Added: 3 years ago
From: GerojSlav
Views: 112,741
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (400)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i think there was some honor fighting the guy face to face with a sword not killing him from 1 mile away with your pussy ass gun , wars should be fought the old way and i bet after an experience like that , man will come to his senses after thousands of years and abolish war and violence

  • @BayouBluesMan I agree ..but ,you have to think before you speak...

  • @BayouBluesMan im TOTAL agree with you

    best wishes from guy who raised on OLD "Zorro" movie with Guy Williams as Zorro :D

  • What movie is it ?

  • Thumps up if you see the charging beard man laughing at 0:13

  • Norwegian win

  • crap movie

  • what is this movie?

  • remember clontarf

  • slavians and vikings could have done alot if they werent busy fighting all the time! both great cultures

  • I stopped watching when I saw a horned helmet. What comes next, double bitted axes and hobbits armed with scimitars?

  • That is the worst shit ever. the guy that make that movie shall burn. first here and and then in hell

  • Vikings were nothing compared to Mongols

  • that reminds WW2, the better beat together some gooks and niggers and jews instead :-).

    Aryan, white, slavic peoples - unite!

  • vikings were nord people. but someday decided to navidate along some rivers to go to russia and there rape some slave girls.. then it was born the slaviks :) inb4 rage

  • vikings was slavs,zdravo!!!

  • this vid is a piece of shit

  • what a fuck. slavians=slaves. slavs were weak warriors.

  • @nomadsaber your an idiot! slavit' in russian means to praise our natural gods, to be a vedist, to be a cultist of sun, aryan Race and russian gods and goddesses.

  • hello from viking communauty club international

  • i only see Slavians fighting other Slavians.

  • @abbe2shit

    Slavians...suuure.

  • its a polish/Ukrainian/slavish/somew­here southeast feelgood movie.

  • vikings had horses im Norwegian i know, but who is who here, i dont think we had horses in Battle overseas. this looks abit gay.

  • Viking was a job not nation

  • Shamefull movie.

  • @pennywise374 , thank you for bullshit

  • @pennywise374

    No.

  • 0:02 as you can see one of the comerade fell down with no reason (in the blink of an eye)

  • @kakajunnmunn

    This movie was made in 2003, plus it's a low budget one.

    For the founds they had they've done an awesome work, much more worth watching that today's holywood crap.

    But yes, it could have been much better. Just noone to pay for it.

  • Comment removed

  • i dont know what is it but it look's awesome

  • What the hell??? why are vikings on horses??? AND WHY DO THEY FALL???

  • slavs wishful thinking. should be beaten for daring to dream of such shite

  • @daytonafreakboy eat less drugs... niggah

  • is a yankee movie? i think this by the distorted history

  • They couldn't afford horses so they put two-thirds of their army into horse costumes instead. It didn't work out so well.

  • The Slavs were not so many

  • That's one really long Capital One commercial.

  • 1. Vikings riding to battle (what the fuck?)

    2. They start falling from their horses for no appearent reason.

  • @Flyingtart

    1. Vikings really had horses and they used them to ride to battle. When they reached the battlefield they dismounted and fought on foot. (Note not all of em.) Sometimes they did not dismount and fought on the horse.

    2. They are falling from their horses because of the tight vegetation. When you watch the whole movie you will understand.

  • @VictumRoManius

    Yes indeed vikings had horses but they were not cavalry. What I've heard about this movie is that it's horseshit when it comes to historical correctness.

    But again: vikings did not fight from horseback. Imagine vikings on their icelandic ponnies swinging from the horseback... haha. Vikings didn't exactly bring their personal horses on the ships either.

    You would never see a scene like this in real life. It looks silly to me.

  • @Flyingtart

    they are falling cuz there are traps

    how hard is that to understand?

  • @narekjuu

    SOME PEOPLE ARE SUCH STUPID THAT SCI-FI IS REAL THINK FOR THEM

  • @foreverslovakia35

    yah indeed ;)

  • @Flyingtart the horses were drunk? :-??

  • @Flyingtart The vikings were the ones on foot, I think.

  • @Flyingtart looks as if someone has dug out ditches and covered them so as they rode past they would fall in

  • @Flyingtart

    1 - Vikings rode horses you...they even put them in their ships...nothing odd about that.

    2 - obviously the slavs had a trap prepared for the horses....seems like a good way to stop cavalry...

  • @Lusitani74

    I quote myself:

    "Vikings riding to battle..."

    Vikings could ride on horses to a battlefield, or use them for work on the farms, but they would never fight from horseback. They stepped off the horse. Scandinavian horses back then were not meant for fighting. If vikings took horses on the ship they were for selling or helping to drag the ship.

    This movie is crap actually.

  • @Flyingtart, horses were given to vikings by knyaz Pepel. See the film

  • @Flyingtart

    No. It's a good movie, although it has some shortcomings when it comes to historical accuracy. That doesn't make it crap. Damn people, be objective.

  • @Flyingtart Yeah, Vikings were foot soldiers not calvery. However they did pay for not having that advantage at Hastings.

  • @Taccom54 Sorry, but at Hastings Vikings have won. Well, not actually Vikings, but their descendants, the Normans. At that time Saxons ruled England.

  • @BadBoy1986PL Point taken, but still they suffered large numbers of casualties because they did not have any calvary of their own.

  • @Flyingtart They did use horses in battle, your just thinking about sea combat. 

  • @Flyingtart Yup. Movie sux in many ways, however it was based on the good book, but in it there was no Vikings. There were Saxons instead. In movie the Vikings got their horses from treacherous Slavic prince. That's why they ride into battle here :)

  • @Flyingtart

    If you watched the entire movie you would see that these Vikings are mercenaries and were offered these polish breed horses for combat.

  • Comment removed

  • @Flyingtart yeah..also I read somewhere that the horses they had were not war horses, they were short, stubby little things :) They weren't fit for battle. A war-horse is, contrary to common belief from movies, a specific breed of a horse that's freaking tall as sh*t and really heavy. You can't just pick a random horse, jump on it and ride it into the fray lol

  • @Flyingtart Why?

    

  • @Flyingtart nope, the vikings was caught when they draging captured stuff to their ship, slavians cross their way, vikings used the advantage of horses (in middleages cavalry was used like a tanks in the battle- crushing power for enemy lines)

  • @Sebastianek1990 He was talking about how historically accurate this movie was, and like he said they would not use horses in battle. Cavalry was just not part of viking warfare in the action itself.

  • @91rumpnisse ohh i know but still this action weren't so inaccurate, i mean if i was commander of this viking, i will use this advantage for the win- from vikings point of view using horse in this battle will be a great idea of make even easier victory over Slavians. I know that vikings was infantry but still they could get off the horses after the crushing charge. Thx for interesting & polite reply, sorry for my bad english

  • @Sebastianek1990 Well as you can see in the video, the cavalry charge wasnt successfull. Besides, if you were a viking commander, you would NOT want to use horses because of the quality on the horses. They were most likely used as workhorses and not warhorses. Vikings were more adept at fighting on foot rather than on horseback as were their tactics.

  • @Sebastianek1990 and your english is just fine.

  • @91rumpnisse thx but i must practice more with it, i have problems with tenses :/

    about the vikings.. maybe you have right, but you can't know how battle will go- it will be winned or lost ? no one know this :D

  • @Sebastianek1990 if i were the viking commander, i would have rallied my warriors and SMASH RIGHT IN TO THE ENEMY LINES LIKE A TRUE VIKING WITH MY BROTHERS AT MY SIDE AND CRACK OPEN SKULLS IN THE ALLFATHERS NAME!!!! ):D!!!!!

  • @91rumpnisse not that its that accurate ofc, they werent mindless savages like i may be :P

  • @91rumpnisse hahah from ?:D

  • @Sebastianek1990 where i am from? sweden

  • @91rumpnisse :D mmm viking ancestors :D i bet you are proud :d

  • @Sebastianek1990 I'm 1/2 russian...could I have Viking ancestors as well?

  • @Freyja1133 yes, in basic history in Poland we hear that Vikings used they tall ships on rivers like on the sea (they were quite light & all crew was trained in building ) travelling southern parts of european russia to trade

  • @91rumpnisse I agree..it was all on foot .. after they landed

  • @Flyingtart before this shit they allways riding

  • @Flyingtart

    1. Yep, thats stupid

    2. Look more attntively. Horses falter and falling into pits. Kinda traps.

  • @Flyingtart their horses sick of them and said get fokking down and fight like a viking god damnit u viking n00bs

  • @Flyingtart pittraps, i saw the movie lol

  • @Flyingtart the horses seem to be falling because of those pitfallss, look more careful.

  • @Flyingtart Some vikings was riding to battle, but just few of them. And their are falling in wolfgraves or what you call it.

  • @Flyingtart, see the film before saying bullshit

  • @Flyingtart

    Mud, buddy, mud...

    But you're right about them never riding into battle.

  • @Flyingtart there are traps under the grass

  • @Flyingtart bananna peels all over the place

    

  • @Flyingtart dude...boobytraps

  • @Flyingtart its seems that there was holes covered with leaves

  • @Flyingtart Have you ever seen this film? They actually didn't know, that they are riding into a battle (they were returning to their ships). Slovans digged holes and covered them with leaves, so that's your "no appearent reason":) And after they fall in this trap, all of them dismounted and start fighting on foot.

  • Rofl! Stolen sound effects from "Braveheart". Is it that hard to make your own stuff? The rest of what i see doesn't look bad, so its a shame they had to ruin it with stolen shit!

  • FUCK russia !!!

    GLORY to USA, POLAND, ENGLAND, GERMANY, FRANCE, SLOVENIA etc. EU and NATO !!!

  • @fabers185 Germany England France Italy said fuck poland and get out from EU this countrys hate poland and polaks poor rats in EU

  • @wolsky25 GLORY to USA, POLAND, GERMANY, ENGLAND, FRANCE etc. EU and NATO !!!

    GLORY to LATIN CIVILIZATION - FUCK russia EAST CIVILIZATION !!!

  • @fabers185 dull polish subhuman)), Poland is not a Latin civilization. Roman civilization is Moldova, Romania, Spain, France, Italy, Portugal. Go to school illiterate))) Russia is a north Civilization Viking and south European civilization Byzantine))) England France Germany Italy hate the Poles and Poland)) Because you have parasites

  • @wolsky25 Roman civilization :)

    FUCK EAST CIVILIZATION: Muslems and orthodox (russia) !!!

    GLORY to LATIN CIVILIZATION !!!

  • @fabers185 x aha ah Roman civilization, maybe you Roma civilization))) fuck Catholic and Judaism poles and poland!

  • @wolsky25 FUCK EAST CIVILIZATION: Muslems and orthodox !!

    GLORY to LATIN CIVILIZATION to URAL - russia go home to ASIA as Kazakhstan and Mongolia !!

  • @wolsky25 And you have lack of brain in your skull, you filthy dog. Poland belong to latin, western civilization as always. You mongol'/ruskie dogs are hordes of inbreed mutts.and all you took is from west, through Poland.

  • @muras100 latin is not west civilisation))) Poland is shitty huno-mongolian turko-jewish land you square-head polish mongoloid)))

  • @wolsky25 Poland is true slavic land and blood , not like russsian mutts fucked by vikings and then by mongols. Poor bastards. Like you, faggot of the year

  • @muras100 Poland's youngest country from all t Slavic nations were founded by the monks from Western Europe, only in 966)), this fact))

    poles real slavs ha ha ah aha poles is Hun land Atilla rape you mommy)) after you mommy raped mongols tatars and jews)) Im from West Russia this land never conquered. slavs is scandinavian type skull (long head) as russians

    Poles have short square-headed high cheekbones,just like Mongols

  • @wolsky25 <----

    I will tell you a secret, fags. This russian whore is a troll- he tries to make you all angry to have a boner, and then jerk off looking at putin's photo.

  • @wolsky25 Talking shit is easy in your case. Huns were located in nowadays Hungary. Russians are mutts- mixed mongols with slavic and ugrofinnic people. You can easily point those faces, typicaml for russian - central asiatic type of face. You have nothing to do with slavs. Russia was found by mongol monks from Mongolia. Its a fact ant the they 9rusk,ies) sucked their dicks for centuries.Among them was your grandma, for sure.

  • @muras100 your face!

  • @ChocolateBear0217 what s that, retard?

  • @muras100

    look through studies on european haplogroups before write this nonsence bro.

  • @Soriori I am not you bro you lil fagg. Nonsence is in your head instead of brain

  • @muras100

    Poland were fucked by Germans and by Russians lol

  • @Soriori And Russia by Mongols , Poles and Germans ROFL

  • @muras100 Poland is fuuuuuuuuuuuuuu)) Poland was founded only in 966)) Russia over more older than Poland)), when Russian Konungs brave Ingvar Helg Rurik conquered Byzantium, Poles jump on trees and eating bananas))

  • @wolsky25 There were no Russia in those times you pathetic moron. When we had castles from stones, ruskies had huts from wood. And were raped and enslaved by mogols. Russia is waaaaaaay younger than PL, uneducated prick.

  • what is the title of the movie? o_0

  • lol.... so which are the vikings? cause they never rode horses into battle and NEVER wore horned helmets

  • viking owned slaws this is ):

  • Comment removed

  • european are brother. and brother have dispute. but brother are brother. then the time comes brother stand together...

    but england people are whoresons.

  • I wish we had better luck at the battle of 1389 against the Turks in Kosovo. Great movie this one, Slava!

  • :). Hey idiot! What do you know about the other Slavs like Bulgarians and Serbs? Do you know monkey that Bulgarians were the first Slavs who had Empire? Actually two Great Empires. We have saved Europe from the Arabs in the VIII century. We have defeated the great Byzantium countless times. We first had Tsar among the Slavs. We have developed the Cyrillic alphabet. What the fuck do you know idiot to talk out of your arse? Back in Middle Ages you westeners were the savage and barbarians.

  • @BiriBagain 1) Byzantium destroyed completely the Bulgarian hordes in 1018 AD--Emperor Basil the Bulgarslayer anihillated the barbarians. 2)WTF are u talking about?? Cyrillic alphabet was invented by 2 Greeks : Cyrillus and Methodius,who lived in 9th century to help Slavs(Moravians at first) to writeTHE SLAVES DIDN'T HAVE WRITTEN LANGUAGE UNTIL 9TH CENTURY. 3)And by the way Westerners were as barbarians as Bulgarians were........

  • @MrKAMIKAZIS Slavs had their own alphabet before Jewish-Byzantium (Afro Semitic) Greek perversion (over Cyril and Method)

    I piss on your fucking Torah and Bible every day when i wake up...

  • @VendPrekmurec Even if you don't like it,you can't change history asshole!!! Go cry to your mum.Slavs didn't have alphabet before......If you are so stupid you can disagree with that fact...

  • Comment removed

  • @VendPrekmurec

    10 millions?! Where do you have these informations from? I'm interested in history and I never heard about it...

    PS. Unity of whole white Europe is necessary not Slaves only. Me, I'm an atheist bu our culture is christian. Do you prefere islamic yelling or nigger ''ju-ju''?

  • @religiofob "our culture is christian". You probably mean - aka "democratic, modern" right? Because ancient Christian and Islamic "culture" was bloody and oppressively. From this madness (and most important behind the source of this "madness" was a plan) the "dark ages" and Inquisition were born... ( "For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Light of the LORD shall shine upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. " The Pentateuch)

  • @VendPrekmurec

    I see you are an anti-christian fanatic... no discussion with you. But don't forget christian religion was/is MORE humanitarian than other (islam, hinduism, taoism etc.). Moreover, even in Middle Age there were universities, books, debates - scientific and analytical way of thinking. This is why Europe created modern science and technology - just Europe, not e.g. China.

    PS. What about these 10 imaginary millions?

    PS. Beginning of Islam had nothing in common with Christianity.

  • @religiofob What are you a pothead or what? "anti christian fanatic". Do you know what is a "fanatism"? LOL "humanitarian". When in Middle ages of Yhwh and Inquisition? Besides tell me when was the Church after 10th century interested into science? Ever read ANY Book? Ever heard about Scholasticism ?! Ever heard about Islamic fresh wind of Philosophy into Europe in dark ages? Literacy was seen as the work of servants and inferior to "christian Aristotle's philosophy of "Perfect universe of God"

  • @VendPrekmurec

    Part 1.

    Christianity is an religion of ''free will''. Do you understand what is it? Separation of ''this world'' and ''other world''. It was very important thing - ''the rationalism within religion''. This a reason that ''european way of thinking'' was different than way of thinking other peoples e.g. Chinese. This is a reason Europeans created basic sciences>engineering>technolog­y>modern world. That's difficult to understand because all the world thinks in european way now.

  • @religiofob "Christianity is an religion of ''free will''" You fail already on beginning. I have no interest to read the rest...

  • @religiofob seems like you have absolutely no clue about neither christianity, islam or history...

  • @EmilReiko

    Oh, very nice to meet a next revolutionist! I know your version of history: the n-words created all inventions, especially modern transport - hypersonic baskets on the head... :) etc. etc. ad infinitum... :)

  • @religiofob lol... naaah obviously you dont know either history or my view on history... but what to expect of brainfarts beliving in races..

  • @EmilReiko

    So teach me about historical truth e.g. BIG inventions of black brothas. :) Or about present successes of african states and black minorities in western countries - for instance, in London and Tottenham... :)

  • @religiofob Have you drunk piss? Have i talked about the supeority of black civilizations? nope... you are building your arguments on strawmen. However if you want to know about African empires and the like, you should start to read about the Mali empire, the Songhai empire, Nubia, ethiopian history, somali city-states and Aksum kingdom.

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 1.

    1) Every leftist doesn't say about black superiority but if someone is talking ''Black didn't create anything!'' the leftist is screaming ''That's racism!''

    2) About black ''civilisations'' - where are artefacts? Bones? Archeological discoveries? Trust me it's a 19th c. romantic legend, reanimated in 1950's by liberals. If it would be true ''National Geographic'' and ''Discovery'' would scream about it day by day... :)

    3) The germanic tribes had ''runs'' writing, the Celts

  • @religiofob d) Now the center of economic and social gravity and thus of invention and pogress are moving rapidly eastwards and the west, and thus the "whites", are moving towards a role as a backward periphery after 500 years of being at the core of the system. The new eastern core could not rise in its current form, without the history of the european dominance and adwanced - and thus the ever ongoing pattern of global history continues.

  • @religiofob On African history: There are plenty of architechture, artefacts, bones, graves and whatnot... One needs to be ignorant not to notice - a common feauture whit people suffering from political ethnocentrism whatever the colour.

    More on african history: African societies, kingdoms and empires functioned well before colonialism - and people were not worse off than in any other place. The present problems are rooted in colonialism and economic empirialism

  • @religiofob Runes were not proper developed before the viking age. And newer came to use as a tool of systematic recording before the coming of christianity into Scandinavia. The main purpose of runes were magic - germanic tribes did not have a need to record history, because of their oral traditions. There are some runestones documenting rather randdom events, and thats it.

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 3.

    yes, it's blame of whites! So roman civilisation was better - the Germanics didn't destroy it completely. And tell me - when white administration did destroy african tradition?

    7) About runes, it's a other subject. I see you want to spit your own ancestors (you are Danish). In other but typical way - you can't deny Europeans created civilisation. Discussion about runs history don't explain this fact. It's sad you (as a revolutionist) can't be proud of Europe... :) :(

  • @religiofob - I do not blame whites, I have never blamed whites... If I blame any it is the upperclasses within different civilizations - regardless of colour. Rome was nothing to be proud of (it was outhright barbaric) and luckily the Germans dismantled most of the empires institutions - sadly they became romanized in the process and thus we lost parts of our culture i would have preferred were kept. But shit happens..

  • @religiofob If you said to me that i spat on my ancestors in my face i would beat you severely up. It has happend before. However i am not proud of my anctry, I admire their deeds, their culture and their societies - but I cannot be proud of something i havent been a part.. I am proud of what i have acomplished or actively been a part of... That is the spirit northmen, we are not proud of abstracts such as race or nation - but only what we acomplish in our lives.

  • @religiofob on european history and culture; there are lots of things and events throughout european history that i admire and honours. But there are also lots of things and events that I despise. And like in the case of my scandinavian ancestry i cannot be proud of what great people did within european culture simply because i have had no part in it these actrions.

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 4.

    PS. About Africa: do you believe in legend of Avalon or Asgard? Melusine and Ondine? and other european myths? Myths about african ''civilisations'' exist since 19th c. and we know don't know anymore about it! Read Basil Davidson's books published in 50's and compare to present knowledge! Any news... :)

    PS. I'm drunk today so excuse my probable mistakes. I hope you (as Vikings' descendant) will forgive me... :)

  • @religiofob No myths. The ethiopian kingdom and civilization are a well established fact. The same for Nubia. The same for Aksum. The same for the Mali Empire, The Songhai Empire, Kanem Empire, Kuba kingdom, Kingdom of Kongo, Kingdom of Mutapa, Dosso Kingdom, The somali city states such as Mosylon and Opone, the Ajuuraan Sultanate... and so on and so forth. There are lots of reports from explorers and travelers on African civilization, as well as plenty of archaeological evidence...

  • @EmilReiko and evidence in tradition..

  • @religiofob (endnote 1) I have never really understood why it is so important for especially white nationalists, to rob Africa of its history. Why don't you guys just stick to to being "proud" of where you yourself came from? - you have lots of cool stuff in poland, no need to feel inferior and stomp on the victims of German, Portugese, French and English empirebuilding?

  • @religiofob (continued endnote 2) You are polish, you ought to know from your own peoples history - that big expansive imperialistic empires tries to erase the history of the ones they which to conquer. Have you forgotten how it was to be under the yoke of empires that saw either your nation as culturally inferior or your species as subhuman?

  • @EmilReiko Thats weird, becouse the oldest runes are from 100 AD, well before the "viking" age. In Scandinavia they where replaced by the latin alphabet somewhere between 1100-1200 AD, and taking into consideration that the "viking" era stops at around 1066... You mean that they where never used?

  • @troyfunction No i mean that they were not used by Norse people as a way of systematic recording their history - beside of some writing on some stones - their function was primarily of a magic (trolddom) persuasion. And there were a great regional/tribal variation in runic alphabets. The Norse relied on their oral traditions, they had no need to write it down. And my point is that this has caused some challenges in documenting what happend afterwards - as in sub-saharan africa.

  • @EmilReiko They where thou... There is a whole bunch of runestones all across Scandinavia that tells the story of certain persons, sometimes they "orderd" by relatives and sometimes by the one that the story is about. Some tells the story of great succsess, some the the story of failure. Some are about women, most of them are about men. Some are even written in code. On the island of Gotland they have found pieces of barch where "vikings" have even written messeges to eachother.

  • @troyfunction what about the New Kennsington Stone founf in the 1300's in america with runes on it and the templar link with viking links of feindship with the scottish templars.

  • @STORMLORD70 yeah?... what about them?

  • @troyfunction chill in the northwind i don't like christians also.

  • @STORMLORD70 Well I can say one thing... Not many "vikings around in 1300, there was however a whole bunch of christian scandinavians around.

  • @STORMLORD70 And im still pretty convinced the Kensington stone is a fake; the language seems all wrong... its to modern.

  • @troyfunction it might be old thou... but still a fake.

  • @troyfunction langauge changes over time as it intertwines with others

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 2.

    - ''ogam'' and (most important) ROMAN CIVILISATION nearly. Roman Empire>medieval Europe>modern times. Learn history.

    4) Bla-bla. ''Everyone has contributed...'' but almost 100% by whites. Science (compilation of knowledges) was in Europe ONLY!!

    5) Ypu should read David S. Landes ''Poverty and weak of nations''. N-words wanted a freedom, yes? Well, thay have freedom since 1960's, in RSA - 1990. And what? A hunger, disorder, diseases, violence - more and more... :(

  • @religiofob Roman Civilization is no more important than the Egypt, Greek, Babylonian, Nubian, Chartagian and so on and so forth. It was built upon the advances of these civilizations and would not have been able to arise without these advances. In reality the romans did now acomplich much in term of technology, they were experts in using existing technology for their own purposes. They emulated what already existed.

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 1.

    OMG You are tireless... :)

    1) Roman civilisation isn't important? What alphabet do you write? Nubian? Roman laws, lifestyle, way of thinking... Romans created medieval Europe>our present Europe! But I agree the ancient Greeks had more scientific achievements. But Greeks are Europeans too, aren't?

    2) No, you are wrong; influence of other civilisations wasn't so big. E.g. Chinese created a pipe of bamboo shooting fireworks. Europeans added: maths+physics+metalurgy+engine­ering

  • And yet in these areas where we have excelled for the last couple of hundred years we stood on the shoulders of civilizations of the past - from far and near. And some day somebody will stand on the shoulders of us. That is what the east is doing now.

  • @EmilReiko

    Part 2.

    =guns and cannons. This is why Europeans won in world ranking... :)

    3) Leftist twaddle! I repeat - Europeans had a science and scientific thinking! Anyone else hadn't it!

    4) Arab succeses existed 200 years only. Then - backward and goats f**cking until today. :)

    5) I agree the Asians dominate in business and industry. But since when? 1950's of XX c.? They are copyists of our achievements!

    6) Lol, it's amazing: fantastic african civilisations and present shit. Why?

  • @religiofob - Arabs, chinese and persians had well developed scientific methods before the dawn of european modernity, the same goes for the Mali Empire in Africa - boasting the University of Sankore in Timbuktu. Examples of science we got from arabs: astronomy, medicine and surgery - as well as a good deal of philosophy. The printing press is a Chinese invention - the same goes for cannons.

  • @EmilReiko

    You can't understand one thing - european science is a compilation of many knowledges. One philosopher thinking about world's deal isn't a scientist! I not deny other civilisations had some merits but 99,9% is an european contribution.

    I don't understand you feel offended. Every european revolutionist hates his own culture, race and tradition. Maybe you aren't a true comrade... :) 

  • @religiofob "They are copyists of our achievements!" The same goes for us, we where copyists. It is called emulation - and civilizations emulate and improve each other through history.

  • @religiofob The Arabs was a world power for a thousand years. Their decline came with the shift in the gravity of trade routes due to acomplishments in ship technology. It hit them hard as their society was built on the foundations of long-distance trade.

  • @religiofob b) Modern Europe was created through european reanniseance, that was made possible through an influx of knowledge (science) from arab empires: that build upon and further developed knowledge from Africa, Persia, India and China as well as European ancient tech long forgotten in Europe. European military dominance made possible by inventions of the far-east.

  • @religiofob c) European military dominance were made possible by inventions of the far-east. Medieval Europe could not have moved away from being an underdeveloped periphery beloning to the Middleeaster economic core without the above.

  • @religiofob 2. In most parts of africa they have the same problem that we have in relation to our history. Like the Germanic, the celtic and easterneuropean tribes before medieval times - in large parts of Africa things was not recorded, because the cultures was based on oral traditions. This creates dark spots when we try to map our history in northern europe, easterneurope and sub-saharan africa.

  • @religiofob 3. on history ) History is a long continium of human relations as well exchange of culture and knowledge across the various regions of the world by various means. We would not have been where we are if it was not for the chinese, arabs and africans and visa versa. Everyone has contributed to the creation of civilization and every one have had the changing roles of "babarians" and "civilized" across the great span of history.

  • @religiofob 4. Modern Africa ) If you want to know why things are sheit in big parts of africa then read the conservative economic Erik Reinert's book "Why Rich Countries Got Rich and Why Poor Countries Stay Poor". No dangerous whitehating-marxist-conspiracy in that one so it is safe for you to read. You will also learn a great deal on European economic history.