Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Should we be thankful for the crusades?

13»

Comments

  • #62
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    This is a pretty good, but very long set of podcasts. I'm not that well read on it but didnt notice any glaring errors.

    http://historyofthecrusades.podomatic.com/

    Its a bit sad (obviously pales in comparison to the humanitarian cost) but will likely not be able to see a lot of the amazing crusader castles for a long time if they survive at all


  • #63
    crockholm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,448 ✭✭✭crockholm


    bnt wrote: »
    The Crusades weren't about "stopping the spread of Islam", they were explicitly about conquering the "Holy Land" for Christianity. The conquest of Spain - much closer to Rome and England - wasn't as much of a concern by comparison. Remember that folks back then didn't have the luxury of a "big picture" view that we do.

    I partly blame the Crusades for causing Islam to turn inwards and become more dogmatic and defensive. I say "partly" because the Mongols under Genghis Khan did far more damage in this regard, conquering huge swathes of territory in the East of the Islamic world. They had been relatively open and progressive before that, making significant advances in science and culture. As a result of those onslaughts on the Islamic world, they developed a siege mentality, and hardiners took over.
    I don't entirely agree with your point.The first Crusade was actually a response to the widespread slaughter of Christian pilgrims from Europe on their way to Jerusalem by Sejluk Turks.The following Crusades were more certainly about dominion of the area-and they felt that the rule of the christians could be traced back to when the city was under Hellenic control (Greeks-Romans-Byzantines, the fall in 637 was seen as illegitimate).

    Nor do I ascribe the more inner facing aspects of Islam to be the fault of the crusaders,because we can see a similar parallel in the moorish kingdom of Al Andalus.If you were to compare the treatment and opportunities for non-muslims there under the Umayyads at the beginning of the conquest to the more established Almoravids and Almohads you can see thing get progressively worse for non-muslims due to a more muscular interpretation of Islam.


Advertisement