| but wasn't part of the reason that the crusades aimed to liberate the holy lands due to the fact that when the Muslims took control of that area they were denying access to Europeans, or something along those lines? |
--DemLocke
Yes, I believe so. I think European Christians were disallowed from visiting Jerusalem, or something like that.
And let's not forget the Muslim invasion of Southern Europe after the fall of Rome. They moved out from the Arabian Penninsula, swept across North Africa and eventually invaded Europe through Italy and Spain. They were only stopped at the Battle of Poitier in France. This was well before the Crusades. It was also, apparently, when France still knew how to do something besides surrender. Of course, it wasn't "France" yet then, either. It was, I believe, part of the Carolingian Empire, under Charles "the Warhammer" Martel, at the time.
The Muslim conquerors of Olde, however, though often cruel and barbaric in war, were a little more lenient toward the people they conquered than perhaps they would be today.
They required no conversion to Islam, for example, and imposed taxes that were often lower than those imposed under Rome.
Perhaps this difference results because Osama and his lot are of a purer breed?
My point is that I have often heard some people say that The Crusades bred, in the Middle Eastern people, such a strong and longstanding hatred for the Christian West that anything they do now is somehow justified by it. What of the Muslim invasions of Europe that pre-dated them? No one seems to mention them.