"Sadly, a second cause is an ancillary residue of historiography which has a tradition of exaggerating the real crimes of Catholicism out of all proportion. The Spanish call this exaggeration the Black Legend of the Inquisition; and it results in a pseudo-acquittal of Islam, by blaming the Crusades on Catholicism."
I am no historian by any means , but Muslims appear to be a fairly peaceful people as long as there are not too many of them.
A new Crusade to lower their numbers would lead to a more peaceful world.
Abe Baker, I'll have to remember that name.
Thank you for this article.
It’s become more pronounced since 9-11-2001. In order to justify the attack, IMO.
The sad part...?
“One may condemn the atrocities of the Crusaders, but what infuriates the objective student of history is that the far greater crimes of Islam are ignored.”
...nothing has changed.
Thank you, NCjim, for the article.
My wife and I were out yesterday visiting various rug stores. As is very often the case, a number of these retailers were run by folks of ME “descent”. It actually made my skin crawl...made me nervous to be there.
Irrational feelings? Maybe.
Rational and prudent feelings? Probably.
Too bad Mohammed wasn’t buried with a silver spike driven through his heart.
Vampires and their followers are hard to kill.
Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds (Vol. 2)
From that volume:
published in 1852
As long as we’re correcting the lies told about the crusades.
Let’s also correct the lies told about Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan did not destroy and pillage like I was always told. The Khan wanted a large empire for commerce. His armies conquered cities and changed governments. He allowed the citizens to keep their businesses, religion and freedoms, he just wanted trade. The only exceptions were Islamic cities. These gave him so many problems that his only course of action was to raze them to the ground. He could not negotiate with them and could not allow them to exist as they were a danger to everyone around them. The Khan did not destroy Christian, Hindu or even Pagan cities, just Islamic.
I see the crusades as a kind of peremptory action by the west. The Saracens were causing a lot of trouble in the Mediterranean basin and beyond in those days. The west decided the best thing to do was to take the fight to them.
Doesn't anyone study or know history anymore, or do they just listen to and believe everything they hear and read from the agenda-driven "news" media?
I say we should announce a new Crusade to rid the earth of the filthy radical mooselimb bent on destroying and subjugating the West. And really do it.
Islam always was, is now and always will be, a vicious evil predatory plague on civilization. Offering nothing of value, it takes or destroys everything. It needs to be extirpated and its adherents converted or confined to the de4sert wastes which spawned them.
IF WE HAD ONLY FINISHED THE CRUSADES WITHOUT TREATY.
Perhaps by comparison to other eras and regions of conquest, maybe they were, but it was hardly a "Golden Age"! At no known time were the non-Muslims not subject to second-class status and increased taxation. Mass deportations and executions met most efforts to equalize the status of non-Muslims. While the Taifa rulers (local princes) were frequently weak and thus inclined to a "let live" religious and social tolerance, the relatively frequent waves of Muslim fundamentalism caused significant periods of intolerance and bloody repression in the 750 year period of Islamic Spain.
People tend to forget this period as explanation of why reconquered Christian Spain was so steeled in doctrine and orthodoxy and felt the need to expel Muslims, Jews and later Protestants as dangerous to what they had labored to reclaim. Remember that, even now, proponents of the "Islamic Caliphate" claim all of Spain and Portugal as part of Islam under the doctrine of once conquered, never given up.
Disproportionalism seems to be a common malady of western historians
“but do we remember that Islamic predation that was the real agent which caused the Dark Ages.”
Good article, but I find that statement to be a bit of a stretch. I think plague was the main causes of the Dark Ages. Plus, a portion of the Dark Ages were literally dark because of a large volcanic eruption.
Weekly, I pester my priest and the bishop to fund an armed force to protect Christians in the Middle East. Granted, they are low level but in the “chain of command,” so to speak and one has to start somewhere.