17,394
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 60:
Line 60: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Aftermath
== Aftermath ==
== Aftermath ==
Thus, though Jerusalem was held for nearly a century and other strongholds in the Near East would remain in Christian possession much longer, the crusades in the Holy Land ultimately failed to establish permanent Christian kingdoms. It should be noted that, in explaining why the crusaders ultimately failed, contemporary churchmen pointed out the sins of the crusaders. Islamic expansion into Europe, while temporarily stalled, would renew and remain a threat for centuries with the disintegration of the [[Byzantine Empire]] and culminate with the campaigns of [[Suleiman the Magnificent]] in the sixteenth century.
Thus, though Jerusalem was held for nearly a century and other strongholds in the Near East would remain in Christian possession much longer, the crusades in the Holy Land ultimately failed to establish permanent Christian kingdoms. It should be noted that, in explaining why the crusaders ultimately failed, contemporary churchmen pointed out the sins of the crusaders. Islamic expansion into Europe, while temporarily stalled, would renew and remain a threat for centuries with the disintegration of the [[Byzantine Empire]] and culminate with the campaigns of [[Suleiman the Magnificent]] in the sixteenth century.
==Historiography and Memory==
===Legend and literature in the West===
Legend and literature surrounded the Crusades with an aura of romance and grandeur, of chivalry and courage.<ref> See Dana Carleton Munro, [http://www.historians.org/info/AHA_history/dcmunro.htm "War and History,' ''American Historical Review'' 32:2 (January 1927): 219–31 online] </ref>The myth is only remotely related to reality. The countless tales of the gallant knights of the Cross glitter in hyperbole. Many stories are true about the crusaders' feats of valor. However the crusaders occupied the Holy Land only temporarily. In their major mission, the crusaders lost in the very long run.
The historical memory of the crusades has been sharply divided. The Catholic tradition in Europe looked upon them favorably, but the Protestant historians were more negative. [[Martin Luther]] once suggested that the Turks were God's instrument for punishing Christians. In recent decades a sense of western guilt is apparent, as in the 1995 BBC television series, presented by Terry Jones, which portrayed the crusades as a long, misguided war of intolerance, ignorance and barbarism against a peaceful and sophisticated Muslim world.<ref>Donald E. Queller and Thomas F. Madden. ''The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople'' (2nd ed. 1999), p. 1, Most historians have a negative view of the reliability of the BBC series. </ref>
Knobler (2006) examines the use of the crusades as a national symbol from the 19th century to the 1910s in France, Spain, the Ottoman Empire, Ethiopia, Britain, Russia, and Bulgaria. Though the Enlightenment and its secular ideological successors held the crusades as an example of medieval barbarity. Enlightenment thinkers like historian-philosophers [[Voltaire]] and [[David Hume]] denounced the crusades, as did the great historian of Byzantium [[Edward Gibbon]], who wrote:
:"The principle of the crusades was a savage fanaticism; and the most important effects were analogous to the cause…. The belief of the Catholics was corrupted by new legends…. The active spirit of the Latins preyed on the vitals of their reason and religion…. The lives and labours of millions, which were buried in the East, would have been more profitably employed in the improvement of their native country."<ref> Edward Gibbon, ''The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,'' (1776), [http://books.google.com/books?id=Hy8OAAAAQAAJ&pg=PT249&lpg=PT249&dq=%22principle+of+the+crusades+was+a+savage+fanaticism%22&source=web&ots=PGcJRsXv2k&sig=gH4PAb31uRoQu2u54z7h_hzGp8U&hl=en ch 61 p. 1086]</ref>
In the 19th century, however, romantic writers like novelist Sir [[Walter Scott]] created heroic images of the crusaders. The romantics and conservative adherents of the European ancien régimes appropriated crusading imagery for their own 19th century political goals, downplaying religion to fit within a modern, secular context and presenting crusades as a counterpoint to liberal ideas of nationalism.
Knobler (2006) explores three primary themes: memory of the crusades as it relates to debates over the generation and use of national symbols; the crusader as a romantic hero; and the Muslim recollection of the crusades as a shameful blot on the past of Christian nations. The crusades appealed to many Europeans because they reflected a morally unambiguous time, sparked romanticized images of warfare in a time of imperialist expansion, and provided heroic templates for modern "crusading" imperialist heroes.<ref> Adam Knobler, "Holy Wars, Empires, and the Portability of the Past: the Modern Uses of Medieval Crusades." ''Comparative Studies in Society and History'' 2006 48(2): 293-325. Issn: 0010-4175 Fulltext: [[Cambridge Journals]]; see also Elizabeth Siberry, ''The New Crusaders: Images of the Crusades in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries'' (2000)</ref>
===The Muslim world===
Muslim historiography does not cover the crusades with the same intensity as the West. One modern reason could be that Turks were primarily responsible for the defeat of the crusaders, and Arab historians (who have written much of modern Islamic history) may have underplayed this, due to the Turks role in establishing the Ottoman Empire - a period that suppressed Arab nationalism for seven centuries into the era of World War I.<ref> Hillenbrand, ''The Crusades, Islamic Perspectives'' p. 5</ref>
The great Muslim hero was a [[Kurdistan|Kurd]], Saladin (1138-93). Having defeated the crusaders in 1187, and become sovereign and founder of the Ayyubid dynasty in Egypt and Syria, Salah al-Din (Saladin) has been for a century the object of an intense glorification in the Arab world. Farah Antun's play ''Sultan Saladin and the Kingdom of Jerusalem'' (1914) illustrates how the historical figure of Saladin came to be presented as a prophet of Arab nationalism. Antun (1874-1922) was a Syrian Christian who presents Saladin as the champion of a just jihad against the Crusaders and as a faithful upholder of the virtues of wisdom, determination, and frankness, calling on the peoples of all Arab countries to unite against Western imperialists. The refusal of Antun's Saladin to become embroiled in quarrels within Europe had obvious echoes in World War I and caused the play to be censored by the British authorities in Egypt. In Palestine, the glorification also took the form of pilgrimages to Nabi Musa and became an occasion to celebrate the memory of the great hero of Muslim history. A recent myth proclaims him the initiator of Palestinian pilgrimages. The figure of the past has become the modern hero of Arab nationalism, giving hope to a society prey to war and dispersion. At the same time, however, the pilgrimage ritual highlights the limits of the hero: constantly appealed to and put to the test, he has begun to show signs of fragility.<ref> Emma Aubin-Boltanski, "Salah Al-din, un Heros a l'epreuve: Mythe et Pelerinage en Palestine," [Saladin, a Hero under Scrutiny: Myth and Pilgrimage in Palestine]. ''Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales'' [in French]] 2005 60(1): 91-107. Issn: 0395-2649</ref>
===Church Liturgy===
Linder (2001) examines 15th-century Church liturgy designed to generate support for the war effort against the Turks and to legitimize its aims. Two types of Contra Turcos Masses were used: masses converted to this function through the addition of appropriate three core prayers and complete dedicated masses. The most popular example of the first type was the triple prayer set originally established by Clement V as a Holy Land crusade liturgy and subsequently mobilized against the Turks. The second type is represented by nine different mass formularies that were introduced after the fall of Constantinople in 1453. Most surviving liturgies are of German or French provenance, indicating extensive use not only among the front-line populations but also in areas far removed from any threat. The liturgy displays an its intense crisis rhetoric. Its predominant stance of vulnerability and defensiveness entailed aggressive mobilization and the conceptualization of the Turk as the actual, specific manifestation of the generic infidel, the competing religious Other; and the remarkable continuity - in form and in content - that linked this liturgy with its parent liturgies (mainly those of the campaigns against the pagans and the Holy Land Crusades) further accentuated these traits. The communicative function and value of this liturgy is highlighted by the concentration of the direct, unmediated communicative elements in that part of the mass that was the most accessible to the laity.<ref> Amnon Linder, "The War Liturgy Against the Turks in the Late Middle Ages." ''Historia: Journal of the Historical Society of Israel'' . 2001 (8): 73-105. Issn: 0334-4843; the text is in Hebrew. </ref>
==Basic further reading==
==Basic further reading==
* Andrea, Alfred J. ''Encyclopedia of the Crusades''. (2003).
* Andrea, Alfred J. ''Encyclopedia of the Crusades''. (2003).