Medieval Myths- the Crusades

Discussion in 'History and Culture' started by 1stvermont, Nov 23, 2019.

  1. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    What is the Truth About the Crusades?

    "Medieval historians have long known that popular culture image of the crusades has nothing at all to do with the events themselves"
    -Thomas Madden Professor of History and Director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University


    "Many in today's society believe the false history presented by critics. Enforced by the media, Hollywood and other outlets, popular perception of historical events reigns supreme even when that perception is completely at odds with historical reality"
    -Steve Weidenkompf The Glory of the Crusades


    Great historical myths die hard....writers continue to spread traditional myths....even though they are fully aware of the new findings. They do so because they are determined to show that religion, and especially Christianity, is a dreadful curse upon humanity.”
    -Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History



    What Were the Crusades?

    "Urban viewed the Crusade as a pilgrimage, the aim of which was not to conquer but to visit the place of pilgrimage and then return home. Later popes maintained the understanding of the Crusades as just, defensive wars with the central goal of the recovery of ancient Christian territory. Heroic men and women of faith, rooted in love of Christ and neighbor, undertook the Crusades as acts of self-defense and recovery of stolen property. This is the proper understanding of these important events in Church history"
    -Steve Weidenkopf Were the Crusades Just Wars?


    Pilgrimage, not war, constituted the overwhelming response to the capture of the holy land...not all armed pilgrims fought”
    --Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006


    The word crusade was not used until 1706. At the time the events took place they were known as armed pilgrimages to the holy land. They were undertaken at great loss of life, money, and earthly gain to go and risk for fellow Christians under persecution, to retake christian lands from Muslim conquerors, to sacrifice for God and to put the holy sites back in christian control. The crusades were controlled generally by the church, but also by kings with rules and regulations such as no prostitution, no gambling, no swearing and violators could be put to death. Often many crusaders went in small groups or alone. A few larger groups that went are now known as the first, second, third crusade etc. For a time line of the major events during the period see links below.

    The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism
    Answering Muslims: Islam and the Crusades: A Warped Perspective

    The memory of the long struggle with Islam from the 7th century was not lost 400 years later. If anything it had grown.”
    -Christopher Tyerman God's War: A New History of the Crusades Harvard university Press


    Crusades Were a Defensive Action Against Muslim Aggressors

    The Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression—an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands....Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christian areas in the world—quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor, which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East. That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be subsumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.
    -Thomas Madden the Real History of the Crusades


    "The Crusades were born from the violent aggression of Islam, which had conquered ancient Christian territory in the Holy Land and North Africa and established a large foothold in Europe within a century of Muhammad’s death in the early seventh century. Particularly troublesome to Christian Europe was the conquering of Jerusalem in 638 by an Islamic force that sacked the city for three days and destroyed over 300 churches and monasteries. ".......The invasion of Christian territory, Muslim persecution of native Christians and pilgrims, plus the threat posed to the Christian Byzantine Empire, were all legitimate reasons to engage in defensive warfare and Pope Urban II cited them as justification for the First Crusade.”
    -Steve Weidenkopf The Glory of the Crusades


    The crusaders saw their cause as a defensive action to protect themselves from further attacks and to reclaim lost christian territories taken by Muslim expansion over the past few hundred years. In 1071 a few years before any pope called for crusade, Islamic Turks captured the byzantine Emperor and destroyed there army. Constantinople was about to fall to the seljuk Turks who raped, tortured, and killed Christians while destroying pilgrimage sites and threatened the largest collection of christian relics in Constantinople. The new Emperor called other christian nations for help. The emperor send word to Pope urban if helped was not received, thousands more Christians would be raped, tortured, murdered and “the most holy relics of the savior” would be lost. With Constantinople under threat and with the emperor recently killed and his army destroyed by invading Muslims. The west believed it would unlock all of Europe to further Islamic expansion, so the west responded.

    "For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help.. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont...They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire.”
    -Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095


    The history of Islam has essentially been a history of conquest...the crusaders far from being an outrageous proto type of western imperialism, as it taught in most schools, were...one of the few occasions when Christians took the offensive to regain the “occupied ground.”
    -Historian Paul Johnston


    Islamic provocations: by centuries of bloody attempts to colonize the West and by sudden new attacks on Christian pilgrims and holy places.”
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions Harper one 2009


    From the safe distance of many centuries, it is easy enough to scowl in disgust at the Crusades.. But we should be mindful that our medieval ancestors would have been equally disgusted by our infinitely more destructive wars fought in the name of political ideologies.. it is a fact that the world we know today would not exist without their effortsl have followed Zoroastrianism, another of Islam's rivals, into extinction”
    -Thomas Madden


    From the safe distance of many centuries, it is easy enough to scowl in disgust at the Crusades.. Whether we admire the Crusaders or not, it is a fact that the world we know today would not exist without their efforts ll have followed Zoroastrianism, another of Islam's rivals, into extinction”
    -Thomas Madden
    Professor of History and Director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University

    Our fathers were better able than we to estimate the danger with witch Islam threatened Christianity.... the crusade was only a process of driving back the invasion”
    -Leon Gautier Chivalry the Everyday Life of the medieval Knight Tumblar House 2015



    Help Christians Traveling to the Holy Land and Christians Suffering Under Islamic Rule

    "The Crusades were also a response to the severe persecution of indigenous Christians living in the occupied territories, whose lives were severely restricted and who suffered constant pressure to convert to Islam Christian pilgrims were also subjected to harassment and violence, which demanded a defensive response from Christendom. The Seljuks, who were known for their brutality, threatened pilgrims to the holy sites in Palestine. As an example, a group of 12,000 German pilgrims led by Bishop Günther of Bamberg in 1065 was massacred by the Seljuks on Good Friday, only two days' march from Jerusalem."
    -Steve Weidenkopf The Glory of the Crusades


    Open extermination of christian populations and the disappearance of eastern christian culture”
    -Bat Ye'or “the myth of Islamic tolerance” interview


    The example of our redeemer on the duty of brotherly love demands of us that we should set our hearts upon the deliverance of our brethren. For as he offered his life for us, so we ought we to offer our lives for our brothers.”
    -Pope Urban the second


    A major reason for the crusades was to help persecuted Christians under Muslim control and to protect their own citizens who wished to travel to the holy lands in safety. Geoffery and Guy of the first crusade gave their motivation as “To exterminate wickedness and unrestrained rage of the pagans by which innumerable Christians have already been oppressed, made captive and killed.” Muslims had made travel to the holy lands expensive, near impossible, as well as dangerous with a real threat of both torture and murder of pilgrims who attempted the travel. In one severe instance in 1065 12,000 unarmed German pilgrims were slaughtered. Under Islamic rule rape, murder, torture, forced into slavery, prostitution, and forced conversions were all things Christians suffered from. No new churches or synagogues were allowed to be built Christians were prohibited from praying out loud [even in churches or houses] or reading the bible. They were not allowed weapons, were taxed and were to “feel inferior, humiliated, punished those who would not convert.” In 705 Muslims assembled Arminian Christians nobles in a church and burned them to death. More than 6,000 Jews were massacred in Morocco and In 1032 as many in Grenada. In 1570 Muslims murdered tens of thousands of Christians in Cyprus. In the 8th century 70 pilgrims from Asia minor were executed. Shortly after 60 were crucified. In the late 8th century Muslim attacked the monastery of Saint Theodosius and slaughtered the monks while destroying churches in Bethlehem. In 796 Muslims burned to death 20 monks from a monastery. In 809 mass rape and murder in Jerusalem. On Palm Sunday 923 churches were destroyed and Christians killed. Egyptians Muslim ruler Hakim had 30,000 churches burned or pillaged and had the Holy Sepulchre destroyed and Jesus tomb partially destroyed. The call for the second crusade by Pope Eugenius the third in his bull Quantum Praedecessors was based on defending the eastern church after the fall of Edessa.

    "Muslim Turkish invasions in the 1050's caused much if not more mayhem and destruction than the crusades were able to achieve."
    -Christopher Tyerman God's War: A New History of the Crusades Harvard university Press


    "We have heard, most beloved brethren, and you have heard what we cannot recount without deep sorrow how, with great hurt and dire sufferings our Christian brothers, members in Christ, are scourged, oppressed, and injured in Jerusadlem, in Antioch, and the other cities of the East... are either subjected in their inherited homes to other masters... they are flogged and exiled as slaves for sale in their own land... has invaded the lands of those Christians and has depopulated them by the sword, pillage and fire; it has led away a part of the captives into its own country, and a part it has destroyed by cruel tortures; it has either entirely destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of its own religion. They destroy the altars, after having defiled them with their uncleanness. They circumcise the Christians, and the blood of the circumcision they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font. When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and dragging forth the extremity of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then with flogging they lead the victim around until the viscera having gushed forth the victim falls prostrate upon the ground. Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent. The kingdom of the Greeks is now dismembered by them and deprived of territory so vast in extent that it can not be traversed in a march of two months..."at least let the great suffering of those who desired to go to the holy places stir you up. Think of those who made the pilgrimage across the sea! Even if they were more wealthy, consider what taxes, what violence they underwent, since they were forced to make payments and tributes almost every mile, to purchase release at every gate of the city, at the entrance of the churches and temples, at every side journey from place to place: also, if any accusation whatsoever were made against them, they were compelled to purchase their release; but if they refused to pay money, the prefects of the Gentiles, according to their custom, urged them fiercely with blows....They not only demanded money of them, which is not an unendurable punishment, but also examined the callouses of their heels, cutting them open and folding the skin back, lest, perchance, they had sewed something there. Their unspeakable cruelty was carried on even to the point of giving them scammony to drink until they vomited, or even burst their bowels, because they thought the wretches had swallowed gold or silver; or, horrible to say, they cut their bowels open with a sword and, spreading out the folds of the intestines, with frightful mutilation disclosed whatever nature held there in secret. Remember, I pray, the thousands who have perished vile deaths, and strive for the holy places from which the beginnings of your faith have come.
    --Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095 August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 36-40
     
    ToddWB and yabberefugee like this.
  2. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Liberate Jerusalem

    If you are conquered, you will have the glory of dying in the very same place as Jesus Christ”
    -Pope Urban


    [going]”On Pilgrimage to wage war on foreign peoples and defeat barbaric nations, least the holy city of Jerusalem be held captive and the holy sepulcher of the lord Jesus to be contaminated any longer.”
    -Raymond of Saint- Gills


    Europeans thought all the time of the holy lands and the relic of the true cross”
    -Thomas Madden The Modern Scholar: Heaven or Heresy: A History of the Inquisition


    Another goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and other places made holy by the life of Christ and the apostles. The reforming Popes 100 years even before urban and continued through, were obsessed with the holy land, relics, the old testament, and returning to the early apostolic Christianity. The century before the crusade increasingly in the west cathedrals and paintings were centered upon Jerusalem, pilgrimages, relics and the holy land in general. Relics flooded the west, plays were themed in the holy land and pilgrimages grew more popular. The third crusade was over the loss of Jerusalem and the loss of the true cross. The Duke of Burgundy telling Saladin via a diplomat “the only reason we have come from our countries is Jerusalem.” In 1009 Muslims destroyed the church of the holy Sepulcher, Crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims performing acts of righteousness on their way to the Holy Sepulcher. Tyerman quotes a veteran of the first crusade as saying “our men rushed the whole city.... all came rejoicing and weeping from excess of gladness to worship at the subculture of our savior Jesus, and there they fulfilled their vows.” The Crusade indulgence they received was canonically related to the pilgrimage indulgence. This goal was frequently described in feudal terms. When calling the Fifth Crusade in 1215, Innocent III wrote:

    will not Jesus Christ, the king of kings and lord of lords, whose servant you cannot deny being, who joined your soul to your body, who redeemed you with the Precious Blood … condemn you for the vice of ingratitude and the crime of infidelity if you neglect to help Him?Of holy Jerusalem...This very city, in which, as you all know, Christ Himself suffered for us, because our sins demanded it, has been reduced to the pollution of paganism and, I say it to our disgrace, withdrawn from the service of God...Who now serves the church of the Blessed Mary in the valley of Josaphat, in which church she herself was buried in body? But why do we pass over the Temple of Solomon, nay of the Lord, in which the barbarous nations placed their idols contrary to law, human and divine? Of the Lord's Sepulchre we have refrained from speaking, since some of you with your own eyes have seen to what abominations it has been given over”...
    -Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095 August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 33-36



    Crusading was a Spiritual Journey of Self Sacrifice

    Considering how many are my sins and the love, clemency and mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ, because when he was rich he became poor for our sake, I have determined to repay him in some measure for everything he has given me freely although I am nor worthy. And so I have decided to go ti Jerusalem where God was seen as man and spoke with men and to adore the place where his feet trod.”
    -Stephen of Neublons


    How does a man love according to divine precept his neighbor as himself when, knowing that his Christian brothers in faith and in name are held by the perfidious Muslims in strict confinement and weighed down by the yoke of heaviest servitude, he does not devote himself to the task of freeing them? … Is it by chance that you do not know that many thousands of Christians are bound in slavery and imprisoned by the Muslims, tortured with innumerable torments?”
    -Pope Innocent III

    "Crusading," Professor Jonathan Riley-Smith has rightly argued, was understood as an "an act of love"—in this case, the love of one's neighbor. The Crusade was seen as an errand of mercy to right a terrible wrong. As Pope Innocent III wrote to the Knights Templar, "You carry out in deeds the words of the Gospel, 'Greater love than this hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friends.'"
    -Thomas Madden the real story of the crusades


    The crusades were only acts of faith. To cause the law of God to triumph... these brave men quitted their homes to undergo hunger and privation in a far-distant land, to die misrabel, alone, with their extorting eyes turned towards Jerusalem, calling on the name of Jesus. These men believed in God and died for him.”
    -Leon Gautier Chivalry the Everyday Life of the medieval Knight Tumblar House 2015


    The biblical text cited to justify participation in the crusades were predominantly the teachings of Jesus in the new testament- references of love, humility, self sacrifice for the good of ones neighbor, and son on. The crusades were understood as an act of humble, loving service in which people risked their lives to liberate eastern Christians from the threat of Muslim invasion of Christianize lands as well as Muslim attacks and actions of humiliation against christian pilgrims to the holy lands”
    -Matthew Flannagan and Paul Copan Did god Really Command genocide” Baker Books 2014


    The Call of Abraham was used to support crusades in Genesis 12 portraying the difficulties of a crusader leaving his family for economical uncertainty while facing difficulty in the long journey with a possibility of death. Crusading was seen as spiritual journey and love/sacrifice to God were the major themes. A major crusading verse was Luke 9.23 and Matt 16.24 were Jesus tells his followers ““Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.” This is why crusaders wore the cross on their cloths and carried crosses as well as on their banners. The themes of denying one self, and taking up their cross. Also Maccabees [catholic books] and various passages in the Gospels were used. Numbers 21 21-24 were used as reason for just [defensive] war, after Islam expansion.

    "Documentary evidence predating the conquest of Jerusalem, such as letters and charters, nonetheless confirms that most crusaders were primarily inspired to set out for the holy land by personal christian devotion...In short, most noblemen who joined the crusade did so from a simple and sincere love of god ...The evidence for the aristocratic response to the crusade message, strongly suggest that spiritual concerns dominated the minds of Latin nobility while they took to the cross "
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam


    "There is one motivator that outweighed all others: faith...Above all, love of God, neighbor, and self drove participation in the Crusades.........Love of God and the desire to serve him dominated the themes of Crusade preachers. Popes and preachers used the image of a Crusader denying himself and taking up the Cross in imitation of the Savior to motivate warriors. Urban II told the assembly at Clermont that “it ought to be a beautiful ideal for you to die for Christ in that city where Christ died for you...... “It is a sure sign that he burns with love for God and with zeal when for God’s sake he leaves his fatherland, possessions, houses, sons and wife to go across the sea in the service of Jesus Christ”
    -Steve Weidenkopf is a lecturer of Church History at the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College


    Crusaders were driven by faith in wanting to please God and self sacrifice for those persecuted. As one crusader said "carrying the cross” so that afterword, they may be carried to haven by the cross."Odo of burgundy said "the journey to Jerusalem as a penance for my sins.... since divine mercy inspired me that owing to the enormity of my sins I should go to the sepluchure of our savior, in order that this offering of my devotion might might be more acceptable in the sight of god." Urbonat Clermat stated "it ought to be a beautiful ideal for you to die for Christ in that city were Christ did for you." Eudes of chateaurout said "as sigh that man loves god when he cast aside the world.... for gods sake he leaves his fatherland, possessions, houses sons and wife to go across the sea in the service of Jesus Christ." Wolfker of Kuffen said he “wanted to fulfill the gospel command “who wishes to follow me”

    the holy war itself was preceived and possibly designed to revolve around Matthew 16.24.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006


    Whoever, therefore, shall determine upon this holy pilgrimage and shall make his vow to God to that effect and shall offer himself to Him as a, living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God..If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me if anyone desired to follow the Lord zealously, with a pure heart and mind, and wished faithfully to bear the cross after Him, he would no longer hesitate to take up the way to the Holy Sepulchre....Brethren, we ought to endure much suffering for the name of Christ - misery, poverty, nakedness, persecution, want, illness, hunger, thirst, and other (ills) of this kind, just as the Lord saith to His disciples: 'Ye must suffer much in My name,' and 'Be not ashamed to confess Me before the faces of men; verily I will give you mouth and wisdom,' and finally, 'Great is your reward in Heaven.”
    -Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095


    During the first crusade, it was items of religious nature that influenced and pushed on the pilgrims such as the holy lance in Antioch that completely changed the campaign. When they reached Jerusalem the crusaders reenacted Joshua at Jericho by marching around the city silent.

    "pope] Gregory did not sell this planned expedition as holy war...but of mercy and act of charity ….It was prayer,fasting and sermons that kept the crusade going at Jerusalem"
    -Thomas F. Madden The New Concise History of the Crusades


    "Priests and other clerics who will be in the Christian army, both those under authority and prelates, shall diligently devote themselves to prayer and exhortation, teaching the crusaders by word and example to have the fear and love of God always before their eyes, so that they say or do nothing that might offend the divine majesty. If they ever fall into sin, let them quickly rise up again through true penitence. Let them be humble in heart and in body, keeping to moderation both in food and in dress, avoiding altogether dissensions and rivalries, and putting aside entirely any bitterness or envy, so that thus armed with spiritual and material weapons they may the more fearlessly fight against the enemies of the faith, relying not on their own power but rather trusting in the strength of God "........." others who have taken up the cross, and those who may still do so, to carry out their vows to the Lord "
    -FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL (1215)


    The crusade [third] was... identified with spiritual renewal. Specifically the process was associated with voluntary poverty and amendment of life.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  3. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Were the Crusades a Conquest?

    "the first crusaders and pope, thought all land would be returned to the byzantine empire"
    The New Concise History of the Crusades Thomas F. Madden


    No. At the end of the first crusade only 4,000 Europeans stayed, they did not view it as a conquest but as a armed pilgrimage. With a few staying behind to defend Jerusalem. It was often the noble class that stayed behind that had wealth and lands in Europe not the peasantry looking for new lands. The holy lands were not a colony of European nations but were independent of Europe and money was continually sent from europe to support the holy land kingdoms. In the summer of 1098 the first crusade leaders sent letters to Pope urban asking him to take command of the crusade.

    Crusades for Wealth?

    "We now know that greed cannot have been the dominate motive among the first crusaders , not least because as recent research has shown, for most participants the expedition promised to be utterly terrifying and crippling expensive."
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam


    "This charge can be easily debunked with the simple fact that going on Crusade was an extraordinary expense—costing a knight four to five times his annual income. From being enriched, the vast majority of Crusaders suffered financial hardship as a result of their participation. Indeed, in order to finance such an expensive undertaking, many knights and their families sold or mortgaged their land and possessions"
    -Steve Weidenkopf The Glory of the Crusades


    Popes, Bishops, and Kings started taxing their people to help pay for the crusades because no one could afford to go. Many kings spent the nations entire treasury and multiple years worth of income of the entire country just to fund a large crusade. Knights sold vineyards, mills, inheritance, land and even entire counties to help pay for the voyage. The church helped fund the crusades with taxes. One observer said of Richard the lionhearted “put up for sale all he had, officials, Lordships, Earldoms, Sherrifdoms, castles, towns, lands, everything.” When the french King left the third crusade to improve his position in France Richard said “We, however, place the love of god and his honor above our own and above the acquisition of many regions.”

    "The ideals of love and sacrifice and not the gain and conquest that are the dominating ideals of much crusading activity...crusading was motivated by piety and not the gain of land, entailing much suffering and hardship"
    -Heath Thomas Jeremy Evans Paul Copan Holy War in the Bible


    When the 4th crusade sacked Constantinople for loot, the Pope [who had excommunicated the crusade] condemned them saying they were after earthly treasure, not heavenly treasure. In 1063 a crusade was called for Spain with rich land and close by, yet few answered because they cared for the holy lands not money. A song composed during the first crusade read “There we must go, selling our goods to buy the temple of God and to destroy the Saracens.” The majority of wealth gained in the holy lands by groups such as the Templar's, came not from “loot” but from taxes from the west.

    Scholars have discovered that crusading knights were generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission. Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt...Of course, they were not opposed to capturing booty if it could be had. But the truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich, but the vast majority returned with nothing.”
    -Thomas Madden


    Most went at immense personal cost, some of them knowingly bankrupted themselves to go...crusading was very expensive undertaking...the best estimates is that a typical crusader needed to raise at least four times his annual income before he could set forth.””
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions Harper one 2009


    Further it was those with the most to lose, that made the sacrifice.

    The cliche of younger sons being drawn to the Jerusalem adventure contains no truth. Almost by definition leaders were, if not all eldest sons, possessed of significant patrimonies of their own.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006


    Were Jews to be Harmed?

    Jews were under the protection of the feudal Lord”
    -Thomas Madden The Modern Scholar: The Medieval World, Part II: Society, Economy, and Culture


    "The Jews are not to be persecuted, nor killed, nor even forced to flee"
    -St Bernard of clairvaux- most famous preacher of second crusade


    It is important to note that almost everywhere....bishops attempted, sometimes even at the peril of their own lives, to protect the Jews.”
    -Leon Poliakon Historian


    Jews were the only officially protected non christian group in medieval European society. St. Bernard frequently preached that the Jews were not to be persecuted he said

    “Ask anyone who knows the Sacred Scriptures what he finds foretold of the Jews in the Psalm. "Not for their destruction do I pray.”

    Emich's actions were against the royal laws and Church cannon laws. The crusade lead by Emich that killed innocent Jews and forced baptism/conversions was going against church decree and was condemned by the Pope. Henry the 4th had forbidden the Jews to be harmed in anyway [he was gone in Italy when Emrich came through] For his acts Emich's crusade was denied entry past Hungary to continue on their crusade. Knights in christian Hungry attacked and destroyed his force when they rallied around their Bishop to oppose his crusade.

    It is fitting that you go forth against Muslims however, anyone who attacks a jew and tries to kill him it is as though he attacks Jesus himself.”
    -Bernard of clairvaux


    John bishop of Speyer hid and saved Jews from the oncoming crusade and after went and persecuted those crusaders who had killed Jews including cutting off hands. The jews who were forcibly converted and baptized the Bishop allowed to revert back to Judaism and helped the rebuilding of the destroyed synagogue. Bishop Rothard allowed Jews to enter his refuge in Mainz to than only be killed by a mob for it. When Emich enter Cologne the jews had dispersed into the country protected by local Christians.

    Jews prior in Germany were protected by the crown and local lords, they thrived along the rhine, some local bishops tried to protect the Jews but many were killed all the same."
    -Thomas F. Madden The New Concise History of the Crusades


    Emich of Flonheim.... his reputation for violence and flouting of royal authority preceding him. In the three months since embarking on his crusade, count Emich had, in the eyes of many, indelibly stained the holy project by the systematic persecution of Jews,”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006


    Crusader scholar Christopher Tyerman of oxford said how their was a financial motive to the attacks on the jews by Emich. He stated “For leaders such as Emich, cash meant power and authority” wealthy Jewish communities made an easy minority target for seekers of power. And of the ghettos?

    The much maligned Jewish ghetto's, which were characteristic of European cities throughout the middle ages were not indicative of an inferior legal status accorded to Jews or of ant-Jewish discrimination. To the contrary, the ghetto was a place where Jews enjoyed complete self government and where rabbinic law applied.”
    --Hans- Hermann Hoppe Democracy the God that Failed The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy and Natural Order Routledge 2001


    A War Between Religions? A Religious war? A war of Conversion?

    ‘we worship and confess the same God though in diverse forms and daily praise and adore him as the creator and ruler of this world’
    -Pope Gregory VII
    Quoted in Gods war Christopher Tyerman

    "the distinction between holy war and pilgrimage was real. The crusades usually referred to themselves as "pilgrim" or "cross bearers".
    -The New Concise History of the Crusades Thomas F. Madden


    Christian rulers tolerated Muslim religion and made no effort to convert them.”
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades


    The war was not primarily between two religions, it was between two groups of people that happened to be of separate religions. The wars happened because of a people group of people, that attacked another group, committed crimes such as rape, murder, forced conversion and conquest. Than in response, another people group, banned together and attacked the first group. No question there was religious nature to many motives, but had these been simply separate countries within western Europe or middle east, a war would have broken out.

    once their rule had been established the Franks proved remarkably tolerant in their treatment of non-Christian subjects.the Franks allowed complete religious freedom to all their subjects.” While Hamilton stresses that Jewish synagogues and rabbinic schools existed in many of their towns, contemporary Muslim sources noted with surprise that mosques were allowed to function in the crusader states (albeit not in Jerusalem itself) and Muslim subjects were even allowed to participate in the haj. This was because, as Jotischky notes, “the First Crusade was a war of liberation and conquest; it was not a war for the extermination or conversion of Muslims.” Far from being forced to convert, the Muslim villagers were run by a council of elders who in turn appointed a “rayse” to represent the community to the Christian lord, while all spiritual and social matters were regulated by the imams in the community in accordance with Sharia law!
    -Jonathan Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, Swanston Publishing Ltd, 1191, p. 16


    Many times christian in the holy lands allied with Muslims against other Christians or fought to help Muslims against invading Christians and vice verse. The king of Jerusalem Fredrick befriended and knighted Muslim emir Fakhr-ad-din. In fact many crusaders saw not Islam, but the Byzantine empire as the true enemy. Some of the awful crimes committed, were done against Christians in the holy lands. Finally Muslims and Jews were allowed to practice their religion in crusader states and forced baptism of Muslims was prohibited. Muslims migrated to the crusader states. The order of St John's hospitals treated Muslims and Muslims made up jurors in the crusader states.

    [the crusaders]"even during the expedition to Jerusalem, they demonstrated a more malleable attitude towards Muslims, engaging in extensive negotiations with fatimids of Egypt, pursuing limited alliances with Muslim rulers of northern Syria like Omar of Azaz and happily formulating a series of admittedly exploitative truces with the emirs of southern Syria,Lebanon and Palestine. The evidence of this is intermittent, and to an extant our Latin sources seem keen to present the crusade as an intense and unbending religious conflict. In reality, contact may have been continuing on a completely different level. Raymond of Aguilers asserted that a Latin priest and visionary Evremar went to Muslim city of Tripoli to rest and recuperate during the latter stages of the siege of Antioch suggest that cross-cultural interaction may actually have been far more common than we know.
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam


    One of the odder myths concerning the middle ages if of a intolerant Christendom corrupting a tolerant Islam.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006


    The Jerusalem Massacre

    The first crusaders killed many non combatants during the capture of Jerusalem Records range from a few hundred to 75,000 [yet the city population was only 20,00-30,000]. However many inhabitants were not killed but captured and ransomed. While yet others were expelled from the city. It was common practice in Europe and the middle east of time period, that after a siege many that had remained in the city would be killed.

    It is probable that anywhere from several hundred to 3,000 were slain by the crusaders"
    -Steve Weidenkomp The glory of the crusades

    But what of the reports of crusaders that described the incident as blood flowing as high as ankles? Those were biblical references to Rev 4.20 and Isiah 63.3

    Islamic Understanding of the Crusades

    Claims that Muslims have been harboring bitter resentments about the crusades for a millennium is nonsense. Muslim antagonism about the crusades did not napper until about 1900...And anti crusader feelings did not become intense until the founding of the state of Israel.”
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades


    The crusades were not a part of Muslim history after the retaking of the holy land. No books were written until 1899 when the first Arabic book on crusades was written. For hundreds of years Muslims did not remember the crusades as a major event in Islamic history but they were viewed as small local events and since they won, they were soon forgotten. In fact Ibn Zafir writing in the 12th century said it was better the franks [crusaders] occupied Jerusalem rather than the Muslim Turks to prevent their spreading into Egypt.

    Before the end of the nineteenth century Muslims had not shown much interests in the crusades...looking back on them with indifference and complacency.”
    -Jonathan Riley-Smith
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  4. Capt Nice

    Capt Nice Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2017
    Messages:
    7,440
    Likes Received:
    5,954
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    LOL. You expect me to read that?
     
  5. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    Not if you dont want to. Maybe you could read one section and give a comment and we could go from their.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2019
  6. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    15,570
    Likes Received:
    5,181
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I done did already read on the subject many years ago. No matter the philosophy or desired outcome the crusades were a dismal failure because the Turks were well organized and more efficient fighters. The Christians were inter warring kingdoms which weakened their force.
     
  7. CKW

    CKW Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    12,888
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I read the first post. Wasn't that hard and has solid info.
     
    ToddWB and 1stvermont like this.
  8. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree they did fail in the end. I also agree that in fighting played a role [however it did on the Muslim side as well] but I disagree the turks were more efficient fighters. The major cause was the numbers. The Christians were always a small minority. Further supply and home terf played their roles.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  9. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Please dont keep the secret. This hidden knowledge you own please share. Show me what of my op cant stand up to the scrutiny of your hidden secret knowledge.


    Can you baseless claim stand up to scrutiny? lets investigate, please support your post.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  10. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    42,588
    Likes Received:
    33,943
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I recommend that anyone who is interested read this ENTIRE ARTICLE.

    https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ewrite-history-crusades-modern-political-ends

    That is the CONTEXT as to WHY there is all of this REVISIONIST history about the crusades.

    In essence it is little more than an transparent attempt to rationalize and justify anti-Muslim sentiments by the right.
     
    Grau and Margot2 like this.
  11. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    So what I have found happens often is some people google the first article they can find that tells them what they want to hear. They than post it thinking or wanting it to be true and support their narrative they desire. When they are challenged to support the claimed myths in the article [the authors could not even defend the claims] and are given sources/facts that refute those claims, they stand alone and are unsure what to do as they have supported a myth. This has just happened above.


    There are so many ways to address this post. I am glad you gave the link I read it and it shows just why it is so important to do threads like this since myths persist for political purposes. So to link to your article.

    https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ewrite-history-crusades-modern-political-ends


    Here is a statement I agree with 100%.

    "Historyand not just the one written by the “victors” – is critical for illuminating both our present and our future; how ideologues try to rewrite it reveals the power of the stories we tell about to past to shape the future they hope to construct."


    Amen. This is just what has happened and the liberal Gurdian is a perfect example. We have myths continued to spread for political purposes even though they are easily shown to be historically false. This is because the victors [enlightenment atheist and protestants] wrote the history to made the catholic church [I am protestant] look bad for political purposes. Every leading medieval scholar or crusade scholar will say the same thing. That is why your article could not support its claims in the least. I understand some give papal infallibility to their favorite political sources such as the guradian, but I need truth and historical fact to justify how I view a past event.


    "Medieval historians have long known that popular culture image of the crusades has nothing at all to do with the events themselves"
    -Thomas Madden Professor of History and Director of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies at Saint Louis University


    "Many in today's society believe the false history presented by critics. Enforced by the media, Hollywood and other outlets, popular perception of historical events reigns supreme even when that perception is completely at odds with historical reality"
    -Steve Weidenkompf The Glory of the Crusades


    Great historical myths die hard....writers continue to spread traditional myths....even though they are fully aware of the new findings. They do so because they are determined to show that religion, and especially Christianity, is a dreadful curse upon humanity.”
    -Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History

    Many vicious distortions and lies had entered the historical cannon with the seal of distinguished scholarly approval, so long as they reflect badly on the catholic church.”
    -Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History Tempelton Press 2016


    What the proponents of the enlightenment actually initiated was the tradition of angry secular attacks on religion.”
    -Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History

    It is so easy, in fact, to manipulate history... for a public that is not knowledgeable about it. We have nearly daily evidence of this on television”
    -Regine Pernoud Those Terrible Middle Ages Debunking the Myths Ignatius press San Francisco


    "The first step in liquidating a people is to erase its memory. Destroy its books, its history. Then have somebody write new books, manufacture a new culture, invent a new history"
    -Milan Hubl, Czek communist


    If you can cut the people off from their history, then they can be easily persuaded.”
    -Karl Marx




    So first i must point out you did not do what I asked for. I said "Can you baseless claim stand up to scrutiny? lets investigate, please support your post." I need you to support your claims, show them true. Its a great example, we can believe the common myths about the crusades if we read only unsupported politically motivated articles and give them papal infallibility while throwing our brains out the winder and refusing to read about the crusades from heretical sources [actual medieval historians, books, original sources etc ] or we can read leading historians such as some of the books below. But if we do that we can no longer believe the myths since they will actually support their position with historical fact and original sources. So unless we are politically motivated to deny truth in search of political correctness, we can learn what actually happened.


    Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006
    Thomas F. Madden The New Concise History of the Crusades
    Rodney Stark God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades

    Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History
    Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam
    Steve Weidenkompf The Glory of the Crusades
    Jonathan Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, Swanston Publishing Ltd
    Thomas Madden The Modern Scholar: Heaven or Heresy: A History of the Inquisition
    Thomas Madden the real story of the crusades




    So if we can make it through all the political fighting in the article [and logical fallacies and false claims] and get to its baseless claims about the crusades, we find this first



    1-"But the Crusades were pretty bad. Historians debate the precise extent and savagery of the violence, but we generally agree that the intensity of the religiously-motivated brutality was staggering. We argue, for example, whether there really was cannibalism during the First Crusade (probably), and whether blood really flowed up to the combatants’ ankles in the Temple of David in 1099 (probably not). But there’s no question that crusaders were sometimes driven to slaughter non-Christian civilian populations both in Europe and in southwest Asia, all in the name of religion.


    2-Reminding the public about ugly moments in the history of Christianity does not make one anti-Christian. To compare the Jordanian pilot who was burned to death by Isis militants to the public burning of Jesse Washington in Waco, Texas does not make one un-American. To acknowledge such comparisons instead gives one the moral authority to call out other acts of violence and atrocity, including those that are justified via religion.



    3- Obama’s statements therefor reflect well-accepted historical knowledge. The Inquisition led to the execution of many people guilty – at most – of thought crime. Christianity has been regularly and explicitly used to justify colonization, slavery, cultural destruction and racial discrimination. These are simply undisputed facts,


    So as my quotes say above the attack is not really the crusades but Christianity that the gurdian hates. And are willing to lie to its readers to get them to hate as well. One thing missing of course is all the evil done by atheistic secular states, whos crimes are far, far worse than anything Christians have done. But lets take the above claims one at a time so we can go throw and show them false and mythical claims believed only by the faithful of the guardian who give papal infallibility to its published materials. We will deal with the first section this post. Claim, The crusades were religiously motivated. I believe this is partially true as my op points out. But you will have to tell me why Christians willing to sacrifice their lives and money to help other persecuted Christians resit tyranny death, rape, robbery, forced conversion etc is a bad thing. The main motivator was not religious as my op points out. And as my op points out it was not a religious war as claimed.


    ‘we worship and confess the same God though in diverse forms and daily praise and adore him as the creator and ruler of this world’
    -Pope Gregory VII Quoted in Gods war Christopher Tyerman

    "the distinction between holy war and pilgrimage was real. The crusades usually referred to themselves as "pilgrim" or "cross bearers".
    -The New Concise History of the Crusades Thomas F. Madden

    Christian rulers tolerated Muslim religion and made no effort to convert them.”
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades

    The war was not primarily between two religions, it was between two groups of people that happened to be of separate religions. The wars happened because of a people group of people, that attacked another group, committed crimes such as rape, murder, forced conversion and conquest. Than in response, another people group, banned together and attacked the first group. No question there was religious nature to many motives, but had these been simply separate countries within western Europe or middle east, a war would have broken out.

    once their rule had been established the Franks proved remarkably tolerant in their treatment of non-Christian subjects.the Franks allowed complete religious freedom to all their subjects.” While Hamilton stresses that Jewish synagogues and rabbinic schools existed in many of their towns, contemporary Muslim sources noted with surprise that mosques were allowed to function in the crusader states (albeit not in Jerusalem itself) and Muslim subjects were even allowed to participate in the haj. This was because, as Jotischky notes, “the First Crusade was a war of liberation and conquest; it was not a war for the extermination or conversion of Muslims.” Far from being forced to convert, the Muslim villagers were run by a council of elders who in turn appointed a “rayse” to represent the community to the Christian lord, while all spiritual and social matters were regulated by the imams in the community in accordance with Sharia law!
    -Jonathan Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, Swanston Publishing Ltd, 1191, p. 16

    Many times christian in the holy lands allied with Muslims against other Christians or fought to help Muslims against invading Christians and vice verse. The king of Jerusalem Fredrick befriended and knighted Muslim emir Fakhr-ad-din. In fact many crusaders saw not Islam, but the Byzantine empire as the true enemy. Some of the awful crimes committed, were done against Christians in the holy lands. Finally Muslims and Jews were allowed to practice their religion in crusader states and forced baptism of Muslims was prohibited. Muslims migrated to the crusader states. The order of St John's hospitals treated Muslims and Muslims made up jurors in the crusader states.

    [the crusaders]"even during the expedition to Jerusalem, they demonstrated a more malleable attitude towards Muslims, engaging in extensive negotiations with fatimids of Egypt, pursuing limited alliances with Muslim rulers of northern Syria like Omar of Azaz and happily formulating a series of admittedly exploitative truces with the emirs of southern Syria,Lebanon and Palestine. The evidence of this is intermittent, and to an extant our Latin sources seem keen to present the crusade as an intense and unbending religious conflict. In reality, contact may have been continuing on a completely different level. Raymond of Aguilers asserted that a Latin priest and visionary Evremar went to Muslim city of Tripoli to rest and recuperate during the latter stages of the siege of Antioch suggest that cross-cultural interaction may actually have been far more common than we know.
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam

    One of the odder myths concerning the middle ages if of a intolerant Christendom corrupting a tolerant Islam.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006



    Next [I love this one], the claim of cannibalism. Yes these barbaric Christians were also cannibals eating their victims alive like zombies. They enjoyed the flesh of non Christians not just jews and muslims but especially white western liberals of modern times. So be scarred readers of the guardian, be very afraid, the christian next door might also be a a secret crusader who will eat you in your sleep. Yes we need a pure secular society to be safe from those Christians. Vote secular. Oh and dont read history or the crimes of secular states, we wont print them they are not important. Just believe what we tell you and dont read any actual historians not on our approved list. Oh, go ahead and support this claim.


    Slaughter of non christian populations. Like the millions of Christians killed by secular states? but what here is the article referring to?



    Now you also claimed but did not
    support my op was.

    massive load of revisionist bovine excrement that fails to withstand scrutiny

    Please support that claim. When you are unable to defend the first claims of the article we will go on to number 2.

     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.
  12. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    15,339
    Likes Received:
    10,802
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Crusades were a(n admittedly reckless and misguided) response to centuries of invasion of Europe by North African Muslims (see: 'Law Reconquista')

    The feudal lords of Europe were quite happy to have such a constant enemy to excuse their totalitarianism for- 'you need me to protect you!' But eventually, the serfs and peasants demanded vengeance and an end to being invaded, burned, raped and beheaded all the damn time. A Crusade was inevitable. But North Africa had little riches, little land worth conquering, few people to lord over. A Crusade was going to be extremely expensive, and feudal lords don't spend money, they invest money. And behold- there's rich Muslims in The Levant! They aren't the ones attacking us, just don't tell the peasants... Here's your Crusade! Bring back all the 'Holy Relics' (priority on the ones made of gold!).
     
  13. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,651
    Likes Received:
    13,762
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What was the population of Jerusalem in 638 AD?

    Do you have a source for all of this?
     
  14. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    basically... over extended supply/communication lines
     
    1stvermont likes this.
  15. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,384
    Likes Received:
    1,703
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Humm, wouldn’t a more effective response be to better defend Europe?

    Pope Urban II initiated the First Crusade (1096–1102) in order to aid the Christian Byzantine Empire, which was under attack by Muslim Seljuk Turks. As a result of this crusade, Europeans captured Jerusalem in 1099. Muslims quickly unified against the Christian invading and occupying force and the two groups battled in subsequent wars for control of the Holy Land. By 1291 the Muslims firmly controlled Jerusalem and the coastal areas, which remained in Islamic hands until the twentieth century.​
    That does not seem likely to me. Society foRom that period was Highly localized.... especially for serfs... who probably lived and died within 20miles of where they were born.
    No, it was promoted. If there were no pope, , no holy land.... there never would have been a crushed.... even assuming foreign invasions. After all.... the Vikings also invaded Europe, but no one thought it was a good idea to invade Norway
    No one went on a crusade to Jerusalem because of its wealth...

    conquest has been a happy game across time, and cultures. Often it seems to ordinate solely with the need for a ruler to show what a bad ass he is
     
  16. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for the comments. I agree the main cause was the Muslim invasions.


    I must differ here. The holy lands were of course the most important to the west as it was under christian or muslim control. Further Constantinople call for help made that area important. I disagree greed was the reason. I will post from my op.


    Were the Crusades a Conquest?

    "the first crusaders and pope, thought all land would be returned to the byzantine empire"
    The New Concise History of the Crusades Thomas F. Madden


    No. At the end of the first crusade only 4,000 Europeans stayed, they did not view it as a conquest but as a armed pilgrimage. With a few staying behind to defend Jerusalem. It was often the noble class that stayed behind that had wealth and lands in Europe not the peasantry looking for new lands. The holy lands were not a colony of European nations but were independent of Europe and money was continually sent from europe to support the holy land kingdoms. In the summer of 1098 the first crusade leaders sent letters to Pope urban asking him to take command of the crusade.

    Crusades for Wealth?

    "We now know that greed cannot have been the dominate motive among the first crusaders , not least because as recent research has shown, for most participants the expedition promised to be utterly terrifying and crippling expensive."
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam


    "This charge can be easily debunked with the simple fact that going on Crusade was an extraordinary expense—costing a knight four to five times his annual income. From being enriched, the vast majority of Crusaders suffered financial hardship as a result of their participation. Indeed, in order to finance such an expensive undertaking, many knights and their families sold or mortgaged their land and possessions"
    -Steve Weidenkopf The Glory of the Crusades


    Popes, Bishops, and Kings started taxing their people to help pay for the crusades because no one could afford to go. Many kings spent the nations entire treasury and multiple years worth of income of the entire country just to fund a large crusade. Knights sold vineyards, mills, inheritance, land and even entire counties to help pay for the voyage. The church helped fund the crusades with taxes. One observer said of Richard the lionhearted “put up for sale all he had, officials, Lordships, Earldoms, Sherrifdoms, castles, towns, lands, everything.” When the french King left the third crusade to improve his position in France Richard said “We, however, place the love of god and his honor above our own and above the acquisition of many regions.”

    "The ideals of love and sacrifice and not the gain and conquest that are the dominating ideals of much crusading activity...crusading was motivated by piety and not the gain of land, entailing much suffering and hardship"
    -Heath Thomas Jeremy Evans Paul Copan Holy War in the Bible


    When the 4th crusade sacked Constantinople for loot, the Pope [who had excommunicated the crusade] condemned them saying they were after earthly treasure, not heavenly treasure. In 1063 a crusade was called for Spain with rich land and close by, yet few answered because they cared for the holy lands not money. A song composed during the first crusade read “There we must go, selling our goods to buy the temple of God and to destroy the Saracens.” The majority of wealth gained in the holy lands by groups such as the Templar's, came not from “loot” but from taxes from the west.

    Scholars have discovered that crusading knights were generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission. Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt...Of course, they were not opposed to capturing booty if it could be had. But the truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich, but the vast majority returned with nothing.”
    -Thomas Madden


    Most went at immense personal cost, some of them knowingly bankrupted themselves to go...crusading was very expensive undertaking...the best estimates is that a typical crusader needed to raise at least four times his annual income before he could set forth.””
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions Harper one 2009


    Further it was those with the most to lose, that made the sacrifice.

    The cliche of younger sons being drawn to the Jerusalem adventure contains no truth. Almost by definition leaders were, if not all eldest sons, possessed of significant patrimonies of their own.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006




    Liberate Jerusalem

    If you are conquered, you will have the glory of dying in the very same place as Jesus Christ”
    -Pope Urban


    [going]”On Pilgrimage to wage war on foreign peoples and defeat barbaric nations, least the holy city of Jerusalem be held captive and the holy sepulcher of the lord Jesus to be contaminated any longer.”
    -Raymond of Saint- Gills


    Europeans thought all the time of the holy lands and the relic of the true cross”
    -Thomas Madden The Modern Scholar: Heaven or Heresy: A History of the Inquisition


    Another goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and other places made holy by the life of Christ and the apostles. The reforming Popes 100 years even before urban and continued through, were obsessed with the holy land, relics, the old testament, and returning to the early apostolic Christianity. The century before the crusade increasingly in the west cathedrals and paintings were centered upon Jerusalem, pilgrimages, relics and the holy land in general. Relics flooded the west, plays were themed in the holy land and pilgrimages grew more popular. The third crusade was over the loss of Jerusalem and the loss of the true cross. The Duke of Burgundy telling Saladin via a diplomat “the only reason we have come from our countries is Jerusalem.” In 1009 Muslims destroyed the church of the holy Sepulcher, Crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims performing acts of righteousness on their way to the Holy Sepulcher. Tyerman quotes a veteran of the first crusade as saying “our men rushed the whole city.... all came rejoicing and weeping from excess of gladness to worship at the subculture of our savior Jesus, and there they fulfilled their vows.” The Crusade indulgence they received was canonically related to the pilgrimage indulgence. This goal was frequently described in feudal terms. When calling the Fifth Crusade in 1215, Innocent III wrote:

    will not Jesus Christ, the king of kings and lord of lords, whose servant you cannot deny being, who joined your soul to your body, who redeemed you with the Precious Blood … condemn you for the vice of ingratitude and the crime of infidelity if you neglect to help Him?Of holy Jerusalem...This very city, in which, as you all know, Christ Himself suffered for us, because our sins demanded it, has been reduced to the pollution of paganism and, I say it to our disgrace, withdrawn from the service of God...Who now serves the church of the Blessed Mary in the valley of Josaphat, in which church she herself was buried in body? But why do we pass over the Temple of Solomon, nay of the Lord, in which the barbarous nations placed their idols contrary to law, human and divine? Of the Lord's Sepulchre we have refrained from speaking, since some of you with your own eyes have seen to what abominations it has been given over”...
    -Pope Urban II (1088-1099): Speech at Council of Clermont, 1095 August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 33-36




     
    ToddWB likes this.
  17. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Population in 638? no I dont know. Most of my attention is in regards to the first crusade around 1096. If you are looking for my main sources see my sources on the quotes and see here


    Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006
    Thomas F. Madden The New Concise History of the Crusades
    Rodney Stark God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades

    Rodney Stark Bearing False Witness: Debunking Centuries of Anti-Catholic History
    Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam
    Steve Weidenkompf The Glory of the Crusades
    Jonathan Riley-Smith, Atlas of the Crusades, Swanston Publishing Ltd
    Thomas Madden The Modern Scholar: Heaven or Heresy: A History of the Inquisition
    Thomas Madden the real story of the crusades
     
  18. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,651
    Likes Received:
    13,762
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I 'm not going to look up all your quotes.. just link them. Jews were not allowed to live in Jerusalem until the Treaty of Omar circa 630 and it was a bloodless coup.

    You might read the journals of Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela or Amad Ibn Fadlan or Ibn Battuta.
     
  19. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    Thanks for the sources. But once more this thread is more about the crusades. Jewish and Christians were persecuted in muslim controlled lands. The crusades come much later in time, the first crusade 400 years after your events
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
    ToddWB likes this.
  20. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    15,570
    Likes Received:
    5,181
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Now that you have learned that the Crusades did not involve he Turks until later when they(Christians of Europe) went to help the Byzantines yet ended up sacking Constantinople, the holders of the levant were the Arabs..And they were still more organized than the Europeans.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  21. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    16,746
    Likes Received:
    6,069
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    The Crusade veterans returning "home"
    came with a thirst for sugar, spices, embellished food.



    Ponder that and get back to Moi
     
    Blaster3 likes this.
  22. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    I disagree, the Turks in many ways were the cause of the crusades. Constantinople was sacked by an excommunicated crusade that left its target in large part because of the abuses of the Byzantines. But I think we stray from topic.
     
  23. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    I dont deny that a few small % of those who left came back with sugar n spices. Maybe even food, they must have been hungry. I dont even go on vacation without buying the standards tourist materials. However I never come back with more than I spent. A knight sells his lands, goes into debt and comes back [if he survives] with a few spices and food. This is suppose to tell us what? ponder that.





    Were the Crusades a Conquest?

    "the first crusaders and pope, thought all land would be returned to the byzantine empire"
    The New Concise History of the Crusades Thomas F. Madden


    No. At the end of the first crusade only 4,000 Europeans stayed, they did not view it as a conquest but as a armed pilgrimage. With a few staying behind to defend Jerusalem. It was often the noble class that stayed behind that had wealth and lands in Europe not the peasantry looking for new lands. The holy lands were not a colony of European nations but were independent of Europe and money was continually sent from europe to support the holy land kingdoms. In the summer of 1098 the first crusade leaders sent letters to Pope urban asking him to take command of the crusade.

    Crusades for Wealth?

    "We now know that greed cannot have been the dominate motive among the first crusaders , not least because as recent research has shown, for most participants the expedition promised to be utterly terrifying and crippling expensive."
    -Thomas Asbridge The first crusade a new history the roots of conflict between Christianity and Islam


    "This charge can be easily debunked with the simple fact that going on Crusade was an extraordinary expense—costing a knight four to five times his annual income. From being enriched, the vast majority of Crusaders suffered financial hardship as a result of their participation. Indeed, in order to finance such an expensive undertaking, many knights and their families sold or mortgaged their land and possessions"
    -Steve Weidenkopf The Glory of the Crusades


    Popes, Bishops, and Kings started taxing their people to help pay for the crusades because no one could afford to go. Many kings spent the nations entire treasury and multiple years worth of income of the entire country just to fund a large crusade. Knights sold vineyards, mills, inheritance, land and even entire counties to help pay for the voyage. The church helped fund the crusades with taxes. One observer said of Richard the lionhearted “put up for sale all he had, officials, Lordships, Earldoms, Sherrifdoms, castles, towns, lands, everything.” When the french King left the third crusade to improve his position in France Richard said “We, however, place the love of god and his honor above our own and above the acquisition of many regions.”

    "The ideals of love and sacrifice and not the gain and conquest that are the dominating ideals of much crusading activity...crusading was motivated by piety and not the gain of land, entailing much suffering and hardship"
    -Heath Thomas Jeremy Evans Paul Copan Holy War in the Bible


    When the 4th crusade sacked Constantinople for loot, the Pope [who had excommunicated the crusade] condemned them saying they were after earthly treasure, not heavenly treasure. In 1063 a crusade was called for Spain with rich land and close by, yet few answered because they cared for the holy lands not money. A song composed during the first crusade read “There we must go, selling our goods to buy the temple of God and to destroy the Saracens.” The majority of wealth gained in the holy lands by groups such as the Templar's, came not from “loot” but from taxes from the west.

    Scholars have discovered that crusading knights were generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission. Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt...Of course, they were not opposed to capturing booty if it could be had. But the truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich, but the vast majority returned with nothing.”
    -Thomas Madden


    Most went at immense personal cost, some of them knowingly bankrupted themselves to go...crusading was very expensive undertaking...the best estimates is that a typical crusader needed to raise at least four times his annual income before he could set forth.””
    -Rodney Stark God's Battalions Harper one 2009


    Further it was those with the most to lose, that made the sacrifice.

    The cliche of younger sons being drawn to the Jerusalem adventure contains no truth. Almost by definition leaders were, if not all eldest sons, possessed of significant patrimonies of their own.”
    -Christopher Tyerman Gods war a new history of the Crusades Harvard U Press Cambridge Mass 2006
     
  24. Moi621

    Moi621 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2013
    Messages:
    16,746
    Likes Received:
    6,069
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    One can always find a reference to support one's view.

    Sugar, spices, embellished food, probably other items such as silk
    became desirable and "set up" Jewish commerce between
    the Muslims and the Christians in Europe as the Jews could
    talk to both populations.

    https://www.amazon.com/s?k=stan+mack+story+of+the+jews&crid=8895QNZT8AD3&sprefix=stan+mack+,aps,516&ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_10


    No :flagcanada:

    DeusVult-1.jpg
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2019
  25. 1stvermont

    1stvermont Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2017
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    77
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male

    I am not sure what you think this proves or what you think i would disagree with here. I never said they never traded with the local population or eat food when there. I said greed/money was not the motivator for why they went. It was in spite of the financial hardships of the pilgrimage they went.
     

Share This Page