Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Crusades

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Wiki has this but doesn't reference it.

    We left Tibnin by a road running past farms where Muslims live who do very well under the Franks-may Allah preserve us from such a temptation! ... The Muslims own their own houses and rule themselves in their own way. This is the way the farms and big villages are organized in Frankish territory. Many Muslims are sorely tempted to settle here when they see the far from comfortable conditions in which their brethren live in the districts under Muslim rule. Unfortunately for the Muslims, they have always reason for complaint about the injustices of their chiefs in the lands governed by their coreligionists, whereas they can have nothing but praise for the conduct of the Franks, whose justice they can always rely on.
    I also found this
    Rights: A Critical Introduction - Google Book Search
    In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

    Leibniz

    Comment


    • Excellent source material - many thanks :)

      Comment


      • In reality the crusades at the end they failed, and caused damage not only to the moslems but also to themselves, and beyond that.

        The biggest damage was caused by the 4th crusade which really destroyed the Byzantine empire by taking Constantinople in 1204. Although they were only able to keep it for 57 years, and the Byzantines ressurected a kingdom, it was so decayed after that........, that soon ended up being just a principality. When the Ottomans finally took over Constantinople in 1453 from the Byzantines, there wasn't any empire that they took over, there wasn't even a kingdom, the so called Byzantines had in their possession only the city of Constantinople and Morea (southern Greece).
        What that meant was that the defences of Europe were now open to the onslaught of the Ottomans.
        Last edited by falcon1131; 09 Nov 08,, 14:36.

        Comment


        • Wasn't the first crusade undertaken to free Spain?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Leader View Post
            The Europeans were responding to being attacked. Doubt that any acts committed by the Euros were any worst then acts committed by the Muslims. Besides judging ancient conflicts by modern standards is a waste of time.
            The West was attacked and that launched the Crusades? Are you talking the Albigensian crusade? The rape of Constantinople? The bloodbath at Jerusalem? When was the west attacked by the Middle eastern turkic/arab states? The west was barbaric by Arab and Greek standards. There were Mosques in Constantinope and Christian churches in Jerusalem. How many Mosques were in Jerusalem after the first crusade? How many jews? the Crusades were barbaric. The Mamelukes imitated that barbarism when the last crusader state fell. It was an invasion on indigenous peoples. How could it be just?
            Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost.
            ~Ronald Reagan

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Roosveltrepub View Post
              The West was attacked and that launched the Crusades? Are you talking the Albigensian crusade? The rape of Constantinople? The bloodbath at Jerusalem? When was the west attacked by the Middle eastern turkic/arab states? The west was barbaric by Arab and Greek standards. There were Mosques in Constantinope and Christian churches in Jerusalem. How many Mosques were in Jerusalem after the first crusade? How many jews? the Crusades were barbaric. The Mamelukes imitated that barbarism when the last crusader state fell. It was an invasion on indigenous peoples. How could it be just?

              Your crazy, the arabs or Arabia were not indigenous to the area, although they were close cousins. They were no closer than the Greeks or Latins however after millenia of Hellenic then Roman rule and intermarriage. The Turkomen were definitely not indigenous. The Levant and Asia Minor had been "European" for over a thousand years when the Arabs invaded.

              As for barbarism, one of the first acts of Islam was the extermination and expulsion of Jews in Mecca. Then any land conquered had its native religion and culture suppressed and eventually destroyed by an Arab over culture that banned things like human images etc. Wars in the ancient world were barbaric- no one was clean.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by falcon1131 View Post
                In reality the crusades at the end they failed, and caused damage not only to the moslems but also to themselves, and beyond that.

                The biggest damage was caused by the 4th crusade which really destroyed the Byzantine empire by taking Constantinople in 1204. Although they were only able to keep it for 57 years, and the Byzantines ressurected a kingdom, it was so decayed after that........, that soon ended up being just a principality. When the Ottomans finally took over Constantinople in 1453 from the Byzantines, there wasn't any empire that they took over, there wasn't even a kingdom, the so called Byzantines had in their possession only the city of Constantinople and Morea (southern Greece).
                What that meant was that the defences of Europe were now open to the onslaught of the Ottomans.
                We would have eventually overrun Byzanz, no matter what.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Your crazy, the arabs or Arabia were not indigenous to the area, although they were close cousins. They were no closer than the Greeks or Latins however after millenia of Hellenic then Roman rule and intermarriage. The Turkomen were definitely not indigenous. The Levant and Asia Minor had been "European" for over a thousand years when the Arabs invaded.
                  Before the Romans and Greeks, there were the Sumerians, Babylonians and Persians for thousands of years. As you can see, your argument is pointless.

                  As for barbarism, one of the first acts of Islam was the extermination and expulsion of Jews in Mecca. Then any land conquered had its native religion and culture suppressed and eventually destroyed by an Arab over culture that banned things like human images etc. Wars in the ancient world were barbaric- no one was clean.
                  I think at that time Cristians were the only ones, forcing their belive onto others, or killing them. Moslems usually didn't force others to become Moslems, that would be unislamic. Though there were exceptions to this rule.
                  Last edited by Hitman817; 07 Dec 08,, 14:53.

                  Comment


                  • [QUOTE=Hitman817;588139]Before the Romans and Greeks, there were the Sumerians, Babylonians and Persians for thousands of years. As you can see, your argument is pointless.

                    The area was settled by Semitic peoples- proto-Arabs if you will. An offshoot of Sumerian cultures, Abraham was from the Sumerian city of Ur. These groups evolved into the Canaanites and Israeli groups and the area was later settled by Mycenaean Greeks (Philistines) and Phoneticians. Persians and Babylonians were invaders who did not stick around. The group that would formally become Arabian Arabs did not arrive in large numbers until the Islamic invasions.


                    I think at that time Cristians were the only ones, forcing their belive onto others, or killing them. Moslems usually didn't force others to become Moslems, that would be unislamic. Though there were exceptions to this rule.
                    caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah destroyed every church he could find including the Church o the Holy Sepulcher. When the Byzantine Emperor paid to have it rebuilt after its destruction and Kakim's death 5,000 people converted back to Christianity after a forced conversion to Islam.

                    Comment


                    • hitman,

                      I think at that time Cristians were the only ones, forcing their belive onto others, or killing them. Moslems usually didn't force others to become Moslems, that would be unislamic. Though there were exceptions to this rule.
                      don't kid yourself. the first wave of islamic expansion was so fast that the conquerers needed to force people- a generation or two was not fast enough to do the slow process of peaceful conversion.

                      afterwards, the whole idea of jiziya was to promote conversion...slightly more subtle, but given how poor people were then it amounted to forced conversion for many, and vastly preferred option for even more.
                      There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                      Comment


                      • afterwards, the whole idea of jiziya was to promote conversion...slightly more subtle, but given how poor people were then it amounted to forced conversion for many, and vastly preferred option for even more.
                        The idea behind jiyiza was to support a ruling class. The early Muslim states had problems with that, because once you are taxing people you have a reason not to consider them converted (poll and land taxes were the only "legit" way to tax). Conversion was a source of trouble, politically and economically. There were even disputes, early on, as to whether a non Arab could become a Muslim.

                        Taxes, according to some, weren't as bad as the ones from the prior regimes.

                        Not to glorify the Islamic conquests, but Pagans didn't survive in Europe but Christians and Jews survived in the Middle East (fortunes rose and fell of course with different regimes). No dispute that plenty of people were killed for not converting, plenty of people liked the message, and plenty of people wanted to cheat their taxes.
                        To sit down with these men and deal with them as the representatives of an enlightened and civilized people is to deride ones own dignity and to invite the disaster of their treachery - General Matthew Ridgway

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Roosveltrepub View Post
                          The West was attacked and that launched the Crusades?
                          Since you asked;
                          Sicily attacked 652
                          Sicily attacked 667
                          Spain invaded 711, which brings about 460yrs of warfare(Reconquista)
                          Septimania attacked 719
                          Nimes, France occupied 725
                          Narbonne and Avignon occupied 730
                          Battle of Tours 732
                          Arles occupied 735
                          Hisham I calls a jihad Narbonne is destroyed 792
                          Civi Vecchia attacked 813
                          Sicily invaded 827
                          Marseille sacked 838
                          Rome attacked(the churches of St. Peter & St. Paul damaged) 846
                          Campagna pillaged 876
                          Monte Cassino burned to the ground 884
                          Monte Cassino destroyed again 994
                          Pisa sacked 1004

                          Comment


                          • KB,

                            i think we covered this point earlier, but the problem i see with all of this is that the command decisions was so decentralized and had so many other motivating factors other than religion, the whole "west vs islam" thing becomes pointless. i doubt pope urban II launched the crusades because a few hundred years ago sicily and france were attacked, for instance. he had other more immediate, pressing secular and religious motivations.

                            it's probably more accurate to note that neither "side" was an innocent victim.
                            There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Trooth View Post
                              Because it isn't a civilised way to behave. And one of the principles of the crusades was to liberate the civilised lands from the barbarians.

                              If we took that argument to its logical conclusion we would still believe the earth was flat, that the heavans revolved around it and the different races of humans were in fact different species.
                              They weren't cicilised times I'm afraid, far from it.

                              Comment


                              • The Crusades were a series of military campaigns during the time of Medieval England against the Muslims of the Middle East. In 1076, the Muslims had captured Jerusalem - the most holy of holy places for Christians. Jesus had been born in nearby Bethlehem and Jesus had spent most of his life in Jerusalem. He was crucified on Calvary Hill, also in Jerusalem. There was no more important place on Earth than Jerusalem for a true Christian which is why Christians called Jerusalem the "City of God".

                                However, Jerusalem was also extremely important for the Muslims as Muhammad, the founder of the Muslim faith, had been there and there was great joy in the Muslim world when Jerusalem was captured. A beautiful dome - called the Dome of the Rock - was built on the rock where Muhammad was said to have sat and prayed and it was so holy that no Muslim was allowed to tread on the rock or touch it when visiting the Dome.

                                Therefore the Christian fought to get Jerusalem back while the Muslims fought to keep Jerusalem. These wars were to last nearly 200 years

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X