From: psperson@old.netcom.invalid
On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 18:32:15 -0400, William Hyde
wrote:
>Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Sun, 5 Oct 2025 17:49:43 -0400, William Hyde
>> wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> I read an article in a military history magazine yesterday on the
>> Albigensian Crusade. It may be helpful to cite a few items:
>>
>> 2. The first to style himself King of France (as opposed to King of
>> the Franks) was Phillip II in 1180. Charles Martel could not and did
>> not add anything to France, because France did not exist in his day.
>
>Here is a good map that illustrates this:
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martel#/media/File:Francia_714.png
>
>Martel of course, claimed the whole as the successor of Clovis and that
>all these territories were in fact part of his kingdom (even if he
>wasn't technically the king).
>
>Charles may not have been adding these territories to France, but he was
>adding them to his personal possessions, and passed on most of what is
>now France to his son (who divided it among his sons, but one died early
>and the other was Charlemagne).
>
>> 4. The local nobles were vassals of King of Aragon.
>
>It's complex. Raymond VI, for example was in various territories a
>vassal of the King of France, Henry II of England, the ruler of Aragon
>and the Holy Roman Empire. He was descended from a recent king of
>France, related to the King of Aragon, and married a daughter of Henry II.
>
>And yes, as you mentioned (and I erroneously snipped) at one point the
>king of Aragon fought to restore his vassal and relative Raymond's lands
>and titles. He obviously took his authority in Languedoc seriously.
And his responsibility, as their liege lord, to assist/protect them.
Feudal obligations were /mutual/, not just one-way.
He did this because the man the Pope put in charge was behaving very
badly, and he did it under threat of excommunication.
>>> The wars were thus fought mainly between Catholics, with non-Perfect
>>> Cathars participating, especially in the defense of their strongholds.
>>
>> Count Raymond VI of Tolouse was Cathar
>
>I don't believe he was. He was sympathetic, and did not persecute, but
>he kept to the Catholic faith.
He was excommunicated for being a Cathar. Per the article, anyway.
>It was difficult to rule and be a Cathar. Too much violence required.
Not in a Cathar territory.
> until he joined the crusade to
>> protect his lands by diverting it to Trenceval. He eventually deserted
>> the Crusade, resumed his Cathar beliefs, and ... well, it's a typical
>> story of the time.
>
>In fact he died in the company of an Abbot, and was cared for by the
>Knights of St John. He was never buried, however, and a recent attempt
>at lifting his excommunication failed (according to wikipedia - none of
>my other sources mention this so ...).
>
>
>> Keep in mind that this is a (Iberian) Spanish history of Spain. Taught
>> by a Castilian Spanish speaker. It may have been a bit ... biased.
>>
>> It was almost certainly something for younger students in Spain than
>> ourselves. But that's not uncommon in learning a language: books
>> written for younger people are closer to the learning student's
>> abilities.
Think of it as an Iberian Spanish 5th-grade textbook being used with
Seattleite 8-grade Spanish students in pursuit of the absurd theory
that they could figure where to put the accent marks by comparing,
while hearing and writing, where the accent should fall with where it
did fall.
IOW, like the /The Gallic Wars/ or the /Aeneid/, it was used, not for
instruction in its topic or enjoyment of its form, but solely to teach
a language. (Latin in the case of /The Gallic Wars/ and the /Aeneid/).
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
