Crusades

Even when describing the inception of an entirely fictional divergent timeline, Poul Anderson continues to educate his readers about the Middle Ages:

"By 1099 the First Crusade had gained its objectives..." (The Shield Of Time, p. 388)

Which were - ?

"...with a massacre of civilians that would have done Genghis Khan proud, and the conquerors settled in." (ibid.)

So they went to conquer and colonize, not to liberate, then leave?

"They founded a string of realms from Palestine up into what [Wanda] knew as southern Turkey - the Kingdom of Jerusalem, County of Tripoli, Principality of Antioch, County of Edessa." (pp. 388-389)

Shortly after this, Anderson presents an informative half page:

"...these Crusades, First, Second, et cetera through the Seventh, as well as those against heretics and pagans in Europe itself, were an artifact of later historians anyway. Sometimes a Pope, or somebody, called for a special effort, and sometimes, not always, this evoked a serious response. Mainly, though, it was a matter of whether you - idealist, warlord, freebooter, or oftenest blend of all three - could get yourself dubbed a crusader. It conferred special rights and privileges in this life, remission of sins in the next." (p. 390)

It sounds like a jihad? Idealism was at best only a third part of the motivation, alongside conquest and theft? I will continue to quote Anderson's prose until the end of this paragraph because it includes one of his list descriptions and it ends with two further consequences, economic and environmental:

"That was the legalism. The reality was men who marched, rode, sailed, hungered, thirsted, roistered, fought, raped, burned, looted, slaughtered, tortured, fell sick, took wounds, died nasty deaths or got rich or became captive slaves or eked out a living in a foreign land or perhaps returned, to and fro for centuries." (ibid.)

Might someone have committed rape while believing that all his sins, including this one, were remitted? Torture of enemies might not have been regarded as sinful.

"Meanwhile the wily Sicilians, Venetians, Genoese, Pisans raked large profits off the traffic..." (ibid.)

So the Regno and the cities would have had an economic motive to press an ecclesiastic to proclaim a Crusade...

"...and Asian rats stowed away in ships bound for Europe, they and their fleas carrying the Black Plague..." (pp. 390-391)

The judgment of God? (I do not believe that but it seems to fit when political and military actions are justified theologically.)

Wanda reflects that Iliria's parents might have agreed to her marrying Lorenzo in the hope that he would win booty in Palestine - idealistic freebooting.

Living in what has become multicultural Britain, I attended a public meeting in a mosque hall. The main speaker was a Member of Parliament. A supporting speaker, the local imam, presenting a historical perspective, described the liberation of Jerusalem from Crusaders by Saracens. To applause from his audience, he said that the liberators restored religious toleration in the city.

As the hobbits realized near the end of The Lord Of The Rings - we are part of that same story.