The article has glaring falsities. He’s not real keen on reality, I suppose. Maybe he has a problem with reading comprehension or simply is dishonest, like you.
Portugal landed in Morocco in 1415 under the command of King John 1. Morocco had languages dating back far before Portugal. Morocco was filled with Phoenicians in the 8th Century BCE, Carthaginians in 110-81BCE and then Rome in 33 BCE.
While Portugal was occopied by pre-Iberian people’s until Rome took it over in the 3rd Century, BCE. We don’t have much info pre-Rome because THEY DIDN’T DEVELOP A WRITING SYSTEM.You should know this, linguist. However, I suppose that’s probably another lie you’ve told like everything else. What became the Celts existed in Portugal and Spain while Morocco was drenched in literature and cultural history. Celts, as we know, didn’t develop writing for a LONG time thereafter…to the 4th to 6th centuries CE.
Morocco even played a role in early Greco-Roman Mythology being that Atlas is associated with the Atlas Mountains and is said to have been the first king of Maurentania. The 12 Impossible Tasks given to Hercules included stealing the “golden apples” from the garden of Hesperidies, purported to have been in or around Lixus. Juba II, king of Mauretania, authored works in both Latin and Greek and was referred to by Pliny the Elder. Of course, in the 8th C AD, Islam took it over and it had a wealth of literature from that point on.
It appears your author doesn’t know even the basics of the argument to which he’s attempting to start.
His attempt to discuss the scientific achievement of the caravel by the Portuguese in the 15th century negates the fact that the place they invaded was Morocco, which was founded by Phoenicians in the 8 century BCE, the greatest navigators of their time, and of course…having the oldest written alphabet in history. But, they started in 3000 BCE…long, long before Portugal existed. Every place has their cycles.
Portugal’s was just more recent than the Phoenicians or Moors or Umayeds, etc.
Your guy sucks at basic history. Good try though…mildly viable rhetoric for dumb people, so i guess I’ll give him a little credit. He understands how to use a period, nouns and verbs. That’s about it.
If you presented this in a paper to class, you’d get an F for being simply too lazy to learn anything about which you’re attempting to discuss. Pathetic attempt.