I was recently on John Fisher 2.0’s channel to debunk a common myth about the crusades. That is, when the Crusaders entered the city of Jerusalem they butchered every Muslim in the city. This myth is thrown around and is accepted uncritically.
I basically showed that Fulcher of Chartres is known for exaggerating numbers. You can watch the video to find out all of the examples I give but I’ll give one here. He puts the crusader army at 600,000. That’s impossible. With an army that large the crusaders could have taken the entire Middle East with ease; instead they barely made it to Jerusalem. Obviously this and other numerical exaggerations show that Fulcher of Chartres exaggerates numbers and the 10,000 killed on the Temple Mount is probably between 1,000 and 2,000. This slaughter happened in the Dome of the Rock which has a prayer capacity of less than 2,000. Keep in mind that the crusaders had to be in there as well. Fulcher also talked about Muslims who were allowed to leave the city so they obviously weren’t all killed.
All that aside, I want to comment on something very disturbing in our culture. Western culture is ruled by people who have absolutely zero respect for our Christian heritage. Obviously people keep throwing around this Muslim massacre lie. When Ridley Scott made Kingdom of Heaven he shamelessly promoted every negative crusader stereotype and lie including this one. I quote the movie in my presentation.
Last year on May 29 I did a video called “The Turks are Lying about Sultan Mehmed II”. In 2012 Turkish cinema produced a film called Fetih 1453. It’s a movie about the Turkish conquest of Constantinople. They basically portray Mehmed II as a saint who is full of godly virtues when the guy was a demon to the core. I debunk a lot of the nonsense in that movie. In the comments a bunch of angry Turks and Muslims said that I was lying but they really didn’t give any examples when I challenged them.
I just want to contrast these two cultures. Western popular culture goes out of their way to lie and make the crusaders and Christians look bad. Turkish popular cultures goes out of their way to lie and make their cultural jihadist leader look like a noble virtuous man.
I think the first step to recovering Christian civilization is actually clearing up the lies of the past. Academia is rotten and won’t help us and I don’t know who will. We’ll just have to do it ourselves.
It’s pretty clear you have scant idea of how history is actually done. You don’t look at one exaggerated contemporaneous account and conclude the whole story is a myth. Fulcher of Chartres is not the only account from which the accepted estimate of 40,000 killed in 1099 is derived. It’s not even a particularly prominent one. Because of a tendency to exaggeration, he is actually rarely quoted at all in secondary estimates relative to the many other chroniclers, both Muslim and Christian, that you have completely and conveniently ignored here in your video and article. In the books I’ve read, he’s almost never taken at his word, in fact. The estimate of 40,000 is taken from the numerous other chroniclers you ignore, and usually takes into account the number of recorded survivors left from the 40-50,000 refugees who were recorded to have taken refuge in Jerusalem from the Crusader advance. You follow this up with a ridiculous argument about the official prayer capacity of the modern Dome of the Rock, ignoring the fact that this is a miniscule portion of the Temple Mount as a whole.
Academic accounts would actually be a great place to start for you. You dislike them because they are
both more educated and more objective than you are. You have a tendency to whitewash massacres committed by Christians, and ignore contemporaneous accounts in favor of massively inflated numbers put forth by chroniclers like Theophanes who lived over 100 years after the events they write about. In the case of the earlier Jewish and Persian massacre of Christians in Jerusalem, accepted figures are between 4,000 and 10,000, as it happens. My advice: replace your semi-literate ramblings about your “Christian heritage” and go about objectively tallying up accepted figures of people killed by Catholic imperial adventurism across the world, of which the sack of Jerusalem was one tiny example. End with the some 56 million indigenous people killed in the Americas by largely Catholic empires. And that’s if you’d like to be generous and ignore what came after. Christian-inspired imperialism has killed, by accepted estimates, more people than any other ideology in world history (Nazism, Stalinism, and Maoism are close seconds). This is not to denigrate Catholicism or any individual Catholics. It is a beautiful religion which, practiced right, deserves the respect of all people both in and out of academia. But there are historical facts that won’t disappear just because you’d like them to.
“It’s pretty clear you have scant idea of how history is actually done. You don’t look at one exaggerated contemporaneous account and conclude the whole story is a myth. Fulcher of Chartres is not the only account from which the accepted estimate of 40,000 killed in 1099 is derived.”
Can you give me a source that says 40,000? Raymond D’Aguilers, Peter Tudebode and the Gesta version don’t give numbers. The Damascus chronicle which is a later Muslim chronicle doesn’t give numbers.
“It’s not even a particularly prominent one. Because of a tendency to exaggeration, he is actually rarely quoted at all in secondary estimates relative to the many other chroniclers, both Muslim and Christian, that you have completely and conveniently ignored here in your video and article.”
You’ve just proved that you haven’t watched the video. I mention the Damascus chronicle in the video. John Fisher 2.0 specifically asks me why should we trust Fulcher and not other chroniclers.
“The estimate of 40,000 is taken from the numerous other chroniclers you ignore, and usually takes into account the number of recorded survivors left from the 40-50,000 refugees who were recorded to have taken refuge in Jerusalem from the Crusader advance.”
Again, give me a chronicler that says 40,000. I’ve never read Ibn Al Athir but he’s 100 years later.
“The estimate of 40,000 is taken from the numerous other chroniclers you ignore, and usually takes into account the number of recorded survivors left from the 40-50,000 refugees who were recorded to have taken refuge in Jerusalem from the Crusader advance. ”
Please cite primary sources giving me the number 40,000 in regards to refugees in Jerusalem.
“You follow this up with a ridiculous argument about the official prayer capacity of the modern Dome of the Rock, ignoring the fact that this is a miniscule portion of the Temple Mount as a whole.”
They mention the Temple of Solomon which in crusader literature always refers to the Dome of the Rock. That’s where the Templars get their name. The Knights of the Temple since they made the Dome of the Rock their headquarters.
“Academic accounts would actually be a great place to start for you. You dislike them because they are
both more educated and more objective than you are. ”
Academia is one of the most close-minded institution in the world. The only difference between North Korea and Academia is that we all know that North Korea is close minded. Academia pretends it is open minded but it isn’t. I’ve also noticed you haven’t quoted a single academic in this response despite fawning all over the institution.
I’ll quote one for you. Thomas Madden in The New Concise History of the Crusades: Updated Student Edition on page 34.
Madden writes:
“By the standards of the time, adhered to by both Christians and Muslims, the crusaders would have been justified in putting the entire population of Jerusalem to the sword. Despite later exaggerated reports, however, that is not what happened. It is true that many of the inhabitants, both Muslims and Jews were killed in the initial fray. Yet many were also allowed to purchase their freedom or were simply expelled from the city. Later stories of the streets of Jerusalem coursing with knee-high rivers of blood were never meant to be taken seriously. Medieval people knew such a thing to be an impossibility. Modern people, unfortunately often do not.”
“You have a tendency to whitewash massacres committed by Christians, and ignore contemporaneous accounts in favor of massively inflated numbers put forth by chroniclers like Theophanes who lived over 100 years after the events they write about. In the case of the earlier Jewish and Persian massacre of Christians in Jerusalem, accepted figures are between 4,000 and 10,000, as it happens. ”
You obviously haven’t watched the video. I quoted Antiochus Strategos as well who’s numbers add up to total approx 65,000. You say 4,000 – 10,000 is accepted? It’s accepted only by people who have never studied the issue or have an agenda. Again, academia is a joke and I don’t trust them unless they can prove themselves.
“My advice: replace your semi-literate ramblings about your “Christian heritage” and go about objectively tallying up accepted figures of people killed by Catholic imperial adventurism across the world, of which the sack of Jerusalem was one tiny example. End with the some 56 million indigenous people killed in the Americas by largely Catholic empires. ”
First of all, the colonial period was different than the crusades. The period from 1075 to 1300 was the age of Popes and the Church. The period from 1300 to 1789 was the age of greedy kings. The Church and the clergy often tried to protect the locals from conquistador persecution. Las Casas and Pope Paul III are two great examples. Also, while I’m not defending the actions of the monarchs, I’d ask some proof on the 56 million figure. I’d like to see a tally of primary sources, not just academic estimates since I believe Academia is a joke.
“And that’s if you’d like to be generous and ignore what came after. Christian-inspired imperialism has killed, by accepted estimates, more people than any other ideology in world history (Nazism, Stalinism, and Maoism are close seconds). ”
Back up this laughable statement with primary sources. “Christian-inspired” – I don’t even know what that means.
“This is not to denigrate Catholicism or any individual Catholics. It is a beautiful religion which, practiced right, deserves the respect of all people both in and out of academia. ”
Yawn…
“But there are historical facts that won’t disappear just because you’d like them to.”
Obviously but some modern academic inventing a number doesn’t make it a historical fact.
Do yourself a favour and do your own research. Think for yourself and don’t just go for what some academic has published. Use your mind critically.
Allan
Hey Allan,
I got your email, I am doing pretty well. Currently, I have my own blog where I am writing posts mostly in the areas of Islam and Roman Catholicism. I would be interested in hearing your responses to some of the work I did on Gelasius on transubstantiation (so far only Dave Armstrong has interacted with it)
https://solideogloriaapologetics.blogspot.com/