ultimately unsuccessful Second Crusade in 1147. Christian hold on the Latin Kingdom began to weaken and finally fell to a Kurdish Muslim general named Saladin (Salah ad-Din). He retook Jerusalem in 1187, beginning the Ayyubid dynasty. He treated the Christians there very well and historical sources suggest that the non-Muslim population held Saladin in high regard. Christian loss of Jerusalem led to the Third Crusade in 1189, in which Christian forces made limited territorial gains, but Christian pilgrims were granted free access to Jerusalem. During the following century or so, Christian forces suffered steady erosion and considerable defeats, and by the Sixth Crusade, the Mamluk dynasty had driven all remaining Crusaders out of Syria-Palestine.
Pope Urban II (r. 1088 to 1099) was the first Christian leader to call for a crusade to the Holy Land. The First Crusade lasted from 1096 to 1099 C.E.
How would one characterize Christian attitudes toward Muslims during the early years of Muslim expansion and the Crusade era?
As Islam expanded into the central Middle East and parts of the Byzantine Empire, Christians generally did not regard the Arabs as different than other invading groups. At first they referred to the invaders “ethnically” as Arabs, culturally and religiously as Agarenes (descendants of Hagar, Abraham’s “slave” wife) and later Saracen (from the Greek Sara kenos, “Sarah’s progeny,” implying descent from Abraham’s wife Sarah). During the Crusades, the name “Saracens” came to refer to their enemies more specifically as Muslims. In Spain and North Africa, Christians referred to Muslims as “Moors,” and beginning with the era of the Crusades, the term “Turk” became more prominent and continued well in to late medieval and Renaissance times. During periods in which anti-Muslim fervor was especially intense, Muslims became the Barbari (barbarians/enemies). In general, Christians during late antiquity and early medieval times had virtually no clear notion of Islamic history and beliefs. Widespread views of the “enemy” were spread by literary works such as the Chansons de Geste (“Songs of Deeds”), popular poems, and works of epic adventure and romance in which Christian heroes dealt crushing blows to the foe. At a more refined level, many Christian scholars across the Mediterranean developed more sophisticated and, generally speaking, more accurate estimates of Islamic beliefs. On the whole, Christians regarded the areas under Muslim rule as outside the civilized world and as fields ripe for the harvest of conversion.
What are some further details about Islam’s religious expansion in the Central Middle East?
Ninth-century Baghdad was a critical focal point in this respect, because of cultural and religious ferment in the still relatively new capital of the Abbasid dynasty. There were conversions of Christians and Jews during this time period, for three main reasons: 1) fear of discrimination and even persecution; 2) relief from the jizya, or poll tax, levied on non-Muslims; and 3) enhancement of social standing within an Islamic society. The conversion rate was more rapid here than elsewhere generally in the Middle East. One estimate has it that the Muslim population in central Iraq grew from 18 percent in 800 to 50 percent in 882. This was not the result, however, of any discernible systematic missionary effort on the part of the Muslims.
What was the fate of medieval Christian pilgrims to the Holy Land?
Many Christians learned about Islam and Muslims by visiting Muslim lands on pilgrimage to holy sites. In an unusual, early ninth-century collaboration, Charlemagne and the Abbasid Caliph Harun ar-Rashid made arrangements for a hostel for the pilgrims in Jerusalem, which had been under Muslim control for nearly two centuries by this time. By the eleventh century, Muslim rulers allowed a fairly steady flow of Christian pilgrims, owing arguably to generally positive attitudes of Muslim rulers towards Christians. During the early period of the Crusades, some sources suggest it may have been difficult to differentiate between pilgrim and crusader. In the early thirteenth century, Francis of Assisi traveled to Damietta (Egypt) in hopes of converting the Ayyubid dynasty caliph. Earlier on, pilgrims generally did not expect to find anything of value in Islam or among the Muslim people, but after the thirteenth century, interest in Islam grew. From the fifteenth century on, European travelers’ accounts about Muslims proliferated, and though understandably skewed by their negative preconceptions, many reports noted praiseworthy aspects of the religion and human qualities of its people.
What is known about early Muslim-Christian relationships in the Central Middle East?
Three documents of the period sum up Muslim-Christian relationships: a letter from Abd Allah ibn Ismail al-Hashimi (a Muslim) to Abd al-Masih ibn Ishaq al-Kindi (a Christian); al-Kindi’s letter of response; and a treatise on Islam by Ali ibn Rabban al-Tabari, a convert from Christianity. All three documents operate on a theoretically elevated level, discussing the validity of theological issues such as the Trinity and Muhammad’s prophethood. These documents show the widespread contact between Muslims and Christians, and reflect that, though there were radical Muslim groups that did not hesitate to use intimidation and even military threat to convert Christians, the majority of inter-religious encounters were peaceful and focused on a discussion of religious truths rather than violence.
How were relations among Christians and Arab Muslims in the Holy Lands before the Crusade era?
By the end of the tenth century, Palestine had different religious groups living within its borders. The relationship among these groups was marked by tolerance and interdependence, exemplified in the burgeoning, multivalent trade system. Communal celebrations were common and continued despite the Crusades. The demographic composition of Palestine changed with the arrival of Sunni Turks in 1065. These Turks harassed both pro-Fatimid Ismaili Muslims and their sympathizers (Jews, Christians). With the landscape shifted, the relationship between Muslims and Christians grew colder, though certainly not to the degree described in many European “reporters,” most notably William of Tyre. The vituperative language used to describe Muslims in crusader memoirs was often hyperbolic. As the control of the Holy Land shifted from Muslim to Christian and back, distrust grew on both sides, and conversion and apostasy became huge issues for inhabitants of each faith. There was, however, little sign of forced conversions, and many times there were instances of an amalgamation of the cultures. Christian Franks adopted Muslim fashion and married Muslim women (who often converted to Christianity). Such “arabacized” Christians were regarded poorly by both Muslims and new European visitors; they were seen as half-Christians, an epithet from either a Christian or Muslim perspective. Muslims did hold Christian knights in high regard for their bravery and Christian monks for their piety, but held the everyday Frank living in Palestine in low esteem. On the whole, the Crusades irreparably disrupted the peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Christians in the Holy Land.
What is known about Christian conversion to Islam and Christian-Muslim relations in medieval Spain?
From very early in Iberian Muslim history, Christianity was a “protected religion” under Muslim rulers. Historians are virtually unanimous that there was no early proselytizing or persecution of Christians by Muslims (the conversion rate during the eighth century was about 5 percent). An important ingredient in Christian–Muslim relations in eighth- and ninth-century Spain is known as the “adoptionist controversy,” a proper understanding of which is useful here. “Adoptionism” in this instance refers to the notion that Jesus was the “adoptive” (not the actual) son of God. Some Christian leaders of the time attributed the prevalence of that notion in Spain to the influence of Muslim theology, with its belief that Jesus is neither divine nor the “actual” son of God. Pope Hadrian I believed that the controversy was a result of “too much association with the Jews and Muslims.” Charlemagne, who had clashed with Muslims on a political and military level, opposed the controversy violently. He blamed it on the Muslims, and, in a letter to a Spanish Christian aristocrat, said that if the Spanish held to adoptionism, they would not receive “appropriate”
