Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Real History of the Crusades
Christianity Today ^ | 5/6/2005 | Thomas F. Madden

Posted on 08/16/2013 12:04:25 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

With the possible exception of Umberto Eco, medieval scholars are not used to getting much media attention. We tend to be a quiet lot (except during the annual bacchanalia we call the International Congress on Medieval Studies in Kalamazoo, Michigan, of all places), poring over musty chronicles and writing dull yet meticulous studies that few will read. Imagine, then, my surprise when within days of the September 11 attacks, the Middle Ages suddenly became relevant.

As a Crusade historian, I found the tranquil solitude of the ivory tower shattered by journalists, editors, and talk-show hosts on tight deadlines eager to get the real scoop. What were the Crusades?, they asked. When were they? Just how insensitive was President George W. Bush for using the word crusade in his remarks? With a few of my callers I had the distinct impression that they already knew the answers to their questions, or at least thought they did. What they really wanted was an expert to say it all back to them. For example, I was frequently asked to comment on the fact that Islamic world has a just grievance against the West. Doesn't present violence, they persisted, have its roots in the Crusades' brutal, unprovoked attacks against a sophisticated and tolerant Muslim world? In other words, aren't the Crusades really to blame?

Osama bin Laden certainly thinks so. In his various video performances, he never fails to describe the American war against terrorism as a new Crusade against Islam. Ex-president Bill Clinton has also fingered the Crusades as the root cause of the present conflict. In a speech at Georgetown University, he recounted (and embellished) a massacre of Jews after the Crusader conquest of Jerusalem in 1099 and informed his audience that the episode was still bitterly remembered in the Middle East.

(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...


TOPICS: History; Religion; Society
KEYWORDS: alreadyposted; crusades; history; islam; thecrusades; thomasfmadden; thomasmadden
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last
To: Sherman Logan
said, "The Muslim Sack of Rome never actually got into the city."

Makes no difference the attack came from Italy it didn't come from a far away base. The vikings were loyal to Italy as proven when those same troops that removed Islam from Sicily joined the first crusade.

21 posted on 08/16/2013 12:53:50 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


About once a year since 2002 (or perhaps before):
Thomas F. Madden crusades site:freerepublic.com
Google

22 posted on 08/16/2013 12:55:30 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's no coincidence that some "conservatives" echo the hard left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; betty boop; marron; Alamo-Girl; CottShop; metmom; xzins; GodGunsGuts; Fichori; ...

Oh, boy! Here we go.


23 posted on 08/16/2013 12:55:51 PM PDT by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
We will be fighting islam with one hand tied behind our backs until the real truth of islam (politically incorrect for some reason...) is finally understood by the masses.

Why are The Crusades considered an unprovoked attack on islam? Why aren't the mooselimbs 4 centuries of attacks on Christendom not discussed? Why is it OK for the mooselimbs to assume any land conquered by them will always belong to them even if re-conquered by an opposing force (say the people who originally lived there)? Why don't people understand that islam is not a live-and-let-live "religion"?

Why is it called the religion of peace, when it is really the religion of submission?

24 posted on 08/16/2013 12:56:23 PM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
said, "Thus betrayed by their Greek friends, in 1204 the Crusaders attacked, captured, and brutally sacked Constantinople"

The rightful king was forced out of power the crusaders attempted to put him back into power that is why they attacked.

25 posted on 08/16/2013 12:59:16 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
I re-read your post you write as an Islamic historian.
Jerusalem was never a choice to take.
26 posted on 08/16/2013 1:02:02 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jeffc
Why is it called the religion of peace, when it is really the religion of submission?

It would be more accurate to call it the religion of domination. All must submit to Islam, which will then dominate the world.

27 posted on 08/16/2013 1:04:39 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
I would suggest watching this:
Why the Fourth Crusade Attacked Constantinople
28 posted on 08/16/2013 1:10:25 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn
The rightful king was forced out of power the crusaders attempted to put him back into power that is why they attacked.

Well, that's one way of looking at it.

The Byzantines, like the Romans before them, never established a solid rule for succession to the throne. So it was always an open question who was the "rightful emperor."

The Angelos dynasty overthrew the Komnenoi dynasty in 1186. The first Angelos emperor (Isaac) was dethroned and blinded by his own brother, who became the second Angelos emperor.

The son of the first emperor (Alexios) fled to the west and cut a deal with the Crusaders. They'd put him back on the throne and he'd pay off their debts to the Venetians and help them retake Jerusalem.

The Crusaders captured Constantinople for him, whereupon he discovered he didn't have the resources to fulfill his pledges. Trying to do so anyway just pissed off his own people by excessive taxation, who dethroned and killed him and put an anti-crusader noble up as the new emperor.

The Crusaders attacked and took the City again, and this time divided it and as much of the Empire as they could grab between themselves and the Venetians.

IOW, the story of the Fourth Crusade is much more complex and interesting than the normal version of evil westerners attacking innocent and peaceful Byzantines.

29 posted on 08/16/2013 1:22:21 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Madden is one of the better Crusades scholars. In my opinion, the key to understanding them is to read the primary sources like this one:


30 posted on 08/16/2013 1:24:08 PM PDT by Antoninus (Sorry, gone rogue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

bkmk


31 posted on 08/16/2013 1:34:48 PM PDT by Sergio (An object at rest cannot be stopped! - The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraceG
Bill Warner does a very good overview of the crusades.
He also shows it was Islam that destroyed the Roman Empire.
32 posted on 08/16/2013 1:36:02 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn

Ping


33 posted on 08/16/2013 1:36:41 PM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat, attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn

Nice video. Leaves out the whole bit about the attack on Zara, which was a key phase in the turning of the Crusade away from the East.

What people tend to forget is how poverty-stricken, by modern standards, Europe was at the time. Getting an army of tens of thousands to the other end of the Med in a condition to fight and win was an astonishingly difficult and expensive endeavor at the time. It is quite amazing that the Crusades were as successful as they were.


34 posted on 08/16/2013 1:37:14 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Will read all later.


35 posted on 08/16/2013 1:39:44 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn

More than a bump .. I urge myself to read this with deliberation


36 posted on 08/16/2013 1:40:55 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Very well said. The post just before yours I posted a video of the same story.


37 posted on 08/16/2013 1:41:10 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Steve Van Doorn
Islam ... destroyed the Roman Empire.

Depends on how you define the Empire.

The western half was of course long-gone before Mo was born. The Eastern Roman Empire was severely damaged by Islam, but still managed to hang on for another 800 years or so.

Much of the rapid spread of Islam in North Africa and the Levant was due to Byzantine political and especially religious persecution of dissenters in those areas. Many of the inhabitants saw Muslim conquest as less oppressive than continued Byzantine rule. So they didn't resist very hard, or even joined the invaders.

And for a while they might very well have been right. But Islam in the long run sucks the life out of everything it touches.

38 posted on 08/16/2013 1:41:22 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

“...and in Jerusalem anyone dressed strangely were identified as Saracens and attacked accordingly...”

True as it went, but the reason Jews & Christians were indistinguishable from Muslims in Jerusalem was the Muslim overlords’ forcing people of all faiths to dress according to Islamic fashions.

The Crusaders breached the walls & found (all men at least) wearing caftans & turbans & they assumed (wrongly) that all were Muslim. The slaughter that ensued was inexcusable, but war is h*** sometimes.


39 posted on 08/16/2013 2:07:48 PM PDT by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
said, "The Eastern Roman Empire was severely damaged by Islam"

Very true and Bill Warner's video shows how Islam attacked the Byzantine empire economy. They didn't just attack the Byzantine's. All of Europe's trade became nearly none existent which created such a dismal life for people in Europe and why we call it the dark ages.

Islam still uses the same tactic today because that was Mo's mode of Operation as a bandit and chief.

40 posted on 08/16/2013 2:16:06 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric Cartman voice* 'I love you, guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson