib (who was in Egypt returning from the pilgrimage): "How had you become ruler?" He replied: "We belong to a family where the son succeeds the father in power. The ruler who preceded me did not believe that it was impossible to reach the extremity of the ocean that encircles the earth (meaning Atlantic), and wanted to reach to that (end) and obstinately persisted in the design. So he equipped two hundred boats full of men, as many others full of gold, water and victuals sufficient enough for several years. He ordered the chief (admiral) not to return until they had reached the extremity of the ocean, or if they had exhausted the provisions and the water. They set out. Their absence extended over a long period, and, at last, only one boat returned. On our questioning, the captain said: 'Prince, we have navigated for a long time, until we saw in the midst of the ocean as if a big river was flowing violently. My boat was the last one; others were ahead of me. As soon as any of them reached this place, it drowned in the whirlpool and never came out. I sailed backwards to escape this current.' But the Sultan would not believe him. He ordered two thousand boats to be equipped for him and for his men, and one thousand more for water and victuals. Then he conferred on me the regency during his absence, and departed with his men on the ocean trip, never to return nor to give a sign of life [5]."
No Abubakari mentioned.
The article on Abubakari II says "Virtually all that is known of Abubakari II was recorded by the scholar Al-Umari during Kankan Musa I's historic hajj to Mecca. While in Egypt, Musa explained the way that he had inherited the throne after Abubakari II's abdication. He explained that in 1310, the emperor financed the building of 200 vessels of men and another 200 of supplies to explore the limits of the sea that served as empire's western frontier. The vessles were pirogues built from large, hollowed out trees equipped with oars and perhaps sails. The mission was inconclusive, and the only information available on its fate came from a single sailor who refused to follow the other ships once they reached a "river in the sea". According to Musa I, his predecessor was undeterred and launched another fleet with himself at the helm. In 1311, Abubakari II temporarily ceded power to Musa, then serving as his kankoro-sigui or vizier, and departed with a thousand vessels of men and a like number of supplies. After the emperor failed to return, Musa became emperor."
Ignoring the difference in the number of boats, can anyone else get that from the first quote?  Is Kankan Musa I definitely Sultan Musa Ibn Amir Hajib? "In the North of Mali there live white Berbers under their ruler." doesn't sound like the Emperor of Mali.--Dougweller (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand that Abubakari is not mentioned. You'd have to know that Abubakari II was the emperor preceeding Musa. He was. The article is mis-stating how we know what we know about Abubakari II. Much of what we know has been dug up by research through Mandinka oral tradition. This research was mainly conducted by Niane, Delafose and to a lesser extent Ki-Zerbo. The info on Musa serving as kankoro-sigui comes from me. I got that directly from Niane. Kankoro-Sigui is the Mandinka equivalent of Vizier. I've never heard Musa referred to as Misa Ibn Amir Hajib. The writer may have been making additions there. The statement about white Berbers being under their rule is definately accurate. The Mali Empire held dominion over just about everyone south of Morocco and west of Kanem. Check out the map on the Mali Empire page and you will see what I mean. i'll see about adding some sources from my library. They are the same ones posted on the Mali Empire page.Scott Free (talk) 01:06, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Quick update. Just took a look at the article you referenced. It has a minor mistake in it that probably threw you off as to this sultan's identity. Your page has the quote as "I asked Sultan Musa ibn Amir Hajib" when virtually every other source has it as "I asked Sultan Musa" or "I asked Sultan Mansa Musa ibn Amir Hajib". That is how we know this is Mansa Musa. No other monarch in Africa at that time used that title (mansa). Sometimes mansa is substituted with sultan (as in your article) or added (as in other sources). Amir Hajib was not the name of the sultan but the name of the father of the interviewer (Ibn Amir Hajib, ibn means "son of" in Arabic). Now that we know this is Mansa Musa, we must go with the idea that the predecessor he was talking about was in fact Abubakari II, since we do know he was the monarch that preceeded him. Hope that cleared everything up, and thanks for bringing this to our attention. I'll make sure to add this name (Musa ibn Amir Hajib) to the Mansa Musa page.Scott Free (talk) 04:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Here are some good BOOKS (I hate website sourcing) that shed more light on this subject
**** (http://books.google.com/books?id=4L2vCuS1LbYC&pg=PA234&dq=Musa+ibn+Amir+Hajib&sig=Kx23UEH4Sj8L1NO6Io0IAhILXb8#PPA235,M1) page 235
**** (http://books.google.com/books?id=cbfORLWv1HkC&pg=RA1-PA276&dq=Musa+ibn+Amir+Hajib&sig=dzK94-34XXGQO_XiHLKgjHgE_KM) page 276
**** (http://books.google.com/books?lr=&q=%22Musa+ibn+Amir+Hajib%22) this is the only source I found that put Mansa Musa's name as you found it in that article. It's from 1949 and unviewable from googlebooks. Even if it was, it's 50 years old and no researcher worth his or her salt would use such a source. Sources should be no older than 2 decades if we can help it.Scott Free (talk) 04:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Correctomundo. Mansa Musa told the governor/sultan of Cairo ibn Amir Hajib a story that was later related by ibn Amir Hajib to Al-Umari..and no, none of these folk are kin. I do agree. Let the editing begin! :)  Scott Free (talk) 23:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wow

message: The article currently uses at least three different transliterations of the name: "Abu Bakr", "Abu Bekr" and "Abubakari". While it's clear that there's no one correct way, I think the article should stick to the one that is most commonly used in English text. --Antti Salonen (talk) 00:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling of the name 

message: It seems impossible to prove the existence of this person. See    which does mention him but has Muhammad as a separate mansa, whhich leaves him out, which has earlier Mansas of that name but  not one matching the one in this article, etc. Dougweller (talk) 19:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on uncertainties 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Abu Bakr II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726073616/http://www.garifunaheritagefoundation.org/285.html to http://www.garifunaheritagefoundation.org/285.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:22, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Abu Bakr II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227032956/http://www.doaks.org/OlmecArt.pdf to http://www.doaks.org/OlmecArt.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In this diff, a "direct quote" was added by Geoffrey.landis|. It's not clear where the text came, from given that the citation itself is to a 1927 French translation. Is it a translation by a reliable source? If so, why are we not citing that source? Or is it a translation by a Wikipedian? If so, we should probably be including the original text, as per WP:NOENG. --tronvillain (talk) 12:51, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, there's a whole section on this above. --tronvillain (talk) 12:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

text: So, the citation should probably be to this, not the original book. We seem to literally be copying the citation that Mohammed Hamidullah gave, which isn't right. Actually, if you go back to Musa I of Mali, that's how the quote is sourced. --tronvillain (talk) 12:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  French translation 

message: I was reading The Golden Rhinoceros, which asserts that the name of Abu Bakr II was a misinterpretation deriving from the fact that Musa's father, not his predecessor, was named Abu Bakr. Now, I see that there was...extensive...debate on this subject on this talk page a decade ago, and I'm no historian so I'm hardly qualified to contribute to the debate myself, but it seems to me that this article does not adequately express the uncertainty of the identity of Musa's predecessor. It seems to me that the issue at hand is that the claim that Musa's predecessor traveled out into the Atlantic is inarguable, but that there is a debate over what the name(s) of the mansas between Sakura and Musa were. The primary focus of this article would seem to be on the immediate predecessor of Musa who traveled out into the Atlantic, regardless of whether their name was Qu, Mohammed, or Abu Bakr, and the formatting of the article should reflect that. The intro section could begin something like "The Mansa of Mali immediately preceding Mansa Musa has been variously reported to be named Qu, Mohammed, or Abu Bakr/Abubakari, due to conflicting sources on the succession of the mansas preceding Musa. He is known for leading an expedition into the Atlantic..." or whatever, and then there would be separate sections about his identity and his expedition. Abu Bakr II/Abubakari II seems to be the name most commonly reported for the mansa responsible for the expedition, and so seems valid as the article title unless scholarly consensus clearly supports Qu or Mohammed as being Musa's immediate predecessor. Ornithopsis (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abu Bakr II vs Mohammed ibn Qu 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Consensus to move. Proposal is well reasoned and not opposed by anyone. (non-admin closure)  Melmann 19:39, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Abu Bakr II →  – There is a clear consensus among the majority of historians of West Africa that no Mansa Abu Bakr II reigned, and that the voyage popularly attributed to him is better attributed to Musa's actual predecessor Muhammad ibn Qu (or, for some reason I have been unable to determine, occasionally Muhammad's predecessor Qu). See the section I added in the main article for relevant sources. The voyage itself is clearly a noteworthy topic that merits inclusion on Wikipedia, but the name of the mansa who led it is somewhat immaterial to the importance of the voyage itself. As the majority of historians of West Africa believe the mansa who led it was not named Abu Bakr II, having the page on the voyage be called Abu Bakr II is a clear violation of WP:NPOV, giving undue weight to an interpretation that has been largely rejected. The fact that the misconception persists among sources not specialized in West African history does not justify continuing to name the article thus. I believe that renaming this article to "Atlantic voyage of the predecessor of Mansa Musa" is a better solution than deleting this article and creating a new article that covers the topic as I suggest. Ornithopsis (talk) 20:49, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the support, but I want to clarify that I recently rewrote much of the article to put the focus on the voyage itself. The alternative, in my opinion, was to simply create a new page at the title I proposed and redirect Abu Bakr II to it, but I took this approach instead because I figured it'd make relevant page history easier to find. Check a previous revision to see what it looked like before my changes. Ornithopsis (talk) 01:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 June 2021