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 24th, 2012, 07:58 AM   #41
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
Then why do you keep referring to justifications?



That's a judgement call, upon what is it based, your own 21st century opinion or those of the populace of Latin Christendom in the 11-13th century Europe? If not the latter then what is it? What relevance does it hold if not?



Which is what we do, and Damien's particular part of that explanation is a bit crap that doesn't match up with historical evidence.
Please check out again with the minimal care;
I have never asked for any "justification".
Period.
And period.

Which "historical evidence"?
You have presented none.
Aside of proposing a "coincidence", of course.


The relevance that even you can't pretend to ignore is that the Crusades appeared in 1096 and just exactly then, and not let say in 637 after the fall of Jerusalem to the Muslims, or in 732 (Battle of Poitiers) or plainly in any other date in the middle.

Why on Earth did exactly in 1096 seem such a wonderful idea to the masses and to the priests inciting them to go slaughter Muslims, Jews & Christians on the other side of their world?


And certainly not to their peers of the contemporary eastern Christianity, for that matter,


PS: "Why" not "how could it be justiified", the later being a question explicitly not asked here.
Period.

Last edited by sylla1; November 24th, 2012 at 08:07 AM.
sylla1 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 24th, 2012, 08:18 AM   #42

DreamWeaver's Avatar
Misanthropologist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wales
Posts: 10,313
Blog Entries: 6

Quote:
Originally Posted by sylla1 View Post
Please check out again with the minimal care;
I have never asked for any "justification".
Period.
And period.
No but you keep talking about it. Odd that. You literally made a judgement call earlier.


Quote:
Which "historical evidence"?
You have presented none.
Aside of proposing a "coincidence", of course.
The historical evidence that allowed me to come to my conclusion.

See dates above

The 1157 appeal of Adrian IV, this can be found in Papsturkunden in Spanien No. 78.
Alexander III's appeal of 1165, can be found in Patralogia Latina Vo. 200 Cols. 384-386.
The 1169 bull Inter Omnia, again in PL 200 cols. 599-601
1181 Cor Nostrum, again PL 200 cols. 1294-1297.

You can read the PL here. Patrologiae cursus completus : Series latina : Migne, J.-P. (Jacques-Paul), 1800-1875 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

The connection between the events of the Latin East and ensuing crusading events has been well commented upon and researched, at least in the 12th Century.


Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119-1187: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Phillips: Books
Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119-1187: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Phillips: Books


contains all you will need.


Prof Damien present purely coincidental material. First three crusade occur in 40 year segments that also align with generations and a need to bleed of extras. Its actually coincidental evidence not hard. An actual demonstration showing correlation and then actual connection between the demographics and crusading would have to be undertaken, which I see none of.



Quote:
The relevance that even you can't pretend to ignore is that the Crusades appeared in 1096 and just exactly then, and not let say in 637 after the fall of Jerusalem to the Muslims, or in 732 (Battle of Poitiers) or plainly in any other date in the middle.

Why on Earth did exactly in 1096 seem such a wonderful idea to go slaughter Muslims, Jews & Christians on the other side of their world?
Yes the question is why. Piacenza appeal in 1095 didnt do very well but Clairmont did. Why....we will probably never know.



Period. Period. Period.

Last edited by DreamWeaver; November 24th, 2012 at 08:25 AM.
DreamWeaver is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 08:36 AM   #43

DreamWeaver's Avatar
Misanthropologist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wales
Posts: 10,313
Blog Entries: 6

Zengi and Saladin talk to their troops, its been 40 years chaps, time to go capture a city or two. The Franj have got too many landless sons, need to go let off some steam. Turns to their scribes, be sure to pencil that in for 40 years hence so I dont forget.

Pure gold.
DreamWeaver is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:09 AM   #44
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
No but you keep talking about it. Odd that. You literally made a judgement call earlier.




The historical evidence that allowed me to come to my conclusion.

See dates above

The 1157 appeal of Adrian IV, this can be found in Papsturkunden in Spanien No. 78.
Alexander III's appeal of 1165, can be found in Patralogia Latina Vo. 200 Cols. 384-386.
The 1169 bull Inter Omnia, again in PL 200 cols. 599-601
1181 Cor Nostrum, again PL 200 cols. 1294-1297.

You can read the PL here. Patrologiae cursus completus : Series latina : Migne, J.-P. (Jacques-Paul), 1800-1875 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

The connection between the events of the Latin East and ensuing crusading events has been well commented upon and researched, at least in the 12th Century.


Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119-1187: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Phillips: Books

contains all you will need.


Prof Damien present purely coincidental material. First three crusade occur in 40 year segments that also align with generations and a need to bleed of extras. Its actually coincidental evidence not hard. An actual demonstration showing correlation and then actual connection between the demographics and crusading would have to be undertaken, which I see none of.





Yes the question is why. Piacenza appeal in 1095 didnt do very well but Clairmont did. Why....we will probably never know.



Period. Period. Period.
No number of "periods" is going to be useful if there is no substance behind them.

You may have perceive that the term "multifactorial" was employed by tours truly (and others) relative to this historical phenomenon.

Amazing as it may sound, it implies that not one single factor would be conidered enough to explain the teh complexity of this historical phenomen.

In fact, at the risk of overstanting the obvious, such is the rule more than the exception for historical phenomena as a whole.

No where did Prof. Damen pretended that this was the only explanation for the Crusades, as you have so desperately try to advance as a fallacious straw man for so many posts now.

Au contraire, this author explicitly mentioned several other complementary or alternative hypotheses.

Which as you have so deliberately ignored, must infer that you have been entirely unable to challenge.

And īplease check out the definition of "evidence" before pretending that you have brought any here on the demographics issue.

Because whatyou have shared with us is exactly zero, just your categorical a priori conclusion that it was just "a coincidence"...
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:10 AM   #45
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
Zengi and Saladin talk to their troops, its been 40 years chaps, time to go capture a city or two. The Franj have got too many landless sons, need to go let off some steam. Turns to their scribes, be sure to pencil that in for 40 years hence so I dont forget.

Pure gold.
Deliberate fallacious straw man is one of the typical last resources of ignorance.

This rule of thumb never ever fails.

Last edited by sylla1; November 24th, 2012 at 09:16 AM.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:16 AM   #46
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Back to the OP, DW, I know your case here couldn't be any more desperate, but even so please try to avoid the cheap red herrings for a moment.

Again, in elementary English:

Why on Earth did exactly and just exactly in 1096 it suddenly seem such a wonderful idea for the fanatic masses and the priests behind them to go to the other side of their world just to massively slaughter Mislims, Jews & Christians?

Why exactly then and not in 637, 732 or any date in between?

Especially when it certainly didn't happen to the eastern Christianity, BTW



Any straight answer?

Aside of any "coincidence" of God's will, of course.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:21 AM   #47
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
You can read the PL here. Patrologiae cursus completus : Series latina : Migne, J.-P. (Jacques-Paul), 1800-1875 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive

The connection between the events of the Latin East and ensuing crusading events has been well commented upon and researched, at least in the 12th Century.


Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations between the Latin East and the West, 1119-1187: Amazon.co.uk: Jonathan Phillips: Books

contains all you will need.
Actually this stuff doesn't seem to contain even what you would need here.

Just to stop the ad infinitum embarassment here, let just note that those nice sources are just advancing some hypotheses on some contributors for this complex historical phenomenon.

In plain English, these are not mutually exclusive hypotheses relative to the demographic hypothesis explained above.

Far as I can tell, no where does any of these sources falsify any of the demographic points presented by Prof. Damen.

Plainly, you are simply answering with oranges a question about apples.




Needless to say, so far one must infer your own categorical bare assertion that the correlation between the demographic evolution of Europe and the chronology of the Crusades must have been just "a coincidence" still comes out just from thin air.

But well, I would love to be corrected here with the evidence that you used for such educated conclusion.

And not just red herrings, BTW.


PS: Please don't forget again to answer the question in my post #46
Thanks in advance

Last edited by sylla1; November 24th, 2012 at 09:31 AM.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:33 AM   #48
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

And here is the sober summary that has required so many fallacious straw men:

Quote:
In a spell-binding speech before a crowd of French knights, Urban exhorted his adherents to win back "the land of milk and honey" and avenge the Turkish atrocities allegedly perpetrated against their fellow Christians.
He cited several of the gory details sent him by Alexius Comnenus and ended by bidding them fight "for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of imperishable glory."
Whether or not he meant it, "Kill Moslems indiscriminately!" is what the crowd understood him to say and chanted back Deus le vult! Deus le vult!" ("God wills it! God wills it!")

From the perspective of history, however, it's clear that there was much more than religious frenzy at work here.
The Crusades reflect other aspects of life in Europe at that time, in particular, its burgeoning population during the High Middle Ages.
That is, around the turn of the millennium (ca. 1000 CE), destructive invasions like those of the Vikings had abated and, amidst the relative calm which followed, the continent had quickly repopulated.
It's hard not to suppose, then, that the Crusades, a century later, are tied to the rapidly changing demographics within Europe, since the first three come every forty years or so, in other words, at intervals of about a generation and a half.
If so, they are, in one respect, a means of bleeding off the ever-replenishing supply of young warriors, especially sons without inheritances or livelihoods and, in general, people seeking some purpose and direction in life.

There were political forces at work as well, since the Crusades were also tied to the Investiture Controversy, the struggle for power between the rising authority of the Pope and the ruling political system in the day.
From the papal perspective, the kings of Europe had long intruded upon the sacred right of the Pope to run his own business—that is, to choose the men who constituted the Church's administration—and in calling the First Crusade, Urban II shifted the theatre of action in this political conflict to an arena where medieval kings had traditionally reigned supreme, the battlefield.
In doing so, Urban usurped the prerogative most secular rulers had claimed traditionally to declare an enemy and muster troops for battle.

Worse yet, by reinterpreting the Truce of God as a warrant for Europeans to kill Moslems and not each other, he also sought to embarrass secular leaders for all their intra-European wars which now looked positively "un-Christian," in spite of that fact that the Church had for centuries up until then sanctioned European-upon-European carnage.
Nevertheless, popes briefly owned the momentum and set the spin.
That is, the Crusades gave them, if only for a minute by historical standards, the opportunity to make the rules of the game.

But for all these underlying causes, the major motivation driving the Crusades —both on the surface and well beneath it—was religious sentiment, something bordering on hysteria.
There can be no doubt that a majority of Christian Europeans saw Urban's call-to-arms as a means of salvation and a way of ridding the world of infidels.
That, to them, referred not only to the Moslems but also the Jews in Europe, many of whom were slaughtered before the knights of the First Crusade rolled out in search of the Holy Lands.
After all, good Christians couldn't send their men off to fight one infidel and abandon the homeland to another.
With this benighted stab at genocide pitched as protecting the loved ones they left behind, the crusaders surged out of Europe on a tidal bore of blood, only to wash up on the shores of the Near East soon to be bathed in the same.
Aside of the incredibly obscure demographical factor, prof. Damen (not "Damien"; that was a character of The Omen series) mentioned:
- the Religious Frenzy.
- the Investiture Controversy, the struggle for power between the rising authority of the Pope and the ruling political system in the day.
- Religious sentiment
- the Truce of God
- Salvation
- and a way of ridding the world of infidels.

Must infer no objections have been found on these contributors.

Last edited by sylla1; November 24th, 2012 at 09:43 AM.
sylla1 is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:42 AM   #49

DreamWeaver's Avatar
Misanthropologist
 
Joined: Aug 2010
From: Wales
Posts: 10,313
Blog Entries: 6

Clearly you haven't been paying attention at all Sylla.

Second Crusade, Third Crusade....think on it.


Your hypocritical over statements are very revealing. You offer nothing. Your ignorance on the matter is clearly evident.

Questions have already been answered.
DreamWeaver is offline  
Old November 24th, 2012, 09:46 AM   #50
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 19,934

Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWeaver View Post
Clearly you haven't been paying attention at all Sylla.
Doctor, cure yourself.

That said, and without any additional ad infinitum red herrings:

- Please give any straight answer for once to the question from my post #46

- Please share with us your relevant hard evidence on why the correlation between European demography and Crusades must be just a coincidence.

Thanks in advance.
sylla1 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Medieval and Byzantine History

Tags
crusades, reason


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Reason Why [Japan vs US] ? Richard Potato War and Military History 25 April 26th, 2011 02:19 PM
Where does reason come from? coberst Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 23 August 4th, 2009 07:39 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.