• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

History Nerd Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
"The defeat at Manzikert twenty-four years prior was merely the catalyst of Alexius' troubles as the ancient Roman Empire and Constantinople's invincible walls had been under assault by the forces of Islam ever since the Prophet's death 460 years earlier. Now, faced with the difficult task of expelling the Turks from Anatolia, whilst under attack from all sides, including by his erstwhile Norman co-religonists, Alexius dispatched a letter to the Bishop of Rome describing, among other things, events in the Holy Land and inquiring about the possibility of obtaining Western mercenaries for use against the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum occupying the Empire's former heartland...."

Was the First Crusade an act of imperialist Western aggression and genocide or a justifiable counter-attack against an implacable and warmongering foe? @jking948, @The Human Q-Tip, @gourimoko, @BimboColesHair

CrusadesKoH_zpsn75t5afl.jpg
 
If we're going to talk general history, can we please just discuss how Rasputin died?

Still vividly remember most of the story. Damn you Mr. Minor for saying that I'd never forget this story. You were fucking right.

"The bell rang, announcing the arrival of Dmitri and my other friends. I showed them into the dining room and they stood for a little while, silently examining the spot where Rasputin was to meet his end.

I took from the ebony cabinet a box containing the poison and laid it on the table. Dr. Lazovert put on rubber gloves and ground the cyanide of potassium crystals to powder. Then, lifting the top of each cake, be sprinkled the inside with a dose of poison which, according to him, was sufficient to kill several men instantly. There was an impressive silence. We all followed the doctor's movements with emotion. There remained the glasses into which cyanide was to be poured. It was decided to do this at the last moment so that the poison should not evaporate and lose its potency. We had to give the impression of having just finished supper - for I had warned Rasputin that when we bad guests we took our meals in the basement and that I sometimes stayed there alone to read or work while my friends went upstairs to smoke in my study.

So we disarranged the table, pushed the chairs back, and poured tea into the cups. It was agreed that when I went to fetch the starets, Dmitri, Purichkevich and Sukhotin would go upstairs and play the gramophone, choosing lively tunes. I wanted to keep Rasputin in a good humor and remove any distrust that might be lurking in his mind.

When everything was ready, I put on an overcoat and drew a fur cap over my ears, completely concealing my face. Doctor Lazovert, in a chauffeur's uniform, started up the engine and we got into the car which was waiting in the courtyard by the side entrance. On reaching Rasputin's house, I had to parley with the janitor before he agreed to let me in. In accordance with Rasputin's instructions, I went up the back staircase; I had to grope my way up in the dark, and only with the greate st difficulty found the starets' door. I rang the bell. "Who's that?" called a voice from inside.

I began to tremble.
"It's I, Gregory Efimovitch. I've come for you."


The above is an extract from the memoirs of the man who led the plot to kill Rasputin, Prince Felix Yusupov. Lost Splendor is available in its entirety online and you can read about his dealings with Rasputin as well as a lot of first-hand insights into the workings of the Czar's court and Imperial Russia in general. Linked below.

felixuniform_zpsaekemi87.jpg


http://www.alexanderpalace.org/lostsplendor/XXIII.html
 
So my point is that it makes a lot of sense to apply some serious skepticism to historical sources. Probably explains why I think Procopius likely made up a whole bunch of the shit he wrote in the Secret History.

You've got me there. I've read a lot about him and his Marshalls, but 100 book collection is damn impressive.

Procopius most certainly made up a bunch of shit for his Anecdota. The story about the specially trained flock of geese eating grains of barley out of Theodora's cunt is one that has to be considered dubious :chuckle:, if not impressive with regard to imagination (who wouldn't want to to see a show like that?). The one about Justinian walking around the Great Palace headless is a pretty big red flag.
 
Was the First Crusade an act of imperialist Western aggression and genocide or a justifiable counter-attack against an implacable and warmongering foe? @jking948, @The Human Q-Tip, @gourimoko, @BimboColesHair

Why not both?

I think the motivations of the Crusaders varied tremendously. The Byzantine Empire and whatever Christian allies it could get had just as much right to recover its lands as the Rashidun Caliphate (initially) and Seljuk Turks (preceding the Crusades) had to take them in the first place. So to that extent, the First Crusade was justifiable, and some of the Crusaders were motivated by a desire to protect Christians/Christianity from Muslim aggression that had led to the conquest of formerly Christian lands.

On the flip side, there's also no question that many Crusaders didn't give two shits about anything except wanting to get land, wealth, and power. And how the different Crusaders conducted themselves during the First Crusade varied pretty widely as well.


CrusadesKoH_zpsn75t5afl.jpg


Great movie. Played a bit loose with some of the characters, but it conveyed the overall events fairly well. Orlando Bloom just doesn't scream "leader of men" to me, though.
 
Last edited:
Why not both?

I think the motivations of the Crusaders varied tremendously. The Byzantine Empire and whatever Christian allies it could get had just as much right to recover its lands as the Rashidun Caliphate (initially) and Seljuk Turks (preceding the Crusades) had to take them in the first place. So to that extent, the First Crusade was justifiable, and some of the Crusaders were motivated by a desire to protect Christians/Christianity from Muslim aggression that had led to the conquest of formerly Christian lands.

On the flip side, there's also no question that many Crusaders didn't give two shits about anything except wanting to get land, wealth, and power. And how the different Crusaders conducted themselves during the First Crusade varied pretty widely as well.


CrusadesKoH_zpsn75t5afl.jpg


Great movie. Played a bit loose with some of the characters, but it conveyed the overall events fairly well. Orlando Bloom just doesn't scream "leader of men" to me, though.

I guess no one disagrees with your assessment. I think people like Esposito claiming the Crusades as the initial and defining interaction that shaped the relationship between Christian Europe and Islam confuse the issue.

Heraclius, the Goths in Spain and the Sassanids would disagree with his opinion. As would four of the five Great Patriarchates of the Christian world. Hell, the First Crusade wasn't even the first time Christian armies plunged deep into the Holy Land in the last 120 years prior to Alexius' letter. This guy earned the moniker "The Pale Death of the Saracens" for a reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_II_Phokas
 
Last edited:
I guess no one disagrees with your assessment. I think people like Esposito claiming the Crusades as the initial and defining interaction that shaped the relationship between Christian Europe and Islam confuse the issue.

Heraclius, the Goths in Spain and the Sassanids would disagree with his opinion. As would four of the five Great Patriarchates of the Christian world. Hell, the First Crusade wasn't even the first time Christian armies plunged deep into the Holy Land in the last 120 years prior to Alexius' letter. This guy earned the moniker "The Pale Death of the Saracens" for a reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_II_Phokas
I call 'Pale Death of the Saracens' for the name of my next thrash metal band.
 
I guess no one disagrees with your assessment. I think people like Esposito claiming the Crusades as the initial and defining interaction that shaped the relationship between Christian Europe and Islam confuse the issue.

Heraclius, the Goths in Spain and the Sassanids would disagree with his opinion. As would four of the five Great Patriarchates of the Christian world. Hell, the First Crusade wasn't even the first time Christian armies plunged deep into the Holy Land in the last 120 years prior to Alexius' letter. This guy earned the moniker "The Pale Death of the Saracens" for a reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_II_Phokas
Esposito and others mistakingly view relationships between cultures as fluid until they are defined, and once defined, the relationship is relatively fixed. Frankly, from my reading of the Crusades, the relationship between Christian Europe and Islam was extremely fluid. As the inner societies changed, and as their needs grew and differed, so did the nature of the relationship between the two cultures.
 
The major player in the birth of the Crusades that hasn't been mentioned is trade.

Muslims were generally traders from the Arabian peninsula, due to their expertise in navigating in the desert. As a few Islamic tribes become progressively less tolerant of cohabitation with Christians (which was not a uniform stance in the Islamic world) trade routes became unstable. Christian control had a lot to do with the Pope whipping people into a frenzy in the first Crusade as well as on human greed, but supply and demand of the silk road is always the chief player, just as demand for oil influences stability in the same area today.

There's no hard feelings the Humanities teacher over here wasn't invited to the thread... I had a huge essay due last Wednesday and knew I'd never finish on time if I read this thread. :alc:
 
The major player in the birth of the Crusades that hasn't been mentioned is trade.

Muslims were generally traders from the Arabian peninsula, due to their expertise in navigating in the desert. As a few Islamic tribes become progressively less tolerant of cohabitation with Christians (which was not a uniform stance in the Islamic world) trade routes became unstable. Christian control had a lot to do with the Pope whipping people into a frenzy in the first Crusade as well as on human greed, but supply and demand of the silk road is always the chief player, just as demand for oil influences stability in the same area today.

There's no hard feelings the Humanities teacher over here wasn't invited to the thread... I had a huge essay due last Wednesday and knew I'd never finish on time if I read this thread. :alc:
That's what I was getting at with my statement on fluidity. The relationship between the Christian and Islamic worlds had a lot to do with access to resources. What's so interesting is, when you look at Asia during this time period, there were regions (Zomia, for instance) that were effectively stateless. But, in Europe and Arabia (as well as Persia), resources and dynasty were what held up leadership. The necessity of maintaining resources was a huge part of the Crusades occurring.
 
July 16th the americans tested the nuclear bomb to kick off the postdam conference with a bang.

Hiroshima was august 6th
August 8th Soviet invasion of Manchura and declaration of war
Nagasaki August 9th
August 14 . Japan indicates surrender
September 2nd Japan signs the 2nd surrender agreement.

I'm not sure why anyone has to look any further than the Manchurian Invasion which occurred from August 8th through august 20th to see that The president did what he thought was necessary in regards to the 2 launchings of atomic bombs.

The Japanese did not send a cease fire agreement to the Armies
in Manchuria. Their Leaders in Manchuria often killed their own people in Suicides rather than surrender and the Soviets continued to rape and Loot on a high scale.

Japan continued to fight by not issuing a cease fire to manchuria

The Soviet invasion plan was well in place before the Soviets War Declaration and it had been their lack of a previous declaration that had given the Japanese more hope than they should have had.

perhaps it was the wrong decision. perhaps it was the right one. regardless at that time there is enough factors Where Truman thought it was necessary.

but its easy to scream racism when you have such a regimented culture entrenched in its people that unique to that Culture.

The postdam conference clearly showcased the Soviets aggressively engaging in expansionism ad there was the same fear this would occur in Asia.

not only that but the Japanese army clearly opposed the surrender of Japan.

here is a translation of the speech played for the people

TO OUR GOOD AND LOYAL SUBJECTS:
After pondering deeply the general trends of the world and the actual conditions obtaining in Our Empire today, We have decided to effect a settlement of the present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure.

We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration.

To strive for the common prosperity and happiness of all nations as well as the security and well-being of Our subjects is the solemn obligation which has been handed down by Our Imperial Ancestors and which lies close to Our heart.

Indeed, We declared war on America and Britain out of Our sincere desire to ensure Japan's self-preservation and the stabilization of East Asia, it being far from Our thought either to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement.

But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has been done by everyone – the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people – the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should We continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers.

We cannot but express the deepest sense of regret to Our Allied nations of East Asia, who have consistently cooperated with the Empire towards the emancipation of East Asia.

The thought of those officers and men as well as others who have fallen in the fields of battle, those who died at their posts of duty, or those who met with untimely death and all their bereaved families, pains Our heart night and day.

The welfare of the wounded and the war-sufferers, and of those who have lost their homes and livelihood, are the objects of Our profound solicitude.

The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable.

Having been able to safeguard and maintain the structure of the Imperial State, We are always with you, Our good and loyal subjects, relying upon your sincerity and integrity.

Beware most strictly of any outbursts of emotion which may engender needless complications, or any fraternal contention and strife which may create confusion, lead you astray and cause you to lose the confidence of the world.

Let the entire nation continue as one family from generation to generation, ever firm in its faith in the imperishability of its sacred land, and mindful of its heavy burden of responsibility, and of the long road before it.

Unite your total strength, to be devoted to construction for the future. Cultivate the ways of rectitude, foster nobility of spirit, and work with resolution – so that you may enhance the innate glory of the Imperial State and keep pace with the progress of the world.

(Hirohito's signature and Privy Seal)

August 14, 1945


The Emporer made no mention of the Soviet invasion of Manchura but he certainly did point out the bombs


Truman showed the soviets that United states was ready to use the bomb and helped convince the Japanese people that this was the only reasonable conclusion.

It was critical in the Reconstruction of Japan allowing the United States take point on the project and ensure the Soviets involvement was limited.
 
July 16th the americans tested the nuclear bomb to kick off the postdam conference with a bang.

Hiroshima was august 6th
August 8th Soviet invasion of Manchura and declaration of war
Nagasaki August 9th
August 14 . Japan indicates surrender
September 2nd Japan signs the 2nd surrender agreement.

I'm not sure why anyone has to look any further than the Manchurian Invasion which occurred from August 8th through august 20th to see that The president did what he thought was necessary in regards to the 2 launchings of atomic bombs.

The Japanese did not send a cease fire agreement to the Armies
in Manchuria. Their Leaders in Manchuria often killed their own people in Suicides rather than surrender and the Soviets continued to rape and Loot on a high scale.

Japan continued to fight by not issuing a cease fire to manchuria

The Soviet invasion plan was well in place before the Soviets War Declaration and it had been their lack of a previous declaration that had given the Japanese more hope than they should have had.

perhaps it was the wrong decision. perhaps it was the right one. regardless at that time there is enough factors Where Truman thought it was necessary.

but its easy to scream racism when you have such a regimented culture entrenched in its people that unique to that Culture.

The postdam conference clearly showcased the Soviets aggressively engaging in expansionism ad there was the same fear this would occur in Asia.

not only that but the Japanese army clearly opposed the surrender of Japan.

here is a translation of the speech played for the people

TO OUR GOOD AND LOYAL SUBJECTS:
After pondering deeply the general trends of the world and the actual conditions obtaining in Our Empire today, We have decided to effect a settlement of the present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure.

We have ordered Our Government to communicate to the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union that Our Empire accepts the provisions of their Joint Declaration.

To strive for the common prosperity and happiness of all nations as well as the security and well-being of Our subjects is the solemn obligation which has been handed down by Our Imperial Ancestors and which lies close to Our heart.

Indeed, We declared war on America and Britain out of Our sincere desire to ensure Japan's self-preservation and the stabilization of East Asia, it being far from Our thought either to infringe upon the sovereignty of other nations or to embark upon territorial aggrandizement.

But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has been done by everyone – the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State, and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people – the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest.

Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should We continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization.

Such being the case, how are We to save the millions of Our subjects, or to atone Ourselves before the hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors? This is the reason why We have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the Joint Declaration of the Powers.

We cannot but express the deepest sense of regret to Our Allied nations of East Asia, who have consistently cooperated with the Empire towards the emancipation of East Asia.

The thought of those officers and men as well as others who have fallen in the fields of battle, those who died at their posts of duty, or those who met with untimely death and all their bereaved families, pains Our heart night and day.

The welfare of the wounded and the war-sufferers, and of those who have lost their homes and livelihood, are the objects of Our profound solicitude.

The hardships and sufferings to which Our nation is to be subjected hereafter will be certainly great. We are keenly aware of the inmost feelings of all of you, Our subjects. However, it is according to the dictates of time and fate that We have resolved to pave the way for a grand peace for all the generations to come by enduring the unendurable and suffering what is unsufferable.

Having been able to safeguard and maintain the structure of the Imperial State, We are always with you, Our good and loyal subjects, relying upon your sincerity and integrity.

Beware most strictly of any outbursts of emotion which may engender needless complications, or any fraternal contention and strife which may create confusion, lead you astray and cause you to lose the confidence of the world.

Let the entire nation continue as one family from generation to generation, ever firm in its faith in the imperishability of its sacred land, and mindful of its heavy burden of responsibility, and of the long road before it.

Unite your total strength, to be devoted to construction for the future. Cultivate the ways of rectitude, foster nobility of spirit, and work with resolution – so that you may enhance the innate glory of the Imperial State and keep pace with the progress of the world.

(Hirohito's signature and Privy Seal)

August 14, 1945


The Emporer made no mention of the Soviet invasion of Manchura but he certainly did point out the bombs


Truman showed the soviets that United states was ready to use the bomb and helped convince the Japanese people that this was the only reasonable conclusion.

It was critical in the Reconstruction of Japan allowing the United States take point on the project and ensure the Soviets involvement was limited.

Just want to add to this that the infighting within the Japanese government continued even after Nagasaki. Even the "peace" faction in the government still insisted that the Emperor retain his position.

One thing that sometimes gets lost in all this is the nuances of the status of the Emperor. While he was permitted by us (MacArthur, really) to remain as head of state, he was stripped of all legal power. We were absolutely insistent on Japan being fully transformed to a democracy, and whether the Japanese government was willing to accept that after Hiroshima is unknown.

The Japanese were so caught up in their traditions and conceptions of honor that actual negotiations with them were extraordinarily difficult. The culture just made submission too difficult.
 
I guess no one disagrees with your assessment. I think people like Esposito claiming the Crusades as the initial and defining interaction that shaped the relationship between Christian Europe and Islam confuse the issue.

I kind of hate to leave it that simply because the whole period is so fascinating. We can talk about "the Muslims" and "the Christians", but here was a lot of variance and even fighting within those groups. Saladin was recognized even by his enemies as a noble and chivalric leader. Baldwin IV and Richard also were decent. But there also was cruelty and pretty naked ambition on both sides.

That's why so many debates over the Crusades deteriorate, because partisans on each side can easily point to heroes on their own side, and scumbags/wrongs on the other, because there are plenty of examples on both sides.

It is kind of an odd thing that the Crusades have tended to be portrayed as a Christian invasion of Muslim lands, with the initial Muslim conquest of those same Christian lands overlooked/ignored.

I mean, what is now Istanbul used to be the great Roman, Christian city of Constantinople. And it wasn't like he Turks took it through free elections.

Heraclius, the Goths in Spain and the Sassanids would disagree with his opinion.

Heraclius is another interesting guy
If not for him, the Eastern Empire might have fallen more than 800 years earlier to the Persian Sassanids, than it actually did to the Turks much later.

This guy earned the moniker "The Pale Death of the Saracens" for a reason:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_II_Phokas

Definitely one of the better Emperors.
 
I kind of hate to leave it that simply because the whole period is so fascinating. We can talk about "the Muslims" and "the Christians", but here was a lot of variance and even fighting within those groups. Saladin was recognized even by his enemies as a noble and chivalric leader. Baldwin IV and Richard also were decent. But there also was cruelty and pretty naked ambition on both sides.

That's why so many debates over the Crusades deteriorate, because partisans on each side can easily point to heroes on their own side, and scumbags/wrongs on the other, because there are plenty of examples on both sides.

It is kind of an odd thing that the Crusades have tended to be portrayed as a Christian invasion of Muslim lands, with the initial Muslim conquest of those same Christian lands overlooked/ignored.

I mean, what is now Istanbul used to be the great Roman, Christian city of Constantinople. And it wasn't like he Turks took it through free elections.



Heraclius is another interesting guy
If not for him, the Eastern Empire might have fallen more than 800 years earlier to the Persian Sassanids, than it actually did to the Turks much later.



Definitely one of the better Emperors.

I think Q-Tip and I had a long back and forth on the Crusades last year around this time. It's absolutely complex and for many people I know, a deeply personal one. I teach the Crusades every year and try to stay fairly even-handed, even still I had an Armenian father go absolutely ape shit crazy that I taught any perspective that was receptive towards the Islamic point of view. I've had an Israeli family do the same in the past.

However, it's the way the Crusades should be approached. There are no clear "good guys". Once Christian communities established themselves in the region for several generations, it became no easier to extract them than it would be to extract Spanish influence from Meso-America. The answer becomes co-habitation... and frankly economics stop that from succeeding in the Middle East.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top