Re-Examining the Origins of the Crusades

Holy Warriors: Islam and the Demise of Classical Civilization

by John J. O’Neill

Felibri.com: August, 2009; 266 pages.

From 9/11, Madrid, Bali, London, Mumbai, to Fort Hood and beyond, thoughtful people across the West are re-examining and re-assessing our understanding of Islamic history and doctrine.

“Holy Warriors” by John O’Neill is an important addition to our scholarship on Islamic jihad in Europe and the advent of the so-called “Dark Ages” of the 8th through 10th centuries, and the fall of classical civilization.

If attributing the demise of classical civilization in Europe to jihad isn’t controversial enough, O’Neill also theorizes (in a lengthy Appendix) that the timeline of the “Dark Ages” is wrong and our understanding of the Dark Ages mistaken. A re-assessment of the origins of the Dark Ages and the decline of classical culture in Europe is timely in light of the resurgence of Islam since the abolition of the Caliphate in the 1920s.

O’Neill acknowledges his debt to the unfairly generally unknown work by the Belgian historian Henri Pirenne, “Mohammed and Charlemagne” (1939).

The lack of archaeological evidence of economic, architectural, and artistic activities, including a dearth of the tools and accoutrements of daily life (e.g., pottery, etc.) in the archaeological record for these centuries in both Christian and Muslim lands leads O’Neill to ask “why?”

O’Neill makes the case that the chronology of that time had been altered by a small but influential group so that one monarch, Otto III, could be remembered for all time as the ruler of the Holy Roman Empire in the year 1001, the hoped-for millennium of the return of Christ (rather than the actual year of say, 701). Such a radical alteration of the calendar could easily have been accomplished – according to O’Neill – as so few then could read, so few were learned, and multiple calendars were then in use.

If O’Neill is right and the chronology of those centuries was altered so that the calendar went from 701 to 1001 there are three theoretically “non-existent” centuries that the absence of archaeological evidence tends to validate. This is a highly controversial thesis and well-argued by the author of this fascinating book.

The lack of archeology during this epoch has long been an enigma, but it is an enigma for which a novel solution has now been proposed. Since the early 1990s German writer Heribert Illig has been suggesting that the years between 600 and 900, or, more precisely, between 614 and 911, never actually existed, and that almost 3 phantom centuries were inserted into the calendar. It was this chronological error, more than anything else, that gave rise to the notion of the Dark Age. (p.233)

If O’Neill’s time-line theory is linked with the onset of the Crusades, then the context of the Crusades becomes very different than the way it is understood today. If O’Neill is correct the Crusades began within decades of Islamic jihad in the Land of Israel not centuries.

“As we have seen, historians have long been puzzled by the fact that, though the Crusades represent the Christian response to the great Islamic conquest, a gap of three and a half to four centuries separates the two episodes.” (p.250)

O’Neill also adds two more particularly valuable insights to our growing knowledge of Islam and the devastating impact that it has had upon the non-Muslim world. Islam and jihad brought about the fall of classical civilization in Europe through its incessant attacks on European states, most particularly through its closure of the Mediterranean. Islamic jihad on the Mediterranean denied papyrus to the nations of Europe. The denial of this fundamental component of European commerce, communication, and record-keeping resulted in catastrophic changes, according to O’Neill.

Christian Europe prior to the “Dark Ages” suffered continual assaults by Islamic armies and the depredations of Viking raids. Two main results occurred; one, European slaves were taken by the Vikings and sold to the Muslims and two, centralized powers of Europe were unable to protect their lands and people.

Local powers arose to oppose attacks against the borders. These new powers became the feudal lords of Europe – completely decentralized powers that arose to defend their lands and oppose jihad and Islamic conquest. European feudalism came about as a direct defensive response to the endless jihad of Islam against Christendom, according to the author.

O’Neill does not miss the current cultural themes across Europe driven by “the mentality of political correctness, where the victim is transformed into the aggressor and the aggressor portrayed as the victim (p182).” Regarding current European views of Islam O’Neill notes, not without irony, that “astonishingly enough, this is a religion and an ideology which is still extolled by academics and artists as enlightened and tolerant.” (p210)

The politicization of scholarship in the United States and Europe is one of the fundamental reasons why the doctrine of Islam and its history remain either largely untaught or mischaracterized as ever tolerant and non-threatening. Political correctness is an impediment to learning and to knowledge; it must be delegitimized and abandoned.

Despite 9/11 and so many other jihad murders of innocents by adherents of Islam many in the West continue to deny history, and the doctrine of Islam which obligates adherents to participate in jihad regardless of whether they want to or not.

Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not. (Koran, 2:216)

The denial of history is foundational to political correctness; it is of no matter to post modernists and the politically correct that the truth is valuable in and of itself; what matters is that closely held Utopian concepts of humanity and civilization remain intact regardless of their being disproved by history, experience, and common sense.

Due to our experiences with Islam over the last several decades culminating in the period between 9/11 and Fort Hood we are obligated to re-think and re-assess our understanding of the motives and purposes of Islam.

We know that jihadists commit atrocities because they are obligated to do so. Many of these killers are not bashful at all in saying so; Islamic doctrine supports their contentions.

And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors. (Koran, 2:193)

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hathbeen forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Koran:9:29)

Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah ‘s Apostle said,

“I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)”

(Bukhari, Hadith, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196)

Though it suffers from a lack of editorial attention and includes one “Wikipedia” citation, “Holy Warriors” is an important challenge to our understanding of the demise of classical culture in Europe and the rise of the “Dark Ages.” It could have been double or even triple its length – and it should have been, with more footnotes, more illustrations and more details specifically relating to O’Neill’s controversial theory of documentation forgery and altered time-line. Additional discussion of archaeological evidence (or lack of it) should also have been included. “Holy Warriors” does not contain a proper bibliography (or end-notes) nor is a biography of the author included. With these issues noted, the book is of note for the issues that it raises and the logical conclusions and theories that it draws from history.

The “Dark Ages” are said to have ended with the acquisition of new knowledge; perhaps our own civilizational phase of darkness, ignorance, denial, and moral equivalence is coming to an end, too.