How come Italy used to be the center of the civilized world,

[Plug Drugs]

and now its all spaghetti and meatballs..

[rootbeer]

shit happens

[rootbeer]

having your country be the center of pizza is better anyways

[maks]

because the moors invaded and polluted the roman gene pool with groid blood IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR?

[Plug Drugs]

all the barbarian tribes of the north uniting, then rolling through the roman empire, pillaging and razing as they went, sounds epic... but did it actually happen?

[Gentleman Doli]

all the barbarian tribes of the north uniting, then rolling through the roman empire, pillaging and razing as they went, sounds epic... but did it actually happen?

no lmfao are you retarded

[Gentleman Doli]

A grand coalition of barbarian tribes attacked the Roman empire at its height and brought Caesar to his knees, the little bitch. Even though Rome was united and had a very strong sense of Roman identity at the time, and wasn't just a bunch of barbarian tribes slapping the label "Rome" on because some merchants in the cities told them to. It could not stand against the might of the Barbarian Coalition (as it is called in historical circles today). This is how Rome fell.

[Plug Drugs]

yeah and the colonial americans couldn't handle the well-organized british army because after all they were just crazed wild-men with a sense of adventure and a hard on for the wilderness there's no way they could defeat the redcoats

[Gentleman Doli]

"rome" as a cohesive entity a la legions and centurions (in the west) didnt even exist at the time of its "fall". it was mostly a loose confederation of barbarians that had been invited into its borders by the patricians in the cities in order to defend against other barbarians, a policy that had the effect of barbarianizing rome.the barbarians never once presented a unified front against rome, either, and the western roman empires fall happened via puttering out not some massive sack of rome (rome was actually sacked 3 times and it didnt fall any of those times)

[Plug Drugs]

is that what the church taught you during your studies to become a priest

[Gentleman Doli]

the christian identity had become far more important than the identity associated with citizenship and rome (this is rly common because of gibbon theme that you see over and over again) and thus the latters fall was regarded, mostly, as a non-event. the "last" roman emperor was some kid who no one even cared about. (even tho the real last roman emperor was constantine xi in constantinople but i digress)

[Plug Drugs]

"loosely tied confederation of barbarians", is that why Rome is still the head of the catholic church and Western Europe has been, for the past 800 years, the definition of "civilized"?

[Gentleman Doli]

is that what the church taught you during your studies to become a priest
*nods head sagely8

[Gentleman Doli]

"loosely tied confederation of barbarians", is that why the vatican is still the head of the catholic church and Western Europe has been, for the past 800 years, the definition of "civilized"?

what are you talking about

[Gentleman Doli]

first of all the western roman empire fell in 400 a.d. not 1200 a.d. so i dont get "the past 800 years" comment, second of all the "loose confederation of barbarians" was referring to the western roman empire at the time of its fall, when it was made up mostly by ostrogoths and lombards, the same people who eventually said hey we dont need a roman emperor anymore.

[Gentleman Doli]

those barbarian tribes later developed into the feudal kingdoms of europe and far less directly the "enlightened monarchies" of 1400+, sure, but i dont get what your point is, that has nothing to do with the state of rome in the middle of the 5th century

[Plug Drugs]

the christian identity had become far more important than the identity associated with citizenship and rome (this is rly common because of gibbon theme that you see over and over again) and thus the latters fall was regarded, mostly, as a non-event. the "last" roman emperor was some kid who no one even cared about. (even tho the real last roman emperor was constantine xi in constantinople but i digress)

the collective consciousness' sense of "identity" and ego (which 'religion' could most undoubtedly be categorized under psychologically) only comes secondary in the human mind's priority to realistic affairs such as socioeconomics (one's "role" in society) and survival.
You could say that the western empire had become lazy, or that the extent of its territories had simply become too large for it to manage and northern barbarians found this exploitable,
but does religion have something to do with it? Probably not. Religion only reinforces what's already present in the mind

[Gentleman Doli]

http://multiply.com/mu/ntensenvention/image/5/photos/15/1200x120/79/Weed-smiley.gif?et=N%2B5o5H60uhwJzxrEwbppKA&nmid=67631243

[maks]

he never actually said religion had anything to do with it, he said that western rome was a patchwork of various conquered tribes who eventually got tired of taking orders from a fat guinea

[Plug Drugs]

what are you talking about

i'm saying that the eastern empire was under just as much pressure from pissed off middle-easterners who didn't want them there as the western empire was under pressure from northern barbarians who didn't want them there.

[Plug Drugs]

he never actually said religion had anything to do with it, he said that western rome was a patchwork of various conquered tribes who eventually got tired of taking orders from a fat guinea

he said "the christian identity had become far more important than the identity associated with citizenship and rome" sic

[Plug Drugs]

those barbarian tribes later developed into the feudal kingdoms of europe and far less directly the "enlightened monarchies" of 1400+, sure, but i dont get what your point is, that has nothing to do with the state of rome in the middle of the 5th century

The nation of England did not have its Feudal roots established by barbarians; most historians agree that the Romans played a much larger role in England's development than Barbarians did.

[maks]

oh I must have missed that one I didn't realize he posted twice. he was right the first time.

[Plug Drugs]

On the contrary, the post-Roman state of Britain still experienced attacks from Barbarian tribes even after it was no longer a part of Rome -- it was not "given over to the barbarians" like Doli makes it sound like.

the Western Empire basically said "fuck it, you're all on your own" to its far away territories (such as Britain), but these territories still maintained a Roman-esque style of government and persevered through an onslaught of barbarians to eventually become the feudal states we hear about in the history books.

If this discussion is about the 'gray area' in European history - the transition of Europe between the Roman Empire and the Feudal Era, General Doli is wrong.

[Plug Drugs]

but I suppose Doli can't be blamed; the bullshit pumped out of the Vatican is probably pretty convincing.. I mean, it has to be

[Plug Drugs]

"The withdrawal of Roman legions did not put an end to the Roman culture of the "lost province", which still remained part of the Roman cultural world, as Britons self-identified as Roman."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Roman_Britain

[Plug Drugs]

I only cite Britain because it seems to be the most discussed in literature, and the least confusing - therefore we can use it as a focal point for our discussion on the Western Empire's transition to Feudalism

Unfortunately it also seems to be the province we know the least about, as writings from that time period and place of the world are extremely rare; but this just makes it good for theorizing and arguing about

[Gentleman Doli]

The nation of England did not have its Feudal roots established by barbarians; most historians agree that the Romans played a much larger role in England's development than Barbarians did.

yes it fucking did you fucking retard holy shit where do you think the feudal system came from in the first place

[Gentleman Doli]

"The withdrawal of Roman legions did not put an end to the Roman culture of the "lost province", which still remained part of the Roman cultural world, as Britons self-identified as Roman."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Roman_Britain

yes, they did. britons weren't the people who founded the kingdom of england, i hope you realize that

[Gentleman Doli]

the kingdoms of england were mostly made up of invading danes, saxons, angles, jutes, etc. these people had never ever ever been part of the roman empire and brought with them the systems established by the ppl in their homeland - where do you think the term "danelaw" comes from

[rootbeer]

i wish i had lived a thousand years ago i would have been king for sure

[Gentleman Doli]

On the contrary, the post-Roman state of Britain still experienced attacks from Barbarian tribes even after it was no longer a part of Rome -- it was not "given over to the barbarians" like Doli makes it sound like.

the Western Empire basically said "fuck it, you're all on your own" to its far away territories (such as Britain), but these territories still maintained a Roman-esque style of government and persevered through an onslaught of barbarians to eventually become the feudal states we hear about in the history books.

If this discussion is about the 'gray area' in European history - the transition of Europe between the Roman Empire and the Feudal Era, General Doli is wrong.


they didnt "survive" an onslaught of barbarians, actually, they completely surrendered to them and their culture became that of their successive conquerors one after the other. further, no one is fucking talking about england when we're talking about the roman empire giving up land to the barbarians because britain was no longer part of the roman empire aftere 410 A.D.

[Gentleman Doli]

I only cite Britain because it seems to be the most discussed in literature, and the least confusing - therefore we can use it as a focal point for our discussion on the Western Empire's transition to Feudalism

Unfortunately it also seems to be the province we know the least about, as writings from that time period and place of the world are extremely rare; but this just makes it good for theorizing and arguing about

no we can't, the feudalism that ultimately developed in england was very different from the feudalism that developed on the continent and you dont get to make these weird ass assertions

[Garfield]

a countrys power is based on the size of the land

[Gentleman Doli]

i'm saying that the eastern empire was under just as much pressure from pissed off middle-easterners who didn't want them there as the western empire was under pressure from northern barbarians who didn't want them there.

this is so fucking wrong and you dont know what youre talking about lol, the only "pressure" they were under was from heretical movements in egypt and syria who sought to replace the orthodoxy of the state with various offshoots, but never dreamed of separating politically from Constantinople, and the Persian Sassanids who were mostly fighting border skirmishes with them over shithole regions like Armenia

[rootbeer]

"writings from ancient rome are extremely rare"
wtfamireading.jpeg

[Garfield]

america is so powerful because it is simply the biggest country (square footage and population)

[Gentleman Doli]

200 years later the muslims came and "wanted them out" but the people of the provinces in the east were far, far more roman than the people in Gaul or Iberia or Britain

[maks]

the eastern empire was more greek than roman, js

[Gentleman Doli]

he said "the christian identity had become far more important than the identity associated with citizenship and rome" sic

youre conflating so many different things but this is to be expected when you know nothing almost nothing about the material and the time period and think that grand coalitions of barbarians went rampaging through the mighty stabilized roman empire which hadn't existed for two hundred years at this point. imho that did not directly lead to rome's collapse, nor do i think it did, but it helps explain the apathy expressed by "romans" when there was no longer a western roman empire.

[Garfield]

a bunch of fags itt

[Garfield]

go study your books some more you fukin' nerds

[Gentleman Doli]

the eastern empire was more greek than roman, js

a distinction without a difference, greek and roman culture had essentially become one by the time rome fell, and while i agree that east eventually became a greek medieval state, up until late antiquity and the reign of emperor heraclius it was far more roman than anything the west tried to front

[Garfield]

http://eyeonfilm.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/revenge-of-the-nerds.jpeg

doli and pluggy talkign roman politics

[Garfield]

http://26.media.tumblr.com/9cyPFQbgCmcenc915e5BlDISo1_400.jpg
maks chillin talkin about france n shit

[Garfield]

http://www.afterelton.com/sites/www.afterelton.com/files/images/lamar1.jpg

[rootbeer]

http://26.media.tumblr.com/9cyPFQbgCmcenc915e5BlDISo1_400.jpg
maks chillin talkin about france n shit

haha what that shirt is legit

[Garfield]

http://coedmagazine.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/revenge-of-the-nerds.jpg
rootbeer watching super bugfights on g4

[Gentleman Doli]

lol... done w/out any irony watsoever? :blowup: im so frocking mad about le history

[Garfield]

i think youre overdoing it patrick, its worn out

[Garfield]

stay true to yourself

[Gentleman Doli]

shut up garfield

[Gentleman Doli]

hmm... i think ur overdoing the funny jokes thing.. could u cut it out and give us more 20 page discusion about roman history with stoners? thaknk you

[maks]

a distinction without a difference, greek and roman culture had essentially become one by the time rome fell, and while i agree that east eventually became a greek medieval state, up until late antiquity and the reign of emperor heraclius it was far more roman than anything the west tried to front

strongly disagree, greek and roman cultures had their similarities but they were very different and distinct. might as well say american culture is the same as roman because some of our government buildings have columns.

[Garfield]

have you been practicing?

[Gentleman Doli]

strongly disagree, greek and roman cultures had their similarities but they were very different and distinct. might as well say american culture is the same as roman because some of our government buildings have columns.

look the problem with what youre saying is that they were very distinct for a very long time, but by this time all distinctions had completely disappeared between the two, and the culture practiced by people in corinth by around 400 A.D. was not much different from the culture practiced by men in rome. there's a reason byzantine rule in italy continued on-and-off until the 10th century

[Gentleman Doli]

americans weren't ruled over by romans for over 500 years lol

[maks]

look man I have a bunch of old copper byzantine coins and the picture on the back is of alexander the great fisting socrates while homer plows him in the ass, seems pretty greek to me.

[maks]

don't even dare point out that alexander was macedonian or I'll kick you in the cock

[rubycalaber]

obviously it's because god is real and catholicism is the true faith

[rubycalaber]

ps "briton" was never apart of the roman empire, only england and wales since scotland was and is too fucking awesome to be invaded, so they just built a wall across the isle to try and keep us from owning them too hard

[maks]

if scotland is too awesome to be invaded why are they ruled by the english to this day? I think you may be confusing scotland with russia...

[Dustin]

I though this was a comedy forum.

[rootbeer]

I though this was a comedy forum.

this is roman history forum

[Dustin]

this is roman history forum

I'm okay with this.

[maks]

I though this was a comedy forum.

depends on your definition of comedy

[rootbeer]

the color brown was discovered in the year 1612

[Dustin]

depends on your definition of comedy

Well, the only thing on the forum that gives me a chuckle is when stomblebs photoshops replies threads. Those made me giggle.

[Garfield]

lol

[maks]

Well, the only thing on the forum that gives me a chuckle is when stomblebs photoshops replies threads. Those made me giggle.

then you my friend have a pretty corny sense of humor

[Dustin]

then you my friend have a pretty corny sense of humor
It was when I did drugs, which I quit doing. Well all I did was smoke pot but whatever.

[Dustin]

I'm still a 420 Cal-I quickscope headshot champion

[m0nde]

how come this forum used to be the the center of the the civilized world?

[Gentleman Doli]

im embarase

[rubycalaber]

if scotland is too awesome to be invaded why are they ruled by the english to this day? I think you may be confusing scotland with russia...

we sold it to them for like literally £1000 lmao

scotland: cant be invaded but we're real cheap whores

[m0nde]

you're going to have your account hacked by digital hiphop now that barryshithead has gone and whined to them. what're you going to do, ruby?

[maks]

I smoke a ton of pot but I can't say I've ever laughed at a stompleb post... I need to find whatever you've been smoking sounds like some good shit.

[maks]

we sold it to them for like literally £1000 lmao

scotland: cant be invaded but we're real cheap whores

so trainspotting is more realistic than braveheart then?

[m0nde]

glasgow is like a dark cesspool. if you go a bit east of glasgow, the place is exactly like trainspotting.
but, if you go way out to edinburgh, it's completely different.

[Garfield]

america bought that piece of shit lousisiana and half of the country for like 2 mil from greece

[maks]

I need to find a blacksmith who can craft me the finest broadsword in all the land

[Gentleman Doli]

we sold it to them for like literally £1000 lmao

scotland: cant be invaded but we're real cheap whores

Fail. It was bcause the Jacobite monarchy .

[Garfield]

Jacobite monarchy .

:goodone:

[Dustin]

I smoke a ton of pot but I can't say I've ever laughed at a stompleb post... I need to find whatever you've been smoking sounds like some good shit.

That's because you hate his guts for whatever reason, I've never really asked or found out why since I didn't post in 2009

[maks]

That's because you hate his guts for whatever reason, I've never really asked or found out why since I didn't post in 2009

I hate him because he's not funny or interesting, it's as simple as that.

[lnopia the great]

plug drugs is always wrong about anything

[Garfield]

lets argue about marvel comics

[rootbeer]

plug drugs is always wrong about anything

vouch

[Dustin]

plug drugs is always wrong about anything

[Dustin]

I hate him because he's not funny or interesting, it's as simple as that.

I guess, I can't really hate the dude. He gave me a dota 2 beta key that was pretty cool of him.

[maks]

I guess, I can't really hate the dude. He gave me a dota 2 beta key that was pretty cool of him.

he'll get on your nerves eventually, no matter how much he kisses your ass.

[Dustin]

he'll get on your nerves eventually, no matter how much he kisses your ass.

;_;

[Gentleman Doli]

reminder that stomple went out of his way to defend obnoxious bitch when it showed up so he could have a new frend

[Dustin]

reminder that stomple went out of his way to defend obnoxious bitch when it showed up so he could have a new frend
WOAH, that's pretty... oh man I'm not sure what to think of this my perception of stombleb has been shatterd. Damn you Doli

[maks]

truth hurts

[Plug Drugs]

yes it fucking did you fucking retard holy shit where do you think the feudal system came from in the first place
uhh cavalry divisions in the roman army being given land grants?

[Plug Drugs]

no we can't, the feudalism that ultimately developed in england was very different from the feudalism that developed on the continent and you dont get to make these weird ass assertions

why not you've just been pulling the argument about barbarians being the founders of the Feudal age out of your ass with no references; you must be thinking "uhh yeah it makes sense in my head so it must be true".
Just because Britons were Anglos or Saxons by blood does not mean that the Barbarian tribes were the ones who invented the Feudal system.

[Plug Drugs]

"civilized barbarians" is any oxymoron Doli.

[Plug Drugs]

Its okay to be wrong...
I was wrong too, once

[Plug Drugs]

"writings from ancient rome are extremely rare"
wtfamireading.jpeg

Writings from post-Roman England after the beginning of the 5th century are fairly rare.

[Plug Drugs]

youre conflating so many different things but this is to be expected when you know nothing almost nothing about the material and the time period and think that grand coalitions of barbarians went rampaging through the mighty stabilized roman empire which hadn't existed for two hundred years at this point.
Yeah there wasn't a bit of sarcasm in my second post in this thread. Hence "But did it actually happen?"

[clay]

i only read the first few posts because i assume the rest arent worth bothering. however:

1.) the moors never invaded italy. they only invaded the iberian peninsula and stopped at castile and aragon. viva el cid.
2.) the successful barbarian invasions of italy were much after the fall of rome. power had already been split and mostly placed in constantinople by that point.

yall some dumb nerds

[Gentleman Doli]

why not you've just been pulling the argument about barbarians being the founders of the Feudal age out of your ass with no references; you must be thinking "uhh yeah it makes sense in my head so it must be true".
Just because Britons were Anglos or Saxons by blood does not mean that the Barbarian tribes were the ones who invented the Feudal system.

The term "fee" of "fief" which is the basic root of the word "feudal" derived from an ancient Gothic source faihu signifying simply "property" which in its most basic sense was "cattle".[2] This can be compared to the very ancient classical Latin word pecunia, which means both cattle and money. Many primitive societies in existence today demonstrate the ancient use of cattle as financial currency, for example the Masai of Kenya, who still pay dowries in this form. Because feudalism was in its origin a Teutonic or Gothic system from northern Europe untouched by Roman civilization, it did not exist in ancient Rome, where the nearest equivalent was clientelism. No classical Latin word therefore exists to signify it, and a new Low-Latin word feodum was invented by mediaeval European scribes to use in their Latinised charters and other writings.[3][4]

[Gentleman Doli]

i only read the first few posts because i assume the rest arent worth bothering. however:

1.) the moors never invaded italy. they only invaded the iberian peninsula and stopped at castile and aragon. viva el cid.
2.) the successful barbarian invasions of italy were much after the fall of rome. power had already been split and mostly placed in constantinople by that point.

yall some dumb nerds

Youre stupid the moors invaded sicily in the late 9th century idiot

[Gentleman Doli]

Both forms of feudalism had their roots in the organization of primitive Germany. A glance at that system is desirable for a thorough comprehension of our subject; it will help us to realize what feudalism was, if not to discern how it grew up. The leading characteristics of the Teutonic polity were individual liberty and tribal autonomy. Each tribe or canton is theoretically independent, and entitled to manage its own concerns; within the tribe all free heads of houses are politically equal, and entitled to a voice in the affairs of the community. Each free villager has his share of the tribe lands,—his homestead, his propor tion of the arable land, with corresponding rights over the forest and pasture lands. The shares are not necessarily equal, as social distinctions exist, and are fully recognized by the law ; but whether large or small, the shares are held on the like terms of participation in all public duties, chief of which are the obligations of attendance in the communal meetings and in the host. The shares so held "bore among the northern nations the name of Odal or Edhel." Whether any etymological connexion exists between the words odal and alod " may be questioned, but their signification as applied to land is the same : the alod is the hereditary estate derived from primitive occupation, for which the owner owes no service except the personal obligation to appear in the host and in the council." As above intimated, political equality was not held incompatible with social inequality ; the population was divided into three classes, rated at different values in the legal tariff. First came the nobilis, eorl, or cetheling, the man distinguished by ancestral wealth and reputed purity of blood; next ranked the simple freeman, the ingenuus, frilingus, or ceorl; at the bottom of the social scale stood the serf or slave (colonus lazzus, lost, servus. theow). An injury done to an eorl or his property would cost the offender twice or three times as much as the same injury done to a ceorl ; at an equal distance below the ceorl ranks the slave, but the compensation for injury done to him of course goes to his master. The official magistracy {principes) are selected from the ranks of the nobility; very distinguished parentage will at times entitle a mere lad to high office, but this is rare.3 Superior birth gives weight and precedence in the national councils; above all, where a powerful tribe or confederation of tribes think fit to exalt their dignity by conferring regal honours on their chief, care is taken to select the king from the family of noblest birth. But in critical times the instinct of a free people taught that the claims of birth must give place to more weighty considerations : whoever might be allowed to rule in time of peace, on the field of battle only the man of tried ability could take the load. Judicial and political business was transacted in the various national assemblies held at fixed times, " generally at the new or full moon." Local questions and matters of police were determined in the meetings of the mark or township (yicus, dorff); the higher criminal jurisdiction and questions of a political nature were reserved for the malls or gemotes of the hundred, canton, or tribe {gait, pagus, gens); "there was no distinction of place ; all were free, all appeared in arms." The order of business was settled beforehand by the chiefs in com-mittee , a leading elder would open the debate; others followed as the spirit moved them ; the people decided as they thought fit. "Opposition was expressed by loud shouts, assent by the striking of spears, enthusiastic applause by the clash of spear and shield."

[Gentleman Doli]

The analogy of popular meetings in other ages and countries will warrant the belief that under ordinary circumstances the people would be greatly swayed by the policy of their leaders, but the fact remains that the ultimate appeal was to the people. So with the local judi-cial meetings: the position of the elected princeps is " rather that of president than of judge; " all the free men sit as his assessors. "Doubtless they both declared the law and weighed the evidence." The authority of the princeps was in all cases limited : " De minoribus rebus principes consultant; de majoribus omnes." Even the prerogatives of the monarchical chiefs were subject to strict limitations. Their position was one of high honour but not of irresponsible power. The practical influence of the chief, whether exalted to royal dignity or not, depended largely upon the strength of his comitatus, or household retinue. This institution, " one of the strangest but most lasting features " of early Aryan civilization, was an arrangement " partly private and partly public in its character," which served to furnish " a sort of supplement to an otherwise imperfect organization." The comitatus was a voluntary bond of partial vassalage, intended for mutual protection and support, by which a freeman, even a man of noble birth, attached himself to a more powerful lord (Maford,s princeps). At the table of his lord the free companion, as he was called {comes, gesith), found a comfortable seat; from his lord he received his equipment for war or the chase (heregeatwe, heriot), which reverted to the lord at his death. In return he was bound to espouse the cause of his lord as against all men and by all means. The position of a favoured gesith was one of comfort and social importance ; but involving, as it did, the surrender of all freedom of individual action, it probably entailed a certain diminution of political status. The tie of the comitatus, when coupled with the tenure of land, gives us the germ from which the whole feudal system was developed. It has been commonly held, apparently on the authority of Montesquieu, that the Frankish con-quests in Gaul were effected by independent nobles fighting each with a powerful comitatus at his back; that the lands so conquered were immediately parcelled out by them among their comités upon terms of military service and special fidelity ; and that the Merwing state from the first was built up on the feudal principle of vassalage. The sound view appears to be that—as in Britain, so in Gaul—the Germanic tribes came over as " nations in arms," " with their flocks and their herds, their wives and their little ones that they brought their Germanic social and political organization with them ; and that the Merwing kingdom was mainly constructed on that basis—subject to modifications introduced perforce by the circumstances of the conquest. In Britain it is clear that the primitive political institutions were introduced en bloc, and took root ; of the agrarian settlement effected, evidence is lacking dur-ing the first centuries of the new order. When trustworthy data begin to appear feudalism has already made large inroads on primitive alodialism. In Gaul the chain of evidence is continuous, and it is beyond doubt that under the first dynasty the tenure of land was still mainly alodial ; that all the people were bound to be faithful to the king as a national duty, and not by virtue of special land ten-ure ; that " the gift of an estate by the king involved no defined obligation of service," all the nation being still bound to military service ; that " the only comités were the antrustions, and these few in number and that the supposed larger class of comités, the leudes, were in fact the whole body of the king's good subjects, in Anglo-Saxon phrase, his "hold."

[Gentleman Doli]

why not you've just been pulling the argument about barbarians being the founders of the Feudal age out of your ass with no references; you must be thinking "uhh yeah it makes sense in my head so it must be true".
Just because Britons were Anglos or Saxons by blood does not mean that the Barbarian tribes were the ones who invented the Feudal system.

Oh am I puling thing out of my ass now retard

[Alex Littleton]

http://s019.radikal.ru/i627/1204/1d/5cdd173b543e.jpg

w extra virgin olive oil & sub 21 nerd fags ITT

[Gentleman Doli]

"civilized barbarians" is any oxymoron Doli.

maybe if youre going to the school of Pop Culture History (heres some more sources for you)

"It should also be noted that the word "barbarian" will be used here as a convenient, nonpejorative term to refer to all the non-Latin and non-Greek speaking exterae gentes who dwelt around, and even eventually settled within, the Roman Empire during late antiquity". Ralph W. Mathisen "Barbarian Bishops and the Churches "in Barbaricis Gentibus" During Late Antiquity" Speculum 72.3 (July 1997), p. 665. Mathisen notes that Eusebius, in his Life of Constantine described the emperor as bishop "of those outside" (exterae gentes).

[Alex Littleton]

Youre stupid the moors invaded sicily in the late 9th century idiot


http://youtu.be/BCnw6aW2dDQ

[Camoron]

wait did plug drugs think england was founded by celts or roman remnants in southern britain?

[Camoron]

listen i play europa universalis 3 extensively i think i nkow my history okay.

[Plug Drugs]

The term "fee" of "fief" which is the basic root of the word "feudal" derived from an ancient Gothic source faihu signifying simply "property" which in its most basic sense was "cattle".[2] This can be compared to the very ancient classical Latin word pecunia, which means both cattle and money. Many primitive societies in existence today demonstrate the ancient use of cattle as financial currency, for example the Masai of Kenya, who still pay dowries in this form. Because feudalism was in its origin a Teutonic or Gothic system from northern Europe untouched by Roman civilization, it did not exist in ancient Rome, where the nearest equivalent was clientelism. No classical Latin word therefore exists to signify it, and a new Low-Latin word feodum was invented by mediaeval European scribes to use in their Latinised charters and other writings.[3][4]
The term feudalism is recent, first appearing in French in 1823, Italian in 1827, English in 1839, and in German in the second half of the nineteenth century.[14] It derived from "feodal" which was used in seventeenth-century French legal treatises (1614)[15][16] and translated into English legal treatises as "feodal government". In the 18th century Adam Smith popularized the forms "feudal government" and "feudal system" in his book Wealth of Nations (1776).[14] In the 19th century the adjective "feudal" (i.e. "the feudal government") evolved into a noun: feudalism.[14]

[Camoron]

battle of the wikipedia autists

[rootbeer]

you cn make it out of a moor invasion, but can you make it out of Garland alive?

[elezzzark]

Clay is dumber and alcoholic dork than nerds

[Camoron]

doli are you on steam

[Alex Littleton]

copy past arguments only thing missing is autoplay and baby bottle post stretching bs

[elezzzark]

doli are you on steam

*removing camoron on my steam due to useless and inactivity, needs to be clean*

[Plug Drugs]

since you're using wikipedia as the undisputed Word of Truth, i'll step it up a notch with some Yahoo! Answers



The collapse of central governing authority in the West meant that regional authorities were left to govern their various areas - most often military commanders, the strongest of whom were also immigrant barbarian federate kings. With no more central bureaucracy, Roman cities shrank or disappeared entirely and society reverted to a more "natural" rural agricultural base. Wealth was measured in land rather than money. There was also little role for learned civilian administrators outside of the church, so the landholding aristocracy focused on military service to maintain their status. The kings, in turn, tended to reward these loyal warriors with land.



Feudalism is often called the economic/social model that was typical for a medieval Europe. The foundation for a feudal economy were laid already during the late Roman Empire, and can be detected from the crisis of the 3rd century onward, and definitely from the Diocletian/Constantine economic reforms that changed the social and economic structure of the empire. The late Antiquity can be seen as time where the long distance trade disintegrated and the urban economy collapsed; so, citizens were leaving cities to move into landlord to obtain food and protection. This gave the basic foundation where people were giving up their personal citizenry and freedom from state to the latifundia landlord, who than were bestowing fiefdom titles to the land. People were forbidden under Diocletian reforms to switch trade, running from land, and their children were expected to follow the same path as their parents. This social immobility continued further fragmentation of the Roman Empire where provinces were left on its own and bound between them and Rome weakened.

[Camoron]

Youre stupid the moors invaded sicily in the late 9th century idiot

yeah they also controlled parts of southern italy so even the argument that they didnt invade the italian mainland is incorrect

this is why sicilians and southern guidos have black hair (this may or may not be entirely true but i remember it from a movie where a guy kept yelling at a mobster that he had nigger blood and he was getting raged)

also irish were raped by vikings and got red hair

[Camoron]

*removing camoron on my steam due to useless and inactivity, needs to be clean*

I am on steam 24/7 jerk

[Alex Littleton]

Clay is dumber and alcoholic dork than nerds

chillax latino clay babysits the baby nerd pak shit teh aint easy brosephina

[Camoron]

and yaeh I need to be clean, i am not dirty like you smegmadick

[elezzzark]

jk

i didn't remove you from list, lol

[Plug Drugs]

So obviously Doli, Feudalism had its roots in the Roman Empire

[Camoron]

feudalism can be really broadly defined and it probably goes back a lot further than that though unless you just mean specifically European feudalism of the middle ages

[Plug Drugs]

why dont you just let me make Doli's own points with slightly different wording and watch as he argues against himself

[rootbeer]

feudalism can be really broadly defined and it probably goes back a lot further than that though unless you just mean specifically European feudalism of the middle ages
yeah pretty much it seems like plug is trying to play semantics or something i dont understand

[elezzzark]

Ancient roman uses slavery

Fedualism uses easement

[Camoron]

japan had feudalism

the mythical land in mount & blade too

[Alex Littleton]

log off baby nerds and go play something of worth :skyrm:


http://youtu.be/OfI5jC3qXZY

[elezzzark]

japanese feudalism is too complex than european feudalism, merchants were considered lowest class than peasants

[Gentleman Doli]

its not the undisputed word of truth, but if you go to the respective wikipedia pages and click on the little [1] and [2], it takes you to sources written by actual historians, several pages of which i posted here on this very page. try to keep up kid

[Gentleman Doli]

The term feudalism is recent, first appearing in French in 1823, Italian in 1827, English in 1839, and in German in the second half of the nineteenth century.[14] It derived from "feodal" which was used in seventeenth-century French legal treatises (1614)[15][16] and translated into English legal treatises as "feodal government". In the 18th century Adam Smith popularized the forms "feudal government" and "feudal system" in his book Wealth of Nations (1776).[14] In the 19th century the adjective "feudal" (i.e. "the feudal government") evolved into a noun: feudalism.[14]

what does this have to do with anything

[Gentleman Doli]

Cleatrly, Feudalism was invented by the monarchs of the Bourbon restoration after the napoleanic wars.

[Gentleman Doli]

The collapse of central governing authority in the West meant that regional authorities were left to govern their various areas - most often military commanders, the strongest of whom were also immigrant barbarian federate kings. With no more central bureaucracy, Roman cities shrank or disappeared entirely and society reverted to a more "natural" rural agricultural base. Wealth was measured in land rather than money. There was also little role for learned civilian administrators outside of the church, so the landholding aristocracy focused on military service to maintain their status. The kings, in turn, tended to reward these loyal warriors with land.

even though the person who wrote this is most likely a retard, you do realize this supports my point and not yours right

[Gentleman Doli]

japan had feudalism

the mythical land in mount & blade too

lol i have over 100 hours logged in that game

[Gentleman Doli]

why dont you just let me make Doli's own points with slightly different wording and watch as he argues against himself

cool puppet master, youv relaly pulled back the curtain except you havent been doing that at all

[elezzzark]

lol i have over 100 hours logged in that game

Do you have mount & blade: warband?

[Plug Drugs]

even though the person who wrote this is most likely a retard, you do realize this supports my point and not yours right

remind me, what were the points

[Gentleman Doli]

Do you have mount & blade: warband?

yes

[Camoron]

doli whats your steam ID

[elezzzark]

yes

Try to install Prophesy of Pendor, you will like it a lot

Maybe we will play online

[Gentleman Doli]

remind me, what were the points

i said feudalism had its roots among the "barbarians" more or less as an off-handed comment that i expected to be taken at face value because it's true and then you went off on some weird tangent about how actually it comes from rome (i assume youre trying to relate it to the patron-client system of rome when actually this influenced italian dynamics but not european feudalism in the slightest).

[Gentleman Doli]

Try to install Prophesy of Pendor, you will like it a lot

Maybe we will play online

i have that its hard

[Gentleman Doli]

doli whats your steam ID

generaldoli

[elezzzark]

i have that its hard

You shouldn't to face against biggest groups and elven warriors. Try to organize your group aganist balanced group.

[Alex Littleton]

remind me, what were the points

Five of them all in NYC

[clay]

Youre stupid the moors invaded sicily in the late 9th century idiot

sicily is not italy

[rubycalaber]

topical huge image test
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Flickr_-_%E2%80%A6trialsanderrors_-_The_Colosseum,_Rome,_Italy,_ca._1896.jpg

[lnopia the great]

only thing ive learned reading thsi thread is that i dont want to study history

[rubycalaber]

test test test

[Gentleman Doli]

sicily is not italy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emirate_of_Bari :)

[Gentleman Doli]

Helo. My name is clay. ;] ;] ;] \ ;] ;]

[clay]

1.) The Emirate of Bari was a short-lived Saracen state (emirate) centred on the south Italian
2.) Saracen was a term used by the ancient Romans to refer to a people who lived in desert areas in and around the Roman province of Arabia
3.) Arabia Petraea, also called Provincia Arabia or simply Arabia, was a frontier province of the Roman Empire beginning in the 2nd century; it consisted of the former Nabataean kingdom in modern Jordan, southern modern Syria, the Sinai Peninsula and northwestern Saudi Arabia.

how stupid are you


Youre stupid the moors invaded sicily in the late 9th century idiot

seriously, how stupid

[clay]

http://i.imgur.com/gx8yS.png

At the dynasty's greatest expanse of control

[Gentleman Doli]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors#Medieval_Southern_Italy

[Gentleman Doli]

http://i.imgur.com/gx8yS.png

At the dynasty's greatest expanse of control

The Almoravids were , exclusively, the Moors, and you arent an idiot arguing semantics

[Gentleman Doli]

1.) The Emirate of Bari was a short-lived Saracen state (emirate) centred on the south Italian
2.) Saracen was a term used by the ancient Romans to refer to a people who lived in desert areas in and around the Roman province of Arabia
3.) Arabia Petraea, also called Provincia Arabia or simply Arabia, was a frontier province of the Roman Empire beginning in the 2nd century; it consisted of the former Nabataean kingdom in modern Jordan, southern modern Syria, the Sinai Peninsula and northwestern Saudi Arabia.

how stupid are you



seriously, how stupid

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/523863/Saracen

[Gentleman Doli]

The people who conquered Bari were people from the fucking tiny Roman province of ARabia by the ancient ROman definition, and it makes sense to apply it to a time 400 years after the Roman Empire fell, and not "Saracens" in the general medieval form of the word which came to mean all practicioners of Islam including berbers, turks, and arabs. This makes a lot of sense, and isnt a really retarded line of arguement.

[Gentleman Doli]

The thing I love even more is that youre quoting from the first line of a wikipedia page without even bothering to read the freaoocking next two sentecnces haha clay youre so retarded and i hate you

In Europe during the Middle Ages the term was expanded to include Arabs, and then all who professed the religion of Islam.[1] The expansion of the meaning occurred first among the Byzantine Greeks and then among the Latins.[1] By the time of the Crusades, beginning in 1095, a "Saracen" had become synonymous with a "Muslim" in European chronicles.

[Gentleman Doli]

Bari first became the object of Arab or Berber raids in late 840 or early 841, when it was briefly occupied.[1] According to Al-Baladhuri, Bari was conquered from the Byzantine Empire by Kalfün, a mirwah—perhaps a servant or escaped slave—of the Aghlabid Emir of Africa.[2] Kalfün (Khalfun) was probably of Berber stock,

[Gentleman Doli]

Clay do you want me to keep going or are you going to stop being an annoying little bitch when I know more about this than you do and youre retarded

[clay]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Almoravids1120.png

[Gentleman Doli]

so what are the facts

[1] saracen is a general term used in the medieval ages often applied to all muslims
[2] saracen is used on a wikipedia page talking about the emirate of bari
[3] "moor" is a similarly general term without much ethnological meaning but, being lenient to clay the retard, can be said to mean "those of berber stock" if we really want to narrow it down even though this is wrong
[4] bari was conquered by a slave from the Emirate of Africa (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emir_of_Africa) and was most likely of berber stock
[5] Bari was conquered by both a Moor and a Saracen by both definitions
[6] clay doesnt know how to read wikipedia unless its for cool semantic arguements made up of "well the meaning of the word fag is actually bundle of sticks, and im not one of those you retard"
[7] Moors went into Italy and clay youre so wrong lol

[Gentleman Doli]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dc/Almoravids1120.png

pretty sure you missed my point about the berbers and further the moors not being united under one grand dynasty called the Almoravids because they werent

[Gentleman Doli]

Damn. Thats some damn good shit, some damn good historical arguements and what not. But you understemated me. I have a map I downloaded from Medieval Total War about my favorite faction the Almoravids (the moors)

[rootbeer]

white germanic is the best race what who said that

[clay]

1.) not in the 9th century
2.) obviously. because the saracens of the 9th century were from arabia.
3.) i didnt specify what i consider to be a moor, so you're pretending to argue a point in order to stick it.
4.) again the emirate of bari was under saracen(arab) control
5.) bari was not an italian city at this time
6.) not part of this argument, again.
7.) bari was not an italian city at this time

[clay]

going back to the original argument, muslims never had any sort of major presence in italy and they had nothing to do with the fall of rome

[Gentleman Doli]

1.) not in the 9th century
2.) obviously. because the saracens of the 9th century were from arabia.
3.) i didnt specify what i consider to be a moor, so you're pretending to argue a point in order to stick it.
4.) again the emirate of bari was under saracen(arab) control
5.) bari was not an italian city at this time
6.) not part of this argument, again.
7.) bari was not an italian city at this time

you dont get to keep posting maps of the almoravids and then say "i never specified what i was calling a moor!! haha loooool fail." when it was really obvious you were using moor to refer exclusively to the berbers in al-andalus which is so fucking wrong its retarded. first the wikipedia article youre using as a source to mean "saracen" was written in the 21st century you retard, its not a long lost relic of the 9th century i promise second "not in 800 A.D." yeah, and you know that how exactly? third, the conqueror of bari was not an "arab", he was a berber. berbers are moors. also, what do you mean "bari was not an italian city at this time". yes, it was. it is not possible to translocate a city from off of a peninsula, and if youre arguing culturally then youre seriously the biggest idiot in the world because the person who first brought up moors and italy was talking about the general region of italy not the medieval use of the word which referred more or less to the kingdom in charlegmanes empire anyway youre dumb.

[Gentleman Doli]

oh hey clay, look, heres something else that i could google easily because my keyboard wasnt covered in snickers leavings

There is also the people-deceiving cult (threskeia) of the Ishmaelites, the forerunner of the Antichrist, which prevails until now. It derives from Ishmael, who was born to Abraham from Hagar, wherefore they are called Hagarenes and Ishmaelites. And they call them Saracens, inasmuch as they were sent away empty-handed by Sarah; for it was said to the angel by Hagar: "Sarah has sent me away empty-handed" (cf. Book of Genesis xxi. 10, 14).

The Fountain of Knowledge by John of Damascus ,c. 730 AD, Chapter On Heresy

[Gentleman Doli]

note in that document that saracen refers to the ishmaelites i.e. the muslims, not the arabs.

[Gentleman Doli]

:rolleyes: Yeah... really nice medieval source there, Doli. You do realize that I have this map of the Almoravid dynasty, right?

[lnopia the great]

pissing match of reposting actual smart peoples work

[Gentleman Doli]

i just want clay to be wrong rly badly bcause i hat hte mods and admins of this site and every blow i strike against them i s once step closer to freedom for all posters

[Gentleman Doli]

pissing match of reposting actual smart peoples work

also this is litreally the academic discipline of "history"... makes u think..

[clay]

having to wade through your posts is honestly such a punishment, dude. i'll read the last 18 ones you did, in response to like 1 of mine, tomorrow

[Gentleman Doli]

or you could just stop postin g here. Thank you

[rubycalaber]

going back to the original argument, muslims never had any sort of major presence in italy and they had nothing to do with the fall of rome

I think you'll find muslims caused the fall of all civilizations as our good friend Anders Breivik understands

[rubycalaber]

http://i.imgur.com/CHkvp.jpg

I'm sorry, did you say """""civilized"""" (fuck you ruby)"?

I thought you'd like animals killing the fuck out of humans

[lnopia the great]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Henry_David_Thoreau.jpg

[clay]

you dont get to keep posting maps of the almoravidsthe almoravid dynasty was the largest that the moors had ever expanded and conquered. so by posting this, i am showing you the maximum possible range of moorish rule.


then say "i never specified what i was calling a moor!! haha loooool fail." when it was really obvious you were using moor to refer exclusively to the berbers in al-andalus which is so fucking wrong its retarded. i didnt specify what i called a moor. you were putting words into my mouth in order to create a counterargument. thats pathetic.


first the wikipedia article youre using as a source to mean "saracen" was written in the 21st century you retard, its not a long lost relic of the 9th century i promise second "not in 800 A.D." yeah, and you know that how exactly?at the time, saracen was used as a term for people from or around arabia at the outreaches of the roman empire. it was only used to refer to any muslim, probably as a slur, around the time of the crusades and later. so the 12th century and beyond. please observe this:
Sar·a·cen
   [sar-uh-suhn] Show IPA
noun
1. History/Historical . a member of any of the nomadic tribes on the Syrian borders of the Roman Empire.
2. (in later use) an Arab.
3. a Muslim, especially in the period of the Crusades.
relevant to that, i will also tie in the following:

oh hey clay, look, heres something else that i could google easily because my keyboard wasnt covered in snickers leavings

There is also the people-deceiving cult (threskeia) of the Ishmaelites, the forerunner of the Antichrist, which prevails until now. It derives from Ishmael, who was born to Abraham from Hagar, wherefore they are called Hagarenes and Ishmaelites. And they call them Saracens, inasmuch as they were sent away empty-handed by Sarah; for it was said to the angel by Hagar: "Sarah has sent me away empty-handed" (cf. Book of Genesis xxi. 10, 14).

The Fountain of Knowledge by John of Damascus ,c. 730 AD, Chapter On Heresy
specifically where you got this from, again, was a wikipedia page youve already referred to. under the paragraph of your selected quote, it says:
Eusebius and Epiphanius Scholasticus, in their Christian histories, place Saracens east of the Gulf of Aqaba but beyond the Roman province of Arabia
this is a reference to the middle east. the ishmaelites in your quote resided east of the shur of egypt, so in the sinai peninsula, all the way up to assyria, or iraq. the person who wrote your quote about what defines saracens from the 8th century was from damascus, or syria, and never left the middle east. your own posting and the related documents suggest that during that time, saracen referred to tribes in the middle east.

third, the conqueror of bari was not an "arab", he was a berber. berbers are moors.specifically i said that the emirate of bari was under saracen control. i didn't mention any person, so i'm not sure if you have trouble reading or just comprehending. you are the one who introduced the emirate of bari, documentation shows that the emirate of bari was a saracen state, and i have just proven that under these contemporary boundaries, saracen refers to people of the middle east.

also, what do you mean "bari was not an italian city at this time". yes, it was. it is not possible to translocate a city from off of a peninsula, and if youre arguing culturally then youre seriously the biggest idiot in the world because the person who first brought up moors and italy was talking about the general region of italy not the medieval use of the word which referred more or less to the kingdom in charlegmanes empire anyway youre dumb. bari, at the time, was under byzantine rule. which by all accounts is not roman/italian rule. the person who first brought up italy was more than likely referring to roman rule, not modern italian geographical boundaries.
How come Italy used to be the center of the civilized worlditaly has never been the center of anything, so he was obviously referring to the roman empire. if you want to get back to basics, which is what you are suggesting, then every part of your argument was after the fall of rome. so you've completely lost, as nothing after the fall can be the cause of the fall.

[Gentleman Doli]

the almoravid dynasty was the largest that the moors had ever expanded and conquered. so by posting this, i am showing you the maximum possible range of moorish rule.

the moors were not a collective unified state, you are identifying a people with a dynasty and its weird and wrong.


i didnt specify what i called a moor. you were putting words into my mouth in order to create a counterargument. thats pathetic.


http://i.imgur.com/gx8yS.png

At the dynasty's greatest expanse of control

you pretty clearly are implying that the almoravids were moors and that this map of their expansion is somehow the limit to moorish conquest which is the most bizarre idea ive ever heard


at the time, saracen was used as a term for people from or around arabia at the outreaches of the roman empire. it was only used to refer to any muslim, probably as a slur, around the time of the crusades and later. so the 12th century and beyond. please observe this:
Sar·a·cen
   [sar-uh-suhn] Show IPA
noun
1. History/Historical . a member of any of the nomadic tribes on the Syrian borders of the Roman Empire.
2. (in later use) an Arab.
3. a Muslim, especially in the period of the Crusades.

cool, yo


relevant to that, i will also tie in the following:

specifically where you got this from, again, was a wikipedia page youve already referred to. under the paragraph of your selected quote, it says:
Eusebius and Epiphanius Scholasticus, in their Christian histories, place Saracens east of the Gulf of Aqaba but beyond the Roman province of Arabia

again, youre an idiot because one of those people wrote over 600 years before the time in question and the other wrote 300 years before it


this is a reference to the middle east. the ishmaelites in your quote resided east of the shur of egypt, so in the sinai peninsula, all the way up to assyria, or iraq. the person who wrote your quote about what defines saracens from the 8th century was from damascus, or syria, and never left the middle east. your own posting and the related documents suggest that during that time, saracen referred to tribes in the middle east.

yes, the christians of the 9th century had a very nuanced view of the muslim world and made these kinds of distinctions all the time. please go kill yourself for making this shit up.


specifically i said that the emirate of bari was under saracen control. i didn't mention any person, so i'm not sure if you have trouble reading or just comprehending. you are the one who introduced the emirate of bari, documentation shows that the emirate of bari was a saracen state, and i have just proven that under these contemporary boundaries, saracen refers to people of the middle east.

critique my reading comprehension and then proceed to ignore the fact that yes, i brought up bari, and i also happened to bring up the person who conquered bari, who was just as much of a moor as the almoravids were. its cool to say "documentation" and then not actually explain yourself, either way, it doesnt show that the emirate of bari was an "arab" (syrian, arabian, whatever) state, in fact quite the opposite. it was a berber regime. if you really want to argue this then youre an idiot but we already knew that.


bari, at the time, was under byzantine rule. which by all accounts is not roman/italian rule. the person who first brought up italy was more than likely referring to roman rule, not modern italian geographical boundaries. italy has never been the center of anything, so he was obviously referring to the roman empire. if you want to get back to basics, which is what you are suggesting, then every part of your argument was after the fall of rome. so you've completely lost, as nothing after the fall can be the cause of the fall.

considering rome as an entity only existed in the form of the byzantines in this time period your argument is filled with a retarded number of holes. you said moors never went into italy. if you want to redefine italy to mean something weird then that's fine, but im going to stick with the conventional definition of italy which is the peninsula and occasionally malta and sicily. since youre so fond of maps heres one

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Roman_Italy.gif

nobody thinks that the moors caused the fall of the roman empire unless they're retarded, the moors werent even around, you had said that the moors never went into italy and yet they did, that's what ive been arguing and just because you like to live in a snickers filled fantasy land where arguments can only be monolithic and you can either accept the entire thing or dismiss all of it doesnt mean that everyone else does.

the only part of your argument that i have been arguing was the moorish presence in italy. your argument is predicated on the fact that

1) the almoravid dynasty represents the maximum extent of moorish expansion (no, and i dont know where you got this idea)
2) because the wikipedia article says that the emirate of bari was a saracen state that means it could not have been a moorish state, and because you are a retard who is trying to grasp for every straw he can to hold onto his argument, you decided to make a giant semantic thing about it (the emirate was founded by a berber slave, it was as moorish as you can get)
3) bari was not part of italy because it was ruled by the byzantines, just like when the Normans invaded England it ceased being England because it was ruled by French-speaking Scandinavians

all three of these points are so wrong and terrible it's honestly sad, it's funny how drugs and snickers have the same effect on people wrt italy

[Gentleman Doli]

i am an american. if i went to some shithole african country and conquered it and installed all my american buddies as friends, it would only actually be a british regime, obviously.

[Camoron]

going back to the original argument, muslims never had any sort of major presence in italy and they had nothing to do with the fall of rome

islam didnt even exist when the roman empire collapsed lol

[rubycalaber]

I like how their argument is gradually going down sentence by sentence through one wikipedia article

[Dustin]

I like how their argument is gradually going down sentence by sentence through one wikipedia article

:rofl: oh god ruby with the massive posts

[Gentleman Doli]

I like how their argument is gradually going down sentence by sentence through one wikipedia article

The State of Modern Scholarship

[rootbeer]

moors wins again

[maks]

http://i.imgur.com/edT0o.png
http://i.imgur.com/Le2tp.png

leave.

[rubycalaber]

http://i.imgur.com/edT0o.png
http://i.imgur.com/Le2tp.png

:zahi:

[m0nde]

Steam has finished downloading Sid Meier's Civilization V