Crusades ????

Picaro

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,311
Reaction score
3,478
Points
290
Location
Texas
They were an orgy of Jew Killing and occasional cannibalism, but other than that...
Yes Jews were killed !!
Jews even fought with Muslims in 1st crusade
When the crusaders came from England they murdered everywhere on their way through the German countries Jews, who never had seen any Muslim in their whole life. This was the begin of antisemitism in Europe. Germans were not part of the first crusade.
Do you want to say, that the Romans (for example, Tacitus) were not antisemitic?
The Jews were Romans since the early third century.
Rubbish. They were all over the ME, Persia, parts of North Africa, Ethiopia, as far away as India and the northern steppes. What is now Yemen was a Jewish state right up to the Muslim conquests, complete with steles of its last two Kings bragging about killing Christians in Arabia, some 40,000 between them. They made over a third of the populations of Medina and other Arab cities. The majority of Jews didn't live in Christian countries. That came later, and mostly in eastern Europe. They came into Spain with the Muslim armies for the most part, and the few already there sided with them as well. The 'Evul Inquisitions' was merely slef-defense on the part of the reconquest, not wanting a bunch of possible traitors living in their midst while Muslim were still a military force in the regions and North Africa.

Most their problems are self-inflicted, by their self-isolation and racism of the Orthodox. They had their 'enlightenment' phase in the late 18th century, however, and joined the rest of society, for good and ill. Their contributions as a group stand out in sciences and law and art from a lot of others, and those that managed to escape eastern Europe thrived under the WASP culture in the U.S. and the Protestant work ethic made many of them successful despite prejudices.
 
Last edited:

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
The Crusades were self-defense, simple as that. Jews wer allies and adminstrators of the conquered territories,and weren't at all famous for their benevolent governing practices for hundreds of years, so yes, Jews weren't beloved at all, nor should they have been; they had an obsession with murdering every Christian they could get away with killing right up to the Muslim invasions, and under Muslims they delighted in making life miserable for Christians everywhere they could; even Maimonides encouraged the harassment and hate fest in Egypt and everywhere he went.
You have a totally wrong idea about this time of history. Always lived an high amount of Christians in the areas of the Orient, where Muslims lived. This changed hundreds of years later during colonialism and in the 20th century. Up to 200 years ago the crusades were called in the world of the Muslims "the Frankonian wars" (Frankonian instead of the Normans, who had lived for 300 years in France and had conquered England). Saladin for example was seen all over Europe as an honorful knight and warrior. No one hated this man only because he wan. The people communicated in general a lot with each other. This had an immense influence to the intellectual history of Europe.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
They were an orgy of Jew Killing and occasional cannibalism, but other than that...
Yes Jews were killed !!
Jews even fought with Muslims in 1st crusade
When the crusaders came from England they murdered everywhere on their way through the German countries Jews, who never had seen any Muslim in their whole life. This was the begin of antisemitism in Europe. Germans were not part of the first crusade.
Do you want to say, that the Romans (for example, Tacitus) were not antisemitic?
The Jews were Romans since the early third century.
Rubbish. They were all over the ME, Persia, parts of North Africa, Ethiopia, as far away as India and the northern steppes. What is now Yemen was a Jewish state right up to the Muslim conquests, complete with steles of its last two Kings bragging about killing Christians in Arabia, some 40,000 between them. They made over a third of the populations of Medina and other Arab cities. The majority of Jews didn't live in Christian countries. That came later, and mostly in eastern Europe. They came into Spain with the Muslim armies for the most part, and the few already there sided with them as well. The 'Evul Inquisitions' was merely slef-defense on the part of the reconquest, not wanting a bunch of possible traitors living in their midst while Muslim were still a military force in the regions and North Africa.

Most their problems are self-inflicted, by their self-isolation and racism of the Orthodox. They had their 'enlightenment' phase in the late 18th century, however, and joined the rest of society, for good and ill. Their contributions as a group stand out in sciences and law and art from a lot of others, and those that managed to escape eastern Europe thrived under the WASP culture in the U.S. and the Protestant work ethic made many of them successful despite prejudices.
Sorry - but the 1st crusade was the start of anti-Semitism in the Christian Europe. And it was not the fault of any Jews in the holy empire, that the crusaders, who came in big masses from England, had attacked them on their way through the holy empire. Bernard from Clairvaux - who got the order from the pope to propagate the second crusade - made later very clear that no one has any right to attack Jews.
 
Last edited:

Silver Cat

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
973
Reaction score
197
Points
70
Location
Absaroka
They were an orgy of Jew Killing and occasional cannibalism, but other than that...
Yes Jews were killed !!
Jews even fought with Muslims in 1st crusade
When the crusaders came from England they murdered everywhere on their way through the German countries Jews, who never had seen any Muslim in their whole life. This was the begin of antisemitism in Europe. Germans were not part of the first crusade.
Do you want to say, that the Romans (for example, Tacitus) were not antisemitic?
The Jews were Romans since the early third century. And Tacitus was against the 7-days week of the Jews. And he was against fasting. Today he could say: If no one works on Sunday and no one consumes then I have to give my slaves a free day a week and if everyone is fasting then I have a decrease in sales.
The Jews (at least some of them) were Romans even before Roman conquer of Israel. And Tacitus wrote much more about the Jews. Just google. Actually, every nation living with Jews became more or less antisemitic.
 

Silver Cat

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
973
Reaction score
197
Points
70
Location
Absaroka
And what about the Northern Crusades against the Russians, Poles and Balts?
"Crusade" was a word which was used very fast instead of the expression "war". Sounded better. We use this word in a similar way today: You can do a crusade against drugs or a war against drugs for example.

But the expression "Northern Crusades" says nothing to me.
Yes, I guessed about it. That's why I've posted a link to wiki.
In the modern Russian mythology, all these Northern Crusades, Lythuanian, Polish, Sweden, French, German invasions and even current NATO and EU expansions are parts of the same process - the waves of the Western barbarians, madmen, faggots, zombies and vampires attacking the last stronghold of the true humankind.

 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
They were an orgy of Jew Killing and occasional cannibalism, but other than that...
Yes Jews were killed !!
Jews even fought with Muslims in 1st crusade
When the crusaders came from England they murdered everywhere on their way through the German countries Jews, who never had seen any Muslim in their whole life. This was the begin of antisemitism in Europe. Germans were not part of the first crusade.
Do you want to say, that the Romans (for example, Tacitus) were not antisemitic?
The Jews were Romans since the early third century. And Tacitus was against the 7-days week of the Jews. And he was against fasting. Today he could say: If no one works on Sunday and no one consumes then I have to give my slaves a free day a week and if everyone is fasting then I have a decrease in sales.
The Jews (at least some of them) were Romans even before Roman conquer of Israel.
All Jews became "citizens of Rome" (= got full civil rights) in the early third century - ¿or was it the fourth? - whatever - century.

And Tacitus wrote much more about the Jews. Just google. Actually, every nation living with Jews became more or less antisemitic.
Why should I be interested in anything what any Roman historian said about Jews? The Jewish temple was the greatest sanctuary of the ancient world. The greedy ancient Romans were not able to live with something, what was greater than they. That's why they destroyed the temple of the Jews. The result: The Romans are dead and the Jews are still alive.
 
Last edited:

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
And what about the Northern Crusades against the Russians, Poles and Balts?
"Crusade" was a word which was used very fast instead of the expression "war". Sounded better. We use this word in a similar way today: You can do a crusade against drugs or a war against drugs for example.

But the expression "Northern Crusades" says nothing to me.
Yes, I guessed about it. That's why I've posted a link to wiki.
In the modern Russian mythology, all these Northern Crusades, Lythuanian, Polish, Sweden, French, German invasions and even current NATO and EU expansions are parts of the same process - the waves of the Western barbarians, madmen, faggots, zombies and vampires attacking the last stronghold of the true humankind.

No idea what you speak about. Fact is that Slaws own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Germanic tribes. And the Russians are orthodox Christians.
 

Silver Cat

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
973
Reaction score
197
Points
70
Location
Absaroka
And what about the Northern Crusades against the Russians, Poles and Balts?
"Crusade" was a word which was used very fast instead of the expression "war". Sounded better. We use this word in a similar way today: You can do a crusade against drugs or a war against drugs for example.

But the expression "Northern Crusades" says nothing to me.
Yes, I guessed about it. That's why I've posted a link to wiki.
In the modern Russian mythology, all these Northern Crusades, Lythuanian, Polish, Sweden, French, German invasions and even current NATO and EU expansions are parts of the same process - the waves of the Western barbarians, madmen, faggots, zombies and vampires attacking the last stronghold of the true humankind.

No idea what you speak about.
That's why I strongly recommend you to read something about it. You can start with Wikipedia


Fact is that Slaws own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Germanic tribes. And the Russians are orthodox Christians.
And Germans own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Slavic (and multicultural) states. For example, Vienna was a mostly Slavic city from 568 to 955.

Russians are Orthodox Christians and that's why they see other Christians as Heretics and Schismatics. The cultural differences are even more important.
 
Last edited:

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
And what about the Northern Crusades against the Russians, Poles and Balts?
"Crusade" was a word which was used very fast instead of the expression "war". Sounded better. We use this word in a similar way today: You can do a crusade against drugs or a war against drugs for example.

But the expression "Northern Crusades" says nothing to me.
Yes, I guessed about it. That's why I've posted a link to wiki.
In the modern Russian mythology, all these Northern Crusades, Lythuanian, Polish, Sweden, French, German invasions and even current NATO and EU expansions are parts of the same process - the waves of the Western barbarians, madmen, faggots, zombies and vampires attacking the last stronghold of the true humankind.

No idea what you speak about.
That's why I strongly recommend you to read something about it. You can start with Wikipedia


Fact is that Slaws own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Germanic tribes. And the Russians are orthodox Christians.
And Germans own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Slavic (and multicultural) states.
Nonsense.

For example, Vienna was a mostly Slavic city from 568 to 955.
Vienna is first of all Austria and not Germany and second: Vienna was not a city at all in 568. The first reports about Vienna started in 9xx as far as I know. So the history of the village Vienna begins later and it needed a while before Vienna became the Vienna it is today. An the area was in the origin part of the master dukedom Bavaria. The Bavarians are the eldest German tribe at all and they never wandered. You can find people in this regions whose ancestors lived since a minimum of 20,000 years in nearly the same place.

Russians are Orthodox Christians and that's why they see other Christians as Heretics and Schismatics.
No idea why you see it this way. To be Catholic or to be Orthodox is not a big difference.

The cultural differences are even more important.
Cultural differences? You think cultural differences separate people?


PS: By the way - do you have problems with your aggressions?
 
Last edited:

Silver Cat

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
973
Reaction score
197
Points
70
Location
Absaroka
And Germans own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Slavic (and multicultural) states.
Nonsense.
Sure, not. Actually it was the German invasion, what caused division of Slavic languages into three different groups - Southern, Eastern and Western. And don't forget, for example, about Polabian Slavs who settled the land of the modern Eastern Germany.

For example, Vienna was a mostly Slavic city from 568 to 955.
Vienna is first of all Austria and not Germany and second: Vienna was not a city at all in 568. The first reports about Vienna started in 9xx as far as I know.
You know not far enough. As I often say: read books, or, at least, Wikipedia:

----------------------------------------------

The name Vindobona derives from a Celtic language, suggesting that the region must have been inhabited before Roman times. The Romans created a military camp (occupied by Legio X Gemina) during the 1st century on the site of the city centre of present-day Vienna. The settlement was raised to the status of a municipium in 212. Even today, the streets of the First District show where the encampment placed its walls and moats. The Romans stayed until the 5th century.

Roman Vindobona was located in the outskirts of the empire and thus fell prey to the chaos of the Migration Period. There are some indications that a catastrophic fire occurred around the beginning of the 5th century. However, the remains of the encampment were not deserted, and a small settlement remained. The streets and houses of early medieval Vienna followed the former Roman walls, which gives rise to the conclusion that parts of the fortification were still in place and used by the settlers.

Byzantine copper coins from the 6th century have been found several times in the area of today's city centre, indicating considerable trade activity. Graves from the 6th century were found during excavations next to the Berghof, in an area around Salvatorgasse. At that time, the Lombards controlled the area, with Slavs and Avars following later. Early Vienna was centred on the Berghof.
-----------------------------------------

So the history of the village Vienna begins later and it needed a while before Vienna became the Vienna it is today. An the area was in the origin part of the master dukedom Bavaria. The Bavarians are the eldest German tribe at all and they never wandered. You can find people in this regions whose ancestors lived since a minimum of 20,000 years in nearly the same place.
Really? Do you want to say, that they survived under the Alpine Ice Shield?

As far as I know, the first settlers in the written history on the land of the modern Vienna were Illyrians. Then, it was conquered by Celtic Kingdom of Norik, and named as "Vindobona".
Than, it was captured by the Langobards, in 568 - by Avarian-controlled Slavs, in 631 after Slavic riots against Avars it became a part of Samo's Empire, than it became a front line between Avars, Franks and Hungarians, and only in the end of X centure, in 976, the Margraviate of Ostarrîchi was given to the Babenberg family. Vienna lay at its border to Hungary.
The same story as with any other piece of land, you know:


Russians are Orthodox Christians and that's why they see other Christians as Heretics and Schismatics.
No idea why you see it this way. To be Catholic or to be Orthodox is not a big difference.
Don't say it to them. There are much more differences than between Sunnites and Shiites.

Cultural differences? You think cultural differences separate people?


Yes, of course. The Aliens are dangerous because they are unpredictable or easily can be wrongly understanded.
By the way, the Slavic exonims for "Germans" are different variations of "Niemcy": "dull", "mute", "speechless".
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
And Germans own today a very big area of Europe, which belonged once to Slavic (and multicultural) states.
Nonsense.
Sure, not. Actually it was the German invasion,
Which Germanic invasion? Germanics existed many hundred years before Slaws appeared in history. And the ancestors of the Germanics were Celts.

what caused division of Slavic languages into three different groups - Southern, Eastern and Western.
What a queer logic.

And don't forget,
?

for example, about Polabian Slavs who settled the land of the modern Eastern Germany.
I remember I took once a short view on this and decided this is nonsense.


For example, Vienna was a mostly Slavic city from 568 to 955.
Vienna is first of all Austria and not Germany and second: Vienna was not a city at all in 568. The first reports about Vienna started in 9xx as far as I know.
You know not far enough. As I often say: read books, or, at least, Wikipedia:

----------------------------------------------

The name Vindobona derives from a Celtic language, suggesting that the region must have been inhabited before Roman times.
All Germanic places have also Celtic names. Celts are the ancestors of the Germanics.

The Romans created a military camp (occupied by Legio X Gemina) during the 1st century on the site of the city centre of present-day Vienna.
So what?

The settlement was raised to the status of a municipium in 212. Even today, the streets of the First District show where the encampment placed its walls and moats. The Romans stayed until the 5th century.
So what? Such a form of history is totally normal for many Germanics and German places. Germanics had Celtic ancestors - and the ancestors of the Germans are Celts, Germanics and Romans.

Roman Vindobona was located in the outskirts of the empire and thus fell prey to the chaos of the Migration Period. There are some indications that a catastrophic fire occurred around the beginning of the 5th century. However, the remains of the encampment were not deserted, and a small settlement remained. The streets and houses of early medieval Vienna followed the former Roman walls, which gives rise to the conclusion that parts of the fortification were still in place and used by the settlers.

Byzantine copper coins from the 6th century have been found several times in the area of today's city centre, indicating considerable trade activity. Graves from the 6th century were found during excavations next to the Berghof, in an area around Salvatorgasse. At that time, the Lombards controlled the area, with Slavs and Avars following later. Early Vienna was centred on the Berghof.
-----------------------------------------

So the history of the village Vienna begins later and it needed a while before Vienna became the Vienna it is today. An the area was in the origin part of the master dukedom Bavaria. The Bavarians are the eldest German tribe at all and they never wandered. You can find people in this regions whose ancestors lived since a minimum of 20,000 years in nearly the same place.
Really? Do you want to say, that they survived under the Alpine Ice Shield?

As far as I know, the first settlers in the written history on the land of the modern Vienna were Illyrians. Then, it was conquered by Celtic Kingdom of Norik, and named as "Vindobona".
Than, it was captured by the Langobards, in 568 - by Avarian-controlled Slavs, in 631 after Slavic riots against Avars it became a part of Samo's Empire, than it became a front line between Avars, Franks and Hungarians, and only in the end of X centure, in 976, the Margraviate of Ostarrîchi was given to the Babenberg family. Vienna lay at its border to Hungary.
The same story as with any other piece of land, you know:


Russians are Orthodox Christians and that's why they see other Christians as Heretics and Schismatics.
No idea why you see it this way. To be Catholic or to be Orthodox is not a big difference.
Don't say it to them. There are much more differences than between Sunnites and Shiites.

Cultural differences? You think cultural differences separate people?


Yes, of course. The Aliens are dangerous because they are unpredictable or easily can be wrongly understanded.
By the way, the Slavic exonims for "Germans" are different variations of "Niemcy": "dull", "mute", "speechless".
Bye bye.
 
Last edited:

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Silver Cat
The first documentary reference from Vienna was in 881 in the annals of Salzburg. But it is not clear, whether this is the city of Vienna or the river vienna. The text is: "apud Weniam" was a battle against the Magyars. With the victory over the Magyars in 955 at the battle on the Lechfeld began the rise of Vienna and Austria. In 976 Bavaria lost big parts (about 50%) of the own territory in this area and this leaded to Austria under the house Babenberger (Bavarian-Frankonian house), who overtook this area in 976 as "Markgraf". The first duke of Austria was Heinrich II., Jasomirgott, from 1156-1177 and the last Babenberger duke was there in 1251. And since 1281 overtook the house of Habsburg until 1916 A.D.

And by the way: Let it be to call the Langobards "Slaws". They were nothing else than Germanics. The Bavarians were able to communicate with the Langobards without to need an interpreter.

 
Last edited:
OP
Q

Quasar44

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Messages
1,874
Reaction score
1,007
Points
893
Location
Las Vegas
They were an orgy of Jew Killing and occasional cannibalism, but other than that...
Yes Jews were killed !!
Jews even fought with Muslims in 1st crusade
When the crusaders came from England they murdered everywhere on their way through the German countries Jews, who never had seen any Muslim in their whole life. This was the begin of antisemitism in Europe. Germans were not part of the first crusade.
Do you want to say, that the Romans (for example, Tacitus) were not antisemitic?
The Jews were Romans since the early third century. And Tacitus was against the 7-days week of the Jews. And he was against fasting. Today he could say: If no one works on Sunday and no one consumes then I have to give my slaves a free day a week and if everyone is fasting then I have a decrease in sales.
The Jews (at least some of them) were Romans even before Roman conquer of Israel. And Tacitus wrote much more about the Jews. Just google. Actually, every nation living with Jews became more or less antisemitic.
I am sure CNN, Ny Times, Chuck Schumer . Weinstein and Epstein makes the folks really love them lol
 

Silver Cat

VIP Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2020
Messages
973
Reaction score
197
Points
70
Location
Absaroka
Silver Cat
The first documentary reference from Vienna was in 881 in the annals of Salzburg. But it is not clear, whether this is the city of Vienna or the river vienna. The text is: "apud Weniam" was a battle against the Magyars. With the victory over the Magyars in 955 at the battle on the Lechfeld began the rise of Vienna and Austria. In 976 Bavaria lost big parts (about 50%) of the own territory in this area and this leaded to Austria under the house Babenberger (Bavarian-Frankonian house), who overtook this area in 976 as "Markgraf". The first duke of Austria was Heinrich II., Jasomirgott, from 1156-1177 and the last Babenberger duke was there in 1251. And since 1281 overtook the house of Habsburg until 1916 A.D.

And by the way: Let it be to call the Langobards "Slaws". They were nothing else than Germanics. The Bavarians were able to communicate with the Langobards without to need an interpreter.

Yes, Langobards were Germans. But later, this land was conquered by Avars and Slavs.
 

zaangalewa

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
415
Points
140
Silver Cat
The first documentary reference from Vienna was in 881 in the annals of Salzburg. But it is not clear, whether this is the city of Vienna or the river vienna. The text is: "apud Weniam" was a battle against the Magyars. With the victory over the Magyars in 955 at the battle on the Lechfeld began the rise of Vienna and Austria. In 976 Bavaria lost big parts (about 50%) of the own territory in this area and this leaded to Austria under the house Babenberger (Bavarian-Frankonian house), who overtook this area in 976 as "Markgraf". The first duke of Austria was Heinrich II., Jasomirgott, from 1156-1177 and the last Babenberger duke was there in 1251. And since 1281 overtook the house of Habsburg until 1916 A.D.

And by the way: Let it be to call the Langobards "Slaws". They were nothing else than Germanics. The Bavarians were able to communicate with the Langobards without to need an interpreter.

Yes, Langobards were Germans.
Germanics.

But later, this land was conquered by Avars and Slavs.
No idea what you speak about. You have a very strange way to orientate yourselve in history. This is the movement of the Langobards:



They came from the North of Germany moved to the North of Italy (Lombardy) in a wide bow. This has nothing to do with the situation that some neighbors of the Germanic tribe "Bavarians" (Today this is the area Bavaria, Bohemia, Austria and North of Italy) were Slaws.

By the way: No one knows, who were the Awars - nor what kind of language they spoke. But in the area, where they were centered, lived always Turkish people.

Question: Which today known language would you say is most similar to the Slawic languages?

By the way: The German word, which is most similiar with the word "Slavs" (=Slawen) is "slafen"="schlafen" (=to sleep). Another interpretation could be "Sklaven"(=slaves), that's why we prefer to write meanwhile "Slaws", because it was always spoken an"w" and never an "f" or "v" as in slave. This all makes no sense. It seems the word comes from the Slawic expression "Slov-ene". Any idea what "Slov" means? And the word you use for Germans is by the way not a specific word - it just simple means something like "stupid stranger" - similar background of this idea as the Greek onomatopoetic word "barbar".

This here is by the way an example for an older Germanic language:

 
Last edited:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top