I have been meaning to
revisit this topic for some time – considering this episode in European history
within the context of my views in general about this period. I have
found medieval Europe to offer the longest lasting example of a society whose
laws came closer to libertarian law than any other place or during under any
other (extended period of) time.
But what of the Crusades? Many years ago, I accepted the
mainstream view – Christians, for no good reason, decided to invade and
slaughter Muslims. Look hard enough at the history of this blog, and I
believe you will find one or two posts that take something like this position
for granted.
But over the last couple of years my thinking has evolved –
after all, there were Christians occupying this land before there were
Muslims…and the Muslims didn’t really convert the inhabitants in a peaceful manner. Of
course, there were others before the Christians…and so the history goes.
The First Crusade was called at the end of the eleventh
century. This was at least four centuries after Muslims conquered
much of the Middle East and North Africa, and even more than three centuries
after the conquest of Spain.
What took so long? Well, keep in mind that after the
fall of Rome, those living in Europe had their hands full with the basic task
of creating something approaching a civilized world. They also had
their hands full with internal consolidation – often in ways that were
less-than-peaceful, with Charlemagne offering a good example. They
also had their hands full with the Vikings – who would regularly sail even into
Paris and other inland cities and set up shop for plunder.
It was in the tenth century when Europe really started taking
some meaningful and sustainable form. This story is well-told by
Paul Collins in his book The
Birth of the West: Rome, Germany, France, and the Creation of Europe in the
Tenth Century. I have covered this book in several posts, but
most relevant here is this post, exploring the Europe that was born
in the tenth century. Let’s just say that few of the stereotypes are
valid.
So…back to the Crusades…I found an interesting article, Christians in the Middle East – Past, Present and Future.
Christians from the Middle East are frequently asked, ‘When did
you or your family become Christians?’ It’s hard for them not to be irritated
by the question, and some of them want to answer ‘On the day of Pentecost!’
Yes. They were the first Christians.
The author of this paper, Colin Chapman, continues the history –
including the imperialism of the West, the creation of the State of Israel,
and the Christian Zionism of America that
supports this state.
Many Christians today
hold a sense of shame regarding the Crusades: how could a succession of Popes
encourage such dastardly deeds? Yet Arab Christians have a wholly
different view of the Crusades:
It is important, however, for us to listen to what many Middle
Eastern Christians say to us on this subject. When I’ve taught about the
Crusades for several years in introductory courses on Islam at the Near East
School of Theology in Beirut, the message that I heard from students goes like
this: ‘Do you western Christians really need to have such a guilty conscience
over the Crusades?’
Is it just that the students are ignorant of history? No,
not really. The students continue:
‘Surely they were simply the delayed reaction of Christendom –
delayed by four centuries – to the Islamic conquest. Western Christians today
may want to apologise for the Crusades; but are Muslim Arabs ever going to
apologise for the initial Arab Islamic conquests? Were the Crusades not an
entirely natural and inevitable reaction on the part of Christendom to the loss
of territories which had been ruled by Christians for centuries?’
Which really should be recognized if one wants to speak
half-knowledgeably about the Crusades.
While looking more into this issue of conquests, Christendom,
and the invasions that continue to shape today’s Middle East, North Africa and
Central Asia, I came across an interesting bit of history. The Forgotten Armenian Genocide of 1019 AD, by
Raymond Ibrahim. Now, I am familiar with the Armenian Genocide of
1915 – and I have touched on this before. But
1019? This is news to me. Ibrahim writes of the recent
April 24 commemoration day of the 1915 genocide:
Ironically, most people, including most Armenians, are unaware
that the first genocide of Christian Armenians at the hands of Muslim Turks did
not occur in the twentieth century; rather it began in 1019 -- exactly one
thousand years ago this year -- when Turks first began to pour into and
transform a then much larger Armenia into what it is today, the eastern portion
of modern-day Turkey.
He describes brutal acts, continuing for decades; hundreds of
cartloads of plunder, mostly taken from churches; the siege and destruction of
Ani – then the capital of Armenia and known as the City of 1001 Churches; the
worst atrocities against those most visibly Christian: priests and monks.
Such is an idea of what Muslim Turks did to Christian Armenians
-- not during the Armenian Genocide of a century ago but exactly one thousand
years ago, starting in 1019, when the Turkic invasion and subsequent
colonization of Armenia began.
Conclusion
The Crusades didn’t
happen in a vacuum.
