First published on 10th May 2021 here: https://megalommatis.wordpress.com/2021/05/10/ethiopian-ocean-a-16th-c-colonial-term-the-treaties-of-alcacovas-1479-tordesillas-1494-and-zaragoza-1529-and-the-ottoman-stiffness-and-incompetence/ Contents I. Misinterpretation of a 15th c. Unhistorical Term by 21st c. Crooks II. No 'Ethiopian Ocean' (or Sea) in 'Classical Geographical Works' III. Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Iranians, the Circumnavigation of Africa, and the Geographical Terms Used IV. Libya (: 'Africa'), the Periplus of Hanno, and the Early Use of the Term 'Atlantic Sea' V. The Terms 'Ocean' and 'Sea', and the leading Ancient Egyptian Scholar Ptolemy the Geographer VI. The Treaties of Alcáçovas (1479), Tordesillas (1494) and Zaragoza (1529), and the Use of the Terms 'Sea of Ethiopia' and 'Sea of India' VII. The Treaties of Alcáçovas, Tordesillas and Zaragoza, Portuguese-Spanish Colonial Conquests, Ottoman Ignorance and Stiffness, and the Collapse of the Islamic World

1. 'EthiopianOcean': a 16th c. Colonial Term,
the Treatiesof Alcáçovas(1479), Tordesillas
(1494) and Zaragoza (1529), and the Ottoman
Stiffnessand Incompetence
How can a new geographical term, first used by a late 15th c. Catholic pope, help us
evaluate the incompetence, misery and absolute failure of the Ottoman sultans who,
after being idiotic enough to invade a small city (Constantinople, 1453) that would
only plague them with many troubles, after being pathetic enough not to make the
most of an illustrious victory (Chaldiran, 1514),and after being demented enough to
make of the sands of Arabia, Egypt and Libya part of their sultanate (1517), thought
it possible for them to be the driving force of the Islamic world only to allow Spain
and Portugal to rule the waves and prepare the demolition of Islam in just 400 years?
Contents
I. Misinterpretation of a 15th c. Unhistorical Term by 21st c. Crooks
II. No 'Ethiopian Ocean' (or Sea) in 'Classical Geographical Works'
III. Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Iranians, the Circumnavigation of Africa,and the
Geographical Terms Used
IV. Libya (: 'Africa'), the Periplus of Hanno, and the Early Use of the Term 'Atlantic
Sea'
V. The Terms 'Ocean' and 'Sea', and the leading AncientEgyptian Scholar Ptolemy
the Geographer
VI. The Treaties of Alcáçovas (1479), Tordesillas (1494) and Zaragoza (1529), and the
Use of the Terms 'Sea of Ethiopia' and 'Sea of India'
VII. The Treaties of Alcáçovas, Tordesillas and Zaragoza,Portuguese-Spanish
Colonial Conquests, Ottoman Ignorance and Stiffness, and the Collapse of the
Islamic World
I. Misinterpretation ofa 15th c. UnhistoricalTerm by 21st c.
Crooks
It sounds strange that the misuse of an Ancient Greek and Latin term by a 15th c.
pope relates to the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the destruction of the entire
Islamic world, but the whole world is nothing more than an enormous field of
semiotics whereby all signs exert impact on one another. At this point, it would
suffice to state that the term "Ethiopian Ocean' was first used in a Treaty signed by
Portugal and Spain under the auspices of the Catholic pope in 1494; that treaty
actually was the death warrant of the Ottoman Sultanate (not yet Caliphate at that
time) and of the Islamic world.
I should rather narrate things in the correct order;few days ago, a friend of mine
based in the Arabian Peninsula sent me a link to an article published in a South
African site under the title "Mapmakers once referred to the southern Atlantic Ocean
as the Ethiopian Ocean" (see after the end of the present article: Addendum I). I
realized immediately what it all was about, but I visited the web page, only to realize

2. that the nonsensical and confusing article was the mere reproduction of an earlier
report, which was initially published in another site; at the bottom of the article, you
can read the following: "This report was written by Africa Check, a non-partisan fact-
checking organization.View the original piece on their website". I subsequently
visited that site, which is an outfit of the French secret services {I am sorry, I meant
'of the Agence France-Presse (AFP) Foundation'}. Details about the Africa Check non-
profit fact checking organization (including their finances and controversial
sponsors) you can find here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa_Check
If you need to spare your time, yes! You guessed correctly! Among the sponsors of
that self-styled organization, you can find the disreputable and fraudulentfinancier
George Soros' Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA; get the basics
here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Society_Foundation_for_South_Africa)
and the notorious Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (now that they will get divorced,
the name will have to change). Next time you want to learn more about African
History, set up your own 'non-partisan fact-checking kiosk' and get some money
from the lottery (it will not be as dirty as that coming from the aforementioned
crooks)! But I am digressing.
The Africa Check report (see after the end of the present article: Addendum II) was
titled "The Atlantic Ocean was known as Ethiopian Ocean until the 19th century",
which is a monstrous lie. I am sure that the present article will help many people
understand that this world's fraudulent 'fact-checking' institutes and othersimilar
associations are set up by criminals intending to tyrannically impose their forgery
systematization and their pseudo-historical dogma which is situated at the antipodes
of the real History of the Mankind, but this is not the intention with which I write
now.
Both publications refer to an earlier post on Instagram (a site belonging to the
notorious Facebook) in which part of a historical map is featured, whereas the
caption reads: "Today's southern half of the Atlantic Ocean in classical geographical
works was known as Aethiopian or Ethiopian Sea or Ocean". This is a lie. Where
does the historical truth lie?
II. No 'Ethiopian Ocean' (or Sea)in 'Classical Geographical
Works'
It is clear that 15th century maps and more recent cartography do not constitute
"classical geographical works". This term denotes AncientGreek and Roman authors,
geographers, historians, scholars, captains, merchants and sailors, who wrote texts of
geographical contents.
Geography and cartography were highly developed in Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria,
Hittite Anatolia, Phoenicia and Carthage, as early as the 2nd millennium BCE (on the
basis of documentation hitherto excavated).Pharaoh Nechao II (610-595 BCE) hired
Phoenicians, who were the then world's most skillful navigators and therefore
cartographers, and tasked them (around 600 CE) with the circumnavigation of
Africa, which they completed in two years, sailing clockwise around Africa. This fact
was not saved in Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic records, but in the part of Ancient

3. Greek Herodotus' Histories in which he narrates his sojourn and studies in Egypt (ca.
453-450 BCE).
Narrating the circumnavigation of Africa,which was undertaken by the Phoenicians
commissioned by Pharaoh Nechao, Herodotus names South Atlantic 'southern sea'
(Histories, book IV, 42):
42. I wonder, then, at those who have mapped out and divided the world into
Libya, Asia, and Europe; for the difference between them is great, seeing that
in length Europe stretches along both the others together, and it appears to
me to be beyond all comparison broader. For Libya shows clearly that it is
encompassed by the sea, save only where it borders on Asia; and this was
proved first (as far as we know) by Necos king of Egypt. He, when he had
made an end of digging the canal which leads from the Nile to the Arabian
Gulf, sent Phoenicians in ships, charging them to sail on their return voyage
past the Pillars of Heracles till they should come into the northern sea and so
to Egypt. So the Phoenicians set out from the Red Sea and sailed the southern
sea; whenever autumn came they would put in and sow the land, to whatever
part of Libya they might come, and there await the harvest; then, having
gathered in the crop, they sailed on, so that after two years had passed, it
was in the third that they rounded the Pillars of Heracles and came to Egypt.
There they said (what some may believe, though I do not) that in sailing
round Libya they had the sun on their right hand.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Herodotus_The_Persian_Wars_(Godley)/Book_IV
In Ancient Greek the text reads:
θωμάζω ὦν τῶν διουρισάντων καὶ διελόντων Λιβύην τε καὶ Ἀσίην καὶ
Εὐρώπην· οὐ γὰρ σμικρὰ τὰ διαφέροντα αὐτέων ἐστί· μήκεϊ μὲν γὰρ παρʼ
ἀμφοτέρας παρήκει ἡ Εὐρώπη, εὔρεος δὲ πέρι οὐδὲ συμβάλλειν ἀξίη φαίνεταί
μοι εἶναι. Λιβύη μὲν γὰρ δηλοῖ ἑωυτὴν note ἐοῦσα περίρρυτος, πλὴν ὅσον
αὐτῆς πρὸς τὴν Ἀσίην οὐρίζει, Νεκῶ τοῦ Αἰγυπτίων βασιλέος πρώτου τῶν
ἡμεῖς ἴδμεν καταδέξαντος· ὃς ἐπείτε τὴν διώρυχα ἐπαύσατο ὀρύσσων τὴν ἐκ
τοῦ Νείλου διέχουσαν ἐς τὸν Ἀράβιον κόλπον, ἀπέπεμψε Φοίνικας ἄνδρας
πλοίοισι, ἐντειλάμενος ἐς τὸ ὀπίσω διʼ Ἡρακλέων στηλέων ἐκπλέειν ἕως ἐς
τὴν βορηίην θάλασσαν καὶ οὕτω ἐς Αἴγυπτον ἀπικνέεσθαι. ὁρμηθέντες ὦν οἱ
Φοίνικες ἐκ τῆς Ἐρυθρῆς θαλάσσης ἔπλεον τὴν νοτίην θάλασσαν· ὅκως δὲ
γίνοιτο φθινόπωρον προσσχόντες ἂν σπείρεσκον τὴν γῆν, ἵνα ἑκάστοτε τῆς
Λιβύης πλέοντες γινοίατο, καὶ μένεσκον τὸν ἄμητον· θερίσαντες δʼ ἂν τὸν
σῖτον ἔπλεον, ὥστε δύο ἐτέων διεξελθόντων τρίτῳ ἔτεϊ κάμψαντες
Ἡρακλέας στήλας ἀπίκοντο ἐς Αἴγυπτον. καὶ ἔλεγον ἐμοὶ μὲν οὐ πιστά, ἄλλῳ
δὲ δή τεῳ, ὡς περιπλώοντες τὴν Λιβύην τὸν ἥλιον ἔσχον ἐς τὰ δεξιά.
http://artflsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-
bin/perseus/citequery3.pl?dbname=GreekApr19&getid=0&query=Hdt.%204
Further bibliography on the topic, you can find here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necho_II#Ambitious_projects

4. III. Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Iranians, the Circumnavigation
of Africa, and the Geographical TermsUsed
Herodotus mentions also other efforts of circumnavigation of Africa that were
undertaken but not completed successfully; the story of Sataspes, who was the
nephew of the Achaemenid Iranian Emperor Darius I the Great (522-486 BCE),is
quite informative. Sataspes was forced to undertake the circumnavigation of Africa
to save his life. He was dispatched to Egypt (then an Iranian province named
Mudraya in Old Achaemenid Iranian),thence fully equipped, and assisted to sail. He
moved counterclockwise, which seems to have been a matter of bad planning or
unfortunate decision; he sailed out of the Mediterranean, advanced southwards, and
reached a coastland inhabited by African Pygmies probably in the area of today's
Congo. There, for undefined reasons, he decided to discontinue his voyage and
returned back to Egypt and Iran; he later justified his decision as due to inability to
further proceed.
In this narrative, Herodotus uses the name 'Libya' (Ancient Greek for 'Africa') for the
Black Continent's southernmost confines (Histories, book IV, 43):
43. Thus the first knowledge of Libya was gained. The next story is that of the
Carchedonians: for as for Sataspes son of Teaspes, an Achaemenid, he did not
sail round Libya, though he was sent for that end; but he feared the length
and the loneliness of the voyage and so returned back without accomplishing
the task laid upon him by his mother. For he had raped the virgin daughter of
Zopyrus son of Megabyzus; and when on this charge he was to be impaled by
King Xerxes, Sataspes’ mother, who was Darius’ sister, begged for his life,
saying that she would lay a heavier punishment on him than did Xerxes; for
he should be compelled to sail round Libya, till he completed his voyage and
came to the Arabian Gulf. Xerxes agreeing to this, Sataspes went to Egypt,
where he received a ship and a crew from the Egyptians, and sailed past the
Pillars of Heracles. Having sailed out beyond them, and rounded the Libyan
promontory called Solois, he sailed southward; but when he had been many
months sailing far over the sea, and ever there was more before him, he turned
back and made sail for Egypt. Thence coming to Xerxes, he told in his story
how when he was farthest distant he sailed by a country of little men, who
wore palm-leaf raiment; these, whenever he and his men put in to land with
their ship, would ever leave their towns and flee to the hills; he and his men
did no wrong when they landed, and took naught from the people but what
they needed for eating. As to his not sailing wholly round Libya, the reason
(he said) was that the ship could move no farther, but was stayed. But Xerxes
did not believe that Sataspes spoke truth, and as the task appointed was
unfulfilled he impaled him, punishing him on the charge first brought against
him. This Sataspes had an eunuch, who as soon as he heard of his master’s
death escaped to Samos, with a great store of wealth, of which a man of
Samos possessed himself. I know the man’s name but of set purpose forget it.
In Ancient Greek the text reads:
οὕτω μὲν αὕτη ἐγνώσθη τὸ πρῶτον, μετὰ δὲ Καρχηδόνιοι εἰσὶ οἱ λέγοντες·
ἐπεὶ Σατάσπης γε ὁ Τεάσπιος ἀνὴρ Ἀχαιμενίδης οὐ περιέπλωσε Λιβύην, ἐπʼ

5. αὐτὸ τοῦτο πεμφθείς, ἀλλὰ δείσας τό τε μῆκος τοῦ πλόου καὶ τὴν ἐρημίην
ἀπῆλθε ὀπίσω, οὐδʼ ἐπετέλεσε τὸν ἐπέταξέ οἱ ἡ μήτηρ ἄεθλον. θυγατέρα γὰρ
Ζωπύρου τοῦ Μεγαβύζου ἐβιήσατο παρθένον· ἔπειτα μέλλοντος αὐτοῦ διὰ
ταύτην τὴν αἰτίην ἀνασκολοπιεῖσθαι ὑπὸ Ξέρξεω βασιλέος, ἡ μήτηρ τοῦ
Σατάσπεος ἐοῦσα Δαρείου ἀδελφεὴ παραιτήσατο, φᾶσά οἱ αὐτὴ μέζω ζημίην
ἐπιθήσειν ἤ περ ἐκεῖνον· Λιβύην γάρ οἱ ἀνάγκην ἔσεσθαι περιπλώειν, ἐς ὃ ἂν
ἀπίκηται περιπλέων αὐτὴν ἐς τὸν Ἀράβιον κόλπον. συγχωρήσαντος δὲ
Ξέρξεω ἐπὶ τούτοισι, ὁ Σατάσπης ἀπικόμενος ἐς Αἴγυπτον καὶ λαβὼν νέα τε
καὶ ναύτας παρὰ τούτων ἔπλεε ἐπὶ Ἡρακλέας στήλας· διεκπλώσας δὲ καὶ
κάμψας τὸ ἀκρωτήριον τῆς Λιβύης τῷ οὔνομα Σολόεις ἐστί, ἔπλεε πρὸς
μεσαμβρίην· περήσας δὲ θάλασσαν πολλὴν ἐν πολλοῖσι μησί, ἐπείτε τοῦ
πλεῦνος αἰεὶ ἔδεε, ἀποστρέψας ὀπίσω ἀπέπλεε ἐς Αἴγυπτον. ἐκ δὲ ταύτης
ἀπικόμενος παρὰ βασιλέα Ξέρξεα ἔλεγε φὰς τὰ προσωτάτω ἀνθρώπους
μικροὺς παραπλέειν ἐσθῆτι φοινικηίῃ διαχρεωμένους, οἳ ὅκως σφεῖς
καταγοίατο τῇ νηὶ φεύγεσκον πρὸς τὰ ὄρεα λείποντες τὰς πόλιας· αὐτοὶ δὲ
ἀδικέειν οὐδὲν ἐσιόντες, βρωτὰ δὲ μοῦνα ἐξ αὐτέων λαμβάνειν. τοῦ δὲ μὴ
περιπλῶσαι Λιβύην παντελέως αἴτιον τόδε ἔλεγε, τὸ πλοῖον τὸ πρόσω οὐ
δυνατὸν ἔτι εἶναι προβαίνειν ἀλλʼ ἐνίσχεσθαι. Ξέρξης δὲ οὔ οἱ συγγινώσκων
λέγειν ἀληθέα οὐκ ἐπιτελέσαντά τε τὸν προκείμενον ἄεθλον ἀνεσκολόπισε,
τὴν ἀρχαίην δίκην ἐπιτιμῶν. τούτου δὲ τοῦ Σατάσπεος εὐνοῦχος ἀπέδρη ἐς
Σάμον, ἐπείτε ἐπύθετο τάχιστα τὸν δεσπότεα τετελευτηκότα, ἔχων χρήματα
μεγάλα, τὰ Σάμιος ἀνὴρ κατέσχε, τοῦ ἐπιστάμενος τὸ οὔνομα ἑκὼν
ἐπιλήθομαι.
IV. Libya (: 'Africa'), the Periplusof Hanno, and the Early Use of
the Term 'Atlantic Sea'
Early in his Histories, Herodotus names the entire sea west of Europe and Africa
"Atlantic Sea" (Histories, book I, 203):
203. The Caspian is a sea by itself, having no connection with any other. The
sea frequented by the Greeks, that beyond the Pillars of Hercules, which is
called the Atlantic, and also the Erythraean, are all one and the same sea. But
the Caspian is a distinct sea, lying by itself, in length fifteen days' voyage
with a row-boat, in breadth, at the broadest part, eight days' voyage.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_History_of_Herodotus_(Rawlinson)/Book_1
In Ancient Greek, the text reads:
ἡ δὲ Κασπίη θάλασσά ἐστι ἐπʼ ἑωυτῆς, οὐ συμμίσγουσα τῇ ἑτέρῃ θαλάσσῃ.
τὴν μὲν γὰρ Ἕλληνες ναυτίλλονται πᾶσα καὶ ἡ ἔξω στηλέων θάλασσα ἡ
Ἀτλαντὶς καλεομένη καὶ ἡ Ἐρυθρὴ μία ἐοῦσα τυγχάνει. ἡ δὲ Κασπίη ἐστὶ
ἑτέρη ἐπʼ ἑωυτῆς, ἐοῦσα μῆκος μὲν πλόου εἰρεσίῃ χρεωμένῳ πεντεκαίδεκα
ἡμερέων, εὖρος δέ, τῇ εὐρυτάτη ἐστὶ αὐτὴ ἑωυτῆς, ὀκτὼ ἡμερέων. καὶ τὰ μὲν
πρὸς τὴν ἑσπέρην φέροντα τῆς θαλάσσης ταύτης ὁ Καύκασος παρατείνει, ἐὸν
ὀρέων καὶ πλήθεϊ μέγιστον καὶ μεγάθεϊ ὑψηλότατον. ἔθνεα δὲ ἀνθρώπων
πολλὰ καὶ παντοῖα ἐν ἑωυτῷ ἔχει ὁ Καύκασος, τὰ πολλὰ πάντα ἀπʼ ὕλης
ἀγρίης ζώοντα·

6. http://artflsrv02.uchicago.edu/cgi-
bin/perseus/citequery3.pl?query=Hdt.+1.202.4&dbname=GreekApr19
Further bibliography about the topic can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus#Early_travels
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histories_(Herodotus)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_History_of_Herodotus_(Rawlinson)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Herodotus_The_Persian_Wars_(Godley)
In the middle of the 5th c. BCE, the Carthaginian king Hanno undertook an
enormous expedition to colonize the Western coast of Africa; 60 penteconter (50-
oared) ships sailed with 30000 colons and the necessary provisions in order either to
repopulate earlier Carthaginian settlements or to found new colonies. The deeds of
the expedition, which sailed across the West African coast down to today's Sierra
Leone (or to Gabon according others), were narrated in an inscription dedicated to
the temple of Baal Hammon (equated to Saturn by the Ancient Romans and to
Cronos by the Ancient Greeks) in Carthage. You can find further bibliography here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal_Hammon
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/penteconter
The inscription was destroyed during the Roman conquest of Carthage (146 BCE),
but it was however saved in a rather abridged Ancient Greek translation, which is
certainly the product of translators working in the Library of Alexandria during the
3rd or 2nd c. BCE. The Ancient Greek translation uses terms like 'Liby-Phoenicians'
for the 'Carthaginians' (i.e. Phoenicians of Africa), 'Libya' for Africa, and 'Ethiopians'
(i.e. people with burned faces) for various Hamitic peoples inhabiting NW Africa.
Related bibliography, further analysis, and the Ancient Greek text you can find here:
https://www.academia.edu/23363041/The_Periplus_of_Hanno_King_of_the_Carth
aginians_and_explorations_of_West_Africa_before_2450_years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanno_the_Navigator
https://el.wikisource.org/wiki/Άννωνος_Περίπλους
One of the earlier Ancient Greek uses of the term 'Atlantic' is noticed in the lyrical
mythical poem 'Geryoneis' of Stesichorus (630-555 BCE); it dates back to the
beginning of the 5th c. BCE. This is saved in fragmentary condition, and it was
mentioned by later poets. The verse reads:
Stesichorus in his Geryoneis calls an island in the Atlantic sea Sarpedonian.
S 86=183 P.M.G. Scholiast on Apollonius of Rhodes
In Ancient Greek, the text reads:
Στησίχορος δὲ ἐν τῇ Γηρυονίδι καὶ νῆσόν τινα ἐν τῷ Ἀτλαντικῷ πελάγει
Σαρπηδονίαν φησί.
S 86 = 183 P.M.G. Schol. Ap. Rhod.1. 211 (p. 26 Wendel)
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/stesichorus_i-
fragments/1991/pb_LCL476.89.xml
In this verse, the Ancient Greek poet (who was born in Calabria and lived in Sicily)
refers to a location off the coast of South Thrace in the Balkan Peninsula. In Greek the

7. term used is 'Atlantic archipelago' (not 'sea'); it clearly corresponds to the sea that we
now call 'Aegean Sea'. The name relates to the mythical Atlantean generation, i.e. the
people of the mythical continent of Atlantis. About:
https://www.greeklegendsandmyths.com/orithyia.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stesichorus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geryoneis
The Ancient Greek use of the term referred to the Atlas Mountains of NW Africa,
which were associated with Atlas, the mythical king of Mauritania, a homonymous
king of Atlantis (which means 'island of Atlas'), and ultimately with the archetypal,
legendary figure of a Titan named Atlas. As a matter of fact, the location of the
mythical Atlantis in the sea beyond the 'Pillars of Hercules' (i.e. Gibraltar) is the very
reason for which that sea was later named 'Atlantic'.
At this point I must clarify that the Ancient Greek appellation of Gibraltar is due to
the Ancient Greek association of the Phoenician-Carthaginian god Melqart with
Hercules. In reality, the two bronze pillars of the Carthaginian temple of Melqart in
Gibraltar are at the origin of the Ancient Greek appellation. It would therefore be
more accurate to use the expression the 'Pillars of Melqart'.
Clarification of terms and bibliography:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_(mythology)#King_of_Mauretania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauretania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Ocean#Etymology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantean
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_(disambiguation)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillars_of_Hercules#Phoenician_connection
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melqart#Cult
V. The Terms'Ocean'and 'Sea', and the leading Ancient
Egyptian ScholarPtolemy the Geographer
I have to highlight now a last point, namely the fact that, for all ancient nations, the
large expanse of sea west of the western confines of Africa and Europe was a 'sea',
not an 'ocean'. This is so because the sea was identified as salted waters, whereas the
'ocean' was thought to be an enormous stream of 'soft waters' that surrounded all
lands and all seas. As term, the ocean of 'soft waters' was extensively mythologized
within the context of the Ancient Sumerian, Assyrian-Babylonian,Egyptian, Hittite,
and Canaanite-Phoenician cosmogonies and cosmologies, notably as Apsu or Nun.
Basics and bibliography can be found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abzu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nu_(mythology)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ocean
The greatest of all geographers of Late Antiquity was Ptolemy the Geographer who
was also a mathematician,an natural scientist, and an astronomer/astrologer; his
venerated masterpiece, 'Geography' (Γεωγραφική Υφήγησις / Geographiki
Hyphigisis / Geographical Instruction), is at the same time an atlas, a gazetteer
(geographical directory) and an elaborate treatise on cartography. He describes the
limits of regions, he identifies the location of mountains, rivers, promontories,

8. islands, cities, towns and villages, and he names the races of inhabitants of all known
regions of the then known world. He is the first to have used the word 'ocean' in the
(non-mythical) sense of large expanse of sea (as we use it in Modern Times).
1- FIRST EXCERPT
Ptolemy the Geographer never used the term 'Ethiopian sea' (or 'ocean'). He used
various terms to define the sea that we now call 'Atlantic Ocean'. In his book IV, ch. 6
(associated with the 4th table of Africa), Ptolemy described the location of the limits
of Inner Libya (Central Africa); in § 3, the text reads:
Από δε μεσημβρίας τη εντός Αιθιοπία, εν η Αγίσυμβα χώρα κατά γραμμήν
την από του ειρημένου πέρατος έως του κατά τον Εσπέριον και Μέγαν
καλούμενον κόλπον της εκτός θαλάσσης
https://books.google.ru/books?id=4ksBAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source
=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
(edidit Carolud Fridericus Augustus Nobbe, tom. I, Lipsiae 1843; p. 266 - LIB. IV.
Cap.6)
In this sentence, there is no verb; this is due to the fact that the verb is stated before
two paragraphs, atthe very beginning of the chapter: 'περιορίζεται' ('is demarcated').
An English translation reads as:
In its southern side, (Central Africa is demarcated) from Inner Ethiopia,
where there is the land of Agisymba, by means of a line from that point up to
the Hesperian Gulf, which is also called Great Gulf, of the Outer Sea.
This excerpt makes clear the following points:
i- Northern Africa from the western confines of today's Egypt and Sudan to the
Atlantic Ocean was called 'Libya'.
ii- Ptolemy the Geographer used the traditional name of Cush (Ethiopia), i.e. Ancient
Sudan, in a wider sense, referring (not only to the kingdom of Meroe but) to all lands
beyond Sudan down to today's South Africa.
iii- Ptolemy the Geographer mentions a location, namely Agisymba, which is also
known to have been the end of a Roman military and commercial expedition under
Julius Maternus at the time of Domitian (ca. 90 CE). Bibliography:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agisymba and
https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/brill-s-new-pauly/agisymba-
e108180
iv- Ptolemy the Geographer demarcates the limits between 'Libya' (North Africa west
of Egypt and Sudan) and 'Ethiopia' (viewed in a broader sense as the entire region of
today's Sudan and the southern half of Africa) through a line, which starts in the area
of today's borders between South Sudan and Central African Republic and ends in
the coastlands of Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, and Cameroon,i.e. the Gulf of Guinea.
v- The Gulf of Guinea is called by Ptolemy the Geographer 'Hesperian (: Western)
Gulf' or 'Great Gulf)
vi- The Atlantic Ocean is called 'the Outer Sea'.
2- SECOND EXCERPT
In the next paragraph of his text (§ 4), Ptolemy the Geographer states that "in its
western side, ('Inner Libya' is demarcated) from the Western Ocean (τω δυτικώ

9. ωκεανώ)", therefore mentioning the then most commonly used term for the sea that
we call nowadays 'Atlantic Ocean'.
3- THIRD EXCERPT
In his book IV, ch. 9 (associated with the 4th table of Africa), Ptolemy described the
location and the limits of 'Inner Ethiopia' (Της εντός Αιθιοπίας θέσις: the location of
Inner Ethiopia); the term 'Inner Ethiopia' clearly refers to the part of Eastern Africa
that is located south of today's South Sudan, Central African Republic, Uganda and
North Kenya. In § 1 (p. 283 as per the above link), the text reads:
Η δε υποκειμένη ταύτη τη χώρα και τη όλη Λιβύη Αιθιοπία περιορίζεται,
από μεν άρκτων ταις εκτεθειμέναις μεσημβριναίς γραμμαίς των ειρημένων
χωρών, διηκούσαις τε από του Μεγάλου κόλπου της εκτός θαλάσσης, μέχρι
του ειρημένου Ραπτού ακρωτηρίου, ...
και έτι τω κατά τον Μέγαν κόλπον μέρει του δυτικού ωκεανού,
από δε δυσμών και μεσηβρίας αγνώστω γη,
από δε ανατολών τω από του Ραπτού ακρωτηρίου Βαρβαρικώ κόλπω, ος
καλείται (Βα)τραχεία θάλασσα διά τα βράχη, μέχρι του Πράσου ακρωτηρίου,
και τη εντεύθεν αγνώστω γη.
An English translation reads as:
Being located beyond that land and the entire 'Libya', ('Inner') Ethiopia is
demarcated from the north by the above mentioned southern limits of the
said lands; these limits (lit. lines) stretch from the Great Gulf of the Outer
Sea up to the aforesaid Rhapton promontory, …
… and still to the part of the Western Ocean that is inside the Great Gulf.
(Furthermore, 'Inner' Ethiopia is demarcated) from the west and the south by
an unknown land,
and from the east by the Gulf of Berberia, which stretches from the Rhapton
promontory, which is also named 'Harsh Sea' because of the rocks, up to
Prason promontory and the unknown land beyond.
This excerpt makes clear the following points:
i- The appellations 'Outer Sea' and 'Western Ocean' are interchangeable across
Ptolemy the Geographer's texts.
ii- South of the line going from today's Gabon, North Congo, and the Great Lakes
region to the coast of Tanzania around Daresalaam,the southern third of the Black
Continent was totally unknown to Late Antiquity Egyptian and Mediterranean
explorers and scholars – with the exception of the East African coast down to today's
North Mozambique.
iii- The distance from today's Gabon to the central coastland of Mozambique was not
only unknown to Ptolemy, but also incalculable.
iv- However, it was clear to Ptolemy that those confines constituted the
southernmost part of the world.
v- In fact, 'Inner Ethiopia' is located south of the demarcation line with 'Inner Libya'
(see point ii), and consequently, the Black Continent's southern part is called either
'Inner Ethiopia' or 'unknown land'.
4- FOURTH EXCERPT

10. In his book VIII, ch. 13 {which contains the first table (map) of Africa ('Libya')},
Ptolemy described the contents and the limits of the map. Specifying how the map is
delimited (§ 2), he defines the western limit of the map as per below:
Περιορίζεται δε ο πίναξ .... από δε δύσεως τω δυτικώ Ωκεανώ, ...
https://books.google.ru/books?id=vHMCAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&sourc
e=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
(Ptolemy Kart Friedrich August Nobbe, Claudii Ptolemaei Geographia, tom. II,
Lipsiae 1845; p. 215 - Libyae Tabula I)
An English translation reads as:
And the map is delimited …. from the west by the Western Ocean, …
This shows that the two most ordinary terms used by Ptolemy the Geographer to
denote the Atlantic Ocean are 'outer sea' and 'Western Ocean'. Ptolemy never used
the term 'Ethiopian Sea' (or ocean).
A list of Ancient Greek and Roman geographers and related bibliography can be
found here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Graeco-Roman_geographers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_geography#Roman_period
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_geography#Hellenistic_period
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_(Ptolemy)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_(Ptolemy)
https://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/Κλαύδιος_Πτολεμαίος
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromata
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhapta
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azania
VI. The Treaties of Alcáçovas(1479), Tordesillas(1494)and
Zaragoza(1529), and the Use of the Terms 'Sea of Ethiopia'and
'Sea of India'
During the Christian/Islamic Times in Western Europe, Ptolemy the Geographer's
works constituted the most authoritative source of information about faraway lands
where Western Europeans could not travel because they were in war with the
Muslims, who organized in different empires and kingdoms, sultanates, emirates
and khanates controlled progressively 2/3 of Asia, 2/3 of Africa, and 1/3 of Europe.
During the Crusades, many knights belonging to several Christian religious orders
encountered and secretively cooperated with various members and leaders of
Muslim mystical orders, thus taking with them back to Europe a plethora of valuable
documentation of either scientific-scholarly or spiritual contents. The Crusaders
mainly targeted the Eastern Roman Empire, which managed to withstand the attacks
of Muslim armies for several hundreds of years and after the middle of the 10th c.
started recovering territories from the Islamic Caliphate, notably Antioch (Antakya)
in 969. The real intention of the Crusades launched by the pope of Rome was not the
recapture of Jerusalem and the Christian Holy Lands, but the obstruction of the
Eastern Roman Reconquista; in other words, the schismatic papal authorities of

11. Rome wanted to prevent the Orthodox Eastern Roman Emperors from conquering
Jerusalem, which was located at a distance of less than 700 km from the borders of
the re-strengthened 'Romania' (Ρωμανία: this was the official name of the Eastern
Roman Empire).
The Crusaders failed to consolidate their early victories and, as they united Eastern
Christians, Jews and Muslims against them, returned home, defeated. The only
tangible and permanent result was the debilitation of the Eastern Roman Empire,
which was temporarily invaded by the Crusaders of the Fourth Crusade (1204-1261).
Following the collapse of the Eastern Roman Empire at 1453, the path of the Western
European pseudo-Christian kingdoms had opened for the colonial conquest of the
West and the diffusion of the Roman Anti-Christ. The supreme master of the colonial
expansion overseas was the pope of Rome; when the overseas criminality of the
Portuguese and the Spaniards started at the very end of the 15th c., he had already
got rid of the sole Christian opponent, who could denounce and reject the deeply
anti-Christian activities of the conquistadors worldwide: the Eastern Roman Empire.
The detailed study of Ptolemy the Geographer's text, the deep knowledge of all the
terms and the names that he recorded, and the meticulous investigation of the
associated cartography occupied a high position among the tasks of the papal
scholars, who advised and guided the various navigators, naval officers, and colonial
gangsters of Portugal and Spain. It was clear to them that Africa could certainly be
circumnavigated and they were fully aware of the scrupulous division of the Black
Continent that Ptolemy systematically made in his masterpiece (as per above).
It can therefore be easily understood -on the basis of the aforementioned- that every
15th c. Italian, Spanish or Portuguese geographer, cartographer and adviser to a
colonial expedition, who had a strong background in Ptolemy's Geography, would
easily extend the use of Ptolemy's term 'Inner Ethiopia' (or simply 'Ethiopia') to
various parts of Ptolemy's 'unknown lands' where he may have sailed in the last
years of the 15th c. and afterwards. Examples: the coasts of today's Angola, Namibia,
South Africa and South Mozambique and their inlands may have been expansively
called 'Ethiopia' (see above Unit V, 3- THIRD EXCERPT, v-).
This would be a reason to also name the surrounding seas 'Ethiopian Sea' or
'Ethiopian Ocean'. However, the need for new names would arise very soon after
Bartolomeu Dias reached the ' Cabo das Tormentas' (Cape of Storms), which was
later renamed as Cape of Good Hope, in May 1488, and Vasco da Gama effectuated
the first voyage from Western Europe to India (1497-1499). Why the need for new
names would arise it is easy to grasp. The old terms used by Ptolemy the Geographer
could not stand anymore; the term 'Western Ocean' would be meaningless, because if
the Atlantic Ocean was named 'Western Ocean', the Pacific Ocean {crossed by
Magellan (1480-1521) and his fleet during the period 1519-1522} could be viewed as
further located in the West. The same is also valid for Ptolemy the Geographer's term
'Outer Sea', which reflects only world perceptions and worldviews of people grown
and educated in the Mediterranean.
The fierce antagonism between the Portuguese and the Spaniards risked
jeopardizing the papal plans for Roman predominance worldwide though colonial
conquests, forced Christianization, andmass killings of the various indigenous
peoples in Africa, Asia and the Americas. Who had the right to colonize a land or

12. island became a major and most thorny problem; that's why the 15th c. and16th c.
Catholic popes
- issued many documents (namely 'papal bulls', like Æterni regis, which was issued
in 1481, Inter caetera,which was published in 1493, and Dudum siquidem, which
was communicated also in 1493),
- convened many conferences (like the Badajoz Junta in 1524) for royal delegates to
negotiate, and
- signed many treaties (notably the Treaty of Alcáçovas in 1479, the Treaty of
Tordesillas in1494, the treaty of Vitoria in 1524, and the Treaty of Zaragoza in1529)
with the two royal houses (of Castile/Spain and Portugal).
It was essential for the Catholic popes to prevent wars between Portugal and Castile,
like the Battle of Toro (1476), the Battle of Guinea (1478), and the War of the Castilian
Succession (1475-1479).
Perhaps the Treaty of Alcáçovas is the most important, when it comes to the
conceptualization and the contextualization of the New World Order, which was
tantamount to the colonization andbrought about the elimination of three great
Islamic Empires and of a plethora of sultanates, emirates and khanates. It introduced
a new approach to the world affairs, by totally denying any native people the right to
be self-administered / self-ruled, if they did not belong to one Christian European
monarch – puppet of the Catholic pope. This treaty (1479) generated a precedent,
because it implemented the concept that indigenous nations do not have the right to
even be asked about their colonization by 'Christian' killers, gangsters, and genocide
perpetrators; more critically, this concept applied for all lands – worldwide. In fact, it
triggered the colonial race, which ensued andlasted for more than five centuries,
down to our days.
However, the Treaty of Tordesillas, which was only complemented by the Treaty of
Zaragoza, was more important because technically it meant thatthe entire Muslim
world was deprived from the right to sail anywhere. By introducing the conceptof
papal lines of demarcation between the Portuguese and the Spanish maritime /
colonial zones of colonial rule and commercial exploitation, the Treaty of Tordesillas
prohibited any other nation's boats from sailing anywhere and consequently from
colonizing overseas territories. In fact, the papal lines of demarcation appeared first
in the papal bull Inter caetera (1493) in which it was stipulated that all the lands
located west of a vertical, north-south line passing 100 leagues west of the Azores
should belong to Castile (Spain). In the Treaty of Tordesillas, the papal line only
moved 270 leagues west to generate a balance between the two Catholic colonial
nations.
The treaty of Tordesillas turned the Spaniards toward the Americas and the
Portuguese to the South (i.e. today's Brazil and Western/Southwestern Africa) and
the East (i.e. the Indian Ocean, the Red Sea, the Persian Gulf, and further up to
today's Indonesia). In 25 years, the future of the Islamic world was mortgaged to the
hilt. All the same, the spectrum of another Portuguese-Spanish war came back in
force, after the Portuguese, having sailed through the Indian Ocean, landed in the
Moluccas (Maluku) islands of today's Indonesia, and few years later, the Spaniards
arrived there too, sailing the other way round through the Pacific Ocean,while
effectuating the circumnavigation of the Earth (the famous Magellan–Elcano
expedition, 1519–1522). A provisory agreement was concluded with the Treaty of

13. Vitoria (1524), which called for a bilateral conference; however the dispute was not
solved in the Badajoz–Elvas conference (1524), and it was only with the Treaty of
Zaragoza (1529) that a second papal line of demarcation was drawn,this time 297.5
leagues east of the Moluccas.
With the second papal demarcation line, the entire world was divided into two zones
(later called hemispheres): Portuguese and Spanish. In fact,almost all the seas of the
world were declared "mare clausum" (Latin for 'closed sea'). The only exceptions
were the North Atlantic (north of the Tropic of Cancer; involving also the North Sea
and the Baltic Sea) and the Mediterranean Sea (including the Black Sea).
1. 'NORTH SEA' (West Atlantic) & 'SOUTH SEA' (most of the Pacific)for Spain
It was then that the need for new names appeared,so that the papal cartographers
immortalize their New World Order, which trapped the Islamic World in an impasse
that heralded the end of every Islamic empire, kingdom or independent state. The
western part of the Atlantic was viewed as their 'North Sea' and the largest part of
the Pacific (until the demarcation line east of the Moluccas) was named 'South Sea'.
2. 'SEA OF INDIA' (Indian Ocean and West Pacific)& ' SEA OF ETHIOPIA'
(Portuguese Sector in South Atlantic) for Portugal
Similarly, the Portuguese introduced the term ' Sea of India' for all the seas between
the Cape of Good Hope and the second papal demarcation line east of the Moluccas.
This large expanse of sea corresponded almost to what the Ancient Greeks and
Romans called 'Red Sea' ('Erythraean Sea') during the Antiquity; but it also included
South China Sea and the Sea of Japan (as per the papal demarcation line). Then,for
the Portuguese sector in Central and South Atlantic (south of the Tropic of Cancer)
the term 'Sea of Ethiopia' was invented and used on the aforementioned grounds,
namely the fact that Ptolemy the Geographer named the lands from Gabon to
Tanzania 'Inner Ethiopia'.
It is however technically wrong to imagine that 16th–19th c.cartographers called the
entire South Atlantic 'Sea of Ethiopia' or 'Ethiopian Ocean' or 'Ethiopic Sea'. This
name concerned only the Portuguese sector in South Atlantic, namely east of the first
papal demarcation line (stipulated in the Treaty Tordesillas, 1494). This means that
the sea off the coast of Uruguay and Argentina, which belonged to Spain, was not
named 'Sea of Ethiopia'.
The two papal demarcation lines were called Meridian (1494) and Anti-Meridian
(1529). However, the two sectors were not exactly equal, although the kings of Spain
insisted on this; the Portuguese got a slightly larger portion, namely 191 degrees of
the Earth circumference, and the Spaniards had to be satisfied with about 169
degrees. It is however clear that the two major colonial treaties and the demarcation
lines were not respected scrupulously.
These were the circumstances under which Ptolemy the Geographer's use of the term
'Inner Ethiopia' for the northern part of Africa's southern half exerted a so posterior
impact as regards a sea where the Ancient Cushitic Qore (kings) of Napata and
Meroe in today's Sudan would have never imagined to sail. Their heirs, namely
today's Arabic-speaking Sudanese and the Cushitic nations of the Oromos, the
Sidamas and others, must find it strange that the name by which the Ancient Greeks
and Romans named their ancestors had a so long history and ramifications – to

14. which the Amhara and Tigray Abyssinian tribes and the modern colonial state of
Abyssinia (Fake Ethiopia) are totally unrelated, except for ludicrously and
shamelessly usurping names that are not theirs. Sic transit gloria mundi!
However, this posterior impact of Ptolemy's use of the term 'Inner Ethiopia' took
gradually an end; this happened, when the mare clausum of the two Catholic
colonial kingdoms started being challenged by several rising rival European
kingdoms and states, namely the Dutch Republic (1588-1795),France, and England,
which advanced the principle of 'mare liberum' (free sea). At the forefront of this
effort was a very remarkable Dutch thinker and scholar Hugo Grotius, who wrote a
homonymous book to defend the interests of the corporation for which he worked:
the Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie; VOC). With
'mare liberum' and VOC, the entire world entered the second stage of European
colonialism, the colonial empires of Spain and Portugal started shrinking, and
gradually the term 'Sea of Ethiopia' was forgotten.
For further research about this topics, go through the bibliography and the historical
sources that you can find here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Alc%C3%A1%C3%A7ovas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeterni_regis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inter_caetera
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dudum_siquidem
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolomeu_Dias
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasco_da_Gama
https://ia902703.us.archive.org/33/items/toscanelliandco00vigngoog/toscanellian
dco00vigngoog.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Magellan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Magellan%E2%80%93Elcano_circu
mnavigation
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/15th_century/mod001.asp
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/16th_century/mod003.asp
https://ehne.fr/en/encyclopedia/themes/treaty-tordesillas-june-7-1494
http://www.enciclopedia-aragonesa.com/voz.asp?voz_id=13214
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Tordesillas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Iberian_mare_clausum_claims.svg
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/thisday/jun7/treaty-tordesillas/
http://ddfv.ufv.es/bitstream/handle/10641/780/La%20Casa%20de%20Contrataci
%C3%B3n%20de%20La%20Coru%C3%B1a.pdf?sequence=1
http://historiasdebadajoz.blogspot.com/2008/11/la-junta-de-badajoz-elvas-de-
1524-sobre.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maluku_Islands
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junta_de_Badajoz-Elvas
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/16th_century/mod003.asp
http://sevilla.2019-2022.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/03/12.ICSevilla2019_Tratado-de-Zaragoza-a15.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Zaragoza
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tratado_de_Zaragoza
http://pares.mcu.es/ParesBusquedas20/catalogo/description/122513
http://www.self.gutenberg.org/articles/eng/Treaty_of_Zaragoza_(1529)#The_treat
y
https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p66561/mobile/ch04s04.html

15. https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2009/2009.12778.pdf
https://hydra.hull.ac.uk/assets/hull:5720a/content
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/13255/13255.txt
https://www.upf.edu/documents/88317877/91074250/6.1.1_EN.pdf/64d20a90-
e6c5-2033-16c1-afd8d4a267c1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cantino_planisphere
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03085694.2012.673762?journalCod
e=rimu20
https://web.archive.org/web/20130401215047/http://www.ciuhct.com/online/do
cs/thesis_joaquim_gaspar_2010-v2.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3350700?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_clausum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erythraean_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portuguese_Nagasaki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mare_Liberum
Attention: the following two links contain numerous mistakes, distortions and
nonsensical sentences probably written by some ignorant idiots hired or bribed by
the illegitimate and felonious embassies of Abiy Ahmed's criminal, tyrannical
government, which has no right and no authority to represent the numerous
oppressed and persecuted nations that have been subjugated and imprisoned in the
colonial state of Abyssinia (Fake Ethiopia):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aethiopian_Sea
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aethiopia
VII. The Treaties of Alcáçovas, Tordesillasand Zaragoza,
Portuguese-Spanish ColonialConquests, Ottoman Ignorance
and Stiffness, and the Collapse of the Islamic World
Going beyond the simple 'Sea of Ethiopia' name issue, the associated cartography,
and the earlier colonial conquests, I must underscore the fact that few people today
understand how dramatically World History was reversed in the late 15th and early
16th c. The shock caused in the 40-year period (1492-1532)was incommensurately
greater than that triggered in the early 7th c. because of Islam (622-662) and stronger
than the one prompted in the early 4th c. due to the Christianization of the Roman
Empire (313-353).
As material conquests, the new territories conquered by the conquistadores for the
benefit of the crowns of Spain and Portugal during this 40-year period, although
significant, really pale if compared with the territorial advances made and the wealth
accumulated by Timur (Tamerlane) and Genghis Khan or by the early caliphs during
the 7th c. Islamic conquests. Other, earlier rulers and conquerors invaded larger
territories in shorter time: Alexander the Great or Darius the Great. Even Selim I,
who was contemporary with the events that founded the Portuguese and Spanish
colonial empires, conquered more lands in eight (8) years of reign (1512-1520) than
the Iberian conquistadores in 40 years (the territories of today's Eastern Turkey, Iraq,
Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan,Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,Qatar,Emirates, Yemen and
Egypt).
Why was the shock caused by the conquistadores far greater and lasted longer?

16. Many would respond to this question, saying that overseas expansion brings (due to
various reasons) greater wealth to a colonial metropolis than continental land
conquest does.
Others would focus on the dramatic material and military superiority of the
conquistadores over the invaded empires or tribes.
Several historians would explain the phenomenon by pointing out that, due to the
15th c. – 16th c. Iberian maritime expansions, the entire world trade was remodeled
after very different plans, patterns, methods and processes terminating the
continental empires' prevalence across the trade routes.
Various historians of religion would underscore the fact that the widespread, forced
evangelization of numerous nations and vast populations across the world by the
Iberian Catholic missionaries was an unprecedented event in the History of the
Mankind, which is tantamount to spiritual and physical genocide and to
perpetuation of ceaseless series of crimes against the Mankind.
This is true; neither the early Islamic conquests nor Genghis Khan's thunderous
invasions led to such criminal acts of religion enforcement and mass killings.
However, the aforementioned approaches (and numerous other interpretations) are
not erroneous, but they reveal only aspects of the phenomenon herewith described. I
believe that the 5-century long irreversibility of this phenomenon has more to do
with the core nature of the acts that were then perpetrated however one may narrate
or present them. Undoubtedly, these acts and events were totally evil and inhuman,
and, if one needs a religious definition, they were inherently Anti-Christian.The core
nature of the Spanish and Portuguese colonial conquests reflected a totally different
notion, ethos, mindset, mentality, approach, attitude and conviction thathad not
been hitherto attested throughout the History of the Mankind.
This notion was first revealed in the Treaty of Alcáçovas (1479) whereby no
indigenous nation (in either known or unknown lands or islands) was thought of as
capable of self-rule, self-administration, and self-determination. It is in that treaty,
which basically concerned bilateral Portuguese-Spanish relations, that the concept of
Catholic world dominance was explicitly evoked, conceding to all the other humans,
either inhabitants of major empires or members of minor tribes, no right to be asked
about their opinion, choice and will.
This ultra-totalitarian concept certainly threatened all the nations of the world, and it
is due to this notion that Spain and Portugal first and several other European nations
(Holland, France and England) later colonized the entire world, but whatmatters
most for us to study (and what determined the world developments over the past
500 years) is the reaction of the other major empires and states of the then world.
Evaluating all aspects and repercussions of the phenomenon of the early 16th c.
Portuguese and Spanish thalassocracy and colonial hegemony, we can easily identify
the major empires and states that were targeted by the two crowns andimpacted by
the aforementioned notion and concept, which epitomized the acts and deeds of the
Iberian conquistadors.

17. Genoa and Venice
Genoa and Venice were formidable Mediterranean maritime forces and very wealthy
republics, thanks to their historical trade with the East; they were in constant wars
with the Ottoman Empire and they could not be involved in the colonial conquests at
an early level, but the flourishing and powerful Genoese and Venetian bankers and
magnates, who were also present in the Iberian Peninsula and interconnected with
numerous institutions there, would certainly be able to extract great benefit from
Spain's and Portugal's colonial acquisitions – which they did.
France, Holland and England
Due to the treaties of Tordesillas and Zaragoza, France, Holland and England were
left with the North Atlantic, which would only offer them meager benefits compared
with those of Spain and Portugal; however, these Western European states accepted
the aforementioned notion and concept, which are the quintessence of colonialism,
and prepared themselves to contravene the arbitrary papal presumption of 'mare
clausum' (closed sea). It took them some time to be ready and when they were, they
counter-attacked, advancing their own presumption of 'mare liberum' (free sea), at
the very antipodes of the peremptory papal nonsense.
China
Throughout their very long History, the Chinese were constituted as a great
continental empire with significant maritime activity alongside the eastern
coastlands of Asia and with strong commercial connections with all the other Asiatic
kingdoms and empires. More particularly in the early 16th c., China had ordinary
and close commercial relations with the Kazakh and Uzbek khanates, and the three
major Islamic empires, namely the Mughal Empire of South Asia, the Safavid Empire
of Iran, and the Ottoman Empire.
However, China was never a colonial empire, and every Chinese activity beyond
China's borders was always undertaken for two reasons only, namely to damage a
dangerous invader and to ensure peace across the trade routes west of China. The
notion and concept contained in the treaties of Alcáçovas,Tordesillas and Zaragoza
were absolutely alien and inhuman to the peaceful and serene Chinese worldview
and world conceptualization.That mindset and attitude was opposite to Chinese
culture and faiths as attested throughout millennia. Similarly, the papal demarcation
lines were meaningless to the Chinese as fully contradictory to the traditional
Chinese humanism. About Chinese humanism:
https://www.transcript-publishing.com/media/pdf/80/2e/bf/ts1351_1.pdf
https://science.jrank.org/pages/7762/Humanism-Chinese-Conception.html
https://www.e-ir.info/2020/02/20/an-examination-of-chinese-humanism/
Ottoman Empire, Safavid Empire of Iran, and Mughal Empire
The three major Islamic empires were arguably in the first half of the 16th c. the
world's three largest and most powerful states, with Ming China being the fourth.
Contrarily to China, they had a certain 'colonial' tradition (although the term
'colonial' here is used with a totally different meaning, rather related to historical
colonialism during the Antiquity and the Christian/Islamic times). All three empires
emerged as continuation of earlier empires with a great past, an outstanding
historical heritage, and therefore continuous presence across the trade routes

18. between East and West, namely the historical commercial network that we now call
"silk, spice and frankincense trade routes across lands, deserts and seas".
The Mughal Empire's (and the earlier Delhi sultanates') sphere of influence, cultural
radiation, and commercial contacts stretched from China and Southeast Asia to
Central Asia, the Arabian Peninsula, and the coastland of Eastern Africa. However,
the Mughal Empire (and its predecessors) never had an involvement in the
Mediterranean.
The Iranian sphere of influence, cultural radiation, and commercial contacts
stretched from the Balkans, the Black Sea, and the Mediterranean to the coastland of
Eastern Africa, the Arabian Peninsula, Central Asia,South-Southeast Asia, and
China. However, any Iranian kingdom or empire and any state based in Iran anytime
during the Islamic Ages never had an involvement in the Mediterranean.
The Ottoman Empire was the continuation of the Eastern Roman Empire with
another official religion and another official language. Long before becoming the
caliph of the Islamic Caliphate, the Ottoman Sultan willingly became Emperor of the
Eastern Roman Empire and he was therefore styled 'Qaysar-i Rum', i.e. 'Caesar of
Rome' ( ‫ق‬
‫ی‬
‫صر‬
‫روم‬ /Kayser-i Rûm). Idiotically invading in 1453 a rather insignificant
remnant of the erstwhile formidable Eastern Roman Empire, i.e. Constantinople,
Mehmet II was inevitably burdened with an enormously heavy past of incessant
Roman-Constantinopolitan clashes,disputes, intrigues, wars, plots and hatred that
had already lasted for almost 1000 years. Either Mehmet II knew or did not know
what he was doing, as soon as he became real successor to the Eastern Roman
Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos (29 May 1453),Mehmet II drew upon him the
unequalled rage and the vicious rancor of the scheming Catholic popes. About:
https://www.academia.edu/43199538/29_May_1453_The_most_Useless_Ottoman_
Victory
Mehmet II's successors did not have a clue about what the Catholic pope was about
to prepare against them; that's why they inanely thoughtthey had to fight for their
faith, whereas in reality they had to fight for bearing the title of Eastern Roman
Emperor – something that all the Catholic popes after the First Schism (869 - and
even earlier) wanted to deprive the monarchs of the Eastern Roman Empire of. The
entire worldview, the world conceptualization, and the perception of targets, tasks
and expansion perspectives that all Ottoman sultans had in mind were disastrously
erroneous, puerile and nonsensical. Even more catastrophically, victims of their
pseudo-Sunni and bogus-Islamic theologians, sheikhulislams, qadis, muftis and
imams, the Ottoman sultans hated their own Turkish people; they repeatedly
persecuted, butchered, and exiled their Anatolian Turkmen subjects – not to mention
other ethnic groups. The Anti-Turkmen hysteria of the Ottoman family became very
clear 60 years after the useless conquest of Constantinople, namely at the time of the
Shahqulu Revival of Anatolian Mysticism (‫قولو‬ ‫شاه‬ / Şāh ḳulu) in 1511-1512.
To please and satisfy the heretic, pseudo-Muslim and anti-Islamic theologians of
Constantinople, Selim I suppressed the freedom of the Anatolian Turkmen
population, persecuted and massacred dozens of thousands of people, thus
implementing a sectarian and self-destructive policy, which turned the outright
majority of his sultanate's Muslim inhabitants against him. Thousands of Qizilbash
Muslims when then exiled in Mora (today's Peloponnesus in South Greece). This

19. meant that the criminal and disreputable sultan was the enemy of his own nation,
being merely a puppet at the hands of the idiotic religious sect that controlled his
state. Bibliography and historical sources can be found here, although the events are
poorly described:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eahkulu
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Eahkulu_rebellion
So blind Selim I was that he could not even understand the reason why most of his
Janissaries rebelled when he advanced to the East in order to declare war against
another Islamic state, namely the Safavid Empire of Iran. This concludes the case of
the Ottoman Empire, which was a failed state already in the early 16th c., although
this reality became evident to all only 400 years later. Look now at it in its real
dimensions:
When the Catholic popes spent time and effort to solve the differences between two
Christian monarchs,the pseudo-Muslim theologians of Constantinople incited Selim
I to undertake a war against another Islamic Empire!
When the Catholic monarchs used to incite their subjects to check their chances by
exploring and exploiting new lands overseas, Selim I oppressed, killed and deported
his own state's unfortunate inhabitants.
Who were truly the worse rulers for the Muslims?
The Catholic kings of Castile/Spain, who simply expelled from their land those who
did not have their own faith (in 1492)…
… or Selim I, who exiled far from Anatolia those who had the same faith with him
(in 1511-1512)?
The weakness of the Ottoman Empire is characteristically underscored thanks to
similar comparisons that every person, thinking out-of-the-box, can easily make,
without being a specialized Turcologist.
Then, what can one say about the Ottoman ignorance and stiffness?
The second half of the 15th c. and the 16th c.are considered, very correctly, as the
peak of the Ottoman civilization and power. From 1413 until 1595 (from Mehmed I to
Murad III), namely for 182 years, in reality and despite several other pretenders, only
eight (8) monarchs reigned the Ottoman Empire. This shows an impressive stability
with an average reign period of ca. 23 years! However, there was no knowledge, no
intelligence, and no vision. There were only a) a permanent, lascivious interest for
voluptuous moments in the harem and b) a recurring passion for harsh moments in
the battlefield, especially if the looting would end up with the arrival of many new
virgin girls in the harem of the Constantinopolitan palace of the Ottoman 'caliphs'.
The Ottoman sultans failed to have intelligence and insight into their enemies'
realms; they knew nothing about the treaties of Alcáçovas, Tordesillas and Zaragoza,
let alone the extremely alarming notions and concepts involved (as per above). Then,
it is their own mistake that they underestimated the real dangers, which existed for
their state. In this regard, during the 16th and the early 17th c., the Ottoman Empire
failed to react at least in the manner the European rivals of Spain and Portugal did.
After that moment, everything was lost for the stubborn Ottoman family that wanted

20. to rule a universal empire as a tribal enclosure. But very few were then smart enough
to realize that the Sick Man of Europe had been contaminated already in the 15th c.
Even worse, there was no vision, and this is so, because never an Ottoman felt as
universal Islamic Emperor and Caliph. There was no real interest in uniting all
Muslims (to say the least) in a centralized caliphate, because there had never been
any properly centralized form of governance in any Islamic state (with only few
exceptions which only confirm the rule). And at this point, I don't mean modern
states' centralization, but at least Roman Empire-level centralization.
When Selim I managed to win over Ismail I Safavid in Chaldiran (1514), he had an
absolutely unique opportunity to unite in one realm all the lands between the
Balkans and the Indus River. In fact, only an empire this big could possibly mobilize
the resources needed to oppose the Spaniards and the Portuguese in the open seas.
But to unite populations in the first place, you have to be anyone else except an
Ottoman. They were a highly sectarian family and therefore an early failed state with
a pathetic administration, which preferred to control the useless sands of Arabia and
Egypt, instead of really rebuilding the world after the illustrious and unsurpassed
example of Timur (Tamerlane) whose conquests regenerated the Islamic World and
brought about what scholars worldwide rightfully call nowadays 'Timurid
Renaissance' (https://es.unesco.org/silkroad/node/467).
However, Timur disdained terribly the miserable Ottomans whom he vanquished in
1402; unfortunately for them, the descendants of Bayazit I did not take the lesson and
did not make of Timur their own supreme prototype. That's why the Ottomans were
repeatedly humiliated, constantly defeated, and finally dissolved by Kemal Ataturk;
their last reigning offspring, Mehmed VI Vahdettin, was expelled from the Yildiz
Palace in Istanbul, and he had to sail on an English warship to Malta and then San
Remo before he died in 1926. This nefarious misfortune will also befall on any idiots
who use the brainless Ottomans as a possible model for their own dirty politics. But
this will be the topic of another article.