2083 A European Declaration of Independence

August 2, 2011

1.6 Naskh – Quranic abrogation

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:30

Quranic abrogation (Naskh) is another central and under-analysed part of Islam.

Those Westerners who manage to pick up a translation of the Quran are often left bewildered as to its meaning thanks to ignorance of a critically important principle of Quranic interpretation known as "abrogation." The principle of abrogation — al-naskh wa al-mansukh (the abrogating and the abrogated) — directs that verses revealed later in Muhammad’s career "abrogate" — i.e., cancel and replace — earlier ones whose instructions they may contradict. Thus, passages revealed later in Muhammad’s career, in Medina, overrule passages revealed earlier, in Mecca. The Quran itself lays out the principle of abrogation:

2:106. Whatever a Verse (revelation) do We {Allah} abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is able to do all things?

It seems that 2:106 was revealed in response to scepticism directed at Muhammad that Allah’s revelations were not entirely consistent over time. Muhammad’s rebuttal was that "Allah is able to do all things" — even change his mind. To confuse matters further, though the Quran was revealed to Muhammad sequentially over some twenty years’ time, it was not compiled in chronological order. When the Quran was finally collated into book form under Caliph Uthman, the suras were ordered from longest to shortest with no connection whatever to the order in which they were revealed or to their thematic content. In order to find out what the Quran says on a given topic, it is necessary to examine the other Islamic sources that give clues as to when in Muhammad’s lifetime the revelations occurred. Upon such examination, one discovers that the Meccan suras, revealed at a time when the Muslims were vulnerable, are generally benign; the later Medinan suras, revealed after Muhammad had made himself the head of an army, are bellicose.

Let us take, for example, 50:45 and Sura 109, both revealed in Mecca:

50:45. We know of best what they say; and you (O Muhammad) are not a tyrant over them (to force them to Belief). But warn by the Qur’an, him who fears My Threat.

109:1. Say (O Muhammad to these Mushrikun and Kafirun): "O Al-Kafirun (disbelievers in Allah, in His Oneness, in His Angels, in His Books, in His Messengers, in the Day of Resurrection, and in Al-Qadar {divine foreordainment and sustaining of all things}, etc.)!

109:2. "I worship not that which you worship,
109:3. "Nor will you worship that which I worship.
109:4. "And I shall not worship that which you are worshipping.
109:5. "Nor will you worship that which I worship.
109:6. "To you be your religion, and to me my religion (Islamic Monotheism)."

Then there is this passage revealed just after the Muslims reached Medina and were still vulnerable:

2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. Verily, the Right Path has become distinct from the wrong path. Whoever disbelieves in Taghut {idolatry} and believes in Allah, then he has grasped the most trustworthy handhold that will never break. And Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.

In contrast, take 9:5, commonly referred to as the "Verse of the Sword", revealed toward the end of Muhammad’s life:

9:5. Then when the Sacred Months (the 1st, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun {unbelievers} wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat {the Islamic ritual prayers}), and give Zakat {alms}, then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Having been revealed later in Muhammad’s life than 50:45, 109, and 2:256, the Verse of the Sword abrogates their peaceful injunctions in accordance with (more…)


1.7 Review 2: Islam – What the West needs to know

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:25

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

2. There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet

3. The struggle

4. Expansion

5. War is Deceit

6. More than a Religion

7. The House of War

This film documentary is also available here:


1. Introduction

Tony Blair:

I wish to say finally as I’ve said many times before that this is not a war with Islam. It angers me as it angers the vast majority of Muslims to hear Bin Laden and his associates described as Islamic terrorists. They are terrorists pure and simple. Islam is a peaceful and tolerant religion, and the acts of these people are holy contrary to the teachings of the Quran.

George Bush:

We respect your faith. It’s practiced freely by many millions of Americans and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends. Its teachings are good and peaceful and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah.

Bill Clinton:

Our actions were not aimed against Islam. The faith of hundreds of millions of good, peace loving people all around the world including the United States. No religion condones the murder of innocent men, women and children. But our actions were aimed at fanatics and killers who wrapped murder in the cloak of righteousness and in so doing profaned the great religion in whose name they claim to act.

Serge Trifkovic, Foreign Affairs Editor, Chronicles Magazine

The tendency of western political leaders to deny the connection between Orthodox Islamic Mainstream and terrorist violence are replicated in (more…)

1.8 European Slaves, Arab Masters

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:20

By Andrew G. Bostom

A public protest in Washington,  DC, April 5, 2005 highlighted the current (ongoing, for centuries) plight of black Mauritanians enslaved by Arab masters. The final two decades of the 20th century, moreover, witnessed a frank jihad genocide, including mass enslavement, perpetrated by the Arab Muslim Khartoum government against black Christians and animists in the Southern Sudan,  and the same governments continued massacres and enslavement of Animist—Muslim blacks in Darfur.  These tragic contemporary phenomena reflect the brutal living legacy of jihad slavery.

Jihad Slavery

The fixed linkage between jihad – a permanent, uniquely Islamic institution— and enslavement, provides a very tenable explanation for the unparalleled scale and persistence of slavery in Muslim dominions, and societies. This general observation applies as well to ‘specialised’ forms of slavery, including the (procurement and) employment of eunuchs, slave soldiering (especially of adolescents), other forms of child slavery, and harem slavery. Jihad slavery, in its myriad manifestations, became a powerful instrument for both expansive Islamisation, and the maintenance of Muslim societies.

Juridical Rationale and Role in Islamisation

Patricia Crone, in her recent analysis of the origins and development of Islamic political thought, makes an important nexus between the mass captivity and enslavement of non—Muslims during jihad campaigns, and the prominent role of coercion in these major modalities of Islamisation. Following a successful jihad, she notes:

Male captives might be killed or enslaved, whatever their religious affiliation. (People of the Book were not protected by Islamic law until they had accepted dhimma.) Captives might also be given the choice between Islam and death, or they might pronounce the confession of faith of their own accord to avoid execution: jurists ruled that their change of status was to be accepted even though they had only converted out of fear. Women and children captured in the course of the campaigns were usually enslaved, again regardless of their faith…Nor should the importance of captives be underestimated. Muslim warriors routinely took large numbers of them. Leaving aside those who converted to avoid execution, some were ransomed and the rest enslaved, usually for domestic use. Dispersed in Muslim households, slaves almost always converted, encouraged or pressurised by their masters, driven by a need to bond with others, or slowly, becoming accustomed to seeing things through Muslim eyes even if they tried to resist. Though neither the dhimmi nor the slave had been faced with a choice between Islam and death, it would be absurd to deny that force played a major role in their conversion. [1]

For the idolatrous Hindus, enslaved in vast numbers during the waves of  jihad conquests that ravaged the Indian subcontinent for well over a half millennium (beginning at the outset of the 8th century C.E.), the guiding principles of Islamic law regarding their fate were unequivocally coercive. Jihad slavery also contributed substantively to the (more…)

1.9 Hindu Kush, the largest Genocides in the history of man

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:15

By Shrinandan Vyas

All the Encyclopedias and National Geographic agree that Hindu Kush region is a place of Hindu genocide (similar to Dakau and Auschwitz). All the references are given for your convenience.


All Standard reference books agree that the name ‘Hindu Kush’ of the mountain range in Eastern Afghanistan means ‘Hindu Slaughter’ or ‘Hindu Killer’. History also reveals that until 1000 A.D. the area of Hindu Kush was a full part of Hindu cradle. More likely, the mountain range was deliberately named as ‘Hindu Slaughter’ by the Moslem conquerors, as a lesson to the future generations of Indians. However Indians in general and Hindus in particular are completely oblivious to this tragic genocide. This article also looks into the reasons behind this ignorance.

21 References – (Mainly Encyclopedia Britannica & other reference books, National Geographic Magazines and standard history books).


The Hindu Kush is a mountain system nearly 1000 miles long and 200 miles wide, running northeast to southwest, and dividing the Amu Darya River Valley and Indus River Valley. It stretches from the Pamir Plateau near Gilgit, to Iran. The Hindu Kush ranges mainly run through Afghanistan and Pakistan. It has over two dozen summits of more than 23,000 ft in height. Below the snowy peaks the mountains of Hindu Kush appear bare, stony and poor in vegetation. Historically, the passes across the Hindu Kush have been of great military significance, providing access to the northern plains of India. The Khyber Pass constitutes an important strategic gateway and offers a comparatively easy route to the plains of Punjab. Most foreign invaders, starting from Alexander the Great in 327 BC, to Timur Lane in 1398 AD, and from Mahmud of Ghazni, in 1001 AD, to Nader Shah in 1739 AD attacked Hindustan via the Khyber Pass and other passes in the Hindu Kush (1,2,3). The Greek chroniclers of Alexander the Great called Hindu Kush as Parapamisos or Paropanisos (4). The Hindu name of the Hindu Kush mountains was ‘Paariyaatra Parvat'(5).

Early history of Hindu Kush region (up to 1000 AD)

History of Hindu Kush and Punjab shows that two major kingdoms of Gandhaar & Vaahic Pradesh (Balkh of Bactria) had their borders extending far beyond the Hindu Kush. Legend has it that the kingdom of Gandhaar was established by (more…)

1.11 What the Crusades Were Really Like

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:10

A people not willing to embrace its past, ultimately forfeits its future.
Alexander Von Humboldt

The Crusaders were not unprovoked aggressors, greedy marauders or medieval colonialists, as portrayed in some history books.

In fact, Thomas Madden, chair of St. Louis University’s history department and author of "A Concise History of the Crusades," contests that the Crusaders were a defensive force that did not profit from their ventures by earthly riches or land.

In fact, Thomas Madden, chair of St. Louis University’s history department and author of "A Concise History of the Crusades," contests that the Crusaders were defensive wars, not wars of conquest.

Madden shared the most popular myths about the Crusades and the modern findings that prove them wrong.

Q: What are some common misconceptions about the Crusades? the Crusaders?

Madden: The following are some of the most common myths and why they are wrong.

Myth 1: The Crusades were wars of unprovoked aggression against a peaceful Muslim world.

This is as wrong as wrong can be. From the time of Mohammed, Muslims had sought to conquer the Christian world. They did a pretty good job of it, too. After a few centuries of steady conquests, Muslim armies had taken all of North Africa, the Middle East, Asia Minor and most of Spain.

In other words, by the end of the 11th century the forces of Islam had captured two-thirds of the Christian world. Palestine, the home of Jesus Christ; Egypt, the birthplace of Christian monasticism; Asia Minor, where St. Paul planted the seeds of the first Christian communities — these were not the periphery of Christianity but its very core.

And the Muslim empires were not finished yet. They continued to press westward toward Constantinople, ultimately passing it and entering Europe itself. As far as unprovoked aggression goes, it was all on the Muslim side. At some point what was left of the Christian world would have to defend itself or simply succumb to Islamic conquest.

Myth 2: The Crusaders wore crosses, but they were really only interested in capturing booty and land. Their pious platitudes were just a cover for rapacious greed.

Historians used to believe that a rise in Europe’s population led to a crisis of too many noble "second sons," those who were trained in chivalric warfare but who had no feudal lands to inherit. The Crusades, therefore, were seen as a safety valve, sending these belligerent men far from Europe where they could carve out lands for themselves at someone else’s expense.

Modern scholarship, assisted by the advent of computer databases, has exploded this myth. We now know that it was the "first sons" of Europe that (more…)

1.15 History of the Islamic Ottoman Turkish Empire I (1299-1876) 1. Rise of the Ottomans

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:05

By the year 1300, a weakened Byzantium had seen most of its Anatolian provinces lost among some ten Seljuk Ghazi principalities.

Ertugruls son Osman becomes Bey in 1281, by 1299 declared himself a sovereign from the Seljuks, establishing the Ottoman Empire.

– Flag of the Ottoman Empire 1299-1453

– Flag of the Osmanli 1326-1517

– Capture of Bursa 1326

– Battle of Plocnik 1386

– Ottoman Battle Flag

– Battle of Kosovo – 1389

– Constantinople – 1452

– Capture of Constantinople – 1453

– Ottoman Flag 1453 1844

– Battle of Chaldiran – 1514

– Sultan Suleiman I 1520-1566

– Battle of Mohacs – 1526

– Battle of Preveza 1538

– Battle of Lepanto – 1571

– Capture of Yerevan 1635

– Capture of Baghdad 1639

– Second siege of Vienna – 1683

The Ottoman society comprised of many ethnicities: Greek, Armenian, Assyrian, Arab, Jew, Kurd, Persian, Georgian, Bulgarian, Serb, Hungarian, Croatian, Romanian, Albanian, etc. The Turk was the ruling and superior element to all others. The Sultanate, government sectors, viziers, pashas, judges, and the military establishment had to be Turkish and Muslim. The Janissary Corps was the backbone of the Military. Its members were forcefully taken from Christian families, converted and (more…)

1.17 Jihadi Genocides of Christians in the Ottoman Empire and Turkey – The Armenian, Greek and Assyrian Genocides

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 12:00

On 7 June 2006 Stephen Pound, member of the British House of Commons linked the case of the Ottoman Greeks with the Armenians and Assyrians claiming that "3.5 million of the historic Christian population of Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks then living in the Ottoman empire had been murdered, starved to death or slaughtered – or exiled by 1923."

I will be covering these three Genocides briefly.

Armenian Genocide – 1915-1918 – 1,500,000+ Deaths

The genocide of the Armenians was a jihad. No rayas (non-Muslim dhimmis under Ottoman rule) took part in it. Despite the disapproval of many Muslim Turks and Arabs, and their refusal to collaborate in the crime, these massacres were perpetrated solely by Muslims and they alone profited from the booty: the victims’ property, houses, and lands granted to the muhajirun, and the allocation to them of women and child slaves. The elimination of male children over the age of twelve was in accordance with the commandments of the Jihad and conformed to the age fixed for the payment of the Jizya. The four stages of the liquidation- deportation, enslavement, forced conversion, and massacre- reproduced the historic conditions of the Jihad carried out in the dar-al-harb from the seventh century on. Chronicles from a variety of sources, by Muslim authors in particular, give detailed descriptions of the organised massacres or deportation of captives, whose sufferings in forced marches behind the armies paralleled the Armenian experience in the twentieth century. As in all Jihads the mosques were a central rallying point where the mullahs and government officials agitated for Jihad. The activity of mass murders, systematic rapes, plunders and enslavements therefore naturally peaked each Friday where everyone felt fully motivated after the weekly pep talk.

The Armenian Genocide, the first genocide of the 20th Century, occurred when two million Armenians living in Turkey were eliminated from their historic homeland through forced deportations and massacres.

For three thousand years, a thriving Armenian community had existed inside the vast region of the Middle East bordered by the Black, Mediterranean and Caspian Seas. The area, known as Asia Minor, stands at the crossroads of three continents; Europe, Asia and Africa. Great powers rose and fell over the many centuries and the Armenian homeland was at various times ruled by Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs and Mongols.

Despite the repeated invasions and occupations, Armenian pride and cultural identity never wavered. The snow-capped peak of Mount Ararat became its focal point and by 600 BC Armenia as a nation sprang into being. Following the advent of Christianity, Armenia became the very first nation to accept it as the state religion. A golden era of peace and prosperity followed which saw the invention of a distinct alphabet, a flourishing of literature, art, commerce, and a unique style of architecture. By the 10th century, Armenians had established a new capital at Ani, affectionately called the ‘city of a thousand and one churches.’

In the eleventh century, the first Turkish invasion of the Armenian homeland occurred. Thus began several hundred years of rule by Muslim Turks. By the sixteenth century, Armenia had been absorbed into the (more…)

1.18 Turkey: Back to the Future?

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 11:55

By Andrew G. Bostom

Once again, Turks are storming the heart of Europe. This time, it is not by the sword, but rather in seeking to join the European Union (EU). Once inside the gates, they will gain access to the great cities, wealth, and power of their ancient rivals. Smoothing the way for incorporation of the former would-be conqueror into borderless Europe is an errant belief that Ottoman Turkey was a tolerant multi-cultural civilisation. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Recently, security analyst Frank Gaffney wrote a courageous essay, featured in the Washington Times, urging that Turkey’s bid to join the EU be rejected. Gaffney highlighted the Islamic Shari’a-based religious revival under the current Erdogan regime as the keystone to his cogent argument. Despite Gaffney’s legitimate concerns regarding the current Erdogan government, he reiterates a common, politically-correct canard which ignores the direct nexus between Erdogan’s ideology, and the goals and behaviours of Erdogan’s Ottoman ancestors. It is ahistorical to speak of "Ottoman tolerance" as distinct from Erdogan’s "Islamism", because the Ottoman Empire expanded via three centuries of devastating jihad campaigns, and the flimsy concept of Ottoman tolerance was, in reality, Ottoman-imposed dhimmitude, under the Shari’a.

With formal discussions regarding Turkey’s potential EU accession currently underway, this three part essay will elaborate on several apposite historical phenomena: Jihad and dhimmitude under the Ottomans, focusing primarily on Asia Minor and Eastern Europe; the failure of the so-called Ottoman Tanzimat reforms to abrogate the system of dhimmitude; and the dissolution of this Shari’a state whose bloody, convulsive collapse during the first World War included a frank jihad genocide of the Ottoman dhimmi population, once considered most loyal to the Empire, i.e., the Armenians. I believe such an analysis is particularly timely, in light of a December 2004 United Nations Conference which lionised "Ottoman tolerance" as a role model, " to be adapted even today" [emphasis added], and Gaffney’s reiteration of this profoundly flawed conception, despite his own bold opposition to Turkey’s entry into the EU.

Part 1 – Jihad Campaigns of the Seljuks and Ottomans

The historian Michael the Syrian (Jacobite Patriarch of Antioch from 1166 to 1199 C.E.) in his Chronicle reproducing earlier contemporary sources, made important observations regarding events which occurred beginning in the third decade of the 11th century. He noted,

the commencement of the exodus of the Turks toSyria and the coast of Palestine[Where] They subdued all the countries by cruel devastation and plunder [1] Subsequently, Turks and Arabs were mixing together like a single peopleSuch was the rule of the Turks amidst the Arabs [2]

Expanding upon this contemporary account, and the vast array of other primary sources- Arabic, Turkish, Greek, Latin, Serbian, Bulgarian, and Hungarian. [3] Bat Yeor concludes, [4]

the two waves of Muslim expansion, the Arab from the seventh century, and the Turkish four centuries later- are remarkably similarThe great Arab and Turkish conquerors used the same military tactics and the same policies of consolidating Islamic power. This continuity resulted from the fact that the conquests took place within the framework of the common ideology of jihad and the administrative and juridical apparatus of the sharia- a uniformity that defies time, since it adapts itself to diverse lands and peoples, being integrated into the internal coherence of a political theology. In the course of their military operations, the Turks applied to the conquered populations the rules of jihad, which had been structured four centuries earlier by the Arabs and enshrined in Islamic religious law.

The Seljuk and Ottoman jihad campaigns were spearheaded by Ghazi (from the word ghazwa or razzia) movements, Warriors of the Faith, brought together under the banner of Islam to fight infidels, and obtain (more…)

1.19 The fall of the Christian state of Lebanon

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 11:50

Lebanon, a fake state, a fake democracy which we pretend exists while in fact it is a Jihadist battleground, administered by terrorised dhimmi notables in the service of their Muslim masters. Only around 25% are now Christian, down from 79% in 1911. How did it come to this? And more importantly, how could France, the rest of the EU and the United States let Christian Lebanon fall?


Christians in the Middle East are fast disappearing from the area. The Lebanese Christians, who constitute the only influential Christian community in the Middle East, are fast declining in numbers and power.

This paper discusses the history of the Christian minority in Lebanon, and the decline of their hold on political power, in favour of the Muslim majority. It will focus on the Christian contribution to the cause of the civil war and the Ta’if accord which brought an end to that war. The paper will be divided into eight chapters. The paper will start by giving a brief overview of the special influential Christian position in the 19th century and its survival during the 1860 civil war with the Muslim Druzes. Then it will discuss the role of Christians in the formation of the Lebanese Republic and Lebanese independence.

Christian nationalism is looked at in depth, in order to discover the roots of the civil war with the Muslims. Moreover, it was the existence of many different ideological Christian parties that incited the civil war.

This paper will concentrate on the role of Christians in the civil war of 1975-1990. The main focus will also be on the causes of the decay of Christian status in Lebanon. In 1990, the civil war ‘is said to have’ ended* following the Christian Army’s General Michel Aoun defeated by the Syrian military. The paper will show how at the end of the civil war, Christians were perceived as losers and Muslims as winners of the civil war. It will demonstrate that the role of the Lebanese Christians has became negligible and it is a matter of time when the Christians will surrender their remaining powers to their Muslims counterparts.

*The claim that there was an end to the civil war is vigorously rejected by many because 60,000 Syrian soldier and their secret service continue to occupy Lebanon together with 5,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards, and thousands of Palestinian from Fatah, Popular Front "Jabha el Shabeyyeh" and other terrorists organisations operate and have a freehand in Lebanon.

Chapter 1: Christian Status prior to 1945

The birth of Christianity in Lebanon and the advent of Islam

Despite the fact that Islam prevailed 600 years after Christianity, the Middle East is now overwhelmingly populated with Muslims, with the Christian minority comprising about 14 million Christians or 10% of the population.

The Christians, mainly Maronite, have existed in the area, of what is known today as Lebanon since the fourth century, and moved in large numbers to Mount Lebanon(Jabal Loubnan) in the eighth and ninth centuries. The Maronites[44] took their name from John Maron, a learned monk who was Patriach of Antioch in the 8th century. The Muslim (Shiite, Sunni and the Druze sects) community emerged in Mount Lebanon at a later stage.

Marguerite Johnson traces the heritage of the Lebanese Christians directly to Jesus. By the 5th century, Christianity became the dominant religion in the area of Lebanon. After the forceful advent of Islam beginning in the 7th Century, many Christian communities along the coast of Lebanon converted to Islam. However, the mountains of Lebanon remained a Christian haven.

Peter Kolvenbach saw that the history of Lebanon’s Christians and the history of Lebanon were so intertwined that without the Christians, and especially its Maronite sect, there would not have been a Lebanon and without Lebanon the destiny of Christians in the Middle East would have been different.

The 1860 civil war between the Maronites and the Druze[45] erupted when Maronite peasants revolted against (more…)

1.20 Battle of Poitiers (Battle of Tours) First Islamic Wave Year 732

Filed under: Uncategorized — sitamnesty @ 11:45

The Battle of Tours (October 10, 732), also called the Battle of Poitiers and in Arabic: maarakat Bal ash-Shuhad) Battle of Court of The Martyrs, was fought in an area between the cities of Poitiers and Tours, near the village of Moussais-la-Bataille (modern Vouneuil-sur-Vienne) about 20km north of Poitiers. The location of the battle was close to the border between the Frankish realm and then-independent Aquitaine. The battle pitted Frankish and Burgundian forces under Austrasian Mayor of the Palace Charles Martel against an army of the Umayyad Caliphate led by Abdul Rahman Al Ghafiqi, Governor-general of al-Andalus. The Franks were victorious, Abdul Rahman Al Ghafiqi was killed, and Charles subsequently extended his authority in the south. Ninth-century chroniclers, who interpreted the outcome of the battle as divine judgment in his favour, gave Charles the nickname Martellus ("The Hammer"). Details of the battle, including its exact location and the exact number of combatants, cannot be determined from accounts that have survived. Notably, the Frankish troops won the battle without cavalry.

As later chroniclers praised Charles Martel as the champion of Christianity, pre-20th century historians began to characterise this battle as being the decisive turning point in the struggle against Islam, a struggle which preserved Christianity as the religion of Europe. "Most of the 18th and 19th century historians, like Gibbon, saw Poitiers (Tours), as a landmark battle that marked the high tide of the Muslim advance into Europe." Leopold von Ranke felt that "Poitiers was the turning point of one of the most important epochs in the history of the world."

While modern historians are divided and there is considerable disagreement as to whether or not the victory was responsible as Gibbon and his generation of historians claimed, and which is echoed by many modern historians for saving Christianity and halting the conquest of Europe by Islam, there is little dispute that the battle helped lay the foundations of the Carolingian Empire and Frankish domination of Europe for the next century. "The establishment of Frankish power in western Europe shaped that continent’s destiny and the Battle of Tours confirmed that power."


The Battle of Tours followed twenty years of Umayyad conquests in Europe which had begun with the invasion of the (more…)

« Previous PageNext Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.