Why crusaders destroyed Muslim Golden Age? Was there no limit

>destroy Muslim civilization
>bad

Also, as much as I'd like Europe to get the credit, the Mongols did most of the heavy lifting.

>>3039770
Muslim Civilization is better than Muslim chimp out that exists now. Same how Saddam was the better alternative to ISIS.

It was mostly the Mongols and their sack of Baghdad. But Europeans did do some shit, which was likely because they have a historical tendency to dehumanize other cultures and view them simply as commodities to be extracted.

>>3039762
They didn't. The Mongols did.

>>3039762

Keep hit someone over and over and when they finally hit you back you fall over and smack your head.

WAAA WAAA YOU BROKE MY SKULL

>ISLAMIC
>GOLDEN
>AGE

>laughingHindusEgyptiansPersiansGreeksRomans.jpg

File: 1499138953822.jpg (24KB, 600x484px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 600x484px

>>3039762
>Muslims Golden Age

>>3039762
you're most likely baiting and the answer has already been given above, but friendly steppe people ended the islamic golden age

>>3039937
>there was no Islamic Golden Age

[revisionism intensifies]

>>3039933
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Wisdom

>>3039789
Are you discribing Westerners who constantly whine that Muslim immigrants occasionally carry out terrorist attacks inside their countries despite the fact that the West has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslims in the last decade?

The Crusades, from the point of view of the Islamic world, were considered a footnote in their history, think Kipchak and Cuman raids in Europe level of irrelevance. It was only in the 20th century when they realized they could guilt trip Western Europeans with references to it.

>>3039782
The first Crusade was launched because Muslim warriors wouldn't stop attacking Byzantium, and the emperor wanted some reinforcements from the west. What about the attacks a couple centuries earlier, resulting in the loss of most of Christian Spain and colonizing by Muslim Moors, which would have also meant the loss of France, if Martel hadn't stone-walled the? Your reasoning is really one-sided and sloppy.

well the mongels kindly debated there right to have a golden age

I wish they did, knights are way more badass than steppeniggers. But the Mongol conquest, and the sacking of amazing cities like Baghdad is what ended the Islamic Golden Age.

>>3039947
>squat atop pre-existing knowledge from antiquity and Oriental knowledge, from acting as toll-men on the Silk Road
>loot the Byzantine and old Roman libraries,
>capture the ERE's brain-trust
>WE
I don't think so, Mohammad.

File: FB_IMG_1484288509236.jpg (38KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x375px

The crusaders didn't destroy the golden age.
The goddamn Mongolians did.

If you doubt me, look who burned Baghdad down. Look who destroyed Central Asia, which was the generator for most scientists and artists of the Caliphate.

(It was not the crusaders)

And it doesnt matter that the Crusaders captured Jerusalem and raided Mecca. Big whoop. Muslims raided Rome several times, and ended up taking Jerusalem back. If the Crusaders too Damascus, maybe, MAYBE, there might be an argument.

But that period in Islamic history has the Great Catastrophe and the Lesser Catastrophe. Crusaders were the latter.

>>3039762
Muslims, specifically the cancerous literalists of Ash'ari, killed islam.

Crusaders were just cleaning up the mess they were making in the holy land.

>>3039979
It is like new knowledge is based upon pre-existing knowledge or something!

File: 1496217250523.jpg (67KB, 680x1020px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 680x1020px

>>3039959
Islamic expansion and European ethnocentrism can both be true.

Show me a religion that wasn't utilized for conquest and show me a culture that isn't implicitly biased to support itself (before 1900).

>>3039995
That's stupid, everybody knows every culture invented everything on their own with absolutely no past knowledge or outside influence.

>>3040003
Easy. Judaism and Jewish culture.

>>3039993
>Ash'ari
>literalists

I think you are confusing Ash'arism with Atharism, but even Atharis are not really literalists. The only really literalist school in Islam is Zahirism, but it is virtually extinct.