“The Crusaders, when out of pork, would (at the siege of Antioch at least) dine upon the flesh of the dead ‘Saracen’. It was reported that it was a little dry, but with a bit of mead - it did not go down ill. ;) “
Citations, please.
Thanks.
I remember reading about this.
http://www.crusades-encyclopedia.com/cannibalism.html
It’s not so much historically verified, but it’s at the least hyperbole on the actual goings on. Old wives’ tales, if you will. Remember, the winners write the history.
I got it from several different sources - including Harold Lamb and his book on the Crusades. Runciman as well. They in turn got it from several sources - both Christian and Muslim.
From the article cited above.........
Radulph of Caen, an eyewitness to events at Ma’arra in 1098, wrote, “In Ma’arra our troops boiled pagan adults in cooking-pots; they impaled children on spits and devoured them grilled.” (1)
The chronicler Albert of Aix seemed to rank Muslims lower than dogs when he wrote, “Not only did our troops not shrink from eating dead Turks and Saracens; they also ate dogs!”
Guibert of Nogent, in his work Historia Hierosolymitana, provides more details on the incident of cannibalism at Ma’arra. There he notes that whenever the Tafurs who took part in the expedition discovered “scraps of flesh from the pagan's bodies” cannibalism was practiced with little discretion. According to Guibert, the Tafurs were well aware that the Muslims feared them because of cannibalism. For that reason, on at least one occasion, the Tafurs publicly “roasted the bruised body of a Turk over a fire as if it were meat for eating, in full view of the Turkish forces.” Guibert notes that the Franks also practiced cannibalism, but they did so “in secret and as rarely as possible.”