🎥 Join our RUclips members and patrons to unlock exclusive content! Our community is currently enjoying deep dives into the First Punic War, Pacific War, history of Prussia, Italian Unification Wars, Russo-Japanese War, Albigensian Crusade, and Xenophon’s Anabasis. Become a part of this exclusive circle: ruclips.net/channel/UCMmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fwjoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals and Paypal paypal.me/kingsangenerals as well!
Revisionists have tried to portray the Battle of Tours (Poitiers) as a raid and not an invasion. However, looking at the map and seeing how far the Caliphate had marched into Francia and the size of the Caliphate's army, would lead one to believe that this was an attempt at conquest. The "Hammer" saved Europe.
@@stonem0013 Maybe u were right 1000 years ago, Today its just funny that u mention it when most of the M-E are bunch of terrorists/dictators and failed states.
@@stonem0013 Going with the ol' "Medieval Europe was a backwater" lie are we? It is quite the misconception. No doubt perpetuated by those wanting to diminish medieval Christian Europe in any way possible.
Tours inevitably stopped the arab conquest going further north. But in 735, they pushed east through Provence and Rhone valley. Charles decided to go there with his army and defeat them again. He started his campaign in 737, and to me, this campaign is much more significant in the history of France and in the process of repelling the muslim conquest than Tours. In 737, he cleared the rhone valley and took back every fortress of Provence in enemy hands one by one. Then, he entered Septimania, the only region north of the Pyerenees formally under Ummayad rule. He took all major cities except Narbonne. The Ummayad tried to help Septimania and sent a large force through the port of Narbonne to defeat Charles. He intercepted this force at the battle of River Berre and decisively defeated them. The battle of river Berre is very important, maybe equal or even more important than Tours. Because it made the Ummayads understand that they will inevitably lose Septimania and could not match Frankish power. From then, the Ummayads stopped sending reinforcements and soldiers north of the Pyrenees, somewhat accepting the fate of losing this land. Which happened a few years later when Charles' son, Pepin, laid Siege to Narbonne and took the city forcing the muslim survivors to choose between going back to the Emirate of Cordoba or being slaughtered on the spot. The Ummayads never tried any invasion of the Frankish kingdom again.
@@SoyluBayezid not really my friend. Yusuf main credit as Governor or Narbonne was to raid and pillage the Rhône in 735. When Charles and the Franks arrived in 737, Ummayads got systematically their asses whooped. Charles never lost a single battle to the muslims in his life.
Its True Umayyad never attempted to conquer France again. But at the time of Abdalrahman the Third, a group of rogue Muslim sailors landed in southern France, overtook all defenses and established Fraxtinatum, a Muslim rogue state that lasted approximately 100 years until the incident where whole of Europe gathered against Fraxtinatum.
Charles was defeated in nabronne 737 he failed took nabronne and septimania those cities would have been taken over by his son pepin during the internal conflicts between yousef al fahiri and abd rahman al dakhlil. Umayyad didn't had large force in lberia max army were less than 20k they had distribut their army all over cities. Battle of river berre wasn't important it was minor engagement charles was aware of incoming forces lead by Uqba ibn al Hajjaj and charles cut their route by sudden surpise attack. According to paul deacon umayyad army retreat due charles formed allies with. So Uqba was sucessfully reached to nabronne and secured it there was no fight. Tour is not even important battle it was raid party for loots
Slight correction on the artwork. Charles Martel was famously clean-shaven. It is said that during the battle "Charles removed his helmet so his men could see his clean shaven face and rally to him"
Arabic and islamic sources didn't mentioned events and details the battle of tour as they didn't viewed as important battle like they did in siege of constantinople 717. all they said where abd rahman al ghafqi invade francia and dead there. iam getting confused where he bringing what is called annymous arab historian without mentioning his name. Umayyad retreating to camp for loots event were most agreed in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic one of the earlist source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation Sounds like trying to amplifying charles's glories and achiement over this battle when it was just raid and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@123kickinitSUPER I mentioned one of oldest source came from chrincle of 757 mozarabic he mentioned abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed which he had no intention of conquest but raiding cities for loots
@@SithStudy Mongol was conquering lands and battle tour was raid and francia was getting raided for plundering cities even one of the oldest source mention tour came from chrincle of mozarabic 757
@@SithStudy Bruh i didn't make excuess tour was party raid for plundering cities if you dont believe me go check sources and read or go watch docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholar or go check chrincle of mozarabic 757 its oldest source mentioned battle
The battle of Tours is a good example for a counter-tactic. The Arabs strength was a mobile cavalry, with which they had beaten romans (east-rome), Persians, Visi-Goth and anyone they faced. The Franks knew the mix of the arab armys and their strategy since their vassal aquitaine was invaded by the arabs many times. So if your enemy is strong in mobility and setting traps, you can counter it with just dont play the mobility-game, but threatening his supply lines with your army, what he cant ignore. Another point is, since the arabs had experienced few resistence in europe until meeting the franks, they probably have judged the franks as relatively weak. In fact the franks where a nation that has grown by beating all other germanic kingdoms and tribes around in permanent wars. This facts and the seize of the frankish kingdom that could recruit many many warriors explains why the franks stopped the arabs, which many other nations including east-rome, persia and visigoth has failed to do.
Eastern Rome lost battles and ground to the Arabs but they weren't overwhelmed by them like the Persians were. Byzantium managed to Stop them with Greek fire at the siege of Constantinople (717 CE), thus delaying the spread of Islam into the Balkans for another 6-7 centuries.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
You seem to tell the whole story against all sources and all logic as well. Tour prevented the arab armys from further raiding and was a turning point in many ways. @@ghostd69
Charles didn't just buy an army with the loan from the Pope from some mercenary shop, most of the men with him at Tours were his seasoned veterans who have bled with him in many battles for over a decade by that point. Umayyads didn't just stumble upon a clever and shrewd strategist, they came upon arguably the hardest dudes in Western Europe at the time. Charles Martel saved Europe from Arabic conquest, there oughta be a statue of him on every corner everywhere in Europe.
Hiring mercenaries isn't the only thing the leader of an army can do with money, but could also bring back many veterans that had retired, promise the soldiers lands if victorious, reinforce the garrisons of endangered cities, manufacture and repair army equipment as well as ensure a steady supply line in case of a prolonged war
@@oishikhasan8500 Sobieski was an absolute beast. His victory at Vienna was arguably more important than Charles' victory at Tours - Vienna was falling when Sobieski showed up and ended it. 3000 Winged Hussars supported by 15,000 mixed cavalry... No one wants to be on the receiving end of that.
Yes but what about loser sambaji and shivaji father who served adilshah? For every 1 hero, you have 10 collaborators. Unfortunately you just know about the hero. @@oishikhasan8500
it was a small raid. the caliphate didn't even use their capable general Tariq ibn Ziad who conquered Spain and instead invited him to Damascus , because they deemed France as too insignificant. christians:" ohhhh we managed to defeat a " mighty caliphate army". ohhhh we can also win a battle against Muslims " lol
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
Proud to know Charles Martel is my 39th great grandfather. Most europeans are decended from him so im no one special but still. Incredible to know that fact
By this time (732), the Muslim Empire (Caliphate) had expanded so much vast & over such diverse populations & territories, that it would ultimately reach to a breaking point if proper consolidation policies wouldn't been applied in the newly conquered territories. And this is the mistake which Umayyads did, as they didn't properly consolidate territory in West Africa (today Morocco), Iberia, Indus & Transoxiana, leaving thus the regions at a risk of rebellion, which when combined with defeats at Tour (732) & in India & Transoxiana in 730s & finally led to serious inside revolts one of them being the Berber Revolt in 740, leading to the empire getting fractured from inside (Third Fitna & Abbasid Revolution), that ultimately resulted in the halting of expansion of Caliphate. Because by this time, almost 100 years in war, you shall not keep winning on tactics, politics & strategy also come into play to keep such far flung empire united, which the Umayyads failed to do, as they faced serious revolts both inside & shocking defeats outside resulting in to bring their own downfall.
@@robleyusuf2566 Yep bro. I mentioned that i.e. Third Fitna. And by that time in 740s, the Caliphate was in serious turmoil as it faced Third Fitna, as well as revolts in Mesopotamia, Yemen, Persia, Transoxiana (Abbasids), Iberia & West Africa. That's well written by Gibbon that the empire got besieged from within. As with so much revolts mounting from inside coupled with military situations arising on frontiers that are so much further, made an ultimate collapse a possibility, & it happened, fracturing the United Caliphate into 3 polities after 750 i.e. Abbasid Caliphate, Independent Berber Kingdoms in West Africa & Emirate of Cordoba in Iberia.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@hendrifai4223don't call them "Arab" but Muslims. the Muslims in that time were a small minority amongst the Arabs and were therefore not representative for all Arabs. the non-Muslim Arabs don't deserve any credit for the caliphate. in that time, the majority of Arabs were miserable and weak people who were christians or pagans, under the rule or romans and persians. then the Muslims conquered these two empires, and the christian and pagan Arabs got ruled by Muslim Arabs
The second I saw not one, but 6 videos about Prussia for members only, holy. I've never ran that fast for my credit card before. I'm watching them all after this, you guys have grown so much, the one about the First Crusade is just a masterpiece. As a historian, I cannot say how much I enjoy your videos.
It did.The Roman Kingdom of Soissons- the last Western Roman rump state- provided the Franks with a relatively intact administrative and economic foundation when they defeated Syagrius and annexed his realm, second only to the Ostrogoths among the barbarian Kingdoms. However, the Ostrogoths were eventually defeated by the Eastern Roman Empire. As a result, the Franks became the sole remaining barbarian kingdom with a semblance of centralized governance and Roman taxation systems, along with a well-organized core. They distinguished themselves by their strong connection to Roman culture, being Chalcedonian Christians, unlike other barbarians who followed Arianism. The Franks also appreciated Roman governance and were one of the last friendly barbarian allies of the Western Roman Empire until its collapse. They only ventured into Gaul when Roman governance completely disintegrated, with various barbarian groups and Roman generals vying for control, while the Franks had previously served as foederati along the Rhine, guarding the Roman frontier. Basically, the Franks had a high affinity for Roman culture along with the Ostrogoths (under Theoderic), as well as having access to a relatively well preserved island of Roman administration in the form of the Kingdom of Soissons- so it's not surprising that they were better off among the other Barbarian Kingdoms- especially when compared to their other barbarian peer, the Visigoths.
"Had there not be Frankish mountain, Arabian sea would drown us all." Serbian leader, poet, philosopher and ruler - Petar II Petrović Njegoš, in his majestic work, "Gorski vijenac"
Their victory had no effect... I invite you to go outside the Saint Denis basilique where all our kings are buried , including Charles Martel.. It is 80% muslim... So Charles Martel rests in a town populated by moors descendants 😂😂😂😂
@@LouisDeBonneDeCréquy All Empires and countries crumble one day nothing is for nothing, France future died in 1815 not in 2024, Saint Denis might be speaking English, Chinese or even Russian one day it wont change that this place was great during thousands of years, people still admire Rome after millennia, it's the same for Paris and France
Excellent video The early Arab-Muslim Empires were impressive. They fought simultaneously in deepest Europe and Central Asia. Looking forward to next video.
they took everyone by surprise, the same way the Mongols did 500 years later. But they were ultimately driven from Europe almost entirely, including Spain.
@@billybob5337The Mongols have large numbers, and they rely in their tactics on exhausting the enemy, such as throwing arrows, and they kill everything to end it with psychological warfare. As for the Arabs, they started with small armies, and they are among the smallest in number. They are distinguished by agility, speed, and ferocity, and they do not kill women, children, and the defenseless. I was hoping that all or most of the Arab tribes would come together and only they would be stopped. Lord, but this is impossible to this day
Yes, it is true that the start of the launch is from the Arabian Peninsula, which is now called Saudi Arabia. We are the descendants of the Umayyads. 🇸🇦
I have said this about many battles and historical events covered in this awesome channel but WHYYY has there not been a major epic movie about this ? Lol
The victory of Charles the « Hammer » changed future France and Europe forever . The genius of one man saved Christianity . Gibbon « without Charles Martel , France will be a Muhammad province » Voltaire .
Even in the event of a Muslim victory, the Arabs wouldn't be able to hold the conquered lands. The rest of Europe was never to stay idle but push them back all the way to Africa.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 it was just raid party and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@YouhavetoBelieve3347 Arabic and islamic sources didn't mentioned events and details the battle of tour as they didn't viewed as important battle like they did in siege of constantinople 717. all they said where abd rahman al ghafqi invade francia and dead there. iam getting confused where he bringing what is called annymous arab historian without mentioning his name. Umayyad retreating to camp for loots and plundering cities searching for loots were most agreed in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic one of the earlist source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation
@@anasanas-ky5qm actually, byzantium save europe , the main arab army was sieging constantinople at the time of the battle of tours. had constantinoplòe fall the arabs would have invade the entire of easter europe,italy and germany before they meet any serious opposition (aka the franks)
I sit here weeping at witnessing so much greatness while my achievements has equated to a fraction of what these titans of history have accomplished. Thanks for posting gents
It will please you to know that the great Julius Caeser still felt as you do. He openly spoke about how his achievements were not as significant as Alexander who was younger than he was when he conquered most of the known and some of the yet unknown world!! Your achievements are still significant my friend!!
Umm, we must not forget that 99.999999% of the titans of history only got to that point because they forced thousands of peasants and slaves to die for them, after hopefully killing slightly more peasants and slaves that were forced to fight for the losing side. These were not good men.
You should only ever compare yourself, to yourself the day before. These Kings and Generals are often raised for the role, and had troubles i would never want.
Charles was a great leader who knew his enemy well. He trained a professional army, picked up the battlefield, knew his strengths and weaknesses, and provided great leadership and innovative tactics.
yes, and the Muslim siege of Malta and the heroic stand of the knights of Malta, reminiscent of the 300 Spartans 6 years before Lepanto, and the destruction of the Muslim army by Polish King Jan Sobieski and Charles, Duke of Lorraine at the Gates of Vienna.
Since the title of this series is early Muslim expansion, do you have an end goal in mind? Or will it segue into e.g. Muslim consolidation or something along those lines?
Great way to begin the show with a short prologue of the map and little bit of story telling. I remember BazBattles usually do this kind of intro. Good job guys.
A lot of people are descendents of Charles Martel or Duke Odo. Some descend from both. Let me have my moment because I am a descendent of both!!!! Great video!
Hi from persia , Hail to the Hammer , it's interesting that 15 years after this war , Persian general Abumuslim from khorasan destroyed all of Umayyad caliphate he destroyed the war machine of Islam. ❤
@@archmandingo1 wow , so they were not beaten fully afterall , here they are causing you nightmares thousands of years later . cry in a corner body . lol
khazars did a big mistake in joining war with the byzantine against the caliphate they eventually get kicked around and lost their capital and territory
@aryahmuad3879 Do you also find the Massacre of Khaybar interesting, too? Or are you only interested in the battles where muslims pretend to be brave warriors? 🤔
@@aryahmuad3879 as a muslim, I have to say Badr has nothing particularly interesting on the military standpoint. You probably have a personal preference on other aspects. The early expansion of the Rashidun Caliphate is probably the most intense and captivating part of Islam's debut in my opinion.
@@archmandingo1 I see bringing up the "Massacre" (they were traitors and sought to rebel against the Muslims) of Khaybar useless, they were punished under Jewish law for the crime they committed.
If you talk, you have to talk with respect about my ancestors. I am proud that I am a descendant of the Umayyads and that our original homeland is Saudi Arabia.
Moahmed ibn qasim defeated inidians he reached in maumbora city at Gujarat province if he didn't dead he would expanding more.. all inidian kingdoms formed alliance to stop umayyad
The number of people coping in the comments sayign it was totally just a raiding force we definitely didn't want to repeat what happenned in Spain and colonise the land completely. Typically also the same people who say that Frankia was jsut a backwater to the Islamic empire, yes because of course you want to raid people poorer than you not take their lands. So much money to be made in "raiding" backwaters lol.
Spain is different suitation it was well supported by caliphate and conquest was preformed by stragties and planning by musa ibn nasyr he sent one of his commander to spain to scout the area before they begin their conquest which umayyad was well prepared and supported for conquest spain unlike tour Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
From my historical perspective of the Battle of Tours/Poitiers, basically three main factors contributed to the Frankish victory: • 1) The first factor, in my historical analysis, is the very discipline of the Frankish forces (as the video superbly highlighted). Charles Martel's soldiers were, first and foremost, battle-hardened veterans of other campaigns, as well as being extremely loyal to their commander. In his book "The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, from Marathon to Waterloo", Sir Edward Creasy pointed out that "Charles Martel added experienced skill to his natural courage, and he had also formed a militia of veterans among the Franks" (pag 83). Furthermore, the devastating Saracen raids throughout Gaul ended up boosting the fighting spirit of the Franks. In the Frankish mindset, it was necessary to halt the Muslim invader once and for all! Otherwise, there wouldn't be a village in Gaul that would be spared from looting. In other words, the violence of the Saracen attacks boosted the Franks' willingness to fight the enemy. As Edward Creasy pointed out: "So dreadful and so wide-spread were the ravages of the Saracenic fight cavalry throughout Gaul that it must have been impossible to restrain, for any length of time, the indignant ardour of the Franks" (Chapter VII, pag 83-84). • 2) Instead of waging the battle in an open field, Charles Martel had positioned his army in a slightly elevated forest, which ended up facilitating the Frankish defense. By placing his troops in an elevated forest near the Vienne river, Charles not only managed to disrupt and minimize the impact of the Muslim cavalry, but he also managed to screen the true size of his army! This strategy adopted by Charles Martel, for example, made Abd al-Rahman reluctant, since he did not see the exact number of the Frankish forces. By positioning his troops on a forested hill, Charles Martel was able to reduce the effectiveness of the ferocious Moorish cavalry! Martel therefore fought how and where he wanted, which proved decisive for his victory. • 3) Odo the Great's forces! In addition to Charles Martel's soldiers, the forces of Duke Odo of Aquitaine were also essential for the Frankish victory at Poitiers (as the video highlighted). Unlike Charles Martel, Duke Odo had been fighting Muslims since 721, i.e., 11 years prior to Poitiers. It was Duke Odo, not Charles Martel, who received the brunt of the Muslim attacks! His fiefdom, the Duchy of Aquitaine, had been attacked since 721, when Governor Al-Samh crossed the Pyrenees with his army. It was Duke Odo's forces, for example, who defeated Governor Al-Samh's forces at the Battle of Toulouse, in which Al-Samh himself had been killed. Furthermore, it was Odo who warned Charles Martel of the danger of the Muslim advance, which inevitably provided time for Charles to prepare for battle. At the Battle of Poitiers/Tours, Odo's forces were essential to the Frankish victory, as they attacked the Arabs from the rear. While Martel's infantry was still engaging the Arab cavalry charges, Odo's forces, who were strategically deployed in Martel's rear, decided to attack the Muslim camp itself! By attacking the Muslims from the rear, Odo intended to ravage the Muslim camp, free slaves, retrieve booty, and, most importantly, draw off part of Abd al-Rahman's forces. Odo's strategy of attacking the enemy from the rear, in my historical analysis, was simply essential to the Frankish victory, as this caused the Moorish troops to retreat towards their own camp! Upon Odo's attack, many Arab units rushed back to save their treasures. Odo's attacks, therefore, shook Arab discipline itself, and not even Abd al-Rahman himself, who was highly respected by his men, managed to restore discipline. By attacking the Muslim camp, Odo managed to destroy not only the Moorish morale, but their discipline as well. In the confusion that followed the withdrawal of the Moorish troops, Abd al-Rahman himself was killed, which further increased the despair of the Muslim forces. Needless to say, Abd al-Rahman's death completely demoralized the Muslim forces. According to Edward Creasy: "The European writers all concur in speaking of the fall of Abd al-Rahman as one of the principal causes of the defeat of the Arabs; who, according to one writer, after finding that their leader was slain, dispersed in the night, to the agreeable surprise of the Christians" (Chapter VII, 84). The fact that Muslim military morale had collapsed after Abd al-Rahman's death at Poitiers, however, has a historical explanation: Abd al-Rahman's popularity as a leader and governor. Virtually all Muslim sources portray Abd al-Rahman as a just and righteous ruler. In his book "The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, from Marathon to Waterloo", Sir Edward Creasy pointed out: "In addition to his cardinal military virtues, Abd al-Rahman is described by the Arab writers as a model of integrity and justice. The first two years of his second administration in Spain were occupied in severe reforms of the abuses which his predecessors had crept into the system of government" (Chapter VII, pag 83). Therefore, Abd al-Rahman's death came as a heavy blow to the troops, as their esteemed ruler now lay dead on the battlefield. Be that as it may, the Battle of Poitiers was only won thanks to a set of factors. If it were not for the discipline of Martel's soldiers, as I explained in the first factor, the Frankish defeat would be inevitable. The terrain, as I explained in the second factor, was also decisive.
I had heard that odo was fighting the muslims alone for years partially due to the fact that he was possibly a rival getting a little too strong, and martel wanted to weaken him a bit. Was there any truth to that?
@@DarkSygil666 Odo (or Eudo) was indeed a rival to Charles. In 732 Charles raided Aquitane twice to try and bring Eudo to heel. And many historians think that Charles was able to move so quickly agaisnt the Moors because he had already mobilized his army for a third attack when the Moors defeated Odo and the Duke came begging for help.
Martel was calculating and strategic He waited for Odo to receive the Moorish host to study the battle to prepare for the inevitable especially the Moorish cavalry charges that helped the Ummayeds to travel so fast thus Martel’s choice of ground to negate the Ummayed hammer and anvil as well as the large amount of booty hindering the speed of Ummayed invading force both psychologically and physically hence the defeat in Tours along with Al Ghafiqi’s weak intelligence on the Mayor of Franks his battle hardened troops the mode of battle the Franks waged and their readiness to defend their ground for the defender has more to lose if defeated Hence Al Ghafiqi must have sent reconnaissance and intelligence on Martel slow down a major encounter but continue the raids on Frankish surroundings and perhaps a more surprising move from my part would be to employ the service of Duke Odo in return to keep his fiefdom and return his daughter in exchange for partnership against the Hammer of the Franks who given from the material read on him was only defeated once unprepared during the Frankish war of succession but remained undefeated ever since fighting in very unorthodox ways Once good intel sufficient cavalrymen without infantry this time and by mongol tactics of hit and run on Martel’s territories to enrich the Moors well placing booty back to a fortification secure and away from Martel’s incursions as well as using Odo’s knowledge of terrain Martel and his Allie’s perhaps to divide and conquer maybe invite back the Merovingians as puppet and choose the ideal ground for Ummayed cavalry superiority or lure Charles into one again through mongol tactics Usual Ummayed Sawaif and Shuwati or Summer and Autumn raids and patience to draw the Hammer of the Franks to-a trap Even if Martel avoided the baits his troops or subjects will goad him to act or revolt hence heads or tails for Charles
@@barryirlandi4217 Easy answer is it was both. The Caliphate followed a military doctrine of first raiding, then, if finding weakness simply staying, or returning with with a conquering force. Essentially, if Charles had not defeated them at Tours, it is likely they would have taken the city of Tours as winter quarters, and as a Forward Operating Base, to raid and conquer further into Europe.
I enjoy less common titles for historical people. There are so many "the Greats" out there, but not many "the Hammers" haha. In all seriousness, thank you for another excellent episode. God be with you out there everybody. ✝️ :)
Traxonuna was entirely conquered by qotybs so thry didn't prevent them umayyad later went into internal conflicts and civil war and even army in traxonuna fought esch other which why they stop advancing and for khazar they lost their capital blanjar and south cascuss to caliphate . There was no serious wars between caliphate and tang they both were bordered each other without no conflicts most of time till abbasid peroid they just fought one battle but in entire regin both had good relationship
He was my 37th great grandfather. Philippe Jean Kogler, You → Denise Kogler, your mother → Marcelle Helene Marchoux, her mother → Jean Texier, her father → Jean Texier, his father → Pierre Texier, his father → Marquis Etienne Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Etienne-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Pierre-Francois-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Henri-Bernard Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Bernard Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Comte Jean-Francois Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Henri de Texier, his father → Francois de Texier, Seigneur du Breuil, his father → Catherine de Texier, his mother → Baron Raymond de Lambertye de Montbrun, her father → Seigneur François De Lambertie, his father → Jean De Lambertie, his parent → Catherine De Lambertie, his mother → Allemande de Gontaut Biron, her mother → Gaston de Gontaut, IV, her father → Pierre De Gontaut Biron, his father → Gaston de Gontaut Biron, III, his father → Marguerite Marqueze de Lomagne, his mother → Obrie de L'Isle-Jourdain, her mother → Bernard Jourdain de L'Isle-Jourdain, Comte de L'Isle-Jourdain & de Dunes, her father → Bernard I de L'Isle-Jourdain, his father → Jourdain I de Lisle, his father → Raymond I de Lisle, his father → Emma Taillefer, his mother → Guillaume III Taillefer, comte de Toulouse, her father → Adélaïde la Blanche d'Anjou, Reine consort d'Aquitaine, his mother → Fulk II, Count of Anjou, her father → Fulko I "Le Rouge", Comte de Anjou, his father → Ingelger, count of Anjou, his father → Petronelle d'Auxerre de Gâtinais, Comtesse de Anjou, his mother → Hugo, Archchancellor of the Empire, her father → Charlemagne, Römisch-deutscher Kaiser, his father → Pippin der Jüngere, his father → Karl "der Hammer" Martell, his father
Charles Martel: So the Muslims want to take France by force, huh? Leo the Isaurian: Hey Charles, you need any help? Charles Martel: Nah Leo, I can handle on my own. I have my first professional army to beat the Umayyads head on.
I don't know how to put it, but the way the opening set up this video just felt different. It made me feel like this was something important. A big deal. It's a good way to set the tone for this whole line of videos.
That's the problem with battles happening in the same geographic area throughout history, most anglo's refer to the battle of Poitiers to the battle there in the 100 years war. One other example of battles with different names comes up quite a bit in the US civil war e.g. the union battle of Bull Run / confederacy Battle of Manassas and this was in the same language in the same period of time.
Battle of the Tours by the Frankish Kingdom and Reconquista is my favourite bit of history as is the Ruy Lopez my favourite chess opening, and 4-3-3 is my favourite football formation.
@@davidvasey5065 4-4-2 is good for defence 4-3-3 is more potent in attack. Carlo Ancelotti and Jose Mourinho used to play 4-3-3 in attack and 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 in defence, they used a version of 4-2-3-1.
I know it's a minor complaint, but "loosing" vs "losing" at 9:55 is disappointing to see in such great summaries of these conflicts that your channel makes.
@@KingsandGenerals no, disappointing is right. It's not a big disappointment by any means, but it is one. I appreciate your content, and I hope that you don't have to deal with people like me in the future. Good luck.
I was wondering but I know you covered the Italian wars of unification aka Risorgimento already and I was wondering if you could do a video on the battle of Castelfidardo and the battle was fought during the expedition of the thousand and the battle was fought on September 18th 1860 and the battle was a Sardinian victory and the opposing sides/ forces were the Sardinians under Enrico Cialdini Duke of Gaeta and he had a strength of 4,880 mobilized and the Sardinians suffered 62 killed and 184 wounded however on the other side was the papal state forces which consisted of volunteers from many European nations including France, Belgium, Austria and Ireland and they were under the command of 3 commanders/ leaders and these 3 were French general Christophe Leon Louis Juchault de Lamoriciere, French Born Austrian general Georges de Rarecourt de la Vallee, Marquis de Pimodan however among the 3 one stood out and that one person was Irish Born American brevet Lieutenant Colonel Myles Walter Keogh who in the following years would ride with union general John Buford as a member of his staff and he was with Buford on the fateful day when Buford decided to make his stand on the high ground west of Gettysburg and after Gettysburg Keogh Would go on to command Company I of the 7th us cavalry and would become one of the many casualties of the battle of Little Bighorn and at Castelfidardo the papal army mobilized 6,500 and suffered 88 killed, 400 wounded and 600 captured and among the dead was Pimodan and the battle was a Sardinian victory.
Grandfather of Emperor Charlemagne, the Prince of the Franks that was Lord Charles Martel, the Hammer of God who crushed the Arabs at Poitiers and saved Western Europe from Islamization, never shall we forget his great victory!
Tour wasn't important battle it was raid Umayyad were constantly raiding into francia even after battle. Retreat army to camp for loots and and plundering cities for loots were agreed most in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic considered oldest source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation Sounds like trying to amplifying charles's glories and achiement over this battle when it was just raid and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
why did you skip the incedent of Battle of Kharistan where Suluk had been defeated after that war he was killed by his own men and the Umayid had established their base powerfully throughout the Transxia.
I am quite confused with this documentary mind explaining to me that If you're foucsing on the Battle of Tour why not focus on the geopolitical of the area and not some battle thousands of Kilometres aways? What's even the pour purpose of that? You spend 15 mins on the Caliphate and only less then 7 on the actual historical events of the battle? If you want to make a history of the caliphate why not separate it to another video?
Great Video as always! Just two remarks: Tours is pronounced with more weight on the "u" than on the "o", And the Franks never had a standing royal army. Of course, all major lords had their retinue, but those were small numbers. To say Charles took a loan from the pope and raised a standing army is very problematic and not in line with the modern consens.
You are correct about the standing army: Patrick S Baker "The Frankish War-Machine of Charles Martel" from Saber and Scroll Journal Volume II Issue II Spring 2013 stated the following: "The small landowners as infantry, the mounted satellites and the antrustiones and the very small number of highly skilled craftsmen that acted as “combat engineers” were the primary sources of Frankish military power throughout the eighth century. Charles’ army was highly mobile, campaigning throughout what is now France, Germany and the Low Countries. The army was also highly effective, winning all but one major set piece battle and failing to capture Angers in 718 and Narbonne in 737. Despite all of this efficiency, there should be no confusion between the army of Charles Martel and the Roman legions, or between Charles’ army and the army of his grandson, Charlemagne. Besides the antrustiones and satellites, Charles’ soldiers were decidedly part-time, being called out for campaigns and then demobilized to return to civilian life.101 However, it is likely that the same men served year after year on expeditio, making them if not professional, then highly experienced.102 The Frankish armies of Charles Martel played an important role in the development of Europe in the early middle ages. The reverberations of their iron discipline and raw courage carry through to even today’s military forces. Sources: Guy Halsall, Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. New York: Routledge, 2003.), 74. and David Nicolle, Poitiers AD 732: Charles Martel Turns the Islamic Tide (New York: Osprey Publishing, 2008), 25.
@@patbaker399 i think it is amazing, how they respond to comments of complimment, but rarely the ones correcting them.I dont know if your correction is right, but still they should reply explaining how they got the conclusion. Their citation of sources some times is good, but sometimes is unclear and in the middle of the video. Love the videos, but honestly, my trust on them is not that amazing.
Looking at the PlayList ... quite hard to follow the thread forward in time! Jews in the early caliphate? Romans VS Arabs? (Two times, for this last item.)
@@BenTrem42 are you challenged? I gave you advice then you attack me lol . The long videos are three seasons which contain all the episodes as for the remaining they are just out of place general topic videos
@@adamsnow4979 *_Advice_* ... you have a very high opinion of yourself! Maybe try reading. I said it was difficult to move forward in the time line *through the PlayList.* You're just pompous, is all.
Sorry, I am usually an enthusiast, BUT I can’t really understand why In a video of 24 minutes over the battle of Tours, at minute 14 (~60%) I am still seeing about the battles fought in the Khorasan.. Why 60% of a video over battle of Tours/Poitiers focuses over Khorasan/Transoxiqna? It is not an introduction.. it is the majority of the video.. I don’t know why this bother me a lot.
Because it is a part of a larger series concentrating on the Early Muslim Expansion. As such, we give all needed information within the series chronologically. If you are interested to know what happened before, check the videos in the description.
@@TT-hx9nj You read it wrong, I said that saved Europe from Muslim rule, what were you thinking I didn't say anything that pertained to what you interpreted.
@@maddogbasil Did I ask about anything like that, I know hygiene was not as good as it is now. But they did know how to read and write, there are many medieval books, and scientific advancements during their times. Get the facts right.
Even if they won the battle Nothing is gonna change Look at Iberia West and Central Europe was a hostile battle ground for dominant and far away from Central islamic world demascus People really overhyping this battle, if you wanna battle to overhyped or praise Look at the seige of constantinople in 717-718 They was way important than the battle of tours
@@ibrahimmohammedibrahim9273 Don't underestimate what the Franks did for Europe. They literally saved them from utter Islamisaztion. It was just as important because if France had fallen, likely the rest of Europe would too.The siege of Constantinople was not that important.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
🎥 Join our RUclips members and patrons to unlock exclusive content! Our community is currently enjoying deep dives into the First Punic War, Pacific War, history of Prussia, Italian Unification Wars, Russo-Japanese War, Albigensian Crusade, and Xenophon’s Anabasis. Become a part of this exclusive circle: ruclips.net/channel/UCMmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fwjoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals and Paypal paypal.me/kingsangenerals as well!
My cup runneth over ❤
Revisionists have tried to portray the Battle of Tours (Poitiers) as a raid and not an invasion. However, looking at the map and seeing how far the Caliphate had marched into Francia and the size of the Caliphate's army, would lead one to believe that this was an attempt at conquest. The "Hammer" saved Europe.
saved it from proper hygiene and medicine 😂
@@stonem0013STFU. I hope the irony of you using colonialist rhetoric to simp for Arab/Muslim empires isn’t lost on you.
@@stonem0013 Maybe u were right 1000 years ago, Today its just funny that u mention it when most of the M-E are bunch of terrorists/dictators and failed states.
@@stonem0013 Going with the ol' "Medieval Europe was a backwater" lie are we? It is quite the misconception. No doubt perpetuated by those wanting to diminish medieval Christian Europe in any way possible.
This dude is definitely a racist
Tours inevitably stopped the arab conquest going further north.
But in 735, they pushed east through Provence and Rhone valley. Charles decided to go there with his army and defeat them again. He started his campaign in 737, and to me, this campaign is much more significant in the history of France and in the process of repelling the muslim conquest than Tours. In 737, he cleared the rhone valley and took back every fortress of Provence in enemy hands one by one. Then, he entered Septimania, the only region north of the Pyerenees formally under Ummayad rule. He took all major cities except Narbonne. The Ummayad tried to help Septimania and sent a large force through the port of Narbonne to defeat Charles. He intercepted this force at the battle of River Berre and decisively defeated them.
The battle of river Berre is very important, maybe equal or even more important than Tours. Because it made the Ummayads understand that they will inevitably lose Septimania and could not match Frankish power. From then, the Ummayads stopped sending reinforcements and soldiers north of the Pyrenees, somewhat accepting the fate of losing this land. Which happened a few years later when Charles' son, Pepin, laid Siege to Narbonne and took the city forcing the muslim survivors to choose between going back to the Emirate of Cordoba or being slaughtered on the spot.
The Ummayads never tried any invasion of the Frankish kingdom again.
*By the way, Yusuf el Fihri, defeats the Franks in the war of 737, my friend.*
@@SoyluBayezid not really my friend. Yusuf main credit as Governor or Narbonne was to raid and pillage the Rhône in 735. When Charles and the Franks arrived in 737, Ummayads got systematically their asses whooped. Charles never lost a single battle to the muslims in his life.
Cause they did sent the full army and there great general. To busy having a civil war
Its True Umayyad never attempted to conquer France again. But at the time of Abdalrahman the Third, a group of rogue Muslim sailors landed in southern France, overtook all defenses and established Fraxtinatum, a Muslim rogue state that lasted approximately 100 years until the incident where whole of Europe gathered against Fraxtinatum.
Charles was defeated in nabronne 737 he failed took nabronne and septimania those cities would have been taken over by his son pepin during the internal conflicts between yousef al fahiri and abd rahman al dakhlil.
Umayyad didn't had large force in lberia max army were less than 20k they had distribut their army all over cities. Battle of river berre wasn't important it was minor engagement charles was aware of incoming forces lead by Uqba ibn al Hajjaj and charles cut their route by sudden surpise attack. According to paul deacon umayyad army retreat due charles formed allies with. So Uqba was sucessfully reached to nabronne and secured it there was no fight. Tour is not even important battle it was raid party for loots
Slight correction on the artwork. Charles Martel was famously clean-shaven. It is said that during the battle "Charles removed his helmet so his men could see his clean shaven face and rally to him"
Arabic and islamic sources didn't mentioned events and details the battle of tour as they didn't viewed as important battle like they did in siege of constantinople 717. all they said where abd rahman al ghafqi invade francia and dead there. iam getting confused where he bringing what is called annymous arab historian without mentioning his name. Umayyad retreating to camp for loots event were most agreed in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic one of the earlist source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation Sounds like trying to amplifying charles's glories and achiement over this battle when it was just raid and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@ghostd69 Cope
@@123kickinitSUPER
I mentioned one of oldest source came from chrincle of 757 mozarabic he mentioned abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed which he had no intention of conquest but raiding cities for loots
@@SithStudy
Mongol was conquering lands and battle tour was raid and francia was getting raided for plundering cities even one of the oldest source mention tour came from chrincle of mozarabic 757
@@SithStudy
Bruh i didn't make excuess tour was party raid for plundering cities if you dont believe me go check sources and read or go watch docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholar or go check chrincle of mozarabic 757 its oldest source mentioned battle
The battle of Tours is a good example for a counter-tactic. The Arabs strength was a mobile cavalry, with which they had beaten romans (east-rome), Persians, Visi-Goth and anyone they faced. The Franks knew the mix of the arab armys and their strategy since their vassal aquitaine was invaded by the arabs many times. So if your enemy is strong in mobility and setting traps, you can counter it with just dont play the mobility-game, but threatening his supply lines with your army, what he cant ignore. Another point is, since the arabs had experienced few resistence in europe until meeting the franks, they probably have judged the franks as relatively weak. In fact the franks where a nation that has grown by beating all other germanic kingdoms and tribes around in permanent wars. This facts and the seize of the frankish kingdom that could recruit many many warriors explains why the franks stopped the arabs, which many other nations including east-rome, persia and visigoth has failed to do.
❤
Eastern Rome lost battles and ground to the Arabs but they weren't overwhelmed by them like the Persians were. Byzantium managed to Stop them with Greek fire at the siege of Constantinople (717 CE), thus delaying the spread of Islam into the Balkans for another 6-7 centuries.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
You seem to tell the whole story against all sources and all logic as well. Tour prevented the arab armys from further raiding and was a turning point in many ways. @@ghostd69
Martel and the Franks were outnumbered by a large margin at Tours (in reality, Poitiers).
Charles didn't just buy an army with the loan from the Pope from some mercenary shop, most of the men with him at Tours were his seasoned veterans who have bled with him in many battles for over a decade by that point. Umayyads didn't just stumble upon a clever and shrewd strategist, they came upon arguably the hardest dudes in Western Europe at the time. Charles Martel saved Europe from Arabic conquest, there oughta be a statue of him on every corner everywhere in Europe.
Martel 732
Sobieski 1683
Hiring mercenaries isn't the only thing the leader of an army can do with money, but could also bring back many veterans that had retired, promise the soldiers lands if victorious, reinforce the garrisons of endangered cities, manufacture and repair army equipment as well as ensure a steady supply line in case of a prolonged war
@@oishikhasan8500 Sobieski was an absolute beast. His victory at Vienna was arguably more important than Charles' victory at Tours - Vienna was falling when Sobieski showed up and ended it. 3000 Winged Hussars supported by 15,000 mixed cavalry... No one wants to be on the receiving end of that.
@@johnl1091 I am from the Indian subcontinent. Closest thing to Sobieski here was Shivaji. Look him up he was an even bigger beast.
Yes but what about loser sambaji and shivaji father who served adilshah? For every 1 hero, you have 10 collaborators. Unfortunately you just know about the hero. @@oishikhasan8500
Charles “The Hammer” prepared for this battle carefully and thoroughly. Impressive.
it was a small raid. the caliphate didn't even use their capable general Tariq ibn Ziad who conquered Spain and instead invited him to Damascus , because they deemed France as too insignificant.
christians:" ohhhh we managed to defeat a " mighty caliphate army". ohhhh we can also win a battle against Muslims "
lol
@@akiogood4712but why are you getting this worked up over a mild mannered comment? Try to contain your religious bigotry.
cope@@akiogood4712
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@thatindiandude4602you might wanna say that to all the Eurocentric bible mashers in the comments too
I’ve been waiting for K&G to do this battle for literally years! Thank you so much, great content like always 👍🏻
Proud to know Charles Martel is my 39th great grandfather. Most europeans are decended from him so im no one special but still. Incredible to know that fact
What an insane and historically pivotal battle. I never get tired of hearing new analysis of it.
By this time (732), the Muslim Empire (Caliphate) had expanded so much vast & over such diverse populations & territories, that it would ultimately reach to a breaking point if proper consolidation policies wouldn't been applied in the newly conquered territories.
And this is the mistake which Umayyads did, as they didn't properly consolidate territory in West Africa (today Morocco), Iberia, Indus & Transoxiana, leaving thus the regions at a risk of rebellion, which when combined with defeats at Tour (732) & in India & Transoxiana in 730s & finally led to serious inside revolts one of them being the Berber Revolt in 740, leading to the empire getting fractured from inside (Third Fitna & Abbasid Revolution), that ultimately resulted in the halting of expansion of Caliphate.
Because by this time, almost 100 years in war, you shall not keep winning on tactics, politics & strategy also come into play to keep such far flung empire united, which the Umayyads failed to do, as they faced serious revolts both inside & shocking defeats outside resulting in to bring their own downfall.
And add there was a civilwar
@@robleyusuf2566 Yep bro. I mentioned that i.e. Third Fitna.
And by that time in 740s, the Caliphate was in serious turmoil as it faced Third Fitna, as well as revolts in Mesopotamia, Yemen, Persia, Transoxiana (Abbasids), Iberia & West Africa. That's well written by Gibbon that the empire got besieged from within. As with so much revolts mounting from inside coupled with military situations arising on frontiers that are so much further, made an ultimate collapse a possibility, & it happened, fracturing the United Caliphate into 3 polities after 750 i.e. Abbasid Caliphate, Independent Berber Kingdoms in West Africa & Emirate of Cordoba in Iberia.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
U mean Arab ummayad empire
@@hendrifai4223don't call them "Arab" but Muslims. the Muslims in that time were a small minority amongst the Arabs and were therefore not representative for all Arabs. the non-Muslim Arabs don't deserve any credit for the caliphate. in that time, the majority of Arabs were miserable and weak people who were christians or pagans, under the rule or romans and persians. then the Muslims conquered these two empires, and the christian and pagan Arabs got ruled by Muslim Arabs
The second I saw not one, but 6 videos about Prussia for members only, holy. I've never ran that fast for my credit card before. I'm watching them all after this, you guys have grown so much, the one about the First Crusade is just a masterpiece. As a historian, I cannot say how much I enjoy your videos.
I would argue that France had a stronger centralization, and that is what kept the kingdom more focused on defeating their enemies
But only beginning with the reign of Charles Martell
It did.The Roman Kingdom of Soissons- the last Western Roman rump state- provided the Franks with a relatively intact administrative and economic foundation when they defeated Syagrius and annexed his realm, second only to the Ostrogoths among the barbarian Kingdoms. However, the Ostrogoths were eventually defeated by the Eastern Roman Empire. As a result, the Franks became the sole remaining barbarian kingdom with a semblance of centralized governance and Roman taxation systems, along with a well-organized core. They distinguished themselves by their strong connection to Roman culture, being Chalcedonian Christians, unlike other barbarians who followed Arianism. The Franks also appreciated Roman governance and were one of the last friendly barbarian allies of the Western Roman Empire until its collapse. They only ventured into Gaul when Roman governance completely disintegrated, with various barbarian groups and Roman generals vying for control, while the Franks had previously served as foederati along the Rhine, guarding the Roman frontier.
Basically, the Franks had a high affinity for Roman culture along with the Ostrogoths (under Theoderic), as well as having access to a relatively well preserved island of Roman administration in the form of the Kingdom of Soissons- so it's not surprising that they were better off among the other Barbarian Kingdoms- especially when compared to their other barbarian peer, the Visigoths.
@@zippyparakeet1074 Certainly! I would also chose France over Germany any day!
@@Moribus_Artibus This wasn’t France yet though
@@sebe2255 Ok, sir, I think you know what I mean. It's not exactly France but it's not the Frankia of old Merovech either.
"Had there not be Frankish mountain, Arabian sea would drown us all."
Serbian leader, poet, philosopher and ruler - Petar II Petrović Njegoš, in his majestic work, "Gorski vijenac"
I mean, would it really be drowning? What’s so bad about Muslims doing what Europeans have always done?
Their victory had no effect... I invite you to go outside the Saint Denis basilique where all our kings are buried , including Charles Martel.. It is 80% muslim... So Charles Martel rests in a town populated by moors descendants 😂😂😂😂
@@LouisDeBonneDeCréquy All Empires and countries crumble one day nothing is for nothing, France future died in 1815 not in 2024, Saint Denis might be speaking English, Chinese or even Russian one day it wont change that this place was great during thousands of years, people still admire Rome after millennia, it's the same for Paris and France
When I talked about my ancestors, I spoke with respect. We are from the Umayyad tribe and our original homeland is Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦
No one cares. Your religion is fraudulant. @@خليلالعلوي-ق2ط
Excellent video
The early Arab-Muslim Empires were impressive.
They fought simultaneously in deepest Europe and Central Asia.
Looking forward to next video.
they took everyone by surprise, the same way the Mongols did 500 years later. But they were ultimately driven from Europe almost entirely, including Spain.
@@billybob5337The Mongols have large numbers, and they rely in their tactics on exhausting the enemy, such as throwing arrows, and they kill everything to end it with psychological warfare. As for the Arabs, they started with small armies, and they are among the smallest in number. They are distinguished by agility, speed, and ferocity, and they do not kill women, children, and the defenseless. I was hoping that all or most of the Arab tribes would come together and only they would be stopped. Lord, but this is impossible to this day
@@billybob5337 after 800 years , ita longer than spain from 1492 hahahahah
Yes, it is true that the start of the launch is from the Arabian Peninsula, which is now called Saudi Arabia. We are the descendants of the Umayyads. 🇸🇦
Hands down my favorite medieval era battle! ⚔️ 🇫🇷
انا عربي واقولك عليك اللعنة ايه الفرنسي
@hiooxkrmagkis9323like how Constantinople lives rent free in your head too
@@mapoleonot really because it was conquered later stupid 😂😂😂😂
Not the Tours battle where we were smashed by the English?? 😂😂
@@mapoleo lol...The british actually occupied before it was given to turkey
I have said this about many battles and historical events covered in this awesome channel but WHYYY has there not been a major epic movie about this ? Lol
This channel is better than school history books
This is the one I’ve been waiting for and it did not disappoint!! Well done as always!!
Been waiting for this battle to be narrated! Thanks!
The victory of Charles the « Hammer » changed future France and Europe forever . The genius of one man saved Christianity . Gibbon « without Charles Martel , France will be a Muhammad province » Voltaire .
Even in the event of a Muslim victory, the Arabs wouldn't be able to hold the conquered lands. The rest of Europe was never to stay idle but push them back all the way to Africa.
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 it was just raid party and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@ghostd69 Ur coping so hard I see u under every comment pasting the same thing😂
@@YouhavetoBelieve3347
Arabic and islamic sources didn't mentioned events and details the battle of tour as they didn't viewed as important battle like they did in siege of constantinople 717. all they said where abd rahman al ghafqi invade francia and dead there. iam getting confused where he bringing what is called annymous arab historian without mentioning his name. Umayyad retreating to camp for loots and plundering cities searching for loots were most agreed in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic one of the earlist source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation
@@ghostd69 Charles won at Narbronne.
I enjoy when you talked about early AD middle east history. Keep up the good work y'all are great.
Charles Martel saved the future culture of France and ultimately, Europe.
Sure Rather, save the world
The byzantine empire did so for almost 800 years so what u bum
@@anasanas-ky5qm actually, byzantium save europe , the main arab army was sieging constantinople at the time of the battle of tours.
had constantinoplòe fall the arabs would have invade the entire of easter europe,italy and germany before they meet any serious opposition (aka the franks)
Well, until the 21st century
And now young Muslim migrant men are back and invading Europe by the hundreds of thousands as we speak
I sit here weeping at witnessing so much greatness while my achievements has equated to a fraction of what these titans of history have accomplished. Thanks for posting gents
It will please you to know that the great Julius Caeser still felt as you do. He openly spoke about how his achievements were not as significant as Alexander who was younger than he was when he conquered most of the known and some of the yet unknown world!! Your achievements are still significant my friend!!
But they are dead and you are alive. That is an achievement too.
Umm, we must not forget that 99.999999% of the titans of history only got to that point because they forced thousands of peasants and slaves to die for them, after hopefully killing slightly more peasants and slaves that were forced to fight for the losing side. These were not good men.
You should only ever compare yourself, to yourself the day before. These Kings and Generals are often raised for the role, and had troubles i would never want.
"War doesn't make you great." Master Yoda
Charles was a great leader who knew his enemy well. He trained a professional army, picked up the battlefield, knew his strengths and weaknesses, and provided great leadership and innovative tactics.
"Can't Touch This" by MC Charles Hammer ft. Leo III and Duke Odo
Thanks
Your writing is wizard class. Beyond master class. Beautiful documentaries.❤ Houston, TX
One of the most important battles ever fought in the last 2,000 years, along with Lepanto
yes, and the Muslim siege of Malta and the heroic stand of the knights of Malta, reminiscent of the 300 Spartans 6 years before Lepanto, and the destruction of the Muslim army by Polish King Jan Sobieski and Charles, Duke of Lorraine at the Gates of Vienna.
Since the title of this series is early Muslim expansion, do you have an end goal in mind? Or will it segue into e.g. Muslim consolidation or something along those lines?
Next season will cover the Abbasid rule in broad strokes, possibly all the way to the Seljuk expansion.
@@KingsandGeneralswill there ever be a series on the mughals?
@@hassanhamid15 yep
the term „early Muslim expansion“ normally describes the conquests up until the mid 8th century. At least thats what Wikipedia says
This Channel and “voices of the past” are simply sublime
Great way to begin the show with a short prologue of the map and little bit of story telling. I remember BazBattles usually do this kind of intro. Good job guys.
A lot of people are descendents of Charles Martel or Duke Odo. Some descend from both. Let me have my moment because I am a descendent of both!!!! Great video!
أنا من نسل الأمويين
*Transoxiana*
1:56 Hisham ibn abd al-Malik's reign
6:03 Qaysi-Yamani conflict
14:07 *Battle of Tours*
Jaxartes
❤
Hi from persia , Hail to the Hammer , it's interesting that 15 years after this war , Persian general Abumuslim from khorasan destroyed all of Umayyad caliphate he destroyed the war machine of Islam. ❤
And he got killed by caliph abu jaffar al Mansour and destroyed hunted his men and brought back arabs and islam rule on persia 😂
@@Junjezargot killed or died in bed he destroyed war machine of Islam , after that Arabs never reach those borders and never reach that power 😂
What benefit do the Persians have from this?
@@mmz5844 abu muslim was only one general out of many other khorasan arab generals it was arab vs arab persians were our slaves back then
@@user-qpp persians become arab worshipers till nowadays they think 12 arab men from the house of the prophet to be gods like
*The Franks beat back the Arabian Caliphate = as we don't say the Christians beat back the Muslim Caliphate.
We must pander to the Islamofascists as to not offend them, because secretly we're afraid of them.
Muslim caliphate is right. The army was composed of different ethnicities all united under Islam.
@@rarelife1 United or subjugated under Islam??
@@archmandingo1 wow , so they were not beaten fully afterall , here they are causing you nightmares thousands of years later . cry in a corner body . lol
@@thesaracen3992 tell me you support rape, murder and pedophilia without actually saying it.... oh, you just did. 🤷♂️ Sicko
caint wait for the kazar series! any ideas when your team will have the chance to release the first episode?
Not sure
@@KingsandGenerals fair enough. keep up the great work as always!
@@KingsandGenerals Can you please make a video on the Swiss Emirate of Fraxinetum
khazars did a big mistake in joining war with the byzantine against the caliphate they eventually get kicked around and lost their capital and territory
@@Ironmike2233because of the rus not the caliphate.
Only 30 kilometers away from Paris. from the deserts of Arabia to the heart of Europe
You make it sounds dramatic, Europe wasn't even a thing back then not until the renaissance
Literally just learning about this in my Islamic Civ course this past week. What amazing timing
Video title: Battle of Tours
K&G: Anyway, here are 14 minutes of Arabs fighting Turks.
important context to show that the Caliphate was not in the best shape
Never knew how much I’d enjoy Islamic history. More please!!
More on the way
The most interesting islamic history (or any history) are the battles of the companions (battle of badr especially).
@aryahmuad3879 Do you also find the Massacre of Khaybar interesting, too? Or are you only interested in the battles where muslims pretend to be brave warriors? 🤔
@@aryahmuad3879 as a muslim, I have to say Badr has nothing particularly interesting on the military standpoint. You probably have a personal preference on other aspects. The early expansion of the Rashidun Caliphate is probably the most intense and captivating part of Islam's debut in my opinion.
@@archmandingo1 I see bringing up the "Massacre" (they were traitors and sought to rebel against the Muslims) of Khaybar useless, they were punished under Jewish law for the crime they committed.
as someone in the german rhineland with frankish ancestors i enjoy every video about the franks
Vielleicht gefällt dir das: ruclips.net/video/Ozs8oFVCO8k/видео.html&pp=ygUaZGFzIGxpZWQga2FybHMgZGVzIGhhbW1lcnM%3D
"Crusade was unprovoked and unjustified agression"
The umayyads:
If you talk, you have to talk with respect about my ancestors. I am proud that I am a descendant of the Umayyads and that our original homeland is Saudi Arabia.
@@خليلالعلوي-ق2ط Fuck them.
@@خليلالعلوي-ق2ط fuck ummayads and all other islamic terrorist empires
@@خليلالعلوي-ق2طyet when the Jew wants they land back you say from the river to the sea😂
Arabs were murdering European pilgrims to the Holy land who wanted to visit the place where Jesus lived and died.
Hope you also make video on arab invasion of gujjar-pratihara dynasty and chalukya dynasty.
Moahmed ibn qasim defeated inidians he reached in maumbora city at Gujarat province if he didn't dead he would expanding more.. all inidian kingdoms formed alliance to stop umayyad
@@ghostd69not really, chalukya dynasty defeated arab army in gujurat while later gujjar-pratihara dynasty also defeated then in Rajasthan.
Amazing to wake up and watch a ⚜ French history video from Kings and Generals
Sweet! I’ve been waiting to see this battle covered by K&G.
The number of people coping in the comments sayign it was totally just a raiding force we definitely didn't want to repeat what happenned in Spain and colonise the land completely. Typically also the same people who say that Frankia was jsut a backwater to the Islamic empire, yes because of course you want to raid people poorer than you not take their lands. So much money to be made in "raiding" backwaters lol.
Spain is different suitation it was well supported by caliphate and conquest was preformed by stragties and planning by musa ibn nasyr he sent one of his commander to spain to scout the area before they begin their conquest which umayyad was well prepared and supported for conquest spain unlike tour
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
Glad you covered Battle of Tours
Ofc they were, this battle of Tours is one of the most famous battle in Early Muslim Expansion
From my historical perspective of the Battle of Tours/Poitiers, basically three main factors contributed to the Frankish victory:
• 1) The first factor, in my historical analysis, is the very discipline of the Frankish forces (as the video superbly highlighted). Charles Martel's soldiers were, first and foremost, battle-hardened veterans of other campaigns, as well as being extremely loyal to their commander. In his book "The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, from Marathon to Waterloo", Sir Edward Creasy pointed out that "Charles Martel added experienced skill to his natural courage, and he had also formed a militia of veterans among the Franks" (pag 83). Furthermore, the devastating Saracen raids throughout Gaul ended up boosting the fighting spirit of the Franks. In the Frankish mindset, it was necessary to halt the Muslim invader once and for all! Otherwise, there wouldn't be a village in Gaul that would be spared from looting. In other words, the violence of the Saracen attacks boosted the Franks' willingness to fight the enemy. As Edward Creasy pointed out: "So dreadful and so wide-spread were the ravages of the Saracenic fight cavalry throughout Gaul that it must have been impossible to restrain, for any length of time, the indignant ardour of the Franks" (Chapter VII, pag 83-84).
• 2) Instead of waging the battle in an open field, Charles Martel had positioned his army in a slightly elevated forest, which ended up facilitating the Frankish defense. By placing his troops in an elevated forest near the Vienne river, Charles not only managed to disrupt and minimize the impact of the Muslim cavalry, but he also managed to screen the true size of his army! This strategy adopted by Charles Martel, for example, made Abd al-Rahman reluctant, since he did not see the exact number of the Frankish forces. By positioning his troops on a forested hill, Charles Martel was able to reduce the effectiveness of the ferocious Moorish cavalry! Martel therefore fought how and where he wanted, which proved decisive for his victory.
• 3) Odo the Great's forces! In addition to Charles Martel's soldiers, the forces of Duke Odo of Aquitaine were also essential for the Frankish victory at Poitiers (as the video highlighted). Unlike Charles Martel, Duke Odo had been fighting Muslims since 721, i.e., 11 years prior to Poitiers. It was Duke Odo, not Charles Martel, who received the brunt of the Muslim attacks! His fiefdom, the Duchy of Aquitaine, had been attacked since 721, when Governor Al-Samh crossed the Pyrenees with his army. It was Duke Odo's forces, for example, who defeated Governor Al-Samh's forces at the Battle of Toulouse, in which Al-Samh himself had been killed. Furthermore, it was Odo who warned Charles Martel of the danger of the Muslim advance, which inevitably provided time for Charles to prepare for battle. At the Battle of Poitiers/Tours, Odo's forces were essential to the Frankish victory, as they attacked the Arabs from the rear. While Martel's infantry was still engaging the Arab cavalry charges, Odo's forces, who were strategically deployed in Martel's rear, decided to attack the Muslim camp itself! By attacking the Muslims from the rear, Odo intended to ravage the Muslim camp, free slaves, retrieve booty, and, most importantly, draw off part of Abd al-Rahman's forces. Odo's strategy of attacking the enemy from the rear, in my historical analysis, was simply essential to the Frankish victory, as this caused the Moorish troops to retreat towards their own camp! Upon Odo's attack, many Arab units rushed back to save their treasures. Odo's attacks, therefore, shook Arab discipline itself, and not even Abd al-Rahman himself, who was highly respected by his men, managed to restore discipline. By attacking the Muslim camp, Odo managed to destroy not only the Moorish morale, but their discipline as well. In the confusion that followed the withdrawal of the Moorish troops, Abd al-Rahman himself was killed, which further increased the despair of the Muslim forces.
Needless to say, Abd al-Rahman's death completely demoralized the Muslim forces. According to Edward Creasy: "The European writers all concur in speaking of the fall of Abd al-Rahman as one of the principal causes of the defeat of the Arabs; who, according to one writer, after finding that their leader was slain, dispersed in the night, to the agreeable surprise of the Christians" (Chapter VII, 84).
The fact that Muslim military morale had collapsed after Abd al-Rahman's death at Poitiers, however, has a historical explanation: Abd al-Rahman's popularity as a leader and governor. Virtually all Muslim sources portray Abd al-Rahman as a just and righteous ruler. In his book "The Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, from Marathon to Waterloo", Sir Edward Creasy pointed out:
"In addition to his cardinal military virtues, Abd al-Rahman is described by the Arab writers as a model of integrity and justice. The first two years of his second administration in Spain were occupied in severe reforms of the abuses which his predecessors had crept into the system of government" (Chapter VII, pag 83).
Therefore, Abd al-Rahman's death came as a heavy blow to the troops, as their esteemed ruler now lay dead on the battlefield. Be that as it may, the Battle of Poitiers was only won thanks to a set of factors. If it were not for the discipline of Martel's soldiers, as I explained in the first factor, the Frankish defeat would be inevitable. The terrain, as I explained in the second factor, was also decisive.
I had heard that odo was fighting the muslims alone for years partially due to the fact that he was possibly a rival getting a little too strong, and martel wanted to weaken him a bit. Was there any truth to that?
@@DarkSygil666 Odo (or Eudo) was indeed a rival to Charles. In 732 Charles raided Aquitane twice to try and bring Eudo to heel. And many historians think that Charles was able to move so quickly agaisnt the Moors because he had already mobilized his army for a third attack when the Moors defeated Odo and the Duke came begging for help.
Martel was calculating and strategic
He waited for Odo to receive the Moorish host to study the battle to prepare for the inevitable especially the Moorish cavalry charges that helped the Ummayeds to travel so fast thus Martel’s choice of ground to negate the Ummayed hammer and anvil as well as the large amount of booty hindering the speed of Ummayed invading force both psychologically and physically hence the defeat in Tours along with Al Ghafiqi’s weak intelligence on the Mayor of Franks his battle hardened troops the mode of battle the Franks waged and their readiness to defend their ground for the defender has more to lose if defeated
Hence Al Ghafiqi must have sent reconnaissance and intelligence on Martel slow down a major encounter but continue the raids on Frankish surroundings and perhaps a more surprising move from my part would be to employ the service of Duke Odo in return to keep his fiefdom and return his daughter in exchange for partnership against the Hammer of the Franks who given from the material read on him was only defeated once unprepared during the Frankish war of succession but remained undefeated ever since fighting in very unorthodox ways
Once good intel sufficient cavalrymen without infantry this time and by mongol tactics of hit and run on Martel’s territories to enrich the Moors
well placing booty back to a fortification secure and away from Martel’s incursions as well as using Odo’s knowledge of terrain Martel and his Allie’s perhaps to divide and conquer maybe invite back the Merovingians as puppet and choose the ideal ground for Ummayed cavalry superiority or lure Charles into one again through mongol tactics
Usual Ummayed Sawaif and Shuwati or Summer and Autumn raids and patience to draw the Hammer of the Franks to-a trap
Even if Martel avoided the baits his troops or subjects will goad him to act or revolt hence heads or tails for Charles
Thanks.. So.. Question.. Was it just a raid? Or was it a Muslim invasion of Frankish lands?
@@barryirlandi4217 Easy answer is it was both. The Caliphate followed a military doctrine of first raiding, then, if finding weakness simply staying, or returning with with a conquering force. Essentially, if Charles had not defeated them at Tours, it is likely they would have taken the city of Tours as winter quarters, and as a Forward Operating Base, to raid and conquer further into Europe.
Bulgaria taught them a lesson in 717-718 as 22,000 Arabs had to die in Thrace alone. It looks like the Franks were taking notes. Good job!
Then the othmans came and but an end to Bulgaria for alot of time
Indian kingdoms also beat back ummayad Caliphate expansion during the same time
@@Ali-vz6oythen bulgaria came back with serbia and greece and massacred the turks like they deserved
@@special.agent.JeffreySteeleFBIThen Came Muhammad bin AlQasem and conquered Indus valley, and India came under Muslim rule for 1000 years😂
@@Ali-vz6oy : Based.
One of my favorite battles in History.
Could you put a scale to show distance in your maps? I would love that,great work again btw!
I enjoy less common titles for historical people. There are so many "the Greats" out there, but not many "the Hammers" haha. In all seriousness, thank you for another excellent episode.
God be with you out there everybody. ✝️ :)
Duke Odo is one of the most underrated generals in history. Martel usually gets all the credit despite all Odo did to stop the Umayyad invasion.
The Legendary Battle of Tours where Charles Martel drives back the first Muslim Invasion of Europe
I wish Kings and Generals make an episode about Tipu Sultan.
Such an underdiscussed stage of this period in history... thanks for covering it!
Terrific video! ⚔🔥🙌
Kazar, Turgesh and Tang also played a very important role in limiting Muslim expansion eastwards for centuries.
Traxonuna was entirely conquered by qotybs so thry didn't prevent them umayyad later went into internal conflicts and civil war and even army in traxonuna fought esch other which why they stop advancing and for khazar they lost their capital blanjar and south cascuss to caliphate . There was no serious wars between caliphate and tang they both were bordered each other without no conflicts most of time till abbasid peroid they just fought one battle but in entire regin both had good relationship
guys please do the Battle of Covadonga next!.... It is basically the Asturian-Spanish version of the 300!
Never knew that Muslim Khaliphate came 200 km close to Paris.
Great video as always thank you.
I only knew about the battle I didn't know a lot of this information thanks 👍🏻
Awesome narrative. Keep it up !
He was my 37th great grandfather.
Philippe Jean Kogler, You → Denise Kogler, your mother → Marcelle Helene Marchoux, her mother → Jean Texier, her father → Jean Texier, his father → Pierre Texier, his father →
Marquis Etienne Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Etienne-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Pierre-Francois-Marie Texier de Javerlhac, his father →
Marquis Henri-Bernard Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Marquis Bernard Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Comte Jean-Francois Texier de Javerlhac, his father → Henri de Texier,
his father → Francois de Texier, Seigneur du Breuil, his father → Catherine de Texier, his mother → Baron Raymond de Lambertye de Montbrun, her father → Seigneur François De Lambertie,
his father → Jean De Lambertie, his parent → Catherine De Lambertie, his mother → Allemande de Gontaut Biron, her mother → Gaston de Gontaut, IV, her father → Pierre De Gontaut Biron, his father → Gaston de Gontaut Biron, III, his father → Marguerite Marqueze de Lomagne, his mother → Obrie de L'Isle-Jourdain, her mother → Bernard Jourdain de L'Isle-Jourdain, Comte de L'Isle-Jourdain & de Dunes, her father → Bernard I de L'Isle-Jourdain, his father → Jourdain I de Lisle, his father → Raymond I de Lisle, his father → Emma Taillefer, his mother →
Guillaume III Taillefer, comte de Toulouse, her father → Adélaïde la Blanche d'Anjou, Reine consort d'Aquitaine, his mother → Fulk II, Count of Anjou, her father → Fulko I "Le Rouge", Comte de Anjou, his father → Ingelger, count of Anjou, his father → Petronelle d'Auxerre de Gâtinais, Comtesse de Anjou, his mother → Hugo, Archchancellor of the Empire, her father →
Charlemagne, Römisch-deutscher Kaiser, his father → Pippin der Jüngere, his father → Karl "der Hammer" Martell, his father
😂😂
@@MuratAltay20 Are you jealous?
I was literally thinking about this battle yesterday and wishing that Kings and Generals did a video on it
Charles Martel: So the Muslims want to take France by force, huh?
Leo the Isaurian: Hey Charles, you need any help?
Charles Martel: Nah Leo, I can handle on my own. I have my first professional army to beat the Umayyads head on.
And Tervel boys I, will take matters into my owns hands .Little true historical corect 😉
I don't know how to put it, but the way the opening set up this video just felt different. It made me feel like this was something important. A big deal. It's a good way to set the tone for this whole line of videos.
It's always weird each time i see an anglo-saxon calling this "battle of Tours", whereas here in France we call "battle of Poitiers"
That's the problem with battles happening in the same geographic area throughout history, most anglo's refer to the battle of Poitiers to the battle there in the 100 years war. One other example of battles with different names comes up quite a bit in the US civil war e.g. the union battle of Bull Run / confederacy Battle of Manassas and this was in the same language in the same period of time.
@@robertbodell55 Aaaaaah ! *Now* i understand. Yeah that makes sense !
Thanks mate, you taught me something today 😊
You guys should really collab with paradox and CK more, every time I watch a KG video it’s all I can think about.
All these Muslims in the comments seething about a battle they lost 1000+ years ago will never not be funny
😂 ikr
I mean Romans lost 100 major and Minor battles on a row against Muslim War Machine and Roman fanboys cry all the time about it.
@@soleimanghaznavi2599muslim war machine couldnt handle Europeans.
Even funnier because centuries later Europeans would conquer whole muslim world
@@cmd7930ottomans ;)
@JstBrahd Manzikert
Oh sweet, I always wanted to know more details about the Arab-Khazar Wars. :)
Fun fact
General Abd al-Rahman al-Ghafiqi’s clan still exist today in Saudi Arabia
Banu Ghafiq clan of ‘Akk tribe
@@Truth21a619 yemenites exist in yemen and southern saudi
All the tribes of these generals and rulers still exists in Saudi Arabia today but the names changed over the centuries.
Battle of the Tours by the Frankish Kingdom and Reconquista is my favourite bit of history as is the Ruy Lopez my favourite chess opening, and 4-3-3 is my favourite football formation.
4-4-2 👍
@@davidvasey5065 4-4-2 is good for defence 4-3-3 is more potent in attack. Carlo Ancelotti and Jose Mourinho used to play 4-3-3 in attack and 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 in defence, they used a version of 4-2-3-1.
Seeing the thumbnail I thought it was a Total war, as Tours also means turns xD
I know it's a minor complaint, but "loosing" vs "losing" at 9:55 is disappointing to see in such great summaries of these conflicts that your channel makes.
Things slip through. Disappointment is probably an overstatement
@@KingsandGenerals no, disappointing is right. It's not a big disappointment by any means, but it is one.
I appreciate your content, and I hope that you don't have to deal with people like me in the future.
Good luck.
i had no idea the caliphate pushed that deep into Europe.
I was wondering but I know you covered the Italian wars of unification aka Risorgimento already and I was wondering if you could do a video on the battle of Castelfidardo and the battle was fought during the expedition of the thousand and the battle was fought on September 18th 1860 and the battle was a Sardinian victory and the opposing sides/ forces were the Sardinians under Enrico Cialdini Duke of Gaeta and he had a strength of 4,880 mobilized and the Sardinians suffered 62 killed and 184 wounded however on the other side was the papal state forces which consisted of volunteers from many European nations including France, Belgium, Austria and Ireland and they were under the command of 3 commanders/ leaders and these 3 were French general Christophe Leon Louis Juchault de Lamoriciere, French Born Austrian general Georges de Rarecourt de la Vallee, Marquis de Pimodan however among the 3 one stood out and that one person was Irish Born American brevet Lieutenant Colonel Myles Walter Keogh who in the following years would ride with union general John Buford as a member of his staff and he was with Buford on the fateful day when Buford decided to make his stand on the high ground west of Gettysburg and after Gettysburg Keogh Would go on to command Company I of the 7th us cavalry and would become one of the many casualties of the battle of Little Bighorn and at Castelfidardo the papal army mobilized 6,500 and suffered 88 killed, 400 wounded and 600 captured and among the dead was Pimodan and the battle was a Sardinian victory.
Grandfather of Emperor Charlemagne, the Prince of the Franks that was Lord Charles Martel, the Hammer of God who crushed the Arabs at Poitiers and saved Western Europe from Islamization, never shall we forget his great victory!
You seem to be on stuck on the historical perspective of Edward Gibbon who lived hundreds of years ago
If he lost then the West would've been as backwards as muslim countries in terms of human rights and science
Tour wasn't important battle it was raid Umayyad were constantly raiding into francia even after battle. Retreat army to camp for loots and and plundering cities for loots were agreed most in sources and inculed chrincole of 757 mozarabic considered oldest source mentioned battle and there is even an documentary called sword of prophet holy war by french scholars covered battle of tour and mentioned same suitation Sounds like trying to amplifying charles's glories and achiement over this battle when it was just raid and expansion. the umayyad army were not intentionally leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
@@ghostd69lol what??? Haha. People get offended for the dumbest reasons!!
@@ghostd69Keep coping boy. It wasn't just a raid.
why did you skip the incedent of Battle of Kharistan where Suluk had been defeated after that war he was killed by his own men and the Umayid had established their base powerfully throughout the Transxia.
I am quite confused with this documentary mind explaining to me that If you're foucsing on the Battle of Tour why not focus on the geopolitical of the area and not some battle thousands of Kilometres aways? What's even the pour purpose of that? You spend 15 mins on the Caliphate and only less then 7 on the actual historical events of the battle? If you want to make a history of the caliphate why not separate it to another video?
This is a series. Check the description
will you make a series on the second punic war?
Can't wait next chapter about Muslim expansion
Yeah sure, like it's possible to expand these days with nukes in hand.
Another excellent video!
The battle that saved Europe and perhaps the world ✝
Eventually France conquered without war
“Saved”
Yes France and Europe were saved from becoming civilised
@@helveticaneptune537why are you coping so hard lol? You lost and your historians call it the highway of Martyrs.
Again a Christian wo knows nothing about Islam
It’s not too far in the future that this battle will have to be recreated.
For a video about the battle of Tours, a lot of it happens in the Middle East.
😅😅Such as Ukraine and Russia
Excellent video. I'm looking forward to the Arab-Khazar Wars.
Great Video as always!
Just two remarks: Tours is pronounced with more weight on the "u" than on the "o",
And the Franks never had a standing royal army. Of course, all major lords had their retinue, but those were small numbers. To say Charles took a loan from the pope and raised a standing army is very problematic and not in line with the modern consens.
You are correct about the standing army: Patrick S Baker "The Frankish War-Machine of Charles Martel" from Saber and Scroll Journal Volume II Issue II Spring 2013
stated the following:
"The small landowners as infantry, the mounted satellites and the antrustiones and the very small number of highly skilled craftsmen that acted as “combat engineers” were the primary sources of Frankish military power throughout the eighth century. Charles’ army was highly mobile, campaigning throughout what is now France, Germany
and the Low Countries. The army was also highly effective, winning all but one major set piece battle and failing to capture Angers in 718 and Narbonne in 737. Despite all of this efficiency, there should be no confusion between the army of Charles Martel and the Roman legions, or between Charles’ army and the army of his grandson, Charlemagne. Besides the antrustiones and satellites, Charles’ soldiers were decidedly part-time, being called out for campaigns and then demobilized to return to civilian life.101 However, it is likely that the same men served year after year on expeditio, making them if not professional, then highly experienced.102 The Frankish armies of Charles Martel played an important role in the development of Europe in the early middle ages. The reverberations of their iron discipline and raw courage carry through to even today’s military forces. Sources: Guy Halsall, Warfare and Society in the Barbarian West, 450-900. New York: Routledge, 2003.), 74. and David Nicolle, Poitiers AD 732: Charles Martel Turns the Islamic Tide (New York: Osprey Publishing, 2008), 25.
@@patbaker399 i think it is amazing, how they respond to comments of complimment, but rarely the ones correcting them.I dont know if your correction is right, but still they should reply explaining how they got the conclusion. Their citation of sources some times is good, but sometimes is unclear and in the middle of the video. Love the videos, but honestly, my trust on them is not that amazing.
Looking at the PlayList ... quite hard to follow the thread forward in time! Jews in the early caliphate? Romans VS Arabs? (Two times, for this last item.)
Just watch the long videos they have all relevant stuff in it
@@adamsnow4979 Funny stuff, attitude.
If you think that's helpful then you really are warped.
@@BenTrem42 are you challenged? I gave you advice then you attack me lol . The long videos are three seasons which contain all the episodes as for the remaining they are just out of place general topic videos
@@adamsnow4979 *_Advice_* ... you have a very high opinion of yourself!
Maybe try reading. I said it was difficult to move forward in the time line *through the PlayList.*
You're just pompous, is all.
Most of the video covers the Muslim vs Turks than what happened with the Battle of Tours.
A man sees in the world what he carries in his heart.
Sorry, I am usually an enthusiast, BUT I can’t really understand why In a video of 24 minutes over the battle of Tours, at minute 14 (~60%) I am still seeing about the battles fought in the Khorasan..
Why 60% of a video over battle of Tours/Poitiers focuses over Khorasan/Transoxiqna?
It is not an introduction.. it is the majority of the video..
I don’t know why this bother me a lot.
Because it is a part of a larger series concentrating on the Early Muslim Expansion. As such, we give all needed information within the series chronologically. If you are interested to know what happened before, check the videos in the description.
been waiting for this one
The battle that saved the continent of Europe from Muslim rule, Battle of Tours 732.We thank Charles the hammer Martel for that.
@@TT-hx9nj You read it wrong, I said that saved Europe from Muslim rule, what were you thinking I didn't say anything that pertained to what you interpreted.
@@maddogbasil Did I ask about anything like that, I know hygiene was not as good as it is now. But they did know how to read and write, there are many medieval books, and scientific advancements during their times. Get the facts right.
Even if they won the battle
Nothing is gonna change
Look at Iberia
West and Central Europe was a hostile battle ground for dominant and far away from Central islamic world demascus
People really overhyping this battle, if you wanna battle to overhyped or praise
Look at the seige of constantinople in 717-718
They was way important than the battle of tours
@@ibrahimmohammedibrahim9273 Don't underestimate what the Franks did for Europe. They literally saved them from utter Islamisaztion. It was just as important because if France had fallen, likely the rest of Europe would too.The siege of Constantinople was not that important.
So many isl*mic savages are oinking
At the half-way point, I was starting to wonder if I was watching the right video.
More videos on Islamic history, Great work Kings and Generals
Well Documented And Narrated
Charles martel ❤
Tour wasn't important because after battle they constantly raiding into francia and charles was even defeated in nabronne 737 tour was just raid party for loots most sources agreed on it inculed chrincole of 754 mozarabic one of oldest source mentioned battle he literally said abd rahman wanted to plundering cities and destroyed it meanwhile he dont want to conquer lands and there is even docmountry called sword of prophet holy war made by french and erouopean scholars covered battle of tour saying the army left camp for loots. the umayyad army leading raid into francia terrorties to plundering cities searching for loots. the army didn't get their profits and their payment from loots since the conquest of lberia, the caliph al walid ibn abed al malik ordered and tariq musa to stop invasion in erouope and return to damascus brining all spoils that has been looted in lberia. Which in resulting the army begin getting raged out afterwards they decide to raid francia without any strategies goals and scouting the area and its climate before their expansion but rather leading their raid straightaway till they reaching tour confront with charles, during engagement franks army were pushing back by umayyad calavry and forced push into forest to aviod their furthur calavry chagring attacks not getting flanked that would prevent calavry not preform any motivation around comfortably. Charles was under pressure cant do anything untill he send his forces under odo to their camp causing umayyad army to be retreat to camp and protecting their loots and took advsntage in suitation to attack them
Great video keep it up you're doing amazing things 😁👍...