Frank Gulotta
Send us your floppy
ALso daily reminder that medieval music is delightful
Medieval - Pre WW2 History Thread
- Thread starter KimberVaile
- Start date
ALso daily reminder that medieval music is delightful
Fallowfox
Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
I wonder whether there's any genetic signal of NW Europeans or sub-saharan Africans in the eastern Mediterranean because of the Barbary slave trade?
I think there's a signal of Turkish and middle-eastern ancestry in south-east Europe, which corresponds with the Ottoman occupation, but I haven't read much about it.
Frank Gulotta
Send us your floppy
Speaking of slavery, it's likely the main reason why Pakistan and Bangladesh even exist. When Tamerlane invaded India, he enslaved millions of Hindus (killing hundreds thousands more), and converting to islam was the only way for these people to escape slavery. Pakistan and Bangladesh are populated by their descendants. Eerie when you think about it
The_biscuits_532
Eternally Confused Feline
I don't doubt his descendants - the Mughals, weren't also responsible. As I noted earlier, the emperors from Aurangazeb onwards were somewhat harsher on the native Hindus, Jains and Sikhs, leading to the eventual collapse of the empire.
Fallowfox
Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
You've made a mistake.
When Timur Gurkani/ 'Tamerlane' invaded India, it was already part of an Islamic sultanate.
This sultanate had existed for over 100 years before Timur was born, and had already pursued a policy of Islamic conversion.
Timur - Wikipedia
Delhi Sultanate - Wikipedia
So I don't think Timur Gurkani can fully be given credit for the Islamisation of the Indian subcontinent. It's certainly true that Timur massacred hundreds of thousands of people in India, but I can't find any evidence that he took millions of slaves and converted them.
The slaves he took were mostly transported out of the Indian subcontinent, back to Samarkand in central Asia.
Wodenofthegays
Fascist Dictator
I can't find any evidence for that narrative of conversion besides some disgusting Hindutva websites trying to compare Muslims in India to the Nazis perpetrating the Holocaust.
Its right-wing junk-bin Islamophobia and its a baseless claim.
As @Fallowfox pointed out, conversion of that area had already been started and was well underway, and Timur did enslave people - everywhere that he conquered, not just India.
Let's just get this right the fuck out of the way: if you use the word "Islamophobia" to handwave any notion that Islam does not have nor ever has had completely clean hands and a spotless record your opinion is shit and should be flushed. Muslims can absolutely be amazing people but the religion is and always has been practiced to some extent as one of conquest and subjugation, it was and still is permissive of and even encourages slavery. The Ahmadiyya are the only sect I would EVER grant any manner of moral high ground and they are actively persecuted by both other Muslims and to some extent by dumb assholes who hate "dirty Ay-rabs". I feel for them and despise the hands they have been dealt but can do little of worth beyond refusing to condone Wahhabists and refusing to toss history down the fucking memory hole just so people like you can champion a brutal, atavistic Bronze Age conquest religion. Back then they were not out of place in the world, but now they need to grow the fuck up, like all the other fucking Abrahamics need to do and continue doing.
Understand, the more you defend Wahhabists the less likely the religion as a whole will ever outgrow its bad habits, including honor culture, persecution of LGBT, rank misogyny on a level western feminists are terrified of even TOUCHING UPON in a worthwhile fashion, and slavery which hangs on in modern day in Muslim countries and about nowhere fucking else.
The_biscuits_532
Eternally Confused Feline
Thought I'd have a look. The first Islamic nations to rule over Pakistan were the Umayyads (661-750) and the Saffarids (861-1003)
From what I can tell, only small areas came under Umayyad rule, but most of Pakistan came under Saffarid rule
From what I can tell, only small areas came under Umayyad rule, but most of Pakistan came under Saffarid rule
KimberVaile
Self congratulatory title goes here
It is disheartening that this thread causes so much friction.
Last edited:
History is full of ugly shit that people keep forgetting or excusing and then repeating. It's a contentious subject even by my milquetoast college history professor's admission, and not in the least because people keep trying to do the aforementioned excuse/forget/deny/rewrite. A wise man learns from mistakes others make, and a wise historian does not bury the past to serve a modern purpose.
E: I'll add the Chinese Uighurs and the Rohingya to the list of unfairly persecuted Muslim demographics too, just to be thorough. Bosnians too.
The Bosnians tie into the thread nicely actually, seeing as one of the flimsy "justifications" for recent atrocity visited upon them is the result of a grudge/revenge cycle against the Ottomans from way back, because the Balkans have a long unhappy history.
Last edited:
Attaman
"I say we forget this business and run."
Oh yeah, since I realize now that they haven't been mentioned in here prior to now: The Extra Credit channel on Youtube, while not exactly scholarly (most of their series' are officially followed up by at least one fact-check video that can go on for 10+ minutes, and even disregarding much of the information is condensed and selective for Edutainment purposes), is usually both relatively entertaining and a good starting point to see if a particular subject, era, or so-on might catch your interest. They also cover a wide variety of topics, from more typical things like "Specific battles / wars" to "Relatively niche historic leaders, movements, (scientific / philosophical) revolutions, etcetera".
There is a moderately noticeable difference between older and newer videos that might lead to somebody who enjoys one set disliking the other (predominantly due to changes in staff and production), but either way it's - again - typically a good spot to at least pick at the surface of some subject or another.
I'm not suggesting any specific videos from them as, to reiterate yet again for emphasis: Some people may like one era's presentation more than the other, and they tend to go through a wide variety of topics in an edutainment fashion so it's kind of moot to suggest one video when even the longest series' tend to be less than an hour and have little in the way of follow-up (at least any time that or the next year).
There is a moderately noticeable difference between older and newer videos that might lead to somebody who enjoys one set disliking the other (predominantly due to changes in staff and production), but either way it's - again - typically a good spot to at least pick at the surface of some subject or another.
I'm not suggesting any specific videos from them as, to reiterate yet again for emphasis: Some people may like one era's presentation more than the other, and they tend to go through a wide variety of topics in an edutainment fashion so it's kind of moot to suggest one video when even the longest series' tend to be less than an hour and have little in the way of follow-up (at least any time that or the next year).
Minerva_Minx
Sheogorath is my co-pilot
Ooh, didn't know we had history threads. Have to get a friend to be furry or accept furry for his Roman and my Etruscan. Another thread.
I would tend to agree on the Hinduvta rewrite, which is current history rewrite to the Marxist rewrite. Marxism held Islam subjugated and converted Hinxu to Islam which would be a distortion o 13th century turn rulership of the area. Ironically, I can't remember the two rulers names who were there, but I think they targeted Buddhivistas more than Hindus as the caste system was either beginning or in place.
Marxism, anyway, was used to change taxation to slavery. Hinduvta sees Marxism as a rewrite, but used the notion for Islamaphobic purposes. Really hard to get all the info in a short paragraph.
Culture and history are really interesting to experience. Might need a burqa for next outing...
I would tend to agree on the Hinduvta rewrite, which is current history rewrite to the Marxist rewrite. Marxism held Islam subjugated and converted Hinxu to Islam which would be a distortion o 13th century turn rulership of the area. Ironically, I can't remember the two rulers names who were there, but I think they targeted Buddhivistas more than Hindus as the caste system was either beginning or in place.
Marxism, anyway, was used to change taxation to slavery. Hinduvta sees Marxism as a rewrite, but used the notion for Islamaphobic purposes. Really hard to get all the info in a short paragraph.
Culture and history are really interesting to experience. Might need a burqa for next outing...
Fallowfox
Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
'Fucking hostile' appears to be living up to his name. I'm not going to take his political speech seriously, because I think we're all more grown up than that.
A point of interest though: Hinduism and Judaism both have roots that extend into the Bronze age, something like over 3000 years ago. Islam is a fairly recent religion though; it has its origins in the early middle-ages.
The mythology Frank posted also made me suspect the source was an edited Hindutva 'simplification' of history in which all of the various central-Asian influences in the subcontinents' history were rolled into a single man. It really gave me the impression that it is intended to persuade the reader that religious variety in India is the result of a historical indignity, and that religious difference is the root cause of the suffering caused by partition.
The British Empire's role is very much the Elephant in the Indian subcontinent in this discussion, lol.
A point of interest though: Hinduism and Judaism both have roots that extend into the Bronze age, something like over 3000 years ago. Islam is a fairly recent religion though; it has its origins in the early middle-ages.
The mythology Frank posted also made me suspect the source was an edited Hindutva 'simplification' of history in which all of the various central-Asian influences in the subcontinents' history were rolled into a single man. It really gave me the impression that it is intended to persuade the reader that religious variety in India is the result of a historical indignity, and that religious difference is the root cause of the suffering caused by partition.
The British Empire's role is very much the Elephant in the Indian subcontinent in this discussion, lol.
Last edited:
Minerva_Minx
Sheogorath is my co-pilot
Ok, crazy, but this was most likely due to the Islamic Age of Enlightement which lasted until the 12th-13th century. They actually were more adventurous and open during this scientific movement -to a point - likely due to impact of the Crusades and need for soldiers. I could see the Muslim transformation of Pakistan and some of India due to coffee trade routes and ports.
After the first one shit went completely off the fucking rails. I understand the whole "fuck those Seljuks for killing pilgrims" to some extent but someone should have dialed it the fuck down well before that Children's Crusade happened.
Wars predicated on religion, not even once.
Nexus Cabler
Conduit of Synergy
A little trivia about castles
The construction and maintenance of a medieval castle would cost around 40 percent of the annual income of a king.
While the wooden structures were cheap, swift and easy-to-build, the stone structures involved having to pay for stonemasons, expensive stone, transportation, mining and a larger construction force.
Add that to the interior decoration of paintings, ornaments, and furniture, and you would be looking at one of the most prominent status symbols of luxury during that time.
(Ross Castle, Ireland)
The construction and maintenance of a medieval castle would cost around 40 percent of the annual income of a king.
While the wooden structures were cheap, swift and easy-to-build, the stone structures involved having to pay for stonemasons, expensive stone, transportation, mining and a larger construction force.
Add that to the interior decoration of paintings, ornaments, and furniture, and you would be looking at one of the most prominent status symbols of luxury during that time.
(Ross Castle, Ireland)
Minerva_Minx
Sheogorath is my co-pilot
1095 was the First Crusade, which signaled the beginning of the End of Islamic Enlightenment and the rise of Christian Theocracy and culminating in the Western Schism. So not sure how the Asian adventurism of Islam in the 8th to 10th century is totally connected with Al-Sirah Salubb and the Children's Crusade of 1212, or dissolution of the Seljuk empire in 1194. Or, since the Seljuk empire was in current Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and Syria what it's immediate impact was. Can you elaborate? I would also be interested in you take on ibn Abdullah's 6th-7th century conquest and confirmation of Judaic and early Christian beliefs.
Attaman
"I say we forget this business and run."
I mean, shit went completely off the rails during the First Crusade. Hell, it went off the rails before: Just take a look at what happened when Peter the Hermit tried marching his People's Crusade to the Middle East. It's almost comical how many Christians (and how much Christian territory) was plundered, razed, and otherwise fucked up before even leaving Europe... by a Christian army.
Of course, that's also because a castle's primary role required... a bit less than what a lot of people think they did. At least during the Middle Ages. A force of, like, a score light to medium cavalry (not even necessarily permanently stationed there: Capable of being housed there!) was a Big Fucking Deal. Both because of what the access to horses fit for combat inferred, and the fact that it doesn't take much to really fuck up attempts to scavenge / a logistical train.
Hell, even taking out the cavalry, again you did not need much. Logistics cause a lot of history to make a ton more sense, but also look a bit more boring to the average casual historian.
An interesting thing to note is that what most people think of when they hear "castle" is not what the majority of historic castles even resembled. In part because what we consider a castle today, the fact that wooden structures have held up significantly less well over the millennia than stone ones, and that what is a "Castle" is fairly arbitrary and distinct category compared to what was considered a castle back then.
Of course, that's also because a castle's primary role required... a bit less than what a lot of people think they did. At least during the Middle Ages. A force of, like, a score light to medium cavalry (not even necessarily permanently stationed there: Capable of being housed there!) was a Big Fucking Deal. Both because of what the access to horses fit for combat inferred, and the fact that it doesn't take much to really fuck up attempts to scavenge / a logistical train.
Hell, even taking out the cavalry, again you did not need much. Logistics cause a lot of history to make a ton more sense, but also look a bit more boring to the average casual historian.
Minerva_Minx
Sheogorath is my co-pilot
Oh hell, suicide rate alone nearly matched disease and not even to Byzantium!
I remember the slayings of pilgrim caravans into the holy land being attributed to Seljuk Turk marauders. Whether I'm misremembering a literal decades-old history lesson or not I'm not sure anymore.
Since Islam wasn't really a thing before 622 afaik and my professor went over the barest details of how that went down, the name ibn Abdullah is not doing more than ringing a faint bell. Most of the Crusades are only tied together strongly by the Catholic Church needing to find some place to dump second and third sons into early graves, and the Children's Crusade was just the crazy going up another notch because why the fuck not.
Mm yes you throw that shade you throw it hard
Last edited:
Minerva_Minx
Sheogorath is my co-pilot
The Seljuk Turks captured Jerusalem in the 1070s and it created the First Crusade. Essentially, this play destroyed the Byzantine and Seljuk Empires and set in motion the political and financial power of the Catholic Church, which was skeptical of Islam (Moors) and saw them as a rising competitor as Muhammed ibn Adullah's successors elevated him to Messiah over Christ, and the Rashidun Caliphate's riches. Jerusalem was set as the objective due to its importance to Christianity via Catholicism. it also was the start of centralizing power in the Church. The ramifications of these actions persist even today.
I can see the Seljuk taking of Jerusalem being a catalyst for the Sunni-Shia split as the Seljuk, by their Sunni leanings, tolerated the Nazali and their more Shi'a tendencies, but not affording same statusand vice versa. The Nazali were more tolerant of the Judaic culture which made them more successful. Again, though, the Seljuk Empire was deposed almost 3 decades before the first Crusaders arrived.
As for Islam not being a thing in 622, the Rashidan Caliphate was created in 632 under Abu Bakr, after Muhammed ibn Abdullah's death after much of the conquest and conversion of the Middle East. So religion did play a HUGE part in the conflicts of the following centuries and today.
The Children's Crusade of 1212 never made it out of Europe and was also not Church santioned. Disease, malnutrition, suicide and poor morale plagued this disaster/debacle. They were also pueri, which could be attributed as either child or lowest class of peasant or farmer. So calling it Children's Crusade is more akin to us calling them "Walking Dead" in a military sense. Their notoriety would establish cause for the fifth Crusade about 6 or 7 years later.
As for castles, the castle at Kizkalesi (Castle by the Sea in Mercin) in Turkey was built after the First Crusade and did see action from time to time. It would have been used as a port and outpost, protected by the surrounding waters. Yilan Kale (Snake Castle) near Adana, Turkey was similarly built around this time and was used to monitor the nearby riverway, most likely. Both have dramatic and stunning views of the local area and were clearly useful, as well as modified multiple times due to damage and rebuilds.
Fallowfox
Are we moomin, or are we dancer?
Because I want to post some actual content.
The Sutton hoo Anglo-saxon ship burial in eastern England dates to a the 6th or 7th century, a period that used to be thought of as a 'dark age' in western Europe.
The burial contains fine treasures that include
-Garnet gemstones from the Indian subcontinent
-Textile from Syria
-Silver from Byzantium
-Treasures decorated in Middle-Eastern or East-African motifs, and inscribed in Greek.
-Silver spoons with cruciform decorations
The collection of fine grave goods almost exactly reproduces legends of a King's burial from the epic poem Beowulf, that had previously been assumed to be fanciful exaggeration.
This was 'the' most significant archaeological find in the history of England, and revolutionised the way this period of history is viewed.
Hostile, this is a thread about history- not about encouraging people to regard cultural or religious groups as brutal or uncivilised people with ignoble pasts.
You posted earlier that you disapprove of people rewriting history and that 'a wise historian does not bury the past to serve a modern purpose', so you can surely support the fact that I noticed the error Frank posted, and support Woden for identifying that it is a modern fabrication designed to serve the purpose of promoting religious conflict.
So you can see that it's nonsense to accuse Woden of championing a 'brutal atavistic Bronze-age[sic] conquest religion', because these facts champion nobody's religion. They are neutral.
If I and Woden had said nothing, then people could have ended up believing a version of history in which the past was buried to serve a sinister modern purpose.
The Sutton hoo Anglo-saxon ship burial in eastern England dates to a the 6th or 7th century, a period that used to be thought of as a 'dark age' in western Europe.
The burial contains fine treasures that include
-Garnet gemstones from the Indian subcontinent
-Textile from Syria
-Silver from Byzantium
-Treasures decorated in Middle-Eastern or East-African motifs, and inscribed in Greek.
-Silver spoons with cruciform decorations
The collection of fine grave goods almost exactly reproduces legends of a King's burial from the epic poem Beowulf, that had previously been assumed to be fanciful exaggeration.
This was 'the' most significant archaeological find in the history of England, and revolutionised the way this period of history is viewed.
Hostile, this is a thread about history- not about encouraging people to regard cultural or religious groups as brutal or uncivilised people with ignoble pasts.
You posted earlier that you disapprove of people rewriting history and that 'a wise historian does not bury the past to serve a modern purpose', so you can surely support the fact that I noticed the error Frank posted, and support Woden for identifying that it is a modern fabrication designed to serve the purpose of promoting religious conflict.
So you can see that it's nonsense to accuse Woden of championing a 'brutal atavistic Bronze-age[sic] conquest religion', because these facts champion nobody's religion. They are neutral.
If I and Woden had said nothing, then people could have ended up believing a version of history in which the past was buried to serve a sinister modern purpose.
Last edited:
The_biscuits_532
Eternally Confused Feline
The Tunguska Incident
In the early hours of June 30th, 1908, Evenki tribesmen and Russian settlers witnessed a blinding blue light just to the northwest of Lake Baikal, following which was a rapidly-expanding cloud, and a pillar of fire shooting into the sky.
Ten minutes later, a shockwave knocked people over for miles, and shattered windows. It was detected as far away as the United States, and modern day Indonesia.
In the nights following, there was light in the skies above Eurasia.
In the words of a Mr Semenov:
A meteor impact. The largest in recorded history - this is still true today.
He returned six years later to search for the crater, with the aid of local tribesmen. They didn't find it - but instead an 8km wide zone deep in the forests, where trees had been stripped of their branches. As they approached the centre, they found the trees knocked radially from the centre.
Later research in the 60s determined the zone of destruction was actually shaped more like a butterfly, and occupied 2,150 km2.
Later on, it was discovered the ground was littered with silicate spheres, and iridium similar to that found at the KPG Boundary level, and it was determined to have been an airburst impact of around 30 megatons - somewhat less powerful than the Tsar Bomba, but twice as explosive as Castle Bravo, and 2000 times stronger than Hiroshima's Little Boy.
It's thought to have killed three people. If it'd had landed somewhere more populous, the 20th century would've been wildly different. Imagine WW1, for instance, if Berlin just got deleted off the map by a wayward chunk of space debris.
In the early hours of June 30th, 1908, Evenki tribesmen and Russian settlers witnessed a blinding blue light just to the northwest of Lake Baikal, following which was a rapidly-expanding cloud, and a pillar of fire shooting into the sky.
Ten minutes later, a shockwave knocked people over for miles, and shattered windows. It was detected as far away as the United States, and modern day Indonesia.
In the nights following, there was light in the skies above Eurasia.
In the words of a Mr Semenov:
And a local Tribesmen, Chuchan:
Following WW1 and the Russian Civil War, investigations were held as to the cause. An expedition led by a Mr Kulik found one probable cause:
A meteor impact. The largest in recorded history - this is still true today.
He returned six years later to search for the crater, with the aid of local tribesmen. They didn't find it - but instead an 8km wide zone deep in the forests, where trees had been stripped of their branches. As they approached the centre, they found the trees knocked radially from the centre.
Later research in the 60s determined the zone of destruction was actually shaped more like a butterfly, and occupied 2,150 km2.
Later on, it was discovered the ground was littered with silicate spheres, and iridium similar to that found at the KPG Boundary level, and it was determined to have been an airburst impact of around 30 megatons - somewhat less powerful than the Tsar Bomba, but twice as explosive as Castle Bravo, and 2000 times stronger than Hiroshima's Little Boy.
It's thought to have killed three people. If it'd had landed somewhere more populous, the 20th century would've been wildly different. Imagine WW1, for instance, if Berlin just got deleted off the map by a wayward chunk of space debris.
Yastreb
Well-Known Member
If I remember correctly those Evenki tribesmen were 15 kilometers from the hypocenter. With that kind of radius of destruction there could have been maybe millions of casualities if it had happened over some city in China or India. It's a good thing most of the Earth was (and still is) so sparsely populated.
The bright nights are an interesting thing. Apparently in Finland it became so bright that some people thought it was the end times and took shelter in cellars and saunas, or so I have heard from old people who heard the story from their own grandparents.
The_biscuits_532
Eternally Confused Feline
There was actually a similar incident a few years ago, which some of you may remember. This time the meteor was only half the size, but above the somewhat more populated Chelyabinsk. Fortunately there weren't any casualties, but there was nearly 2000 injuries.