0
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4,385 Given: 1,891 |
Some of my threads:
Thumbs Up |
Received: 21,121 Given: 11,131 |
Conquistador. More of an adventure into the unknown and they had much better endings for the most part.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 25,690 Given: 23,946 |
Spaniards did not fight against children, women and old men like Crusaders did when they crossed the Kingdom of Hungary, MENArva.
And unlike Crusaders, a few hundreds of Spaniards fought against hundreds of thousands of Amerindians, in their own jungles and territories.
For last, Crusaders lost while Spaniards won. FACT.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 1,722 Given: 2,806 |
Cumans
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4,385 Given: 1,891 |
Indeed you much likely killed them or worse, enslaved them, Morisco.
Crusaders fought in the desert and arab territories for that matter.
Spaniards and not only apparently...
Reconquista wasn't fought by Spaniards only like Conquistadores weren't only Spaniards.
It doesn't matter if they won or not. Fighting in the Crusades is much more interesting imo.
Also, they lost in the Middle East not in other parts. Crusaders/Military orders weren't only in the Middle East and your Reconquista is an example.
Some of my threads:
Thumbs Up |
Received: 257 Given: 0 |
Cumans
Thumbs Up |
Received: 68 Given: 2 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4,385 Given: 1,891 |
Oh, just shut up you. Who cares of American colonies?
Italians have had colonies in other parts of Europe (and outside) starting from Middle Ages, Spain only from 1500.
I would gladly defend Europe from Muslims rather than killing and enslaving primitives in America for territories...
Some of my threads:
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks