Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Crusading movement

Article promoted by Gog the Mild (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Crusading movement
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it was recently a DYK on the main page, following a successful GAR and looks in pretty good shape. However it probably needs a fresh pair of eyes. I am sure there are improvements to be made bur please be gentle, it can get to be a heated topic on here. Topic wise it is about the institution of Christian Catholic Holy War & the Crusades. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 10:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Lead
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Suggest splitting the first paragraph at "The concept of crusading"
 * Suggest merging the final paragraph with the first

Background
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 08:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ 11th century added Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ crusading movement - added Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ badly worded, opposite was intended Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ reworded to less significant, also attributed to the technical definition from International Relations Theory Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph does not belong here, as it is not about the background; move to the Legacy section
 * "was seen by a reformist movement" when was this?
 * " identified three key pre-conditions" for what?
 * "The crusades were not only a function of anarchy" That does not seem correct, given the degree or organisation involved
 * " and when these factors played less of a part" This wording is unclear. Less of a part in what? Suggest re-wording.

Christianity and war
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ w-l Christocentric Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ❌ The source is explicit that it was the first Gregory, cited to page 10 of Erdmann Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ reworded instead Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Texts describe the development of a distinct ideology that promoted and regulated crusades." Suggest "A distinct ideology promoted and regulated crusades."
 * "The Church defined crusading in legal and theological terms based on the theory of holy war and the concept of pilgrimage.
 * Link "holy war", "pilgrimage", "just war", "Old Testament", "New Testament"
 * What are "Christocentric views"?
 * "fighting in Sicily" Suggest "Norman conquest of Sicily" instead
 * "The idea developed under Pope Gregory I" Should this be Gregory VII?
 * "The Church viewed Rome as the Patrimony of Saint Peter" I don't know what the significance of this is here - consider deleting

Penance and indulgence
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Before the 11th century" Is "By the 11th century" mean here?
 * Link "absolution", "Atonement in Christianity", " Calixtus II", "Albigensian", "Papal bull"
 * " with two recorded directives" Delete "recorded"

Knights and chivalry
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 14:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ should have read these which now makes more sense, split the para later as this runs on correctly now Norfolkbigfish (talk) ❌ Hmmmm, as written it pretty much matches the source I think. Honig refers to Hans Delbrück In feudal Europe power was too fragmented for medieval rulers to be able to organise disciplined, combined units that could follow orders and execute tactical and strategic designs. He also quotes Charles Oman:Nowhere are more reckless displays of blind courage, or more stupid neglect of the elementary rules strategy and tactics to be found in the great expeditions to the Levant. Even where tactical ability is acknowledged, strategic thinking is absent because structural factors prevent decisive leadership. Armies were little more than plundering gangs in many cases. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 14:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * De-capitalise "chivalry"
 * " The new methods of warfare" Spilt paragraph here. And what were the new methods of warfare?
 * "Military strategy and medieval institutions were immature in feudal Europe, with power too fragmented for the formation of disciplined units." I don't think that the second phrase is true. And what institutions are we talking about? And were there other that medieval ones in feudal Europe?

Military orders
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:53, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Split paragraph at "Military orders" and "After the fall of Acre"
 * link "fall of Acre"
 * Any illustrations available of one of the military order knights?

Perception of Muslims

 * "Islam" is used before it is linked.

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

The sections on "Knights and chivalry", "Military orders", "Common people" and "Perception of "Muslims are not part of the background; move to the next section

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

12th century
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:44, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Link "Crusade of 1101", "Alfonso the Battler"

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Should "church" be capitalised?

✅ :-) Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:29, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Calixtus II extended the definition of crusading during his five years as Pope, before his death in 1124. It is hard to imagine him doing it after his death. See Principle of Some Astonishment.

13th century

 * Link Western schism.

❌—already linked at first usage. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 07:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

15th century
✅ This was driven by factors including contractual recruitment, increased intelligence and espionage, a greater emphasis on navel warfare, the grooming of alliances, new and varied tactics to deal with different circumstances and opposition, and the hiring of experts in siege warfare. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Warfare was now more professional and costly." Why?

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Is the Great Schism the East-West or the Western? Suggest using the latter term instead.

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Link Ottoman Empire

✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Split paragraph at "Around the end of the 15th century"

Legacy
✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:15, 16 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:15, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "or subject to migration" But Outremer was subject to migration
 * Move "in 1936" to the previous section

Historiography
I don't know if the historiography section is relevant Hawkeye7  (discuss)  20:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

❌— I was thinking along the lines of how the movement was perceived/criticised/lauded was all part of it as an institution. Particularly in the way it changed over time. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Thx @Hawkeye7, I am busy IRL, but will get on these ASAP. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 16:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

I will review once Hawkeye's review has been addresssed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:55, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note


 * Hey @Peacemaker67, @Hawkeye7—just for my information are there any actions on this that you think are with me? I have have been assuming it is with you guys atm, let me know if my assumption is incorrect? As ever, thanks for everything you do. KR Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)


 * All my concerns have been addressed, Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:31, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Image review - pass
All images are appropriately licensed. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * File:The Church of the Holy Sepulchre-Jerusalem.JPG - Flickr image - CC 2.0 - okay
 * File:SCONTRO A NABLUS - AFFRESCHI CONTROFACCIATA S. BEVIGNATE.JPG - Wikipedian image - old art - CC 3.0 - okay
 * File:Knights hospitaller.JPG, File:CouncilofClermont.jpg, File:Baldwin II ceeding the Temple of Salomon to Hugues de Payens and Gaudefroy de Saint-Homer.jpg - old art - okay
 * File:Cappella Piccolomini sposa Eleonora e cardinale Pinturicchio Siena.jpg - Wikipedian image - old art - multiple licences - okay

Comments Support by PM
Big effort to get this together, Nbf! This might take a few bites to get through. I immediately noticed that given the amount of religious terms introduced, there is a need for more links. Also, quite a few links are made after a term has been first introduced, or two or more links are made to the same term (which is probably excessive).

✅—Norfolkbigfish (talk) 18:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Lead
 * extend the sentence following "Crusades" in the first sentence to explain what they were eg "Crusades – a series of religious wars initiated, supported, and sometimes directed by the Christian Latin Church in the medieval period." with appropriate links
 * link Christian martyr
 * move link to First Crusade to first mention
 * link penance
 * change the Biblical italics to a quote bound by quotation marks
 * "the recovery of Jerusalem and the Palestinian holy places" from whom?
 * for "papal" link pope
 * link Christendom
 * link Christian pilgrimage

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:21, 10 December 2023 (UTC) ✅—Norfolkbigfish (talk) 18:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC) This could take some working through. Down to Birth, more to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:11, 10 December 2023 (UTC) All the above now ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC) Down to 14th C. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:40, 12 December 2023 (UTC) All ✅ apart from the highlighted—I will circle round and address later. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC) Down to 15th C. More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:22, 13 December 2023 (UTC) All ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 12:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC) Down to Historiography. Nearly there... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:54, 14 December 2023 (UTC) All ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Background
 * "mundus" is obscure, provide its meaning
 * link Monasticism
 * link liturgy
 * link Res publica Christiana
 * link Cluny Abbey
 * link Christendom at first mention and delink later usage
 * German Historian→German historian
 * decap International Relations Theory
 * link Latin Church and delink later usages
 * link paganism
 * move link to holy war to first mention and delink later usage
 * link Christian pilgrimage
 * link Canon law of the Catholic Church at first mention and delink later usage
 * need a space after fns [7][8]
 * decap Empire
 * just war is linked twice in the Christianity and war subsection
 * if the just war criteria are inclusive (ie all should be met), suggest decapping first letter of each dot point and putting a semi-colon at the end of the first two dot points, "and" after the second dot point, and a period at the end of the last dot point.
 * state when was Erdmann writing, if his thinking has now been superseded?
 * suggest applying the same approach as with the criteria to the dot points regarding Erdmann's ideas
 * suggest piping the link to absolution to "remission and absolution of sin" not just absolution ❌—T didn't find this page Norfolkbigfish (talk) 18:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
 * link contrition
 * link Confession (religion)
 * link penance
 * link Restitution (theology)
 * link Indulgence#Plenary indulgences
 * should it be "the exemption from atonement"?
 * link infidel
 * Evolution
 * "a myth conflicting with the ideals of the Church" in what respects? ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * link Kingdom of Jerusalem
 * link Crusader states
 * how did Humbert of Romans generate resources by his preaching? ✅ added narrative to describe his work Norfolkbigfish (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * link Jean Flori
 * while I am aware there is a book titled "Political Augustinianism" it is a book title, and scholars like John Rist decap "political" when discussing it. I suggest this should be "political Augustinianism".
 * Thomas Aquinas→Aquinas, he's been introduced already
 * rm comma from "This required what were partly inefficient,"
 * "The view on penance, that it could apply to killing adversaries" do you mean "it could be achieved/accomplished by killing adversaries"?
 * "The identification of the recovery of the despoiled country of Christ" I don't know what this means? The Holy Land? Or a metaphysical concept?
 * "led by a new knighthood" which knighthood?
 * link esprit de corps
 * link anti-pope A
 * comma after "William I, Count of Burgundy"
 * delink Hospitallers in "one by the Hospitallers"
 * move the link to Clement V up to the first mention
 * move the link to Cistercians up to the first mention
 * link forced conversion
 * link Schism
 * suggest linking dissenter for non-conformist
 * link Pope Gregory IX to Cardinal Hugo Ugolino of Segni then unlink later one
 * same suggestion about the dot points for just war applies to Segni's actions and to Gregory's actions (also link Teutonic Order in the latter and rm the later link)
 * link Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor at first mention
 * clarify that "against the emperor" means against the Holy Roman Emperor. At the most appropriate point I think you need to explain the relationship between the Pope and Emperor/Church and Empire, as it affected the crusading movement.
 * move the link to Innocent IV to first mention
 * what was the "after the conflict in Lombardy and Sardinia"? Is there a link?
 * explain "Staufen dynasty" or link
 * why use "general passage" rather than crusade? It is obscure to the general reader.
 * "Western Europeans blamed failures – the First Crusade" I thought the First Crusade was a success?
 * italicise "Würzburg Annals"
 * link Louis IX of France
 * who was the dean of Lincoln at the council? Richard de Mepham or John de Maidenstan? Link Dean of Lincoln regardless.
 * " Although a A minority view"
 * careful with using an obscure term like Outremer to refer to something already explained, it just has the reader looking for the earlier use, or wondering what it means.
 * In general, avoid starting a sentence with "However". The sentence beginning "However, ideas, and the consolidation" is trying to say too much, and I cannot actually work out what that is.
 * the first para of the 14th C subsection seems to be more about the 13th C, with its focus on Gregory X, who was long dead before the 14th C began.
 * link Mamluks and explain who they were
 * suggest avoiding using Latin words when plain English would be clearer, ie passigium particulare
 * say what Routiers were
 * link Western Schism
 * The sentence beginning "His famous Latin letters and speeches" needs a rewrite. It isn't clear to me what the subject is.
 * "the conqueror of Constantinople"→"Mehmed II"
 * Pope Pius II
 * same suggestion about the dot points
 * "Exiled rulers" from where?
 * navel→naval
 * Bohemia? link?
 * Maximilian? link?
 * suggest "Alexander IV himself"
 * Spanish Reconquista? link?
 * capture of Granada in 1492? link?
 * Castile? link?
 * French Wars of Religion? link?
 * suggest "Catholic Church in Spain" as it wasn't a separate entity?
 * suggest "This is a contentious issue, as others maintain that the the Latin settlements in the Levant did not meet the accepted definition of a colony, that of territory politically directed by or economically exploited for the benefit of a homeland." BTW, where does this definition come from? from memory this comes from Phillips in the cited source (The Oxford History), although I suspect he wasn't the origin of it. Is this an issue do you think? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * de-italicise religious colonies, it isn't in line with MOS:ITALICS
 * Historiography
 * I suspect there is quite a bit of overlinking as well as missing links. Once you are done, I will check it with the script and identify any.
 * at second mention " Jonathan Riley-Smith" ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * In this section I expected to read about the perspectives of historians of Islam and Byzantium (and in fact I expected them to be compared and contrasted throughout, but other than a short sentence "The Muslim context now receives attention from Islamicists." it is missing. I don't think that is enough for A-Class, esp when there are sources like The Crusades from the Perspective of Byzantium and the Muslim World edited by Laiou and Mottahedeh; and The Crusades: Islamic Perspectives by Hillenbrand. Otherwise, I am now done. Great job so far. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:49, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much @Peacemaker67, I'll start from the top and work down. This will probably be next week, real live is a bit full on atm. Greatly appreciated. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:33, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * New paragraph added to cover the Muslim viewpoint, cited Hillenbrand and added to sources. Getting the scope right is challenging, particularly differentiating between what is about the movement and what is about events. Hope this fills that gap, what do you think Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * All good, looking forward to seeing this at FAC in the fullness of time. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you @Peacemaker67 for all your time and attention—it has been interesting and fun. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Image review by Adam Cuerden
Six images. All kind of pass, but there's some issues I really need to bring up.

 Failed Fixed now
 * File:The Church of the Holy Sepulchre-Jerusalem.JPG - Flickr review checks out.
 * File:SCONTRO A NABLUS - AFFRESCHI CONTROFACCIATA S. BEVIGNATE.JPG - Standard Wikipedian-taken photo.
 * File:Baldwin II ceeding the Temple of Salomon to Hugues de Payens and Gaudefroy de Saint-Homer.jpg - I can't find more on this. It's terribly reproduced, but....
 * File:Cappella Piccolomini sposa Eleonora e cardinale Pinturicchio Siena.jpg - Typical Wikipedian-taken photo.
 * File:Knights_hospitaller.JPG is your source. It's a detail from [[:File:Gestorum Rhodie obsidionis commentarii - BNF Lat6067 f3v.jpg] BNF = Bibliotheque national de France, the filename says it's from "Gestorum Rhodie obsidionis commentarii". Seriously, people need to do their research before cutting out all the information while transferring a file to commons.


 * File:CouncilofClermont.jpg - Better documented, but doesn't link the source in question. It's https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b72000271/f47.item and this is a terribly mangled copy thereof.

I'll fix those last two at some point. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.7% of all FPs. 09:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Both have been replaced with the full-size originals. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.7% of all FPs. 11:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Everything passes, if that needs said. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 06:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Source review - pass
Hawkeye7  (discuss)  22:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The articles uses reputable sources that accurately represent the relevant body of published knowledge
 * Sources are generally well-formatted
 * Why does Jubb come after Koch? ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Why does MacEvitt come after Maier? ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * You now have Maier (2006a) and (2006b) bracketing MacEvitt. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:54, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ apologies @Hawkeye7, how about this? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 18:17, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't Madden come after MacEvitt? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 00:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ABC-CLIO, Routledge are inconsistently linked. ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Link Oxford University Press, Palgrave MacMillan, ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Link de:Uta-Renata Blumenthal, Jonathan Riley-Smith, Christopher Tyerman ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Full stop after E in Chevedden, Paul E ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Flori, Jean (2005), Maier, C. (2000) and Tuck, Richard (1999) are the only references with locations. I didn't find these, but have removed the two locations I did find, is this OK? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:28, 16 February 2024 (UTC) ✅ Found it now! Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * The archive link for Tuck isn't useful. ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Spot checks: 19, 34, 45, 102 - okay
 * Thanks again, as ever @Hawkeye7, I will get on these soon. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Hawkeye7, I think I have addressed all these. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
 * All good. Passing. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  06:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

12th century

 * Consider deleting "although it is likely that had the First Crusade failed this would have been different" While I think this is a logical conclusion, I am concerned that in an A-class article this could be criticized as speculation, or worse, original research, unless directly supported by a citation. ✅ It is pretty much what Riley-Smith wrote in the source, but it is subjective. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I have deleted "by" in the phrase "Urban he by defeated the three." If this is not a typo, perhaps it is the remnants of a draft phrase which was either not completed or not completely removed? you are right, it is left over detritus from various edits. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I will resume my review at this point later.

13th century

 * The paragraph starting with "Between 1217 and 1221, Cardinal Hugo Ugolino of Segni..." and ending with bullet points has no citation. ✅ It was cited to Tyerman in the following sentence. Added Paragraph break to make this obvious. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)


 * The following paragraph after "Frederick finally arrived in the Holy Land..." and ending with bullet points has no further citation. ✅ cited to Bird. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

14th century

 * "...blockade of the Egypy..." needs clarification. "Egypt"? a port in Egypt? ✅ typo y>>t Norfolkbigfish (talk) 12:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

15th century

 * Suggest that after "the Hospitallers retreated from Rhodes..." add "to Crete and Sicily and in 1530 to Malta and Gozo." and break sentence at this point.

I will resume my review soon with the "Legacy" section. Donner60 (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2024 (UTC) ✅ Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you @Donner60, I will get to these asap, just very busy IRL atm though :-) Norfolkbigfish (talk) 09:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)


 * You have done a great job of providing competing points of view in the concluding sections. I think your responses to the previous reviews provide balance and neutrality. These are excellent summary sections. The only minor comment that I have is that I probably would have written "in the Holy Land" rather than "on the Holy Land" in the second paragraph of Legacy. I think it is ok either way so I am going to support without further recommendations. An outstanding article on a difficult topic but interesting and easy reading throughout. Even with my limited comments, I am only the third reviewer and there is not a third full or nearly complete previous review. So I will recommend that an uninvolved coordinator take a look at this for passing on to A class. Donner60 (talk) 10:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you kind words @Donner60, it has been a long journey to get to this point. I have taken your point on on the Holy Land I think that was a mistake on my behalf. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)