JULIE BIRCHILL'S BOOK ON "CANCEL CULTURE" IS CANCELLED BY PUBLISHER...

Here is a list of every major history of the First Crusade, literally every single one of them points to the central role of the Church, let me know which one's you have read or which one's dispute the role of the Chruch. I have read Jhon, Hotaling and Riley-Smith. Happy to take any questions you may have. I'll wait....


Absolution of sins is a powerful motivator for many, as is the chance of loot for the italian normans.. The bottom line is the church was fixed on one goal and it wasn't to kill muslims, but heal the schism and unify the faith under the Roman, rather than Orthodox Banner.... The many Jihads prior to the crusades you seem to want to ignore, but the evidence is clear, that europe learned lessons from the arabs and imitation was clear both in the eastward expansion and counter drives into Spain.

P.S.
The nobles financed themselves, though the church provided monies as loans against land. The Greeks probably provided much of the funding for the actually armed expedition, until after Antioch fell and the crusaders failed to return it.
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
Absolution of sins is a powerful motivator for many, as is the chance of loot for the italian normans.. The bottom line is the church was fixed on one goal and it wasn't to kill muslims, but heal the schism and unify the faith under the Roman, rather than Orthodox Banner.... The many Jihads prior to the crusades you seem to want to ignore, but the evidence is clear, that europe learned lessons from the arabs and imitation was clear both in the eastward expansion and counter drives into Spain.

P.S.
The nobles financed themselves, though the church provided monies as loans against land. The Greeks probably provided much of the funding, until after Antioch fell and the crusaders fail to return it.

Some of what you say is accurate, I am not disputing it, the topic of dispute is who initiated and directed the First Crusade initially, as I have proven, it was Pope Urban II. The fact such an established well known matter of historical record is even being debated on here is quite shocking, but does show to some extent the lengths some posters will go to in an attempt to whitewash the role of Christianity vis a vis Islam historically. All in all, quite a bit of pent up hate on here....
 
Some of what you say is accurate, I am not disputing it, the topic of dispute is who initiated and directed the First Crusade initially, as I have proven, it was Pope Urban II. The fact such an established well known matter of historical record is even being debated on here is quite shocking, but does show to some extent the lengths some posters will go to in an attempt to whitewash the role of Christianity vis a vis Islam historically. All in all, quite a bit of pent up hate on here....
I don't usually source Wikipedia, but its quick and dirty:-
The earliest initiative for the First Crusade began in 1095 when the Byzantine Emperor, Alexios I Komnenos, requested military support from the Council of Piacenza in the Byzantine Empire's conflict with the Seljuk-led Turks.

The Emperor wanted a professional mercenary army and that was what the Church wanted. But, the crusade caught the public imagination and as I've constantly tried to hammer into your skull, is the west had been under attack itself only a century or more before and it was inevitable.......
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Some of what you say is accurate, I am not disputing it, the topic of dispute is who initiated and directed the First Crusade initially, as I have proven, it was Pope Urban II. The fact such an established well known matter of historical record is even being debated on here is quite shocking, but does show to some extent the lengths some posters will go to in an attempt to whitewash the role of Christianity vis a vis Islam historically. All in all, quite a bit of pent up hate on here....

Only in your fevered imagination. The excesses of the Crusades are well documented, as is the fact that Crusaders and at least one military order the Crusades spawned were capable of being a formidable menace to everyone who encountered them.

I've yet to see anyone denying Crusader atrocities unless it's to wind you up - in which case I can assure you that the Sack of Jerusalem never happened.
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
I don't usually source Wikipedia, but its quick and dirty:-
The earliest initiative for the First Crusade began in 1095 when the Byzantine Emperor, Alexios I Komnenos, requested military support from the Council of Piacenza in the Byzantine Empire's conflict with the Seljuk-led Turks.

The Emperor wanted a professional mercenary army and that was what the Church wanted. But, the crusade caught the public imagination and as I've constantly tried to hammer into your skull, is the west had been under attack itself only a century or more before and it was inevitable.......

It's nice when you get so offensive so quickly. Stay classy.

The issue here is you use Wikipedia and I used....er....the world's leading expert on the matter and have sources.

Maybe if you did not rely on "quick and dirty" and had some diligence it may add weight to your argument. Irrespective of the fact that there had been wars before the Crusades, the point of the debate (which you make a habit of missing) was the Church's role.

Now maybe a time to have a think about basing your life and knowledge around Wiki and trying to actually read a book, but going by your past posts, I do not hold out much hope....
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
Only in your fevered imagination. The excesses of the Crusades are well documented, as is the fact that Crusaders and at least one military order the Crusades spawned were capable of being a formidable menace to everyone who encountered them.

I've yet to see anyone denying Crusader atrocities unless it's to wind you up - in which case I can assure you that the Sack of Jerusalem never happened.

It's still talks. It still provides no evidence. It still claims it guest lectures.

Sorry chap, just waiting for your next round of "My missus does some work on de -radicalisation and her mates told her Muzzies were bad". Please post something like that again, it was so authoritative last time round....
 
It's nice when you get so offensive so quickly. Stay classy.

The issue here is you use Wikipedia and I used....er....the world's leading expert on the matter and have sources.

Maybe if you did not rely on "quick and dirty" and had some diligence it may add weight to your argument. Irrespective of the fact that there had been wars before the Crusades, the point of the debate (which you make a habit of missing) was the Church's role.

Now maybe a time to have a think about basing your life and knowledge around Wiki and trying to actually read a book, but going by your past posts, I do not hold out much hope....
Actually I've read all of Runciman, which is laced with an anti-papist tone and numerous works on the crusades and I know the subject chapter and verse.... I gave you a wiki cut, because you suggested in an earlier posting, that I should use wiki ?

On modern crusade literature. It always tries to pull punches for Islam and go out of the way to describe crusader excesses, which were many. I should note, the crusaders first introduction to islam, was the Seljuk massacres of the peoples crusade at dracon and the sense, that the Greeks were treating the crusaders as mercenary vassals to be used.

Obviously, a year or two of heavy danger, starvation and bloodshed the crusades had to steal a line from the bible, had a period in the wilderness and were now hungry enough to cross the jordan river.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
It's still talks. It still provides no evidence. It still claims it guest lectures.

Sorry chap, just waiting for your next round of "My missus does some work on de -radicalisation and her mates told her Muzzies were bad". Please post something like that again, it was so authoritative last time round....

A strange post from one who got tearful abut playing the man and not the ball.

I think we've conclusively proved that elements of this country's Islamic population represent a threat and that you've no credible argument to the contrary.

I suppose you realise that one doesn't have to be an academic to lecture at a University and that folk like me are invited in to make up the deficit in real world experience, professional excellence and the practical application of expertise which is created if institutions are forced to rely on people like you?

I shall ask my wife if any of her colleagues have met you. I'm sure they'd remember a swivel-eyed loon with a fixation on the Crusades, difficulties with making eye-contact and a rather touching conviction that cut n' pasting a reading list on the First Crusade whilst eating a toffee apple is somehow a triumph of scholarship.
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
Actually I've read all of Runciman, which is laced with an anti-papist tone and numerous works on the crusades and I know the subject chapter and verse.... I gave you a wiki cut, because you suggested in an earlier posting, that I should use wiki ?

On modern crusade literature. It always tries to pull punches for Islam and go out of the way to describe crusader excesses, which were many. I should note, the crusaders first introduction to islam, was the Seljuk massacres of the peoples crusade at dracon and the sense, that the Greeks were treating the crusaders as mercenary vassals to be used.

Obviously, a year or two of heavy danger, starvation and bloodshed the crusades had to steal a line from the bible, had a period in the wilderness and were now hungry enough to cross the jordan river.


Again, you seem to now be questioning the authority of modern historians as they seem to sympathetic to Islam? As they disagree with your world view? Fine, I can accept that. We really need to end this now as I have given you expert opinion and you refuse to actually a accept it. Not really much I can do here.......
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
A strange post from one who got tearful abut playing the man and not the ball.

I think we've conclusively proved that elements of this country's Islamic population represent a threat and that you've no credible argument to the contrary.

I suppose you realise that one doesn't have to be an academic to lecture at a University and that folk like me are invited in to make up the deficit in real world experience, professional excellence and the practical application of expertise which is created if institutions are forced to rely on people like you?

I shall ask my wife if any of her colleagues have met you. I'm sure they'd remember a swivel-eyed loon with a fixation on the Crusades, difficulties with making eye-contact and a rather touching conviction that cut n' pasting a reading list on the First Crusade whilst eating a toffee apple is somehow a triumph of scholarship.

Is your missus hot?
 
Again, you seem to now be questioning the authority of modern historians as they seem to sympathetic to Islam? As they disagree with your world view? Fine, I can accept that. We really need to end this now as I have given you expert opinion and you refuse to actually a accept it. Not really much I can do here.......
I haven't actually seen a fact from you at all...... For instance, I stated Dracon, which was the village described by Runciman where the turks had laid an ambush in a narrow defile and always interested me. But the histories have written the battle up as Civetot, which was where the crusaders retreated to, after the turks had panicked the christians into flight.

My world view is the facts are the facts and crusaders killed loads of innocent people, but so did the other side and the modern desire to cast the west as perennially bad is a distortion of history.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer

HCL

LE
", Pope Urban II initiated what is known today as the First Crusade". Can you understand that sentence?

You have asked me for sources supporting my argument, I gave you the world's leading expert on the subject.

You cannot post once source to support your argument that I am wrong. Not only are you are hypocrite of the highest order, but as anyone with basic comprehension can see, we are done here. Of course expecting you to be magnanimous in defeat was expecting too much I guess.

Off you f**k now.....

Intiated does not mean organised nor does it mean financed. Even a Grade 4/D English GCSE student would know what initiated meant in that context.

Misconstruing meaning is another low level troll tactic. You're a troll and probably not an indigenous troll as some of the howlers in your syntax indicate.

Fake. Troll. And an idiot too.
You wouldn't, Titch.

I owe you an apology. I posted you were trolling as @MissingOTC. I'm wrong. I apologise. You at least have a decent measure of wit and intelligence unlike this troll.

Edit to remove excess contrition
 

MissingOTC

War Hero
I haven't actually seen a fact from you at all...... For instance, I stated Dracon, which was the village described by Runciman where the turks had laid an ambush in a narrow defile and always interested me. But the histories have written the battle up as Civetot, which was where the crusaders retreated to, after the turks had panicked the christians into flight.

My world view is the facts are the facts and crusaders killed loads of innocent people, but so did the other side and the modern desire to cast the west as perennially bad is a distortion of history.

You seem to be having an argument with yourself here, this has nothing to do with the debate at all, guess this was inevitable when you could not back up any argument.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
You seem to be having an argument with yourself here, this has nothing to do with the debate at all, guess this was inevitable when you could not back up any argument.

You seem very keen on backing up arguments. Is there any danger of you taking your own advice?
 
Folks, the poo-poo thread is that-a-way :
------------------------------------------------------------------------>​
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
Folks, the poo-poo thread is that-a-way :
------------------------------------------------------------------------>​

Forget the poo poo thread. As the OP predicted, the ideal home for this one is the hole.
 
Top