Bobsprit wrote:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1269350/posts


How scary. When the Bush people claim "god saved them" you know they're no
different than Bin Laden and is kind.

RB

Scarey isn't it Bob? Just as bad as the analogy being bandied around likening Bush's activities in
the Middle East to the Crusades, he should do a little research; didn't the Crusaders get whooped there,
followed by the Moors taking over half of Europe?

Cheers
Marty

Martin Baxter wrote:
Scarey isn't it Bob? Just as bad as the analogy being bandied around
likening Bush's activities in
the Middle East to the Crusades, he should do a little research; didn't
the Crusaders get whooped there,
followed by the Moors taking over half of Europe?

I think ya got that one backwards. The Moors overran Spain in the early
700s and battled Charlemagne's grandfather at Tours in 732. By the time
the Carolingian Renaissance was under way, Charlemagne was fighting them
south of the Pyrenees. The Crusades didn't start until more than three
hundred years later, when Pope Urban cried out against the infidel, a
classic political red herring, and the crowd roared "Deus Le Volt"
(trans: the batteries in my Walkman are dead)

BTW for those inclined to take the recent election too seriously
http://letsriot.com/stuff/new_map.jpg

Regards
Doug King

DSK wrote:


I think ya got that one backwards. The Moors overran Spain in the early
700s and battled Charlemagne's grandfather at Tours in 732. By the time
the Carolingian Renaissance was under way, Charlemagne was fighting them
south of the Pyrenees. The Crusades didn't start until more than three
hundred years later, when Pope Urban cried out against the infidel, a
classic political red herring, and the crowd roared "Deus Le Volt"
(trans: the batteries in my Walkman are dead)

Thanks Doug, my knowledge of history in that area leaves something to be desired.

Cheers
Marty

Martin Baxter wrote:
Thanks Doug, my knowledge of history in that area leaves something to be
desired.

Mine too... one of my goals in learning Spanish is to read about some of
the history involved.

Regards
Doug King

DSK wrote:

Martin Baxter wrote:

Thanks Doug, my knowledge of history in that area leaves something to
be desired.


Mine too... one of my goals in learning Spanish is to read about some of
the history involved.

Regards
Doug King


Did a bit of reading last night, turns out the Crusades analogy is not so bad. The first Crusade was relatively
successful, the objective was reached ('liberating' Jerusalem). The Second Crusade captured some more land, and shamelessly
sacked Constantinople along the way. The last three Crusades were pretty much a bust and in the long run most of the territory fell
back to the Saracens.

The one great legacy of the Crusades was the implementation of system of organized taxation, a lofty goal for the GOP (remember that's how this
arabesque got started).

Cheers
Marty

Martin Baxter wrote:
Did a bit of reading last night, turns out the Crusades analogy is not
so bad. The first Crusade was relatively
successful, the objective was reached ('liberating' Jerusalem). The
Second Crusade captured some more land, and shamelessly
sacked Constantinople along the way. The last three Crusades were pretty
much a bust and in the long run most of the territory fell
back to the Saracens.

The one great legacy of the Crusades was the implementation of system of
organized taxation, a lofty goal for the GOP (remember that's how this
arabesque got started).

groan

But seriously, the Crusades are a good analogy for present times...
maybe those who don't know history really are condemned to repeat it.
The Crusade served the European princes & kings fairly well at some
secondary political goals, such as sending troublesome younger sons far
away; also furthered the goals of the old Mediterranean trading powers,
and introduced fractional reserve banking. Double entry accounting was
invented somewhere in there too.

A man named Steve Runciman has written several good books on the Crusades.

IIRC the First Crusade was relatively straighforward. They succeeded in
capturing Jerusalem and a fair amount of territory (thus giving those
younger sons some area to rule) but it was 'just barely' and they never
established self-supporting principalities. Just about the time these
Crusader principalities got on their feet economically, and could
develop reasonable trade relationships with neighboring Arab
territories, a new wave of belligerent Crusaders arrived and knocked
over the applecart.

Crusaders that returned to Europe brought with them new technology and
new tastes, and a much greater knowledge of the world around them. The
Arabs which had overrun the Hellenic empires, inheritors of Alexander
the Great, had a much greater familiarity with classical & ancient
knowledge. This opened the door, several generations down the road, for
the Renaissance.

The crusading era ended with Saint Louis the Pious, (Louis Xth IIRC) who
was blatantly delusional and a one-man military strategic disaster.
Drawing the parallels to modern times is best left as an exercise for
studious!

Regards
Doug King