Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Medieval and Byzantine History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Medieval and Byzantine History Medieval and Byzantine History Forum - Period of History between classical antiquity and modern times, roughly the 5th through 16th Centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 18th, 2012, 11:39 AM   #291

Yōḥānān's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Portugal
Posts: 2,686

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
What is absolutely unhistorical is the pretension that the Reconquista as a whole could be attributed to any Crusade called by any Pope.
Which nobody claimed that I noticed.
Yōḥānān is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 18th, 2012, 11:59 AM   #292

DreamWeaver's Avatar
Misanthropologist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wales
Posts: 10,355
Blog Entries: 6

As for Spain one might attribute some/part of it to the actions of crusaders, rather than a/a set of specific crusade(s) since crusading indulgences and other benefices were granted to those individuals who went to Spain, as well as those undertaking actions and tasks already present or native to the region itself. Thus those present while not actually participating in a specifically called and organised crusade were at the same time still crusaders.
DreamWeaver is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 12:54 PM   #293

Yōḥānān's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Portugal
Posts: 2,686

The entire ideological movement of the Crusades influenced the Reconquista in every aspect. To be honest before this thread I was not even aware that some of these decisive battles were considered direct acts of Crusade. To me the relevance of the Crusades in the Reconquista is undeniable.
Yōḥānān is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 01:11 PM   #294

Yōḥānān's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Portugal
Posts: 2,686

There is also the notion, in my opinion wrong, that the reconquista was an easy thing against a decadent enemy. The time it took compared with the time it took for the Muslims to conquer the Iberian Peninsula (seven years) or to conquer more than half of what had been the Roman Empire (less than a century) gives a good idea of how easy it was.

Last edited by Yōḥānān; November 18th, 2012 at 01:18 PM.
Yōḥānān is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 02:31 PM   #295
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Mar 2010
From: Montréal
Posts: 512

I can agree with mercantile republics and merchants.

Click the image to open in full size.
BrowniesRule is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 02:36 PM   #296
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yōḥānān View Post
The entire ideological movement of the Crusades influenced the Reconquista in every aspect. To be honest before this thread I was not even aware that some of these decisive battles were considered direct acts of Crusade. To me the relevance of the Crusades in the Reconquista is undeniable.
THat may be exactly why I habe been explicitly not denying it all along this nice thread.

The exact measurement or estimation of such contribution is another entirely different and much more controversial story.

As a whole the contribution of any non-Peninsular Christian armies to the Reconquista ever recruited by the Papacy was minimal at best.

Besides, the Reconquista was always a primarily political far more than religious struggle; Muslim ad Christian states constantly switched alliances with each other.

The religious ideology was exacerbated only by the XI-XII centuries, not for any alien influence but fundamentally due to the invasions from the African desertic regions of fanatically radical new Muslim converts, fundamentally the Almoravides and the Almohades.

Lisbon was presumably the most relevant crusader contribution to the Reconquista.
Conquered by the some Norwegian Crusaders in 1108, it was conquered again by the Muslims (Almoravids) in 1111; so it required to be freed again by Alfosnso I of Portugal with the help of the II Crusade (some 13,000 non local Crusaders) in 1147.

On the campaign of the critical aforementioned battle of Navas de Tolosa, the bulk of of the reportedly like 30,000 predominantly French Crusaders actually laergely massively deserted after the conquest of Calatrava la Vieja and Malagón, where their fanatiic cruelty against pacific Muslims and Jews was extremely problematic for the local Christian rulers.

The bulk of such Crusaders were simply absent of this critical battle itself.

And little, very little additional objective military contribution from any Papal Crusade is discernible all along eight centuries.

So you should excuse me if I'm not particularly impressed by some typically opportunistic claims from some biased sources of the Catholic church itself.

On the other hand, this is admittedly a complex field well beyonfd the purely military issues that would no doubt deserve its own ad hoc thread.

Particularly because the extensive and complex Reconquista period was only tangentially related with the OP.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 18th, 2012, 02:50 PM   #297
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1
What is absolutely unhistorical is the pretension that the Reconquista as a whole could be attributed to any Crusade called by any Pope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yōḥānān View Post
Which nobody claimed that I noticed.
Aside of you, do you mean?.
Quote:
However the Reconquista in the designated period was sometimes an act of Crusade and for the rest of the time within the spirit.
BTW, which "spirit"???

And maybe our Dreamweaver too:
Quote:
As for Spain one might attribute some/part of it to the actions of crusaders, rather than a/a set of specific crusade(s) since crusading indulgences and other benefices were granted to those individuals who went to Spain, as well as those undertaking actions and tasks already present or native to the region itself. Thus those present while not actually participating in a specifically called and organised crusade were at the same time still crusaders.
These gross exaggerations simply couldn't be any more fallaciously out of proportion.

The centuries-long Reconquista was only exceptionally an Act of Crusade (even most widely understood as any military expedition began by the Papacy) as it was duly explained above; the objective military contribution was sometimes valuable but as a whole extremely limited, more often than not simply negligible.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 05:48 AM   #298

DreamWeaver's Avatar
Misanthropologist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wales
Posts: 10,355
Blog Entries: 6

No, not me, Im a Pluralists with Popularist leanings, not a Generalist.

Definition issues as always. If one is a crusader, does on crusade? You can be a crusader in spain, crusading about, but not on a Crusade in spain. Distinction, hardly a gross exaggeration. Highly applicable in the 12th and 13th Centuries. Innocent III only rescinded crusading priveleges for Spain in 1213 if I recall correctly, after Las Navas des Tolosa. Could those who fought be termed crusaders? Potentially they could, though not all would agree to such a notion.


On a related note, the Templars and Hospitallers were quite well represented in Aragon and Castile, along with other native Mlitary Orders to Iberia itself. Though off the top of my head i know not how involved they were in the active progression of warfare in the region. Not my really my area.



However....[Insert overly long semantical debate where nothing is decided here]....and also the simple chronological fact that if Crusading comes about as of 1095, actions prior to it, whcih includes a goodly proportion of the Reconquista, could not be attributed to it in the same manner

Last edited by DreamWeaver; November 19th, 2012 at 06:17 AM.
DreamWeaver is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 06:11 AM   #299

Yōḥānān's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2012
From: Portugal
Posts: 2,686

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Aside of you, do you mean?. BTW, which "spirit"???
Including me as can be read in the quote you so kindly posted. I had the care to circumscribe my statement to the period of the Crusades.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yōḥānān View Post
However the Reconquista in the designated period was sometimes an act of Crusade and for the rest of the time within the spirit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post

These gross exaggerations simply couldn't be any more fallaciously out of proportion.

There is no point in throwing gross exagerations at each other, facts have been laid on the table everything else is a matter of interpretation. I am as convinced as ever of the importance of the Crusades in the Reconquista.
Yōḥānān is offline  
Old November 19th, 2012, 07:38 AM   #300
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yōḥānān View Post
Including me as can be read in the quote you so kindly posted. I had the care to circumscribe my statement to the period of the Crusades.








There is no point in throwing gross exagerations at each other, facts have been laid on the table everything else is a matter of interpretation. I am as convinced as ever of the importance of the Crusades in the Reconquista.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yōḥānān
However the Reconquista in the designated period was sometimes an act of Crusade and for the rest of the time within the spirit.
(yup, emphasis is mine this time)

Anyhow, facts are indeed facts.

Rest assured that challenging the strength of your conviction is well beyond any of my goals here.

Again, if you would like us to continue discussing virtually anything about the fascinating issue of the centuries-long Reconquista a brand new ad hoc thread would be an absolute requirement, as it is only tangentially related to the OP here.
sylla1 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Medieval and Byzantine History

Tags
crusades, victor


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Crusades SPERRO Medieval and Byzantine History 66 September 29th, 2011 02:34 AM
Different Victor at the second Battle of Philipi Isoroku295 Speculative History 2 March 8th, 2010 05:44 PM
GIAP: The Victor in Vietnam bigscreeninkster History Book Reviews 1 December 29th, 2009 03:15 AM
Victor Davis Hanson Pantagruel History Book Reviews 12 July 22nd, 2009 07:24 AM
Victor Hugo Commander History Book Reviews 8 June 11th, 2008 08:11 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.