c. 2005 Religion News Service
(UNDATED) The Crusades lasted close to 200 years and constituted one of the pivotal events in world history. To most Americans, they might as well be a fable like “The Lord of the Rings” _ just not nearly as well known.
Muslims pinched off the last pitiful vestige of Crusader occupation in 1291, two centuries before Columbus sailed the ocean blue. The Crusades mean nothing to American history, whatever they may mean to the American future.
But the Crusades are discussed in Middle East cafes as if they happened last week, says historian/novelist Tariq Ali, one of many scholars and historians who describe events in The History Channel documentary “The Crusades: Crescent & the Cross” (9 p.m. EST Sunday, Nov. 6 and Monday, Nov. 7).
“Crusades” is a two-part, four-hour program. Part 1 ends in July 1099 with the Catholic capture of Jerusalem, only three years after some 60,000 French, German and Italian Crusaders set out to capture the cradle of Christendom. But the first Crusade affected events for the next two centuries.
It began in duplicity, yet always had a streak of idealism. Each side believed ardently that it was serving God and that anything it did to the enemy worked to his glory. In 1095, Pope Urban II devised a “Wag the Dog” scheme to consolidate long-dissipated church power, unite Europe’s scores of tiny warring kingdoms and send the most bellicose knights on a mission that could use their reflexive fury.
Urban’s immediate excuse for the Crusades was a plea for help from Alexius, emperor of Constantinople, who feared that his weakening kingdom might fall to the ever-strengthening Muslims, who had occupied Jerusalem for 400 years. But Alexius had asked for only a battalion of elite knights, not four divisions of infantry and cavalry. Jerusalem made holy war possible. Jesus and Mohammed had died there.
Urban was a charismatic leader who used his peculiar powers to promulgate one of the most bracing recruiting programs ever uttered. As pope, he guaranteed salvation to all participants. They could not be damned, no matter what dreadful things they would do to infidels. And they were encouraged to enrich themselves as much as possible.
Urban defined an infidel as any non-Catholic, which caused the Crusades to start before anyone left town. Surprised European Jews were slaughtered by the thousands and their properties looted.
The concentration of “Crusades” on the first five years emphasizes the Europeans’ only real success in 200 years, the capture of Jerusalem. In the process they slaughtered some 30,000 inhabitants _ men, women, children, Muslim, Jew and Christian. That event, among many other atrocities, gave the word “Crusade” the same implication to Muslims then and now that the word “Holocaust” now has.
Fate played an elaborate joke on the Crusaders. The first Crusade seemed to be God’s gift to the Catholics. Along with some skilled leaders, they got some incredibly lucky breaks, even though only some 13,000 survived to take Jerusalem. European luck began to run out, but gradually over an often cruel occupation. Not until 1187 did Muslims recapture Jerusalem, inspiring the last two ill-fated Crusades.
Despite the rallying power of Crusader atrocities, Muslims responded slowly. They were not the monolithic entity Catholics perceived. They were replete with diverse communities, and fell into two major divisions that exist today, Sunnis and Shiites.
Despite several great leaders, Muslims only fitfully coalesced into effective fighting forces.
Ultimately, the physical environment was their ally. The Crusaders were always strangers in a strange land.
“Crusades” is an extravaganza for The History Channel. Re-enactors do some elaborate, spectacular stuff. A few actors play historical or historically representative characters who relate their observations to other characters _ and us _ in addition to a fine set of historical experts. Tariq Ali casually implies links between 1099 and 2003.
The first Crusade, successful though it was and full of colorful heroes and villains, did not have the stars of later expeditions, including Eleanor of Aquitaine, her little boy Richard the Lionheart, Nural-Din and Saladin. The few who saw Ridley Scott’s impressive production “Kingdom of Heaven” will see in “Crusades” the broader context of his story and several of his characters.
Scott’s “Kingdom” flopped in the U.S. _ it did quite well in Europe and elsewhere _ a fact that underscores the irrelevance of the Crusades to most Yanks. Even the director of “Blade Runner,” “Alien” and “Gladiator” could not sell one of the most colorful and crucial events in human history.
“Crusades” offers a vivid and exciting summary of an event still keenly relevant to a large part of the world. This documentary makes playing catch-up fascinating.
(Ted Mahar is a staff writer for The Oregonian of Portland, Ore.)
KRE/PH END MAHAR
Editors: To obtain photos of the “Crusades” film, go to the RNS Web site at https://religionnews.com. On the lower right, click on “photos,” then search by subject or slug. If searching by subject, designate “exact phrase” for best results.
