Comments on: Stark Nepotism http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/2009/11/17/stark-nepotism/ Mike Aquilina's Blog Fri, 25 Jan 2013 09:36:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Tim O'Neill http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/2009/11/17/stark-nepotism/comment-page-1/#comment-1883637 Tim O'Neill Fri, 14 May 2010 22:02:25 +0000 http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/?p=2192#comment-1883637 Stark's book might seem to make a plausible case to the non-specialist, but critical analysis shows it is riddled with errors, full of convenient use of selective evidence and undermined by flawed arguments. He manages to debunk a few myths about the Crusades, but his apologetic argument simply does not work. For detailed critical analysis see: http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2010/05/gods-battalions-case-for-crusades-by.html Stark’s book might seem to make a plausible case to the non-specialist, but critical analysis shows it is riddled with errors, full of convenient use of selective evidence and undermined by flawed arguments. He manages to debunk a few myths about the Crusades, but his apologetic argument simply does not work.

For detailed critical analysis see:

http://armariummagnus.blogspot.com/2010/05/gods-battalions-case-for-crusades-by.html

]]> By: Paul Crawford http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/2009/11/17/stark-nepotism/comment-page-1/#comment-1720271 Paul Crawford Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:35:44 +0000 http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/?p=2192#comment-1720271 And my compliments to Mike Aquilina for drawing our attention to this book. I haven't read it, but I have read reviews, and as a historian of the crusades I can say that it looks like a wonderful, and long overdue, contribution on the subject. I can't wait to get the book itself. Thanks, Mike! And my compliments to Mike Aquilina for drawing our attention to this book. I haven’t read it, but I have read reviews, and as a historian of the crusades I can say that it looks like a wonderful, and long overdue, contribution on the subject. I can’t wait to get the book itself. Thanks, Mike!

]]> By: Carl Sommer http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/2009/11/17/stark-nepotism/comment-page-1/#comment-1719424 Carl Sommer Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:42:01 +0000 http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/?p=2192#comment-1719424 My compliments to Professor Stark for writing a much-needed corrective to some of the modern writings on this subject. I have been aware for years that the Crusades were basically defensive in nature, but Stark lays it out for all to see. Very courageous, too, in the current climate. My compliments to Professor Stark for writing a much-needed corrective to some of the modern writings on this subject. I have been aware for years that the Crusades were basically defensive in nature, but Stark lays it out for all to see. Very courageous, too, in the current climate.

]]>