Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Crusades,reasonable?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
malizai_ View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan

Alcinous

Joined: 05-Feb-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2252 		  Quote malizai_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Crusades,reasonable?
    Posted: 13-Feb-2007 at 07:11
Originally posted by Maharbbal

There are a few factors that haven't been mentioned:

The "Holy land" was caught in the midst of several wars during the 11th c., access to it WAS difficult. Little wonder the Christians wented to restore a form of security for their pilgrims.

It is also well known that many turned back to Europe after 1099. Does that say that those who stayed were greedy politicians and those who left holy warriors? No, but it indicates that there were several reasons and ways to go to the crusades.

Ultimately I found the all fuss a bit pointless:
Is a religious war more honorable than a political one?
Isn't religion strictly embedded in politics when it deals with hundreds of individuals?
Where is the problem with the crusades? Couldn't they be seen as one of these nomadic groups who every once in a while invade the region (the great Morrocan writer Ibn Khaldun did so in the 14th c. when he included them in the cyclical process called Muqaddimah).
 
All fair considerations, the cursades or the mongols, makes no difference the effect was the same.
 
A religious war could be based on morals, but a political war is usually based solely on more pragmatic secular needs of statecraft. The Gladstones versus the Disarelis.
Back to Top
Praetor View Drop Down
Consul
Consul

Suspended

Joined: 26-Jun-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 386 		  Quote Praetor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Feb-2007 at 00:20
Originally posted by Jagiello

You can say the same thing about pointles death and cruelty about each war and this will mean that all the wars were not reasonable,but at least isn't it a bit reasonable that the christians united for the firs time on such scale,just like the muslims did for some time and tried to free land which originaly were christian?(this doesn't mean i justify the cruelty and death,i only say it is something normal for every war and the crusades aren't exeption).


Firstly though in all wars they're are deaths that serve no purpose whatsoever, in the crusades however such massacres that gave no political and military advantages were even more common then in the majority of medieval wars. Secondly the christians were hardly united by the crusades (ignoring the fact that you can't claim to unite Christians using a teaching that is against the teachings of the Bible) as they resulted in much infighting amongst the crusaders and some of the crusades were launched against other christians (eg. Fourth crusade and the Hussite crusades). Futheremore the crusades normally took place because the areas were thier soldiers came from were at peace and were rarely the cause of that peace, as for the crusaders they had simply stopped fighting each other (for the most part) and started fighting muslims (for the most part). Finally just because the Muslims did it beforehand doesn't make it right.


Edited by Praetor - 17-Feb-2007 at 00:21
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.125 seconds.