Westerners need to be reminded at how close they were to losing their identity as European Christians. The Quran commands Muslims to fight non-Muslims until Islam is supreme and all other subdued (Quran chapter 9 verse 29) and they eagerly tried to make this a reality. If it were not for great men like Martel, we may have ended up speaking Arabic and memorizing the Quran in madrasas.
This is crap. The Moors were black. The word Moor comes from the Greek word Mauros which means "black or very dark" Those actors playing Moors looked just like the other Europeans. History channel loves to distort African history. They should be exiled for corruption.
@HeruTutankhamun Sorry to burst your black nationalism, but the Moors were not the Blacks you'd like to think. To get an idea of what Europeans considered Moorish, take a look at a painting of Leo Africanus. And if that doesn't settle it, take a look at what modern day Berbers look like (e.g. Zinedine Zidane)
@mmorrtt The word Moors comes from Mauros which means Black or dark. And the Berbers were originally darker than modern day Berbers. And there are some black Berbers today, their DNA can be traced back to S. East Africa as they are Haplogroup E which is East African in descent. The Song of Roland describes the Moors as being "Blacker than ink, with big noses, big ears and the only thing white on them is their teeth" Look up "Black Mummy in Libya" for deeper origins.
@mmorrtt The reason why some of the Berbers are yellow skinned and light brown today is because of the admixture of Romans and Arabs of over the past 2500 yrs. But prior to that the population was mainly black and brown. So I guess you are just going to rewrite history and edit the word "Mauros" which in Greek means "Black or dark". And by the way the Greeks were in Africa prior to the Romans so they saw the Moors first.
@HeruTutankhamun So you are admitting that the Moors were a genetically diverse people, including even Roman and Arab genes, and that therefore many of them are light skinned. So what is the issue? Clearly the Moors are not identical to Africans living in say, Uganda. And as for the etymonology of the word "Moor," it derives from a Latin word, Maurus meaning "inhabitant of Mauritania." But I suppose this is part of the revision, eh?
@mmorrtt I told U the Moors did not become mixed UNTIL some of the Romans and Arabs got mixed in with them. But still they will be of African descent and relatively dark looking just like Halle Berry or Obama. Moor" comes from the Greek word mauros (plural mauroi), meaning "black" or "very dark," which in Latin became Mauro (plural Mauri) - New World Encyclopedia.
@mmorrtt The Moors carry the same genetic origin as many South East Africans do. Their origins can all be traced back to South East Africa if you go back far enough. Africans have the deepest roots out of all "Ethnic groups" I'm not jet black, I'm golden brown but I'm still in the black umbrella. I come from a very dark woman. End of Story...Enjoy the lesson
@mmorrtt New World Encyclopedia "The Latin word for black was not mauro but niger, or fusco for “very dark" According to Roman documents, among the Berbers were the "black Gaetuli and black-skinned Asphodelodes." Saint Isidore of Seville, who was born in 560 C.E. and died in April 636 C.E., wrote that Maurus means "black" in Greek.
What a mistake in a seemingly informative documentary ! Excommunication is NOT,, condemnation to hell for eternity '' at all ! The Catholic Church teaches that excommunication is the exclusion from the Church for grave (usually public) offences. It includes the ban from receiving the Holy Communion. Normally, it is temporary and can be lifted after an offender does penance for his sin(s) and fulfills other requirements of the Church. Moviemakers should do more research before they start filming.
@kyle887923 Although the Franks defeated Muslim invaders from Spain and saved Western Europe, it was another war that truly saved Christendom. The main Muslim forces were concentrating their resource and manpower to attack and conquer Constantinople. The Eastern Roman Empire was the only state in Christendom that was strong and stable enough to resist Muslim invaders. If the city was captured, the Muslims would used it resources to conquer Christendom.
@mitomke Christendom had nukes because the Soviets had nukes. The Crusaders actually were more tolerant of the Muslims after the 1099 massacre and handled them Lassie Faire style. And the Inquisition allows people to leave the country before the official persecutions and often allows non-Catholics to leave.
I'd like to say 1. Palestine is Jordan, 2. Jews are protecting their sacred 6,000yr old land, ignoramuses, 3. Americans are doing the middle east a practical favour, killing saddam, killing Osama, getting rid of the Taliban, etc,.. Some day you'll thank the USA and the U.K and Canada too.
i am naming my first born child after charles the hammer for his constribution for catholic church.... and for saving europe from the muslims... even though i am not that religious.. i carry my belief.
Care to learn how to achieve real enlightenment?Not satisfied what all the chakras and third eye talk?mind reading powers, intuition, inner peace, it is all true.Sleep no more, THE-HIDDEN-SPIRITdotCOM
@SuperBluepurple Islam is a tool for arab dominance...christianity was'nt intended as a religion at all! Both are put to good use by middle men who benefit its name,in the latter it is people who brainwash othewrs to do their bidding in the name of a prophet and in the former it is the prophet himself who profits!According to history arabs were nowhere before islam and all its customs,culture and rituals are from arab pagans!all muslims pray towards mecca,isn't that proof its an arab religion?!?
@AssyrianGuy34 I don't get what's your intention by you saying 'Christians are violent, it's not because Jesus told them to be violent'. do you mean that Islam told its followers to be violent? and most of your comments here I see are one sided. Idk why you hate muslims so much but in any case, this discussion of suicide bombings and trashing of religions are irrelevant to the video.
@DAGDAsRevenge after all....................all of them (charles martel, richard lionheart, godefroy de bouillon, louisIX allias saint louis, boudoin IV etc.............
What is enlightenment?Tired of all the energy and chakra talk with no real results?intuition, healing powers, it is all part of human nature.Let the spiritual revolution begin THE-HIDDEN-SPIRITdotCOM
I don't see what made the Muslims of that time any worse than the Christians. When you really think about it, both sides were all about conquest and faith. But the Muslims of that time were far more advanced than the barbarian powers. In fact, at the same time as the European Dark Ages, the Middle East and North Africa were experiencing something called the Islamic Golden Age.
muslims have much to contribute today as they did yesterday. only fanatics on both sides christian and muslim make life miserable for those innocents who suffer.to have faith in the creator is a good thing but to use that faith to kill is wrong.
@AssyrianGuy34 You can say one side but what side is God on? And how do you figure a person's faith by the religion that they encompassed within their culture? We do not have that choice at birth. Muslim, Christian by what ever name, all have used religion and what they say are its laws for their own selfish ends. No one faith is monolithic not are its people. To bridge the gap is a task for the brave and selfless. If they come looking for Jews to kill then I am a Jew or Muslim or Buddhist.
@mitomke I don't know what your point is but all I can say is that when Christians are violent, it's not because Jesus told them to be violent,; rare as it is. I can't remember the last Christian, or Buddhist, or Jewish, or Hindu suicide bomber who deliberately targeted women and children on a bus. That's my point.
@AssyrianGuy34 Yes that is true about some muslims who even target their own people of different sects. but look at the case of ireland where protestants and catholics have been killing each other for centuries, the inquisition and many wars in europe. You can say they didnt act according to Jesus and you would be right. but muslims who kill others in suicide missions and killing wantonly, stoning etc are not acting according to their faith either or are they?
@AssyrianGuy34 Seriously only one side? Their are Christian terroist just theyre are Muslim terroist. How about the guy who killed the abortion doc. Was that not for god? How about all the people who are Christian who kill because God told them too. Do they not count? Yes on the west its painted as if Muslims are the only terroist....thats bullshiit and anyone who doesnt get that is a brainwashed idiot.
@AssyrianGuy34 they don't need a suicide bomber to kill women and children they use drones and while they are not targeting civilian directly saying "oops oh well" every time is not much better
@AssyrianGuy34 Yeah atleast christians have stopped being violent..or have they stopped being christian at all?The thing is europe with its affluence ,wealth and awakening(scientifically atleast) have stopped listening to the church and clergymen like the pope..europeans are atheist or are naturalist/neopagan today,not christian.It is this awakening of europe that has forced the pope and church to adopt a more defensive posture,if not they would be as violent as mullahs and islam!
@cillantro Christianity hasn't been a solely European religion for centuries, so your argument about affluence and scientific awakening would explain Christian peoples not being very violent in the name of religion anymore doesn't make sense. More than half of Christians live throughout the world outside Europe, especially in the Americas. Americans and Latin Americans are in general very religious, and you'll not see an American terrorism. There's violence, but not of a religious kind.
@Homoclassicus I said christian people became relatively moderate.Europeans still influence christianity all over the world because of their millenia long association with it.They became aware of their region's history(one not written by the church/monks etc) as literacy became common in europe,next the church started to listen to the newly powerfull middle class in democracy unlike theocracies/monarchies of old.So the church adopted a moderate position to keep an ever dwindling faithfull base..
@AssyrianGuy34 thats because christians and jews dont have too bomb buses, they can bomb cities, how many palestian children do you think have been killed by jewish bombs, and why did you even bring buddhists in to this discussion lol? violence is not in their dictionary
@AssyrianGuy34 but if christans are not voilent y they kill inoccents in iraq afghanistan and now a days in london. y jews kill muslims childs in philistine??? if u do a action then ofcourse their i,ll be a reaction. . . and who do suside bombing is not a muslim and our religious belive is also that not to kill the inoccent.. having a bear noy mean that he is a muslim cz jews also have a bear
@ali10110 They are not probrably trying to killing innocent people because God tells them to, it is what their government tells them to do. What is Philistine? Do you mean Palestine? You should capatalize key words like the first words of sentence.
@ali10110 That depends what each muslim believes, a muslim can be an extremeist or not. Christians can be extreme and fight for God to in this case the crusades which was somewhat of a fight over the Holy Lands.
@AssyrianGuy34 Muhammad and Allah never told their followers to strap c4 to their chest either... The concept of jihad is usually supposed to be an internal struggle for freedom, although it can be external. The best example of jihad would be Saladin's war against the Crusaders, who were most definitely invaders. The worst example is, unfortunately, happening right now.
@AssyrianGuy34 Often, when Christians WERE violent they were ignoring the Sermon on the mount due to the fact that someone is threatening their livehood, wives and children. And Jesus did say, "He who does not have a sword, let him sell his coat and buy a sword." Case in point; the Crusades; the Crusades would've not happened had the Muslims maintained their policy of tolerating Christian Pilgrims.
@AssyrianGuy34 Hindus have a suicide bombers. And Christians have fanatical "figthers" that can do smilar deeds. Christ never told anyone to be violent? What religious book do you read? Wasnt Christ that said sell your cape and buy a sword? Or attack the Jewish Merchants in Holy Temple? Christianity can be such violent as Islam or Judaism and thank thats true otherwise there will be no Christianity today! Christians have being violent since at least Constantine and whats your prob with it?
@ImperialGuard9001 Actually, even with all that, Muslim fanatics outnumber Christian ones 300 to 1. Because with these other religions, there's room for bad followers who aren't the most devout; most especially in Catholicism.
@mslewp Actually, the Quran tells people to conquer in the name of faith, AFTER the verses about "peace" and "toleration" which means the violent shit abrogates the peaceful ones, which is why Muslim rulers govern like John Calvin upon their people, oppressing them and forcing them to obey every single rule, while figuratively and literally shitting upon non-Muslims. With both the OT and the NT, there are verses that stress respect for aliens and foreigners.
@HolyknightVader999 The verses in Surah 9 you are reffering to were about polytheists who broke their agreements with the Muslims (I think it was at Mecca). The polytheists betrayed the Muslims two years before the death of Muhhammad, so it was made later. The Prophet fled to Medina, where he rallied troops to conquer Mecca. I don't know where you're getting your facts from, but they sound like this one nonbeliever on YouTube. In fact, you are using his exact words. I am sick of this media-hate.
@mslewp Actually, I'm using historical analysis and sociology. Islamic patterns of sociology explain why despite a considerable lead over Europe during the "Dark Ages" in terms of science and culture, they still fell behind whereareas Christendom went from Dark Ages to being the most advanced civilization in the globe.
@HolyknightVader999 That's pretty ignorant thinking. Christianity STARTED the Dark Ages! Islam was meant extremely pro-science religion, whilst Christianity is faith. You can't look at the best examples of your religion, and the worst examples of Islam, and say 'my religion is good, and there's is bad.' Creationism is the abomination and handicap of the scientific-world. America is one of the three developed-nations with a religous majority (67%), along with Turkey and S. Africa. Read the Bible?
@mslewp Christianity started in the Golden age of Rome. And the more Christian half of the Empire survived the Dark Ages and into the eleventh century. The only reason Muslims were scientifically advanced was due to them CONQUERING THE TERRITORIES OF THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE THAT PRESERVED AND ENHANCED ANCIENT GREEK SCIENCE. And most Muslims also reject evolution in favor of Creationism.
@mslewp And as for Islamic Science, it is rather a shame that a civilization that was more scientifically advanced than Christendom during the Dark Ages ended up being at the ass end of scientific progress during the Renaissance, Eighteenth century and the Imperialist ages of the Nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They should've been shooting up rockets into the moon by the time we invented cars, since during the Dark ages, they were ahead of us.
@HolyknightVader999 You're still straying from the point. 'Christendom' shot ahead because of the Scientific Revolution, which was the fall of Christian-dominance in Europe. It's illogical to say 'Christianity did this!' No, people who happend to have a Christian majority did that. You're using the same logic used by creationists (which you seem to be from your profile). We're talking about the actual merrits of the religions, not what Europeans or Arabs or Americans or anyone else did.
@mslewp Actually, THE CHURCH PAID THE SCIENTISTS IN THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION. And even before that, during both the High Middle Ages and the Renaissance, THE CHURCH HAS ALWAYS FUNDED EDUCATION AND LEARNING. Their only scientific restrictions were light restrictions on heliocentrism that died in the 1700s. Otherwise, the Church always stood by scientific exploits and it is one of the complaints Martin Luther had for the Church; it was investing TOO MUCH in science rather than Christianity.
@HolyknightVader999 What bullshit! I knew you were stupid, but I didn't think that you'd be so dishonest! I need to go to by board-breaking for TaeKwonDo.
@mslewp Who said anything about the Church? They are but one part of the history I see. You see, I see things from a more multidircetional perspective, and I ask myself why? Why are Muslim societies more religiously rigid and puritan than Christian ones, and it is the Christians the media love to assault? Why would the media paint a few bad examples of Christians here in America as all Christians are, while in the Middle East, gays get stoned to death and rape victims are murdered?
@HolyknightVader999 I'll try to put you out of your incredible stupidity on personal messages, because I'm sick of this 500 character limit! I'm sorry for inslting you, but you've snapped my little patience for religious fundementalists! It amazes me how quickly I lose it with you people!
@mslewp You're losing in due to the fact that the people you thought were progressive are rather apathetic when gays and other "infidels" are getting killed.
@mitomke , I don't see your point either; look around, of all the religions, Islam is the only fighting religion that still fights with blood. It's as if it has stopped to hundreds of years ago, like when the Inquisition did what it it did. I am not saying that a religion is better than another, but if you really believed what you said, how could you support or 'have faith' in the very thing that contradicts it.
@lmgtech I did. And the more violent parts of the Koran that encourage bloodshed are AFTER the verses that encourage toleration. Which means they ABROGATE the toleration laws and justify faith spread by the sword. Unlike Christianity, whose bible's laws allowing for killing in the name of God PRECEED Christ's orders of tolerance, love and peace. Which means the "Eye for an eye" stuff is abrogated by Christ's teachings.
Islamic jihad is the missionary arm of Islam,its not the something Islamic haters produced propaganda.
First study quran.I studied myself and found what inside it.Races like Assyrian are in extinction due to the Islamic jihad on them for 1400 Years.What you call islamic world or arab world is once populated by ethnically diverse mainly christian population.
Colonization of America or other countries have nothing to do with Christianity. Jesus himself said that do not
have an eye on others property.Of course I am a christian but not white ,the white people had done nothing to save there christian brothers in east under Islamic oppression.The Colonization is done for the thirst of Europeans for the wealth and luxury ,How dare is the modern westerners is escaping from this by blamin christianity for Colonization
Colonization of America or other countries have nothing to do with Christianity. Jesus himself said that do not
have an eye on others property.Of course I am a christian but not white ,the white people had done nothing to save there christian brothers in east under Islamic oppression.The Colonization is done for the thirst of Europeans for the wealth and luxury ,How dare is the modern westerners is escaping from this by blaming christianity for Colonization
@optimus2g I believe there would have been few white people who were Muslim at this time unless they were forced. Of course there are now but I am talking about this video and time period. I am pleased to give you the *"dumb ass"* award for St. Patrick's day. Cheers too beer and pork!
@optimus2g I believe there would have been few white people who were Muslim at this time unless they were forced. Of course there are now but I am talking about this video and time period. I am pleased to give you the *"dumb ass"* award for St. Patrick's day. Cheers too beer and pork!
@AssyrianGuy34 You make no sense. Quick comebacks don't hide that you're a bigot. Enjoy being one if that's what floats your boat. Reality is that Muslims brought civilization back to the world while backwards ass Pagan Europeans were in the depths of misery. Try to respect other people's religions even if you don't believe in them yourself. Maybe you'll get there one day yourself. Bigot.
@optimus2g Thank God for the crusades because it help stop Europe from becoming like the Middle East and North Africa are today. Civilization? Right? Show me the muslim Mozart, or the muslim Leonardo Da Vinci, or the muslim Beethoven, or the muslim Rene Descartes, or the muslim Adam Smith, or the muslim Thomas Jefferson, show them to me. They took over great Christian Metropolises like Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch and turned them into backward shit holes.
"They took over great Christian metropolises... and turned them into shitholes"
Your thinking of the Assyrian Empire, i think. They turned every city they conquered into a shithole full of corpses. Come to think of it, didn't your people invent genocide? Isn't that your ONLY invention?
That battle is a fine example of Frankish cavalry. Their armored cavalry was unmatched in combat. That is why they won at the Batlle of Dorylaeum. Because their cavalry came in and saved the day against a force that was almost 3 times the size of the whole Christian army put together.
The reason why these Moorish armies could move so fast is because the had ver little armor. The Frankish knights had much more armor and could therefore defeat armies a lot bigger then themselves. That is why they were able to defeat the Moors at places such as the Battle Of Roncevoux Pass, where the odds against them were staggering.
its just like today...the muslims want to kill or convert all the europeans to islam, the europeans want to kick them out LOL the world would have been so much more fucked if the muslims achieved victory in europe...
thats not to say the christians didnt fuck stuff up either tho.
Christian state propaganda. Never trust an american or british made documentary. Read the books. In history, if you see black and white then you probably don't know any real history. It is in the books rather than this easy to digest pop fare.
@zomailver1 i dont see why that even matters, this documentary isnt even pro Christian. the areas where they expressed Christianity in such a positive way is just to show how the people of the time felt, they still pointed out the negatives, such as the oppressive and subjective ways of many monasteries and churches.
@Dread556 It may not be pro Christian but the point of this part and the documentary as a whole has this message of muslim, barbarian invaders being stopped in Spain. It's historically inaccurate and simplistic to think there was a muslim invasion into Europe. Spain at the time is like Turkish Byzantium - it is as much eastern than it is western. I would venture that it was much more muslim than christian before the Reconquista.
@zomailver1 why does it matter? so what if its depicting Muslims invading the area (which THEY DID btw), you see plenty of documentaries about the horrors of the crusades and such.
your just saying you dont want Muslims being shown as a kind of aggressive race, when they very much were just like EVERYONE else back then.
its not like its propaganda or anything, so why even bother with it?
@Dread556 It matters because every BBC or History channel documentary does a disservice to the general public by tilting it towards the West. It matters because no serious historian takes this seriously. It's like Soviet propaganda, only here it is much more deceitful that you can't tell hence much worse. It is really ignorant to say Muslims invaded as if their motive was religious. History is not black and white and I think you know that.
@Dread556 Who makes crusades? Not the fanatic bishop or priest in some small town in France. The pope does. Kings do. Why are there so many excommunications by the pope against christian states? Why was Richard Lionheart friendly with Saladin on HIS CRUSADE? Why were there so many Christians in Muslim states and Muslims in Christian Jerusalem? It is like saying the war in Iraq is for the promotion of democracy. If you believe that then you don't know how realpolitik works.
@decovamp you just prove that you are so poor in history. Islamc education led you to sit your ass and type this commenet .. look up who invented the number 0 which used in computers.
just watch this movie and you'd know that you still live in a dark age yourself
Martel met 15 000 muslims, while Constantinople at its 2nd arab siege met ca 240 000, i'd say that was what saved Europe, don't think Martel could have done much on his own vs such a force. Typical west trying to hog all credit.
@TsarSamuil True, the main Islamic forces concentrated to take the Byzantine capital. If the city fell, the Muslims will use its vast resources and wealth to conquer the rest of Europe. The Franks may have to face a two-front war with the Muslims. The defeat of the Muslims by both the Franks in the west and the Byzantines in the east allows the development of Medieval civilization and Eastern Orthodox civilization in Europe.
Islam is dominating Europe again, not by War, but rather by increasing population. Christianity has been in the decline phase since Byzantine Empire collapsed.
Read about the bulgarian ruler khan Tervel and the other savyor of Europe! Many contemporary Arab and Western historians look at the Second Arab siege of Constantinople in the same light that modern Western historians look at the Battle of Tours, as a pivotal milestone in history that turned back the tide of Muslim incursions into Europe, ensuring Christianity would be the dominant religion at a time when Europe was in a state of disarray.
@passjay That's my other historical fantasy. Hannibal's my hetero-man-crush. He single-handedly held of hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers for two decades with a single, small, slap-dash army that didn't even speak one language, and with political machinations back home kneecapping him constantly. That man was single-handedly responsible for killing more men than anyone until the 20th Century.
Without the grand cannon the Turks could never have overran Constantinople and also if Europe aided the Byzantines the Balkans could have been saved from Islamic conquest. Islam was not successful beyond the Pyrenees but they were successful in Sicily, Crete, Cyprus (until 10th centure) and southern Italy which they held for more than 10 to 20 years. While Byzantine forces were able to invade Northern Iraq, retake Antioch and parts of Syria and Lebanon until the end of Basil II's reign.
@TempvsMortis The Emperor Alexios IV sought help from the crusaders to re-consolidate his power and low and behold.. the crusaders sacked the city, divided Greece to themselves and sent the Byzantine empire in exile in Nicaea plus fragmenting them into two more areas which would become the despotate of Epirus and the Trebizond Empire which lasted until 1479. If Isaac II, Alexios IV and V didn't come to the throne... Byzantium could have been more resilient to Turkish and Frankish attacks..
Charles Martel isn't even french, the carolingian house is far from French, it are descendants from the ripuarian franks, Franks that lived in modern germany. He had his army fighting for decades against saxons and frisians as the Mayor of Austrasia. Modern day belgium, holland, and western germany. everything south of this didn't even contribute to his army. The French will always be to weak to fight, history has proven it over and over again.
Don't forget that during roughly the same time the Muslims were also besieging Constantinople, loss at either Tours or Constantinople at that sensitive time in European history would almost certainly have spelled the end of Europe as we know it. 700 years later we would have the same challenge, this time by Ottoman Turks, the fall of Constantinople in 1453 and the siege of Vienna in 1689...
When the people of Europe were poor, dumb and filthy. The empires of Asia such as in India (Harsha Empire, Badami Chalukya Empire, Pala Empire, Rashtrakuta Empire, Gurjara Pratihara Empire, Chola Empire) and China (Sui, Tang, Song, Jin dynasties) were going through their golden ages. We will rise once again and rule the world that is rightfully ours.
@dewan357 I'm sure there were many poor, dumb and filthy people in India as well during the same time period. You cannot compare the best of India during India's golden age with the worst of Europe during Europe's "dark age". Life in the European metropolis Constantinople was even during the "dark ages" heads and shoulders above anything else you'd find on the face of the planet, including India...
Well, the Franks weren't accurately portrayed either. Last time I checked, the Franks did not have giant conical "Negau" helmets or carry scutum shields. You would of thought that these people that produced this documentary would have done some research first.
This is the overlooked portion of history where the Muslims were the instigators... I will never apologize to the Muslims for the crusades because IMO it was a justified endeavor... Unfortunetly it was taken to extremes by idiots.
@mynoobtube acualty Christians were the ones who *mostly* caused these wars. thats why there were so many crusades. usally people get there facts wrong but i dont blame you. i think i should blame the western media.
@mynoobtube Islam fighting white people? first of all Islam (muslims) isn't a race, its a religion and secondly many muslims are whiter (have paler skin) than many Europeans.
Shame that modern descedents of Franks voluntary invited not 50 000 but 5 000 000 strong Army of Mahometians. But nature abhors the vacuum so post Chritian Europe instead of becoming atheist utopia became ME like Eurabia. Only thing saving her from being overun are those tough Jewish "bastards" from Israel. Which is highly ironic.
Ahh, stereotypes. Gotta love 'em, eh? How ironic that despite fighting in 168 major wars since 387 BC (and winning most of them) against such badasses as the Roman Empire, the British army and the Turkish forces, the French are still perceived as cheese-eating surrender monkeys. France is the most underestimated military force in the world, with the third highest military budget and an estimated 300 nuclear warheads at their disposal. So you might want to knock off the "coward" talk.
Westerners need to be reminded at how close they were to losing their identity as European Christians. The Quran commands Muslims to fight non-Muslims until Islam is supreme and all other subdued (Quran chapter 9 verse 29) and they eagerly tried to make this a reality. If it were not for great men like Martel, we may have ended up speaking Arabic and memorizing the Quran in madrasas.
mmorrtt 1 week ago
This is crap. The Moors were black. The word Moor comes from the Greek word Mauros which means "black or very dark" Those actors playing Moors looked just like the other Europeans. History channel loves to distort African history. They should be exiled for corruption.
HeruTutankhamun 1 month ago in playlist The Dark Ages - history channel documentary
@HeruTutankhamun Sorry to burst your black nationalism, but the Moors were not the Blacks you'd like to think. To get an idea of what Europeans considered Moorish, take a look at a painting of Leo Africanus. And if that doesn't settle it, take a look at what modern day Berbers look like (e.g. Zinedine Zidane)
mmorrtt 1 week ago
@mmorrtt The word Moors comes from Mauros which means Black or dark. And the Berbers were originally darker than modern day Berbers. And there are some black Berbers today, their DNA can be traced back to S. East Africa as they are Haplogroup E which is East African in descent. The Song of Roland describes the Moors as being "Blacker than ink, with big noses, big ears and the only thing white on them is their teeth" Look up "Black Mummy in Libya" for deeper origins.
HeruTutankhamun 1 week ago
@mmorrtt The reason why some of the Berbers are yellow skinned and light brown today is because of the admixture of Romans and Arabs of over the past 2500 yrs. But prior to that the population was mainly black and brown. So I guess you are just going to rewrite history and edit the word "Mauros" which in Greek means "Black or dark". And by the way the Greeks were in Africa prior to the Romans so they saw the Moors first.
HeruTutankhamun 1 week ago
@HeruTutankhamun So you are admitting that the Moors were a genetically diverse people, including even Roman and Arab genes, and that therefore many of them are light skinned. So what is the issue? Clearly the Moors are not identical to Africans living in say, Uganda. And as for the etymonology of the word "Moor," it derives from a Latin word, Maurus meaning "inhabitant of Mauritania." But I suppose this is part of the revision, eh?
mmorrtt 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mmorrtt I told U the Moors did not become mixed UNTIL some of the Romans and Arabs got mixed in with them. But still they will be of African descent and relatively dark looking just like Halle Berry or Obama. Moor" comes from the Greek word mauros (plural mauroi), meaning "black" or "very dark," which in Latin became Mauro (plural Mauri) - New World Encyclopedia.
HeruTutankhamun 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mmorrtt The Moors carry the same genetic origin as many South East Africans do. Their origins can all be traced back to South East Africa if you go back far enough. Africans have the deepest roots out of all "Ethnic groups" I'm not jet black, I'm golden brown but I'm still in the black umbrella. I come from a very dark woman. End of Story...Enjoy the lesson
HeruTutankhamun 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mmorrtt New World Encyclopedia "The Latin word for black was not mauro but niger, or fusco for “very dark" According to Roman documents, among the Berbers were the "black Gaetuli and black-skinned Asphodelodes." Saint Isidore of Seville, who was born in 560 C.E. and died in April 636 C.E., wrote that Maurus means "black" in Greek.
HeruTutankhamun 1 week ago
does anyone believe this crap?
naleyan 1 month ago
@naleyan Trust me, this shit is propaganda.
MrPhilippedorleans 1 month ago
What a mistake in a seemingly informative documentary ! Excommunication is NOT,, condemnation to hell for eternity '' at all ! The Catholic Church teaches that excommunication is the exclusion from the Church for grave (usually public) offences. It includes the ban from receiving the Holy Communion. Normally, it is temporary and can be lifted after an offender does penance for his sin(s) and fulfills other requirements of the Church. Moviemakers should do more research before they start filming.
Ladymariastella 2 months ago
You gotta admit the Dark Ages were a pretty cool time. Despite the bad things sprouting around.
darkaquav2 3 months ago
THE FRANKS WAS HERETIC CREATURES, WAS NOT christians.
unfukkkmee 3 months ago
God bless Martell
Steely1888 3 months ago 2
The West owns their freedom to Charles and the Franks
kyle887923 4 months ago
@kyle887923 Although the Franks defeated Muslim invaders from Spain and saved Western Europe, it was another war that truly saved Christendom. The main Muslim forces were concentrating their resource and manpower to attack and conquer Constantinople. The Eastern Roman Empire was the only state in Christendom that was strong and stable enough to resist Muslim invaders. If the city was captured, the Muslims would used it resources to conquer Christendom.
MrLantean 4 months ago
@MrLantean THE BYZANTIUM IS GREEK
unfukkkmee 3 months ago
You seem to forget the Inquisition and the Holocaust. Also why is that all the Christian countries have stockpiles of Nuclear weapons?
mitomke 5 months ago
@mitomke Christendom had nukes because the Soviets had nukes. The Crusaders actually were more tolerant of the Muslims after the 1099 massacre and handled them Lassie Faire style. And the Inquisition allows people to leave the country before the official persecutions and often allows non-Catholics to leave.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
I'd like to say 1. Palestine is Jordan, 2. Jews are protecting their sacred 6,000yr old land, ignoramuses, 3. Americans are doing the middle east a practical favour, killing saddam, killing Osama, getting rid of the Taliban, etc,.. Some day you'll thank the USA and the U.K and Canada too.
iwannabethekid34x 5 months ago
The Hammer
hafiidz3 6 months ago
Hmm. The French won - but only when defending Christianity.
Who still think's there's no God?
SpadaccinoLuciano 6 months ago
@SpadaccinoLuciano
lol
Adyma1997 5 months ago
@SpadaccinoLuciano XD
HolyknightVader999 3 months ago
i am naming my first born child after charles the hammer for his constribution for catholic church.... and for saving europe from the muslims... even though i am not that religious.. i carry my belief.
pcortes1987 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Care to learn how to achieve real enlightenment?Not satisfied what all the chakras and third eye talk?mind reading powers, intuition, inner peace, it is all true.Sleep no more, THE-HIDDEN-SPIRITdotCOM
DawnTharpe 8 months ago
@SuperBluepurple Islam is a tool for arab dominance...christianity was'nt intended as a religion at all! Both are put to good use by middle men who benefit its name,in the latter it is people who brainwash othewrs to do their bidding in the name of a prophet and in the former it is the prophet himself who profits!According to history arabs were nowhere before islam and all its customs,culture and rituals are from arab pagans!all muslims pray towards mecca,isn't that proof its an arab religion?!?
cillantro 8 months ago
Thank God for Christians. Without Christianity, you White boys would be speaking Arabic, reading Korean with a turban on your head right now.
UnitedKorean 8 months ago
@UnitedKorean
"Reading Korean"
Lol. You're such an idiot!
adel999100 8 months ago
Catholism presently believes that our religion is not to be forced upon anyone, but the Muslims think its there duty to kill us "infadels".
MoviMakr 8 months ago
Europe owe alot to muslim
rain4438 9 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 I don't get what's your intention by you saying 'Christians are violent, it's not because Jesus told them to be violent'. do you mean that Islam told its followers to be violent? and most of your comments here I see are one sided. Idk why you hate muslims so much but in any case, this discussion of suicide bombings and trashing of religions are irrelevant to the video.
TheChaiTeaLatte 9 months ago
the top comments are dumb
Albatross5050 9 months ago
its moors not moops!
redstar7000 9 months ago
muslims= fat black terroists
PhaSe431 10 months ago
@DAGDAsRevenge I agree...................
distick63 10 months ago
@DAGDAsRevenge after all....................all of them (charles martel, richard lionheart, godefroy de bouillon, louisIX allias saint louis, boudoin IV etc.............
distick63 10 months ago
@DAGDAsRevenge You just stick to your job flipping burgers at McDonald's redneck...
MrOcelotRevolver 10 months ago
we need a new charles martel
distick63 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What is enlightenment?Tired of all the energy and chakra talk with no real results?intuition, healing powers, it is all part of human nature.Let the spiritual revolution begin THE-HIDDEN-SPIRITdotCOM
theMerrillWally 10 months ago
I don't see what made the Muslims of that time any worse than the Christians. When you really think about it, both sides were all about conquest and faith. But the Muslims of that time were far more advanced than the barbarian powers. In fact, at the same time as the European Dark Ages, the Middle East and North Africa were experiencing something called the Islamic Golden Age.
Fatcatnevercameback 10 months ago
muslims have much to contribute today as they did yesterday. only fanatics on both sides christian and muslim make life miserable for those innocents who suffer.to have faith in the creator is a good thing but to use that faith to kill is wrong.
mitomke 11 months ago 2
@mitomke I agree, but there's only side that uses that faith to kill...
AssyrianGuy34 11 months ago 7
@AssyrianGuy34 You can say one side but what side is God on? And how do you figure a person's faith by the religion that they encompassed within their culture? We do not have that choice at birth. Muslim, Christian by what ever name, all have used religion and what they say are its laws for their own selfish ends. No one faith is monolithic not are its people. To bridge the gap is a task for the brave and selfless. If they come looking for Jews to kill then I am a Jew or Muslim or Buddhist.
mitomke 11 months ago
@mitomke I don't know what your point is but all I can say is that when Christians are violent, it's not because Jesus told them to be violent,; rare as it is. I can't remember the last Christian, or Buddhist, or Jewish, or Hindu suicide bomber who deliberately targeted women and children on a bus. That's my point.
AssyrianGuy34 11 months ago 12
@AssyrianGuy34 Yes that is true about some muslims who even target their own people of different sects. but look at the case of ireland where protestants and catholics have been killing each other for centuries, the inquisition and many wars in europe. You can say they didnt act according to Jesus and you would be right. but muslims who kill others in suicide missions and killing wantonly, stoning etc are not acting according to their faith either or are they?
mitomke 11 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Seriously only one side? Their are Christian terroist just theyre are Muslim terroist. How about the guy who killed the abortion doc. Was that not for god? How about all the people who are Christian who kill because God told them too. Do they not count? Yes on the west its painted as if Muslims are the only terroist....thats bullshiit and anyone who doesnt get that is a brainwashed idiot.
Oldcartoons571 10 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 they don't need a suicide bomber to kill women and children they use drones and while they are not targeting civilian directly saying "oops oh well" every time is not much better
umbrum2 8 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Yeah atleast christians have stopped being violent..or have they stopped being christian at all?The thing is europe with its affluence ,wealth and awakening(scientifically atleast) have stopped listening to the church and clergymen like the pope..europeans are atheist or are naturalist/neopagan today,not christian.It is this awakening of europe that has forced the pope and church to adopt a more defensive posture,if not they would be as violent as mullahs and islam!
Peace out!!!!
cillantro 8 months ago
@cillantro Christianity hasn't been a solely European religion for centuries, so your argument about affluence and scientific awakening would explain Christian peoples not being very violent in the name of religion anymore doesn't make sense. More than half of Christians live throughout the world outside Europe, especially in the Americas. Americans and Latin Americans are in general very religious, and you'll not see an American terrorism. There's violence, but not of a religious kind.
Homoclassicus 7 months ago
@Homoclassicus I said christian people became relatively moderate.Europeans still influence christianity all over the world because of their millenia long association with it.They became aware of their region's history(one not written by the church/monks etc) as literacy became common in europe,next the church started to listen to the newly powerfull middle class in democracy unlike theocracies/monarchies of old.So the church adopted a moderate position to keep an ever dwindling faithfull base..
cillantro 7 months ago
Comment removed
luigiperso 7 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 thats because christians and jews dont have too bomb buses, they can bomb cities, how many palestian children do you think have been killed by jewish bombs, and why did you even bring buddhists in to this discussion lol? violence is not in their dictionary
Egyptair69 6 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 but if christans are not voilent y they kill inoccents in iraq afghanistan and now a days in london. y jews kill muslims childs in philistine??? if u do a action then ofcourse their i,ll be a reaction. . . and who do suside bombing is not a muslim and our religious belive is also that not to kill the inoccent.. having a bear noy mean that he is a muslim cz jews also have a bear
ali10110 6 months ago
@ali10110 They are not probrably trying to killing innocent people because God tells them to, it is what their government tells them to do. What is Philistine? Do you mean Palestine? You should capatalize key words like the first words of sentence.
1Historygenius 6 months ago
@1Historygenius yes then ofcourse killing americans in afghanistan is right cz ALLAH tell us to defend ourself.
ali10110 5 months ago
@ali10110 That depends what each muslim believes, a muslim can be an extremeist or not. Christians can be extreme and fight for God to in this case the crusades which was somewhat of a fight over the Holy Lands.
1Historygenius 5 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Muhammad and Allah never told their followers to strap c4 to their chest either... The concept of jihad is usually supposed to be an internal struggle for freedom, although it can be external. The best example of jihad would be Saladin's war against the Crusaders, who were most definitely invaders. The worst example is, unfortunately, happening right now.
QuantumFerret 5 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34
you are very offencive.
Adyma1997 5 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Often, when Christians WERE violent they were ignoring the Sermon on the mount due to the fact that someone is threatening their livehood, wives and children. And Jesus did say, "He who does not have a sword, let him sell his coat and buy a sword." Case in point; the Crusades; the Crusades would've not happened had the Muslims maintained their policy of tolerating Christian Pilgrims.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Hindus have a suicide bombers. And Christians have fanatical "figthers" that can do smilar deeds. Christ never told anyone to be violent? What religious book do you read? Wasnt Christ that said sell your cape and buy a sword? Or attack the Jewish Merchants in Holy Temple? Christianity can be such violent as Islam or Judaism and thank thats true otherwise there will be no Christianity today! Christians have being violent since at least Constantine and whats your prob with it?
ImperialGuard9001 4 months ago
@ImperialGuard9001 Actually, even with all that, Muslim fanatics outnumber Christian ones 300 to 1. Because with these other religions, there's room for bad followers who aren't the most devout; most especially in Catholicism.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 Wrong. The Bible says to conquer nonbelievers in both testaments. The Qur'an says not to wage wars of aggression.
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp Actually, the Quran tells people to conquer in the name of faith, AFTER the verses about "peace" and "toleration" which means the violent shit abrogates the peaceful ones, which is why Muslim rulers govern like John Calvin upon their people, oppressing them and forcing them to obey every single rule, while figuratively and literally shitting upon non-Muslims. With both the OT and the NT, there are verses that stress respect for aliens and foreigners.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 The verses in Surah 9 you are reffering to were about polytheists who broke their agreements with the Muslims (I think it was at Mecca). The polytheists betrayed the Muslims two years before the death of Muhhammad, so it was made later. The Prophet fled to Medina, where he rallied troops to conquer Mecca. I don't know where you're getting your facts from, but they sound like this one nonbeliever on YouTube. In fact, you are using his exact words. I am sick of this media-hate.
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp Actually, I'm using historical analysis and sociology. Islamic patterns of sociology explain why despite a considerable lead over Europe during the "Dark Ages" in terms of science and culture, they still fell behind whereareas Christendom went from Dark Ages to being the most advanced civilization in the globe.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 That's pretty ignorant thinking. Christianity STARTED the Dark Ages! Islam was meant extremely pro-science religion, whilst Christianity is faith. You can't look at the best examples of your religion, and the worst examples of Islam, and say 'my religion is good, and there's is bad.' Creationism is the abomination and handicap of the scientific-world. America is one of the three developed-nations with a religous majority (67%), along with Turkey and S. Africa. Read the Bible?
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp Christianity started in the Golden age of Rome. And the more Christian half of the Empire survived the Dark Ages and into the eleventh century. The only reason Muslims were scientifically advanced was due to them CONQUERING THE TERRITORIES OF THE EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE THAT PRESERVED AND ENHANCED ANCIENT GREEK SCIENCE. And most Muslims also reject evolution in favor of Creationism.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@mslewp And as for Islamic Science, it is rather a shame that a civilization that was more scientifically advanced than Christendom during the Dark Ages ended up being at the ass end of scientific progress during the Renaissance, Eighteenth century and the Imperialist ages of the Nineteenth and twentieth centuries. They should've been shooting up rockets into the moon by the time we invented cars, since during the Dark ages, they were ahead of us.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 You're still straying from the point. 'Christendom' shot ahead because of the Scientific Revolution, which was the fall of Christian-dominance in Europe. It's illogical to say 'Christianity did this!' No, people who happend to have a Christian majority did that. You're using the same logic used by creationists (which you seem to be from your profile). We're talking about the actual merrits of the religions, not what Europeans or Arabs or Americans or anyone else did.
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp Actually, THE CHURCH PAID THE SCIENTISTS IN THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION. And even before that, during both the High Middle Ages and the Renaissance, THE CHURCH HAS ALWAYS FUNDED EDUCATION AND LEARNING. Their only scientific restrictions were light restrictions on heliocentrism that died in the 1700s. Otherwise, the Church always stood by scientific exploits and it is one of the complaints Martin Luther had for the Church; it was investing TOO MUCH in science rather than Christianity.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 What bullshit! I knew you were stupid, but I didn't think that you'd be so dishonest! I need to go to by board-breaking for TaeKwonDo.
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp It's not bullshit. Anyone who studies history and its truth would know such things.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 Yes, it is bullshit. The history that I studied for years is more valuable than your church-sessions.
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp Who said anything about the Church? They are but one part of the history I see. You see, I see things from a more multidircetional perspective, and I ask myself why? Why are Muslim societies more religiously rigid and puritan than Christian ones, and it is the Christians the media love to assault? Why would the media paint a few bad examples of Christians here in America as all Christians are, while in the Middle East, gays get stoned to death and rape victims are murdered?
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999 I'll try to put you out of your incredible stupidity on personal messages, because I'm sick of this 500 character limit! I'm sorry for inslting you, but you've snapped my little patience for religious fundementalists! It amazes me how quickly I lose it with you people!
mslewp 4 months ago
@mslewp You're losing in due to the fact that the people you thought were progressive are rather apathetic when gays and other "infidels" are getting killed.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
Comment removed
luigiperso 7 months ago
@mitomke , I don't see your point either; look around, of all the religions, Islam is the only fighting religion that still fights with blood. It's as if it has stopped to hundreds of years ago, like when the Inquisition did what it it did. I am not saying that a religion is better than another, but if you really believed what you said, how could you support or 'have faith' in the very thing that contradicts it.
luigiperso 7 months ago
@mitomke fuck muslims
PhaSe431 10 months ago
@mitomke
I recommend you to personal study the quran,go to an islamic country for studies. I recommend you some
islamic channels like iqra english .study what is sharia ,hadith,Jihad etcc..... . Visit islamic countries .
Read and understand quran. Then comment.
lmgtech 5 months ago
@mitomke
I recommend you to personal study the quran,go to an islamic country for studies. I recommend you some
islamic channels like iqra english .study what is sharia ,hadith,Jihad etcc..... . Visit islamic countries .
Read and understand quran. Then comment.
lmgtech 5 months ago
@lmgtech I did. And the more violent parts of the Koran that encourage bloodshed are AFTER the verses that encourage toleration. Which means they ABROGATE the toleration laws and justify faith spread by the sword. Unlike Christianity, whose bible's laws allowing for killing in the name of God PRECEED Christ's orders of tolerance, love and peace. Which means the "Eye for an eye" stuff is abrogated by Christ's teachings.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
@HolyknightVader999
Muhammad made Islam by copying Jewish and Christian scriptures.
Islam= pirated Jewish -Christian scriptures +evils of muhammed
lmgtech 4 months ago 2
@mitomke
Islamic jihad is the missionary arm of Islam,its not the something Islamic haters produced propaganda.
First study quran.I studied myself and found what inside it.Races like Assyrian are in extinction due to the Islamic jihad on them for 1400 Years.What you call islamic world or arab world is once populated by ethnically diverse mainly christian population.
lmgtech 5 months ago
@mitomke
Colonization of America or other countries have nothing to do with Christianity. Jesus himself said that do not
have an eye on others property.Of course I am a christian but not white ,the white people had done nothing to save there christian brothers in east under Islamic oppression.The Colonization is done for the thirst of Europeans for the wealth and luxury ,How dare is the modern westerners is escaping from this by blamin christianity for Colonization
lmgtech 5 months ago
@mitomke
Colonization of America or other countries have nothing to do with Christianity. Jesus himself said that do not
have an eye on others property.Of course I am a christian but not white ,the white people had done nothing to save there christian brothers in east under Islamic oppression.The Colonization is done for the thirst of Europeans for the wealth and luxury ,How dare is the modern westerners is escaping from this by blaming christianity for Colonization
lmgtech 5 months ago
@lmgtech Actually, the reason Columbus and the West wanted American wealth was because the Muslims blocked their way to China.
HolyknightVader999 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@optimus2g I believe there would have been few white people who were Muslim at this time unless they were forced. Of course there are now but I am talking about this video and time period. I am pleased to give you the *"dumb ass"* award for St. Patrick's day. Cheers too beer and pork!
mynoobtube 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@optimus2g I believe there would have been few white people who were Muslim at this time unless they were forced. Of course there are now but I am talking about this video and time period. I am pleased to give you the *"dumb ass"* award for St. Patrick's day. Cheers too beer and pork!
mynoobtube 11 months ago
Comment removed
mynoobtube 11 months ago
Comment removed
mynoobtube 11 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 At least you admit you're a bigot. Very manly of you. Moron.
optimus2g 11 months ago
@optimus2g It's not bigoted to believe what you see...I know reality is tough pill to swallow sometimes, but don't worry you'll get there...
AssyrianGuy34 11 months ago
@AssyrianGuy34 You make no sense. Quick comebacks don't hide that you're a bigot. Enjoy being one if that's what floats your boat. Reality is that Muslims brought civilization back to the world while backwards ass Pagan Europeans were in the depths of misery. Try to respect other people's religions even if you don't believe in them yourself. Maybe you'll get there one day yourself. Bigot.
optimus2g 11 months ago
@optimus2g Thank God for the crusades because it help stop Europe from becoming like the Middle East and North Africa are today. Civilization? Right? Show me the muslim Mozart, or the muslim Leonardo Da Vinci, or the muslim Beethoven, or the muslim Rene Descartes, or the muslim Adam Smith, or the muslim Thomas Jefferson, show them to me. They took over great Christian Metropolises like Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch and turned them into backward shit holes.
AssyrianGuy34 11 months ago 2
@AssyrianGuy34
"They took over great Christian metropolises... and turned them into shitholes"
Your thinking of the Assyrian Empire, i think. They turned every city they conquered into a shithole full of corpses. Come to think of it, didn't your people invent genocide? Isn't that your ONLY invention?
adel999100 8 months ago
@optimus2g Bigot. Moron. Idiot. Go ahead use every name in the book that you can find, but it doesn't make you any less wrong, or me any less right.
AssyrianGuy34 11 months ago
Charles Martel.......He hammered Islams Crusade of mainland Europe into pieces and they run away back to Spain!
Leighsharpe 1 year ago
No one fucks with Europa!
911wasdonebyjews 1 year ago 2
That battle is a fine example of Frankish cavalry. Their armored cavalry was unmatched in combat. That is why they won at the Batlle of Dorylaeum. Because their cavalry came in and saved the day against a force that was almost 3 times the size of the whole Christian army put together.
billyslo87 1 year ago
The reason why these Moorish armies could move so fast is because the had ver little armor. The Frankish knights had much more armor and could therefore defeat armies a lot bigger then themselves. That is why they were able to defeat the Moors at places such as the Battle Of Roncevoux Pass, where the odds against them were staggering.
billyslo87 1 year ago
"Martelé" is a verb in french that mean hammering.
Patriote17 1 year ago 4
His victory did not gave him the nickname Charles the Hammer. The word Marteau mean hammer in french. Charles Martel gave his name to the hammer.
Patriote17 1 year ago 2
lol at the french
wade2bosh 1 year ago
its just like today...the muslims want to kill or convert all the europeans to islam, the europeans want to kick them out LOL the world would have been so much more fucked if the muslims achieved victory in europe...
thats not to say the christians didnt fuck stuff up either tho.
jsbeard18 1 year ago
thank you charles the hammer, if they didn't win the world would be even ,more fucked up than it is now
pauleallen2 1 year ago
Is true that the franks had rectangular shields?
RomanLegioXx 1 year ago
Christian state propaganda. Never trust an american or british made documentary. Read the books. In history, if you see black and white then you probably don't know any real history. It is in the books rather than this easy to digest pop fare.
zomailver1 1 year ago
@zomailver1 i dont see why that even matters, this documentary isnt even pro Christian. the areas where they expressed Christianity in such a positive way is just to show how the people of the time felt, they still pointed out the negatives, such as the oppressive and subjective ways of many monasteries and churches.
Dread556 1 year ago
@Dread556 It may not be pro Christian but the point of this part and the documentary as a whole has this message of muslim, barbarian invaders being stopped in Spain. It's historically inaccurate and simplistic to think there was a muslim invasion into Europe. Spain at the time is like Turkish Byzantium - it is as much eastern than it is western. I would venture that it was much more muslim than christian before the Reconquista.
zomailver1 1 year ago
@zomailver1 why does it matter? so what if its depicting Muslims invading the area (which THEY DID btw), you see plenty of documentaries about the horrors of the crusades and such.
your just saying you dont want Muslims being shown as a kind of aggressive race, when they very much were just like EVERYONE else back then.
its not like its propaganda or anything, so why even bother with it?
Dread556 1 year ago
@Dread556 It matters because every BBC or History channel documentary does a disservice to the general public by tilting it towards the West. It matters because no serious historian takes this seriously. It's like Soviet propaganda, only here it is much more deceitful that you can't tell hence much worse. It is really ignorant to say Muslims invaded as if their motive was religious. History is not black and white and I think you know that.
zomailver1 1 year ago
@zomailver1 and why wasn't it religious?
i guess since the Muslim invasions weren't religions, then the crusades weren't religious then?
or how about the Spanish inquisition? im fairly sure that wasn't religious either, now was it?
although the end result was always to conquer, the catalyst has ALWAYS been religious zealotry, your just fooling yourself to believe otherwise.
Dread556 1 year ago
@Dread556 Who makes crusades? Not the fanatic bishop or priest in some small town in France. The pope does. Kings do. Why are there so many excommunications by the pope against christian states? Why was Richard Lionheart friendly with Saladin on HIS CRUSADE? Why were there so many Christians in Muslim states and Muslims in Christian Jerusalem? It is like saying the war in Iraq is for the promotion of democracy. If you believe that then you don't know how realpolitik works.
zomailver1 1 year ago
OMG the fights and the weaponry of Muslims are so fake. They whirl around with Shamshir and Kilidsh which first came up in 16th century, not 8th.
Protherium 1 year ago
@decovamp you just prove that you are so poor in history. Islamc education led you to sit your ass and type this commenet .. look up who invented the number 0 which used in computers.
just watch this movie and you'd know that you still live in a dark age yourself
ibrahema88 1 year ago 2
@ibrahema88
If Islam had conquered Europe, you wouldn't have to worry about computers being invented, so who'd need "0"?
baraxor 1 year ago
abdul rahman failed to heed sun tzu. never attack uphill.
briansle 1 year ago
@briansle And never put your troops in a valley.
DASW7 1 year ago
Martel met 15 000 muslims, while Constantinople at its 2nd arab siege met ca 240 000, i'd say that was what saved Europe, don't think Martel could have done much on his own vs such a force. Typical west trying to hog all credit.
TsarSamuil 1 year ago
@TsarSamuil True, the main Islamic forces concentrated to take the Byzantine capital. If the city fell, the Muslims will use its vast resources and wealth to conquer the rest of Europe. The Franks may have to face a two-front war with the Muslims. The defeat of the Muslims by both the Franks in the west and the Byzantines in the east allows the development of Medieval civilization and Eastern Orthodox civilization in Europe.
MrLantean 11 months ago
@TsarSamuil
The second Arab siege of Constantinople was no larger than 80,000, and was probably smaller than that.
adel999100 8 months ago
Ha on the franc sheilds at certain mements you can see there just roman shields covered in cloth!
MrLordwells 1 year ago
DAMN THE FRENCH ACTUALLY DID SOMETHING!
lifes40123 1 year ago
@lifes40123 spoken like a true ignoramus.
avzett 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Muslims Rule Long Live Islam
akisgr8101 1 year ago
Islam is dominating Europe again, not by War, but rather by increasing population. Christianity has been in the decline phase since Byzantine Empire collapsed.
iYobo1000 1 year ago
@iYobo1000 HAHAHAHA, look who opened the door to let the muslims into Jeruselem to take it from the Christians
TheProclaimator 1 year ago
We need another Charles Martel
Dancing88Mike 1 year ago
Read about the bulgarian ruler khan Tervel and the other savyor of Europe! Many contemporary Arab and Western historians look at the Second Arab siege of Constantinople in the same light that modern Western historians look at the Battle of Tours, as a pivotal milestone in history that turned back the tide of Muslim incursions into Europe, ensuring Christianity would be the dominant religion at a time when Europe was in a state of disarray.
mvdGenius 1 year ago
@passjay That's my other historical fantasy. Hannibal's my hetero-man-crush. He single-handedly held of hundreds of thousands of trained soldiers for two decades with a single, small, slap-dash army that didn't even speak one language, and with political machinations back home kneecapping him constantly. That man was single-handedly responsible for killing more men than anyone until the 20th Century.
TempvsMortis 1 year ago
Without the grand cannon the Turks could never have overran Constantinople and also if Europe aided the Byzantines the Balkans could have been saved from Islamic conquest. Islam was not successful beyond the Pyrenees but they were successful in Sicily, Crete, Cyprus (until 10th centure) and southern Italy which they held for more than 10 to 20 years. While Byzantine forces were able to invade Northern Iraq, retake Antioch and parts of Syria and Lebanon until the end of Basil II's reign.
melbingkoy 1 year ago
@melbingkoy Really, if the crusaders had just not invaded and sacked the Byzantine Empire, it might have survived one or two hundred years more.
TempvsMortis 1 year ago
@TempvsMortis The Emperor Alexios IV sought help from the crusaders to re-consolidate his power and low and behold.. the crusaders sacked the city, divided Greece to themselves and sent the Byzantine empire in exile in Nicaea plus fragmenting them into two more areas which would become the despotate of Epirus and the Trebizond Empire which lasted until 1479. If Isaac II, Alexios IV and V didn't come to the throne... Byzantium could have been more resilient to Turkish and Frankish attacks..
melbingkoy 1 year ago
Charles Martel isn't even french, the carolingian house is far from French, it are descendants from the ripuarian franks, Franks that lived in modern germany. He had his army fighting for decades against saxons and frisians as the Mayor of Austrasia. Modern day belgium, holland, and western germany. everything south of this didn't even contribute to his army. The French will always be to weak to fight, history has proven it over and over again.
Donar331 1 year ago
Don't forget that during roughly the same time the Muslims were also besieging Constantinople, loss at either Tours or Constantinople at that sensitive time in European history would almost certainly have spelled the end of Europe as we know it. 700 years later we would have the same challenge, this time by Ottoman Turks, the fall of Constantinople in 1453 and the siege of Vienna in 1689...
unapologeticmind 1 year ago
Did you know that the smoke pot the priest is holding has similarities to hinduism
nsy94 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
When the people of Europe were poor, dumb and filthy. The empires of Asia such as in India (Harsha Empire, Badami Chalukya Empire, Pala Empire, Rashtrakuta Empire, Gurjara Pratihara Empire, Chola Empire) and China (Sui, Tang, Song, Jin dynasties) were going through their golden ages. We will rise once again and rule the world that is rightfully ours.
dewan357 1 year ago
@dewan357 I'm sure there were many poor, dumb and filthy people in India as well during the same time period. You cannot compare the best of India during India's golden age with the worst of Europe during Europe's "dark age". Life in the European metropolis Constantinople was even during the "dark ages" heads and shoulders above anything else you'd find on the face of the planet, including India...
unapologeticmind 1 year ago
@unapologeticmind What??? Do some research buddy. Look at the Patna, Delhi, Badami, Belur, and countless others.
dewan357 1 year ago
1:19 Muslim Armies didn't use sabres or bent swords until the arrival of the Seljuk Turks around 950 Ad.
Norguy77 1 year ago
Well, the Franks weren't accurately portrayed either. Last time I checked, the Franks did not have giant conical "Negau" helmets or carry scutum shields. You would of thought that these people that produced this documentary would have done some research first.
emoslayinrage 1 year ago
What if Charles Martel came back from the dead? the muslims would be up shit creak without a paddle, if only :))
Freyja17plus1 1 year ago
This is the overlooked portion of history where the Muslims were the instigators... I will never apologize to the Muslims for the crusades because IMO it was a justified endeavor... Unfortunetly it was taken to extremes by idiots.
rudkappa 1 year ago 2
whaddaya know the muslims attacked first
bundlesofmsg 1 year ago 2
charles the hammer was a rocker , god bless his soul , fuck islam !.......
heavy666metal1 1 year ago 3
The French for centuries had the greatest army in Europe.
Then Napoleon effed them over, and a new, less admirable tradition was born.
baraxor 1 year ago
Mmmmmmmmmm giggty
LtBriJMAC 1 year ago
Its like Islam has been fighting white people for a long time. Im glad this king won, and saved our religion.
mynoobtube 1 year ago 4
@mynoobtube So, there aren't Muslim White people? lol.
optimus2g 11 months ago
@mynoobtube Yes the white man has been killing them (and others for a while as well)
Oldcartoons571 10 months ago
@mynoobtube acualty Christians were the ones who *mostly* caused these wars. thats why there were so many crusades. usally people get there facts wrong but i dont blame you. i think i should blame the western media.
umairool50 9 months ago
@mynoobtube Islam fighting white people? first of all Islam (muslims) isn't a race, its a religion and secondly many muslims are whiter (have paler skin) than many Europeans.
Norguy77 8 months ago
People should read more books and watch less utube for their sources of historical knowledge . ....and Hannibal wasn't Black African !
napalmcoffee 1 year ago
people should read more books and watch less Utube to really make educated opinions of history .
napalmcoffee 1 year ago
nice spelling lol bizzy ^_^
tyanth12 1 year ago
woah, at 7:00 they were like cheering just like it was a football game!
Roachmins 1 year ago
HI AGAIN AGAIN MR.CARUSO CLASS
allenronis 2 years ago
and just think,,,,, at one time France actually knew how to fight and did so. who knew?! 8^)>
bladestormviking 2 years ago
Shame that modern descedents of Franks voluntary invited not 50 000 but 5 000 000 strong Army of Mahometians. But nature abhors the vacuum so post Chritian Europe instead of becoming atheist utopia became ME like Eurabia. Only thing saving her from being overun are those tough Jewish "bastards" from Israel. Which is highly ironic.
strategus999 2 years ago
Ahh, stereotypes. Gotta love 'em, eh? How ironic that despite fighting in 168 major wars since 387 BC (and winning most of them) against such badasses as the Roman Empire, the British army and the Turkish forces, the French are still perceived as cheese-eating surrender monkeys. France is the most underestimated military force in the world, with the third highest military budget and an estimated 300 nuclear warheads at their disposal. So you might want to knock off the "coward" talk.
URSExelcior 2 years ago 2
Fuck Hannibal
rvgmuhs07 2 years ago
@rvgmuhs07 fuck YOU
iknohiphop 1 year ago