Wasn't there a 19th century version of ISIS? n/t
= new reply since forum marked as read
the ottomon empire? I mean, those areas of the middle east were a part of the ottomon empire in the 19th century. They want to consider themselves a "caliphate."
BTW there was a 20th century version of ISIS that came on Saturday mornings with Shazam!
In the Sudan. This was a religious zealot to decided to take over. Even had a successor, who did declare himself the Caliph (even though the Ottoman Empire still had the official designation of caliphate). This is close to ISIL, even if the "caliph" doesn't consider himself the mahdi (do Sunnis even have that idea?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mahdist_Sudan
Late in the Ottoman Empire's life--when it was sick and on its death bed--with the British aiding and abetting those on the ground (think "Lawrence of Arabia"
there was a bit of an uprising against Ottoman rule in favor of Arab independent. The Saudis became part of this, in the broad scheme of things, but they weren't the main event. This was more nationalist than religious and religious overtones (besides being mostly Sunni) were to the side. It was late during this revolt that the Sauds took over the Hejaz and other portions of the Peninsula (al-Jazeera) and "united" the kingdom.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt
The House of Saud and Wahhabi first hooked up in the late 1700s and established a state. It was a marriage between a politically ambitious house and a religiously ambitious preacher. Later the emirate that the Sauds had set up and defended expanded. This is more a state that adopted a church as a partner, with a secular power broker adopting a religious POV that aided and defended it, not a religious group forming and seizing secular power. In this it's not quite like ISIL.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirate_of_Diriyah
There have been various and sundry groups like this over time. Hard to know some of them because they'd have been small and if the territory was in a state of relative chaos they'd have come and gone with little notice. Unless at some point the geopolitics of the area strike your interest, it's hard to recognize that most of what's happening now--from tolerant dictators to hardline Salafi thugs to zealots that seize territory and engage in serious ethno-religious oppression--are just MOS (more of the same). Even Andalusia and India had its share Islamist thugs running things and went around beheading uppity Christians and instituting the jizya tax, even if the PR put out for Spain and India say how enlightened, wise, and kind the Islamic invaders were as rulers. It's mostly Muslims and their 19th-century sympathizers that put out this PR and they're not likely to shame themselves or those they sympathize with.