The Crusades

[Rían]

I put out a general request for some knowledgeable person to start a thread on the Crusades, and no one did, so I am taking it upon myself to start the thread, because I like reading about history even tho I'm not good at it!

The Crusades have come up in two threads lately (the entertainment forum, about the movie The Kingdom of Heaven, and one of the religious-discussion threads), and there's lots of good info being posted. So I hope you guys that have studied this subject will post here so we can centralize the discussion.

Would some knowledgeable person please start us off by perhaps giving a general background and an overview of the Crusades?

[me9996]

Well, the first crusade was to retake Juruselem (Please tell me how to spell it) from crazy Turkey people who didn't like pilgrums. (I realy can't spell) So they went over and took it back. Then they lost it and took it back meny times, evenculy they quit.

If there was a call I think it could happen again...

[Nurvingiel]

Jerusalem
Turkish (people from Turkey)
many
eventually
(Dictionary.com is my friend, and it can be your friend too. )


If I recall correctly, there were six Crusades over quite a long period. But I'll leave the posting for someone who someone who really knows what they're talking about (Elvellon, Lief, et al) .

But one comment must be made... You think there could be more Crusades Me9996? I'm interested for you to elaborate on this - the idea has never occured to me before.

I'd say that if another war was to occur, it would be too different to say it's another Crusade. There wouldn't be boatloads of children going to war, for example. (Though children are unfortunately involved in war, in different capacities in different countries.)

[Count Comfect]

Traditionally, there were 8 crusades, from 1095 to 1270. The first was called by Pope Urban II at Clermont in France. He called on the people under the Catholic Church (ie everyone west of the Byzantine Empire) to go to war against the Saracens (general term for Muslims in the Mideast, both Turk and Arab) who held Palestine, and in particular Jerusalem. The phrase "God wills it" ("Deus Le Volt") was their rallying cry. Those who went put crosses on their clothing, hence 'Crusade.' The first Crusade was a rather suprising success. Various Christian states were established in the Mideast by formerly minor lords (primarily from France). Bohemund of Sicily (a Norman, long story) ruled in Antioch, and a family from Bolougne ruled the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the first among equals. The successive later Crusades were generally phrased as aid to these states.

I could go on, but I don't know all the details. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm is very good (as it was a Catholic enterprise, the Catholic Encyclopedia is unsurprisingly fairly accurate about it, from the Christian point of view). It should be pointed out that there were Children's Crusades (very sad affairs - in at least one of them the children ended up sold into slavery by the men who had agreed to take them across the Mediterranean) and the Peasant's Crusade preached by Peter the Hermit in 1095. That one actually predated the 1st Crusade and, unfortunately, was almost entirely slaughtered. Except Peter survived.

[Tessar]

For me one of the most interesting things about the Crusades was how it showed that the good intentions of the Church can be foiled by the weak people within it. The motivations for (At least the first) Crusade were entirely pure, but lead to wild sacking and looting, and unneeded destruction.

And Me9996, if you're having trouble with spelling, cut and past your message into WinWord, or some other program with a spell checker, and use the spelling and grammar checks before posting it--that way you can be sure you have at least a correct variation of the word you're looking for. I used to use it a lot, and I still do use it from time to time.

[Rían]

What I'm looking for, too, is the back story, since it's pretty obvious that the Pope didn't just decide to start a Crusade at random after breakfast one day. What were the various motivations behind the Crusades?

[Butterbeer]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Would some knowledgeable person please start us off by perhaps giving a general background and an overview of the Crusades?

REPLY:
me9996:


Well, the first crusade was to retake Juruselem (Please tell me how to spell it) from crazy Turkey people who didn't like pilgrums. (I realy can't spell) So they went over and took it back. Then they lost it and took it back meny times, evenculy they quit.

If there was a call I think it could happen again...




Well you've got to hand it to ME9996: for sheer comedy value that's a classic!
Excellent 700th post Immortal one!
worthy post (whether that was intended or not!)
__________________

and tessar on good spelling: " Cut and past" ! Nice touch (whether that was intended or not!)

Best BB

[Count Comfect]

Rian - the cause was first, that the Pope was beset by Anti-Popes claiming the Papacy, so he wanted some pressure off. Second, there had been some rumblings from Byzantium about how it would be nice if a picked force from W. Europe came over to help (they had no idea they'd get a horde). Third, there were a bunch of violent people who were very good at war wandering around - it was a good idea to go throw them at someone else

[Falagar]

Originally Posted by Tessar

For me one of the most interesting things about the Crusades was how it showed that the good intentions of the Church can be foiled by the weak people within it. The motivations for (At least the first) Crusade were entirely pure, but lead to wild sacking and looting, and unneeded destruction.

Good intentions? I think that can be debated a bit. It was the pope's idea, for some of the reasons the Count mentioned. Of course, there were quite a few who went to reclaim Jerusalem in good, Christian spirit. But many people also went for material reasons: there was a lack of fiefs for the young lords in Europe, so they went out to claim their own. The common soldiers were poor farmers and city-people who were hoping to get away from debt, forced labour and poverty. Lots of people (women and children included) left without preparing much, and died from hunger, toil and sickness before they got to see any fighting.

A bit late for me to write anything of much worth, this will have to be my contribution for now. Not an expert on the crusades, have to do some more research...

[Count Comfect]

Heh, another point I forgot to mention: the Crusade came with a plenary indulgence. That is, if you went on Crusade ALL sins were forgiven. You got a good leavening of criminals for that very reason.

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

the crusades were basically a moral indulgence for christianity, not being able to bear the fact that another religion shared their god and their 'holy' land

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Originally Posted by Last Child of Ungoliant

the crusades were basically a moral indulgence for christianity, not being able to bear the fact that another religion shared their god and their 'holy' land

Sounds awfully familiar...like maybe in place of Jeruselum, insert another Arabian city that causes Jihads...er...Crusades... to be declared because of "infidel invaders" have desacrated its sacred ground...

did you see through my cunning wordplay?

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Originally Posted by Count Comfect

Rian - the cause was first, that the Pope was beset by Anti-Popes claiming the Papacy, so he wanted some pressure off. Second, there had been some rumblings from Byzantium about how it would be nice if a picked force from W. Europe came over to help (they had no idea they'd get a horde). Third, there were a bunch of violent people who were very good at war wandering around - it was a good idea to go throw them at someone else

Well, thats all... interesting..., but your skipping the one obvious point.

The Christians, who roughly to that point, or around the time of the disasterous Battle of Manzikert in 1071, had had unfettered access to the holy land for pilgrimages. This was stopped by the Turks, then occupiers of Jeruselum, and they abused and mistreated pilgrims, denying them access. This, coupled with Urban II's desire to unite both feuding Christian kingdoms in Europe, as well as Western Christendom with Easterndom Christendom, caused the famous speech at Clermont in 1095 wich started of the whole messy business.

[Fenir_LacDanan]

Righto Sports fans, here we go!

In the Left Corner, the challanger, fighting for the Lord our God, weighing in at 224 lbs, the Roman Catholic Church!

And in the Right Corner, the current holders of Palestine, fighting for the Prophet and for Allah, weighing in at 231 lbs, the new and growing faith of Islam!

Lets get ready to Ruuumbbbbblllll... and so forth.


Deep breath, and here we go:
First Crudade was the only sucessfull one, and that it did indeed (re)take the Holy City in 1099.

Second Crusade, 1144, was called due to growing Muslim expansion in the region, with the Muslims victorious.

Third Crusade, Famous for its major adversaries Saladin and Richard Coer de Leon, 1189, was launched after the Muslims retook Jeruselum. It ultimatley failed to recapture the city.

Fourth, 1202, was a farce. Christians, supposedly inlisting to fight the infidel, ended up sacking Constantinople, a Christian city, and then going home.

Fiftht, 1217. Another attempt, the last real attempt, to retake the city through military might. Still, it too, couldn't get over the line.

Sixth, 1228, funnily enough won through diplomacy what swords had failed to achieve, access to a number of holy cites including Jeruselum.


But eventually the Christian Kingdoms established in the region, called Outremer, all fell one by one. Still, Pilgrims did gain access, though the Flags of Chrisianity were never again to fly above Jeruselum.


Here endeth the lesson.

[Tessar]

I'm not saying that everyone had pure motives--in a huge force, it's impossible to have everyone be of pure motives. The main idea behind it likely seemed pure to many of them, though, and they were fighting for what they believed in.


Butterbeer--It's slightly more ironic that you're pointing out my misspelling, considering the vast amount in every post you make :P.

[Falagar]

People seldom have only one motive. The people who went for loot would also have thought that they were doing the right thing (they were fighting for their religion against an invading culture, after all), while the noble, religious people probably had the promises of conquest, treasure and fame that would follow a successful crusade at the back of their minds as well on their way to the holy land. Human minds are seldom as simple as some would have it.

[me9996]

Originally Posted by Fenir_LacDanan

Sounds awfully familiar...like maybe in place of Jeruselum, insert another Arabian city that causes Jihads...er...Crusades... to be declared because of "infidel invaders" have desacrated its sacred ground...

did you see through my cunning wordplay?

Faith the sise (Need help spelling) of a musturd seed can move a mounten, now consiter what happens during a Crusade or holy war of any sort...

[me9996]

Originally Posted by Fenir_LacDanan

Well, thats all... interesting..., but your skipping the one obvious point.

The Christians, who roughly to that point, or around the time of the disasterous Battle of Manzikert in 1071, had had unfettered access to the holy land for pilgrimages. This was stopped by the Turks, then occupiers of Jeruselum, and they abused and mistreated pilgrims, denying them access. This, coupled with Urban II's desire to unite both feuding Christian kingdoms in Europe, as well as Western Christendom with Easterndom Christendom, caused the famous speech at Clermont in 1095 wich started of the whole messy business.

After that, I can hardly blame them...

(Gee, this is stating to turn into a religes argument!)

[me9996]

How about we duscuss the tactics and helped invations...

[Mercutio]

Come on guys....you've got it all wrong. The Crusades were nothing but the younger sons letting off some steam (being so fed up with primogeniture ).


note ^ is only very very very slightly serious!