@lockeproposal and anyone else who cares to chip in.
When did Europe forget that Islam was at war with it?
Sure they did, but that's what happened everywhere back then. It is also important to note the makeup of European armies. During those times, national armies were not really a thing, and big armies weren't a thing either. European armies were small and split up between various different noblemen and such. That is the reason we got completely fucked by the Mongols out of nowhere, because nobody had large armies and it took a lot for them to organise and agree to fight together. Muslim armies were far better at organisation, at first because they were nomadic forces, and later because their armies were more centralised than European ones.
Rome's influence waned entirely because of Rome. In fact, if Rome governed itself better, the church would not have had anywhere near the amount of influence they ended up having. When the Romans vanished, the church became the government. Whilst the church did use a religious angle to whip up armies from different countries, I would argue that the expansion from Muslim countries during that time had a lot more to do with expansion for the empire's sake, rather than being religiously motivated. The church had to use a religious excuse to get the armies together because of the makeup of the forces in Europe, Muslim leaders did not because the armies were already there.
Sure they did, but that's what happened everywhere back then. It is also important to note the makeup of European armies. During those times, national armies were not really a thing, and big armies weren't a thing either. European armies were small and split up between various different noblemen and such. That is the reason we got completely fucked by the Mongols out of nowhere, because nobody had large armies and it took a lot for them to organise and agree to fight together. Muslim armies were far better at organisation, at first because they were nomadic forces, and later because their armies were more centralised than European ones.
Rome's influence waned entirely because of Rome. In fact, if Rome governed itself better, the church would not have had anywhere near the amount of influence they ended up having. When the Romans vanished, the church became the government. Whilst the church did use a religious angle to whip up armies from different countries, I would argue that the expansion from Muslim countries during that time had a lot more to do with expansion for the empire's sake, rather than being religiously motivated. The church had to use a religious excuse to get the armies together because of the makeup of the forces in Europe, Muslim leaders did not because the armies were already there.
If you would have a look at this? You'll see that the Muslims tear apart and consume the classical world with a series of relentless battles. They didn't save that knowledge for us, they took it from us and then bits of it leaked back centuries later. Look at the waves of attacks hitting what is now Italy for example, that would have disrupted any attempts of the remnants of Rome that may have risen again. What if without the Islamic attacks a Nuovo Roma may have happened within a couple of centuries?