I spent Thursday through Saturday ( I missed the last day because of work) in Kalamazoo Michigan for the 43rd International Congress on Medieval Studies. I went with another medievalist (
( Read more... )
France and Riley-Smith don't like each other very much. I think I lean more towards France's theories on the crusaders ambitions, but then again I am rather cynical in viewing human nature.
Heh, I guess even old British scholars can't all get along.
I enjoined France's paper and his comments on the crusaders as conquerors who were very practical (after the initial carnage, anyways) in terms of ruling. They had to rely on the native population regardless of their religious beliefs. He also hammered the point that recent archaeological work has shown that the crusaders were more entrenched within society than previously believed. He also made a quip about how much they liked those Armenian women.
All in all, it was worth packing into that small classroom.
Comments 2
Reply
I enjoined France's paper and his comments on the crusaders as conquerors who were very practical (after the initial carnage, anyways) in terms of ruling. They had to rely on the native population regardless of their religious beliefs. He also hammered the point that recent archaeological work has shown that the crusaders were more entrenched within society than previously believed. He also made a quip about how much they liked those Armenian women.
All in all, it was worth packing into that small classroom.
Reply
Leave a comment