JL, You write, “re-thinking the Crusade, as Richard the CoeurLion _is_ on my list of lists! And I wonder what led these people to cross all Europe to restore the Faith.” Medieval studies were revolutionized during the twentieth century. The historian of that process was Norman Cantor who wrote the excellent, Inventing the Middle Ages in 1991. I read it twice, in 1996 and 1999. He traces the history and development of the study of the Middle Ages. He also wrote the very nice survey, Civilization of the Middle Ages . This book I read was published in 1994 and I read it the following year. I gave up the study of the Middle Ages after 9/11 as the latter’s implications seemed more pressing and interesting. I noticed among other things that the study of the Middle East, Islam, Islamism, etc., as complicated as that was, was easier than the study of the Middle Ages. There is comparatively little to read about the Middle East, although the literature is growing at a rapid rate, but the material available on the Middle Ages is vast, and it too is growing. Cantor is evangelistic about his subject and in the back of both the books I mention above are appendices entitled “Recommended Reading.” He is realistic about the amount of attention others, even other academics, will be inclined to give his subject so he breaks his Reading list into two categories. The first (in Civilization of the Middle Ages) is 14 titles: “A Short List (14) Titles) “Here is a short reading program in medieval history that, if mastered, will make you well informed on the subject, so you can more than hold your own in any discussion about the European Middle Ages around the faculty lunch table, in the country club lounge, at a publishing house brainstorming session, in a church study group, or in an undergraduate or adult education seminar. “The full bibliographical listing for each book, including the publisher, is found in the long List that follows. The books on this short list are all in print, most of them in paperback, and they can be ordered directly from the publisher or through your local bookstore.” I won’t list these books, but I made several attempts to buy them all, but I discovered that Cantor’s book was first written in 1963 and then rewritten several times since. The copy I read was “A completely revised and expanded edition,” but he must not have rechecked the availability of the books on his list because many of them were no longer available. His long list is 143 titles. I began buying those as well. But many of those were also out of print and unavailable; although I was slowly increasing my library of medieval history, much as you have been increasing your library of Loeb Classics. I also found books published since Cantor wrote. I can’t say there is no good reason for being uninformed or misinformed about the Middle Ages because there is. Even if all Cantor’s 143 titles were available, it would take a concerted prolonged effort to read them all. In regard to the Crusades, Cantor has nothing on his short list, but on his long list he has The Crusades, a short history by Jonathan Riley-Smith; which I read in 1999. He also lists a longer, earlier work (which I didn’t read), Runciman’s A History of the Crusades in 3 volumes, 1951-54. Examining his list for books pertaining to your interest, I see The Origin of the Idea of Crusade, by Carl Erdmann, a very provocative title and one I considered getting, but it is $259.80 on Amazon.com, I didn’t have a limit of $5.00 as you do with your Loeb Classics, but $259.80 seemed rather steep, and this was for a used book. It was no longer in print. But the “idea of crusade” was discussed in several of the books I read, so, hopefully, I can do without Erdmann. I made a general statement about the Crusades in an earlier note and apparently surprised Geary who didn’t know that the Crusades were initiated in response to Islamic aggression and not the reverse. The crusades would not have been initiated had not Islamic peoples been bent upon taking over as much as Europe as possible. What is confusing in the study of the crusades is that the motivation for them was varied. Yes, the Pope was sending them off in response to the request for help from the Byzantine Church, but Crusaders often had motives of their own. Some went to make a name for themselves much like the Greeks who went to Troy. Others went for booty, which was another motivation for going to Troy. And many went for religious reasons, especially to free, as they put it, Christ’s birthplace from the heathen. The idea that the Crusaders shared equal blame with the invading armies of the Muslims is intriguing and at least as interesting as the idea of Crusade itself. Islam was an aggressive, military force bent upon conquering the entire world, if they could. Sayyid Qutb has criticized his weak Muslim brethren for giving this goal up. It is Allah’s goal that the entire world be submissive to him, he writes. And no Muslim is a true Muslim unless he is engaged in Jihad. Well, the Turks were engaged in Jihad when the Crusaders, rather ineptly confronted them. Lawrence From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx [mailto:Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx] Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 5:21 PM To: lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Ain't going to war no more' Thanks for a thought (and feeling) provoking thought. I see traffic is slow and your post has not been distributed yet with the list, and, as far as this post by mine -- this very one I'm sending you now cc the list -- is concerned, perhaps never will! So for the record, I made a little search into two delightful OED expressions, "Foreign Office" and "War Department". Enjoy! I think you are right and that it's irresponsible to deny war, etc. I hope you appreciate I was trying to mimick the silly entries in "Who's Who", where one reads of Churchill, "He enjoys a cigar in the tub", or stupid things like that. I was also interested in (a) motivating you to reply and providing an occasion, as it proved, to let us see your excellent, superb, stylish defense of the casus belli -- complete with description of the Hellenes are 'barbarian', which I enjoyed, and the motto, "There are always barbarians". Indeed, a common idiom in Buenos Aires is still, "There are no Moors on the coast" ("No hay moros en la costa") meaning, "No danger in view", which must come with the Conquistadores and there fear that the Moors would tripple across the Gibraltar Strait like _this_. (b) re-thinking the Crusade, as Richard the CoeurLion _is_ on my list of lists! And I wonder what led these people to cross all Europe to restore the Faith. You are possibly right that I would not like Buenos Aires being bombed so I apologise if I hurt your feelings which have grown so loyal to your homeland as they should after 9/11. I hope other members of the list also comment on your post. It deserves good commentary. When I was mentioning the 'superb', etc. I was referring to your qualifying the excerpts from Cartladge and Strauss, not the not-so-great JLS. Anyway, thanks. Hey, my English setter, Ruperto, never died, so I still _own_ him, in a metaphorical sense (He was stupidly stolen). You can count the fox terrier as yet another dog I own, though. Again, I was mocking the Who's Who entries. This pdf. on athletics I recently referred to in a post http://www.aafla.org/SportsLibrary/JSH/JSH1985/JSH1203/jsh1203b.pdf. makes a few references to what the author calls the 'warrior-athlete', which I hope you will appreciate. Apparently, it's pretty heavy gear! I have a few other thoughts about war, etc. Back to the recruit versus volunteer. And I don't want to sound offensive, but how much 'volunteer' can it be if a member of the armed forces receives a salary. (I've just come from a 'literacy' volunteer centre, and by definition, a 'volunteer' is someone who does not receive monetary compensation. Please explain!). Back to the war-argument, I think you DO like the ghurkas, but during the Falklands War, the Argentine army was basically (a) professional -- though hardly 'volunteer' -- and (b) draft, recruits -- if you volunteer, the best for your mental health, I would think. Argentina was not prepared for the fight, and they were using silly gear and weapons -- like Mausers -- that could not compare to the mercenary killing instict of _them_ ghurkas -- and their foreign faces! For some reason I cannot imagine an English officer climbing Tumbledown to kill an Argentine! After the years of the Good Beef from Old Argentina and all that. They trusted the _ghurkas_ to do the 'dirty' job. It's also worth considering that what you mention as war being the occasion or excuse or pretext for the display of manly deeds may no longer be applicable with the technicalization (if that's the word) of most 'military strategies' now. I love a bootcamp, but apparently it's all computerized now, and don't be surprised if they also have 'simulated' boots in simulated 'camps'. My reference to 'foreign' was meant as partly comical, in that it's a word that has nice philosophical puzzles (of the naive linguistic kind) about it. We think of a foreign-language, and that's French for Americans, but it's American for the French, et al. I was also reminded of George Mikes (a foreigner, name pronounced Mikesh) who writes in "How to be an alien", "I told this Englishwoman that I was ready to marry her, as my mother did approve of my marrying a foreigner. To which she replied, "Me, a foreigner? I'm not a foreigner. You are a foregner, and your old mother, too!". "Even in Croatia?" I asked. "Surely. Things like these are truths, and surely truth is not relative to place or time." :-) Hey, you make me sound like I'm Nero in an sempiternal (if that's the word) orgy in Buenos Aires. And no, I would not resign (if that's the word) my right to fight in a war. I don't like a satrap, least so a foreign one! I commend your honor and intelligence and passion in dealing with and doing your best to understand 'foreign policy'. It can be a fascinating subject too. And nice to catalogue in the swimming pool library too. I have a few books on British foreign policy, and they make for quite a shelf! One is called "Britain in the Western Mediterranean" with a nice map showing all those posts of the Empire from Horatio Nelson's little bay in Mayonne (Minorca), plus Malta (where the Queen recently celebrated her 60th? anniversary with Philip) and of course Gibraltar (that they still possess). I also own a little silly, "Queen Victoria's little wars", and books on the "Indian Mutiny", "The Boer War", "The Reason Why" -- and a few on the Falklands/Malvinas. Foreign is as foreign does, too. Who would have thought that the Chileans -- to an European -- would count as a 'foreign' to Argentina!? Why, they (Chile) were _once_ part of the Argentine Empire! Yet, we were more than once on the verge of war, and I understand your commentary on wanting to negotiate peace as best as possible. As a matter of history, it was the Pope who settled peace for us! -- over the Beagle Channel. And as you mentioned on this list too, it's the Uruguayans now. Fancy living in a country which, as Homer (Simpson) sings, sounds like "UR-u-Gay?" I won't be offended (:-) if you decide not to comment online or if you copy and paste as you wish! This has been a pretty long post, and I thank you for your fueling it! Cheers, J. L. Speranza Buenos Aires, Argentina Foreign Office: the department of the ‘Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs’; the building in which the business of this department is carried on. 1797 Rep. Committees Ho. of Comm. XII. 301 The Office of Secretary of State for the *War Department was first established on the 11th July 1794. 1819 D. B. WARDEN Acc. U.S. III. 395 Chapter xliv. Of the War Department. Ibid. 405 The original proceedings of all courts-martial, ordered by the war department, are transmitted to that department by the judge advocate of the court. 1866 G. B. MCLELLAN Let. 26 Dec. in McLellan's Own Story (1887) xii. 221 The entire establishment..was removed to the War Department building, without my knowledge. 1944 Time 2 Oct. 19/1 This was strictly a military document drafted by the War Department.