- The idea that the crusaders were aggressors, who fell upon peace-loving and tolerant Muslim states without provocation.
- The equally anachronistic idea that the crusades were an early form of European colonialism.
- The claim that Jerusalem was particularly “holy” to Muslims in the period before the Crusades.
- The thesis that crusaders were primarily motivated by greed.
- The portrayal of crusaders as uncultivated barbarians fighting a “higher” civilization in the Muslim east.
- The assertion that the Christians conducted warfare in ways that were more brutal and cruel than their enemies.
- The myth that the Muslim rulers were more tolerant of other religions — and their own heretics — than Christian rulers.
- The thesis that Western/Latin crusaders fell upon Constantinople without provocation and “destroyed” the city without cause.
- The notion that bitterness over the crusades persisted (despite the Muslim’s complete and utter victory over the Crusader States in the second half of the 13th century) to the present day.
|A Medieval Depiction of Richard the Lionheart and Saladin|
|The Church of the Holy Sepulcher as we see it today is largely a crusader construction because the earlier Byzantine churches were destroyed.|
Book I: Knight of Jerusalem was released in September 2014.
A landless knight,
a leper king,
and the struggle for Jerusalem.
Buy now in Paperback or Kindle format!