On the 29th of this month, Switzerland will vote on banning minarets. Home to approximately 300,000 Muslims, the Swiss People’s Party and Federal Democratic Union are behind a referendum claiming that the construction of a minaret is not protected by the freedom of religion as it has “no religious significance”.
Actually, minarets not only have religious but historical significance as well. Furthermore, minarets are described as “symbols of a religious-political claim to power and dominance which threatens – in the name of alleged freedom of religion – the constitutional rights of others.” I am not sure how building a couple of minarets here and there would be an infringement on the constitutional rights of others…
In highlighting the issue of the argument that a ban would be an infringement of human rights, Damien Thompson writes in his blog that ‘minarets broadcast a call to prayer which interrupts the lives of Muslims’. Yes, it does – but that is if one lives in a Muslim-majority country where the call to prayer is announced through mega speakers five times a day. However, not all Muslim-majority countries allow the call to prayer to be announced five times a day. In Istanbul, ‘the city of a thousand minarets’, mosques are only allowed to announce the call to prayer a couple of times a day when it least disrupts the lives of Istanbullus.
In most places in London (since I live here) where there are mosques, to my knowledge anyway, the call to prayer is not broadcasted out loud. However, Regent’s Park Mosque has a minaret. And it is part of the architecture, which signifies the unique design of a particular time.
I don’t see anything wrong with building a mosque or temple which architecturally has religious significance as long as it caters to a local community. The idea that non-Christian religious buildings poses a threat is absurd – it is not like hundreds of mosques and temples are springing up everywhere – where there is demand there is supply.
Moreover, the argument that as long as Churches are not allowed to be built in Saudi Arabia and ‘Muslim countries’ is stupid. Just because some authoritarian governments do not cater to religious minorites does not mean that Europe has to act the same. In fact, Qatar, for example, has a church that caters for 4,000 Christians living in the country. I’ve seen it, and it is massive.
However, since Europe is a historically Christian continent I think it only right that its historical and cultural heritage preserved. So of course, no one would want to see Switzerland turn into a ‘city of a thousand minarets’. But, I highly doubt that was ever going to be a reality.
Besides, isn’t Switzerland meant to be a democratic country? What happened to liberal values?
10 Comments
Furthermore, minarets are described as “symbols of a religious-political claim to power and dominance which threatens – in the name of alleged freedom of religion – the constitutional rights of others.” I am not sure how building a couple of minarets here and there would be an infringement on the constitutional rights of others…
The threat to the constitutional rights of others is the “religious-political claim to power and dominance”. Minarets are described as symbols of the latter, the proper name of which everyone still seems content to tiptoe around.
The referendum will be a good test of how peecee Switzerland is.
I’ve always preferred North African, particularly Maghrebi, minarets to Asian minarets. I’m not a big fan of tall, spindly Turkish minarets. And Mughal minarets are an abomination.
I agree about the Maghrebi minarets, Faisal. Years ago, I lived in Morocco surrounded by these big, square, bulky things. Some have argued that they are based on the Visigothic church towers of al-Andalus.
I am fond also of the Syrian design, you see in Israel, Palestine and – of course – Syria. The minarets with the with a big over-hanging roofed balcony.
The Minar ‘Issa on the corner of the Great Mosque in Damascus looks for all the world like a church tower as well. It is where Jesus will appear at the End of Days, it is said.
Some have argued that they are based on the Visigothic church towers of al-Andalus.
Of al-Andalus or of the Maghreb proper, which was Christian for a long time (e.g. Augustine of Hippo)? Of course, Christianity was thoroughly extirpated, so hardly any (Roman/Byzantine) Christian structures remain, but it’s possible that they had square, blockish towers too. The Mosque of Uqba in Tunisia was probably built before the Arabs crossed swords with the Visigoths and it has one of the characteristic design. Local influence/inspiration shouldn’t be ruled out.
The Minar ‘Issa on the corner of the Great Mosque in Damascus looks for all the world like a church tower as well.
Whch leads one to wonder how much of the cathedral of St John on that site was really demolished, as legend has it, to make way for the mosque.
There are, of course, Vizigothic churches and other structures still standing in Spain. Byzantine and post-Roman remains litter the Maghreb. The notion that Christianity was extirpated is, of course, very controversial – suggesting that there was some sort of mass repression of Christians in the early spread of Islam across North Africa. This is contestable.
There is an interesting “lost” town a little above the salt basin near Tangier. It has fairly extensive ruins, including a typical basilica church. Pot-shards and roof tiles litter the area. As far as I am aware it has not been archaeologically surveyed. The population densities of late-Roman Africa (proper) were such that much archaeology is still to be done. The persistence of Christianity in such small rural communities into Islamic times cannot be ruled out.
Very little remains of the Church of St John, Damascus. The mosque is, however, decorated in Byzantine mosaics (although none are human figurative). The main axis of the building is East-West, so that the rows of faithful point southwards towards Mecca. However, the central section is of a North-South orientation, under which is the mausoleum of John the Baptist’s head. The design is purely Byzantine, but shorn of its Christian elements. Hardly a surprise, the Caliph concerned also used Byzantine and Coptic artisans at the Dome of the Rock and the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina.
Intriguingly, on the south face of the central, core section of the mosque in Damascus is a blocked-in square-headed doorway with a very illegible inscription in Greek across its lintel. However, this might be part of the prior temple complex that stood on the site – as other elements of the same were included both in the Church of St John and reused in the Mosque. For example, the colonnade of arches that still, now ruined, join the West entrance of the Mosque courtyard to the souk; or the field of pillars that stand close behind the Mausoleum of Salah al-Din.
May I ask more information about the mosques in Istanbul which are not allowed to announce the call to prayer five times a day? I search on the net and I could not find any information but I found that some people says in some areas announcement takes 15 minute because of some mosques are very close to each other.
There is a very good article on the history and meaning of the minaret, here:
http://www.saudiaramcoworld.com/issue/200202/the.minaret-symbol.of.faith.power.htm
It is well worth a read:
To the Swiss, be very wary and guard against danger.
Mosques are barracks, minarets bayonets, believers soldiers ….
Some famous Muslim said something like that
Top item in the World section of Google News.
Votes are in.
Minarets are out.
This is a real shame, but democracy, as they say, has spoken. I don’t quite understand why so much fuss has been stirred up over Switzerland’s 4 minarets. It does seem OTT.