Different Views on Saladin

As my research project, I've been exploring Saladin's consolidation of power in Egypt. From my research, I've realized there are many different points of view on Saladin's achievements. In other words, some people think of Saladin as an excellent, perhaps one of the greatest, leaders of the crusades era; others find his achievements to be largely overstated. I've developed my own opinion, which is somewhere inbetween the two views. I highly suggest taking a look at the book Saladin by Hans Mohring. The book provides details about Saladin's life, stripped of all bias and flowery praise. Try seeing what opinion you form on the Sultan.

Pope Urban's Beginnings

I was curious about Pope Urban's role in the Church before his papacy and the beginnings of the First Crusade, so I found some information at the following site: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0010.html. Before Pope Urban II became Pope, he was held prisoner by Henry IV and served as assistant to Pope Gregory. During the early years of his reign, he improved ecclesiastical discipline and called for the Council of Clermont in November 1095, which began the First Crusade. Due to strong sentiments against Urban made by the Countless Matilda of Tuscany, Pope Urban had to wait six years until he was allowed to sit on the papal throne. Soon after taking the throne, Urban's call to arms for the defense of Christians and the acquisition of the Holy Land led to the People's Crusade followed soon after by the slightly more organized majority of the army for the First Crusade.

Multiculturalism in the Levant

Coming into this course I guess I had pictured the Middle East to be populated solely with people of the Islamic faith during the pre-Crusade era; this image, I have found out, is very far from the truth. Obviously there was a dominant Muslim culture to be found there, with the Seljuk empire present, but there were also peoples of other cultures--some, as it turns out, who practiced Christianity. Most notable were the Armenians and Syriacs, who had been on the fringes of the Roman Empire but were some of the first societies to adopt Christianity as their religion. The Armenians were thriving in Southeast Asia Minor when the first Crusaders began to appear, and indeed there were Armenian inhabitants all the way into Northern Syria. These groups and others, such as the Bedouins, often aided the Crusaders on their ventures. During the first Crusade, for example, the Crusaders were given information and guides by these peoples as they made their way to Jerusalem. Perhaps the first Crusade would not have been so successful without these minor groups coming to the Crusaders' aide... This just goes to show that history is usually complicated, and one can't regard a certain region as having the same culture among all of its inhabitants.

Council of Nablus, 1120

I just came across reference to a meeting known as the Council of Nablus. It established the first written laws for the Kingdom of Jerusalem and involved representatives of the clergy and crusader nobility. It did not really seem to intriguing at first but the actual decrees, or canons, agreed upon really demonstrate subtle concerns of the Latin kingdom. Canons 12-16 essentially outline forms of Latin-Muslim segregation. Canon 16, for instance, prohibits Muslims from wearing European clothing. Inter-group sexual relationships are specifically forbidden, with harsh penalties like castration and nasal mutilation awaiting any transgressors. The rape of Saracen women is punishable by castration so I suppose the otherwise divisive legislation does benefit Muslims to an extent. Overall, though, the canons attempt establish the foundation for a legal system designed primarily to maintain precedents from Western Europe, not to create something new and different. Wikipedia has a pretty decent summary of the canons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Nablus#Signatories

Villeins and Slaves

As I work on my research paper, I have noticed that some historical authors, especially ones from before the mid-twentieth century, tend to define the role of native peoples under crusader rule as being one of "villeins and slaves." Some even state "villains and slaves." At first I thought villein meant something similar to the modern word "villain." I was surprised, however, to learn that a villein was a type of serf, the most numerous type of serf to be exact. Aside from freemen, villeins had the most rights of any serf group. It was only when former serfs began to migrate to the growing urban centers of Europe that the term "villain" received its modern connotation. Also, villeinage had existed centuries before the crusades, indicating that it was not some new system solely designed to oppress the Muslims and other groups living in Palestine. Most of the sources that write the phrase as "villains and slaves" are openly anti-crusader and some are even anti-Christian (http://www.ftarchives.net/foote/crimes/c9.htm). I suppose it just shows how cautious one must be in taking sources' impartiality for granted.

For Reasons Unknown

I was researching the about the technology advancements during the crusades and I got to this article: http://ina.tamu.edu/yasymposium/PDFs/Pryor.pdf. It highlights how the ships got better during the crusades. During the first crusade, it took two seasons for the large fleets to travel from Europe to the Holy lands. Plus they were not equipped with provisions to carry horses. According to the Article, crusaders did not bring horses till the Venetians brought around only 300 in 1123. But right after the First Crusade the Crusades were able to travel to the Holy lands in 3-4 weeks. For the Fourth Crusade, Venetians had made specialized galleys to carry over 4500 horses and knights. Now the interesting part is that the article argues that there is no evidence to show that there was a revolution in ship design but yet they could carry more and travel faster. The article suggests that this might have been due to better port facilities, better knowledge of the routes. But the evidence to suggest all this is very minimal but there is no doubting that there was a fundamental change in the ships.

Crusades in Catholic Education

I ran across an interesting link leading to a Catholic education website. The specific link I provide here is the website's section on the crusades. Unfortunately, the website only provides a brief summary of the highlights of the crusades as a whole. One thing did stand out right away though. The Christian leaders are definitely portrayed very heroically and almost surrealistically. Does the Catholic education source provide biased teaching material because of the religious factor? You check it out:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0010.html

Medieval Clothing

I was interested in how the medieval men and women dressed during the crusades. Unsurprisingly, the clothes were highly depended in the class of the people. The clothes of the peasants were pretty simple but the of the nobles were distinguishable by their sleeves. Knights wore sleeveless "surcoats" covered with a coat of arms. The rich even managed to import turbans and silks from the East. However, at the end of the 13th century, styles changed and tunics became tighter and undershirts and briefs were worn underneath sleeveless jacket and an additional tunic. In addition, men's medieval clothing also consisted of cloaks “with a round opening that was slipped over the man's head.” Early medieval women wore "kirtles", which were tunics worn to their ankles and over a shirt. Married women wore tight-fitting caps and nets over their hair.

http://www.medieval-life.net/clothing.htm

Chivalry

After a presentation a few days ago on Chivalry in the middle ages, I wanted to learn a little more about medieval concepts of chivalry. I found some information at the following site: http://www.medieval-life.net/chivalry.htm. The term "chivalry" originates from several different languages in Europe all meaning "warrior on horseback." Over time, the true meaning of the term changed to include the knights' system of virtues and ethics. Chivalric values began in the middle ages during the conquests to the west consisting of vows of honor and regulation of activities. As the concepts of chivalry evolved they grew to include honoring, serving, and doing nothing to displease women. Knights were vital members of society because of their status as bearer of arms, owners of horse and armor, and participators of religious ceremony. After the crusades declined, knights continued to practice their values and skills in tournaments. Tales of knights and chivalry are still widely known today.

Medieval Religious Institutions

When looking different things up for research paper ideas I came across many different medieval institutions (mainly religious) that are still around today. These institutions came about during the crusading era and in some cases played very large roles in certain conflicts. Two I found that had full fledged websites, membership info, etc. were the Dominicans and The Franciscans. Their respective websites are http://www.op.org/ and http://www.franciscans.org/. I find it very interesting that an institution can have trouble lasting a few years in modern society, but these have lasted for many hundreds of years. It raises the question with me as to why religious ideals can last, when ethical and moral based groups cannot. Those types of groups may change drastically over the years to maintain stability, but the Bible, Koran, etc. are the same book they always have been.

Gregorian Chant and Holy Week

As a lover of music and tradition--and as Holy Week is upon us--I wanted to do some research on the types of music that would have been sung for Holy Week masses during the Middle Ages. I searched for some of the Gregorian Chants specific to these days--here's what I found:

Click here for a website with recordings from St. Benedict's Monastery in São Paulo, Brazil. This has a number of recordings of all the masses during Holy Week; although sometimes the sound quality is not perfect, I think it's kind of interesting to hear birds chirping in the background.

Below are two links to the abby of Solesmes, in France. The first gives a decent description of Gregorian Chant (as a subject), the second describes the order of the mass (for those who may not be familiar with the service).
Gregorian Chant
Order of the Service

Gregorian Chant was recorded in one of the earliest forms of written music called neumes: click here for a description of them and how to read them.

Finally, this is a link to a youtube video I found. It is described as an "old Roman chant" for "Easter Sunday Service." The organ pedel that you hear in the background is called a "drone," which did often accompany Gregorian Chant when it was sung.

Happy Easter!

~C. Erba

Albigensianism

In doing some research on the Albigensian Crusade recently, I came across some really interesting information about the origins of the Albigensian, or Cathar, doctrines. For all intents and purposes, Albigensianism (also known as Catharism) is a version of the ancient doctrine of Manichaeism, which initially developed in the first few centuries after the death of Christ. Both of these share a belief in a dualist deity that is composed of a good entity and a bad: the bad entity is responsible for all things material (including the human body), and it is the principal aim of the soul to escape from its imprisonment in the human body and to rejoin the good entity. In addition, these sects had select members of their believers who formed an inner, sanctified core (in the Albigensian tradition, these people were called “perfaits” or “perfects”). Most intriguing was that Albigensianism flourished in Languedoc, a region in modern-day southern France which has been known throughout the centuries for its religious tolerance.

For more information see:
Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo, A Biography, (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000)
http://www.cathar.info/

~C. Erba

The Modern Use of Trebuchets

For your amusement:

In High School I joined an engineering club that built a Trebuchet every year to participate in an event held in early November in which teams compete to hurl a pumpkin as far as possible.

The event is World Championship Punkin Chunkin.

The largest Trebuchet there is called Yankee Siege which uses a counter weight that can hold 30,000 lbs. It can hurl a 50-100 lb projectile between 300-400 yards with a partially filled counter weight. Its maximum range to date is just over 2000 ft.

Midieval Trebuchets were used to either destroy fortifications or as terror devices, employed to throw dead animals or live enemies over the wall as a psychological weapon. They generally had a range of about 300 yards. In many ways they were the pinnacle of siege technology and were made obsolete by the advent of gunpowder. They fired slowly as it took a long time to reload the device.

The operation of a Trebuchet is a bit of history that you can witness and it is easy to see how these massive machines could tear down walls with ease or fill defenders with fear.

Children's Crusade

I was looking up some more information on the Childrens Crusade and instead of taking it all for face-value, I tried looking up some information against it. Turns out there was a study in 1977 by Raedts called "The Children's Crusade of 1213". He argued that the army was not made up of primarily children, but of the 'wandering poor'. The traditional view of the crusade was that it began with a little boy claiming that he had been told to lead a crusade to the holy land by Jesus himself. He was supposed to peacefully convert Muslims to Christianity. He gained as many as 30,000 children but before making it to Jerusalem, most either died or were tricked into slavery. Modern views have claimed this story to be fake. Recent historians claim that there were actually two movements of people (of all ages, really). Mistakes in the interpretation of pueri, meaning boys, arose when past historians thought it to literally mean children where they probably actually meant country boys.

Crusading in the News

I would just like to comment on how common the term "crusading" has become these days. Just by searching the term in Google News, I ran into several articles describing some more 'modern' crusades: Obama's health care crusade, a crusade to provide food and shelter for the homeless of New York City, a crusade against junk food (seriously?). In my opinion, I think that the term "crusading" should be reserved for describing past crusades of the Middle Ages, where the term was originally coined, or even to describe modern religious warfare. But when I read an article telling me a chef is launching a CRUSADE to promote healthier eating, I can't help but feel a little frustrated at how common and poorly-used this word/concept has become.

A Very Long Walk In The Park

I feel like a major part of the Crusades that is often overlooked was the actual journey to get to the Holy Land itself, not just the conflict/fighting that was done once the Crusaders had arrived. I mean, in some Crusades (most notably the First and Second) people would walk by land the entire way from Western Europe to the Holy Land, not being shipped over across the Mediterranean Sea. That's pretty inconceivable. The distance from Paris to Jerusalem, for example, is just over 2000 miles, and that's if you travel as the crow flies, which is impossible because the Mediterranean Sea stands in the way. That is an incredible distance to travel on foot. Imagine walking one marathon a day, every day, for close to three months, and that's about the distance some of these Crusaders had to traverse. Just doing this without any hardships would be an amazing accomplishment-- but then you have to factor in (to the First Crusade) the battles fought along the way to the Holy Land, in such places as Nicaea and Antioch. Undoubtedly there was something strong motivating these Crusaders to march on, whether it be the promise of redemption or riches.
Anyway, all of this got me to thinking about the type of footwear that the Crusaders used on their multi-thousand mile journey, but I really couldn't find that too much on it. I did find that as a result of the Crusades, shoe styles from the Byzantine Empire were brought back to Western Europe, including the characteristically Medieval long-pointed shoes. These were called crackowes or poulaines.

The Tafurs

Some accounts of the First Crusade seem to agree that crusaders would sometimes resort to cannibalism when actual food was lacking. I assumed that it was a general accusation but I just saw a site that asserts that such atrocities were attributed to one particular group: the Tafurs. The nature of this groups is debated but a disturbing proposition is that the Tafurs lay at the core of crusading atrocities. It was rumored that they raped any women they captured, looted everything they could get their hands on, and simply reveled in butchery. Led by a former knight, Le Roi Tafur, the Tafurs dressed in sackcloths and used only the crudest of weapons. Yet Muslim sources refer to them as being "living devils" who fought with almost beast-like fury in combat. Apparently their reputation was so fierce that even the crusader nobles required an armed escort to pass by their tents. The Tafurs were also motivated by greed, with Le Roi Tafur leading the first assault on Jerusalem exclaiming, "Where are the poor folk who want property? Let them come with me!....for today with God's help I shall win enough to load many a mule!" Although the Tafurs' exploits are undoubtedly exaggerated, their legacy is definitely an interesting of the crusades often overlooked. http://www.antiqillum.org/texts/bg/Qadosh/qadosh018.htm (There is also a wiki article on them but it only comes in French)

Art of the Crusades

The crusades not only introduced Islamic knowledge to the West, but also Islamic art. I found it very interesting that the crusaders would plunder the Muslims of the Levant and then they used these religious pieces of art for their own Christian practices. For example they would take Muslim silks and use them to decorate churches or wrap holy relics. They even went as far to use a Muslim made cloak for the German Emperor's coronation. This was also the beginning of the Gothic Period and large lavish Cathedral were sprouting up in all the major cities of Europe. I am always impressed by these pieces of both architectural and artistic genius. Having visited some examples of this architecture, it boggles the mind a how the laborers of that time could build this huge structures of stone, with no power tools or construction equipment.

Source

Louis IX

I had looked over material on the Crusade of St. Louis and was interested the life of Louis IX. I read over an article on Louis IX early life: http://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/louis_ix_king_of_france.jsp. The kingdom of France was inherited by Louis IX at a young age after his father, Louis VIII, died. France was actually ruled by Louis IX's mother, Blanche of Castille, while he was learning how to rule his country. Blanche was a chief adviser of Louis IX until her death. Duke Peter I of Brittany, Duke Raymond VII of Toulouse, and King Henry VIII of England began several revolts in Louis' early years as King but were quickly suppressed by Blanche. Louis took the cross in 1244 and led his crusade into Egypt in 1248 only be captured two years later. He was ransomed and immediately traveled to the Latin colonies to promote organization and strong fortification. Louis returned to France an continued to rule until he was canonized in 1297. Under Louis' rule, France reached a high level of peace, prosperity, and organization through excellent diplomacy and administration.

The Spanish Inquisition

"In the early years of the 16th century, to combat the rising tide of religious unorthodoxy, the Pope gave Cardinal Ximinez of Spain leave to move without let or hindrance throughout the land, in a reign of violence, terror and torture that makes a smashing film. This was the Spanish Inquisition..."

NO ONE EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!

In a response to the Albegensian Crusade, the papacy instigated one of the first inquisitions against the Cathar heretics. Though it was only moderately effective against the Albegensians, it became a weapon of the papacy against heretics.

During the end of the 15^th century, Spain was a melting pot for many religions. Mulsims, Jews, Protestants, and Catholics all were packed into the small country. In order to combat this, Pope Sixtus IV laid the papal bull Sinceras Devotionis Affectus which served to establish the inquisition under the control of the Spanish monarchy in Castile. In 1483 Tomas de Torquemada was appointed to grand inquisitor. He established a structure to the inquisition, and began it on the reign of terror that would make the movement infamous. Thousands were accused and killed, and often the inquisitors would already know the victims guilt and require only a confession, which they obtained with harsh questioning and torture. The papacy was astonished by the ferocity and indiscriminate accusations of the inquisition, but was unable to put a slow its advance. It continued in force for the next fifty years, pursuing heretics, witches, blasphemy and any other threat to the church. Though the ferocity of the inquisition subsided around 1530, it remained a political tool for the Spanish monarchy until the papacy finally ended it in 1843.

Eleanor of Aquitane

As I was researching about the crusades, I was interested in finding out the women’s role in the crusade. When Pope Urban II decreed that no women should join the crusades, few women actually took part in the crusades. There are many accounts of men leaving for many years in crusades having adverse effect on their wives. However, Eleanor of Acquitane was one of the few that actually joined the crusade. She was an energetic woman dedicated to help the crusaders. Her marriage with King Lous VII, the King of France, brought together her vast region from the River to the Pyrenees. At age of 19, she knelt in the cathedral of Vézelay before the Abbé Bernard of Clairvaux offering him thousands of her vassals for the Second Crusade. According to the article: http://www.womeninworldhistory.com/heroine2.html “Queen Eleanor appeared at Vézelay dressed like an Amazon galloping through the crowds on a white horse, urging them to join the crusades.” But the church was not happy when Eleanor and her 300 ladies decided to join the crusade to help care for the wounded. However, the women never actually took part in battle. And Eleanor returned when the crusaders lost. It amazing to see that even when Pope did not permit women to join the crusades, strong willed women like Eleanor still found a way around it.

The Mongol Invasion of Europe

The Crusades reader talks about the Mongol presence in the Middle East. However, the Mongols advanced much farther west than just the Middle East; it turns out that they invaded and conquered all the way through Central Europe. They originally had conquered Russian lands, sacking Kiev in 1240. Apparently many of the Russian boyars fled westward into Hungary, as well as a people called the Cumans. Batu Khan, the leader of the Mongols in this operation, cited this as a reason to invade and conquer Hungary, as the Cumans were thought of as traitors in the Mongolian Empire. (Of course, he probably would have invaded anyway, and this was just a petty excuse.) The Hungarian forces were absolutely decimated by the Mongols, who then killed Hungarians who resisted them. Luckily for Western Europe, the Geat Khan died in 1242 and Batu Khan went back all the way to Central Asia, where he had a chance of being elected Great Khan, taking pretty much all of the Mongol army that he had back with him. This is the general reason cited by historians as to why the Mongols stopped their invasion of Europe. The invasion prompted Hungary to build many stone fortresses, which were effective the next time the Mongols invaded Hungary in the 1280's.

NY Times Book Review

There is a review on the NY Times website for a recent book about the Crusades, titled
HOLY WARRIORS: A Modern History of the Crusades. The review was titled Butchers and Saints so read through it, wondering if it was anything worthwhile or just a crowd-pleaser. From the review, it seems to have achieved both. The author, Jonathan Philips, stresses that the crusaders were indeed motivated largely by religious faith, not greed, and that slaughter in God's name was truly believed to have divine approval. Philips apparently makes the historical figures of the time come to life, with descriptions and personalities so appealing that the book sounds more like a historical novel than nonfiction text. The book places a good deal of emphasis on the Muslim perspective, as well. Apparently Philips also describes relatively unknown but influenital personalities on each side, such as Queen Melisende of Jerusalem. It sounds like it could be an interesting counterpart to Thomas F. Madden's The New Concise History of the Crusades. Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/books/review/Ormsby-t.html?ref=world

Crusading at it's Height

I've been looking at many websites for information but I found that lots are just too much to take in at once; almost like there way to spread out over the place or too random or they just aren't clear enough. Anyway, I found this website that is very clear and gives some really helpful information. Also, lots of the links here are primary sources!
Hope it helps!
-Abby

Crusading at it's Height

Kingdom of Heaven - Sound Off

After being pushed to pay attention to close details while watching Kingdom of Heaven, I decided to re-watch important scenes with the volume set on mute. Basically, I realized that about 90% of the strength of the movie comes from the music/sound effects superimposed with the actual footage. Balian of Ibelin's entry into Jerusalem was very bland on mute; we watch him entering a city with lots of people in it. Cool. Watching it yet again with the sound on, Jerusalem appears to be an exotic, exciting new place for Balian and the streets come through as a cultural melting pot as they are filled with different faces, languages, foods, etc. Background music also plays an important role, setting a mood to scenes which would otherwise appear unimportant or uninteresting. I suggest you watch Kingdom of Heaven with the sound on (obviously) but don't forget to mute some scenes to appreciate the importance of sound in Kingdom of Heaven and any other movie!

Assassins

I was playing Assassins Creed earlier today and got to thinking about the effect hashshashins had during the time of the crusades and how they played into the scene. The hashshashin movement started around 1090 and continued until 1256. They fought under Hasan ibn Sabbah at the beginning with the belief that following him was the only way to receive salvation. They listening to him without question and ended up taking the lives of many nobles including Raymond II of Tripoli, Conrad de Montferrat, and Prince Edward. Sometime they even fought along with the Crusaders but only because they had similar enemies.
There's not much information I could find about how they specifically were involved... but I'd really love to find more information on this!!!
- Abby

The Fourth Lateran Council

I wanted to know more about the Fourth Lateran Council so I looked at a few articles on http://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/lateran_council_fourth.jsp. The Fourth Lateran Council was convened in Rome by Pope Innocent III in 1215. It was summoned for the purpose of creating a list of canons to dictating the Pope's policies regarding the Church. These canons included minimum requirements for remaining a Christian, various disciplinary protocols, and arrangements for another crusade. The council caused the majority of soldiers still engaged in the Albigensian crusade to migrate east to support the fifth crusade. Simon of Montfort, controlling the Christian forces of the Albigensian Crusade, resorted to hiring mercenaries to conquer and control Toulouse.

"Crusading" Without the Title

Lately on the news I've seen reports of bible verse references being incribed on the sides of the gun sights being used by U.S. Marines in Iraq. In the reports Marine Corps spokespersons continued to deny any pervious knowledge to the references, but what I witnessed when watching several reports was that certain Marines found comfort in the inscriptions and were glad they were there. In the report on ABC News' website a Major in the Marine Corps even backs up the placement of the inscriptions, using the fact that 'In God We Trust' is on the back of our currency. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/secret-bible-verses-guns-marines-concerned/story?id=9602030

Besides the fact that references from a religious text are being placed onto items that are being used to kill thousands of people, and the interesting questions that raises, it seems that religion is being used in similar ways as it was during the Crusades. The only difference seems to come with the change in thought of current times versus the time of the Crusades, and the political correctness and the strive for levels of racial and religious tolerance in today's society. The Marine Corps can't back up the weapons manufacturer itself, but many people involved openly express their support, even ranking officers. It's interesting that even after a thousand years we still seem to love the same, old arguments, even over the ones that are actually at hand.

A Culinary Revolution

As a cook and lover of food I began to wonder what foods were available for crusaders to eat. As it turns out prior to the crusades much of the food eaten in Europe was bland and was not varied. When the Crusaders met with the eastern world they were exposed to a new variety of food and spices. In Jerusalem many different foods were available from fresh fruits and nuts to chilled wine and juices. With the introduction of these new and expensive foods many franks began to eat extravagantly spiced meals to show off their wealth. The meager tables of Europe benefited greatly from their exposure to the extravagant tables of the Levant.

And what is food without drink. As it turns out the depictions of drunken feasts in Europe were more then just celebrations. There was very little clean water in Europe and drinking contaminated water was a health hazard. By drinking beer or other forms of alcohol one can eliminate the risk posed by unclean water as the alcohol kills any bacteria in the water. The drunken revelry was often a heath necessity not a celebratory measure.

The Varangian Guard

As I read the section in Madden about the Fourth Crusade, I saw that a group known as the Varangian Guard were mentioned several times. I thought it was an elite Byzantine unit but it turns out that they were actually Anglo-Saxon mercenaries. Apparently, following the Norman conquest of England, there was a substantial emigration of Saxons and some former Housecarls found employment in the Emperor's bodyguard, the Varangian Guard. The descendants of these English immigrants comprised the Guard encountered by the Crusaders in 1204.
As a unit, the Varangian Guard dated back to the mid-tenth century, when Constantine Porphyrogenitus recruited Christianized Russians (Scandinavian migrants, mostly) to act as marines. Their ferocity eventually earned them a position as imperial guards. At the battle of Manzikert, the Guard was virtually wiped out, defending the Emperor to the last man. This probably allowed for the Saxons to acquire positions within the rebuilt unit.
Unlike the provincial Byzantine forces, the Varangians apparently put up a good fight during the Crusader assaults on Constantinople, using their two-handed battle-axes to devastating effect. Here's an interesting link about the Saxons' role in the Guard: http://www.deremilitari.org/resources/articles/pappas1.htm

Greek Fire

While reading Geoffrey of Villehardouin's account about the 4th Crusade and the siege of Constantinople, I saw that there was a brief reference to "Greek Fire," an innovation used by the Byzantines. I decided to look up a bit of the history behind the development of the weapon. The exact date of its invention by the Byzantines is up for some debate, but it was definitely instrumental in their defense against the incoming Arab nations beginning in 672 C.E. So by the time of the 4th Crusade it was no longer a new weapon, having been used for many centuries previously. In fact, it appears that the use of "Greek fire" might have been discontinued by the Byzantines by the time of the 4th Crusade. Perhaps if the Byzantines had had the means to employ it, the siege of Constantinople would have turned out differently...

The actual contents of this "Greek fire" are not known for sure; the Byzantines kept the formula secret, and it appears that they were successful in that regard. Contemporary experts suspect that the ingredients combined to create "Greek fire" included petroleum and resins. The Byzantines not only created the mixture, but developed a pretty effective apparatus that would shoot the liquid fire onto other ships, through the use of pressure and a pump. I guess you could think of the entire weapon being, in a sense, like a flamethrower...

One of the defining characteristics about the "Greek fire" which made it so legendary (and devastating) was that it couldn't be put out with water, so it was a pretty effective weapon. The Byzantines used it for centuries to defend and expand their empire. Unfortunately for the residents of Constantinople, they either couldn't use it during the siege of 1203 by the 4th Crusaders, or it was ineffective in defending the city, for the city eventually fell to the crusaders.

Thoughts on Runciman

In preparation for the recent in-class debate, I was reading Steven Runciman's famous "The Summing-Up," from his "A History of the Crusades, vol. 3." Granted, I have not read his entire book; however, I was quite surprised by the quality (or lack thereof) of his chapter.
Throughout these ten pages of text, Runciman makes unsupported claims, doubles back on his arguments, and, reveals an extreme bias that feels more like blind accusation than scholarly hypothesis.

One example of this is Runciman's flat statement on the link between the Crusades and the beginning of the Renaissance. He argues that the Crusades had virtually nothing to do with Europe's emergence from the "Dark Ages," and consequent transformation to the period we now entitle "rebirth." However, one of the tenants of the Renaissance period was a push back towards classical learning, facilitated by access to ancient texts taken from the Byzantine Empire and the Middle East (a result of the Crusades). In addition, as Runciman himself points out later in his paragraph, the Crusades did facilitate and open trade between Europe and the Levant, another element in the development of the Renaissance.

Another example is Runciman's analysis of the Muslim world. He argues that the Crusades, by providing a distraction, drastically weakened Muslim presence in the in the Middle East. It is important to note, however, that the Muslim world was divided by both ethnic and religious sects. Turks, Abbasids, and Fatimids were all Muslim and enemies; they had been fighting wars before the Crusaders entered the picture, and they continued to fight when the Crusaders left. The Ottoman Empire, whose principal religion was Islam, lasted another half dozen centuries until the beginning of the twentieth century. Moreover, even with Crusader presence in the Middle East, Muslim influence still remained both strong and powerful.

One last example to offer: on pp. 398-399, Runciman writes: "The Italian Renaissance is a matter of pride for mankind. But it would have been better could it have been achieved without the ruin of eastern Christendom." However, his very next sentence is: "Byzantine culture survived the shock of the Fourth Crusade. In the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries Byzantine art and thought flowered in splendid profusion." How is it possible that eastern Christianity both was ruined and flourished at the same time?

Overall, I was very disappointed with Runciman, although it made my debate preparation a bit easier.
~C. Erba

Albigensian Crusade

I was doing some research for an essay topic and came across the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229). Although many people believed crusades to be a call to arms against Muslims, this was not always the case. Christians often took up the sword against other Christians and non-Muslims as an attempt to get rid of heretics and those who threatened the power of the church. In 1208, Innocent III set out a campaign against the Albigenisian region and called it a crusade (figures, right?). It actually seems to me like the crusades did start out to deliever Jerusalem and their Christian brothers from the 'non-Christians', but the more people started getting comfortable with the idea, the more they started throwing around the word crusade as an excuse to do their will freely. Anyway... I won't get started on that!
So Innocent set out against this region. They believed the beliefs of these people to be 'heretical' to those of Christians. They believed that Jesus was never a man, but a spirit, although they did accept him as the son of God. They thought the Catholic church corrupt and full of sin. Their religion believed that the church and the pope himself were working for the devil.
When Raymond became the Count of Toulouse and refused to take put down the Albigensians, Innocent III had him excommunicated and eventually, when Raymond found out the Pope's army was coming after him, he begged forgiveness and joined the crusade against his own people.
The crusade ended in 1220 when the Peace of Paris Treaty was signed.
Within a century, Albigensianism ceased to exist.
I find this certain crusade extremely interesting!!!

Google Timelines

I was poking around the internet as a young adult is apt to do, and I discovered that the creative geniuses at Google have come up with another cool search engine. With this one you can search a key word (I used crusades, go figure) and then it will search the web for articles or pages that mention the keyword and a date. The timeline is also very adaptable and you can search specific years or look over a specific time period. I always love timelines to help get my dates in order and see what events could have affected each other and which ones are chronologically separated. So enjoy this new feature and I'm sure this will come in handy in other subjects besides the Crusades.

http://www.google.com/search?q=crusades&hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&sa=X&tbo=p&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&tbs=tl:1,tl_num:100,tll:1200,tlh:1209&ei=-zJ-S9CFL4W1tgeU1MzEDw&oi=timeline_histogram_main&ct=timeline-histogram&cd=1&ved=0CLwDEMkBKAE

(Disclaimer: I might be the only one who does not know about this and as my girlfriend has informed me it has been around for a while, but I just found it so it seems exciting to me)

Crusader 155mm Self Propelled Howitzer

I found cool article about Howitzer when I searched for Crusader. So I decided to do some research about this Crusader 155mm Self Propelled Howitzer.
The Crusader self-propelled howitzer was a result of the Crusader program launched by U.S. Army to make a replacement for the Paladin. The Crusader was planned to be fielded in 2009, but the program was terminated by the Department of the Defense due to its low efficiency for its cost. Even though the Crusader achieved firing rate of 10.4 rounds per minute in live firing trials in 2000,(which was a lot of improvement from Paladin's maximum firing rate 8 rounds per minute and sustained rate of fire of 1 round per 3 minutes) it had low mobility and precision. The Crusader can be found in Cannon Park at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

Source - Paladin
- Crusader

Age of Empires II: The Saladin Campagin

http://pc.ign.com/articles/070/070754p1.html

Does anybody remember that old computer game, Age of Empires II? It's a game that consists of selecting a civilization to play with, building a city, and (basically) destroying all other civilizations. I sure know I spent a lot of time playing it. Until recently, however, I had never tested its historical accuracy.

The link is to an information page about the Saladin campaign of Age of Empires II. As you begin campaign mode, you are thrown back into the times of the third crusade, when the Muslim world is in a state of confusion, run by weak leaders. You take control of Saladin and his armies and slowly unite Muslim armies in order to fight off Christians in your homeland. There are two levels I distinctly remember: the first level, where Saladin marches to Cairo to overthrow a weak vizier and break Cairo's alliance with the Frankish people; and another level, where the pirates of Reynald are ruthlessly attacking Muslim caravans and Saladin and his troops must put an end to this growing problem. Several other historically accurate levels exist, such as the Muslim victory at Hattin. However, we also find some fairly inaccurate material in this campaign, such as Richard the Lionheart's attack on Jerusalem, which never fully carried out.

Overall, this game is worth a try for anybody remotely interested in the Middle Ages and has proven to be one of the most fascinating games of its time. While some inaccuracy exists on the topic of the crusades, the engaging gameplay experience will most likely help you overlook those minor details.

The Battle of the Horns of Hattin

I was curious about the Battle of the Horns of Hattin, so I found an article detailing the engagement at the following site: http://historymedren.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya&zTi=1&sdn=historymedren&cdn=education&tm=16&f=10&tt=14&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.intranet.ca/~magicworks/knights/hattin.html. Saladin brought 12,000 knights and an army carrying provisions to Tiberius. The Christian army amassed for the battle consisted of 20,000 foot soldiers and 1,000 knights. The Christian army set out for Tiberius early the day before the battle without enough water to sustain their ranks the next day. By nightfall the Christian army was weary and dehydrated. The only water source nearby was a stream well guarded by Muslim warriors; any Cristian who attempted to drink for the stream was captured and beheaded. The Christian army led a charge the morning of July fourth to which Saladin allowed the advance of the enemy army into his ranks, surrounded the Christians, and slaughtered them. Any soldiers that were captured were sold off as slaves. All Hospitalers and Templars were beheaded except for the Templar Grand master Gerard de Ridefort. The barons were held as hostages and eventually ransomed. King Guy of Jerusalem, who had spent the duration of the battle hiding in a tent at the center of his army, was put under Saladin's protection, and the prince of Antioch, Reynald, after insulting the Muslim prophet Muhammad, was executed. King Guy was released from prison the next year.

The Children's Crusade.

I learned about Children’s Crusade through the first assignment. While reading the article about the Crusade, Children’s Crusade caught my eye. After reading the article, I tried to search for information from the books. Children’s Crusade, however, was not mentioned. I have decided to learn more about the Children’s Crusade and found this article: The Children’s Crusade of 1212.

It describes how the crusade began, where the children have traveled, and the dangers they have faced. Wikipedia article, however, disagrees with this article in few aspects. Children’s Crusade actually consisted of wandering poors rather than children and Wikipedia explains it is due to mistranslation.

- Wikipedia article

Popularity vs. Accuracy in Movies

After the class when watching the trailer for the Nicholas Cage movie trailer Season of the Witch, I was interested in two things:

1. Even though it seems that the movie is based on total inaccuracy, as are a lot of historical movies lately, I think everyone can agree that the point of the movie is not to be polite to the history books. It's a movie, thus it's entertainment, and if it's eccentric and entertaining it gets more money. I did wonder that if there were any recent movies that were fair to history, or if it took a trip further back in time to find ones that were. I bet myself that I wouldn't find one on a list that was made after 1990 on a legitimate looking list for historically accurate medieval movies... http://www.drury.edu/multinl/story.cfm?ID=5947&NLID=229. I wasn't surprised by this (minus the fact that there was one movie on the list from 1994), but I was surprised to find that people during class acted as if a movie coming out today was holding to historical myth over accuracy.

2. The reasons behind witchcraft being blamed for the black plague. The cultural beliefs of the time seemed to fit right into a myth blaming women for a mass epidemic. I found this interesting... http://www.elizabethan-era.org.uk/elizabethan-witchcraft-and-witches.htm

Medieval Sourcebook

I was trying to find credible sources online that could help out with the new debate assignment, essays, and everything basically. I came across this source, Medieval Sourcebook, which I think turned out to be pretty cool. That link will take you to a page that has basically, a table of contents. If you click on the link you'd like to get more information, you're taken to that page and all it's goodies. At the way bottom are the sources so you can check those out as well. Pretty awesome?

Abby P.

Crusades Songs and Troubadours

After reading The Song of Roland, I was interested in the kind of music that was popular during the time of the Crusades. As it turns out, the crusades were actually seen as a catalyst for music in Europe, partially because it increased contact with Islamic culture and music which influenced European artists, but mostly because of the rise of the troubadours. Before the crusades, the most common form of music was church-related, either being Gregorian Chant, a Sequentia or other similar forms. About the time of the Crusades, however, individual musicians began to rise. Many journeyed with the crusaders and wrote of their adventures, while more remained behind either in the service or a lord or as travelers. With the rise of chivalry, tales of honor, love and courage became very popular.

This website lists some details on the more famous of the troubadours, and even has some samples of their work.

-Peter C.

A couple recent mentions of "crusades" in the news

The above title naturally omits news stories about the chap "crusading" to save a pub, things of that sort. I'm referring to mentions such as that in Stafford Williamson's American Chronicle. The relevant passage appears below, since it's rather far down the page:

They´ve Gone Too Far - AND They "Broke" the Constitution

Where they went was to Iraq and Afghanistan, but in this case, it isn´t a who, it´s a what. It´s a WHAT?? Okay, that may be sloppy linguistic construction but the problem here is worth mentioning because it is the kind of arrogance that could spark a regional conflict into a global war that lasts a millennium. Pardon me, I mean, another millennium, because this one has already been going on since the Crusades, indeed, it IS the Crusades being resurrected by the same kind of intolerant religious fanatics who started the Crusades in the first place.

No, in case you didn´t pay attention in history class, I am NOT talking about the "Infidels" who captured the ancient biblical lands, I mean the Christians who were outraged by the fact that they had been relieved of control of the "holy lands" despite the generally peaceful and tolerant rule provided by Moslems then and now. That may not ring as a popular sentiment with some people, and I am sorry they have come to that conclusion because of a few hundred fanatics on the "other side" (which is to say, Moslems) who "hijacked" their religion for political purposes. But this is an action that could inflame Muslim sentiment around the world, and it should have been prevented by rules already in place that prohibit religious propaganda on government goods.

My concern here is not with the modern political content, as the article goes on to discuss the recent flap over that arms manufacturer labeling military weapons (not my business, given the general purpose of this blog), but with the casual (and untested) assumptions that a) medieval Muslim society was homogeneous, and b) Muslim rule in general was benevolent. Regarding point A, there was no single "Muslim society" in the 11th-13th centuries, something of which the Latin West was well aware, and of which the Egyptians, Arabs, and Turks were very aware. John France has done some excellent work regarding the constant infighting and warfare that plagued crusades-era Muslim society, just as Latin Christian society was afflicted with constant fighting. Regarding point B, the various sultanates, emirates, and other principalities did have a generally better track record in dealing with minorities than did the Latin West, but that has to be heavily contextualized and qualified, depending on time and place. Not to get into the business of making a numbers game of massacre, but it's worth remembering that Baybars' slaughter of Christians at Antioch and the Mongols' destruction of Baghdad made the capture of Jerusalem in 1099 rather pale in comparison. So, there's plenty of blame and atrocity to go around...

On the other hand, here's a letter to the editor which goes a bit too far in the other direction, particularly with this line:

I accept the fact that there were those Crusaders who sacked cities and treated people unjustly. However, these people were in the minority and were condemned or excommunicated by religious leaders.

Ummmm....no, not really. They weren't in the minority, and they weren't excommunicated. War in general was a nasty business, regardless of who fought it, and the "rules of war," while they did exist in various fashions, were too fragmented and uneven to apply in all circumstances. The negotiations between Richard and Saladin, and Richard's massacre of the prisoners of Acre, are both worth studying as examples of how "international" modes of diplomatic discourse and martial codes functioned in the 12th century.