L
Larry1700
Guest
I’m looking for a good, truthful, DVD about the Crusades. Any recommendations?
- Status
D
dmar198
Guest
This DVD by EWTN is really good: ewtnreligiouscatalogue.com/Home+Page/MULTIMEDIA/EWTN+HOME+VIDEO/All/THE+CRUSADES.axd
It is a documentary consisting of four 30-minute episodes, and it is based around interviews with historians (who talk about the history of the crusades) and theologians (who explain how the crusades relate to the Church’s just war doctrine). It is faithful to the teaching of the Church and presents a sympathetic understanding of why the Crusades happened. It also is filmed with the cooperation of a historical reenactment troup, who dress up like the Crusaders and imitate the battles. Those parts could use some improvement, in my opinion. I don’t think their reenactment group was very big, and so none of the battle imagery is very epic, in my opinion.
U
unstoppable_II
Guest
A few years ago, I watched EWTN’s broadcast of Military Orders and the Crusades by James and Joanna Bogle. I thought it was fairly good, although it seemed to concentrate on the Military Orders, hence the title. I don’t know if EWTN still sells them, but I think you can view parts on YouTube and decide whether to go for it. You might peruse the EWTN website for DVDs on the subject since there might be others.
I also checked out of my public library Islam: Empire of Faith put out by PBS. Although it was not about the Crusades per se, I didn’t think it was very good at all on what it did cover, the PBS sponsorship notwithstanding. It seemed too “politically correct” and is definitely one to pass over.
J
JohnR77
Guest
Yes. That was excellent
Talked about it on EWTN Live
youtube.com/watch?v=hcX9t5Du-aE
My notes from EWTN.
Before the first crusade the Muslims had captured over two thirds of Christendom, the Middle East, North Africa, Spain Portugal, etc. A pilgrimage from Germany to the Holy Land totaled 7,000 peaceful pilgrims who came to pray were our Lord Jesus lived, died, and rose from the dead. They were attacked by the Muslims and only 2,000 returned. And so, the First Crusade began as a defensive battle.
The Crusaders were only allowed to capture land that was taken by force by invading Muslims. They were not allowed to go into new territory, unlike Muslims who evangelized new lands by the sword.
You can click on ‘watch the video’ – Dymanic Battle Map
548 offensive Battles by Muslims. Crusaders had about 16 battles that were defensive battles trying to free Christians.
www.politicalislam.com/blog/jihad-vs-crusades/
.
U
unstoppable_II
Guest
Thx. Some of my notes based on my readings:
There were 463 years between Mohammed’s death in 632 AD and the calling of a Crusade to free lands that had been Christian before the Muslim invaders arrived; but to hear what passes for common “knowledge” [from self-hating Christians at that!], the whole affair was solely the fault of power-hungry popes, greedy soldiers of fortune, and Christians who were persecuting harmless, pious Muslims minding their own business. Muslims are only too happy to help Christians perpetuate this mea maxima culpa attitude.
Stenhouse[1] lists only some of the events that took place in those 463 years, among them,
633 – Mesopotamia falls to Muslim invasion, followed by the entire Persian Empire
635 – Damascus falls
638 – Jerusalem capitulates
643 – Alexandria falls, ending 1,000 years of Hellenic civilization
648-49 – Cyprus falls
653 – Rhodes falls
673 – Constantinople attacked
698 – All of North Africa lost
711 – Spain invaded
717 – Muslims attack Constantinople again; repelled by Emperor Leo the Isaurian
721 – Saragossa falls, Muslims sights on southern France
720 – Narbonne falls.
732 – Bordeaux was stormed and its churches burnt down
732 – Charles Martel and his Frankish army defeat Muslims, turning back the Muslim tide
732 – Attacks on France continued
734 – Avignon captured by an Muslim force
743 – Lyons sacked
759 – Arabs driven out of Narbonne.
800 – Muslims incursions into Italy begin, Islands of Ponza and Ischia plundered
813 – Civitavecchia, the port of Rome sacked
826 – Crete falls to Muslim forces
827 – Muslim forces begin to attack Sicily.
837 – Naples repels a Muslim attack
838 – Marseilles taken
840 – Bari falls
842 – Messina captured and Strait of Messina controlled
846 – Muslims squadrons arrived at Ostia, at the Tiber’s mouth, sack Rome and St. Peter’s Basilica
846 – Taranto in Apulia conquered by Muslim forces
849 – Papal forces repel Muslim fleet at the mouth of the Tiber
853 – 871 – Italian coast from Bari down to Reggio Calabria controlled, Muslims terrorize Southern Italy.
859 – Muslims take control of all Messina
870 – Malta captured by the Muslims.
870 – Bari recaptured from the Muslims by Emperor Louis II
872 – Emperor Louis II defeats a Saracen fleet off Capua
872 – Muslim forces devastate Calabria
878 – Syracuse falls after a nine-month siege
879 – Pope John VIII forced to pay tribute of 25,000 mancuses (AUD$625,000) annually to the Muslims
880 – Byzantine Commanders gain victory over Saracen forces at Naples
881 – Muslims capture fortress near Anzio, plunder surrounding countryside with impunity for forty [40] years.
887 – Muslim armies take Hysela and Amasia, in Asia Minor.
889 – Toulon captured
902 – Muslim fleets sacked and destroyed Demetrias in Thessaly, Central Greece,
904 – Thessalonica falls to Muslim forces
915 – After three months of blockade, Christian forces victorious against Saracens holed-up in their fortresses north of Naples
921 – English pilgrims to Rome crushed to death under rocks rolled down on them by Saracens in the passes of the Alps
934 – Genoa attacked by Muslim forces
935 – Genoa taken
972 – Saracens finally driven from Faxineto
976 – Caliphs of Egypt send fresh Muslim expeditions into southern Italy. Initially the German Emperor Otho II , who had set up his headquarters in Rome, successfully defeated these Saracen forces
977 – Sergius, Archbishop of Damascus, expelled from his See by Muslims
982 – Emperor Otho’s forces ambushed and his army defeated
1003 – Muslims from Spain sack Antibes
1003-09 – Marauding bands of Saracens plunder Italian coast from Pisa to Rome from bases on Sardinia
1005 – Muslims from Spain sack Pisa
1009 – Caliph of Egypt orders destruction of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, the Tomb of Jesus
1010 – Saracens seize Cosenza in southern Italy.
1015 – All Sardinia falls
1016 – Muslims from Spain again sack Pisa
1017 – Fleets of Pisa and Genoa sail for Sardinia, find Saracens crucifying Christians, drive Saracen leader out. Saracens try to re-take Sardinia until 1050
1020 – Muslims from Spain sack Narbonne
1095 – The First Crusade.
While the pope has apologized for the Crusades, Muslims have never so much as acknowledged any responsibility.
For additional reading, see “The Real History of the Crusades” by Medieval historian Thomas F. Madden catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0055.html
Notes:
[1] “The Crusades In Context” by Dr Paul Stenhouse answering-islam.org.uk/Green/crusades-stenhouse.htm
[2] “JIHAD BEGOT THE CRUSADES”
Andrew Bostom americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4467 [Two parts]
[3] “The Legacy of Jihad in Historical Palestine”
Andrew Bostom
americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4999 [Two parts]
D
dmar198
Guest
When you say the pope has apologized for the crusades, could you post the quote you are referring to? Because I don’t think that’s true. In fact, it is my understanding that Pope John Paul II celebrated the 300 year anniversary of the Crusade of Vienna in 1983.
J
JohnR77
Guest
Thanks for the dates.
Here are some new links
“The Real History of the Crusades” by Medieval historian Thomas F. Madden
web.archive.org/web/20130927081819/http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0055.html
crisismagazine.com/2011/the-real-history-of-the-crusades
[1] “The Crusades In Context” by Dr Paul Stenhouse
web.archive.org/web/20070814220855/http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Green/crusades-stenhouse.htm
Jihad begot the Crusades (1)
web.archive.org/web/20060806000928/http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4467
Jihad begot the Crusades (2)
web.archive.org/web/20060807181854/http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4470
The Legacy of Jihad in Historical Palestine (Part I)
web.archive.org/web/20061027183333/http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4999
web.archive.org/web/20060329175322/http://americanthinker.com//articles.php?article_id=5003&search=
Crash Course on the Crusades
Code:
[crisismagazine.com/2012/crash-course-on-the-crusades](http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/crash-course-on-the-crusades)catholic.com/magazine/articles/how-the-800-martyrs-of-otranto-saved-rome
.
U
unstoppable_II
Guest
Thx. I’ve read some of them; the rest I will check out.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
I agree concerning the PBS show.
O
oldcatholicguy
Guest
If memory serves he apologized for the immoral stuff that took place during the various Crusades, not for the various Crusades themselves.
L
Larry1700
Guest
You all have provided great information! Thank you very much!
unstoppable II, the list you provided is great info! I’m thinking about putting it on a 3 X 5 card to keep in my pocket to have available for quick reference to show folks how much the Muslims did, which essentially forced a military response from Christians. I am curious, though; why did you put the English dying from rocks rolled on them in red font? (I don’t have any problem with it at all; I’m just curious.)
unstoppable II, the list you provided is great info! I’m thinking about putting it on a 3 X 5 card to keep in my pocket to have available for quick reference to show folks how much the Muslims did, which essentially forced a military response from Christians. I am curious, though; why did you put the English dying from rocks rolled on them in red font? (I don’t have any problem with it at all; I’m just curious.)
L
Larry1700
Guest
I just finished reading Thomas Madden’s “The Real History of the Crusades” at catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0055.html
There is one paragraph that disturbed me, so I would appreciate a little guidance from you folks that are obviously more educated about this subject than I am. After showing that only the First Crusade was successful, while the other four were not, Madden says:
“Yet, even while these close shaves were taking place, something else was brewing in Europe — something unprecedented in human history. The Renaissance, born from a strange mixture of Roman values, medieval piety, and a unique respect for commerce and entrepreneurialism, had led to other movements like humanism, the Scientific Revolution, and the Age of Exploration. Even while fighting for its life, Europe was preparing to expand on a global scale. The Protestant Reformation, which rejected the papacy and the doctrine of indulgence, made Crusades unthinkable for many Europeans, thus leaving the fighting to the Catholics. In 1571, a Holy League, which was itself a Crusade, defeated the Ottoman fleet at Lepanto. Yet military victories like that remained rare. The Muslim threat was neutralized economically. As Europe grew in wealth and power, the once awesome and sophisticated Turks began to seem backward and pathetic — no longer worth a Crusade. The “Sick Man of Europe” limped along until the 20th century, when he finally expired, leaving behind the present mess of the modern Middle East.”
On it’s face, it sounds as though the Catholic crusades, pursued (for the most part) at the bidding of the popes, as a form of penitence and for a Godly purpose, failed. What stemmed the tide of Islam was the Europe’s increased wealth caused by “humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Age of Exploration,” and perhaps the Protestant Reformation.
Comments, please?
There is one paragraph that disturbed me, so I would appreciate a little guidance from you folks that are obviously more educated about this subject than I am. After showing that only the First Crusade was successful, while the other four were not, Madden says:
“Yet, even while these close shaves were taking place, something else was brewing in Europe — something unprecedented in human history. The Renaissance, born from a strange mixture of Roman values, medieval piety, and a unique respect for commerce and entrepreneurialism, had led to other movements like humanism, the Scientific Revolution, and the Age of Exploration. Even while fighting for its life, Europe was preparing to expand on a global scale. The Protestant Reformation, which rejected the papacy and the doctrine of indulgence, made Crusades unthinkable for many Europeans, thus leaving the fighting to the Catholics. In 1571, a Holy League, which was itself a Crusade, defeated the Ottoman fleet at Lepanto. Yet military victories like that remained rare. The Muslim threat was neutralized economically. As Europe grew in wealth and power, the once awesome and sophisticated Turks began to seem backward and pathetic — no longer worth a Crusade. The “Sick Man of Europe” limped along until the 20th century, when he finally expired, leaving behind the present mess of the modern Middle East.”
On it’s face, it sounds as though the Catholic crusades, pursued (for the most part) at the bidding of the popes, as a form of penitence and for a Godly purpose, failed. What stemmed the tide of Islam was the Europe’s increased wealth caused by “humanism, the Scientific Revolution and the Age of Exploration,” and perhaps the Protestant Reformation.
Comments, please?
D
dmar198
Guest
Quick note: in that article, Madden says: “in five centuries of crusading, it was only the First Crusade that significantly rolled back the military progress of Islam.” The phrase “the other four” in your summary should refer to four centuries, not four other crusades. There were many crusades, not just five. Anyway, moving on…
First, I think the Crusades can only be said to have “failed” if you look at them from a secular perspective, because by that perspective, they were merely an attempt at conquering territory, and the Muslims ended up with it anyway.
But I don’t think that’s a Catholic outlook. Catholics held the territory of the Holy Land for the better part of 200 years, and during that time, pilgrimages were made, souls were saved, and non-Catholics were brought to salvation. I think that is a success. Moreover, the crusades in Spain managed to reconquer the whole Spanish peninsula in an even more permanent way. So I don’t think it’s correct to say the Crusades failed, not from a Catholic perspective.
Second, the scientific revolution and the age of exploration were born from a Catholic heart. I don’t think it’s fair to think of this in terms of “the crusades failed, and they were pious, but these other nonpious things succeeded.” No, the age of exploration was bound up with a desire to expand salvation to new lands through missionaries, and the scientific revolution was bound to the Catholic universities that developed people both spiritually and intellectually. The Catholic Church’s innovations are what made Europe the dominant power in the world, and those things had their own kind of piety.
Even the humanism Madden talks about was the “Christian humanism” that is baked into Scholastic thinking: how can man be fulfilled? Only through salvation in Christ.
- Status