Is there a more based time period than 900-1050?
>Resurgence of Byzantine power
>Rise of the Fatimids and Shi'a Islam
>High water mark or Norse power, birth of the Normans
>Franks and Germans finally getting their shit together
>Christianization of the Rus
>Downfall of the Kh*zars
>Crumbling of Arab power and coming of the Turks
Late Dark Age/Early Medieval discussion
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
magyars were fricking shit up too. the franks and germans only got their shit together from the threats they had from all sides, muslims and pagans alike
When did Franks stop being Franks and become French? How come they were never relevant again after Otto I?
The Frankish nobility was superseded by Saxon nobility in East Francia gradually and then definitely under Henry who was one of them and Otto.
The Franks in western francia stopped being Franks to become French when they elected Hugues Capet as their king. The other Frankish states drifted apart to form their own identities as well.
Starting as early as the 9th century probably. Wasn't official until 1190.
They call it the beginnings of the high Middle Ages for a reason. A glorious rebirth of strong cultures after the weakness of the Western Roman Empire was replaced with the stronger Holy Roman Empire. A damn shame the 1300s and latter crusades fricked it all up
The 1350-1550ish period:
>ming dynasty
>zheng he's voyages of discovery
>timur lane's conquests
>fall of constantinople and rise of ottomans
>vasco de gama's voyages of discovery
>aztecs
>incas
>the reconquista
>discovery and conquest of new world by europeans
>sikhism
>luther
>the rennaissance
>the tudors
Suddenly everything happened at once
Would Islam look better today under Fatimid Isma'ili Shi'ism than Sunnism, Wahhabism or Twelver Shi'ism?
Fatimids would be conquered by crusaders and effectively already were, the Turkish forces under Nureddin ZENGI led by his deputy Saladin were what saved Egypt from turning into a Crusader Kingdom. Then Egypt was Zengid for a few years and ZENGI died, Saladin took over his empire and Saladin’s dynasty took in more Turkish soldiers that eventually resulted in the rise of the Mameluke State (which called its Dawlat al Turkiyyah and had a star and crescent flag). This Mameluke state lasted until Selim I conquered it, and he only did so because while he was on his way to deal with Ismail I, the Mameluke made deals with Venice to launch an invasion of Anatolia, so he reluctantly put off his attack on Ismail to turn south— but even then he kept asking the Mamelukes for a truce even after winning battles, but they kept refusing so he had to go all the way to Cairo. Then Egypt was Ottoman until 1918 officially.
What I mean is would Islam look better or worse if this branch of Shi'ism remained dominant (or at least independent and significant) over the last 1000 years instead of being wiped out by (Sunni) Turks as you said? I have heard it was a lot more mystical and esoteric, and considering the Fatimid Caliph was also the Imam it would have made for an interesting political situation as time went by
The fracturing of the Seljuk empire was the main contributor to the success of the crusaders. I mean the Fatimids were a failed state with only Egypt left during the crusades and the crusaders failed multiple times to annex it. It just wasn't going to happen
>Wahhabism
I think something like this was inevitable. In the same way the Reformation brought a ton of fundamentalist morons trying to "purify" Christianity, so did the same thing happen with Islam. That's what happens when you give plebs the holy scriptures. Anyway I prefer the Shiites to Sunnis.
Also relevant is the death of the Cordoba caliphate after the fitna of 1009, and its abolishment in 1031
Also, Castille rising to become a major player in christian iberia from just a marcher county, becoming its own kingdom in 1065 and conquering toledo in 1085
Amazing that for most of history there is only one serious claimant to the Caliphate, but at this time we had three
The most kino century to learn about indeed
All the caliphates also had very differenr views on islam, the Cordoba caliphs were much more lax on things like eating pork or drinking wine for example
Would the Crusades have worked better long-term (displacing as much of Islam as possible to establish Christian states) if the crusaders had attacked Spain and moved on to Morocco etc. and gone as far as possible until running out of steam? They would have been much further from Muslim centres of power and had a closer sea route to France to send reinforcements
>if the crusaders had attacked Spain
they did do this though. It's amazing how ignorant this board is sometimes
I obviously meant with the full crushing weight of the crusader armies as in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd crusades. It's amazing how ignorant this board is sometimes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Lisbon
it's time to stop posting.
Yes, one contingent of crusaders taking a detour on the way to the main campaign is definitely the same thing as what I said. Fricking moron
Are you moronic? 15 thousand men is an extremely large army in medieval times.
>full crushing weight of the crusader armies
The reconquista didn't see as many crusaders because the land was always going to be returned to the iberian christians, the crusaders that fought there did gain some land but nothing in comparison to what the holy land promised
Going overland through morocco would mean the crusaders at most tunisia and in no way would they reach the holy land, which was the objective in most crusades
The 7th and 8th century was kino.
>Byzantine-Sassanid death war
>Rise of Islam
>Arrival of Bulgars
>Avars khanate peak
>Tang dynasty founded in China
>Western and Eastern Turks split, rise of Khazars
>Japan started becoming more civilized
>Rise of the Srivijaya kingdom in SEA
>Samo's kingdom
>Beginning of the Heptarchy in Britain
>Rise of Charles Martel
>Beginning of Viking raids
>Muslim conquest of Iberia
new zealand wasnt settled in 900. terrible map
It's the most boring period of the entire Middle Ages
of Byzantine power
The troony frickers got back the Balkans, a bit of Italy, and a bit of land in Anatolia. It's mildly interesting I guess, I like Nikephoros Phokas, but otherwise kinda boring.
>>Rise of the Fatimids and Shi'a Islam
Boring
>>High water mark or Norse power, birth of the Normans
I guess King Cnut is one of the more interesting aspects of this period
and Germans finally getting their shit together
The frogs don't. The HRE is created and has a few cool figures in the beginning, the most interesting part of this period. There is all of this art with the Ottonians.
of the Rus
Boring
of the Kh*zars
Boring
of Arab power and coming of the Turks
Eeeh
It's not a bad period, none of the Middle Ages is. But it's just kinda mediocre in comparison imo.
cringe
Turk moron
>150 years
>century