Talk:List of the oldest mosques

Talk?
Given the edit war apparently in progress over, I'd have expected some discussion here William M. Connolley (talk) 21:59, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * These sources  seem to support what Wasifwasif added, but they're not particularly reliable. A more reliable source  says "there can be no vouching for its accuracy". Most of the table is unsourced, in any case. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:30, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll risk trying to expound PaM's point, since I think I know what he is trying to say, but hasn't got across terribly well. He is saying that the claim itself is very implausible, and only the highest quality sources could be acceptable for such a claim. PaM's argument appears plausible, though I don't have the knowledge to be sure. If he is correct then List of mosques in India needs attention too. You are correct that many other statements in the article are unsourced (though one would hope that they were sourced in their sub-articles) William M. Connolley (talk) 22:59, 16 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks WMC. That is what i tried to say. The claim is very implausible which is why there are no reliable sources. There are also I.P. complaints about unreliability of sources in Cheraman Juma Masjid article. Pass a Method   talk  10:34, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I've just noticed that the Afghan ref I added is to an UNESCO listing. I'd guess that any of the really old mosques ought to have such a listing, too William M. Connolley (talk) 11:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No doubt the mosque is one of the oldest. Lot of sources have been added in teh masjid's page. This deserves a place in the List of oldest.... article. Wasif (talk) 11:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * But there is indeed doubt. The newspaper cuttings are hardly definitive. Having looked at the UNESCO list it isn't there. Why not? William M. Connolley (talk) 12:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Have a look at the article List of oldest churches. Have all the 100+churches listed there found a place in the UNESCO list? No. Never. Then why do they find a place there?. Despite 5+ reliable sources being added for it being one of the oldest (not if 629), why keep on targetting that mosque alone? Wasif (talk) 14:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason for doubting the claim has been given, up above. You don't have to agree with it, but don't try to pretend that the "why" hasn't been given. Why not try to address the problem already raised? As for "5+ reliable sources" there aren't: there are 3-4 sources, all not-very-reliable William M. Connolley (talk) 14:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As for the comparison to the churches article: indeed, lets look at the india section. It says: Some of the oldest churches in the world are said to have been in Kerala, India, built from the time of Saint Thomas. But they were all destroyed as apostate when the Portuguese came to India in the 16th century. [2] Thiruvithamcode Arappally (Arappally means Royal Church) Kanyakumari District is the oldest Church building that still exists in India. It is believed locally that it was built in the first century. St. Francis Church, Kochi, built 1504-1516, Oldest European church building in India (Church of South India) Kadamattom Church, built in the 9th century. St. Marys Church, Puthenchira, First Church built in 400 AD, was destroyed at the time of Tippu Sultan and reconstructed in the early 19th centuary. This Church was the Archbishops head quarters. (Arch diosce of Kodungallur). None of those claims are particularly unbeliveable, and the only old one is qualified with "It is believed locally that..." William M. Connolley (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I am not talking only those in India but the entire list. But still, can i know the reason why the UNESCO factor is not considered as a parameter here but there alone? Wasif (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Because you'd expect the worlds second-oldest mosque to be on the UNESCO list. I'd also expect the worlds second-oldest church to be. That is &lt;checks> Dura-Europos house church. No, it isn't. Oh well William M. Connolley (talk) 15:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I din't bring in the UNESCO factor. You did it. Adding without the tag line. Wasif (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Twice in this article, it is stated that Kazimar Big Mosque in Tamilnad, India, built in 13th century is the second oldest mosque in India. If this is true, then it would mean no mosques were built between the first in Kerala (7th century) and 13th century. Can someone comment please?

The very 1st masjid which build in India was Badhan Masjid (Old Jumma Masjid of Kilakarai) in 628-630AD by yemeni persian Trade merchants who settled down at the time of khalabharas at the port city of persian Qom of Cylane or Vagaitha Bharas (Ever Won Port city of sharbaras or Khalabaras) or Vaguthapuri. Which is in the coastal town currently called as Keelakarai. original old city was sunk under the sea which has many archaeological evidence under the sea. which is said in Book "Recapturing the Buried History of early dynasties" S.A.S Asana, Jane Chan, P. Donaldson and D. Rose(2008)UK.

In the early islamic time Muhammad (PBUH) hijarath to madina from Mecca. there he build Kuba masjid, then Masjid an Nabawi. that time there is no possibles of wars with other nation by muslims other than Badr and Uhad which is between Mecca Kafirs and Muslims. there are few hadeed (hadeed about ahali war, where Prophet and his companions breaks rocks and digs sands for the war. that time lightning blow from axe of Prophet... ) which states clearly about 1st conversion of foreign nation other than mecca and madina was yemen, then persia and byzantium. Arabs (Muslims ) especially meccans and madina people never goes ship trade until they captured yemen and Persia. Arabs use to starts trade or shipping from and through only by yemen ports in early islam periods.

Yemen was that time under the control of Sassanian persian empire king Khosru II. and the yemen was ruled by the governor Badhan ibn Sasan of sassanian family. He is popular among the yemenis due to his brave and honest.

Prophet send letters to different nations in that was persia to khosru II. After this the king ordered yemeni governor Badhan to bring Muhammad (PBUH) to his court. Badhan Send 2 horse men for this task. Muhammad (PBUH) Refused to come with them and prophesies that the king Khosru II was killed by his son Kavadth II and overthrown the power. When the prophesies came to be true. Badhan and the two men along with major Yemenis accepted islam. Prophet allowed badhan to rule over the yemen as a 1st Islamic governor. That time yemen had trade like with different nations like Malaya, china, cylane, indya and the other part of persian aniran, the qom of cylane. Aniran was that time occupied by pallava and pandiya by the help of yemeni Merchants and settlers who hates the sharbharas rule by themself because of his cruelty and dishonest nature of sharbharas. Those yemeni merchants and their families were honored by the new kings and had trade link with Yemen through them. Sharbaras went back to iran with their supporters after the defeat of the kingdom. This time whole Yemen comes under Islam and the badhan send message to qom of cylane to accept islam. that time those yemeni Merchants of qom of cylane follows Zoroastrianism. Follow the example of Governor of yemen Badhan they all accepted Islam and Built a masjid in the name Badhan, to honor their governor Badhan. Badhan Came to qom of cylane 628-630 AD after he replace his son sahr as a new governor of yemen. After Badhan came to qom of cylane there in yemen a man proclaim himself as a prophet name azaz (false prophet. he took the wife of sahr to his custody and kill sahr. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) send a man to save her from evil man. he kill that false prophet and save sahar's wife from him. then after yemen was uncontrolled by the various internal problems. Prophet send few sahabas to find Badhan. Tamim bin zayd al ansari was 1 in that who came to qom of cylane where he hered the news that the badhan was fall in ill and died in qom of cylane itself he found his burried place and got back to madina. where he fall in sick and died at the place of kovalam. Badhan Masjid was reconstructed in 11th century. Ibnu battutah travel notes clearly explains the nature of the place and masjid. he said in his travel notes this stone built masjid was oldest among the early once of islam and the people alongside the masjid was lived as in arabs style. he surprised to see them living in the own land. this clearly states the relationship with them and the kings of that periods.

About Persian Empire and Early divisions.

Persian empire is the combination of many units of lands. in that aniran and iran are most powered and popular.

Aniran (place of one who not worship fire and worship demons) was the place of east towards the cost of cylane (srilanka) was the Wealth Capital of Persia. where they gets valuable source of raw materials and ornaments. which is popular for pearl beds as well as the world's largest sea fort (54 miles longest) constructed by early Persians ruler Shapur Iafter demolishing the forts of parthia in the famous sea port city korkai, kaveri and betella, which is constructed by Vologases I in 126 to 122 BC.

Iran (who worship fire) is the place of west which is current iran the capital city of Persia.

Aniran was ruled from Shapur I to shahean sha of persia Khosru II.

Khosru II was ruled aniran under his brave man called shahrbaras (Kalabhras called by tamil people, due to his unhonest and cruel nature). Aniran was occupied from the victory of Indian and Tamil kings of Chalukya, pallava, pandiya, chola and chera by  Arsaces VIII or Vologases (I)in 126 to 122 BC. then the Khosru's forefather the great king shapur I captured the aniran in between 240 to 270 AD by defeating Parthian and formed sassanian rule over there. Before all it was under early tamil kingdoms.

Kadungon the king of pandiyan dynasty and Simhavishnu the king of pallava dynasty joinly recaptured this place with the help of yemeni parsi people and their descendants settled in this kingdom at the time of King Shapur I who hates Sharbaras dishonest rule and his cruelty. sharbaras was overthrown and defeated by the Pandiyas and pallavas with the help of their own people makes him to get back to iran. The people who settled down in the kingdom was mostly yemeni merchants and traders. they were honored and supported by the new kings.

Related article List of first mosques by country
I started List of first mosques by country recently, having not found an equivalent article and having not yet run across this one. I think these two articles are somewhat different, so not necessarily any need to merge, though I would welcome any comment as to how to best keep the two articles clear in their purpose. Thanks for any suggestions! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

sourcing
All entries need sources that meet our criteria at WP:RS. We can't rely on there being sources in other articles. Dougweller (talk) 16:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Merger Discussion
Request received to merge articles: List of first mosques by country into List of the oldest mosques in the world; dated December 2015; discussion here. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Rationale: none given by proposer: User:92.16.237.72.
 * There is duplication between List of the oldest mosques in the world into List of first mosques by country. For clarity, I favour keeping these list articles separate, and removing List of the oldest mosques in the world#By country Verbcatcher (talk) 16:56, 30 December 2015 (UTC)


 * [REPHRASED FOR CLARIFICATION] ChrisJBenson (talk) 04:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC) says: I strongly oppose merging the two lists into one list with just one mosque per country. I support keeping both "first mosque" and "oldest mosque" information, whether they are joined into a multi-column list or not. Several circumstances can cause these two lists to be different. Even where they currently match, they can become different in the future. A merge of information from one list into the current form of the other will therefore cause a loss of information. The obvious example is when a country's first mosque no longer exists, and another mosque is currently its oldest. A difference can also occur when one country is formed from part of another. For example, India had mosques in the 7th century. When part of India became Pakistan in 1947, the oldest mosque in Pakistan was the Sixty Dome Mosque in East Bengal (1450). But when that part of Pakistan became Bangladesh in 1972, Nivin Masjid in Lahore (1465) became the oldest mosque in Pakistan, and the Sixty Dome Mosque became the oldest mosque in the newly created Bangladesh. Neither of those 15th century mosques qualify as the first mosque built either in India or in countries that didn't exist at the time, yet both of them qualify as the oldest mosque in their respective countries now. There are currently several errors of inconsistency between the two lists. This might be alleviated if the two lists were maintained within a single article, but I don't have a strong opinion about that aspect. ChrisJBenson (talk) 13:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * , it sounds to me that your intention is not to oppose merger, but rather to Merge, conditional on both "first" and "oldest" being covered. See my "!vote", next.  Could you perhaps clarify your "!vote"? -- do  ncr  am  17:57, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the confusion. My intent is to keep information about both the "first mosque" and the "oldest mosque" for each country where that is applicable. My terminology is based on archaic database terms where a "merge" would be the undesirable replacement of two pieces of information with just one. In database terminology, I support "joining" the two lists into one list that RETAINS all information. I am not strongly against their combination into one list. I just thought that the dual criteria of "first mosque" and "oldest mosque" would be better managed as two separate lists because of the following asymmetry. Countries or territories that no longer exist (such as the canonical Holy Roman Empire) can usefully appear in the list of first mosques, but do not belong in the list of oldest current mosques. At least, it is my opinion that "the first mosque to be built within the Holy Roman Empire" might be of some interest. But "the oldest currently active mosque in the Holy Roman Empire" ceased to be useful even before that container of territories ceased to be holy.


 * With thanks from ChrisJBenson (talk) 04:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge, into a list that covers both "first" and "oldest" ones. It seems to me that all of the examples mentioned by ChrisJBenson should be included in one merged list to be created from the two separate lists, both of which happen to be incomplete lists.  In other words the merged list should be defined clearly to include all mosques that ever were the first mosque in a country and all current mosques that are the oldest in their current country.  And I think also all mosques that were the first or the oldest in the area of a former country.  Take Germany for example, where the Berlin Mosque is apparently the oldest current mosque, and let's assume Berlin Mosque is located in the part of Berlin that was in West Germany.  Then if an editor wants to add a different current mosque that is the oldest in the area of East Germany, they would be free to do so.  It seems to me interesting to list what was the first and/or oldest mosque in the Holy Roman Empire, for another example, if there was any mosque in the HRE before the HRE dissolved in 1806.  If that one is already included as the current oldest mosque within some current country, then just add to its note the fact that it was also the first/oldest mosque in the HRE.
 * There is a possible complication suggested in the definition of membership for the List of first mosques by country: "For the purposes of this list, the mosques given are the 'first' to occur within the boundaries of the modern nations listed, though they may not have been part of those nations at the time of the founding of the listed mosque." I think that means simply that for a modern nation, the first mosque that had been created within its boundaries should be included.  This conveys already the idea that a mosque created before the nation was founded is deemed to be the nation's first.  And that the first new mosque created after the nation is founded does not become the "first".  But I think if the first mosque in the area no longer existed when the nation was founded, the oldest then-existing mosque should also be listed, as it would have been the one representing Islam in the nation, it was the one the nation had to contend with, unhappily, or it was the one considered an asset, happily.  If the nation was founded and dissolved before any mosque was created in its area, however, then we include no mention of that nation (except perhaps in a list of such countries given in a footnote).  It doesn't make sense to note which later mosque was first in the former nation's area, because Islam was just not present during the entire history of that former nation.  There may not have ever been a mosque in the area of the Confederate States of America, for example, so the CSA would not be mentioned (and this happens to avoid any argument about whether the CSA was ever a nation or not).
 * The merged list can be displayed easily in one table. The above discussion yields four types:  A) first mosque in a nation's area and still existing, B) first mosque in a nation's area and no longer existing, C) oldest existing mosque in a nation's area, if different, and D) mosque that was oldest existing mosque in a former nation, if different.  All four types can be included in one sortable table, primarily ordered by country, but sortable by type and/or by age.  And color-coding of rows can convey at a glance which mosque is of which type.  When more than one type applies for a given mosque, it is to be coded into the first of the types that apply, out of A-B-C-D priority order.-- do  ncr  am  17:54, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Some comments by ChrisJBenson (talk) 04:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC) in response to Doncram's suggestion to expand "first" and "oldest" to four potential categories (A-B-C-D ):


 * I don't think the list (or lists) should be restricted to modern countries that currently exist for the following reasons:


 * (1) It's not just countries: There might be merit in noting the first mosque in a region that is larger than one country, such as "Scandinavia".
 * (2) It's not just current places: Several former countries might prove interesting, such as Yugoslavia, USSR and once again the One and Only Holy Roman Empire.


 * I don't think we need four separate categories. I recommend adopting the very specific definitions that become obvious from the following analogy.


 * We might think of Adam as the world's first man, and Yisrael Kristal as (currently) the world's oldest man. Adam is not going to be stripped of his title, despite being neither alive nor real. But Mr. Kristal (who is both alive and real) will lose his designation one day (though hopefully not soon).


 * Using those definitions, the first mosque in X will always be that mosque. It may cease to exist, but it retains the title the first mosque in X. In contrast, oldest implies "... and counting" in the sense that it still exists. When the oldest mosque in Y ceases to exist, it ceases to be the oldest mosque in Y, and the next oldest existing mosque in Y will assume that designation.


 * And finally, I am not Muslim. Wikipedia editors of the Muslim faith should be consulted. I might be missing something very important.


 * With thanks from ChrisJBenson (talk) 04:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment. Please see Articles for deletion/List of famous mosques, where there is discussion of merging both of these back into a leading section of the master "List of mosques" list-article. -- do  ncr  am  17:54, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I note that the broader Articles for deletion/List of famous mosques reached no consensus, but that the local discussion to join List of the oldest mosques and List of the oldest mosques did have consensus. So, merging (in Wikipedia-speak), but keeping the lists in separate sections). Klbrain (talk) 17:53, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of the oldest mosques. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://whc.unesco.org/pg_friendly_email.cfm?cid=326&id=1928&
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110903153644/http://www.albaniaexplorer.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=45&Itemid=78 to http://www.albaniaexplorer.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=45&Itemid=78
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110706071224/http://kshk.gov.al/index.php?fq=brenda&gj=gj2&kid=19 to http://kshk.gov.al/index.php?fq=brenda&gj=gj2&kid=19

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) 20:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Palestine and Israel
There have been several competing edits describing places as in Palestine or Israel or both. The mosques concerned are:
 * Al-Aqsa Mosque, old city of Jerusalem
 * Al-Qibli Mosque, old city of Jerusalem
 * Ibrahimi Mosque, Hebron
 * White Mosque, Ramla

We should be guided by the Wikipedia articles on these places, as they are likely to reflect established Wikipedia practice.


 * Jerusalem, the article presents the issues, saying "Administered by Israel, claimed by	Israel and Palestine"
 * Hebron, the article states 'State of Palestine'
 * Ramla, the article states 'a city in central Israel'.

Based on this, we should have 'Palestine' for Hebron and 'Israel' for Ramla, these are widely recognised internationally, and reflect the administration of these places.

For Jerusalem I favour indicating both Palestine and Israel, reflecting the competing claims and the Israeli administration. Alternatively, we could leave the country box blank, or put an explanatory phrase or footnote.

Comments please. Verbcatcher (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Ferdows Congregation Mosque 1.png

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Masjid Quba Mosque.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Masjid Quba Mosque.jpg

Reliable sources and exceptional claims
It's important to note that there are a lot of claims of "oldest" mosque in many parts of the world which are not supported by reliable scholarly or academic sources, often based on local popular narratives rather than on solid historical evidence. Scholarly sources often caution that the dating of many reputedly early mosques is difficult to confirm and often based on primary sources written long after the fact (e.g. off the top of my head, see this recent article, or see comments about this for North Africa, China, etc).

Some of the entries in this list cite local news articles, tourism/travel sites, and other non-scholarly sources. This makes it likely that some WP:EXCEPTIONAL claims here would not stand up to scrutiny. It doesn't help of course that many corresponding articles for individual mosques are poorly-sourced too. I'm sure there are similar problems at List of oldest church buildings and other similar list articles, so this is maybe just a comment for general consideration when editing this list.

My personal preference, given how large and unwieldy the list has also become, would be to liberally trim entries that aren't carefully sourced (and whose claims cannot be easily verified from a quick search). I've done that for a few already, but there's a lot of potentially dubious entries that probably need a second look. R Prazeres (talk) 23:11, 19 September 2023 (UTC)


 * PS: It may also be worth reconsidering the criteria for inclusion to be more restrictive (and thus more manageable) and whether dates should be based on construction of the current structures rather than on the oldest foundation dates of their predecessors. R Prazeres (talk) 23:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC)