The Crusades- Share your view

That the Papacy gained from control of the Crusading ideal is beyond a doubt. They very well may have belived what they were doing was entirely justifiable, but if the masses of christendom could be turned against one enemy then it could be tunred against another. Gregory VII and Urban II existed within the context of the Investiture Contests whilst Honorius III, Gregory IX, Urban IV had to contedn with a resurgent Holy Roman Empire, who were as much a threat to them as the Muslims of the Levant ever were. That they could use the crusades as a call to secure their own position and power is evident in the 14th and 15th Centuries when they use it as a means to attack their politcal rivals. That said the 14th/15th Century Papacy and the ideas of crusading are a different kettle of fish to 1095-1291.

well if Alexius I had not sent the calls for aid then there might not have ever been any crusades and the reason he sent those call was due to Turkish aggression as the Byzantine empire just couldn't hold them at bay.

DreamWeaver I picked up "The First Crusade; a new history" by Thomas Asbridge - Oxford Press. What do you know about this historian? So far it look great but I have only read the Intro and a small part of chapter one.




Edited by eaglecap - 24-Jun-2010 at 14:35

Dream Weaver, wrote;

"That the Papacy gained from control of the Crusading ideal is beyond a doubt. They very well may have belived what they were doing was entirely justifiable, but if the masses of christendom could be turned against one enemy then it could be tunred against another. Gregory VII and Urban II existed within the context of the Investiture Contests whilst Honorius III, Gregory IX, Urban IV had to contedn with a resurgent Holy Roman Empire, who were as much a threat to them as the Muslims of the Levant ever were. That they could use the crusades as a call to secure their own position and power is evident in the 14th and 15th Centuries when they use it as a means to attack their politcal rivals. That said the 14th/15th Century Papacy and the ideas of crusading are a different kettle of fish to 1095-1291."

Wow! I am impressed! It seems you have hit the fish's mouth upon the head! I do hope you realize just what the "fish's mouth" really means and suggests?

But, I can only argue to a degree, about the motives of some of the Popes!

Certainly some of them might well have had their "senses" and not have been senile, but it seems that the "curia", did not really want to elect someone that had any sense at all? What they needed was an involutary "yes man", to follow their lead, and just sign on the dotted line! This poor man (as some Popes were described to be) was just to be the "Judas Goat",if things went wrong! And, if they did, these old senile men could easily die! As apparently from the length of time so many of them reportedly served, did!

But, the rest of your post was excellent!

Originally posted by opuslola But, I can only argue to a degree, about the motives of some of the Popes! Certainly some of them might well have had their "senses" and not have been senile, but it seems that the "curia", did not really want to elect someone that had any sense at all? What they needed was an involutary "yes man", to follow their lead, and just sign on the dotted line! This poor man (as some Popes were described to be) was just to be the "Judas Goat",if things went wrong! And, if they did, these old senile men could easily die! As apparently from the length of time so many of them reportedly served, did! But, the rest of your post was excellent!

Periods of weak popes, periods of strong popes, all a question of who is controling the Curia. Gregory VII, Innoncet III, Gregory IX, Innocent IV and Boniface VIII would harldy be considered weak old men (Innoncent III was uncharacteristcally young) to sit in the See of St Peter, though certainly it would be of immense benefit to the curia or anyone else for that to be the case. Honorius III all but bends over backwards for Frederick II. Hadrian IV,Celestine V, Clement V, on the other hand would be also similar.

I quit my history major when my professor in World History asked a question in class concerning "tides"!

I stated that "tides" (note the rising of water levels of seas, oceans, etc. on a daily basis) were mostly a product of the gravitational effects of both the Moon and the Sun!

Dr. Marcus W. Orr, my professor, told the class that I was a fool, and that the ocean tides were merely caused by the rocking of the Earth on its axis!

I then realized that as a Department Head, I might well not be well received by the esteemed Dr., if I proceeded in my History major!

Note, the late Dr. Orr, was also confined to a wheelchair, and was mostly an asshole! Sorry to speak bad about the dead, but "facts is facts!"

Originally posted by opuslola Having read the web-site shown by "historynut91", I have certain reservations about these words; "Even with smart technologies, the United States has killed far more innocents in our wars than the Crusaders ever could. But no one would seriously argue that the purpose of American wars is to kill women and children." It seems that "smart technologies" only existed within the last 20 or so years, even less? And, it is specific that the site mentioned only the United States! So, even with the mentions in crusader history of the massacre of entire cities men, women and children, over a period of hundreds of years, the author of the site has concluded that the United States has in less than 20 years "killed far more innocents in our wars than the Crusaders ever could.!" I would classify those words as pejorative and inflamatory! I certainly do not think the possession of "smart technology" has killed more "innocents" than the hundreds of years of crusading did! Just how many "innocents" have been killed in the last 20 years by "smart technology?" A technology designed to do just the opposite! It seems the author(s) are but another group of American haters! But, it seems this is to be expected! But, of course the writers of the site, obviously included the world wars and other wars that the USA has been involved with, where the number of "innocent deaths" are merely the result of greater populations and better death dealing weapons! If the crusaders had similar weapons, the war in the Levant would have been over in close order! Infidels were expected to die! And, I don't think that any of the crusaders would have had the least worry about killing as many of these "innocent" people as possible!

Opus this would make a great thread elsewhere but I see no connection to this one so please veer back on topic. I always appreciate you posts and I am glad you are with us.

Originally posted by opuslola Eaglecap, if I posted the above quoted words here, then I was too drunk to know where I was! But, I will try to watch where I place my posts from now on! I certainly enjoy reading the posts of so many educated men and women! I just wish I was so inclined? But, I just plod along with my ingrained prejudices and out-dated ideas!

I think we all plod along at one time or another here-

Thanks, "Bud!"

May I call you "Bud?"

Avoid it like a "Miller!"

Originally posted by ConradWeiser <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; "> Also "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades" by Robert Spencer.  </span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; "></span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; ">Ugghhh. This is an AWFUL book. Make sure you stay away from this.</span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; "></span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; ">-----</span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; "></span> <span apple-style-span="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 1px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 1px; ">For a quick and informative read related to the Crusades, try Sea of Faith by Stephen O'Shea. </span>

Well then we can agree to disagree, but if it comes to close to the truth then I can understand your dislike for it.   

Are you a Muslim?

For a quick and informative read related to the Crusades, try Sea of Faith by Stephen O'Shea.

I could check it out but I think I am beyond quick reads. I do have a Masters in history afterall. It still might be good so thanks!

Edited by eaglecap - 01-Jul-2010 at 11:32