History Summarized: Christianity, Judaism, and the Muslim Conquest 

Yeah it’s just a face thing really

@@zazzyboy8592 uP

How do you know that's not what he looked like?

@@aidanmagill6769 quite simple really: we only need to look at the Arabs today and we can extrapolate that this Arab Prophet looked like a bearded version of what an average Arab man looks like today

There is no "islamic symbol" as the rashidun era only had a plain white flag and a plain black flag. Everything after the rashidun era is dynastic rule, islamicate era, of which, Ottomans were the last, and the crescent and star was their symbol.

*LMAO*

"AAH" said the byzantine empire, "we need help!" They need help so they called the pope.

So, they called the pope, And came Europe To the east and messed everything forever 🙂

@@Shahi_lancer Hey but atleast the Veniceins got some good trade deal!!

InstaBlaster...

Beauty of our land... Jai Hind.

It's people like you and I that will change this world my friend. Anyone who has faith yet is open minded are always welcome at my table. Please pass your knowledge, faith, and compassion on to others. I love studying other cultures and their beliefs. I feel that though this will we truly achieve peace and learn to understand each other. Alsalam Ealaykum

many religions thrive huh? can you hook me up with a forged indian pasport I need to get out of isreal

Weren't there violent purges of Muslims in India like 60 years ago?

Nika niiiiiice

And maybe conquer the world as well

Nika needs more fish

BILL WURTS

@@tart-miano *_~how 'bout I dooooo anyway...~_*

that's my kind of Caliphate

Sadly destroyed by the holy gitrekt kingdom

@@MrGamer-xd1pf then came the Abbadassid Caliphate

@@pongers5895 which was conquered by the Homobid caliphate

@@MrGamer-xd1pf then came the Seljuk Turks

DEUS VULT! i mean! Yeah! Crusade Hype! ;D

DEUS VULT

@Kaiser Franz von Lappen der 2. Agree

Kaiser Franz von Lappen der 2. Christians didn’t have problem with it up until Seljuks

IT NEVER ENDS

OSP Blue IT'S CONTEXT ALL THE WAY DOWN.

@@skyleryarroll2369 That's actually a really good description of what History is...

😂😂😂😂

Timon Rein more like Alexander the SWOLE AMIRITE KIDS?!?!?!?!?!?!

Alexander the greatest

Alexander the Good I guess

Amen Wait.....

random person67 randomized oh god tell me about it...

I'm Satisfied YOU WILL NEVER BE SATISFIED, GOD I HOPE YOUR SATISFIED! I'm sowy Hamilton is bootyful

Be more careful talking about Islam. That's a mess just waiting to explode. .... wait...

idk I think he was careful he only talked about historical events, no opinions

Your point is very important. The popes regularly condemned the mass slaughters of Jews that took place in Europe during the crusades, it's just that a lot of people didn't listen.

Adque Yeah accounts of persecution did happen but to me this was a time where there was instability in Europe and the Catholic Church Tried to stop as much persecution as she can but you know human nature gets in the way.

Although the church also did a lot of bad things to the Jews as well, it wasn't just a one sided view point that never changed over time.

You're right but atleasts its not as bad as islamic rule

@@MrGamer-xd1pf i like Islamic rule

Arturo Pastor most the first accounts from the holy land at that time actually at the period of the crusades did not report large scale persecution at that time. The pope(s) just wanted to build up fear of this so he could try to unite the European states and perhaps Eastern Rome as he was losing grip over European leaders of that time.

Arturo Pastor Yh and Seljuks were basically mongols

@@dickvanhorneater405 yeah basic horse lord nomad raider stuff,

As opposed to being murdered in Europe?

​@@mauddib696as a jew back in the day paying tax would befar better than getting impaled by crusaders

Dimesional Wayfarer Tell that to the Indians.

then the sikhs

Or to shia

@@BlackIce3190 The Caliphs never waged war on India.

Tom Pearse acts committed there ? Dude it was one hell of a dumb before muslims took it and turned it into a great society in every aspect of civilization

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the tax less "humiliation" and more of a "get out of military" tax? You know, instead of being drafted into the military you pay the tax. Which, at least to me, sounds admiringly reasonable given the time period. Sucks a bit that the division of military or tax is made by religion rather than choice, but personally I'd rather see that my family pays a tax than someone in my family being forced into the military. Then again, I'm Scandinavian and we are generally very tolerant towards taxes.

Helena Nilsson Yh and muslims payed zakat both party’s paid taxes but the non Muslims were exempt from the military so that is more than fair

Jizia wasn't a humilliation tax by any means. People of other religions could pay the tax instead of being drafted by the military and Muslims were already paying money to the government in the form of Zakat, which was *significantly* higher than the Jizia. The tax was instituted because the state needed funding to protect all the people of different religion within it's boarders. People of other religions had the same protections so they were required to pay a tax as per their duties as citizens. This is the exact same social contract every nations-state engages in today with their citizens. So non-Muslims didn't have to fight in the army, paid lower taxes than the Muslims, enjoyed all the benefits of your average citizen, and the freedoms of instituting their own religious governments within the Muslim boarders. That's a pretty sweet deal the proof the people like living under these arrangements can be found in immigration patterns. Historically religiously persecuted groups like Jews and Unothadox Christians sects consistently left Christian Kingdoms to settle in Muslim land where they remained and prospered for centuries. Not to mention that the ancestors of these religious immigrants still live in these lands today. The only reasons they came was because they were treated better in Muslims lands, much better than in Christians lands. If they were mistreated, they would never have come let alone settled there.

There is no historical evidence that the Jizya was 'humiliating' nor did it upset anyone. In fact it was more likely that people were much happier to pay the Jizya than live elsewhere were they were persecuted. The Jizya also had a Muslim variation that Muslims had to pay, but since Muslim law could only be extended onto a Muslim population (Yes, Sharia only governed Muslims - Canonical and Rabbinical laws were used for self-governing Christian and Jewish populations) Jizya was formed.

The age of reformation is over since 1610, so good luck.

But the age of People Vigorously Disagreeing Over Stuff continues as strong as ever.

+sander heutink Discussion is a gift, people have the right to disagree, as well as the right to be called out on their foolery.

DEUS VULT!

Polyester Homes AVE MARIA!

I'm gonna put a Jihad on your stupid joke. ;)

There seems to be a lot more "oh the comments are going to be Crrrrraaaazy" posts than actual debate.

Oh shut the fuck up

me 😂😂💖

I'm very sorry that you were offended. Several different resources and maps I used marked everything south of the Danube river as part of the byzantine empire in this specific time period (as well as others), and I'm loyal to my sources. Additionally, this entry seems to definitively indicate a Byzantine presence in Bulgaria for a long span of time en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_conquest_of_Bulgaria (Yes, it's wikipedia, but it's quick and to the point)

I am terribly sorry about this, Sir! I am indeed at fault here, as I hastily jumped to conclusions! I got the impression that you were talking about a different time period and my bitterness got the better of me, since it's often the case in historical videos that Bulgaria is not included when it should be. Please, accept my apology, because I truly am sorry!

Haha, no worries. I can sympathize, as the Byzantine empire, in keeping with roman traditions, have wildly changing borders that depend as much on the direction of the wind as it does on political and military factors. And the fact that I didn't put accompanying years & dates in this video is very much my own fault for the confusion. Most empires have the courtesy to expand and shrink in predictable patterns, but the Byzantine empire keeps shifting every one of its borders in every conceivable direction for its entire history.

except that slavery was a continous thing before and after the caliphate so don't make it look like the racist transatlantic slavetrade

Also the europeans kept practicing slavery until the 19th century, it just fell a bit out of fashion during the middle ages because they had developed serfdom(AKA slavery with extra steps), and this without mentioning the vikings(at least the arabs didn't disembowel thralls as human sacrifices) AND both arab and viking slavers looked like the Red Cross when compared to european slavers.

@@HerrMasterLizard wow, the Vikings doing human sacrificess by using their slaves? I'd deffinietly searched it up.

Deja Kat XD yep

aw ye :P

Yes, nobody care fuck off.

Present.

Finnian Quail really

In his crusades videos he's says the reason why he doesn't like the crusades is because there was 9 of them, and almost all of them failed miserably, not because they were Christian.

Ross Ferguson So if they succeeded he would be fine with them? Doubt it.

@@devinconyers6430 I can't say whether he did or not, all I know is what did happen, and his reaction on them.

and you could say some very successful Crusades 2 out 3 is not bad

i call bullshit on that, btw most cristians in africa and asia were happy that they got out of the decomposing corpse that is byzantium with its (often violent) attempts to end the monophysites sect.

Compared to the christians, and especially the crusaders, they were surely way more benevolent.

The sacking of cities during this period wasn't uncommon by different people all around the world. Siege warfare required large allocations of manpower and resources for period up to years. Non countries wanted to have to commit to sieges, especially when campaigns would require the sieging of multiple cities and strongholds. It was common practice to sack and exhort significant vengeance of populations that resisted so as to scare future targets into not resisting. There was also the difficulty of exerting control on ones armed forces after a lengthy siege when a location was taken by storm. Casualties would be very high and even up to the Napoleonic war it was somewhat normalised for Armies to be given time to sack and loot as a form of reward to the troops involved.

wrong christainty was forced upon people .. you know nothing about history

Coughreligiousbacklashcough.

@@mauddib696 how so ? Its pretty historical.

he spoke facts why cry about it

@@abdulHaqqqq Don't you have a goat to fuck or something instead of replying to everyone calling out this dumb ass video?

Obviously awesome

Did you even watch the first video about the history of Islam that he mention at the start of the video?

Mannn sugarcoating is real, do they also talk about crusades? And how they did yk the thingys

Zoroastrian

@@farazsal ye found it out thanks

wich by the way ,if you want to draw conclusions ,seems to indicate that this video is made without a bias or favoring of any group presented

What

Lock Up Again not me bruh..... just let it go

If god didn’t create evil then he is not all powerful. If God Is all powerful than he DID create evil. religion is a sham