|
God's Battalions: The Case for the Crusades | 
| Author: Rodney Stark
Publisher: HarperOne
Category: Book
List Price: $24.99
Buy New: $13.52
as of 7/30/2010 23:42 MDT details
You Save: $11.47 (46%)
New (32) Used (18) from $12.40
Seller: BRILANTI BOOKS
Rating:  43 reviews
Sales Rank: 19164
Media: Hardcover
Pages: 288
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.7
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6 x 1
ISBN: 0061582611
Dewey Decimal Number: 909.07
EAN: 9780061582615
ASIN: 0061582611
Publication Date: October 1, 2009
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
In God's Battalions, award-winning author Rodney Stark takes on the long-held view that the Crusades were the first round of European colonialism, conducted for land, loot, and converts by barbarian Christians who victimized the cultivated Muslims. To the contrary, Stark argues that the Crusades were the first military response to unwarranted Muslim terrorist aggression. Stark reviews the history of the seven major Crusades from 1095 to 1291, demonstrating that the Crusades were precipitated by Islamic provocations, centuries of bloody attempts to colonize the West, and sudden attacks on Christian pilgrims and holy places. Although the Crusades were initiated by a plea from the pope, Stark argues that this had nothing to do with any elaborate design of the Christian world to convert all Muslims to Christianity by force of arms. Given current tensions in the Middle East and terrorist attacks around the world, Stark's views are a thought-provoking contribution to our understanding and are sure to spark debate.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 43
 Thoroughly Researched; Puts the Crusades in Proper Historical Context July 26, 2010
Rev. Dr. Charles Erlandson (Tyler, Texas United States)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Rodney Stark is one of the best sociologists of religion writing today, and God's Battalions is one of his most important ones because of the topic: the Crusades. God's Battalions is a thoroughly researched book that puts the Crusades in their proper historical context.
If God's Battalions accomplished nothing more than revising the revisionist histories of the Crusades, in which the Crusades are seen in an entirely negative and almost ahistorical light, then it would be worth reading. But along the way Stark presents other research that makes this an important book.
The current myths and mythologies surrounding the Crusades present the Crusades as entirely negative and just another example of Western imperialism. In fact, the Crusades are often chosen not because of an intrinsic interest in the history of those events and that era but as a surrogate attack on Christianity in general. The problem with such attacks is they do not read the Crusades in the context of the world of the time, and they ignore the equally (or more so) bloody and inhumane acts of other cultures at that same time.
What Stark does, and does well, is to give us all a better perspective on the Crusades. It's important to recognize that Stark in no way glorifies the Crusades: he is not returning to a Romantic notion of the Crusades. Instead, he allows the best historical research about the Crusades to speak for itself.
Here are Stark's main conclusions:
1. The Crusades were not unprovoked (instead, they can be seen as a response to centuries of Islamic attacks on Christian lands)
2. The Crusades were not the first round of European colonialism (but were conducted for limited, religious purposes)
3. The Crusades were not conducted for land, loot, or converts (but stemmed mostly from sincere, religious motivations related to medieval Christian spirituality)
4. The Crusaders were not barbarians who victimized the cultivated Muslims (but were as civilized as the Muslims and in general acted more humanely)
5. The Crusaders sincerely believed that they served in God's battalions.
In addition to Stark's balanced perspective on the Crusades, God's Battalions is important for Chapter 3, in which he assesses the Muslim contribution to culture and the nature of the Dark Ages. The current myth holds that the East ("Islam") was cultured and enlightened, while the West ("Christianity") was barbaric and unenlightened. Stark provides evidence for a much needed reassessment of this false mythology. Perhaps his most important conclusion here is, "To the extent that Arab elites acquired a sophisticated culture, they learned it from their subject people" (page 56). Stark then proceeds to present evidence for this thesis from the fields of mathematics, architecture, and medicine.
In contrast to the myth of "the Dark Ages" (a myth propagated, naturally, by "The Enlightenment"), Stark provides a long litany of inventions and advancements made by Christian Europeans in the Middle Ages: the collar and harness, iron horseshoes, superior plows, the three-field system, the crossbow, stirrups, and more.
My one complaint with the book is that Stark spends most of the second half of the book or so on recounting the history of the Crusades and less on correcting the myths regarding Islam, Christianity, and the Crusades. In spite of this one criticism, this is a significant work that hopefully will correct many of our erroneous contemporary myths.
 It's Rodney Stark, I'll pass for sure July 3, 2010
Stephen J. Snyder (Lancaster, Texas United States)
1 out of 14 found this review helpful
Knowing the amount of erroneous information he has peddled in other books in the past, largely in the service of boosting the alleged beneficial events of Christian culture in medieval Europe (no, Rodney, Xns did NOT introduce the stirrup to Europe; no, Rodney, the cannon was NOT little more than a playtoy before getting into the hands of Xn Europe), even though he himself is not a Christian, from what I have read, and certainly not a conservative one -- knowing all that, I'll pass on reading this book.
It's sure to be incorrect in many ways, and in the current American political climate, sure to be a "tool" to bolster the screeds of various neoconservative types.
I've read half a dozen of his other books, which include laughers such as claiming that Hindus are, at core, monotheists. Why do I need to read this one to know it too will be wrong?
New learnings July 2, 2010
Torben
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
It was a pleasure to read a very well reseached book giving a completely different view on an important period og Europes history. In this opposing the opinions 'on the mountain'
Interesting Perspective July 1, 2010
Ky. Col.
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
The Crusades are often used as a symbol of European imperialism or barbarity which set in motion the conflicts between Christianity and Islam. I remember taking an Arabic history class in which a textbook vividly described the massacre at Jerusalem in 1099 while often downplaying Islamic atrocities (e.g. the Ottoman genocides during WWI got very, very little mention). Other documentaries, articles, and books on Islamic history have echoed similar trends. The noted social scientist and author Rodney Stark has written a very readable and informative book challenging this view of the Crusades. First of all, Stark places the Crusades in the context of centuries of Islamic holy war and subjugation. The rise of the Seljuk Turks and attacks on Christian pilgrims were major factors in inspiring the Crusades. Stark argues that the First Crusade was primarily religiously motivated and heavily influencd by family linkages/social factors but not heavily influenced by economics (e.g. inheritance issues). Stark discusses other Middle Eastern crusades up through the final fall of the Latin Kingdoms in the late thirteenth century. The author also makes interesting points about Byzantine conspiracies and lays out events leading up to the Fourth Crusade's attack on Constantinople (the Byzantines do not come out so well in the book). Finally Stark challenges the notion of the continued legacy of the Crusades through the centuries but instead argues that the fall of the Ottoman Empire really accelerated Muslim rage over the earlier European incursions.
Helpfully, Stark notes aspects of Medieval seige warfare which largely explains the difference between the 1099 massacre in Jerusalem and Saladin letting most of the city's Christians leave decades later. In other cases (Edessa and Antioch for example), Muslim armies could be just as willing to massacre. What often made the difference was whether a city surrendered or was stormed. It is pretty fair to say that neither Crusaders nor Muslims followed an equivilent of the Geneva convention. Stark does NOT make the Crusaders look innocent. He clearly notes the violent nature of knighthood during the period. What he does though is give a perspective with much more balance and context of the events. Also interesting was information on technological differences between Muslim and Western European societies. In some ways the Muslims were ahead (more access to translated Greek philosiphies thought Stark notes an ironic result of this). However, stark argue that the Western Europeans were ahead in some more practical technologies (naval superiority in the Meditteranean for example). There are some mistakes in the book (one being about the impracticality of later European plate armor compared to chain mail [actually plate armor was generally far superior which is why chain mail was eventually superceeded]). Some Christians may find the idea of a holy war wrong due to passicifist or simply defensive fighting views. The main point Stark makes though is that the Crusades should be put into the context of the time and seen against a backdrop of centuries of Islamic aggression. Thus they were a sort of counterstrike. Finally this is a book about the Crusades in the Middle East and North Africa. The author generally does not go over religious warfare in France or Northern Europe or later battles with the Ottoman Turks. Some information is given on fighting in Spain and Sicily setting up the context of 1095.
Saladin: Have Scimitar Will Travel July 1, 2010
4321dud (OC, CA)
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
If you want to have some fun storming the castle, bringing along your crossbow squad is an absolute must. Armaments, weapons, tactics, even the relative weight of the Crusaders' horses verses the relative weight of the Muslim's horses was part of this book's presentation. Beyond that we learn who did what to whom, when, where, and why. Normally, all those details with all those names and dates turn my mind to fog, but not so with this book. This book nearly reads like a novel. While we learn that the Crusaders were neither saints nor demons, we also learn that the Islamic side should not be historically looked at as ruled by benign innocents peacefully minding their own business amongst their Christian neighbors. Other perspectives are revealed. For instance, my son's 7th grade history teacher described the 4th Crusade during which Constantinople was sacked by the Crusaders as an act of bloodthirsty and greed crazed berserkers. My son's class was given no more reason nor details than that. In Stark contrast to that simplified history, we learn the real reasons for Constantinople's unfortunate sacking. Stark's shortest paragraph of the book (p.212) prepares us for the intrigue: "Now for the details". With all the beheadings, betrayals, and massacres, this book is not with out some chuckles. For instance (p.234), " On July 1, 1277, Baibars died ... it is generally believed that he poisoned the drink of an Ayubite prince and then carelessly drank it himself". On page 242 Stark outlines some of the reasons many Europeans of the time opposed the Crusades. I was wondering if Stark didn't just edit some current newspaper editorials for that section.
Showing reviews 1-5 of 43
|
|
|
Contact Military Topix
Privacy and Legal CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. Powered by Associate-O-Matic
| |
