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.