The background of the crusades is pretty well understood. We have the Ishmaelites (or Muslims, or Mosselmen, or Moors, or Islam) occupying Jerusalem. Or Mohammedans. I include all these words in case anyone is wondering if going about asking what the right word for something is brings them to looking to the east of a morn and wondering if changing the words for things is the best way of going about the business.
I advocate change--talking about in things which are no less important than knowledge. But only of a kind that a father and a son can agree to. To put fathers and sons at odds suggests a change which involves disagreement as to what is true.
Perhaps how a woman dresses has something to do with language, and learning. Changing the words one uses for the culture of another is perhaps a matter of insulting them. Or perhaps it is a matter of not being able to stop unruly children from making fun of other people in how they say the words that their parents use for those other people.
It would hardly do to forget that the occupation of Spain by the Moors brought the Enemy a little too close for comfort.
It's hard to forget something you don't know. For instance, it may so be that you find yourself contemplating facts which underlie writing itself: you might not know that you are therefore contemplating facts which underlie the writing of a marriage certificate. A degree in pure maths is pretty useless, but it does mean you get to claim the shape. Others might suggest you aught to claim the colour, too.
It would be a bit of a jump along the Real number line to suggest that alternative branches of maths were started for the same woman. But it is a bit maddening to hear it said that the word vector as something different from the word point.
England and the continent have been in an intellectual spat since it was decided not to have a central authority that worked for all matters of authority that are not a matter of boundaries, in a society that allows people to choose under whose authority they live simply by packing up their possessions and finding somewhere else to put them down again.
We must mention that Jews lived amongst these people as a matter of necessity, and were only disobedient on the matter of going to Church. The word indistinguishable comes to mind, looking for a place to occupy.
Which reminds me I've left the Moors in Spain.
The Rock of Gibraltar is much talked about in religious histories. Those who don't think they aught to be remembering things that no-one told them might prefer to hold onto this rock and contemplate the shape of the world: the fact that this shape is ever-changing is not something we need to remember or be told. It might just be that some consider this change more important to study, for floods and earthquakes and volcanoes must change the course of history. But that would be to forget a tool which changes the shape of the world.
The Moors meant business, and went about it in a business-like fashion. How they differed from the Jews, only the Jews could say. Pushing them back and fortifying the Rock took the united effort of England and the continent.
We can't say how much fighting this involved. It may so be that all it took as resolve to show the invaders that they were not welcome.
It is not say easy to tell your friends to get out the country for just because. It might be harder to tell them that you're not coming along with them for just because you're an Englishman. It may so be that to do anything else would be to start an unholy argument.
I must put aside the idea that Christian men believed it was acceptable to enter barbary with the idea of capturing a wife. Those poor Spanish authors: shame! Hiding a marriage certificate in a work of fiction, so deeply that the publishers didn't blink. The main thing about getting married is getting people to acknowledge you are, obviously. If no-one will go to your wedding, and no-one will read your marriage certificate, they may therefore ignore everything you tell them on religious matters, and then ask you when you're getting married.
But this is besides the vector I'm trying to make. The fact is that Christendom has always included those who find themselves tangled in debt. Their opinion of Jews was very simple: Jews put gold above love.
It may so be that other types within Christendom didn't feel comfortable with the idea that a city, which is a monument, could not be visited without pretending to be a half-wit incapable of saying anything other than the name of Jesus Christ.
But it's awfully difficult to decide between fathers and sons who agreed that this shameful state of affairs aught to be rectified, and those fathers and sons who insisted that well-enough aught to be left alone.
They say that healthy rivalry is good. It does seem that corruption is more difficult to contain in places wherein no harems are to be found.
That should give you something to think about.
I no longer intend to stand for a girl not of my nationality which nation doesn't have a fucking clue, for being a nation of silly nincompoops.
When they are beautiful in all sense of the word, Englishwomen ask you to please get on with the story instead of looking for silly adjectives, and if mentioning names just makes the task a name-dropping game, we might just as well dispense with all names.
The crusades just seemed to peter out as if one set of fathers-and-sons had won the argument.
The recovery of Jerusalem by England is circumstantial.
You know the real problem of the world? Revisionism: people just don't know how to keep their website like a perfect archive.