NY Times blames Crusaders--wrongly

So much for a "newspaper of record": all the history that's not "fit to print". A letter just sent to the Gray Lady:

The story, "Across Europe, Worries on Islam Spread to Center" (Oct. 11), states "that there is a deep and troubled history between Islam and Europe, with the Crusaders and the Ottoman Empire jostling each other for centuries...". That statemen is a chronological impossibility. The Crusader presence in the mainland Levant ended with the fall of Acre to the Mamluk Egyptian Sultan, al-Ashraf, in 1291. The origin of the Ottoman Empire is usually considered to be the declaration of an independent state by Osman I in 1299.

The Ottomans were certainly in conflict with Europeans for centuries--they entered the Balkans in the 14th century and they besieged Vienna as recently as 1683; but they certainly did not "jostle" the Crusaders for centuries.

Facts on the Muslim conquests of Christian lands after Mohammed and on the Crusades are here. Pity the Times seems unaware of the big picture concerning who was conquering whom and when.

Mark C.

Update: See "Comments" for a gentle correction from a friend and my reply.

Posted by markc at October 11, 2006 10:08 AM