34 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

Not quite true Biff. The inquisition accompanied the Spanish (in particular) to the New World where it was used widely as a tool of repression against native populations.

Perhaps discounting the Americas    .

 

48 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Perhaps discounting the Americas    .

 

Not at all. Read Toby Green's Inquisition if you want a sense of the scale of the Inquisition's barbarities. That's one of the problems with trying to implicate only one religion or Empire.

18 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

Not at all. Read Toby Green's Inquisition if you want a sense of the scale of the Inquisition's barbarities. That's one of the problems with trying to implicate only one religion or Empire.

In Italy we say : 'E Vero'.

 

2 hours ago, Dr John Dee said:

Not at all. Read Toby Green's Inquisition if you want a sense of the scale of the Inquisition's barbarities. That's one of the problems with trying to implicate only one religion or Empire.

The death toll from both sides was huge.

The Christians usually held a trial however brief.

5 hours ago, dieter said:

Always a relief to come across educated discourse on a site like this rather than the display of half baked basically prejudiced views formed on comfortable armchairs.

don't think you'll find any comfortable chairs at the gat, dieter. at least not my idea of comfortable

2 hours ago, Dr John Dee said:

Not at all. Read Toby Green's Inquisition if you want a sense of the scale of the Inquisition's barbarities. That's one of the problems with trying to implicate only one religion or Empire.

no doubt the barbarities of the si were considerable, doc but it was always my understanding that the actual deaths were quite low. anyway i just re-checked and this is from wiki......" García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed.^[110] "

33 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

no doubt the barbarities of the si were considerable, doc but it was always my understanding that the actual deaths were quite low. anyway i just re-checked and this is from wiki......" García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed.^[110] "

I also have it on good authority - but this is DEFINITELY NOT QUOTED IN BRITISH HISTORY BOOKS - that the Sassenachs killed more people during the Inqusition than Spain, many, many more.

Go read up, my friend, go read up.

The Brits are the squeaky cleans of History as we know it aren't they. That's handy when you belong to a race of finger pointers.

There but for the grace of god....

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

The death toll from both sides was huge.

The Christians usually held a trial however brief.

So frigging what? Ask Copernicus.

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

no doubt the barbarities of the si were considerable, doc but it was always my understanding that the actual deaths were quite low. anyway i just re-checked and this is from wiki......" García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed.^[110] "

Yes. .

I think stats back up my point.

Christians had trials.

Thanks.

2 minutes ago, Biffen said:

Yes. .

I think stats back up my point.

Christians had trials.

Thanks.

Christians had the Reformation too: end result: W/W1, W/W 2, The slaughters of Stalin and Hitler, Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Gaza twice with so-called Christian blessing. Where should I stop, Mr Biff?

2 minutes ago, dieter said:

Christians had the Reformation too: end result: W/W1, W/W 2, The slaughters of Stalin and Hitler, Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Gaza twice with so-called Christian blessing. Where should I stop, Mr Biff?

That's a contentious argument but then Im not defending Christians nor would I blame them for these conflicts.

1 hour ago, dieter said:

I also have it on good authority - but this is DEFINITELY NOT QUOTED IN BRITISH HISTORY BOOKS - that the Sassenachs killed more people during the Inqusition than Spain, many, many more.

Go read up, my friend, go read up.

The Brits are the squeaky cleans of History as we know it aren't they. That's handy when you belong to a race of finger pointers.

There but for the grace of god....

??

I was only trying to qualify the death toll of the si. I'd also point out that I don't consider the spanish colonial death toll death in the new world as being an intrinsic part of the si  

lay off the booze, dieter, it's not a competition with the english

39 minutes ago, dieter said:

Christians had the Reformation too: end result: W/W1, W/W 2, The slaughters of Stalin and Hitler, Hiroshima, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Gaza twice with so-called Christian blessing. Where should I stop, Mr Biff?

you needn't worry to much about the christians these days, dieter, they're fast dying out and are effectively a spent force. the atheists however may become the new barbarians, lol

Can anyone research what a Jannisarie soldier did?

Also hard to find any peace for Christians in Yugoslavia.

Christians there were not aloud to ring bells,be the first to sleep with their wife, ride a horse or have a nice house.

The stronger boys were converted to Islam and made into fervent "Ottomans"  under Islam and the Turks.

They would return later to claim their lands for Mohammed and kill their own parents .

The Devrishme was a similar brand of Ottoman- stolen child soldiers from closer to Stambul.

Jews were exempt and first born sons exempted .So kind.

Edited January 10, 20178 yr by Biffen

8 hours ago, Biffen said:

Yes. .

I think stats back up my point.

Christians had trials.

Thanks.

If by Christians you mean the Inquisition, they also had some pretty legendary forms of torture. Trials, where they were necessary (and they were only necessary when it had already been decided to execute someone), were only to rubber-stamp confessions already extracted.

4 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

If by Christians you mean the Inquisition, they also had some pretty legendary forms of torture. Trials, where they were necessary (and they were only necessary when it had already been decided to execute someone), were only to rubber-stamp confessions already extracted.

The records back up my point .

Christians actually did record the trials and deaths,punishments, their outcomes.

As DC pointed out it is tenuous to link the inquisition with the Crusades although both involved Spain.

Keep defending Islam though- who needsfacts or truth?

Still haven't found any enlightening achievements made by the various Warlords- Sultans.

Find me something they did or have I finally destroyed this myth of civility and achievement falsely credited to the Islamic Turkish rolling conquest known as the Ottomans.

It would be wise for you to admit that the the great Christian crusades were a tame imitation of the horror committed in the name of Allah.

The British succeeded in ending 800 years of rape, murder and death to non- Muslims.

Islam built a few domes and is now in Suicide mode.

9 hours ago, daisycutter said:

no doubt the barbarities of the si were considerable, doc but it was always my understanding that the actual deaths were quite low. anyway i just re-checked and this is from wiki......" García Cárcel estimates that the total number processed by the Inquisition throughout its history was approximately 150,000; applying the percentages of executions that appeared in the trials of 1560–1700—about 2%—the approximate total would be about 3,000 put to death. Nevertheless, it is likely that the toll was higher, keeping in mind the data provided by Dedieu and García Cárcel for the tribunals of Toledo and Valencia, respectively. It is likely that between 3,000 and 5,000 were executed.^[110] "

I don't know that playing the numbers game helps all that much, daisy, since the west wins that one hands down every day. My point was about barbarism itself and the Inquisition was a particularly barbarous form of expression of the Counter-Reformation because of its methodologies, which weren't so much about killing Jews and Moslems but using torture and execution as ways of suppressing entire populations.

Burning people alive was particularly horrific and I don't really think that whether or not the Spanish executed less people than the Ottomans killed in the Balkans or anywhere else eases the burden of barbarity on the former. I know you haven't argued that but your comment feeds Biff's obsession, which does rely on drawing moral ratios.

4 minutes ago, Biffen said:

The records back up my point .

Christians actually did record the trials and deaths,punishments, their outcomes.

As DC pointed out it is tenuous to link the inquisition with the Crusades although both involved Spain.

Keep defending Islam though- who needsfacts or truth?

Still haven't found any enlightening achievements made by the various Warlords- Sultans.

Find me something they did or have I finally destroyed this myth of civility and achievement falsely credited to the Islamic Turkish rolling conquest known as the Ottomans.

It would be wise for you to admit that the the great Christian crusades were a tame imitation of the horror committed in the name of Allah.

The British succeeded in ending 800 years of rape, murder and death to non- Muslims.

Islam built a few domes and is now in Suicide mode.

You're getting hysterical Biff. Most of this isn't worth bothering about. All I'll comment on is the bolded bits:

(i) I made no such link. Actually, nor did daisy, he was commenting on links between the Inquisition and deaths in Spanish colonies;

(ii) I don't know what you've destroyed other than any semblance of logic and coherence, not that you displayed much of that in the first place. Why don't you submit your rantings to a refereed history journal and see what they think of your mythoclastics?

If you want to read anything I've said as 'defending Islam' I can't stop you but you obviously haven't got a clue.

1 hour ago, Dr John Dee said:

You're getting hysterical Biff. Most of this isn't worth bothering about. All I'll comment on is the bolded bits:

(i) I made no such link. Actually, nor did daisy, he was commenting on links between the Inquisition and deaths in Spanish colonies;

(ii) I don't know what you've destroyed other than any semblance of logic and coherence, not that you displayed much of that in the first place. Why don't you submit your rantings to a refereed history journal and see what they think of your mythoclastics?

If you want to read anything I've said as 'defending Islam' I can't stop you but you obviously haven't got a clue.

I defer to your superior sense of historical knowledge and wisdom.

Every assertion I've made has historical evidence to back it.

On your first bold point - you mentioned " the new world " which I took to be the Americas.

On your second, in relation to my historical theory, you tend to obscure the method of torture and those killed and forcibly converted with the numbers.

I think the numbers of lives ruined is central to the conversation and the methods of barbarity are more illustrative only as to the seperate organisations unique styles.

The crusaders never approached the same scale as the Muslimen(Ottoman standing army) not a racist term.

Also my contention was originally to do with English/ Middle Eastern contact not Spanish / Middle Eastern civilisations that may have been in contact for centuries prior.

You can keep trying to portray me as an intellectual oaf if you wish .It doesn't bother me as long as I encourage others to read up and contribute sensibly as you generally do.

10 hours ago, daisycutter said:

??

I was only trying to qualify the death toll of the si. I'd also point out that I don't consider the spanish colonial death toll death in the new world as being an intrinsic part of the si  

lay off the booze, dieter, it's not a competition with the english

I did misread what you wrote. Apologies.

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

I defer to your superior sense of historical knowledge and wisdom.

Every assertion I've made has historical evidence to back it.

On your first bold point - you mentioned " the new world " which I took to be the Americas.

On your second, in relation to my historical theory, you tend to obscure the method of torture and those killed and forcibly converted with the numbers.

I think the numbers of lives ruined is central to the conversation and the methods of barbarity are more illustrative only as to the seperate organisations unique styles.

The crusaders never approached the same scale as the Muslimen(Ottoman standing army) not a racist term.

Also my contention was originally to do with English/ Middle Eastern contact not Spanish / Middle Eastern civilisations that may have been in contact for centuries prior.

You can keep trying to portray me as an intellectual oaf if you wish .It doesn't bother me as long as I encourage others to read up and contribute sensibly as you generally do.

As I've said there really isn't any point trying to argue with the jumble of claims that are spread over your various posts on this thread.

There's also no point in holding any conversation with someone who doesn't actually bother reading what I've said. The New World was the Americas. you turned the point into something to do with the Crusades. Now you're trying to advance some justification for what you've said by pointing out that the New World was the Americas.

And the Iron Maiden as mere stylistics. Yeah, right.

Barbarism is barbarism. 

8 minutes ago, Dr John Dee said:

As I've said there really isn't any point trying to argue with the jumble of claims that are spread over your various posts on this thread.

There's also no point in holding any conversation with someone who doesn't actually bother reading what I've said. The New World was the Americas. you turned the point into something to do with the Crusades. Now you're trying to advance some justification for what you've said by pointing out that the New World was the Americas.

And the Iron Maiden as mere stylistics. Yeah, right.

Barbarism is barbarism. 

what is your point re barbarism, doc? History is studded continuously with various forms and degrees of barbarity. No nation, race, tribe, country or era has been immune to it. war is barbarity and recorded history is one great monologue of war and barbarity. the 20th century was as barbaric a century as any other. i'm a bit lost where this discussion is headed

I'm not racist, but .............. 

Perhaps the erudite among us might like to re-visit history and see what the Crusades did to the Moors, in the name of a Christian God.

2 minutes ago, iv'a worn smith said:

I'm not racist, but .............. 

Perhaps the erudite among us might like to re-visit history and see what the Crusades did to the Moors, in the name of a Christian God.

Well said!!!1

11 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

what is your point re barbarism, doc? History is studded continuously with various forms and degrees of barbarity. No nation, race, tribe, country or era has been immune to it. war is barbarity and recorded history is one great monologue of war and barbarity. the 20th century was as barbaric a century as any other. i'm a bit lost where this discussion is headed

That is my point daisy. Biffen is carrying on endlessly about the barbarity of the Ottomans or whatever other category he chooses to use to calumniate Muslims (in their entirety) and in order to do so he's also endlessly whitewashing European interferences in the rest of the world let alone the massacres, pogroms, genocides and so on at home. There is no vantage point of moral superiority on which to stand. The complexity of the history that leaves us where we are today needs to be accepted as such before anything is likely to be solved. 

Simplistic cause and effect relationships and caricatures/stereotypes/generalisations etc are the stuff of propaganda. I'd have thought better of Biff than to trade in them.