Oh-kay.

I watched the whole thing. Did a remarkable job trying to cover so much. However, the accuracy far outweighed some nitpicks. (castle origin, ad the like).

The most important one is not even a nitpick, but an important detail:

Re this:

Quote:

---

"Less than a generation after the Prophet's death, Christian North Africa has fallen to Islam."

---

What he said is accurate, but it overlooks something of importance that makes the Muslims look stronger than they were. Eastern Rome and Persia had just fought a knock-down drag out war. Persia lost, Byzantium won, but it was an exhausting victory for both sides. That war had closed down in 628 CE with the Byzantine seige of Ctesiphon. Off in Arabia, Muhammad died in June 632. Islam attacked both empires in force just after---in that weakened state == in 636 they defeat the Persians at al Qadisiya, and the Byzantines at Yarmuk. Syria is lost to the Christians as a result; the Persians left in even worse shape. In 642 Persia falls to them after the Battle of Nihawand. Alexandria came under seige, and was betrayed and surrendered by a Quisling character also in 642. By 668 Eastern Rome has lost Egypt, the Holy Land, and Syria. But you can see that though that was a stunning advance, its because of the great `world war' level of fighting between Persia and Byzantium that had ended barely a decade before.

The rest of the video is very accurate about the progress of the Muslim expansion and imperialism. But it overlooks the role played by the fact that Islam split into competing Caliphates such as the Fatimids and Abassids (we are talking about simultaneously existing in the Bagdad area, as verusu North Africa centered around Egypt. This phenomena would occur in other places. Spain would become one. And this is not even mentioning the split between Sunni and Shi'ia, which creates the Persian elements associated with Iran and alot of Iraq. But this factors more for understanding some of the politics, and does not change his message.

Particularly important was his reminder of a "forgotten" little remarked upon period--- all the Islamic incursions in Europe prior to the Crusades launch of 1095- -- the forgotten history of the Mediterranean and the sea-raiding. The last strong phase of the Byzantine navy is important in this period, as is the rise of the city states of Naples, Genoa, Venice. But like many things in the Middle Ages, fighting among themselves was just as common. Same with the Muslims.

Another good reminder was the even more forgotten and overlooked Balkan wars breaking away from Ottoman rule in the 19th Century. That recent. Some may have heard of Armenia --- its connection to the Greek East and the Greek War of Independence was playing out as late as the atrocities there just after WW I. The Serbian issues of the 90's also have some ties there, but go all the way back to the original fall of the Balkans to the Ottomans. The 19th C and Turkish policy toward Palestine and sell of land there has more to do with creating the present, incidentally. 19th C outside American history -- and 1870-to WW I is oddly strongly neglected in American attention regarding other countries---just flashes of the British Empire's work --- holds many keys to those interested.

He was absolutely right in what he said about slavery and how it operated. The last vestiges (before its considerable revival under the bad leadership of the 21st C) of the North African slavery is the famous Barbary Pirates phase. Appropriately enough, the birth period of the U.S. Marines and the U.S. Navy in international action was retaliating against this, and setting a new tone.

His concluding remarks, though said in pundit fashion, were very telling and on the mark about the absolutely destructive effects of PC-Leftism on Europe in the undermining of their history, the promotion of self-hatred, and the carrying too far "self-criticism" when other cultures records on almost all points is far worse. His concluding message that the gift of Western civilization will be lost if Europe (and America) continues on its course of self-attack and self-hatred, is true enough.

Fortunately it looks like the PC-Left and especially the more Obamian agenda, was sharply refuted last month in America, and it looks like its nature is becoming more clearly seen to rank and file. But as the history shows, the overall selective omission of pretty much everyone else's record while ripping Europe's is an ongoing destructive thing to be mindful of.

Remark: What makes it important is its accurate narration of much of the sequence. But even in the commentary posted here, its easy to slip into the mistake of thinking it is part of some plan. When you read of those periods, only in the general sense of the religious command, could the expansions be said to have been planned, and at times were reacting to something, as much as causing it.

This is important to note, because he is far more accurate about the destructive impact of the regressive left agenda today on Europe in their `western shaming' and running down European history (we see it spectacularly here too), and how at a time when surrounded by `sociopathic and destructive cultures' it is the worst thing to do. But like all things, pay more attention to the narrative fact sequence on its own merits, rather than the tone presented. That also goes for this commentary. Investigate on your own.

Rating: Excellent and fairly accurate overview of sequence of events. Encourage further reading and study to form your own opinions about how much of it is part of some movement, or was the chaotic forces of the Medieval Ages and the post Roman collapse period taking effect.

Quote:

---

I don't mean to derail, but can you talk about this a little more?

---

Haha-- -but that would be a derail. (See, I tried to keep it `short'---still too long! LOL. But this is History board, not the TLDR group, so will leave it.) ;-)

Another time perhaps, but a large nutshell single post in hopes of not derailing-- for future reference:

The Balkans, part of the Christian East (some Catholic, but most Orthodox) was part of the Byzantine Empire, the Eastern Romans, and would be partly aligned under the later Tsarist Russia (also Orthodox East). As the Byzantine Empire entered extremis in its last phase, that after recapturing parts of the Empire including Constantinople in 1261 from the treacherous Fourth Crusade occupation --- during this time the other parts of that Byzantine commonwealth (much of it including recent Yugoslavia, places like Serbia, Bosnia, Croation, Rumania, Bulgaria, etc) remained strong. But the same Ottoman offensives that grind down Byzantium and will take Constantinople in May 1453 are also hammering against the Balkans and Eastern Europe. The Battle of Kosovo in 1389 is reckoned as one of the big setbacks in Balkan history. Even Kosovo in 1990's still speaks of 1389 battle.

A very long story short, at Kosovo, Nicopolis, and of course 1453, leading up to the Ottoman advance on Vienna described in the video, large parts of the Balkans come under Muslim rule. (The period of Vlad Dracul [a] and his brutal rulership's resistance and even temporary victory, is in this time period. In 1477 the same conqueror of Constantinople, Sultan Mehmet II, is said to have had Vlad's head paraded on a pike in that city. Anyways, rushing forward, Eastern European fortunes wax and wane --- Hungary manages to remain apart---forming part of the well-known Habsburg Empire. Other places like classical Greece, remain under Muslim, specifically Turkish, (and that matters) domination till the 19th C and the Greek War of Independence. Some of the Balkans get freed in the same time frame. Tsarist Russia particularly took great interest in liberating parts of the former Byzantine East whenever it could---it has always had an interest in Bulgaria (Bulgaria converted Orthodox in 869 not long before Russia itself is considered to have in 988) , and helps it break away in the 1870's at the time of the Greek break away.

(This is all part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire as ailing "sick man of Europe" period of the 19th some rmay recall hearing taught..) Recall even today, Putin sometimes talking about "liberating Constantinople" -- this refers to the fact that the ancient Greek (Byzantine) claim is like that of Rome----they want it back, and have long wanted it back, and Russia, both Tsarist and now Putinesque -- feels the same. (One of the things reminding that Putin is not Soviet is the various Orthodox and Tsarist themes re-appearing.) Anyway, back to the Serbians and Balkans---Serbians are largely Orthodox East --- they have that same anti-Turkish streak, anti-Muslim streak, that goes back to what said above, and also covered some in the video. (The animosity is mutual from Turkey toward both Serbia and Greece.) The Serbian ethnic atrocities are to be seen in this context.They are anti-Muslim presence. Finally, Armenia, on the other side of Turkey from Greece--- was also embroiled in independence movements from the Ottomans, but WW I essentially gives Turkey the breather and leverage to crush that part at least. That's the time of the great put down and deportations, the Armenian genocide.

Hope that helps.

Dr.Watson,

Quote:

---

Jesus, Titan, you have to always relate things of the 7th-11th century to modern "liberals," don't you? I used to respect your opinion.

---

Its pretty obvious you didn't watch the full 35 minutes of the video, but remarked on my commentary about what the video author spent the first minute on and the last several minutes concluding on.

That required commentary too. And he is correct. Any remaining doubt has been abolished the past few months.

See? That's more like it. But that was covered too in the commentary.

Quote:

---

Its perpetrating an "us vs them" narrative while blowing over any and all facts that might harm the modern-serving narrative.

---

There is a vast, vast, amount of facts in the period covered. His last several minutes makes clear he is focusing on the general trajectory what the current pitching of the Crusades and other aspects of it are doing.. People can go investigate for themselves.

What you are not addressing is he is arguably countering an existing "them vs us" narrative in reverse being pitched in the real-time present. You did the same to my commentary.

Dr. Watson,

In lieu of the above, which I believe, I will make you a proposal. I will either suspend or explicitly single out even more than already did what is my opinion and commentary, if you do the same. We can be each other's watchdog ---- History posts have the potential to avoid an automatic political vs political discussion if that is valued.

What the video spoke of in the last several minutes does exist today, but that does not mean their is an assumption you are part of it or a champion. Politicians and news people are in a special class of manipulator. Those are not your intentions as far as can tell. Your command of subjects show that, as do mine.

Let's try to coordinate differences of view (where exist) in an "iron sharpens iron" way so that the information given and received is all the better for it.

Watson throwing his Liberal slant again.......

Too bad Titan's not posting any longer, and that youtube account is gone. On this day in history, the first crusaders crucially re-took Antioch.

Sad state of affairs again today, of course.

I'm here in the Holy Land where there are several outstandingly preserved Crusader fortresses.

Here is one I went to a few weeks ago north of Herzliya at Appalonia / Arsuf.

the castle up in the Galilee is amazingly well preserved I will post pics if anyone is interested. they also have an UNDERGROUND castle at Akko in the north (at the time known as ACRE)

Titan hasn't posted since December of 2022.
Hope he is okay. That was an impressive couple of posts above.