Quote: (11-23-2018 02:58 PM)AvonBarksdale Wrote:
Quote: (11-23-2018 12:39 PM)Trumpian Wrote:
Quote: (11-23-2018 12:08 PM)MANic Wrote:
lol at the erroneous take on the crusades.
The crusades were effectively an invasion, by a marginal, underdeveloped primitive and savage people, of the most culturally developed, civil and advanced global blocs at the time.
Sound familiar? It should, and such is the cycle of our world
.
Gross simplification. We know the Middle East today as an Arab/Muslim region. But at the time of the Crusades, it hadn't been that long since that part of the world was part of Christendom under the Byzantines. Huge Christian population. Which the remnants of are still there today.
In their minds, they were taking back what was theirs.
Most of the Arab/Muslim technology was inherited from Byzantium. They were ahead of Western Europe in some areas as a result.
That said those European savages tore through the Arab armies while being wildly outnumbered and half starving in the 1st crusade. So that doesn't reflect too well on the Arabs I suppose.
But frankly, the notion that Europeans were backwards in the dark/early middle ages is really historically inaccurate. There was considerable technological innovation post fall of Rome.
Not true my friend. The moors (North West Africans) that colonised Spain had much more technological, scientific and medicinal advancements than Europeans. They had lights on the streets of Granada before there were in London or Paris. Also, Europeans would come to the Moorish kingdom to learn about medicine.
Your notion that Europeans were the most civilised and sanitary people in the world at the time is false. The Moors themselves believed they were civilising the Spanish people, who lived in the same homes as their horses and chickens.
Arabs are still savages. Look what they did to Kashoggi in the Consulate... Their national sport event is the Sunday beheading marathon at the Chop-Chop Square.
After the fall of Rome Iberia was populated by almost all Barbarian tribes, Visigoths, Alemanni, Suevi, Vandals, Alans, Ostrogoths...The Visigoths being the strongest united all tribes, then inner fighting paved way for the Muslim Invasion in 711 who quickly conquered all of Iberia except for the Asturias where the Christian warriors got refuge and then slowly started to gain ground in the reconquest. After some land was re-conquered the Christians started to fight again between themselves, also the muslims had a lot of in-fighting.
From wikipedia
"Both Christian and Muslim rulers fought amongst themselves. Alliances between Muslims and Christians were not uncommon.[4] Blurring distinctions even further were the mercenaries from both sides who simply fought for whoever paid the most. The period is seen today to have had long episodes of relative religious tolerance.[5]"
Religion was secondary, only power was important. Even the famous El Cid fought alongside the muslims for a period. (That is why in my opinion Geraldo the Fearless, is a much more simbolic figure of the Reconquista, but is not known, written, or even depicted in Cinema/TV as much as the latter).
It was not until the Crusades that finally there was a general idea that the Moors "have to go back".
When "they went back", emerged the two first global empires and superpowers, with richess and knowledge that the world has never seen before, Spain and Portugal. So I guess that Christians fared better after those savages left the Peninsula.