https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Tours
>>555906
Thats not how you spell Odo of Aquitaine
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Toulouse_(721)
>>555906
>ignoring the siege of Byzantium.
>>556560
By the time of the siege of Vienna, Europe as a whole had vastly eclipsed the Muslim world. I mean, Austria was a great power, but probably weaker than any of France, Spain, or England, who were sitting this one out.
1529 going differently would probably have led to a different religious and possibly even ethnic makeup in southeast Europe, but it wouldn't have permanently altered things.
>>556591
Were the Ottomans able to conquer Austria they would instantly get annihilated within the decade because then they would be France's new nemesis.
And there was no beating France back then.
>>555906
There were still Arab European enclaves in Southern France and Italy for centuries after Charles died, not to mention the Emirate/Caliphate of Cordoba and its successors. The 8th and 9th century was about the Franks invading the rest of Europe while the Arabs and others were raiders, pirates, and mercenaries that thrived on its borders.
>>555906
*Stopped a minor raiding expedition
Honestly, the Umayyad's knew their lines were impossible stretched and wouldn't be able to hold territory past Gascony
>>556875
>they were only pretending!
>>557182
Actually it was only a raid (probably to scout further Frankish clay to conquer, only to be deterred).
Still doesnt undermine its significance though.
Also,
>Posting based Jean de La Valette
I like you now.
>>557182
>Mathias Corvinus
>not Janos Hunyadi
>>557182
>no based constatine palaiologos
>no based alexios komnenos
>>556591
>By the time of the siege of Vienna, Europe as a whole had vastly eclipsed the Muslim world.
The Ottomans were more powerful than the European powers.
>I mean, Austria was a great power, but probably weaker than any of France, Spain, or England, who were sitting this one out.
Austria and Spain were both ruled by Charles V.
England under Henry VIII was not very powerful and was weaker even than Austria without Hungary, Bohemia, Burgundy (including Flanders) and Spain.
>>556875
This
The consequences of the battle of Tours are overrated to be quite honest
>>557191
>Actually it was only a raid
Arab sources suggest there were 50k "raiders" And even if it was a raid, the Muslims were trying to stay in europe,they were holding the city of Narbonne until 729.
>Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers -already, you see, the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity! -then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism [Islam], that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so.
What were the chances of the germanic people actually adopting Islam back in the 8th century?
>>557282
>The Ottomans were more powerful than the European powers.
Please. The war demonstrated they weren't a match for Austria alone, let alone all of Christendom.
>Austria and Spain were both ruled by Charles V.
So? They were still very much seperate entities, even if they were all Hapsburg.
>England under Henry VIII was not very powerful and was weaker even than Austria without Hungary, Bohemia, Burgundy (including Flanders) and Spain.
They could pull together bigger armies for the wars of the roses, some decades earlier, than Austria could muster up to defend Vienna. They weren't active on the Continent, and they had yet to develop their colonial empire, but they were hardly weaklings.
>>556611
Conquering Austria wasn't even on the table for the Ottoman's, just besieging Vienna.
>>557567
Not as good as they are now.
