What was your country’s greatest victory?

being able to influence the entire world through our media and culture :^)

this, please make more blacked

I'd say having a country copy their identity from an ancient Greek region

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Nicopolis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Preveza
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mohács
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Chaldiran
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Constantinople
There are more but these are the first ones that comes to my mind

the battle of w h o

>the absolute state of that shithole

B A S E D
white kuffars have no right to exist!!!

Eine doner danke

i want to suck fat arab cock

Yes who could forget all those times Slavs btfo the Persians

>Eine doner danke

Attached: 1584112581510.jpg (236x300, 11.74K)

Gettysburg

that's poles, no?

but only one horse wounded?

I don't get why some people celebrate a warlord who did nothing but wage war and cause death and destruction.

he built cities as well and ushered in the era of Hellenism which lasted for centuries

Attached: Cartagena de Indias.png (322x966, 190.73K)

cuz it was their warlord that waged war and caused death and destruction on others

Silence, my humble vassal!

we won against 3 out of 5 UN permanent security council members

you guys aren't real macedonian, fucking slavnigger

Alexander the Great wasn't a slav(e) subhuman like you

such an ugly butthurt ape would not say the same if Xerxes or Darius had taken Greece

Also Macedonia is a greek region.

Attached: Maps-roman-empire-peak-150AD.jpg (2620x2076, 1.52M)

>italian
>roman
you guys are g*rmanic inbred

we have too many to choose from

please shit on my chest arab BVLL

>tfw your king is so OP that god has to step in and nerf him

Attached: 1578657616431.jpg (2400x3352, 2.76M)

They did lol

silence, fyrom slav

There we go again

Why this historical revisionist argument comes up only when talking about italy? What about france, are we gonna argue they have nothing to do with the gauls and franks?

It's not like being descendant of the romans automatically adjust the problems we have today anyway.

Meant To reply to

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_destruction_of_Athens
I'm not proud of it though, for two reasons. First, the people that did that had basically nothing to do with me and second, what they did was bad.

and napolean took moscow and hitler took stalingrad
xDDDDD

Seething irrelevant historylets

Attached: 20200326_144716.jpg (365x1832, 246.54K)

The progressive conquest of India was very fantastic. Reads like an adventure novel.

The Hundred Years War was also extremely impressive when you consider how much smaller England was than France in both land and population at the time. Granted we ultimately lost that and it thrusted us into a bloody civil war but still. Impressive display.

The Somme was the bloodiest battle ever fought by the British Army, but that was mostly due to incompetence and bad intel rather than facing overwhelming odds.

Battle of Waterloo is also notable, but I’m not too informed on Napoleon’s era it bores me.

1066 would have been legendary in medieval history had Harold won against William, but he didn’t. The speed in which he marched northwards and kicked Hardrada’s arse at Stamford Bridge before marching straight down south to meet William’s army still deserves commendation though. Proper shame the way things turned out for him. Even with his army exhausted and outnumbered it looked like he was going to win for most of the battle. It was only with a feigned retreat from the Normans that things turned south. The English ignored all their previous tricks and held a strong defensive line, halting all Norman skirmishes and cutting down any man that stepped forward. The Normans at that point adopted a new strategy, pretending to panic and retreat. What followed was the English infantry progressively gaining too much confidence and ultimately losing their patience, they pursued on foot to finish off the fleeing Normans, only for them to be cut down by surprise Norman cavalry. But even with that bastardry, the battle was still in the English’s favour, what finally turned the tide was poor king Harold being struck from his horse by an arrow. Absolutely terrible luck.

Then of course you have the naval battles which are far more relevant in British military history, but I’m not too fond of naval warfare so I don’t know much about them

I’ve always thought this way but Yas Forums never bought into what I was saying.

A modern day Frenchman would be considered foreign to ancient Gauls — different langauge, religion, customs, etc

At least with late Romans, you can make an argument that modern Italians (and even French) share many similarities with their religion and langauge and stuff

Attached: world-map-the-largest-restaurant-chain.gif (660x447, 72.57K)

the Persians did conquer most of Greece tho lol

Attached: 88750184-0748-4E3F-B91F-7DFF5DBC6BCD.jpg (440x213, 54.55K)

none, we don't have victories, the American one was a proxy war

Attached: 20200326_145210.jpg (352x1412, 282.54K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II

Attached: Second_world_war_europe_1943-1945_map_de.png (1088x998, 176.64K)

Both sides were french lol

We DO share similarities, we ARE the descendants of the numerous italic tribes (and therefore the romans), just like the swedes, norwegians and danes from the vikings, the greeks from the ancient greeks ecc.

We are not absolutely 100% direct descendants but still

And as I said , being descended from an iconic ancient tribe doesn't change how the world is today for us, and the greeks are a perfect example of this

William deserves commandment in his own right. He inherited Normandy as a bastard, fatherless child and held it together in a civil war. He fought off an invasion from the King of France and the Holy Roman Emperor at once. Then he invaded Paris and forced the hand of the king of France. He marries a descendant of Charlemagne. His legal decisions like the Truce of God change medieval society. He conquers the oldest kingdom of Europe from many rivals, which was promised to him anyways. He ends their slavery.

The army was English. Look at the numbers. Only 1/6 were knights. The rest were English bowmen, which is why the battle is famous in the first place. The nobility at that point were a mix between French and English, btw. They spoke both languages, often switched between the two and observed customs from both regions. Not quite identical to the soldiers serving underneath them don’t get me wrong, I don’t think most of them would have considered themselves as English as the peasantry. But to say they were still entirely French by that point is wrong.

because my ancestor :)

>A faroese

How is like living there?

>The Hundred Years War was also extremely impressive when you consider how much smaller England was than France in both land and population at the time. Granted we ultimately lost that and it thrusted us into a bloody civil war but still. Impressive display.
England proper was smaller than France proper, but England used to own more lands than the french king himself

Attached: 102119-06-History-England-France-Hundred-Years-War-Medieval-Middle-Ages.jpg (464x429, 95.24K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Suomussalmi and en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Raate_Road
Those two battles that were fought concurrently saved Finland.

England controlled the largest portion of Europe since Charlemagne actually

>Battle of _____

Attached: c69.jpg (640x590, 34.75K)

like everywhere else first world countries

mit yogurt bitte, kanake

>The nobility at that point were a mix between French and English, btw.
Not really. When William conquered your country he kicked all of the anglo-saxon nobility

True. But the kingdom being promised to him has no legal basis, you know. It was a very, very shaky claim. William said it was promised to him by Edward on his deathbed, but there were no witnesses other than William. And even if it was promised, that isn’t how the Anglo-Saxons decided who was King of the English. The King was elected by the Witan, an informal meeting between the most powerful lords of England. The previous king’s word WAS taken into account, but it was ultimately up to the Earls and Ealdormen who should serve as king. William did away with all of that. English slavery isn’t quite how we imagine it now either. And what he replaced it with was just slavery by a different name. Don’t get me wrong, William was a great man in the classical sense in that he accomplished great things, but he wasn’t a good king for England. His claim is laughable and his tyranny and cruelty in enforcing his will on the English people, was nothing short of monstrous. Some would even say genocidal. And if you believe tradition about what William had to say on his deathbed, he would be inclined to agree with me.

Yes. That's why think the Hundred year's war was much more impressive from the french side than for the (losing) english side.
The french monarchy was almost as decentralised as HRE at the time

You misunderstood me. Their foremothers were Anglo-Saxon, their nurses were Anglo-Saxon, their servants were Anglo-Saxon, their subjects were Anglo-Saxon and their soldiers were Anglo-Saxon. By the time of the HYW they were intimately familiar with Anglo-Saxon customs and language. Many of the lesser lords’ first language was Anglo-Saxon. Do you see what I’m saying? They were just as influenced by the English as the English were by them, if not more so considering they no longer exist

I meant to say It in the sense of living in such a small island in the middle of nowere with "only" 50.000 inhabitants

The horse was hurt in his leg to be specific

The autismo in me wishes Edgar Aethling would have been king, but looking at all the circumstances, William was the best king out of all the possibilities in 1066 imo, even if he was unconventional. Dont' trust the Godwinsons

>His claim is laughable
How is it laughable? The royal families of Normandy and England were extremely close and they were part of the same family tree. William was a model king, Harold was an intriguer

>his tyranny and cruelty
Norman yoke is propaganda. William wasn't that tyrannical nor cruel

Whatever the case, the House of Normandy is probably the overall "best" house to rule England before the modern era

Not initially. He respected them

Why would peasants influence the bourgeoise Norman's?

All English nobility were killed by William the conqueror.