Battles and Events That Saved Europe

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aside from White Europeans fighting and Invading themselves Only 3 other non European empires came close to conquering the whole of Europe. These are the Battle and Events that stopped that from happening.

Europe.png

Green - Umayyad Caliphate
Red - Ottoman Empire
Orange - Mongol Empire
White - European land that was never conquered by foreign Invading forces


These events did not happen at the same time because non of these empires existed simultaneously.
They happened hundreds of years apart, but they are the most important battles that saved Europe.

1. The Battle of Tours (732 A.D)
The Umayyad Caliphate invaded France but were unsuccessful
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tours#Battle_.28October_732.29
Steuben_-_Bataille_de_Poitiers.png



2. The Battle of Cerami (1063 A.D)
A huge Nordic army took advantage of the civil-unrest between the Emirs of Sicily. Invading Cerami and destroying the Emirate of Sicily
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cerami#Siege_of_Cerami
RogerAtTheBattleOfCerami1061.JPG




3. The Battle of Legnica (1241 A.D)
The Mongol Horde Invaded Legnica-Poland and Summarily destroyed Nights of The Templar, Polish, and Czech Armies. They intended to take the whole of central Europe but were cut short by the death of Ögedei Khan. Right after they won the Battle the armies and their generals were ordered to come back to Mongolia to attend the burial of the old khan and crowing of the new.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica
teutonic-order-and-mongols-at-the-battle-of-liegnitz-1241.jpg




4. The Battle of Vienna (1683 A.D)
After the Ottoman Empire took and besieged the Imperial City for 2 months, the Habsburg Monarchy, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire, joined forces under the command of King John III Sobieski against the invading Ottoman Empire to lift the siege Vienna. The battle marked the first time Poland and the Holy Roman Empire had cooperated militarily against the Turks, and it is often seen as a turning point in history. In the ensuing war that lasted until 1698, the Turks lost almost all of Hungary to the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna
Battle_of_Vienna_1683_11.PNG





Imagine if The Ummayads, Ottomans, or Mongols continued on and won those wars.
Europe would look a whole lot different today.
 
Why did Mongols have so much luck? Waa Shaytamo. The Mongos / Tartars did much more damage to the Muslim world than Europe though.
 

The_Cosmos

Pepe Trump
Two Somali looking people on the right behind beard dude:ohhh:

In fact Somalia was a part of the Umayyad Empire but alot of maps are inaccurate and lacking Somalias inclusion. So those two could very well be Somalis
https://books.google.ae/books?id=XpdAzRYruCwC&pg=PA3&dq=somalia+umayyad&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Wf-iUMu8K-WS0QHd5YCwDg&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=somalia umayyad&f=false See page 3. Recommend reading/skimming the book as its incredibly fascinating and interesting.

They're most likely slaves. The Arabs has a lot of African slaves.
 

The_Cosmos

Pepe Trump
Aside from White Europeans fighting and Invading themselves Only 3 other non European empires came close to conquering the whole of Europe. These are the Battle and Events that stopped that from happening.

View attachment 8324
Green - Umayyad Caliphate
Red - Ottoman Empire
Orange - Mongol Empire
White - European land that was never conquered by foreign Invading forces


These events did not happen at the same time because non of these empires existed simultaneously.
They happened hundreds of years apart, but they are the most important battles that saved Europe.

1. The Battle of Tours (732 A.D)
The Umayyad Caliphate invaded France but were unsuccessful
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tours#Battle_.28October_732.29
Steuben_-_Bataille_de_Poitiers.png



2. The Battle of Cerami (1063 A.D)
A huge Nordic army took advantage of the civil-unrest between the Emirs of Sicily. Invading Cerami and destroying the Emirate of Sicily
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cerami#Siege_of_Cerami
RogerAtTheBattleOfCerami1061.JPG




3. The Battle of Legnica (1241 A.D)
The Mongol Horde Invaded Legnica-Poland and Summarily destroyed Nights of The Templar, Polish, and Czech Armies. They intended to take the whole of central Europe but were cut short by the death of Ögedei Khan. Right after they won the Battle the armies and their generals were ordered to come back to Mongolia to attend the burial of the old khan and crowing of the new.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica
teutonic-order-and-mongols-at-the-battle-of-liegnitz-1241.jpg




4. The Battle of Vienna (1683 A.D)
After the Ottoman Empire took and besieged the Imperial City for 2 months, the Habsburg Monarchy, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and the Holy Roman Empire, joined forces under the command of King John III Sobieski against the invading Ottoman Empire to lift the siege Vienna. The battle marked the first time Poland and the Holy Roman Empire had cooperated militarily against the Turks, and it is often seen as a turning point in history. In the ensuing war that lasted until 1698, the Turks lost almost all of Hungary to the Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna
Battle_of_Vienna_1683_11.PNG





Imagine if The Ummayads, Ottomans, or Mongols continued on and won those wars.
Europe would look a whole lot different today.

The same thing would've happened to them that also happened to the Muslims, they would've converted to Christianity.
 
They're most likely slaves. The Arabs has a lot of African slaves.
I'm talking about the two Somali looking people. The one on the horse with a sword and a helmet, and the one with the red koofiyad and blue shirt.

Somalis were never slaves for Arabs but Somalia was a part of the Umayyad Caliphate as seen from the source I posted so they're most likely soldiers. I mean you could have just read what I said in the book.
 
I'm talking about the two Somali looking people. The one on the horse with a sword and a helmet, and the one with the red koofiyad and blue shirt.

Somalis were never slaves for Arabs but Somalia was a part of the Umayyad Caliphate as seen from the source I posted so they're most likely soldiers. I mean you could have just read what I said in the book.
I swear Islam entered Somalia in 11th - 12th century?
 

The_Cosmos

Pepe Trump
I'm talking about the two Somali looking people. The one on the horse with a sword and a helmet, and the one with the red koofiyad and blue shirt.

Somalis were never slaves for Arabs but Somalia was a part of the Umayyad Caliphate as seen from the source I posted so they're most likely soldiers. I mean you could have just read what I said in the book.

I know, I was talking about Africans in general so I wasn't excluding Somalis. There's nothing in that photo that can even remotely give you any idea that those men were Somalis. You do know that the Ummayad had many black slaves whom it recruited into its armies? Nothing suggests they're Somalis. What would a 8th century Somali nomad be doing in Europe? Let's get real.
 
I swear Islam entered Somalia in 11th - 12th century?
Pretty sure Islam entered Somalia very early on but it might have taken a while for Islam to fullt manifest itself in Somalia because in game peacefully rather than through a big offensive Islamic conquest
IMG_0012.jpg
IMG_0013.jpg
IMG_0011.jpg

Im not an Expert though so I refer to these aswell as other sources
 

Bahal

ʜᴀᴄᴋᴇᴅ ᴍᴇᴍʙᴇʀ
VIP
Nah, Abyssinia was always Al Habash, Somalia Bilad Al Barbar, and south of them, Bilad al-Zanj.
 
Nah, Abyssinia was always Al Habash, Somalia Bilad Al Barbar, and south of them, Bilad al-Zanj.
The terms were loosely defined at that time though. Around Ibn Battutas time that Bilad-al Berbera was properly defined to be Somalia as a way to distinguish from Xabashis and Bantus.


i think :manny:
 

Dhabaal

Part time -Devils Advocate Full time- Anarchist
Al-zanj was an earlier broader term for the east African coast I believe.

Bilad-al Barbara came later

Not really Zanj was the name they had for Bantu population from in the Swahili States in south. It was an Ethnonym for ''Bantus''

This is one of the mistakes many Western Oriental writers like Ali Jimale /Ali Mukhtar make when they speak of Mogadishu they tend to lump it with the Swahili world , despite the Arab world were direct in distinguishing us from them. So this is an assertion they are copying and pasting into Somali historiography.

Plus Land of the Barbars was an earlier Pre-Islamic denote for Somalis used by the Greeks and Ancient Egyptians, which was then afterwards carried by the Arabs ,so it existed way before there was any mention of the word Zanj.

There is no actua sources mentioning Mogadishu being part of Bilad Al Zanj there are only mentions of Southern Somalia(Including Mogadishu) being part Bilad Al Barbar and inhabited by Barbars.


For example one of the sources include the twelfth century Syrian historian Yaqut al-Hamawi, who explained that the inhabitants of Mogadishu were dark-skinned Berbers (the ancestors of the Somali). From J. D. Fage, Roland Oliver, Roland Anthony Oliver, The Cambridge History of Africa, (Cambridge University Press: 1977), p. 190.:

"Yakut, a twelfth-century Arab geographer, says that the inhabitants of Mogadishu were 'Berbers, of a colour between that of the Abyssinians and the Negroes."

And the Moroccan traveler Ibn Battuta, who visited the city in 1331 and made sure to distinguish between the inhabitants of the Bilad al-Barbar ("The Land of the Berbers", which was the medieval Arabic name for the Somali coast) and the Bilad al-Zanj ("The Land of the Zanj, which was the old Arabic name for the Swahili coast to the south of it). From The Rise and Fall of Swahili States by Chapurukha Makokha Kusimba, p.58:

"As to the occupants of these settlements, Ibn Battuta noted that the ruler of Mogadishu was from Berbera and his speech was not Arabic or Persian, but Mogadishu, while the occupants of Mombasa and Kilwa, he noted were Zanj, extremely black, with cuttings in their faces..."
 

Dhabaal

Part time -Devils Advocate Full time- Anarchist
Your rather cryptic suggestion that where Arabs "conquer" they apparently don't share is irrelevant, as Arabs never conquered the Somali territories. They came as individual merchants, proselytizers and settlers (not en masse), and they never managed or indeed even attempted to subjugate the local Somalis

https://books.google.ca/books?id=LR8A4tEYZUAC&q=enslaved&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false


Where as Zanj history in Abbasid Caliphate is very well known, on the contrary to Southern Somalis relationship with the Abbasid which is practically non-existent in the History books.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top