Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Crusades


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 Racoon

Racoon

    Politically Incorrect

  • Members
  • 3800 posts

Posted 13 June 2006 - 03:52 AM

Is anyone else enthralled with this bit of History?? World altering history?
I can't seem to get enough of it...It has everything imaginable, and unimaginable for that matter.

War. Holy Visions. Unholy Alliances. False Promises. Sieges. Slaughters. Lunatics. :confused:

Starting with Pope Urban II's plan in 1095.
But Peter the Hermit took the first shot by gathering an army of peasant fanatics and minor knights in 1096. His "troops" behaved badly along the way: thieving, ransacking, killing indescriminately...:D

To make a long story short, they ended up in Anatolia. Nobody wanted these crazies around :eek: . They took refuge in Xerigordon castle, where Kilij Arslan eventually cut off their water supplies, and ambushed them on their way out after repeated deals were made and unmade.

Theres SO much to the Crusades! :hihi:
So here is some of the Begining...I could read this stuff for hours. :)

http://en.wikipedia....eople's_Crusade

#2 Panjandrum

Panjandrum

    Suspended

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 13 June 2006 - 08:38 AM

One thing that annoys me about peoples attitudes towards the Crusades is that they are often seen as the forerunner of western imperialism and colonialism, when in fact they were a respose to arab/ islamic imperilaism and colonialism. The Crusades where an attempt to stem the tide of islamic conquests, a last-ditch effort by a continent and culture on the brink of annihilation to reverse centuries of defeat at the hands of the arab armies. It is telling that those same liberal scholars who wring their hands over western 'guilt' over colonialism say nothing about the far longer-lasting and more thorough colonialism of the arabs.

#3 Freddy

Freddy

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 464 posts

Posted 13 June 2006 - 09:11 PM

The Childrens' Crusade was the worst. At least the adults could have opted out.

#4 Qfwfq

Qfwfq

    Exhausted Gondolier

  • Members
  • 6241 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 03:22 AM

Panjandrum, I find your post somewhat outside the scope of the forum. Please remain on topic.

#5 Qfwfq

Qfwfq

    Exhausted Gondolier

  • Members
  • 6241 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 03:29 AM

The Crusades were fought for the same reason as many other military actions in the same area and adjoining ones, i. e. the conjunction between three continents. The band from Asia minor to Sinai/Egypt was the prime land route for traders between the East and both Europe and North Africa.

#6 Panjandrum

Panjandrum

    Suspended

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 08:53 AM

Panjandrum, I find your post somewhat outside the scope of the forum. Please remain on topic.


The crusades cannot be understood without reference to their cause, which was the arab conquest of the middle east. Yet while we are asked to feel ashamed for the crusades, no-one considers the longer-lasting and far more brutal arab conquests to be equally worthy of condemnation.

#7 Michaelangelica

Michaelangelica

    Creating

  • Members
  • 7797 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 11:31 AM

The Crusades where an attempt to stem the tide of islamic conquests, a last-ditch effort by a continent and culture on the brink of annihilation to reverse centuries of defeat at the hands of the arab armies.


mmm
If that was the case the crusaders should have attacked S Spain.

I see the Crusades as religiously inspired. Jerusalem was the crusaders goal.
If they killed or converted some infidels on the way well-and-good.

I find it interesting that at that time the Arabs were so tolerant of Christians and Jews in their Empire.
The Crusaders were bastards to non-Christians.
They were barbarians compared to the cultured, learned, scientifically advanced Islamic Culture.
The Arabs soon learnt to show no mercy either

The other thing that fascinates me about the crusades is that the Arabs/Islamists have STILL not got over it.
I saw an academic interviewed on TV one night. She was very intelligent and learned in her field but the Crusades STILL rankled with her.
Amazing -let it go Arabs it was a long time ago!!

-- l

#8 Panjandrum

Panjandrum

    Suspended

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 03:26 PM

mmm
If that was the case the crusaders should have attacked S Spain.


They did. it was called the Reconquista.

I see the Crusades as religiously inspired. Jerusalem was the crusaders goal.
If they killed or converted some infidels on the way well-and-good.


Jerusalem was their stated objective, but the driving force of the Crusades was the appeal of the Eastern Romans for help from Western Christendom. they were religious only to the extent that the opposing forces followed diffrent religions.

I find it interesting that at that time the Arabs were so tolerant of Christians and Jews in their Empire.


This is untrue. Its is a myth, based on western scholars glossing over arab atrocities in order to criticise western governments. The arabs not onlt annihilated entire non-muslim populations, they destroyed ancient and tolerant empires such as Persia and the Hindu kingdoms of north India. Those who remained were treated little better than slaves, were ground into abject poverty by discriminatory taxes, and were frequently the victims of random attacks and forced conversions.

The Crusaders were bastards to non-Christians.
They were barbarians compared to the cultured, learned, scientifically advanced Islamic Culture.


Arab civilisation was the epitome of barbarism. All the high culture they are given the credit for was taken from the older nations they over-ran, particularly from the Greeks, the Persians and the Jews.

The Arabs soon learnt to show no mercy either


I suggest you read up on the career of Muhammed. he was a bandit leader, a murderer, a liar and a child-rapist who openly critisised his followers for showing mercy to his enemies. This is all chronicled by arab historians and biographers, and is not western predjudice.

#9 Racoon

Racoon

    Politically Incorrect

  • Members
  • 3800 posts

Posted 14 June 2006 - 04:03 PM

A bit on the Arabs and Muslims: :shrug: (not my words)

Upon the death of the Prophet Mohammed, the Moslem Empire split. The Successors, or Caliphs, branched off. The Shi ites, or followers of the son-in-law, Ali, were in Tripoli. The followers of Fatima, The Prophet's daughter, called the Fatmids, were in Egypt. They had lost their holding on Jerusalem to the Byzantine in 1096. The Selchukid (Seljuk) Turks, were in Syria, each city having its own ruler, and no organization. They were also in Baghdad and had extended into the Byzantine held Anotolia. The Umayyad Caliphate was in Cordova, Spain.

The Arab Empire, though united in Islam, was not very united politically. Revolt, civil war, assassination, all were common. But they had a unique culture that fast spread its influences to the Western Europeans.

They had developed advanced mathematics. They had explored the movements of the stars and planets in the heavens. They taught the Crusaders Chess. They traded in rare spices and silks, some the likes of which the Crusaders had not seen before. They introduced new arts, dance, metalworkings, story telling, all which became incorporated into the culture of the Crusaders, as apparent in clothing, jewelry and literature.

#10 Qfwfq

Qfwfq

    Exhausted Gondolier

  • Members
  • 6241 posts

Posted 15 June 2006 - 04:21 AM

The crusades cannot be understood without reference to their cause, which was the arab conquest of the middle east.

But this does lie within what I said. The Arabs have a long history as traders, just like their Hebrew rivals, and this antagonism has never ceased.

What I did leave out was the importance of these areas for military strategy, this goes hand in hand with that for trade. The Arab conquest, reaching the Mediterranean shores, changed the roles in trade between these continents and also gave the military advantage to maintain the position. This was one factor inducing Charlemagne to devise the feudal system that so much shaped the course of European history. The whole of the Middle East has become the crux of today's planetary strategy, it's just a wider scale.

I think we should avoid discussions of "who's better" and "who's worse" and focus instead on the real aim of discussing history: that of better understanding what's behind events, including current ones.

#11 Michaelangelica

Michaelangelica

    Creating

  • Members
  • 7797 posts

Posted 15 June 2006 - 08:47 AM

Arab civilisation was the epitome of barbarism. All the high culture they are given the credit for was taken from the older nations they over-ran, particularly from the Greeks, the Persians and the Jews.

Yes they incorporated it,(just as the Crusaders learnt from them) But they didn't burn it to the ground because the books were not the worde of God.

They did allow religious freedom in countries they conquered .
The babarism and war crimes started with the Christians, the Arabs followed suit.
The Arabs around 1000AD where far more advanced in scholarship (they had translated much of the early Greeks and had massive libraries). They were more advanced in medicine. -they had hospitals, eye operations Avicenna. The Arab world far more advanced in Architecture & Engineering. The Europeans had no idea how to build huge domed structures.
Arab towns had running water and sewage treatment-something the Europeans didn't have for centuries.
There were beautiful Gardens of medicinal herbs and running water that still influence our ideas of garden design.
It is said Columbus got his ideas of geography from the Arabs.
The period was not the European "Dark Ages" that many suggest but there was an awful lot to learn from the Arabs and they did. Listen to Medieval music and tell me it is not Arabic. By 1400 we had the European renaissance and massive domed cathedrals popping up everywhere.

I am reading a book called "The man who warned America" about the pre 9/11 FBI chief. Bin Laden is quoted a few times and he often refers to the Crusades. I don't think the scars of Islamic/Christian barbarity have healed.
Here are some that are trying and some other web sites of interest


Pilgrims beg forgiveness for Crusades

http://www.abc.net.a...ries/s35847.htm

AM Archive - Tuesday, 13 July , 1999 00:00:00
Reporter: Jim Gale
COMPERE: It seems it's never too late to say sorry - even for something that happened 900 years ago. This week Jerusalem will play host to thousands of pilgrims who've taken part in a three-year trek. They've begged the forgiveness of orthodox Christians in Greece and Turkey, as well as Arabs, as they travelled along the old Crusader trail winding through Syria. Now they've arrived at the walls of Jerusalem, where on Thursday hundreds will gather to mark the 900th anniversary of the Crusader liberation of the Holy City and the subsequent massacre of tens of thousands of Arabs and Jews. Jim Gale was at the Jaffa Gate to welcome them.


The religious motivation for the war:_

FROM:
http://www.mrdowling.com/606islam.html
The modern nation of Turkey is named for its Turkish inhabitants, but the Turks were not originally from Turkey. The Turks were nomadic people from Central Asia. Many Turks remain in that area, in fact, there is a nation in Central Asia known as Turkmenistan ("land of the Turks").

One Turkish tribe, the Seljuks, began moving into the Anatolian peninsula, or what we now call Turkey. These Turks were Muslims, and a Christian emperor, Alexius I, controlled the peninsula. Alexius appealed to the Pope to help him rid Anatolia of "the unbelievers."

Pope Urban II received Alexius's call for assistance, but decided to use that call to advance a more ambitious plan. Jerusalem, on the east coast of the Mediterranean Sea in the modern nation of Israel, is considered holy land to Christians, Jews and Muslims, but in 1095, the city was controlled by Muslims. The message from Alexius presented Urban with an opportunity to retake the holy lands from the Muslims. The pope called for a "War of the Cross," or Crusade, to retake the holy lands from the unbelievers.

Pope Urban said
http://www.fordham.e...ban2-5vers.html
(this is agood source of original documents)

"Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ's heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.
"All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested

There were seven to nine crusades, so I guess it is hard to generalise
http://www.thehistor..._crusades-1.php
Urban II's call to arms
As the Byzantine Empire in the 11th century struggled to hold back the Seljuk Turks, Emperor Alexius I appealed to the West for aid. This plea did not fall on deaf ears and in 1095 Pope Urban II delivered his great speech to the Council of Clermont in which he exhorted Christendom to go to war for the Sepulcher, promising that the journey would count as full penance.

The battle cry of the Christians, he urged, should be Deus volt [God wills it]. From the crosses that were distributed at this meeting the Crusaders took their name.

From
http://www.medievalc...es.com/foes.htm


Upon the death of the Prophet Mohammed, the Moslem Empire split. The Successors, or Caliphs, branched off. The Shi ites, or followers of the son-in-law, Ali, were in Tripoli. The followers of Fatima, The Prophet's daughter, called the Fatmids, were in Egypt. They had lost their holding on Jerusalem to the Byzantine in 1096. The Selchukid (Seljuk) Turks, were in Syria, each city having its own ruler, and no organization. They were also in Baghdad and had extended into the Byzantine held Anotolia. The Umayyad Caliphate was in Cordova, Spain.

The Arab Empire, though united in Islam, was not very united politically. Revolt, civil war, assassination, all were common. But they had a unique culture that fast spread its influences to the Western Europeans.

They had developed advanced mathematics. They had explored the movements of the stars and planets in the heavens. They taught the Crusaders Chess. They traded in rare spices and silks, some the likes of which the Crusaders had not seen before. They introduced new arts, dance, metalworkings, story telling, all which became incorporated into the culture of the Crusaders, as apparent in clothing, jewelry and literature.

--

#12 Qfwfq

Qfwfq

    Exhausted Gondolier

  • Members
  • 6241 posts

Posted 15 June 2006 - 09:22 AM

I agree that western culture owes some credit to the Arabic Empire, but we shouldn't make it too much of a discussion between sides. Let's try to talk about them please, more than for one or the other. Also, Racoon had already quoted the last bit, although he hadn't bothered citing any source.

#13 Michaelangelica

Michaelangelica

    Creating

  • Members
  • 7797 posts

Posted 15 June 2006 - 09:33 AM

I agree that western culture owes some credit to the Arabic Empire, but we shouldn't make it too much of a discussion between sides. Let's try to talk about them please, more than for one or the other. Also, Racoon had already quoted the last bit, although he hadn't bothered citing any source.


Not "some" credit - heaps. Without them a lot of the Greek writers would have been lost- & see above list of achievements!

I am not arguing "sides" I am arguing-
1. Arab civiliasation was technically and culturally, if not morally far more advanced than European culture in 1,000AD
All wars are barbaric wastes and
2 the motivation for the Crusades was religion (& without the free pass into heaven few would have gone)

I have always been amused by the fact that the Arabs alchemists/chemists invented the still.(Which gave us gin, brandy etc)
Such wonderful irony

#14 Qfwfq

Qfwfq

    Exhausted Gondolier

  • Members
  • 6241 posts

Posted 16 June 2006 - 02:19 AM

I agree with many things you say but I was trying to avoid the discussion straying a bit too much. :hihi: It is OK to talk about these things but only as they are relevant and in appropriate manner, without the sole purpose of arguing against previous antiislamic and politically biased posts that should only be considered off topic. Making a long list of achievements, like above, isn't within the purpose either.

I might say that the monks across Europe preserved the Greek and Roman writings through centuries of labour, the cultural importance of the Arabic world was mainly in new progress, which they added to oriental as well as classical European knowledge. There was certainly an abiss following the fall of Rome but this isn't a reason for tooting one trumpet against the other.

Religion was, as usual, used politically as an instrument, by both sides, but this doesn't mean it was the ultimate motivation behind the Crusades. Did the Acheans really siege and burn Troy just because of pretty Helen?

#15 Panjandrum

Panjandrum

    Suspended

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 16 June 2006 - 03:28 PM

They did allow religious freedom in countries they conquered .


No, they didnt. If you nhappened to belong to one of the 'tolerated' religions of Christianity or Judaism, you could continue to follow your faith, subject to numerous onerous restrictions, including a ban on riding, a ban on building new churches or synagoges, a ban on practising your faith in the presence of a muslim, a ban on travel etc etc. I suggest you look into the Dhimmi code, which expresses eloquently the utterly subservient position of non-muslims under islamic regimes. Two more restrictions placed on Dhimmis are a heavy tax imposed on all non-muslims, and the prohibition under islamic law of a non-muslim being in a position of authority over a muslim.

Furthermore, if you did not follow Christianity or Judaism, if you were a pagan, or a Hindu, or whatever, the only choice you were given was convert or die. And if you were an athiest, death was all you could expect.

The babarism and war crimes started with the Christians, the Arabs followed suit.


Read up the life of Muhammed. He was the leader of a bandit gang who robbed and murdered merchants rather than make an honest living for themselves. He made and broke treaties on a whim, had a whole tribe of Jews who had lived with him in Medina peacefully executed, and once crucified a general for the heinous crime of showing mercy to some captives.

The Arabs around 1000AD where far more advanced in scholarship (they had translated much of the early Greeks and had massive libraries).


No, they didnt. The texts of the classical scholars were translated into arabic by Christian and Jewish subjects of the islamic empire. Besides which, the possession of the knowledge of the high civilisation they destroyed can hardly be taken as one of thier achievments.

The Arab world far more advanced in Architecture & Engineering. The Europeans had no idea how to build huge domed structures.
Arab towns had running water and sewage treatment-something the Europeans didn't have for centuries.


The arabs learnt all they knew of architecture from the persians and romans. they had absolutely no native tradition in this area. Roman towns had sewers, and the Byzantines built the worlds greatest domed building, the Hagia Sophia. The design of which inspired the islamic love of domes.

There were beautiful Gardens of medicinal herbs and running water that still influence our ideas of garden design.


Persian.

It is said Columbus got his ideas of geography from the Arabs.


Who says this?

The period was not the European "Dark Ages" that many suggest but there was an awful lot to learn from the Arabs and they did. Listen to Medieval music and tell me it is not Arabic.


Its not Arabic.

By 1400 we had the European renaissance and massive domed cathedrals popping up everywhere.


The renaissance was the _re_ discovery of classical, european learning. You may say, "Well the arabs kept it safe for us!" but the fact is that if they hadnt destroyed it in the first place wed have had no need for a renaissance.

I am reading a book called "The man who warned America" about the pre 9/11 FBI chief. Bin Laden is quoted a few times and he often refers to the Crusades. I don't think the scars of Islamic/Christian barbarity have healed.
Here are some that are trying and some other web sites of interest


So? Bin Laden is a nutcase and a zealot. Of course he wants to blame us for his desire to kill everyone, but if the Crusades had never happened hed have found some other excuse. Except hed not have needed one, since without the Crusades there would have been no west.

As to your weblinks, I am aware of the history involved, and I find it pathetic that christian groups beg for forgiveness for a campaign that allowed christendom to survive.

#16 Freddy

Freddy

    Understanding

  • Members
  • 464 posts

Posted 16 June 2006 - 08:33 PM

The Childrens' Crusade was the worst. At least the adults could have opted out.


After a little research there seems to be a debate by scholars as to whether this crusade took place at all or was exagerated by later writers. Contemporary sources are not available.

#17 Michaelangelica

Michaelangelica

    Creating

  • Members
  • 7797 posts

Posted 16 June 2006 - 09:48 PM

I agree that western culture owes some credit to the Arabic Empire,

I am surprised by the denial and depreciation of the huge impact Islamic arts and sciences had on the west
.I am talking 1,000 to 1,100AD not 600AD. The time of the first Crusade Without the Arabic libraries much herbal and medical knowledge would have been lost.
It was only much later (1350--)that Christian Monks began to copy manuscripts in earnest. This was more to show all healing came from God rather than plants. "Wise women" were getting too much power and were too Pagan in their approach. Spells told with herbs were replaced with Christian prayers and the plants were given Christian names.The wilds of scotland were very pagan up to 1600+

--
Arab contributions to Sciences

http://www.fordham.e...l/med/wiet.html
Even before the founding of Baghdad, whose well-earned fame grew for at least four centuries, the caliph Mansur sullied his own reputation by having Ibn Muqaffa', the creator of secular Arabic prose, put to death for what were probably political reasons. The writer was only thirty-six years old when he was executed in 757. The caliph thus did away with the reputed translator of the Fables of Bidpai, known today under the title of Kalila and Dimna. It is a masterpiece of Arabic prose, whose literary qualities have never been denied by Arab writers.

Mamun was the caliph who was largely responsible for cultural expansion. An Arab historian states the following: "He looked for knowledge where it was evident, and thanks to the breadth of his conceptions and the power of his intelligence, he drew it from places where it was hidden. He entered into relations with the emperors of Byzantium, gave them rich gifts, and asked them to give him books of philosophy which they had in their possession. These emperors sent him those works of Plato, Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen, Euclid, and Ptolemy which they had. Mamun then chose the most experienced translators and commissioned them to translate these works to the best of their ability.
After the translating was done as perfectly as possible, the caliph urged his subjects to read the translations and encouraged tbem to study them. Consequently, the scientific movement became stronger under this prince's reign. Scholars held high rank, and the caliph surrounded himself with learned men, legal experts, traditionalists, rationalist theologians, lexicographers, annalists, metricians, and genealogists. He then ordered instruments to be manufactured."

Astronomical observation was begun in Baghdad in an observatory in the Shammasiya section, on the left bank of the Tigris, east of Rusafa. The staff set to work measuring the ecliptic angle and fixing the position of the stars. In addition, the caliph ordered that two terrestrial degrees be calculated in order to determine the length of the solar year. (This work was not to be taken up again for seven centuries.)
The engineer Ibrahim Fazari, who helped plan the founding of Baghdad, was the first in the Arab world to make astrolabes. (The Bibliothque Nationale in Paris has perhaps the oldest instrument of this type, one dating from the year 905. It was probably made in Baghdad, since it has on it the name of an heir apparent to the caliphate, a son of the caliph Muktafi.).

People of the West should publicly express their gratitude to the scholars of the Abbasid period, who were known and appreciated in Europe during the Middle Ages. There were the astronomer al-Khwarizmi (850), from whose name comes the word "algorithm"; Farghani, whom we call Alfraganus (about 850); the physician Yahya ibn Masawayh, called Mesua in the West; the astronomer Abu Ma'shar, the Albumasar of the Europeans (about 996).

The caliph Mamun was responsible for the translation of Greek works into Arabic. He founded in Baghdad the Academy of Wisdom, which took over from the Persian university of Jundaisapur and soon became an active scientific center. The Academy's large library was enriched by the translations that had been undertaken. Scholars of all races and religions were invited to work there. They were concerned with preserving a universal heritage, which was not specifically Moslem and was Arabic only in language. The sovereign had the best qualified specialists of the time come to the capital from all parts of his empire.
There was no lack of talented men. The rush toward Baghdad was as impressive as the horsemen's sweep through entire lands during the Arab conquest. The intellectuals of Baghdad eagerly set to work to discover the thoughts of antiquity.

Harun al-Rashid, Mamun's father, was particularly interested in the physicians brought to his capital. The physicians who had become justly famous under the first caliphs of Baghdad had been students at the Persian school of Jundaisapur. The first representative of the famous Bakhtyashu family came from this school, too. The family furnished physicians to the Abbasid court for more than 250 years. The biography of one of them indicates that the examination of urine was a common practice.

The Nestorian Christian, Yahya ibn Masawayh, wrote many works on fevers, hygiene, and dietetics. His was the first treatise on ophthalmology, but he was soon surpassed in this field by his famous pupil, Hunain ibn Ishaq. Their books are of special value since there is no Greek treatise on the subject.

Particular mention should be made of the man to whom Arab science owes so much, the man who could be called the father of Arab medicine, Hunain ibn Ishaq, also a Christian. In medieval Latin translations he was known as Johannitius. For him the caliph Mutawakkil restored the translation bureau, which had been originally established by Mamun. Not only did Hunain work at translations, but he directed a team of scholars. His enthusiasm was responsible for great progress.
He can be credited with having greatly increased the scientific knowledge of the Arabs. By inventing medical and philosophical terms, he was largely instrumental in forming a scientific language. Thanks to him and his collaborators, Arab writers formed the cultural avant-garde for a century or two. In the field of morals, this school was the first to translate the Hippocratic Oath.

Razi, the physician of genius known in medieval Europe as Rhazes, profited greatly from these works. His own medical work was extensive. This fine clinician, who had universal interests, had his differences with the Moslem religion because he was opposed to all dogmatism. For this reason, extremely violent diatribes were directed against him.

The way in which the caliph Mamun kindled the enthusiasm of others is admirable. Three brothers, the sons of Musa ibn Shakir, sought to distinguish themselves by giving fabulous sums of money to collect manuscripts and to bring translators together. The Banu Musa were themselves scholars who made advances in mathematics and astronomy.

Kindi, who was to be known to posterity by the honorary title "philosopher of the Arabs," lived in Baghdad in this richly intellectual milieu. Because of his Mutazilite convictions, he attained the threefold position of translator, teacher, and astrologer. With him, "Arab intelligence rises to the level of philosophy." Of the role he played, it is enough to say that he was the creator of a doctrine that was to flourish in Arab philosophy, the idea of conciliation between the positions of Aristotle and Plato.

Arab contributions to Music
here I am talking post-crusades
Post Hildegard von Bingen (c.1098-1179) was a more provincial figure (from Germany), and one of the most distinctive musical voices of the age. Her music is monophonic and in Latin. New instruments such as the shaun were introduced to the west
. The westward movement of scientific scholarship into the Muslim universities of Spain is known to have influenced the Christian West t substantial influence existed in areas ranging from rhythm and song forms to music theory, nomenclature, and musical instruments.

Influence in the case of instruments is indicated by name derivations: for example, the lute from al-'ud; the nakers, or kettledrums, from naqqarat; the rebec from rabab; and the anafil, or natural trumpet, from al-nafir.
Added evidence comes from manuscript illustrations of instruments that have obvious Near Eastern origins. One such document is the thirteenth-century collection of songs entitled Cantigas de Santa Maria, prepared for the Spanish King Alfonso X, who was known as el Sabio (the wise). This work was decorated with miniature illustrations in color, showing musicians, including Moors, performing on a wide variety of instruments such as the lute, the psaltery, and the double-reed shawm.
more at
http://trumpet.sdsu....rab_Music1.html

Religious tolerance in India
Kabir and Nanak

The synthesis of Hinduism and Islam is exemplified by the emergence, at this time, of the ideas of two great saints, Kabir and Nanak. Drawing on the devotional Hindu Bhakti and the mystical Islamic Sufi cults, the tolerance of Hinduism and the ideas of equality in Islam, they preached religions that advocated simple living and practical common sense. Kabir emphasised the oneness of the Divine in memorable couplets - "Hari is in the east, Allah in the west; look within your heart for there you will find both Karim and Ram." The followers of Guru Nanak founded the Sikh religion, which has a large following.

The most important Islamic empire was that of the Mughals, a Central Asian dynasty founded by Babur early in the sixteenth century. Babur was succeeded by his son Humayun and under the reign of Humayun's son , Akbar the Great (1562-1605), Indo-Islamic culture attained a peak of tolerance, harmony and a spirit of enquiry.Buland DarwazaThe nobles of his court belonged to both the Hindu and the Muslim faiths, and Akbar himself married a Hindu princess.
Leaders of all the faiths were invited to his court at Fatehpur Sikri to debate religious issues at the specially built 'Ibadat Khana'. Akbar tried to consolidate religious tolerance by founding the Din-e-Ilahi religion, an amalgam of the Hindu and the Muslim faiths.
http://www.indembass...iminvasions.htm