Talk:Crusades/Archive 2

message: There is a confused text on this article which I attempted to edit but it has been reverted to the original again for some reason.  The text said "Peace and Truce of God movements, forbidding violence against certain people at certain times of the year."  However, the way this is stated seems that the peace of God and the Truce of God movements forbidded violence against certain people at certain times, which is incorrect.  The peace of God movement forbided violence against certain people 24/7 every day of the year, while the truce of God forbided violence all together on certain religious holdays and the like.  The latter, was against ALL forms of aggressive actions, while the former was a effort to prevent violence ALWAYS against certain people, such as unarmed monks, peasants, and etc.  In fact, the stipulations get interesting and complicted - defining weapons along the lines of length of the weapon and also weather the unarmed person had another person armed as a body guard with him (under this condition, attacking was more acceptable).  It is obvious that the sentenice is not only misleading, but completly incorrect as it seems to stipulate that only on certain days only certain people were to be protect.  This is false, as I showed earlier.  If sources are necessary to make this change, I can find them sometime after my test (history of late middle ages) or if someone with authority to change it could, then great.  Best regards.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 149.169.89.160 (talk • contribs) .
:Yeah I reverted it, it's a complicated subject and the purpose of mentioning P&ToG in this section/article is not to explain what it is, the Peace and Truce of God article does that, but to emphasise there were other methods before the Crusades, rather than going off on a tangent about the technicalities of P&ToG in the Crusades article, we allready have an article that explains it in detail. --Stbalbach 21:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok removed the description. If youd like to help review the Peace and Truce of God article that would be great thanks. Stbalbach 16:37, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confused text 

message: This currently runs as follows: Before the Comneni, particularly under the threat of Seljuks, Byzantine Emperor Michael VII made a request to Pope Gregory VII for help. The Pope sent several letters, however in 1005 caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah had sacked the pilgrimage hospice built in AD 600. In 1056 the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was closed and more than 300 Christians were expelled from Jerusalem. Later, after the two Seljuk invasions to Georgia (in 1064 and 1068) the country began to render a tribute until 1099, when Jerusalem was reconquered by Crusaders. In 1063, Pope Alexander II had given papal blessing to Iberian Christians in their wars against the Muslims, granting both a papal standard (the vexillum sancti Petri) and an indulgence to those who were killed in battle. A plea for help from the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I Comnenus in opposing Muslim attacks thus fell on ready ears.
There are some problems with this that I notice even without my books:
* Michael VII was a member of the Comnenus/Ducas clan and came after Isaac Comnenus. So "Before the Comneni" is problematic (it was before they had a stable grip on the Empire, though)
* All this was long after 1005 (and, according to Wikipedia, 1009 was the year al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah started serious persecution of Christians). The Church of the Holy Sepulchre was destroyed then, but had been rebuild in 1048 by Constantine IX. So the time line seems to be rather convoluted...
Someone with more knowledge should straighten this out (I can do this, but need some time for research, which means it would not happen before next week at the earliest). --Stephan Schulz 13:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to fix it, but I don't know what is going on with that paragraph. It just repeats information found later in the same section. This whole article needs to be rewritten completely, it gets so much crap added to it, or just simple vandalism, I don't think anyone can follow it anymore. Adam Bishop 15:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's much better now, thanks! --Stephan Schulz 21:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Background, second paragraph 

message: From the original article:
:Despite the ultimate defeat in the Middle East, the Crusaders slowed down the military expansion of Islam, helped regaining the Iberian Peninsula and bought Europe some precious time before it faced the next invading force of Islam - the Ottoman Empire.
Aside from a bad tense (should be "regain"), I find the third claim a bit fishy.  Now, I'm all about alternative history theories and counterfactuals- I think they fit in an encylopedia just fine- but let's not forget that the Fourth Crusade burned down Constantinople and greatly weakened the Byzantines, the people holding the Ottomans back.  While perhaps the Crusades slowed down Islam as a whole (and I left that in), it's a much murkier issue with regards to the Ottomans.  Secondly, from what I recall, the Ottoman Empire isn't quite "the next invading force of Islam-" while everybody loved to style themselves the true succeding caliph at the time, I don't recall the Ottomans as being particularly devout toward Islam.  They certainly cheerfully let lots of Christian communities continue to exist in Serbia, Greece, and Hungary when they eventually did move in. SnowFire 17:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slowing down the Ottomans. 

message: This is a helluvah difficult way to go about correcting a spelling error on Wikipedia, of all places, but considering the article is locked, I have no choice.
Under the "Crusade legacy" section, "Europe" subsection, final line:  the correct spelling is "permanently," not "permenantly."
I'm sure we'd all appreciate a revision by someone who has the keys to this page.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.233.155.64 (talk • contribs) .
:Done. Thanks for pointing it out. But for me, the page appears neither protected nor semi-protected at the moment. If you have a problem, any administrator can protect or unprotect pages. --Stephan Schulz 00:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is semi-protected, so anonymous users can't edit it. I know it sucks, but otherwise it gets craploads of vandalism. Adam Bishop 23:07, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: I'm just going to alter the section on the Albigensian crusade if that's Ok with everyone. Eg It only became a French war of conquest towards the later stages, the area was not then part of France, and the mention of heresy could be seen as POV. Also there is an increasing tendency to refer to the Crusades (there were two separate ones) as the Cathar Wars. Ernie G C P Spiggot 17:26, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Albigensian Crusade

message: The French Wiki has an excellent summary list of Crusading leaders at Liste des principaux chefs croisés. I think it should be translated into English. It's a long list, but I will begin to create it soon if nobody else does. Srnec 15:33, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Les principaux chefs

message: There is no way that Crusaders were 'excommunicated' for slaughtering Jews. You can check it on Encarta.com search: Crusades and Jews. Jews were persecuted not because a few Crusaders were anti-Semitic but because they were told to do so. Again you can check it on Encarta.com search: Crusades and Jews. You'll also find it there that what the Roman Catholic Church and other Christians did sounds very similar to what Hitler id as well. Someone needs to be able to edit the page "Crusades" and the section on the Jews on that page. Unsigned by Iliketoedit 01:06, 29 May 2006 
:Thanks. Adam Bishop 01:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CRUSADERS WERE NOT EXCOMMUNICATED 

message: The url listed currently redirects to the website's home page. The correct URL is . Pcu123456789 20:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed--I didn't realize it was only semiprotected/. Pcu123456789 20:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  first external source new url