Military Review

Crusaders - fascists in iron armor and white cloaks

Crusaders - fascists in iron armor and white cloaks

The Crusaders are fascists in iron armor and white cloaks with a red cross, led by the Fuhrer - the Catholic Pope.

A recently read note on a lecture by Pope Benedict XVI at the University of Regensburg entitled "Faith, Reason and the University" became the reason for writing this article. Let me remind you that in his youth, dad, whose name in the world was Joseph Alois Ratzinger, became a member of the Hitler Youth in 1941, later during World War II he was a soldier in an anti-aircraft battalion, and in 1944 joined the Austrian Legion air defense unit created under the patronage of Himmler .

Speaking to the gathering, the pontiff said that Muhammad brought to the world only "something evil and inhuman, such as his order to spread by the sword the faith he preached." A week after the scandal broke out, he expressed regret that his words were only a quotation from the medieval text of the Byzantine emperor of the XIV century Manuel II and did not reflect his personal opinion.

One day in the Middle Ages, another pope named Urban II addressed the assembly in France, delivered a fiery speech and unleashed bloody wars that entered into history humanity like the Crusades.

People of the Scripture

The fact is that in Islam all biblical prophets are deeply revered, they are mentioned in the Koran, and Jews and Christians are called “People of the Book”, since the Almighty sent down to them the Psalter, the Torah and the Bible.

I will give the names of the same prophets in the Koranic, Christian and Jewish interpretations.

Biblical Adam and Eve Adam and Havva in Islam.
Biblical Enoch and the Jewish Hanoch in the Koranic version is Idris. This prophet is the great-great-grandson of Adam and the great-great-grandson of Nuh, the biblical Noah.
Biblical Noah or the Jewish Noah - the Islamic prophet Nuh.
Hud is an Islamic prophet identified with the Old Testament everer (Eber, Ebor).
Ibrahim - Islamic prophet, identified with the biblical Abraham.
Ibrahim (Abraham) - the ancestor of the Arabs along the line of Ismail (in the biblical interpretation - Ishmael, Jewish - Ishmael), Jews (along the line of Ishak (in the biblical interpretation - Isaac)).
Yusuf (Yusuf) - Islamic prophet, identified with the biblical Joseph and the Jewish Yosef.
His father Yakub (Jakub) is biblical Jacob.
Loot in Islam is Biblical Lot.
Ayyub (Ayyub) is identified with the Christian Job, Jewish Job.
Islamic Prophet Harun - Biblical and Jewish Aaron.
Harun's brother - prophet and messenger of Musa - biblical Moses and Jewish Moses.
The holiday of Ashura (fasting for two days) Sunnis celebrate the successful exodus of the Jews, led by Moses, from Egypt from the oppression of the pharaoh.
The Muslim prophet Ilyas (Ilyas) is identified with the Christian Elijah or Jewish Elijah.
Al-Yasa (Al-Yasaa) - a prophet, a disciple of the prophet Ilyas, is identified with the Christian Elisha, Jewish Elishcha.
Yunus (Yunus) - a famous biblical and Jewish prophet Jonah.
Shuaib - a prophet identified with the biblical Yofor or Jewish Yitro.
Prophet Samuel - biblical Ishmail, Jewish Shmuel - "heard by God."
King and Prophet Daoud - Biblical David and Jewish Dawood.
Sent to David Psalter in Islam it is called Zabur.
His son Suleiman is a famous biblical Solomon or the Hebrew Shlomo.
The Islamic prophet Uzeyr (Uzayr) is identified with the biblical Ezra and Jewish Ezra.
The mother of Jesus is known in Islam as Maryam (Maryam) or Maria in Christianity.
The Muslim prophet Yahya (Yahya) is identified with the biblical John the Baptist (John the Baptist) and the Jewish Johan bar Zecharya.
His father Zakaria is identified with the Christian Zachary (Jewish Zachariah).
Prophet Isa in Islam is identified with the biblical Jesus and Jewish Yeshu.
The last prophet on earth is the Islamic prophet and messenger Mohammad.

Umayyad Mosque

What was the relationship between Islam and Christianity, shown on the example of the visit to Syria of the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin in the report “Without the right to make a mistake. Christmas visit to Damascus” (Russia 24).

I give the content and quotes from the report.

“The cortege arrives at the Umayyad Mosque, one of the most sacred places for Muslims around the world. But it is also a special place for Christians. In the center of one of the main Islamic shrines is the tomb of St. John the Baptist. According to legend, part of the head of John the Baptist rests here. For Muslims, this is the mausoleum of the prophet Yahya and the place where, according to the legend, the second coming of Jesus Christ should happen.
The place is unique, there is definitely no second like it in the world. Here, Christians and Muslims can pray side by side, and here Christians and Muslims believe that the Last Judgment will begin.
The Great Mosque of Damascus is considered the most liberal mosque in the world. Here, the People of the Book are treated as tolerantly as possible and they never ask at the entrance what god a person believes in. God is one and the point.
Putin does not come to the mosque empty-handed; he donates an edition of the Holy Book of the XNUMXth century. The Koran, which Putin handed over to the mosque, is now in eternal storage in the museum. The usually closed tomb of John the Baptist, which is located in the center of the prayer hall, is opened for the Russian president.”

V. V. Putin:

“The visit took place during the days when we celebrated Orthodox Christmas. It was a matter of course that we visited a Christian church. But I really wanted to visit the Umayyad Mosque, because the relics of John the Baptist (John the Baptist) are kept there. It was unexpected for me that the relics of John the Baptist are preserved in the mosque, moreover, they are carefully preserved and revered in the Islamic world. This saint for those people who profess Islam is the prophet Yahya. There, Jesus Christ is revered, this is Isa. Here is the closeness of the two world religions, which are based on common moral values, universal, humanitarian values, this cannot but arouse interest and respect. By the way, thanks in this case to the representatives of Islam for the preservation of Christian shrines.

The director of the museum, who accompanied the president, is happy to show and tell the history of the mosque:

“After the pagans were expelled, part of the temple was converted into a large church of St. John. And so it was until the advent of Islam in 636. Muslims discovered the lands of the Levant and came to Damascus. Christians - parishioners of the temple offered to build a mosque next to the church, in which they could pray. Therefore, before the Umayyad mosque there was a mosque called As-sakha. The church and the mosque, both small in size, were in the same place, and the whole complex had one entrance through which both Muslims and Christians entered. The Muslims went to the right towards their mosque, and the Christians went to the left towards their church. And so it went on for about 70 years. And during this period there is no mention of any differences between Muslims and Christians.

I would like to add a report.

Both Christians and Muslims come to pray at the Umayyad Mosque. This place in the Aramaic era was occupied by the temple of Hadad, in the Roman era - by the temple of Jupiter, in Byzantine times a Christian church appeared, in which one of the shrines of Christianity was kept - the relics of John the Baptist.

Muslims in 636, having conquered ancient Damascus, did not destroy the church, they only made an extension of adobe brick opposite the southern wall of the temple. Soon the area of ​​the church and the mosque turned out to be insufficient, it was decided to build a large mosque with the preservation of shrines common to both religions. They bought the church from the Christians and started building a mosque. A huge complex 125 meters long and 50 meters wide was built. 12 thousand workers, the best artists, architects, stone craftsmen from Athens, Rome, Constantinople, and the countries of the Arab East were involved.

The southeastern minaret bears the name of the prophet Isa (Jesus). According to Christian and Islamic teachings, it is on the eve of the Last Judgment that he will descend from heaven to earth. For this reason, on the ground under the minaret, where the foot of Jesus should set foot, the imam of the mosque lays a new carpet every day.

The mosque was built from 706 to 715. During its laying, the builders discovered a burial. According to the Syrian Christians, it was an ancient grave with the head of John the Baptist or the Muslim prophet Yahya, who was killed on the orders of King Herod. In the eastern part is the tomb of the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad - Hussein ibn Ali.

An idyllic picture of the world... Muslims, creating their caliphate, did not organize massacres and robbery in the conquered cities, because their goal was to carry monotheism.

The intrigues of the Vatican in the distant past led to the fact that the Christian Church split into the Western, that is, the Catholic - "worldwide", and the Eastern, that is, the Orthodox - "correctly glorifying God." The Vatican did not stop there. Through the efforts of the Roman Catholic Church, Islam began to be propagated as something bloody and hostile. Muslims were allowed by the Almighty to take up weapon against the pagans who threatened them and the lives of their families.

What movies and series do we remember when we hear the phrase "Crusades"?

Personally, I remember "Kingdom of Heaven" (2005) and many films about Robin Hood - the son of a representative of the English nobility, who was unjustly deprived of his title and possessions, who, after returning from the Crusade, sided with the dispossessed.

But these films do not tell how and why the popes unleashed these same Crusades, which lasted several centuries, brought with them hundreds of thousands of murders and robberies. In the minds of people there is only a version that the Muslims captured Jerusalem and the crusaders set off to liberate the Holy City for the three world religions.

He will come on foot with his servant on a camel

Let me remind you how the Arabs occupied Jerusalem in 677. The warriors of Islam laid siege to the ancient city, called Al-Quds by the Arabs, and kept it under siege for 4 months. Soon, a proposal was received from the rulers of the city and the Orthodox Patriarch Sofroniy - they were ready to surrender Jerusalem, but not to the military, but to Caliph Umar. According to tradition, the ruler of the Muslim ummah was in Medina. The one who controlled vast lands set out on a journey to take over the Holy City, taking with him only one servant and one camel.

Umar, famous for his justice, rode alternately with his servant on the ship of the desert. When they got to Jerusalem, it was the servant's turn to ride the camel. He said that it was not proper for the caliph to walk in front of those who were going to surrender the city to him. But Umar insisted that he would keep his word, and so, leading the camel on which the servant rode, the righteous caliph appeared before the Orthodox patriarchs and the Jewish high priests. Seeing this, the Jews remembered the legend that the keys to the city should be handed over to the ruler who would come on foot with his servant, sitting on a camel.

According to biblical prophecy, “a poor but just and powerful man” will rise to become the protector and ally of the Christians of the Holy City.” Umar was not only fair, but also a physically powerful and strong man, and at the same time, having converted to Islam, he became an ascetic. Immediately the Jews told about the legends to Umar, handed over the keys to the important city of Jerusalem for the three world religions.

The next day Umar entered Jerusalem. Patriarch Sofroniy showed him the temples of the city. At that moment, when the azan sounded, calling for midday prayer, Umar and the patriarch were in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Sophronius suggested that the Caliph pray there, in the temple. Umar did not accept the invitation and left the temple. He went out into the street, spread a rug next to the temple and prayed, because he wanted the temple to remain a temple.

Umar suggested that in the future, the fact that the caliph, as the ruler of the Muslim world, performed namaz inside an Orthodox temple could become an example that Muslims would follow. Appreciating the wisdom and care of Caliph Umar, Sophrony of Jerusalem gave him the keys to the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

An agreement was signed between Caliph Umar and Patriarch Sofroniy, according to which the Muslim Ummah guaranteed the safety of the people of Jerusalem, promised to preserve life, property, churches, temples, their property and other freedoms.

In those days, the peoples were distinguished by religious intolerance, the conquerors considered it their duty to convert the conquered peoples to their religion. For the first time, Islam destroyed this tradition, guaranteeing the preservation of the conquered peoples of their faith, except for paganism. In exchange, they had to pay a tax called jizya.

People always pay taxes. And to the Roman Catholic Church every person paid taxes. The people of Jerusalem used to pay taxes to their Persian or Byzantine conquerors. But in those lands people were forced to change their faith. If a person did not agree, then they killed him. Jizya was a small amount that was assigned only to adult able-bodied men, and children, women, the elderly and the sick were exempt from tax.

Among other things, the Muslims set the jizya at such a rate that it was several times less than what, for example, the inhabitants of the Holy City had previously paid to the Byzantines or Persians. Receipts from jizya were intended for the organization of military protection and existed throughout the territory of the Arab Caliphate.

Thus, the Jewish and Christian predictions came true, the city was not plundered, no one was killed, everyone lived in good and harmony.

Pope Urban II, in order to unleash a war, presented the flock in a different light.
We can read about what really happened in Jerusalem on the eve of the Crusades in the book by M. A. Zaborov “The Papacy and the Crusades”:

“Later, some time after the crusading movement unfolded, Western chroniclers, in order to justify it, invented various legends about the Seljuk persecution of Christians in Eastern countries, about the desecration of Christian shrines by “pagans”, and the persecution of pilgrims heading to Jerusalem. Historians of subsequent centuries picked up these legends, embellished them with all sorts of details.

Numerous authors have painted much the same picture, arguing that the Seljuks created a threat to "Christianity", and this required the military intervention of pious Catholics, led by the papacy.

Similar ideas about the immediate causes of the Crusades are still widespread today. However, they do not correspond to the facts attested by many medieval writers. The Seljuks were not at all characterized by fanatical religious intolerance. In relation to the Gentiles, they continued the loyal policy that had been established back in the days of Arab domination. The Seljuks did not impose any serious restrictions on Christians in religious matters.

Moreover, for adherents of the Christian confessions that prevailed in Asia Minor, Syria, Palestine (Orthodox, Monophysites, Nestorians, Gregorians, etc.), the Seljuk conquest meant getting rid of the religious and fiscal oppression of the Byzantine church. It is indicative that the Christians - the inhabitants of the Eastern Mediterranean countries - never sought protection from the religious persecution attributed to the Seljuks - neither in the West, nor in Byzantium.

Yes, and Western pilgrims, as before, could visit Jerusalem without being insulted by the Seljuk rulers. The Seljuks charged pilgrims a certain fee for visiting the "holy city", but in the same way in Constantinople the pilgrims had to pay a tax to the Byzantine authorities; therefore, it is impossible to see in this a sign of religious intolerance of the Seljuks. There were still two hotels in Jerusalem, maintained there at the expense of the city of Amalfi. And the empty place, which the Christians called the "holy tomb", was in complete safety.

True, the pilgrims had to change the land route to the sea route, since the situation in Asia Minor made it difficult to travel to Jerusalem, but this circumstance had nothing to do with the persecution of Christians. Meanwhile, historians have always blamed the Seljuks for precisely this.

Stories about the sufferings of Eastern Christians under the Seljuks, the obstacles placed on pilgrims, etc. - all these are, to a large extent, idle inventions of later Byzantine and Western church writers. They deliberately sowed rumors about all sorts of Seljuk atrocities against "Christianity", doing this for purely political purposes - in order to facilitate the influx of new military contingents from the West with fables about the threat to Christian shrines from "infidels". Similar rumors spread from papal Rome.

The news of the most insignificant complications that occurred among pilgrims in the East and which were inevitable in the conditions of anarchy that reigned there during the collapse of the Seljuk empire, were deliberately blown up to enormous proportions. The papacy took advantage of Western Europe's poor awareness of what was going on in the East to misinform the Catholic world. According to Caen, Rome gave out the catastrophe that befell Byzantium, for disasters allegedly experienced by Eastern "Christianity" in general.

The Seljuk conquest served as a pretext for preparing a war between the West and the East, allegedly in the name of religion, only insofar as it dealt a blow to Byzantium, which had long been the object of the desires of the Roman Curia.

If in our time the West, under the auspices of "protection of human rights" and "democracy", sends NATO and other satellites to rob countries, then under the pretext of protecting religion, the same thing was carried out.

It is believed that one speech by Pope Urban II inspired thousands of people to sign up as volunteers for the crusade. This is a big misconception. To unleash the war, a lot of preliminary work was done, begun by his predecessor, Pope Gregory VII.

In 1020/1025, near Tuscany, the boy Hildebrand (Hildebrant) was born - the future pope, who remained in history with the nickname "Saint Satan". According to some sources, the boy who will become Gregory VII was born into a peasant family, according to others - into the family of a blacksmith, according to others - into a family of poor landowners. A young man who dreamed of becoming a military man became a clergyman.

Over time, he ended up at the court of the German emperor, held positions under five Roman pontiffs, he helped some of them ascend to the papal throne. There is a version that he rigged his election during the funeral of his predecessor, when from the crowd of those present they began to shout: “Let Hildebrand be dad”, and soon a man with a mantle appeared and put it on his shoulders. So, in 1173, he entered the cathedral as a monk, and left as a pontiff. It was he who introduced celibacy - mandatory celibacy for priests, and already married people were supposed to divorce their wives.

M. A. Zaborov in the book "The Papacy and the Crusades" writes about the goals of the new pontiff:

“The Pope wanted to impose an ecclesiastical union on Byzantium on the terms of the complete subordination of the Greek Church to Rome. However, the exorbitant demands of Gregory VII, put forward by him during the negotiations, ran into opposition in Constantinople.

It was then that the pope had the idea to achieve his goals by armed force. He planned to organize a military campaign to the East, covering his true goals with the slogans of protecting the Christian faith and helping the Greeks against the Seljuk Muslims.

To return the Greek Church to the Roman bosom, to expand the sphere of influence of Catholicism at the expense of Byzantium, by force to include it in the orbit of papal influence, to seize the riches of the Greek Orthodox Church - these were the true goals of Gregory VII.

The greater the influence of the papacy, the greater the power and income, and their lust for power and money knows no bounds.

Where did dad start? In 1075, the "Diktat of the Pope" was published, in accordance with which he stood up for the right of non-jurisdiction, infallibility and supreme dominance in the world of the Roman pontiffs. Saying:

“Gold is not as valuable as lead as priestly power is higher than royal power.”

declared that, having power from God, the popes have the right to appoint and depose not only clerics, but also monarchs.

F. Gregovius in the book "History of the city of Rome in the Middle Ages (from the XNUMXth to the XNUMXth centuries)" writes:

“Having barely entered the papal throne, Gregory had already embarrassed the kings with his plan to create a second world domination of Rome. The lands of the West were to be turned into fiefs of the Roman Church, and their sovereigns were to become vassals of St. Peter."

The Pontiff sent letters to foreign sovereigns announcing that their lands belonged to the Holy See:

“... Gregory VII considered himself a fief sovereign of Bohemia on the grounds that Alexander II (the former pontiff - ed.) allowed the Duke of Bratislava to wear a miter; further - the sovereign of Russia because the fugitive prince of Novgorod visited the tomb of St. Peter and declared his country the fief possession of the apostle; then - the sovereign of Hungary, since Henry III brought the state spear and crown of this country as a gift to St. Peter's Basilica when he conquered it. Having ascended the papal throne, Gregory immediately sent Cardinal Hugo to Spain in order to achieve recognition in it of the sovereignty of the Roman Church, since this state allegedly belonged to St. Peter.
Gregory presented the same demands to Corsica, Sardinia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Poland, Scandinavia and England, seriously considering all these countries the property of St. Peter. With his bold plan, Gregory wanted to provide the church with secular power over vast lands in all countries, completely free it from vassalage in relation to the crown, subordinate the church to the pope alone, and thus create a Roman church state from half of Europe.

- cites information M. A. Zaborov.

It is impossible to compare the incomparable - Pope Gregory VII and the Prophet Muhammad. But each of them was the head of his flock. From this side I hope to be correctly understood. The Prophet Muhammad, being the head of the Muslim Ummah, sent letters calling for monotheism to the rulers of Ethiopia (Abyssinia), Egypt, Bahrain, Byzantium, Iran (Persia), Oman, Busra, the governor of Damascus. There was no mention of any personal submission.

Further, Gregory VII came up with the idea of ​​becoming the head of the church of Catholic Rome and Orthodox Byzantium, a predatory European campaign against the Muslim world, cynically calling it "God's Project". At the same time, he pursued the goal of becoming the ruler over the monarchs of Europe, that is, to combine as many as three hypostases - the pope, the Byzantine patriarch and the emperor of the monarchs of Europe.

But man proposes and God disposes. Gregory VII died, but his work did not die, it continued and was implemented by Pope Urban II.

In the West - poverty and hunger, and in the East - wealth: plunder!

In Medieval Europe, an economic crisis raged, exacerbated by lean years and the banditry of knights generated by the inheritance system.

Where did the knights who robbed in Europe come from?

Two reasons. The first is the lean years, the crisis, due to which the feudal lords lost the opportunity to pay the knights. The second is a system of inheritance known as primacy. Imagine a feudal lord who has three sons. After the death of the father, the elder receives everything, the second is attached to the monastery, and the third is given a horse, a spear and a shield. And so on throughout the territory of the former Western Roman Empire. And there are dozens, if not hundreds of thousands of such younger sons all over Europe. From childhood, they were taught to wield weapons, they grew up as professional warriors, they don’t know how to do anything else. To feed themselves, they gather in groups and begin to rob people in the counties and duchies of their older brothers with impunity.

The pontiff dreams of sending these knights on campaigns of conquest. But for this you need to prepare the ground.

“Having arrived in France, Urban II began one by one to go around the Cluniac cloisters in the south of the country. Here, in deep secrecy, negotiations were carried on for a future war, which was to surpass in scale the recent Spanish expeditions of the French feudal lords. With whom, if not with the Cluniac monks, could the pope consult about his plan and ways to implement it? And if Urban II himself, this plan was probably drawn only in general terms, then as a result of meetings with the leaders of the Cluniac monasteries, he became more clear.
The “Holy War” that was being prepared by the Apostolic See needed not only preachers with a cross in their hands, but, above all, warriors wielding a sword, as well as authoritative church leaders. However, the student of Gregory VII was a politically shrewd enough to understand the simple truth: it would be incompatible with the interests of papal prestige to embark on an enterprise without first having the assurance that at the very beginning it would be supported by at least a few influential secular and ecclesiastical lords. And dad really tried to enlist their support.
On the way to Clermont, he made two important visits: first, in August 1095, Urban II met in the city of Puy with a prominent church leader, Bishop Adémar of Monteil. The pope later gave him the official leadership of the crusaders.
In September of the same year, Urban II visited the Count of Toulouse - Raymond IV. Urban II wanted to ensure the consent of the count to participate in the planned event: the initiative of Raymond IV, one of the largest princes of Southern Europe, would serve as an example for other seniors. Raymond IV readily went to meet the wishes of Urban II: as we will see, the war that the apostolic throne started was in full accordance with the interests of this feudal lord, ”

- describes the preparatory work for the famous speech of Pope Urban II, historian M. A. Zaborov.

Thousands of people gathered in Clermont, waiting for the pope, whom the city could hardly contain. The lower classes, exhausted by hunger, thousands of knights, hungry for profit, ordinary people in anticipation of important events. Representatives of the clergy did not stand aside: over two hundred bishops, four hundred abbots, archbishops of France. After all, the speech of the pontiff had to be heard, remembered, absorbed and passed on to the flock, which was not present.

The Pope needs to find such words so that, under a plausible pretext, he sends knights to where there is gold, silver, lands, harvested several times a year and this place is called the Holy Land.

If these crowds of bandit knights fall at the hands of Muslims, the pope will declare them holy martyrs, and he himself will rejoice that peace will reign in Europe and the number of beggars will decrease. But if they seize the lands, the principalities controlled by the pope in the Holy Land are formed, so this will be a very important bonus. If the knights bring with them trophies in the form of gold, silver, and other good things, then this is an additional enrichment.

In the modern world, the West creates money out of thin air, by pressing keys on the computers of the Fed, the European Central Bank, etc., but medieval Europe needed precious metals to mint the coins needed to get out of a protracted economic crisis.

Pope Urban II promised the mendicant people of Medieval Europe forgiveness of their debts to the church. Every Catholic was required to pay a poll tax. In the absence of money, it was possible to replace the products.

The pontiff promised everyone, including criminals, the forgiveness of past and future sins, not only in the campaign to the Holy Land, but also with the Muslims in Spain. He permitted robbery on the road to Jerusalem so that they could find food.

Researchers talk about the existence of four versions of the text of Urban II's speech, but they are identical in their main message: whoever is poor in Europe will be happy and rich in the Holy Land. In the West - poverty and hunger, and in the East - wealth, and Jerusalem is the most fertile land, it is like a second paradise. The speech of the pontiff was interrupted by loud exclamations:

"That's what God wants! That's what God wants!"

Before Urban II had time to finish his speech, those who wished began to sew crosses of red ribbons on their rags as a sign of consent to go on a campaign, from there the name "crusaders" appeared, and later - red crosses on the white cloaks of robber knights. Later, the words of the pope began to be repeated in all Catholic temples and churches in Europe, driving the medieval poor crazy.

Papa did not limit himself to one performance in Clermont, he will continue his “tours” in France for eight months. In addition to representatives of the Catholic Church, various “saints” and “holy fools” who had prophetic dreams, visions, they could work miracles and tell “sacred fables” will be involved in the cause of the call, because

"The crusade is a divine act, not a human one."

Dad wanted the campaign to be in 8-12 months, and his speech inspired so much that after a couple of months, despite the approaching cold, there were many who wanted to. In addition, the natural phenomena that occurred in 1095 (lunar eclipse, meteor shower) were perceived as a blessing for the campaign.

Urban II addressed the knights, but not the kings against the Muslim world. The fact is that in the confrontation with the Seljuk Turks, the Byzantine emperor Roman IV Diogenes, leading an army that greatly outnumbers the enemy, was captured in 1071 at the Battle of Manazkert (Manzikert). Not only for the Byzantine Empire, but for the entire Western world, the capture of the emperor by Sultan Alp-Arslan was a bolt from the blue.

Roman IV was released for a ransom of 1,5 million nominees. Urban II, knowing that the European kings were afraid of the Seljuk Turks, so it would be difficult to lure them into a war against the Muslims, he focused on recruiting knights.

Professional thugs

Historians identify the following Crusades:

Crusade of the "poor" (1096).
First crusade (1096–1099).
Second crusade (1147–1149).
Third Crusade (1189–1192).
Fourth Crusade (1202–1204).
Children's crusade (1212).
Fifth Crusade (1213–1221).
Sixth Crusade (1228–1229).
Seventh Crusade (1248–1254).
Eighth Crusade (1270).

In the first Catholic campaign, a continuous unorganized poor, led by an ascetic monk, but with outstanding oratory skills, Peter Hermit and an impoverished knight named Walter, nicknamed Golyak (beggar), advanced. According to various sources, from 100 to 300 thousand people came forward - thieves, impoverished peasants, robbers, ruined knights, other antisocial elements, and even ladies with low social responsibility.

There is evidence that there were numerous families with children. They, armed with pitchforks and axes, on their way robbed and killed the Christian and Jewish population for the crucifixion of Jesus. The robbers were rebuffed on the lands of the Hungarians, Bulgarians, Czechs, French, Germans, Byzantines, through which their path passed. A significantly thinned army reached the lands of the Seljuk Turks, which was destroyed as soon as they found themselves on the territory of the ancestors of modern Turks in Asia Minor.

After such a defeat, the Catholic Church declared the so-called "God's peace", which meant a ban on skirmishes and military conflicts. Under the guise of concern for the lives of Christians, one thing was hidden - the lives of Europeans must be saved so that they perish in the East. Following the banner of predatory campaigns for the poor, the knights picked up. These were already professional thugs, whose actions M.A. Zaborov describes as follows:

“Before reaching Constantinople, this band of robbers began to rob and rape. The Lorraine knights plundered all of Lower Thrace. Violent violence against the population of Epirus, Macedonia and Thrace was perpetrated by the Norman knights of Bohemond of Tarentum.
The crusaders of the Count of Toulouse marked their passage through Dalmatia with no less wild robberies. The southern French chronicler Raymond of Aguilera, who was the count's chaplain during the campaign, in his "History of the Franks who took Jerusalem", tells how the farmers of Slavonia (Dalmatia) refused to sell anything to the knights and give them guides, how, when the crusaders approached, they fled from their sat down, killed cattle, so that it would not go to the robbers with crosses on banners.
The inhabitants of Slavonia saw in the crusaders primarily robbers and rapists. Yes, they really were. Raymond of Toulouse, for example, gained notoriety in Dalmatia for his atrocities: once (his chaplain tells about this not without pride) he ordered the eyes to be gouged out and the arms and legs of the Dalmatians captured by his knights to be cut off.
The entire path of the Western crusaders across the Balkan Peninsula was accompanied by unbridled robberies and robberies. But that was only the beginning. In all its ugliness, the behavior of Christ's soldiers appeared later.

Catholic monks began to build inns along the roads, eager to send out knights and the poor, especially those who lived nearby, moving dangerous social elements away not only from their ecclesiastical possessions, but also from Europe. Bishops and abbots began to buy up real estate and estates of seniors, who were attracted to the campaign by a thirst for profit and military glory.

Once in the Holy Land, the crusaders were in no hurry to Jerusalem. They went to plunder cities, capture fortresses and establish their dynasties. After 3 years of paths, consisting of robberies and violence, on June 7, 1099, the fascist crusaders stood at the walls of the desired city with a long history.

In Solomon's temple, the blood reached the knees of the horsemen

The peace-loving emir of Jerusalem, Iftikar ad-Daul, offered the crusaders an unhindered pilgrimage to the holy places, but without weapons and in small groups, but received a militant answer: they did not come to liberate the Church of the Holy Sepulcher ...

During the capture of Jerusalem by the crusaders on July 15, 1099, at least 10 citizens were killed, regardless of nationality and religion, because they could not be distinguished externally from each other. The knights achieved what they were heading to the Holy City for - they completely sacked Jerusalem.

The keys to Jerusalem were given to Muslims without bloodshed, and 400 years later, during the crusade, the city was brutally conquered.

E. Larina in the article “Jerusalem Massacre. How the Crusaders plundered the Holy City in the name of Christ” describes these events:

“According to historians, the city almost literally drowned in blood. People were slaughtered by whole families, and the crusaders turned their homes and all their property into their own property. A year before the capture of Jerusalem, the same terrible fate befell the inhabitants of Maarra, which stood in their way, the population of which the crusaders exterminated almost completely. Damascus survived only by a miracle - the army of the crusaders rebelled and reminded their commanders of the ultimate goal of the campaign.
Jerusalem has historically been a holy place for Christians, Jews and Muslims alike. Entering the city, the crusaders burned the Jews who were fleeing in their temples, destroyed and plundered the holy places of the Muslims. In the temple of Solomon, the blood reached the knees of the horsemen, and the heads of babies were smashed on the pavements in order to cleanse the city with the blood of the infidels, chroniclers testify.
The Kingdom of Jerusalem actually existed until the XNUMXth century, supporting itself with new crusades.

A. Bokk in the article “City of David and Solomon. Jerusalem is the capital of living history" writes:

“But the most important thing is that the massacres against Muslims, routinely committed by Christian knights during the campaign, caused a response from the Muslims, who were now eager to avenge their brothers in faith, not distinguishing between the right and the wrong. And looking at the modern Middle East, it becomes clear that what began 900 years ago has not ended to this day.
And the main inspirer of the crusade, Pope Urban II, died on July 29, 1099, two weeks after the capture of Jerusalem. But at a time when there was no telegraph, telephone, radio and Internet, two weeks for transmission News from Jerusalem to Rome was not enough - the new pontiff already learned about the "liberation of the Holy Sepulcher."

After a successful campaign, when the knights not only looted, but also founded their own monarchical dynasties, European monarchs joined the crusades - King of France Louis VII and German Emperor Conrad III. Against the backdrop of the Second Crusade, Pope Eugene III proposed a crusade against the Slavs.

The second campaign did not achieve the desired goals, was considered unsuccessful. The pope, who blessed robbery, violence and death, was nicknamed the Antichrist, his teacher and assistant Saint Bernard from the prophets rolled into false prophets. But if they were satisfied with the seizures, the looted property, then they would be carried in their arms ...

But the papacy did not stop its bloody activities. Popes Gregory VIII and his successor Clement III initiated the Third Crusade, in which the most powerful monarchs of medieval Europe took part: the English king Richard I the Lionheart, the German emperor Frederick I Barbarossa, the French king Philip II, the Austrian Duke Leopold V, who were opposed by the Sultan Saladin (Salah ad-Din).

The elderly German emperor Frederick Barbarossa, having won several victories, died while crossing the river in 1190, before reaching the Holy Land. Considering this a bad sign, many of the German crusaders returned.

The opposing sides were dissatisfied with what had been achieved. Jerusalem was recaptured by the Muslims, Saladin allowed Christian pilgrims to visit the Holy City. The death of the sultan from a fever and the division of his empire among his heirs greatly increased the chances of the conquering crusaders.

Your deeds are the deeds of the devil

It is impossible not to talk about the pontiff Innocent III, whose activities were described with the phrase:

"Your words are the words of God, but your deeds are the deeds of the devil."

The years of "service" of Innocent III: 1198-1216, that is, he unleashed the 4th, 5th and Children's Crusades.

Innocent III tirelessly searched for orators who could inspire the people for new predatory campaigns. In France, he found a priest who gained a reputation among the masses as "God's man", working miracles and healing the sick. The monarchs of Medieval Europe remained deaf to the aspirations of the pontiff and his envoy.

The French king Philip II replied that one crusade is enough for a human life. Richard the Lionheart stated the following:

“You advise me to renounce my three daughters - pride, greed and debauchery. Well, well, I give them to the more worthy: my pride to the Templars, my greed to the Cistercian monks and my debauchery to the priests.

The pontiff got his way only when he lured the crusaders into debt traps and doomed them to trials of hunger, after which they had no choice but to go to war.

Venice undertook to provide vessels for the crossing of 4,5 thousand knights and horses for them, 9 thousand squires and 20 thousand infantrymen. The Crusaders undertook to pay Venice 85 marks of silver for this in installments of four installments, and also to give half of everything that would be looted by them. The trap was that the crusaders pledged to pay 85 marks, regardless of how many knights came to Venice.

As the historian M.A. Zaborov writes, although the crusaders did not know about the impending trap, when signing the treaty, Innocent III was well aware of this. The pontiff willingly approved the agreement, set a small condition: the crusaders would not fight against the Christians.

By the appointed time (summer 1202), the crusaders gathered in Venice, but they turned out to be significantly less than the expected number of soldiers. They were taken to the island of Lido, and for accommodating they began to starve and torment them with thirst. Of the required money, only 51 were raised. The Venetians wanted to conquer the Christian city of Zadar on the Adriatic coast with the help of the crusaders.

The crusaders, remembering the prohibition of Innocent III, turned to him for clarification. The pontiff, whose deeds were from Satan, replied that it is better to atone for a small evil with a great good deed than to return home as inglorious sinners, leaving the crusading vow unfulfilled.

So, with the assistance of the pontiff Innocent III, the crusaders drew their swords against their own Christians.

How did the Crusaders kill Byzantium?

The next time they did it was against the Byzantine Empire, whose wealth and power haunted Catholic priests and crusaders.

It is generally accepted that the Byzantine Empire, which existed in 1123, fell under the onslaught of the young Ottoman Empire, forgetting to mention that before that it was the West that plunged this empire into an abyss of decline, and then finished it off with the Fourth Crusade, and it did this for several decades: from 1204 to 1261.

The situation preceding the fall of the empire is colorfully described by the historian V. E. Shambarov in the book “The Tsar of Terrible Rus'”:

“... Byzantium has fallen into decline. The main reason was the change in its policy. The kings from the Komnenos and Angels dynasties, instead of using national forces and resources, headed for "friendship" with the West. They let foreign bankers and merchants into the country, giving them the broadest rights. Western fashions, mores, and management models were introduced into the empire. As a result, Constantinople, the city of the nouveau riches, nobles and oligarchs, grew rich and flourished, while the province was ruined.
In order to receive the help of Europe, Michael Palaiologos sacrificed the Faith, concluding the Union of Lyon with the Pope in 1274. And although it was terminated by the son of Michael, Andronicus II, but the following emperors again reached out to the Vatican. John V personally appeared in Rome, humiliated himself in front of the pope and kissed his shoe. And under John VIII, the Council of Florence passed and in 1439 he concluded the union for the second time.
And in Byzantium itself, the majority of Orthodox rejected the union. Instead of strengthening the country, it caused a split among the people. Meanwhile, the Ottoman Turks were getting stronger. They actually did not conquer, but settled the deserted lands of the empire. Often the inhabitants voluntarily gave themselves under their protection.
The last emperors had neither the strength nor the means to fight the Ottomans, they preferred to pay tribute. Only Constantinople and a few patches of territory in the Sea and Crimea remained from the former power. With regard to the Orthodox, the sultans behaved wisely, took them under their protection. And the union did not bring the slightest benefit to the Byzantine kings. They didn't get any help from the West anyway.
In 1453, as a punishment for stupid politics and intrigues, Mehmed II laid siege and stormed Constantinople, and another, Ottoman, was spread on the site of the disappeared empire.

The fall of the Byzantine Empire began when the West involved it in a trade alliance called the Golden Bull. Only with time did the Byzantines realize that this treaty turned out to be enslaving and beneficial only to the West.

For some reason, I had a parallel with Ukraine. The West was desperately trying to force Yanukovych to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union. When the epiphany came to him, the trigger was already cocked over Ukraine, and after the signing of the Agreement on the settlement of the political crisis, the trigger was pulled.

In a matter of a decade, production and agriculture rapidly degraded, local producers became dependent on foreigners or went bankrupt. When the emperor Andronicus realized the perniciousness of the undertaking and annulled the Golden Bull agreement, tried to block the flows that bring financial resources abroad, he was killed.

The empire was finished off by the Venetian oligarchy, which organized a crusade and plundered Constantinople for fifty years. Today, the Cathedral of St. Mark in Venice is decorated with columns, marble, and precious interior decoration taken from Constantinople.

Many Byzantine treasures, works of art adorn the museums of European cities. Like mushrooms after the rain, the first European banks and pawnshops began to appear. Constantinople after 50 years was able to free itself from the greedy crusaders, but could not recover due to the emerging corruption and the oligarchs, who acquired their armies under the guise of servants, and later plunged the country into the abyss of civil wars.

The empire stopped educating the people, and under the influence of Western ideologies about violence against a person, it let the ideology take its course. She began to grovel before the Renaissance, forgetting about her thousand-year history. The pro-Westerners declared that Byzantium had exhausted itself as a political, cultural and religious phenomenon, they demanded the reorganization of all state institutions along the lines of Western European states. They prevailed over the patriotic forces.

Soon they began to revise, distort and rewrite the history of the empire, where victories were presented as defeat, traditions were ridiculed, the army was destroyed. Young people stopped loving and respecting their country, and rich parents began to send their offspring to study abroad.

The best minds of Byzantine science moved to the West, now they worked not for their empire, but for the destroying states. Having entered into a single military-political alliance with the West, the empire was left without an army. They started a reform, destroyed their army, but did not create a new one.

Doesn't it remind you of anything?

The fact that the last destructive point and the most terrible blow for Byzantium was the church union with Rome, says Metropolitan Tikhon Shevkunov in the documentary film “The Death of the Empire. Byzantine lesson ":

“Another terrible loss from the betrayal of faith was the loss of people's confidence in the authorities. And although not everyone accepted the union, the spirit of the people was broken. People no longer want to live. Rare families, if they were created, often did not have children. Abortions have become ubiquitous. The darkest occult and gnostic systems, characterized by a hatred of life, reigned supreme. Suicide has become one of the main causes of death among the population.”

After the Crusaders were driven out, Constantinople was a sad sight of a ruined and deserted city.

“The number of its inhabitants has decreased to 40-50 thousand. For comparison, before the capture of Constantinople by the crusaders, the population of this largest city in Europe, together with the surrounding inhabitants, was about a million people.

- cites information from T. A. Matasova in the book "Sophia Paleolog".

Peter I owns the words:

“And most of all, do not forget the deeds of the military, so as not to prepare for yourself the fate of the Byzantine Empire.”

All other crusades were led by European monarchs, but I would like to dwell separately on the Children's Crusade.

Children's Crusade

Historians write that at the beginning of the XNUMXth century in France and Germany, the peasants were in distress due to feudal civil strife and wars. In the West, from time immemorial, any distress is solved by unleashing wars and robberies of other lands and peoples. The idea was let into the masses: it is necessary to recapture Jerusalem once again, then the Almighty will have mercy, and the troubles will end, and innocent children are best suited for this role.

In France, the Catholic Church chose the twelve-year-old shepherd boy Etienne as a preacher. He went from one village to another, "performed miracles", talked about his visions, where he saw Jesus showing the way for the liberation of Jerusalem with the help of children. Later, many such imitative boys appeared, they began to unite in huge masses. They were joined by thieves, various criminal adult rabble and the urban poor.

The Catholic Church, inciting the flames of fanaticism, was able to recruit up to 30 children in one summer month. The “young crusaders” were sure that when they reached Marseilles, the waters of the Mediterranean would part before them, as before Moses. When this miracle did not happen, there were compassionate people who were ready to take the children across the sea on seven ships free of charge for the "retribution of God". Two ships with children sank during a storm, the remaining five ships took the children to the slave market in Egypt, and they joined the ranks of slaves.

In Germany, the boy Niklas was found, who was similarly joined by 20 boys and girls. Their bitter fate is described by M. A. Zaborov:

“Overcoming all difficulties, this army, leaving Cologne, headed along the Rhine, crossed the Alps (in the mountains, two-thirds of the participants in this campaign died of starvation), and, passing Geneva, in August 1212 reached Genoa: then the children moved on South. Having reached Rome, part of them turned back, the other - to Brindisi: only the intervention of local authorities prevented the slave traders from loading live goods onto ships, which seemed to go into their hands.
Innocent III did not condemn this whole undertaking in a word: he limited himself to agreeing to give the young crusaders a reprieve to fulfill their vow (until they come of age). Almost all the surviving children died on the way back from exhaustion and disease. The Children's Crusades were one of the last manifestations of the mass crusading frenzy, and its fruits - the death of tens of thousands of children - is perhaps the most terrible tragedy in the entire history of the Crusades.

To this over the top cynicism, I want to say: the girl-eco-activist from Sweden with an evil face, Gretta Tumberg, was lucky. Adults from the UN rostrum make her say that her childhood was spoiled by environmental problems, and she is only promised to solve them, but it doesn’t go beyond the words “blah blah blah”. If she lived in the Middle Ages, she would be forced to lead the Children's Crusade, and somewhere along the way to the Holy Land she would starve to death or drown, or be sold into slavery.

Western Europe enriched itself at the expense of the East, not only through robbery, but also due to the fact that it borrowed a number of achievements in various fields. So, they adopted a windmill, an improved water wheel, inventions in architecture, musical instruments, manufacturing technologies for expensive fabrics such as silk, satin (in Arabic “beautiful”), muslin (the fabric is so named after the cities of Mosul and Damascus).

Europeans borrowed previously unknown garden, melon and field crops (apricots, lemons, rice, buckwheat). They also adopted the use of carrier pigeons. The Arabs learned how to make paper from the Chinese, and the Europeans took it from the Arabs. In the field of finance, they adopted such an instrument as a bill. The Europeans also borrowed the device of hot baths. This list is extensive.

But this does not end the story of the atrocities of the popes, which I want to tell.

Drang nah Osten

No one is eternal, the Satanist Innocent III also died. The knights chose a new object for robbery, which is succinctly described by M. A. Zaborov:

“... rich Slavic lands along the Laba and Odra and in the Eastern Baltic. And none other than Innocent III, back in the early years of the XIII century. took the lead in the bloody German-knightly "Drang nach Osten".

Under the slogan of the Christianization of the Slavs, Livs, Estonians, and Prussians, from the beginning of the 1202th century, the Roman Catholic Church sent predatory German knights on numerous crusades against the then scattered Slavic and Baltic tribes to conquer Livonia. In XNUMX, Innocent III even established a special German military monastic order of the “Brothers of the Host of Christ” or swordsmen - modeled on those that were created in Palestine.

Defeated by the Lithuanians in 1236, this order then merged with another robber organization of German knights - the Teutonic Order.

It arose in Palestine during the Third Crusade and, having moved to Europe in the mid-20s of the XIII century, acted as the main carrier of the bloody aggression of the German feudal lords in the Southern Baltic. Order knights tried to subjugate North-Eastern Rus' to their dominance. In the Battle of the Ice on April 5, 1242, the valiant forces of Russian soldiers under the command of Alexander Nevsky put an end to these aggressive aspirations of the German feudal lords and the apostolic throne.

So, at the beginning of the XIII century, the German knights found a new field for their aggressive actions - the territories of Eastern Europe: the Baltic lands of the "pagans" and Rus' were more seductive in their eyes than distant Syria and Palestine. The German knights basically left unanswered the appeals of papal preachers to save the "Holy Sepulcher".

Now it was the turn of Alexander Nevsky to beat the knight dogs and confront their master in the person of the Roman pontiff. So, Pope Innocent IV offered Alexander Nevsky to convert to Catholicism, receive a royal title and enter the family of European peoples, but was refused.

Some historians believe that Alexander Nevsky made the wrong choice in favor of the Golden Horde. Firstly, the history of Europe shows that any union with the West at all times is evil, and secondly, the popes allowed themselves to interfere in the affairs of the state, which could deprive the monarch of the throne.

I would like to give them an example of how the decisions of the popes had a detrimental effect on the states on the example of two European monarchs of the Middle Ages.

Once the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation Henry IV and the pontiff Henry VII, known to us by the nickname "Holy Satan", quarreled.

The confrontation between these two leaders of spiritual and worldly existence began. In a letter, the pope threatened the emperor with excommunication. In response, using his right, Emperor Henry IV announced the deposition of the pope. The pope responded by excommunicating the emperor from the church.
The pontiff declared to the subjects of Henry IV that they were free from the vassal oath.

Priests stopped performing weddings, funerals, baptisms, etc. The people believed that the pope, being the representatives of God on earth, could both send to hell and heaven. Since the pope is not pleased with the emperor, then such a monarch cannot be served, otherwise they will go to hell. The Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire was left absolutely alone with his nominal power without troops, vassals, people. After meetings with papal legates, the German princes swore that they would not recognize the monarch until the pope lifted the excommunication.

Then they set about choosing a new emperor. Only disunity between the German princes became an obstacle to the emergence of a new ruler. The monarch, who found himself in a hopeless situation, in the winter from the monastery in the town of Speyer through the Alps went to the castle of Canossa, where the pope was. And this is not one dozen kilometers on foot ... But this seemed not enough to the arrogant dad. He kept the monarch at the gate for another three days in the cold with his head uncovered. All this time, Henry IV fasted and prayed.

Henry IV received a pardon from the pope. After this campaign of the emperor through the Alps, the phrase "go to Canossa" appeared, which meant unheard of humiliation. The German princes agreed, chose a new monarch for themselves, Henry IV had to make war with him. After the victory, he deposed the pope, who in response again anathematized him, but this had no effect, since it was believed that it was impossible to be excommunicated twice. The emperor with his army attacked Rome, Pope Gregory VII fled and died in poverty. The next pope was chosen by the German emperor.

Known to us, Innocent III, who has affairs from Satan, was elected pope at the age of 37. Claiming that the Pope is not only the vicar of the Apostle Peter, but also of God himself on Earth, he is called to rule over all peoples and kingdoms. At ceremonial receptions, he forced everyone present to kneel in front of him and kiss a shoe, which no monarch in Europe forced to do. He not only zealously fomented the Crusades, but also interfered in the internal and external affairs of European states, enthroned and deposed monarchs. The kings of England, Poland, and some states on the Iberian Peninsula recognized themselves as vassals of Innocent III.

Henry IV was not alone in his humiliation at the hands of the Pope. Challenging each other's power, losing, Frederick Barbarossa was forced to kiss the shoe of Pope Alexander III and, like a groom, he publicly had to lead the pontiff's horse by the bridle in order to receive not only forgiveness, but also restore his power.

But, despite this humiliation, Hitler named the plan of attack on the USSR in honor of Frederick I Barbarossa, the German monarch-leader in the Third Crusade. They tried to give the extermination of the Soviet people the aura of some higher ideals, allowing them to kill non-Christians. The well-known phrase of the first crusaders "God is with us" was inscribed on the belt buckles of the Nazis.

In December 2022, the Foreign Intelligence Service published materials proving that Pope Pius XII, who remained in history as "Hitler's dad" in April 1941, knew about the imminent attack of Nazi Germany on the USSR. In this regard, the Jesuits in the western Soviet territories were ordered to move closer to the border:

“On Wednesday, April 23, a secret gathering of 400 Jesuits took place with the Pope, who appealed to them to increase their activity in the East,” the message said. It was noted that "Jesuits located in the Baltic States, Western Ukraine and Belarus were given instructions to gradually concentrate closer to the border, since a German offensive against the USSR is expected soon after the liquidation of the Greek question."

This article shows only a small part of those bloody atrocities committed by the papacy. Only in the Middle Ages were there both reconquista and conquista.

Lands of the Vandals

The campaign of the European peoples approved by the Roman curia against the Muslims who occupied the Iberian Peninsula, Southern Italy, Sicily, was called the reconquista or crusades before the crusades. Europeans, seizing lands, organized genocide and robbery of the local population. The conquests of the Muslims were fundamentally different from those of Europe. Their goal was to carry monotheism.

Berbers from North Africa converted to Islam and led by Arabs from Morocco in 711 swam 14 kilometers along Gibraltar and ended up on the shores of Spain. Before them, the Visigoths ruled the Iberian Peninsula. The Arabs and Berbers called this state Al-Andalus, which meant "land of the vandals."

The Muslims offered the cities in crisis a new government and rules of life. Of course, there were some battles and confrontations, but many cities handed over the keys of the city, settlements and fortresses without a fight. They had heard of the benevolent rule of the Muslims.

Unlike their predecessors, the Arabs did not rob people, on the contrary.

Thanks to this, the army of Muslims was replenished with the local population. They built mills, an irrigation system, many desert lands flourished, the landscape was transformed, and previously unseen plants began to grow. In Spain, oranges, lemons, avocados, artichokes, pomegranates and many others began to grow. At a time when William the Conqueror in England fenced off and, under pain of death, forbade the removal of a branch thicker than a finger from the forest, arranged a census of the population and property in order to tax everything, the Arabs distributed the land to the peasants.

The development of agriculture not only gave food to the peasants, but also brought income to the treasury. In Al-Andalus, cities began to appear like mushrooms after the rain, in which there were running water and lanterns at night. Madrid, conquering with its beauty, was founded by Muslims. At a time when Muslim Spain flourished, the rest of Europe was in the Dark Ages.

Arabic medicine was centuries ahead of its contemporaries in Europe. The most famous surgeon in the capital of Andalusia was Albucasis (Abu-l-Qasim al-Zahrawi). He became the author of the 30-volume work "at-Tasrif", which included chapters on surgery, ophthalmology, orthopedics, pharmacology, nutrition, etc., he described 200 types of surgical instruments, and was the author of some of them.

Some surgical practices described by an Arab physician nearly 10 centuries ago are still in use today. And in order to reach the level at which the medicine of Al-Andalus was, Europeans will need to get out of the shackles of the papacy and escape from the fire of the Inquisition, and this will take at least two centuries.

On the territory of modern Spain, except for the north, Muslims founded the Al-Andalus Caliphate with its capital in the city of Cordoba. When this city had more than 100 thousand houses, 700 mosques, 300 public baths, 70 libraries, each of which had about 500 thousand books. Against their background, London or Paris were provincial settlements. It was the Arabs who preserved and increased the heritage of ancient scientists. The caliphate broke up into twenty principalities.

In the north of the Iberian Peninsula, a small part remained occupied by Catholic Christians - the Spaniards and the Portuguese. Soon they formed a Christian principality. Reconquista is a term used to describe a series of military campaigns by Christian states against Muslim principalities, beginning in 711 and ending in 1492.

The Muslims conquered Spain in 4 years, and it took almost 800 years to conquer it from them. Maybe they did not win, but conquered from the Muslims?

The inferiority complex, coupled with the religious prejudices of Catholics and European monarchs, led to a silence on the contribution of Muslims to the development of Europe.
This was facilitated by bonfires, in which up to one million books in Arabic were burned after the end of the reconquista. The very language in which the Quran was sent down was declared heretical, rude and banned.

The scientific works and books of Arab scientists on medicine, astronomy, mathematics, geometry, architecture, agriculture and other sciences, which remained in the archives of Catholic priests, enriched Western science after translation.

After the reconquest, the conquest will begin - the conquest of America, and this is another bloody story of the extermination of peoples on another continent, inspired by the papacy.


There are several reasons behind all the troubles of mankind.

First when a person loses God in his heart. Then he loses his conscience. The absence of this important component in a person's life is very detrimental, because he becomes capable of doing a lot of bad things.

The second - greed and irrepressible greed.

The third - system of inheritance.

The pontiffs replaced God's place in the heart with rituals, "cleansed" the conscience with indulgence - the payment for the forgiveness of sins, but the thirst for power overshadowed the mind. These demons accompanied the Roman pontiffs and led to disastrous results for mankind.

Thus, it was the Roman Catholic Church that brought to the world a mixture of evil and inhumanity, a mixture of immorality and satanism, bloody feuds and robberies.

Photos used:
Photos from open sources on the Internet

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. ee2100
    ee2100 12 January 2023 05: 36
    In the next article they will be called Bendera-Jews.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 12 January 2023 06: 09
      Crusaders - fascists in iron armor and white cloaks
      1. insafufa
        insafufa 12 January 2023 13: 02
        I will add from myself:

        Jews, Christians and even Gentiles remained in the Muslim countries. In Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.
        Not a single Jew was left in Spain and the Moslem and Arian were all killed and expelled by the Catholics.
        In France, the Albigensian Crusade slaughtered half of Toulouse and Marseilles Muslims were slaughtered twice in Marseilles for the last time after the fall of Napoleon to the flesh to women and children.
        Orthodox, Muslims and Jews lived in Sicily after the conquest of the Normans. under the leadership of the flock. both religious groups were slaughtered.
        After the conquest of a particular territory, Muslims do not impose their faith under the threat of death, unlike Catholicism, Protestantism. Here in Armenia there are neither Azerbaijanis nor Russians, almost 0,39% of the total population, while in neighboring Azerbaijan there are Russians 1,35% of the population as many Armenians 1,35%.

        So everything that is connected with Catholic or near Catholicism is always on the face of mass cleansing of the territory from another culture, religion and ethnic group.
    2. Dante Alighieri
      Dante Alighieri 12 January 2023 06: 39
      In the next article they will be called Bendera-Jews.

      Hahahaha exactly. Well, what do you want? For more than 30 years, the teachings of Marx, including the theory of socio-economic formation, have been in disgrace and have been taught in so far as. As a result, not only knowledge of the terms, but also the base itself. A small educational program to the author. Fascism is an extreme reactionary form of capitalism. You understand Oksana, capitalism! When did the Crusaders live? That's right - in the Middle Ages, where the main socio-economic formation was what? That's right - feudalism. With the same success, the ancient Egyptians, Romans and, in general, all ancient civilizations can be attributed to the fascists, because life was more complicated then, customs were simpler, and the concept of humanism was a little different. The same Saracens never hesitated to cut off the heads of prisoners, whether they were people of the book or co-religionists. The time was like this.
      1. Edward Vashchenko
        Edward Vashchenko 12 January 2023 07: 58
        A small educational program to the author. Fascism is an extreme reactionary form of capitalism. You understand Oksana, capitalism! When did the Crusaders live? That's right - in the Middle Ages, where the main socio-economic formation was what? That's right - feudalism.

      2. Uncle lee
        Uncle lee 12 January 2023 08: 21
        Quote: Dante

        Slavery, feudalism, capitalism are one and the same. Only the ways of human exploitation are changing. And everything is geared towards making a profit by a bunch of slave owners, feudal lords, capitalists, or .... So the author is right, what is the name of the extermination of Indians in America? The destruction of the Saracens and other peoples under a convenient slogan, what is it called? So like this...
        1. Dante Alighieri
          Dante Alighieri 12 January 2023 09: 38
          So the author is right - what is the name of the extermination of Indians in America? The destruction of the Saracens and other peoples under a convenient slogan, what is it called? So like this...

          Well, they turned it down ... So you can agree to the genocide of the Polovtsians and Pechenegs. Our ancestors, after all, are also far from being saints. As for what to call it - call it vicious human nature and cruelty. Make no mistake. They did so because they could and had the opportunity to do so, and the norms of morality did not prevent this, and not because it was a purposeful state policy. As a result, the same crusaders were able to create states on the holy land (Antioch, Tripoli, the Kingdom of Jerusalem), the majority of whose subjects were Saracens, who, by the way, could call any Muslim, regardless of whether he was an Arab, Egyptian or Moor. How could this be possible if the alleged main goal of the crusaders was the total extermination of all Muslims? This means that this did not happen, which means that even here hostility and hatred had limits, which cannot be said about the fascists of the 20th century, who not only robbed and captured, but deliberately destroyed entire nations. That is why the issue of terminology is the most important and it is with it that any scientific research begins.
        2. Stanislav_Shishkin
          Stanislav_Shishkin 12 January 2023 14: 57
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          And everything is imprisoned for making profit by a handful of slave owners, whether, feudal lords, whether capitalists ....
          Not the fact that a handful of profits are made. Why, for example, to arm the German proletarians and say "Rob the loot, beat the Jews and other inferior!" - this is fascism, but to arm the Russian proletarians released from prisons of "socially close" bandits, rapists and say "Rob the loot, beat the bourgeois and their henchmen!" Isn't that fascism? Or does the end justify the means? The same is true of modern Ukraine.
      3. Stanislav_Shishkin
        Stanislav_Shishkin 12 January 2023 11: 45
        Quote: Dante
        Fascism is an extreme reactionary form of capitalism. ... With the same success, the ancient Egyptians, Romans and, in general, all ancient civilizations can be attributed to the Nazis
        Why was this term taken from the history of ancient Rome to designate the social group of fascists? Did the extremely reactionary capitalists and their critics lack the education or the imagination to come up with a new one? Or you do not have enough knowledge of history to see the systemic, fundamental similarity of all fascists from ancient times. Georgy Dimitrov's definition of fascism, which you want to shove into Marx's teaching, does not fit well into him: his ears stick out. In 1939, after signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty, Dimitrov softened his rhetoric about "an extreme reactionary form of capitalism", and in 1941 he returned to it. So, this is a definition for the occasion, pulled out of Marxism like a bunny from a magician's hat. In other cases, there are no bunnies in the hat. request
        1. Dante Alighieri
          Dante Alighieri 13 January 2023 10: 06
          Why, then, was this term taken from the history of Ancient Rome to designate a social group of fascists? Did the extremely reactionary capitalists and their critics lack the education or the imagination to come up with a new one?

          Those. you want to say that, for example, the greatest artists and sculptors of the Renaissance are actually no more than narrow-minded apprentices just because they drew inspiration from ancient culture? Hmmm... Interesting logic...

          By the way, it is unlikely that the progenitors of the idea of ​​fascism perceived themselves and their teaching as a reaction to the crisis of capitalist relations. On the contrary, they thought of themselves as a progressive part of society, as fighters for everything good against everything bad. And the term they chose to illustrate their views also had to meet this requirement. Let me remind you that fascism originally had a completely different meaning than what we put into this word today. In particular, according to the idea of ​​the same Benito Mussolini, fascism is a kind of synonym or analogy for the idea of ​​solidarism, developing and deepening it, because it implies the need to unite the interests of the working masses and representatives of industrial and banking capital in order to ensure the tasks of state and nation building. Such a kind of symbiosis of a toad and a viper in the name of the well-being of their own swamp. That is why the image of the fascia was chosen as a bundle, a ligament. Agree, at first glance, a very progressive and constructive idea. However, the term is not only what the author put into it, but also the practice of its application. Indeed, today by fascism we understand not only its Italian variation, but also German National Socialism, and at the same time we do not make any distinctions. That is why it is quite difficult to find a more capacious and more comprehensive definition of this phenomenon than that given by Georgy Mikhailovich Dimitrov. Although I personally cited in my commentary a more abbreviated version that Ivan Abramovich Galkin uses in his work "German Fascism", fortunately they do not contradict each other.

          As for the extent to which these definitions correspond to Marxist theory, here we need to make a small clarification. Marx died in 1883 and simply physically could not predict all the processes that would take place in the capitalist world at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. As a result, very soon the supporters of Marx's ideas were faced with the need to make corrections and clarifications to it, the largest and most significant of which belong to the pen of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. However, even then there were opponents of the introduction of these adjustments. And you know what? This is absolutely normal. Any theory that does not develop over time and does not cause controversy is a priori dead. In turn, Lenin also underestimated the margin of safety of the capitalist system, and the possibility of the emergence of new varieties of it. And even more so, neither Marx nor Lenin could have foreseen the emergence of modern information technologies, and with them a completely new hypostasis of human existence - the information society. I will not say anything about the fact that Marx saw the development of society exclusively in the form of a linear progressive process, from less progressive social and economic forms to more progressive ones. However, over the past 40 years of our own national history, we have shown that this is far from always the case and that regression is quite possible, degradation from more promising forms of human community to less, to that which was already abandoned at the previous stage of the path. But this does not mean at all that the basis of Marxist theory is not correct and that it is based not on production and economic relations, but on something else. Another issue is the ratio of the base and the superstructure. Here, I agree, there is room for discussion, but again, this is not able to change the picture dramatically.

          Well, in conclusion, a few more words about fascism and why this term is incorrect and incorrect to apply in relation to those manifestations of racial and ethnic hatred that took place in antiquity. To do this, it is enough to recall that for the idea of ​​fascism it is the main subject of a fetish, as well as an object of influence. That's right - the nation. But what exactly is a nation? Nation is a relatively recent political category that appeared in the 17th-19th century along with the final establishment in the world of bourgeois relations. Until that moment, nations as such did not exist, and the political picture of the world was represented exclusively by peoples, who, of course, were by no means homogeneous. As an example, it is enough to recall the aquilae of the Roman legions with which they went into battle, on which the abbreviation SPQR proudly appeared, which literally read "The Senate and the people of Rome" (well, or according to another translation - the Senate and the people, and there is Rome). I draw your attention - not the Italian or Roman nation, but the people of Rome. Similarly, the ancient Egyptians, Persians or Greeks did not have nations, but there were the people of Greece, the people of Egypt, the people of Persia, Judea, etc. Nations, as I said, will appear much later and their slogans will have a completely different formula: what is good for Krupp (West and East India Company, Ford, General Motors) is good for Germany (Great Britain, USA). And of course, how can one not remember about the domestic ersatz option: Gazprom is a national treasure. Feel the difference? Everything is very simple. Until bourgeois relations are formed, there is no national question, because there is no capital that takes upon itself the right to speak and act in the name of its own interests as from the interests of the whole people. So there is no fascism as an ideology of national superiority. Instead, there is racial and religious hatred. No more and no less. Yes, of course, many will not see the difference between these two phenomena, just as for many there are no differences between the people and the nation, but this, as I hope I was able to show, is a deeply vicious delusion, which in many ways has led us to the current political situation, when the Russians of Ukraine are fighting with Russian from Russia.
    3. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 12 January 2023 06: 40
      The author has a gift, which is not uncommon in today's times, to say a lot about nothing, summing up the ideological base and completely not understanding the subject being described.
      1. ee2100
        ee2100 12 January 2023 07: 11
        Shalom, Orthodox!
        Greta Tumberg is a pity, the poor thing would have drowned!
        It's all these scumbags to blame!
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 12 January 2023 07: 34
          Hi Sasha!
          For 6,5 years on the forum I have seen different characters, from Neanderthals to Russo-Aryans, but I have not yet met Islamists.
          1. ee2100
            ee2100 12 January 2023 07: 42
            We are all the same. Somewhere just a profile view, and somewhere from the side
            laughing drinks
          2. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn 12 January 2023 08: 59
            Quote: 3x3zsave
            For 6,5 years on the forum I have seen different characters, from Neanderthals to Russo-Aryans, but I have not yet met Islamists.
            The most surprising thing is that the author is not aware of Hitler's attitude towards this very Islam, in spite of the "villains" of the Catholics. Here are a couple of quotes wassat
            The trouble is that we profess the wrong religion ... The Mohammedan faith would suit us much better than Christianity with its rag tolerance
            oh and the cherry
            If Charles Martel had lost, we would probably all have been converted to the Mohammedan faith, a cult that glorifies heroism and opens the way to heaven only for brave warriors. Then the peoples of the German race would have conquered the whole world,” Hitler said, pointing out that “the Arab conquerors, because of their racial inferiority, would not have been able to settle in the harsh climate and conditions [of Europe] in the long term. They would not have been able to cope with a more energetic local population, and in the end, not the Arabs, but the Islamized Germans would have been at the head of the Mohammedan empire.
            1. Stanislav_Shishkin
              Stanislav_Shishkin 12 January 2023 14: 26
              Quote: Stirbjorn
              If Charles Martel had lost, we would probably all have been converted to the Mohammedan faith, a cult that glorifies heroism and opens the way to heaven only for brave warriors. Then the peoples of the German race would have conquered the whole world," Hitler said.
              Hitler and a devout Muslim approach Islam and understand it differently. For a Muslim, this is a means to change oneself, fulfilling the good will of the Almighty. And for Hitler, this is a means of seizing power throughout the world and enslaving other peoples. Hence the results are different.
              1. Stirbjorn
                Stirbjorn 12 January 2023 15: 31
                Quote: Stanislav_Shishkin
                Hitler and a devout Muslim approach Islam and understand it differently.
                Yes, this is understandable, it’s just that the author of the article puts an equal sign between the crusaders and the Nazis, and, quite frankly, between the pope and the Fuhrer. What utter absurdity!
                1. Stanislav_Shishkin
                  Stanislav_Shishkin 12 January 2023 15: 49
                  Quote: Stirbjorn
                  the author of the article puts an equal sign between the crusaders and the Nazis, well, absolutely - between the pope and the Fuhrer
                  Rather, a sign of similarity. Analogies - on the surface. The Pope at the beginning of the 5th century illegally seized power in part of the Christian Cathedral Church, the Fuhrer - in one country. "Both" sought to spread it to the whole world by force of arms with the most plausible purpose. What are the differences, can you explain?
                  1. Stirbjorn
                    Stirbjorn 12 January 2023 19: 54
                    Quote: Stanislav_Shishkin
                    "Both" sought to spread it to the whole world by force of arms with the most plausible purpose. What are the differences, can you explain?
                    So you can remember Mohammed - Muslims spread their influence by force of arms. Or is there Genghis Khan ... garbage is all, as they rightly said in the comments - one policy
                    1. Stanislav_Shishkin
                      Stanislav_Shishkin 13 January 2023 10: 15
                      Quote: Stirbjorn
                      So you can remember Mohammed - Muslims spread their influence by force of arms
                      Excuse me, who decided that these wars in the 7th century were fought by Muslims to spread their influence? The Jews of Maddina, in alliance with the much more numerous than the Muslims, Meccan pagans Quraysh, as it were, have nothing to do with it?
      2. Edward Vashchenko
        Edward Vashchenko 12 January 2023 08: 01
        Anton, good morning!
        summing up the ideological base and completely unaware of the subject being described.

        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 12 January 2023 08: 07
          Hello Edward!
          It's like with Grigulevich: it seems that the facts are stated correctly, but it's impossible, the ideology makes you sick.
  2. Nikolay Malyugin
    Nikolay Malyugin 12 January 2023 05: 59
    Hypocrisy is the main postulate of those who wish to plunge a person into the font of ignorance. And it doesn't matter where it all comes from, from secular or religious services. What humanity now has was created not thanks to religion, but in spite of it. At the very beginning, Arab surgeons secretly studied the human body. During the Second World War, the atheists defeated the Nazis, who had the inscription “God is with us” on their plaques. There is nothing worse than religious wars, and even at the time of nuclear technology.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 12 January 2023 06: 24
    There are several reasons behind all the troubles of mankind.
    The first is when a person loses God in his heart. The second is greed and irrepressible greed.
    The third is the inheritance system.
    Is this about the modern capitalist world?
  4. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 12 January 2023 06: 27
    Thanks to the author for the voluminous article, which made it possible to recall one of the periods of history, which is intertwined with today's events. If they went to the "Crusades" with a sword and a spear "reinforced" by the parting words of the fathers of the Catholic Church, today they go with modern weapons, reinforced by a powerful informational component, moreover, deceitful and cynical. And the goal remained the same - robbery and destruction of those who disagree. Therefore, the current "crusaders" at the ideological level do not differ from the medieval ones and act just as harshly, regardless of any moral norms. As they say, an apple from an apple tree...
  5. 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 12 January 2023 07: 09
    It became interesting, I alone took revenge that the article is propaganda of Islamic fundamentalism?
    1. ee2100
      ee2100 12 January 2023 07: 40
      The narrative is clear - "What about us?"
      1. Edward Vashchenko
        Edward Vashchenko 12 January 2023 08: 04
        good morning,
        in continuation of your thought: where is that criterion, from a scientific point of view, that this one believes correctly, and this one is not correct. The same story with the "crusaders", who will say that they are less Christian than the Byzantines?
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 12 January 2023 08: 24
          The same story with the "crusaders", who will say that they are less Christian than the Byzantines?
          If we recall the "Latin Massacre", completely innocently overlooked by the author, one of the others stands in terms of Christian virtues.
        2. ee2100
          ee2100 12 January 2023 08: 36
          Good morning!
          Everyone believes that his faith is the most faithful, and whoever thinks differently .... Ax head!
          Or take the right faith or Faith. Or small, but Vera.
    2. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 12 January 2023 08: 27
      Definitely, especially with Spain. Just such nyashki, what are they in Algeria and Tunisia, they didn’t create such a paradise, but more and more they noted in the pirate part
    3. Hypertension
      Hypertension 12 January 2023 09: 50
      Quote: 3x3zsave
      It became interesting, I alone took revenge that the article is propaganda of Islamic fundamentalism?

      There is something like that... But basically it is another demonization of the West. And for this, all methods are good, according to propaganda. The agenda is being worked out ... The main thing here is that when fighting a dragon, do not become a dragon yourself. After all, if the crusaders (according to the author) are such terrible villains, then they are not people, and therefore humanism is not applicable to them.
    4. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst 12 January 2023 10: 15
      Did you feel it too? However, the material is chosen with a smell. But thanks to the author anyway - perhaps for a firm life position. It will be interesting to learn views on other problems of the universe.
    5. kor1vet1974
      kor1vet1974 12 January 2023 10: 27
      that the article is propaganda of Islamic fundamentalism?
      I wouldn’t say what exactly is fundamentalism, but it smacks of Islam propaganda. Do you remember the articles about the Aztecs, where Cortes is presented as a savior, of other Indian tribes, from the "bloodthirsty" Aztecs? .. But this cycle was until February 24, 2022
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 12 January 2023 10: 57
        I even remember two such cycles, one by Shpakovsky, the other by Ryzhov. The second with a more pro-Spanish focus
        1. kor1vet1974
          kor1vet1974 12 January 2023 11: 27
          Shpakovsky, I don’t remember, he apparently discussed with Ryzhov, he persistently argued that Cortes had gone on a “holy cause”, against bloodthirsty pagans. smile
  6. Boris55
    Boris55 12 January 2023 08: 02
    From today. When our patriarch asked for a Christmas truce, the Pope, as it were, called for the cessation of hostilities, but only on our part, i.e. we don’t dare to kill them, but they can kill us. dad is not responsible for the actions of the Binderites.

    The Supreme declared a truce, only with the obligatory suppression of violators, i.e. turned the "usual" situation when they can us, but we can't.
  7. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn 12 January 2023 08: 47
    They bought the church from the Christians and started building a mosque.
    Yeah, they bought it right away, like the Turks did Hagia Sophia later. I remember a quote from Huck Fin from childhood "Why can't you take a club, and even redeem them right away with a club on the head?" The Franks who settled in the Levant were quickly cultivated, the main scumbags were just new arrivals. About the first ones, I will give a couple of quotes from Arabic sources
    It is interesting, in this regard, to testify to the implacable enemy of the crusaders, the Arab traveler ibn Jubair, who wrote the following around 1184: Allah from such a temptation... Muslims are the owners of their houses and govern themselves as they themselves understand... The hearts of many Muslims are tempted to settle there (in the Frankish lands) when they see the position of their brethren in the areas ruled by Muslims, for the condition of those is very far from prosperous. Unfortunately for Muslims, in countries where their fellow believers rule, they always complain about the injustice of their masters, but they praise the behavior of the Franks, whose justice they can only be proud of. The words of ibn Jubair are echoed by the famous Arab poet and scholar Usama ibn Munkiz, who also seriously fears the mass migration of Muslims under the rule of the Crusaders. Osama, who is by no means friendly towards the Franks, praises the fairness of their justice, which he experienced firsthand - the court in his lawsuit with a Catholic took the side of Osama, and not his co-religionist. The Arab poet also notes that the Christians (in this case, the Templars) gave him the opportunity to pray to Allah in his own chapel. In general, Islamic authors emphasize that the conquerors were quite tolerant in matters of religious rituals: suffice it to say that there were two mosques in the citadel of the Crusaders - Acre.

    The Jewish population of the Levant was in a similar position to the Muslims. They were also forbidden to live in Jerusalem, and the tax burden was the same. However, it is worth noting that both Muslims and Jews did not pay church tithes, which reduced the fiscal burden, and sometimes caused discontent among some Christian communities; in particular, the Armenians of Jerusalem complained about such injustice. And in general, the attitude towards Jews in the Christian states of the East was not bad. The Jews were quite free to perform their religious rites, no one forced them to wear special clothes indicating their faith, which was practiced constantly in Europe and often caused the hostility of the population and persecution. In Syria and Palestine for all two hundred years there was not a single Jewish pogrom. The practice of the ghetto, so beloved in Europe, was also not applied: Jews could freely settle in cities and engage in any kind of activity at their discretion.

    I advise "The Crusades. Under the Shade of the Cross" by A. Domanin. I don’t know how authoritative this is, but it was the first work that I read entirely devoted to the theme of the Crusades.
  8. kor1vet1974
    kor1vet1974 12 January 2023 10: 04
    Thus, it was the Roman Catholic Church that brought to the world a mixture of evil and inhumanity, a mixture of immorality and satanism, bloody feuds and robberies.
    About how! Basil II sent his best commander Botaniat to finish off the remnants of the Bulgarian army. But Botaniatus was ambushed by the Bulgarians and was killed, and his troops were destroyed. Enraged at the loss of his best commander, Basil II blinded 15 Bulgarian soldiers and sent them back to Tsar Samuil. Seeing 000 blind people, Samuel went crazy .. But this is different .. smile
  9. ee2100
    ee2100 12 January 2023 22: 43
    I like the minuses that appeared on this resource!
    One feels a "full-fledged" martial art of vision.
    With these we will 100% win!
  10. AvesevA
    AvesevA 13 January 2023 13: 51
    Great job, read it in one breath. Very interesting
  11. awdrgy
    awdrgy 14 January 2023 01: 39
    Indeed, the West is quite organized and consistent in its goals of developing foreign territories and including the population in its cultural field with subsequent assimilation, which implies a single leadership for a long time. This is dangerous for the Orthodox. But the east is not harmless to us either ... they say you can have four wives there, which means that demography is growing and this is also a threat to the Orthodox, because assimilation or even replacement of the population can occur, followed by inclusion in their cultural field. The methods are different, but the goal seems to be the same.
  12. Diviz
    Diviz 17 January 2023 15: 15
    Therefore, the parasite does not care what to be destroyed by a meteorite or bubonic plague.
    Rome hides history, they live there in their own matrix. We need our history.
  13. merkava-2bet
    merkava-2bet 23 January 2023 20: 27
    Thanks for the article, I always thought that there were four crusades, and there were ten of them, they enlightened.