The Crusades

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone has had their moment in the sun, (except for Africa not counting the north if we're honest,) every civilization has murdered and killed and invaded if the oppurtunity arises and of course it isn't right. Europeans repelled the Arabs from their lands and had a large army left over at their disposal, what civilization has ever been in that situation and not exploited it that has lived to tell the tale?
 
Everyone has had their moment in the sun, (except for Africa not counting the north if we're honest,) every civilization has murdered and killed and invaded if the oppurtunity arises and of course it isn't right. Europeans repelled the Arabs from their lands and had a large army left over at their disposal, what civilization has ever been in that situation and not exploited it that has lived to tell the tale?

Have you ever heard of Mali. What about Songhay, Benin, Kongo, Swahili states, Great Zimbabwe, Rozwi?
 
Have you ever heard of Mali. What about Songhay, Benin, Kongo, Swahili states, Great Zimbabwe, Rozwi?
They really beat the crap out classical Greece and Rome.
 
Have you ever heard of Mali. What about Songhay, Benin, Kongo, Swahili states, Great Zimbabwe, Rozwi?

I believe he said "except for the north," which would include Mali, Songhay, Egypt and Morocco. Though he's forgetting the Zulus in the south.

They really beat the crap out classical Greece and Rome.

I disagree, they each had their own excellencies. Greece was a pinnacle of philosophical achievements and Rome sustained a massive empire for several hundred years through several civil wars. On the other hand, Mali had an incredible economy and powerful culture.
 
They really beat the crap out classical Greece and Rome.

Exactly. What African empire has managed to fight its way through its own tribes and expand into the mainland? I have nothing against Africa but the more iscolated a civilization is from the mainland, the less it is "in the loop" on technology and alike. South Africans were basically iscolated for a long time like the aborigines, so what can you expect them to do?
 
Exactly. What African empire has managed to fight its way through its own tribes and expand into the mainland? I have nothing against Africa but the more iscolated a civilization is from the mainland, the less it is "in the loop" on technology and alike.

What "mainland"? Africa is a continent. If you want examples of African empires that expanded beyond their core "tribes" and conquered enormous areas, then Mali, Songhai, and Kanem-Bornu are obvious examples that leap to mind.
 
@ Innonimatu....
Hm I did not know Prehistory ended in 1834
 
@ Innonimatu....
Hm I did not know Prehistory ended in 1834

Pre-history ends whenever a culture (or others for them) starts keeping written records. Thus it extended well into the 19th (and even 20th) century in several parts of the world.

What foreign encroachment? There are plenty of Arab and Persian merchants but the cities were largely governed by Africans.

Political power on those city-states rested with an elite formed by those merchants. Culture had been imported from the arabian peninsula, and the new elite and its culture clashed against those who lived outside the city-states. That's foreign encroachment.
 
Pre-history ends whenever a culture (or others for them) starts keeping written records. Thus it extended well into the 19th (and even 20th) century in several parts of the world.

The Incas and the Aztecs never keep written records, yet they developed powerful cultures.

Political power on those city-states rested with an elite formed by those merchants. Culture had been imported from the arabian peninsula, and the new elite and its culture clashed against those who lived outside the city-states. That's foreign encroachment.

In which case nearly all the world's existing cultures can be considered "products of foreign encroachment", since they all import culture from other civilisations. Only few cultures have evolved entirely on their own.

Take Ancient Rome for instances - its culture was imported largely from the Greeks and Etruscans, and its religion was imported from the Greeks, then from Palestine. In its early days Rome was probably controlled by an Etruscan elite, whose culture clashed with those of others.
 
The Incas and the Aztecs never keep written records, yet they developed powerful cultures.

Those had records, there are even some surviving Aztec codices. But I agree they were, like most African cultures, at an early stage of development. Which made them vulnerable...

In which case nearly all the world's existing cultures can be considered "products of foreign encroachment", since they all import culture from other civilisations. Only few cultures have evolved entirely on their own.

Take Ancient Rome for instances - its culture was imported largely from the Greeks and Etruscans, and its religion was imported from the Greeks, then from Palestine. In its early days Rome was probably controlled by an Etruscan elite, whose culture clashed with those of others.

I fully agree with you on that! :D That's where the difficulty with understanding the development and the collapse of empires starts. Who rules who? By what means are people ruled? Often this is not as it seems.
 
Modern Muslims don't justify spousal abuse, and Muhammed married Aisha when she was six because she was financially insecure and needed a husband. They did not consummate their marriage until later.

Couldn't he have just adopted her? And I read an article last week written by a Muslim woman in Italy about how many Muslim women there are beaten by their husbands.
 
Couldn't he have just adopted her? And I read an article last week written by a Muslim woman in Italy about how many Muslim women there are beaten by their husbands.

So are women of other religions. Seriously, violence against women is pretty much universal why single out Islam?

Not condoning violence against women of course. Personally I believe such people should be punish very severely.
 
So are women of other religions. Seriously, violence against women is pretty much universal why single out Islam?

Not condoning violence against women of course. Personally I believe such people should be punish very severely.

I wasn't particularly singling out Islam. He just said that modern muslims don't justify spousal abuse, but apparently many of them do.
 
Modern Muslims don't justify spousal abuse, and Muhammed married Aisha when she was six because she was financially insecure and needed a husband. They did not consummate their marriage until later.

Don't make me laugh. She was his favourite wife of which he had many; more than avergae muslims are allowed in fact. "They did not consumate their marriage until later:" Care to share when? I wonder why it slipped your mind. He was 57 and she was 9 when it was consumated... yes... very justified...
 
If one more person uses the fact Mohammed married a 9 year old and loosly turns it into another one of those "Proof that Islam is bad ZOMRG!!!11!"on stupid facts that they made up base on not the sitaution of Pre-Arabic Islam but that of Modern Day culture, I will fire a bullet into the thick headed bastard who talks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom