Not at all, its mostly that I never hear how english speaking people use french name, for example in the video he used Francis the Ist instead of François Ier
2:58 It's not well-known today, but the site of the Dome of the Rock was *also* a church (dedicated to the Mother of God/Theotokos, St. Mary) before the Islamic invasion of the Levant.
@EzzadinFarah Correct, I didn't make that statement with any hidden sentiment in mind. Things change, and we should acknowledge how and when those changes occurred where applicable.
Very briefly on the scale of history that is the history of Jerusalem. But ... Yes. Medieval Christians liked to claim the high points and centers of cities as sacred sites. Thankfully, they did not also wrap the site in Christian mythology, as Islam did. The current problems would be even worse, if they had.
I wonder what could have made al hakim do a complete 180 in religious policy, did his mother die and cause him to start feeling guilty and speaking of his mother how did she react to his religious prosecutions ?
The answer at this moment is that we don't know. One issue is that al-Hakim was a pretty contentious figure so its difficult know if justifications others gave for his actions in the historical record are true. Some people said he was madman, other people said he was a very pious person. But its also important to remember that he became Caliph when he was 10 years old and changed when he was 28 so it could just be that he grew up. If you want to learn about it in detail check out the Caliph of Cairo by Paul E Walker
Great work, always a delight to see your videos. Interesting how secular France still tried to argue they had rights to all the area against the British.
Thanks for the support! There are always stories that come out about the conflicts that happen when the French President goes to visit these sites, notably with Macron and Chirac
In the end, the Frankish crusaders have succeeded. Very good and inforative video, really thorough yet concise in its summary of MULTIPLE centuries of complex geopolitics.
@@seventhtenthThe Bible states that he lied in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb in *all four Canonical gospels, including Acts.* Whether or not he rose from the dead is irrelevant. He was buried in there for at least a period of time. Every mainline denomination believes that.
@@seventhtenthAccording to the Bible, yes Jesus was definitely crucified (planted on a cross till death) then buried. According to the Quran (if you believe the "Jesus" spoken of in both to be the same person), he was neither crucified nor buried.
(Before watching) Of course France would claim it, France has a bit of an inferiority complex in general when it comes to their former colonial (or in this case, crusader) possessions. That's why Francafrique was a thing for so long. They just privatized or outsourced the colonial part.
Ehhhh. That's quite a bit of a fudge. The whole néocolonialist criticism of post-war France is problematic. It's heavily doused in politics and in the past couple decades has become a propaganda talking point. France was reluctant to let go of its empire. Yes. Evidence: Algeria. But la France Afrique is a much trickier topic. You could argue that it's also evidence of that reluctance. However, it is also true that France and Britain were both attempting to be MORE responsible in HOW they decolonized than, say, the Belgian who left the Congo in an utterly ruinous state. The Brits were focused on institution building and wanted to leave behind an educated ruling class who could govern well and prevent tribal conflicts. They succeeded in only a couple cases. The French tried the economic technique of tying African economies to Paris. Did they succeed? In the Sahel, absolutely not. But in coastal West Africa? Well, the remaining ECOWAS Nations are now finally emerging economies. So, perhaps that's a partial yes. Take a closer look at the details of this history. It's complicated, but better than just going with the simplistic anticolonialist propaganda line. The devil is in the details.
20 годин тому+1
It is really hard to make anything succeed in Africa due to Africans themselves. The English keep boasting about their former colonies, but their colonies were made of mostly fellow Europeans, Canada for instance didn't go the African way because French Canadians were there to build stuff.
The whole point of a video like this is, like, how far do you want to go back to determine whether someone is descended from a colonialist or not, and who "rightfully" owns it? How do you decide what "native" even means? Nobody in the U.S. has a legitimate claim to any land if they aren't native, OK, what if some tribe kicked another out before then? How far back do you turn the clock? What's happened over the past century is idiotic, cruel, and shouldn't have happened- but if the clock's gonna turn back it should be their own damn fault. Just impose consequences and watch as they either chill or implode because they can't stop themselves.
The protection was specific to the Christian population even as a crowbar against the ottoman empire, Remember that most of eastern Anatolia and much of the levant had a predominantly christian population of Armenia, Greeks, Coptic and Syriac christians. The "native Palestinian" is as much as a colonizer to those people as the Arabs were to them before migration or outright genocide by the ottoman empire.
Considering France is there via a treaty with the Palestinian Authority on what grounds could the Palestinian Authority undermine its own signed treaties
Not only are these not mutually exclusive, but capitalism evolved in part out of protestant (Christian) thought. Even today, the most religious parties in Britain are also the most capitalist. Sure they struggle to resolve the ideological contradictions, but the implication that these beliefs weren't and aren't connected is silly.
As a french viewer of your its quite interesting to hear famous french names the way english speaking people use it.
Thanks for the support! Cool to know that I have fans in the Francophone world
This is a very polite way to say "sorry? What word was that?!"
Not at all, its mostly that I never hear how english speaking people use french name, for example in the video he used Francis the Ist instead of François Ier
2:58 It's not well-known today, but the site of the Dome of the Rock was *also* a church (dedicated to the Mother of God/Theotokos, St. Mary) before the Islamic invasion of the Levant.
It also used to be a jewish temple and a pagan temple under Roman aelia capitalonia stuff changes man
@EzzadinFarah Correct, I didn't make that statement with any hidden sentiment in mind. Things change, and we should acknowledge how and when those changes occurred where applicable.
@@isaiah3872 I know I was just saying it’s ok
Very briefly on the scale of history that is the history of Jerusalem. But ... Yes.
Medieval Christians liked to claim the high points and centers of cities as sacred sites.
Thankfully, they did not also wrap the site in Christian mythology, as Islam did. The current problems would be even worse, if they had.
Ze French shall inherit ze holy land, wei wei
I wonder what could have made al hakim do a complete 180 in religious policy, did his mother die and cause him to start feeling guilty and speaking of his mother how did she react to his religious prosecutions ?
The answer at this moment is that we don't know. One issue is that al-Hakim was a pretty contentious figure so its difficult know if justifications others gave for his actions in the historical record are true. Some people said he was madman, other people said he was a very pious person. But its also important to remember that he became Caliph when he was 10 years old and changed when he was 28 so it could just be that he grew up. If you want to learn about it in detail check out the Caliph of Cairo by Paul E Walker
Always Watch your videos the day they drop 👍
Thanks for the support!
Great work, always a delight to see your videos. Interesting how secular France still tried to argue they had rights to all the area against the British.
Thanks for the support! There are always stories that come out about the conflicts that happen when the French President goes to visit these sites, notably with Macron and Chirac
Love your vibes always a highlight!
This is actually a really insightful video. I love videos that touch upon obscure topics nobody ever talks about, thanks!
Your videos always Great and great 👍👍👍👍👍
Well done algorithm.
You got me.
It’s not a colony but a gif from the ottoman empire for the help in the crimean war
In the end, the Frankish crusaders have succeeded.
Very good and inforative video, really thorough yet concise in its summary of MULTIPLE centuries of complex geopolitics.
The more important question is why it's in the shape of a perfect star🤔
but amazing video as always
Very interesting
I don't know how exciting this is; it seems like just embassy-theory.
And I thought the holy land wouldn't be victim to be renamed to "Côte-Sableuse"
The Crusade never ended
the Crusade ended. its hatred for the Crusade that never ended.
Youre just as terrible as the 'islam is invading europe' crowd
France is secular dude.
Always the french retaining colonial influence
Also Russia, the russian court
Cool
Outremer never ended
Jesus wasn't buried 1:05
9:42 blessings from men are worthless
sorry, just blasphemy according to the Bible
@@seventhtenthThe Bible states that he lied in Joseph of Arimathea's tomb in *all four Canonical gospels, including Acts.* Whether or not he rose from the dead is irrelevant. He was buried in there for at least a period of time. Every mainline denomination believes that.
@@seventhtenthAccording to the Bible, yes Jesus was definitely crucified (planted on a cross till death) then buried. According to the Quran (if you believe the "Jesus" spoken of in both to be the same person), he was neither crucified nor buried.
(Before watching)
Of course France would claim it, France has a bit of an inferiority complex in general when it comes to their former colonial (or in this case, crusader) possessions. That's why Francafrique was a thing for so long. They just privatized or outsourced the colonial part.
This isn't anything colonial or crusader, it was given by the Ottomans. It's more like the WW1 memorials owned by Canada in Western Europe.
Ehhhh. That's quite a bit of a fudge. The whole néocolonialist criticism of post-war France is problematic. It's heavily doused in politics and in the past couple decades has become a propaganda talking point.
France was reluctant to let go of its empire. Yes. Evidence: Algeria.
But la France Afrique is a much trickier topic. You could argue that it's also evidence of that reluctance. However, it is also true that France and Britain were both attempting to be MORE responsible in HOW they decolonized than, say, the Belgian who left the Congo in an utterly ruinous state. The Brits were focused on institution building and wanted to leave behind an educated ruling class who could govern well and prevent tribal conflicts. They succeeded in only a couple cases. The French tried the economic technique of tying African economies to Paris. Did they succeed? In the Sahel, absolutely not. But in coastal West Africa? Well, the remaining ECOWAS Nations are now finally emerging economies. So, perhaps that's a partial yes.
Take a closer look at the details of this history. It's complicated, but better than just going with the simplistic anticolonialist propaganda line.
The devil is in the details.
It is really hard to make anything succeed in Africa due to Africans themselves.
The English keep boasting about their former colonies, but their colonies were made of mostly fellow Europeans, Canada for instance didn't go the African way because French Canadians were there to build stuff.
Classic French W
I don’t think any colonial power has a legitimate claim over native palestinian land.
The whole point of a video like this is, like, how far do you want to go back to determine whether someone is descended from a colonialist or not, and who "rightfully" owns it? How do you decide what "native" even means? Nobody in the U.S. has a legitimate claim to any land if they aren't native, OK, what if some tribe kicked another out before then? How far back do you turn the clock?
What's happened over the past century is idiotic, cruel, and shouldn't have happened- but if the clock's gonna turn back it should be their own damn fault. Just impose consequences and watch as they either chill or implode because they can't stop themselves.
so if neither the Jewish, the French or the arabic people have any claim who does have claim?
The protection was specific to the Christian population even as a crowbar against the ottoman empire, Remember that most of eastern Anatolia and much of the levant had a predominantly christian population of Armenia, Greeks, Coptic and Syriac christians.
The "native Palestinian" is as much as a colonizer to those people as the Arabs were to them before migration or outright genocide by the ottoman empire.
Considering France is there via a treaty with the Palestinian Authority on what grounds could the Palestinian Authority undermine its own signed treaties
Native isreali land
I think i know who should own the holy land...
Idk, God probably
@AmericaIsACountry Fictional characters can't own land.
@@dragonballgacha and yet people want to give it to these "Palestinians"
8:33 England is a Capitalist power.
Not only are these not mutually exclusive, but capitalism evolved in part out of protestant (Christian) thought. Even today, the most religious parties in Britain are also the most capitalist. Sure they struggle to resolve the ideological contradictions, but the implication that these beliefs weren't and aren't connected is silly.
are you suggesting you aren’t allowed to be christian if your country chooses certain economic system
dgxshix ‘s comment is why literacy is so important.
@@julian4992 i can’t tell if your reply is supposed to tell me or the original commenter
@@DgxShixIt's an abominably bad faith take on the comment you are replying to...
Free Palestine 🇵🇸
Free France! France will Win fs!