For this debate, I think it's important that the first crusade be the main focus. Most people interested in the period, even or especially those with links to the catholic church will agree that the later crusades (especially the forth) were led by people with evil or misled intentions.

It's also important to establish the circumstances.




This was how Europe and the Middle East looked just before the first crusade was called. This was shortly after the Christian Byzantine Empire (technically the Roman Empire) was forced out of the levant by the Seljuk Turks. Before the conquest the population was made up almost entirely of Orthodox Christians and Jews. Muslims and Jews were not well treated under Byzantine rule, and their treatment by the new Muslim rulers is debated by historians today.

What should be noted is the extent of Arab occupation, and the numerous attempts to capture Constantinople and occupy Eastern Europe. The leaders of the European States would likely to have been very worried at this expansion, which may have been one of the major motives to join the crusade against Arab occupied lands, to weaken them.


Discuss, chaps.

__________________


"What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist..."- The last words of General John Sedgewick, killed by a sniper in the American civil war

Whatever the open reason eg. "retaking the Holy land" even back then people knew the real purpose.
Europe was still trying to stand up from the Dark Ages and Black Death, as a whole it was fairly poor and disorganized.
Without the Romans to rally up things and keep all the tribes in check, people were just all fighting each other.

Very shortly before the Crusades, you started seeing actual national unification such as the Holy Roman Empire (Germany)
This then generated at least some stability in the region compared to a thousand tribes constantly fighting and splitting land.
Now instead of the Rhine fighting the Gelderlanders because they just wanted a slightly bigger kingdom,
we today have the Germans, French, English etc.

Preparing for Crusades meant arming and mobilizing thousands which also cycles money through the economy.
And then the return profit from the Crusades was immense. Not only did it bring back riches and knowledge they had never seen,
but then it exposed them to cultures and trade routes that otherwise never would have been thought of.
You could easily draw the link between the Crusades and the 'Age of Exploration' by this exposure to new riches spurring on the search for more.

__________________
"The good warrior knows when to fight, and when to withdraw."
- Sun Tzu

I'll smith anything up to 93 smithing if you have the material for me to make it with
My Story, Horrors of Myron County
RV's Drawing archive topic, post yours or comment on others

It's easy to look back on history and see the benefits and drawbacks of various decisions.

But I ask you this: If you were in a position to start another Crusade, and receive proportionally equal benefits to our culture, economy, etc:

Would you?

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde

I don't quite understand the question, are you asking if I would start a crusade in the same circumstances? If so that's the whole point of this debate

__________________


"What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist..."- The last words of General John Sedgewick, killed by a sniper in the American civil war

My point it's easy to say, "Yeah, they were justifiable because of all these benefits," when we are so removed and not personally affected by the situation. If it were to happen in this day in age with the same level of drawbacks and benefits, I believe people would be far more hesitant to support it.

It kinda reminds me of a lot of psychology experiments. Sure, we learned a lot from ones done in the past, but with today's standards we'll never be able to replicate them. And that's a good thing; think of the negative impact they have on the subjects.

__________________
Natemania! The Nateman sensation that's sweeping the nation!


Thanks for the sig, Viruz.
"Ambition is the last refuge of failure." ~Oscar Wilde

I don't know that this is a fair question. Even the first crusades were not exactly 'planned' as such. The whole thing arose in the form it did much by accident.

Pope Urban only wanted basically to get the Orthodox church on side by getting the European kings to gather some mercenaries to help the Byzantine Emperor.

I wouldn't change a thing.

__________________

All of the Crusades, including the first one, as it has already been mentioned; were thinly veiled by religion but were ultimately large treasure hunts.

Were there some soldiers and maybe commanders on board for the religious aspect? Sure. Were the top tier guys really just in it for noble cause? I doubt it.

__________________

Awesome Squall sprite courtesy of Goten! Check here if you'd like a runescape or game-themed sprite!

It's pretty obvious that religion wasn't the only factor, but that doesn't mean the crusades were neccesarily unjustifiable.

__________________


"What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist..."- The last words of General John Sedgewick, killed by a sniper in the American civil war

Theft, rape, and murder aren't justifiable.

__________________

Awesome Squall sprite courtesy of Goten! Check here if you'd like a runescape or game-themed sprite!

Look at the map in the OP. Forces of the Islamic Caliphate were trying to expand into Eastern and Western Europe. To many the crusades may have seemed like a chance to slow down this expansion and protect their homelands.

__________________


"What? Men dodging this way for single bullets? What will you do when they open fire along the whole line? I am ashamed of you. They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist..."- The last words of General John Sedgewick, killed by a sniper in the American civil war