Galloglasses Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 (edited) I love my medieval and Dark age/classical history. Love it to bits. My favourite is the Crusades and related history. Especially the knights. I've started this topic in the hopes of creating debates about the crusades. Their morality, the events that happened, (or more accurately, YOUR interpretation fo the events that has happened, seriously, during the Age of 'Enlightenment' and the Age of 'Revolution', Revisionists have twisted and turned Crusader history so many which ways its not even funny anymore), the morality of warrior monks. Good/bad points. And anything else about the period. I'm just interested in various people's responses as I have never heard too many responses to this topic from Catholics. This is an open topic, designed to debate about the events in the revelent time period. DO NOT bring modern day events into this, however revelent, I do not want a topic to degenerate into slander as so many others before it. Please, bring your questions here though, someone is bound to have an appropriate answer. Edited July 13, 2008 by Galloglasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hassan Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 [quote name='Galloglasses' post='1599323' date='Jul 13 2008, 04:31 PM']I love my medieval and Dark age/classical history. Love it to bits. My favourite is the Crusades and related history. Especially the knights. I've started this topic in the hopes of creating debates about the crusades. Their morality, the events that happened, (or more accurately, YOUR interpretation fo the events that has happened, seriously, during the Age of 'Enlightenment' and the Age of 'Revolution', Revisionists have twisted and turned Crusader history so many which ways its not even funny anymore), the morality of warrior monks. Good/bad points. And anything else about the period. I'm just interested in various people's responses as I have never heard too many responses to this topic from Catholics. This is an open topic, designed to debate about the events in the revelent time period. DO NOT bring modern day events into this, however revelent, I do not want a topic to degenerate into slander as so many others before it. Please, bring your questions here though, someone is bound to have an appropriate answer.[/quote] The First Crusade was theoretically justified. The rabid persecution of Jews by the Christian armies/mobs, the horrific slaughter that the Crusaders inflicted in the "Holy" lands, and Urban II's raciest speech were not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galloglasses Posted July 13, 2008 Author Share Posted July 13, 2008 You do realise that the persecution of the Jews by the Christian mobs was condemned by the Church, don't you? Heck, thats one of the reason why the Venitian Lead crusader army, (I can't remember wether or not it was the 4th or 3rd one), was excommunicated for sacking a city in Eastern Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hassan Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 [quote name='Galloglasses' post='1599332' date='Jul 13 2008, 04:37 PM']You do realise that the persecution of the Jews by the Christian mobs was condemned by the Church, don't you?[/quote] yes. Which would be why I said armies/mobs rather than "Bishops" or "Popes" [quote]Heck, thats one of the reason why the Venitian Lead crusader army, (I can't remember wether or not it was the 4th or 3rd one), was excommunicated for sacking a city in Eastern Europe.[/quote] alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 13, 2008 Share Posted July 13, 2008 I had almost a dozen direct ancestors serve in the Crusades, two that died there. I would like to think that at the time, they took part for what they believed was a noble cause, a righteous one. I am not inclined to double guess them in hindsight anymore than I would judge what my father did in WWII. I also find that part of history fascinating due in large part to family genealogy. I do wonder how I would have fared in their time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galloglasses Posted July 13, 2008 Author Share Posted July 13, 2008 You would've probably have gone with them. Crusaders broughts their families. (In fact, alot of them where berated by their wives and shamed into joining the crusades if they had second doubts XD) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 I think history plays a funny game with victors and wars. War is brutal on all sides, and I'm sure there are acts on all sides which are wrong. It just seems that the loser gets noticed a lot more. Personally I think the Crusades as an order were a good thing. I think some of the acts that took place were a bad thing. I think that militarily, other than the 1st Crusade, the others were failures. Given that they failed, people tend to only focus on the bad things that occurred. Had say the 2nd or 3rd Crusade been successful, we might have a different view of the crusades as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galloglasses Posted July 14, 2008 Author Share Posted July 14, 2008 Good Point. Everyone loves the underdog..... oddly enough that means the Muslim defenders in this case, and not the Crusaders who were the losers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niccolò Posted July 14, 2008 Share Posted July 14, 2008 [quote name='Hassan' post='1599329' date='Jul 13 2008, 05:35 PM']The First Crusade was theoretically justified. The rabid persecution of Jews by the Christian armies/mobs, the horrific slaughter that the Crusaders inflicted in the "Holy" lands, and Urban II's raciest speech were not.[/quote] [url="http://crusades-medieval.blogspot.com/2008/01/speech-of-pope-urban-ii-at-clermont.html"]This[/url] speech? I don't really see how it's "racist." I think the word "race" really had different connotations back then than today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galloglasses Posted July 15, 2008 Author Share Posted July 15, 2008 Fun fact, there was next to no Racism in the Middle Ages. Religion was veiwed as transcending race and differences, hence, more important. If Hassan had of called the Speech "Sectarian" he'd probably be closer to a more accurate in derogatory terminology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG45 Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 There are a number of small things that could be said against the Crusades...and they get repeated over and over. But to look outside the standard box; Europe was opened up to the rest of the world. Instead of staying in isolationism, new trade and knowledge was brought from those returning home...planting quite possibly, the desire to explore that brought the world as we know it into being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 You're probably right about that. The Moors certainly were ahead of the West in medicine and the sciences during the Crusade years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madame Vengier Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 (edited) [quote name='CatherineM' post='1600836' date='Jul 15 2008, 10:34 PM']You're probably right about that. The Moors certainly were ahead of the West in medicine and the sciences during the Crusade years.[/quote] How so? Inquiring minds want to know. Edited July 16, 2008 by Madame Vengier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madame Vengier Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 [quote name='Galloglasses' post='1599418' date='Jul 13 2008, 06:28 PM']You would've probably have gone with them. Crusaders broughts their families.[/quote] It sounds fun, like going for a family picnic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madame Vengier Posted July 16, 2008 Share Posted July 16, 2008 [quote name='Galloglasses' post='1599774' date='Jul 14 2008, 04:41 AM']Good Point. Everyone loves the underdog..... oddly enough that means the Muslim defenders in this case, and not the Crusaders who were the losers.[/quote] Yeah, see that's the problem I have with the Crusaders. They didn't get the job done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now