http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4467
<http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4467&search=bostom>
&search=bostom
 
Jihad begot the Crusades (1)
May 4th, 2005
[Part 2, including end notes, can be read here
<http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4470> ]
The New York Times’ Alan Riding recently opined
<http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10914F7345A0C778EDDAD0894DD
404482>  that  
“…[The C]rusades were waged, [by] European monarchs, lords, knights and
their armies of devout followers to fight – and settle – in an area
stretching between what is today Syria and Egypt. The Muslims responded
[emphasis added] with their own sporadic jihads until finally, by 1291, the
Christians had been driven out.” 
He further lauds the fact that in Ridley Scott’s new film portrayal of the
Crusades,
<http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html?v_id=294331&inline=nyt_ttl
> Kingdom of Heaven   
“…Mr. Scott and his screenwriter, William Monahan, have tried to be
balanced. Muslims are portrayed as bent on coexistence until Christian
extremists ruin everything.” [emphasis added]  
Little wonder then that the  <http://www.danielpipes.org/article/394>
jihadist organization CAIR,  waxed Unfortunately, such
<http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usnw/20050425/pl_usnw/muslims_call
_new_fox_crusader_film_embalanced/emem_cair_says/ememkingdomof_heaven/em_avo
ids_negative_stereotypes126_xml> ahistorical claptrap has become standard
fare for journalistic and even pseudo-scholarly “summary assessments” of The
Crusades, with perhaps the most egregious example of the latter being this
reductio ad absurdum commentary by John Esposito, the doyen of academic
apologists for Islam:
Five
<http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usnw/20050425/pl_usnw/muslims_call
_new_fox_crusader_film_embalanced/emem_cair_says/ememkingdomof_heaven/em_avo
ids_negative_stereotypes126_xml>  centuries of peaceful coexistence elapsed
before political events and an imperial-papal power play led to
centuries-long series of so-called holy wars [emphasis added] that pitted
Christendom against Islam and left an enduring legacy of misunderstanding
and distrust. [1]
In
<http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/usnw/20050425/pl_usnw/muslims_call
_new_fox_crusader_film_embalanced/emem_cair_says/ememkingdomof_heaven/em_avo
ids_negative_stereotypes126_xml>  Islam
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0838639437/qid=1114650892/sr=
1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-5499140-0864723?v=glance&s=books>  and Dhimmitude,
(2002) Bat Ye’or analyzed Esposito’s summary account of the first half
millennium of jihad conquests. Bat Ye’or notes how Esposito completely, 
“…ignores the concepts of jihad and dar al-harb…” [2], and  she highlights
the “thematic structure” of Esposito’s selective overview, typical of the
prevailing modern apologetic genre: [3]  …historical negationism, consisting
of suppressing or sketching in a page or a paragraph, one thousand years of
jihad which is presented as a peaceful conquest, generally welcomed by the
vanquished populations;  the omission of Christian and, in particular,
Muslim sources describing the actual methods of these conquests: pillage,
enslavement, deportation, massacres, and so on;  the mythical historical
conversion of “centuries” of “peaceful coexistence”, masking the processes
which transformed majorities into minorities, constantly at risk of
extinction; an obligatory self-incrimination for the Crusades…”
Inundated by such disingenuous apologetics Westerners have remained largely
ignorant of jihad—the Islamic war of conquest. Thus the chattering classes,
confused all too easily by superficial similarities, equate jihad with the
Crusades. In fact, there are many fundamental differences between the
uniquely Islamic institution of jihad, and the Crusades, as they derive from
widely divergent religions and civilizations. 
Jihad, as a nascent ideology, originated from the putative military
activities of Muhammad himself, described in the Muslim sacred texts.
September 622 C.E. marks a defining event in Islam- the hijra. Muhammad and
a coterie of followers (the Muhajirun), persecuted by fellow Banu Quraysh
tribesmen who rejected Muhammad’s authenticity as a divine messenger, fled
from Mecca to Yathrib, later known as Al-Medina (Medina). Gil notes that
Muslim sources described Yathrib as having been a Jewish city founded by a
Palestinian diaspora population which had survived the revolt against the
Romans. [4] Distinct from the nomadic Arab tribes, the Jews of the north
Arabian peninsula were highly productive oasis farmers. These Jews were
eventually joined by itinerant Arab tribes from southern Arabia who settled
adjacent to them and transitioned to a sedentary existence. 
Following Muhammad’s arrival, he created a “new order”, as described by Gil,
[5]
…establishing a covenant between the tribes which imposed its authority on
every clan and its members, [which] soon enabled him to attack the Jews and
eventually wipe out the Jewish population of the town. Some were banned from
the towns, others were executed, and their property-plantations, fields, and
houses- was distributed by Muhammad among his followers, who were destitute
refugees from Mecca. He also used the former property of the Jews to
establish a war fund, setting up a well-equipped army corps of cavalry
troops the likes of which had never before been seen on the Arabian
peninsula. Muhammad evidently believed in the capacity of this army, imbued
with fiery religious belief, to perform great and sensational feats of
valor.
Richard Bell summarized Muhammad’s final interactions with the Jews and
Christians of Medina, and northern Arabia. His analyses, based upon the
sacred Muslim texts (i.e, Qur’an, hadith, and sira),  authoritative Qur’anic
commentaries, and the narratives of Muslim chroniclers of early Islam, also
underscored the theological basis for the “Great Jihad”: [6]
His relations with the Jews form a part of all biographies of Muhammad, for
they worked out to a bitter and savage conclusion in the course of his first
few years residence in Medina…Shortly after the Battle of Badr a Jewish
tribe, the Bani Qainuqa, were deprived of their goods, and expelled from
Medina. The Bani Nadir were similarly expelled some two years later, and
finally the Bani Quraiza were besieged, and, after capitulation at
discretion, were slaughtered, their goods confiscated, their women and
children enslaved. This bitter hostility was no doubt due to the annoyance
which the opposition of the Jews caused him…in Muhammad’s mind there also
rankled the old feeling that the Jews had misled him in regard to what the
Revelation contained, and having discovered that Jesus had been a prophet to
the Bani Isra’il whom the Jews had rejected, he may have in his own mind
justified his harsh dealing with them by the reflection that they were
renegades who had already more than once rejected the Divine message…But
when Muhammad’s power began to spread in Arabia his attitude towards the
Christians soon began to cool. Any real alliance or even peaceful
accommodation was indeed impossible from the first. Muhammad complains
(Q.2:113/114) that neither Jews nor Christians will be satisfied with him
until he follows their milla or type of religion. It was just as impossible
for him to make concessions…Thus the relationship with the Christians ended
as that with the Jews ended- in war…We know that before the end of his life
Muhammad was in conflict with Christian populations in the north of Arabia,
and even within the confines of the Roman [Byzantine] Empire. What would
have happened if he had lived we do not know. But probably the policy which
Abu Bakr carried on was the policy of Muhammad himself. There could have
been no real compromise. He regarded himself as vicegerent of God upon
earth. The true religion could only be Islam as he laid it down, and
acceptance of it meant acceptance of his divinely inspired authority…The
Hijra and the execution of the Divine vengeance upon the unbelievers of
Mecca had given the immediate occasion for the organization of such a
warlike community. The victory of Badr confirmed it. This is what it had
grown to, a menace to whatever came in its way. Muhammad could bide his
time, but he was not the man to depart from a project which had once taken
hold of his mind as involved in his prophetic mission and authority. He
might look with favor upon much in Christianity, but unless Christians were
prepared to accept his dictation as to what the true religion was, conflict
was inevitable, and there could have been no real peace while he lived. 
Within several centuries of Muhammad’s death in 632 C.E., based upon the
“proto-jihad” campaigns he waged in Arabia, Muslim jurists and theologians
formulated the institution of permanent jihad war against non-Muslims for
the submission of the known world to Islam. 
The essential pattern of the jihad war is captured in the great Muslim
historian al-Tabari’s  recording of the recommendation given by Umar b.
al-Khattab to the commander of the troops he sent to al-Basrah (636 C.E.),
during the conquest of Iraq. Umar (the second “Rightly Guided Caliph”)
reportedly said: [7]
Summon the people to God; those who respond to your call, accept it from
them, (This is to say, accept their conversion as genuine and refrain from
fighting them) but those who refuse must pay the poll tax out of humiliation
and lowliness. (Qur’an 9:29) If they refuse this, it is the sword without
leniency. Fear God with regard to what you have been entrusted.
Jihad was pursued century after century, because jihad, which means “to
strive in the path of Allah,” embodied an ideology and a jurisdiction. Both
were formally conceived by Muslim jurisconsults and theologians from the 8th
to 9th  centuries onward, based on their interpretation of Qur’anic verses
[8] (for e.g., 9:5,6; 9:29; 4:76-79; 2: 214-15; 8:39-42), and long chapters
in the Traditions (i.e., “hadith”, acts and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad,
especially those recorded by al-Bukhari [d. 869] [9] and Muslim [d. 874]
[10]). The consensus on the nature of jihad from all four schools of Sunni
Islamic jurisprudence (i.e., Maliki, Hanbali,  Hanafi, and Shafi’i) is
clear:
Ibn Abi Zayd al-Qayrawani (d. 996), Maliki jurist [11]
Jihad is a precept of Divine institution. Its performance by certain
individuals may dispense others from it. We Malikis [one of the four schools
of Muslim jurisprudence] maintain that it is preferable not to begin
hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the
religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have the
alternative of either converting to Islam or paying the poll tax (jizya),
short of which war will be declared against them.
Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328), Hanbali jurist [12] Since lawful warfare is
essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely
and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who
stand in the way of this aim must be fought. As for those who cannot offer
resistance or cannot fight, such as women, children, monks, old people, the
blind, handicapped and their likes, they shall not be killed unless they
actually fight with words (e.g. by propaganda) and acts (e.g. by spying or
otherwise assisting in the warfare).
>From (primarily) the Hanafi school (as given in the Hidayah of Shaikh
Burhanuddin Ali of Marghinan, d. 1196) [13]
It is not lawful to make war upon any people who have never before been
called to the faith, without previously requiring them to embrace it,
because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call the
infidels to the faith, and also because the people will hence perceive that
they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking
their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this
consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call,
in order to save themselves from the troubles of war… If the infidels, upon
receiving the call, neither consent to it nor agree to pay capitation tax,
it is then incumbent on the Muslims to call upon God for assistance, and to
make war upon them, because God is the assistant of those who serve Him, and
the destroyer of His enemies, the infidels, and it is necessary to implore
His aid upon every occasion; the Prophet, moreover, commands us so to do.
al-Mawardi (d. 1058 ), Shafi’i jurist [14]
…The mushrikun [infidels] of Dar al-Harb (the arena of battle) are of two
types: First, those whom the call of Islam has reached, but they have
refused it and have taken up arms. The amir of the army has the option of
fighting them…in accordance with what he judges to be in the best interest
of the Muslims and most harmful to the mushrikun… Second, those whom the
invitation to Islam has not reached, although such persons are few nowadays
since Allah has made manifest the call of his Messenger…it is forbidden
to…begin an attack before explaining the invitation to Islam to them,
informing them of the miracles of the Prophet and making plain the proofs so
as to encourage acceptance on their part; if they still refuse to accept
after this, war is waged against them and they are treated as those whom the
call has reached…
Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406), jurist (Maliki), renowned philosopher, historian, and
sociologist, summarized these consensus opinions from five centuries of
prior Sunni Muslim jurisprudence with regard to the uniquely Islamic
institution of jihad: [15]
In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the
universalism of the [Muslim] mission and [the obligation to] convert
everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force… The other religious
groups did not have a universal mission, and the holy war was not a
religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense… Islam is under
obligation to gain power over other nations.
By the time of the classical Muslim historian al-Tabari’s death in 923,
jihad wars had expanded the Muslim empire from Portugal to the Indian
subcontinent. Subsequent Muslim conquests continued in Asia, as well as on
Christian eastern European lands. The Christian kingdoms of Armenia,
Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania, in
addition to parts of Poland and Hungary, were also conquered and Islamized.
When the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a
millennium of jihad had transpired. [16] These tremendous military successes
spawned a triumphalist jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in
detail the number of infidels slain or enslaved, the cities and villages
which were pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized.
Christian (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav, etc.), as well as Hebrew
sources, and even the scant Hindu and Buddhist writings which survived the
ravages of the Muslim conquests, independently validate this narrative, and
complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering
of the non-Muslim victims of jihad wars. [17]
>From its earliest inception, through the present
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14017> , jihad has
been central to the thought and writings of prominent Muslim theologians and
jurists. The precepts and regulations elucidated in the 7th through 9th
centuries are immutable in the Muslim theological-juridical system, and they
have remained essentially unchallenged by the majority of contemporary
Muslims. The jihad is intrinsic to the sacred Muslim texts, including the
divine Qur’anic revelation itself, whereas the Crusades were circumscribed
historical events subjected to (ongoing and meaningful) criticism by
Christians themselves. Unlike the espousal of jihad in the Qur’an, the
constituent texts of Christianity, the Old and New Testaments of the Bible,
do not contain a form fruste institutionalization of the Crusades. The Bible
sanctions the Israelites conquest of Canaan, a limited domain, it does not
sanction a permanent war to submit all the nations of humanity to a uniform
code of religious law. Similarly, the tactics of warfare are described in
the Bible, unlike the Qur’an, in very circumscribed and specific contexts.
Moreover, while the Bible clearly condemns certain inhumane practices of
paganism, it never invoked an eternal war against all of the world’s pagan
peoples. 
The Crusades as an historical phenomenon were a reaction to events resulting
from over 450 years of previous jihad campaigns. At the close of the 11th
century, particularly after the crushing Byzantine defeat by the Seljuk
Turks at Manzikert in 1071, Christendom, including Europe, was under
existential threat by a confluence of Muslim advances. To the West, the
Almoravid Berber Muslim tribes drove into Spain and pushed northward,
pillaging and massacring the Christian populations they encountered. In the
East, following their victory at Manzikert, the Seljuks put Armenia to fire
and sword, and within a decade they had conquered three-fourths of Asia
Minor. By 1090 C.E., Grousset has observed [18], 
…Turkish Islam having almost entirely driven the Byzantines out of Asia
[Minor], was preparing to pass over into Europe. [i.e., from the East]
Finally, in the Holy Land (i.e., Palestine) itself, the Muslim yoke under
the Seljuks had become particularly onerous for the indigenous Christian
(and Jewish) population, as well as Christian pilgrims. Both the native and
pilgrim populations were subjected to forced conversions, kidnappings, and
murder in an atmosphere of overall insecurity for the life and property of
non-Muslims. Michael the Syrian, the 12th century Jacobite patriarch of
Antioch, reproducing earlier contemporary sources in his famous Chronicle,
summarized the prevailing conditions for Christians in Palestine, as
follows: [19] 
As the Turks were ruling the lands of Syria and Palestine, they inflicted
injuries on Christians who went to pray in Jerusalem, beat them, pillaged
them, levied the poll tax at the gate of the town and also at Golgotha and
the [Holy] Sepulchre; and in addition, every time they saw a caravan of
Christians, particularly of those from Rome and the lands of Italy, they
made every effort to cause their death in diverse ways. And when countless
people had perished as a result, the kings and counts were seized with
[religious] zeal and left Rome; troops from all these countries joined them,
and they came by sea to Constantinople [First Crusade (1096-99)].
The late Jacques Ellul’s penetrating analysis of the jihad [20] argued
convincingly that in fact,  
…the idea of a holy war is a direct product of the Muslim jihad. If the
latter is a holy war, then obviously the fight against Muslims to defend or
save Christianity has also to be a holy war. The idea of a holy war is not
of Christian origin. Emperors never advanced the idea prior to the
appearance of Islam.  
Ellul’s thesis is confirmed when one examines more closely the jihad
conquests of the Iberian peninsula, Asia Minor, and Palestine, as well as
the imposition of Muslim rule in these regions (particularly the Iberian
peninsula and in Palestine), prior to the onset of the Crusades. 
Jihad conquests and early Muslim rule on the Iberian peninsula
The Iberian peninsula was conquered in 710-716 C.E. by Arab tribes
originating from northern, central and southern Arabia. Massive Berber and
Arab immigration, and the colonization of the Iberian peninsula, followed
the conquest. Most churches were converted into mosques. Although the
conquest had been planned and conducted jointly with a faction of Iberian
Christian dissidents, including a bishop, it proceeded as a classical jihad
with massive pillages, enslavements, deportations and killings. Toledo,
which had first submitted to the Arabs in 711 or 712, revolted in 713. The
town was punished by pillage and all the notables had their throats cut. In
730, the Cerdagne (in Septimania, near Barcelona) was ravaged and a bishop
burned alive. In the regions under stable Islamic control, subjugated
non-Muslim dhimmis Jews and Christians like elsewhere in other Islamic lands
– were prohibited from building new churches or synagogues, or restoring the
old ones. Segregated in special quarters, they had to wear discriminatory
clothing. Subjected to heavy taxes, the Christian peasantry formed a servile
class exploited by the dominant Arab ruling elites; many abandoned their
land and fled to the towns.  Harsh reprisals with mutilations and
crucifixions would sanction the Mozarab (Christian dhimmis) calls for help
from the Christian kings. Moreover, if one dhimmi harmed a Muslim, the whole
community would lose its status of protection, leaving it open to pillage,
enslavement and arbitrary killing. [21] By the end of the eighth century,
the rulers of North Africa and of Andalusia had introduced rigorous Maliki
jurisprudence as the predominant school of Muslim law. Thus, as Evariste
Lévi-Provençal, observed, three quarters of a century ago: [22]  The Muslim
Andalusian state thus appears from its earliest origins as the defender and
champion of a jealous orthodoxy, more and more ossified in a blind respect
for a rigid doctrine, suspecting and condemning in advance the least effort
of rational speculation. 
Charles Emmanuel Dufourcq provides these illustrations of the resulting
religious and legal discriminations dhimmis suffered, and the accompanying
incentives for them to convert to Islam: [23]
A learned Moslem jurist of Hispanic Christian descent who lived around the
year 1000, Ahmed ibn Said ibn Hazm (father of the famous
mid-eleventh-century author Ibn Hazm) gives glimpses, in several of his
juridical consultations, of how the freedom of the “infidels” was constantly
at risk.  Non-payment of the head-tax by a dhimmi made him liable to all the
Islamic penalties for debtors who did not repay their creditors;  the
offender could be sold into slavery or even put to death.  In addition,
non-payment of the head-tax by one or several dhimmis – especially if it was
fraudulent – allowed the Moslem authority, at its discretion, to put an end
to the autonomy of the community to which the guilty party or parties
belonged.  Thus, from one day to the next, all the Christians in a city
could lose their status as a protected people through the fault of just one
of them.  Everything could be called into question, including their personal
liberty…Furthermore, non-payment of the legal tribute was not the only
reason for abrogating the status of the “People of the Book”;  another was
“public outrage against the Islamic faith”, for example, leaving exposed,
for Moslems to see, a cross or wine or even pigs.
…by converting [to Islam], one would no longer have to be confined to a
given district, or be the victim of discriminatory measures or suffer
humiliations…Furthermore, the entire Islamic law tended to favor
conversions. When an “infidel” became a Moslem, he immediately benefited
from a complete amnesty for all of his earlier crimes, even if he had been
sentenced to the death penalty, even if it was for having insulted the
Prophet or blasphemed against the Word of God: his conversion acquitted him
of all his faults, of all his previous sins. A legal opinion given by a
mufti from al-Andalus in the ninth century is very instructive: a Christian
dhimmi kidnapped and violated a Moslem woman; when he was arrested and
condemned to death, he immediately converted to Islam; he was automatically
pardoned, while being constrained to marry the woman and to provide for her
a dowry in keeping with her status. The mufti who was consulted about the
affair, perhaps by a brother of the woman, found that the court decision was
perfectly legal, but specified that if that convert did not become a Moslem
in good faith and secretly remained a Christian, he should be flogged,
slaughtered and crucified…
Al-Andalus represented the land of jihad par excellence. Every year (or
multiple times within a year as “seasonal” razzias [ghazwa]) raiding
expeditions were sent to ravage the Christian Spanish kingdoms to the north,
the Basque regions, or France and the Rhone valley, bringing back booty and
slaves. Andalusian corsairs attacked and invaded along the Sicilian and
Italian coasts, even as far as the Aegean Islands, looting and burning as
they went. Many thousands of non-Muslim captives were deported to slavery in
Andalusia, where the caliph kept a militia of tens of thousand of Christian
slaves, brought from all parts of Christian Europe (the Saqaliba), and a
harem filled with captured Christian women. Bat Ye’or summarizes these
events as follows: [24]
Breaking out of Arabia and from the conquered regions- Mesopotamia, Syria,
Palestine-these successive waves of immigrants settled in Spain and
terrorized southern France. Reaching as far as Avignon, they plundered the
Rhone valley by repeated razzias. In 793 C.E., the suburbs of Narbonne were
burned down and its outskirts raided. Calls to jihad attracted the
fanaticized hordes in the ribats (monastery-fortresses) spanning the
Islamo-Spainish frontiers. Towns were pillaged and rural areas devastated.
In 981, Zamora and the surrounding countryside in the kingdom of Leon
suffered destruction and the deportation of four thousand prisoners. Four
years later, Barcelona was destroyed by fire and nearly all its inhabitants
massacred or taken prisoner; several years after its conquest in 987,
Coimbra remained desolate; Leon was demolished and its countryside ruined.
In 997, Santaigo de Compostela was pillaged and razed to the ground. Three
years later, Castille was put to fire and sword by Muslim troops and the
population, captured in the course of these campaigns, enslaved and
deported. The invasions by the Almoravides and the Almohades (eleventh to
thirteenth centuries), Berber dynasties from the Maghreb, reactivated the
jihad. 
Society was sharply divided along ethnic and religious lines, with the Arab
tribes at the top of the hierarchy, followed by the Berbers who were never
recognized as equals, despite their Islamization; lower in the scale came
the mullawadun converts and, at the very bottom, the dhimmi Christians and
Jews. The Andalusian Maliki jurist Ibn Abdun (d. 1134) offered these telling
legal opinions regarding Jews and Christians in Seville around 1100 C.E.:
[25] No…Jew or Christian may be allowed to wear the dress of an aristocrat,
nor of a jurist, nor of a wealthy individual; on the contrary they must be
detested and avoided. It is forbidden to [greet] them with the [expression],
“Peace be upon you’. In effect, ‘Satan has gained possession of them, and
caused them to forget God’s warning. They are the confederates of Satan’s
party; Satan’s confederates will surely be the losers!” (Qur’an 58:19
[modern Dawood translation]). A distinctive sign must be imposed upon them
in order that they may be recognized and this will be for them a form of
disgrace.  Ibn Abdun also forbade the selling of scientific books to dhimmis
under the pretext that they translated them and attributed them to their
co-religionists and bishops.  (In fact, plagiarism is difficult to prove
since whole Jewish and Christian libraries were looted and destroyed).
Another prominent Andalusian jurist, Ibn Hazm of Cordoba (d. 1064), wrote
that Allah has established the infidels’ ownership of their property merely
to provide booty for Muslims. [26] In Granada, the Jewish viziers Samuel Ibn
Naghrela, and his son Joseph, who protected the Jewish community, were both
assassinated between 1056 to 1066, followed by the annihilation of the
Jewish population by the local Muslims. It is estimated that up to five
thousand Jews perished in the pogrom by Muslims that accompanied the 1066
assassination. This figure equals or exceeds the number of Jews reportedly
killed by the Crusaders during their pillage of the Rhineland, some thirty
years later, at the outset of the First Crusade. The Granada pogrom was
likely to have been incited, in part, by the bitter anti-Jewish ode of Abu
Ishaq a well known Muslim jurist and poet of the times, who wrote: [27]
Bring them down to their place and Return them to the most abject station.
They used to roam around us in tatters Covered with contempt, humiliation,
and scorn. They used to rummage amongst the dungheaps for a bit of a filthy
rag To serve as a shroud for a man to be buried in…Do not consider that
killing them is treachery. Nay, it would be treachery to leave them
scoffing.” [The translator then summarizes: ‘The Jews have broken their
covenant (i.e., overstepped their station, with reference to the Covenant of
Umar) and compunction would be out of place.] 
The discriminatory policies of the Berber Muslim Almoravids, who arrived in
Spain in 1086, and subsequently those of the even more fanaticized and
violent Almohad Berber Muslims (who arrived in Spain in 1146-1147) caused a
rapid attrition of the pre-Islamic Iberian Christian (Mozarab) communities,
nearly extinguishing them. The Almoravid attitude towards the Mozarabs is
well reflected by three successive expulsions of the latter to Morocco: in
1106, 1126, and 1138. The oppressed Mozarabs sent emissaries to the king of
Aragon, Alphonso 1st le Batailleur (1104-1134), asking him to come to their
rescue and deliver them from the Almoravids. Following  the raid that the
King of Aragon launched in Andalusia in 1125-1126 in responding to the pleas
of Grenada’s Mozarabs, the latter were deported en masse to Morocco in the
Fall of 1126. [28] Dozy summarizes the events leading up, and surrounding
the mass deportations, as follows: [29]
…the Fakihs and the [Muslim] populace fostered against them [the Mozarabs]
[an] envenomed hatred. In most towns they formed but a small community, but
in the province of Granada they were still numerous, and near the capital
they possessed a beautiful church, which had been built about 600 C.E. by
Gudila, a [Visi]Gothic noble. This church was an offense to the Fakihs…they
issued a fetwa decreeing its demolition. Yusuf [b. Tashifin, the Almoravid
ruler] having given his approval, the sacred edifice was leveled with the
ground (1099 C.E.). Other churches seem to have met with a similar fate, and
the Fakihs treated the Mozarabs so oppressively that the latter at length
appealed to Alfonso the Battler, King of Aragon, to deliver them from their
intolerable burdens. Alfonso acceded to their request. In September, 1125,
he set out with four thousand knights and their men at-arms…Alfonso, did not
however, achieve the results he aimed at…the ultimate object of the
expedition had been the capture of Granada, and this was not effected. Upon
the withdrawal of the Aragonese army, the Moslems cruelly avenged themselves
on the Mozarabs. Ten thousand of the Christians were already out of their
reach, for knowing the fate in store for them they had obtained permission
from Alfonso to settle in his territories, but many who remained were
deprived of their property, maltreated in endless ways, thrown into prision,
or put to death. The majority, however, were transported to Africa, and
endured terrible sufferings, ultimately settling in the vicinity of Saleh
and Mequinez (1126 C.E.). This deportation was carried out by virtue of a
decree which the Kady Ibn Rushd grandfathter of the famous Averroes- had
procured…Eleven years later a second expulsion took place, and very few were
left in Andalusia. 
The Almohads (1130-1232) wreaked enormous destruction on both the Jewish and
Christian populations in Spain and North Africa. This devastation- massacre,
captivity, and forced conversion- was described by the Jewish chronicler
Abraham Ibn Daud, and the poet Abraham Ibn Ezra. Suspicious of the sincerity
of the Jewish converts to Islam, Muslim “inquisitors” (i.e., antedating
their Christian Spanish counterparts by three centuries) removed the
children from such families, placing them in the care of Muslim educators.
[30] Maimonides, the renowned philosopher and physician, experienced the
Almohad persecutions, and had to flee Cordoba with his entire family in
1148, temporarily residing in Fez — disguised as a Muslim — before finding
asylum in Fatimid Egypt. Indeed, although Maimonides is frequently referred
to as a paragon of Jewish achievement facilitated by the enlightened rule of
Andalusia, his own words debunk this utopian view of the Islamic treatment
of Jews: [31]
..the Arabs have persecuted us severely, and passed baneful and
discriminatory legislation against us…Never did a nation molest, degrade,
debase, and hate us as much as they…
Jihad in Asia Minor
The modern historian Vacalopoulos has summarized the devastation wrought by
the Seljuk jihad conquest of Asia Minor: [32] 
At the beginning of the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks forced their way
into Armenia and there crushed the armies of several petty Armenian states.
No fewer than forty thousand souls fled before the organized pillage of the
Seljuk host to the western part of Asia Minor…From the middle of the
eleventh century, and especially after the battle of Malazgirt [Manzikurt]
(1071), the Seljuks spread throughout the whole Asia Minor peninsula,
leaving terror, panic and destruction in their wake.  Byzantine, Turkish and
other contemporary sources are unanimous in their agreement on the extent of
havoc wrought and the protracted anguish of the local population… With the
extermination of local populations or their precipitate flight, entire
villages, cities, and sometimes whole provinces fell into decay… Other
districts were literally transformed into wildernesses… Impenetrable
thickets sprang up in places where once there had been luxuriant fields and
pastures.     
The contemporary (primary) source narratives of Matthew of Edessa (12th
century; d. after 1136), Samuel of Ani (d. 2nd half of 12th century), Anna
Comnena (d. 1153), and an anonymous Georgian chronicler, describe the Seljuk
campaigns which ravaged Armenia, Anatolia, and Georgia during the 11th and
12th centuries, as follows: Matthew of EdessaIn the beginning of the year
465 [1015-16 C.E.] a calamity proclaiming the fulfillment of divine portents
befell the Christian adorers of the Holy Cross.  The death-breathing dragon
appeared, accompanied by a destroying fire, and struck the believers in the
Holy Trinity.  The apostolic and prophetic books trembled, for there arrived
winged serpents cone to vomit fire upon Christ’s faithful.  I wish to
describe in this language, the first eruption of ferocious beasts covered
with blood.  At this period there gathered the savage nation of infidels
called Turks.  Setting out, they entered the province of Vaspuracan and put
the Christians to the sword….Facing the enemy, the Armenians saw these
strange men, who were armed with bows and had flowing hair like women. [33]
During the year 551 [the date is wrong and could be 511,1062] of the
Armenian era, the Turks under the command of three of Sultan Tughril [Beg]’s
generals, called Slar Khorasan, Mdjmdj [Medjmedj] and Isulv, [brought about
a torrent of blood on the Christian nation and they] invaded the district of
Baghin in the Fourth Armenia and sacked it. From there [like a venomous
snake], they moved into the adjacent districts of Thelkhum and Arghni, where
they took the Christians by surprise and exterminated them. The massacre
began on the 4th of the month of Areg, a Saturday, at the eighth hour of the
day [there follows a vivid description of massacre that is not translated by
Dulaurier. The translation into English has been made from Dulaurier’s
French translation, with omissions reintegrated in square brackets]. [34]
Everywhere throughout the Cilicia, up to Taurus, Marash and Deluh and the
environs, reigned agitation and trouble.  For populations were precipitated
into these regions en masse, coming by the thousands and crowding into them.
They were like locusts, covering the surface of the land.  They were more
numerous, I might add seven times more numerous, than the people whom Moses
led across the Red Sea; more numerous than the pebbles in the desert of
Sinai.  The land was inundated by these multitudes of people.  Illustrious
personages, nobles, chiefs, women of position, wandered in begging their
bread.  Our eyes witnessed this sad spectacle. [35]
Toward the beginning of the year 528 [1079-80] famine desolated….the lands
of the worshippers of the Cross, already ravaged by the ferocious and
sanguinary Turkish hordes.  Not one province remained protected from their
devastations.  Everywhere the Christians had been delivered to the sword or
into bondage, interrupting thus the cultivation of the fields, so that bread
was lacking.  The farmers and workers has been massacred or lead off into
slavery, and famine extended its rigors to all places.  Many provinces were
depopulated; the Oriental nation [Armenians] no longer existed, and the land
of the Greeks was in ruins. Nowhere was one able to procure bread. [36]
Samuel of Ani-The Taking of Ani by Seljuk Sultan Alp Arslan (1064)In 513 of
the Armenian era [1064], at the time of the festival of the Virgin, on a
Monday, the town of Ani was taken by the Sultan Alp Arslan [1063-73], who
massacred its inhabitants, apart from the women and children whom he led
into captivity. [37]
Anna ComnenaAnd since the succession of Diogenes the barbarians tread upon
the boundaries of the empire of the Rhomaioi….the barbarian hand was not
restricted until the reign of my father.  Swords and spears were whetted
against the Christians, and also battles, wars and massacres.  Cities were
obliterated, lands were plundered, and the whole land of the Rhomaioi was
stained by blood of Christians.  Some fell piteously [the victims] of arrows
and spears, other being driven away from their homes were carried off
captive to the cities of Persia.  Terror reigned over all and they hastened
to hide in the caves, forests, mountains and hills.  Among them some cried
aloud in horror at those things which they suffered, being led off to
Persia; and others who yet survived (if some did remain within the Rhomaic
boundaries), lamenting, cried, the one for his son, the other for his
daughter.  One bewailed his brother, another his cousin who had died
previously, and like women shed hot tears.  And there was at that time not
one relationship which was without tears and without sadness. [38]
Georgian ChroniclerThe emirs spread out, like locusts, over the face of the
land….The countries of Asis-Phorni, Clardjeth, up to the shores of the sea,
Chawcheth, Adchara, Samtzkhe, Karthli, Argoueth, Samokalako, and Dchqondid
were filled with Turks, who pillaged and enslaved all the inhabitants.
In a single day the burned Kouthathis, Artanoudj, the hermitages of
Clardjeth, and they remained in these lands until the first snows, devouring
the land, massacring all those who had fled to the forests, to the rocks, to
the caves…
The calamities of Christianity did not come to and end soon thereafter, for
the approach of spring, the Turks returned to carry out the same ravages and
left [again] in the winter.  The [inhabitants] however were unable to plant
or to harvest.  The land, [thus] delivered to slavery, had only animals of
the forests and wild beasts for inhabitants.  Karthli was in the grip of
intolerable calamities such as one cannot compare to a single devastation or
combination of evils of past times.  The holy churches served as stables for
their horses, the sanctuaries of the Lord served as repairs for the
abominations [Islam].  Some of the priests were immolated during the Holy
Communion itself, and others were carried off into harsh slavery without
regard to their old age.  The virgins were defiled, the youths circumcised,
and the infants taken away.  The conflagration, expending its ravages,
consumed all the inhabited sites, the rivers, instead of water, flowed
blood.  I shall apply the sad words of Jeremiah, which he applied so well to
such situations: “The honorable children of Zion, never put to the test by
misfortunes, now voyaged as slaves on foreign roads.  The streets of Zion
now wept because there was no one [left] to celebrate the feasts.  The
tender mothers, in place of preparing with their hands the nourishment of
the sons, were themselves nourished from the corpses of these dearly loved.
Such and worse was the situation at that time…..”
As Isaiah said: “Your land is devastated, your cities reduced to ashes, and
foreigners have devoured your provinces, which are sacked and ruined by
barbarian nations.” [39]
J.B. Segal reviewed the destruction of the Christian enclave of Edessa in
1144-1146 C.E., during the Crusades, using primary source documentation:
[40]
Thirty thousand souls were killed. Women, youths, and children to the number
of sixteen thousand were carried into slavery, stripped of their cloths,
barefoot, their hands bound, forced to run beside their captors on horses.
Those who could not endure were pierced by lances or arrows, or abandoned to
wild animals and birds of prey. Priests were killed out of hand or captured;
few escaped. The Archbishop of the Armenians was sold at Aleppo…The whole
city was given over to looting, ‘..for a whole year..’, resulting in
‘…complete ruin..’. From this disaster the Christian community of Edessa
never recovered.
Finally, these two devastating jihad attacks (1144 and 1146 C.E.) on Edessa
by the Seljuk Turks, which included the mass murder of non-combatants, were
depicted in a graphic contemporary account by Michael the Syrian [41], as
follows:
The Turks entered with their swords and blades drawn, drinking the blood of
the old and the young, the men and the women, the priests and the deacons,
the hermits and the monks, the nuns, the virgins, the infants at the breast,
the betrothed men and the women to whom they were betrothed! …Ah! what a
bitter tale!  The city of Abgar, the friend of Christ, was trampled
underfoot because of our iniquity:  the priests were massacred, the deacons
immolated, the subdeacons crushed, the temples pillaged, the altars
overturned!  Alas! what a calamity!  Fathers denied their children; the
mother forgot her affection for her little ones!  While the sword was
devouring and everyone was fleeing to the mountaintop, some gathered their
children, like a hen her chicks, and waited to die together by the sword or
else to be led off together into captivity!  Some aged priests, who were
carrying the relics of the martyrs, seeing this raging destruction, recited
the words of the prophet:  “I will endure the Lord’s wrath, because I have
sinned against Him and angered Him.”8  And they did not take flight, nor did
they cease praying until the sword rendered them mute.  Then they were found
at the same spot, their blood spilled all around them…. The Turks descended
from the citadel upon those who had remained in the churches or in other
places, whether because of old age, or as a result of some other infirmity,
and they tortured them, showing no pity.  Those who had escaped from being
suffocated or trampled [in the crush] and had left the city with the Franks
were surrounded by the Turks, who rained down upon them a hail of arrows
which cruelly pierced them through.  O cloud of wrath and day without mercy!
In which the scourge of violent wrath once again struck the unfortunate
Edessenians.  O night of death, morning of hell, day of perdition! which
arose against the citizens of that excellent city.  Alas, my brethren!  Who
could recount or hear without tears how the mother and the infant that she
carried in her arms were pierced through by the same arrow, without anyone
to lift them up or to remove the arrow!  And soon, [as they lay] in that
state, the hooves of the horses of those who were pursuing them pounded them
furiously!  That whole night they had been pierced by arrows, and at
daybreak, which was for them even darker, they were struck by the swords and
the lances!... And then the earth shivered with horror at the massacre that
took place:  like the sickle on the stalks of grain, or like fire among wood
chips, the sword carried off the Christians.  The corpses of priests,
deacons, monks, noblemen and the poor were abandoned pell-mell.  Yet,
although their death was cruel, they nevertheless did not have as much to
suffer as those who remained alive;  for when the latter fell in the midst
of the fire and the wrath of the Turks, [those barbarians] stripped them of
their clothing and of their footwear. Striking them with rods, they forced
them – men and women, naked and with their hands tied behind their backs –
to run with the horses;  those perverts pierced the belly of anyone who grew
faint and fell to the ground, and left him to die along the road.  And so
they became the prey of wild beasts, and then they expired, or else the food
of birds of prey, in which case they were tortured.  The air was poisoned
with the stench of the corpses;  Assyria was filled with captives.
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to