>calls himself the "sword of Islam"
>wrecks west asis and the heart of the Muslim world
What did he mean by this?
>calls himself the "sword of Islam". >wrecks west asis and the heart of the Muslim world
Talk religion
Talk religion
>calls himself the "sword of Islam"
>wrecks west asis and the heart of the Muslim world
What did he mean by this?
The weak should fear the strong.
the cripple who backstabbed everyone and died of stomach flu.
>That is rich coming from someone who killed his own brother.
>Cope harder, tork, while I plow your serbian b***h.
He literally called serbians to be lions at ankara tho
>source cited:
Timur admired the Serbian troops who according to him "fight like lions".
They toughts the ottomans were a better goverment/rulers ?
>They toughts the ottomans were a better goverment/rulers ?
Better chances to loot is more likely explanation. The same motivation lead them to turn on Turks and each other.
Why do christian serbs fought so hard for their Ottoman masters? They contributed in every single major ottoman engament after Osman
his eyes should be smaller.
Not necessary. Uzbeks also have Indo european roots.
any human origin of the turkics is considered annulled.
idk but he had a sweet hat
I love his excuse
>I must avenge Ali and Husayn
Timur wiped out the last Crusader regime in Anatolia's Smyrna (now Izmir). May Allah be pleased with him.
Timur reinforced Islam in the North Caucasus and Pontic–Caspian Steppe. May Allah be pleased with him.
Timur strengthened Sunni Orthodoxy by weakening the Arab heathens. May Allah be pleased with him.
Timur's backing united the Blue Horde and the White Horde, reuniting the Golden Horde, which successfully fought back against Muscovite Russia and Lithuania. May Allah be pleased with him.
Timur began the Timurid Renaissance in arts, architecture, sciences and the mastery of firearms, which led to the later success of the Ottomans, Safavids and Mughals known as the "gunpowder empires".
Timur's war with the Ottomans and the subsequent civil war (1402–13) and the civil war a century later (1509–13) taught the Ottomans to avoid wars over succession disputes at any cost, which led to a system of royal fratricide and imprisonment of sibling rivals, which ensured that civil wars did not happen which would have caused massive instability and cost countless lives like it did in the frequent wars and civil wars in Christian Europe.
Timur laid the foundational pillar for the continuing rise of Islamic power and religion across continental Eurasia between the Late Middle Ages and the Early Modern Age.
all the same, he will remain an subhuman animal for all sane people.
>all the same, he will remain an subhuman animal for all sane peopl-ACK
>Good morning, Sir. Nice elephants.
>directly lead to shiite autism taking over Persia and permanently contesting sunni islam
>directly lead to shiite autism taking over Persia
that was already the case since before timur's time. The Sunni Seljuks conquered the Shia Buyids and suppressed shiism but failed to acheive success. When the khwarezmians ousted the Seljuks and conquered Iran from them the shah adopted a pro shia policy to stabilize his new conquest and because he wanted to garner support for his planned campaign to destroy the abbasid caliphate. But then the mongols arrived and destroyed the khwarezmians. For half the mongol period the sunnis lost the state support they had and began to decline and even the mongols converting to sunni islam failed to reverse this trend. Meanwhile we had local shia dynasties in northern iran and many shia majority regions in in the rest of iran even centuries after the buyids. During this time we see shia movements like the ismailis (ismaili dai'is were dependant on local support down to the village level to maintain their insurgency), hurufis, sarbadars, etc. Some of these movememts were done at the grassroots level. After the fall of the seljuks there was a very quick resurgence for the shia that continued to unabated until the safavids. Otherwise you would not have sunni emirs like Husayn Bayqara who in his desperation against the uzbeks attempted to appeal to his iranian subjects by making overtures to the shia (he did repeal this because his sunni advisors and subjects became pissed but the very fact that this event occured is telling) echoing what the khwarezmian shah was doing 300 years before. Many shia practices with the most eye catching one being the veneration of the 12 imams were noted by contemporaries in this period. Some try to write this off by saying sunnis also venerate the twelve imams but that's not true. Ibn Tamiyya and other famous sunni scholars of the time period did not think highly of them. They also noted the shi'ism in Iran associated the mongol with shi'ism even though the mongols were sunni at that point
Because you could just see an irrelevant cult from Ardabil somehow rising up and conquering it all.
The only people I see worshiping this guy are always poop skinned Pakistanis.
Even turkish turks see this guy as pure evil.
Arabs see him as a reincarnation of the Dajjal (Satan)
But for some reason, Indian Muslims bow down to this guy a lot, even though he would probably torture them just for fun.
I know his grandson made the Mughal Empire, but even they became alienated with their satanic Gurkani lineage. They drank alcohol and smoked hashish. So why do Indian Muslims worship this guy so much?
paki here, let me explain something. Pakistani identity, as well as the identity of Indian Muslims in general, is exclusively built around the Mughals, local histories, and even the histories of other Islamic states don't matter. race and geography, don't exist in our history textbooks. there are only Hindus, Muslims, and British, that's why you have Pakistani's and Indian Muslims LARPing as Arabs and Turks much to the annoying of everyone, they have absolutely no sense of identity.
It all comes across as an extreme national stockholm syndrome. I don't mean what I said out of hate.
Hindus I see are usually content with their living situation. They're happy to be living abroad in a Western country etc.
Indian Muslims, they just seem like devils trapped in an uncomfortable body. They're clearly not comfortable with being Indian.
Why not worship a benevolent figure like Saladin instead? He's an Armenian convert, but at least he didn't dehumanize people
>Why not worship a benevolent figure
>like Saladin
Saladin was a kurdish-arab mutt
Not an armenian
kurds like to babble about their people being the same as Armenians, so it's not a huge difference.
South asians are very slavish in their mentality
Turks are the white people of the west asian race
indian muslims are basically the same as white liberals when it comes to the whole self hatred of race, history, culture thing
He was a crypto-Shia doing taqiyya
I'm not Muslim but i do wonder how Islam would have progressed if not for the Turks and Mongols.
Let's just say if turks and mongols didn't become Muslim and didn't have any interactions with Muslims it would have been better for Islam and Muslims.
Literally how? Arabs were pushed back by Byzantines before the Turks arrived and from the 1000's onward, the Middle East was ruled by either Turkic, Persian and even European despotic rulers
Turks maybe but mongols only did harm
If the Turks and Mongols don't convert then I honestly don't see Islam surviving in any recognizable form. Because then you have the Turks and Mongols still destroying all the Arab empires, but putting up Pagan ones in their place. That does some real hurting on Islam being a universal instead of ethnic Arab religion. Depending on how these theoretical non-muslim Turks and Mongols govern, you might see a real resurgence of native faiths (which at this time weren't as marginalized and small) in a lot of places, Maybe the Mongols bring back Zoroastrianism in Iran, maybe the Turks lead to a resurgence in Coptic Christianity. "Orthodox" Religions are quick to die when deprived of state subsidy. Look how fractured, incoherent, and syncretic Buddhism is for a good example. Maybe Islam gets "Folded back in" to Christianity in a lot of places.
No and no and no
Could you maybe explain why?
>Yo, Muhammad, check these heads!
>‘These poor fellows are beaten, though they are fighting like lions.”
Why are serbs always celebrating their defeats? It's like the ethos of serbian identity is "we lost, but everyone owes everything to us because of our losing"
himself the "sword of Islam"
No he did not. It was a coping mechanism by Muslims to try to retain their self image as conquerors and not the conquered. It's like when neo rabbinicalists come on this board and take credit for everything America does. It's obvious they did nothing to liberate themselves in WW2 but they need something for their self esteem.
Seemed like the type who loves violence, hen says anything to justify it after the fact