Understanding the Crusades

[childinthefaith]

I think you’re reacting a little defensively. I know of no actual historians in “modern America” who seriously consider The Crusades the way you describe it. I know plenty of ignorant facebook warriors who talk like that but they clearly don’t know what they’re talking about. The Crusades as a… I guess call it a movement (?) had different goals from differing points of view.

I’m not being defensive. Def not a Facebook warrior. I honestly have no FB account.

My data is taken from Steve Weidenkompf(sp?) “The Glory of the Crusades,” as well as audio on formed.org. I consider both reliable. If I’m incorrect on that point then I’ve been misled.

 

[Rhubarb]

Forgive me, I think perhaps I wasn’t unclear.

I mean that the popular opinion of the Crusades as you described doesn’t represent any serious scholarship on the topic. There are anti-Christians who talk about the Crusades like it’s some sort of evidence that Christianity is bad - but they’re wrong. It’s sort of… populist history that is bunk.

But it’s also bunk to paint the Crusades as a pure endeavor. It was an instance of geo-politics in a time in the world where religion and politics were intermingled. It’s complicated.