Talk:Armies of the Crusaders

Notes[edit]

Anyone delete anything, and I'll call a crusade against you. And send a few Soviet Space troops too.

This is now a redirect page. --Funandtrvl (talk) 21:26, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh[edit]

I'm surprised no one has actually discussed anything about this article.

Well, no one knows about it, because it isn't linked from any other page except your userpage. Adam Bishop 20:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the tactics page greatly

added in more on tactics, emphasis on knights/infantry weakness of crusder army to their over eager nature, keen to face the enemy and get led into trap by pursuing fleeing foe abit on the two main orders expanded on the fortifications which was rather drab 'could stand indefintely unless water/food supply was cut of'

Silliness[edit]

The idea that since Islam forbids alcohol, and Christianity does not, the Christians were drunk and the Muslims not ignores the fact that people actually sin quite a bit. The prohibition on drinking was widely breached by the upper class in the Muslim States. That being said, no commander turned up to any significant battle so shtonkered as to be unable to command: we would know because it would have been recorded by observers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.3.65.1 (talk) 00:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what Fundamentalist fool added that in but I removed that nonesense. Exactly were will the Crusaders get their wine, if the region was dominated by Islamic powers? Tourskin (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That did happen actually - Ilghazi was frequently recorded as being drunk. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source please[edit]

"Contrary to popular belief, crusading soldiers wore armour far heavier than their Saracen and Turk counter parts." Id sure like to see some trustworthy source material for that sentance, since it contradicts just about everything Ive ever read about the muslim armies in the Lavant during the crusades. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.226.70.172 (talk) 00:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do you explain a smaller Crusader army defeating Muslim armies much larger? The Turks were lightly armed, the Mamelukes were heavily armed yes, but the Turks called the Franks "Men of Iron". I'll try to find something. Tourskin (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]