Text: Ivo Wolsing. This article previously appeared on Over de Muur. Photography: Wikimedia Commons.
.jpg){kind=link}
2500 years ago, the Second Greco-Persian War began. In April 480 BC the Persian King Xerxes I crossed the Hellespont and defeated the Spartans at Thermopylae a few months later. The Persian fleet was ultimately destroyed at Salamis and Xerxes returned home empty-handed, but his expedition continues to influence our society to this day. Not only directly through films like 300, but also indirectly: Xerxes’ expedition gave rise to a way of thinking that continues to be strongly anchored in our political discourse.
In the wake of the Persian expedition, the idea was born of a ‘free West’ that must defend itself against an ‘unfree East’. The Athenians justified their dominion over other Greek city states by presenting themselves as protectors of freedom. After all, they were the ones who had defeated the Persians and saved the free Greeks from despotism. Equating the East with oppression turned out to be a golden move that has served many purposes throughout history. However, this is only one side of the story. The Persian Empire also inspired awe in many Greeks: Xenophon saw in the Persian king Cyrus an ideal ruler for example, and we know that Alexander the Great consciously borrowed Persian traditions after he had conquered Darius’ empire. Therefore, despite the fact that there were many conflicts, there was never any question of an ideological clash of civilizations between the Persians and the Greeks.
Approximately 1500 years after the Greco-Persian Wars, the Crusaders justified their expedition as an attempt to free their Christian brethren in the East from the yoke of an Islamic oppressor. For this reason, the Crusades form an important source of inspiration for members of the Alt-right community, who see themselves as modern-day heirs to the Crusaders, united under the battle cry ‘Deus vult’ (‘God wills it’). But also in mainstream politics, the idea of a clash between civilizations is commonplace. Recently still, the leader of the Dutch confessional political party ChristenUnie Gert-Jan Segers spoke of the ‘long battle between Western civilisation and freedom on the one hand and Islamism on the other’ on Twitter. It is often forgotten, however, that there is much evidence for mutual respect and even friendship between Christians and Muslims in the Crusader states in the Middle East. On the Iberian Peninsula and on Sicily, Arabic culture even enjoyed such a high status that the Christians who conquered the area used Arabic architectural styles and inscriptions to legitimize their power.
Across the Hellespont, the idea of East against West is no less alive. When the American President George W. Bush spoke of a ‘Crusade... against terror’ in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, many in the Islamic world saw this as a confirmation that English, French and American imperialism was simply a continuation of the medieval Crusades. ISIS also made grateful use of Bush’s words in their propaganda by portraying the US and England as eternal aggressors. Add to this a recent comment by the Turkish President Recep Erdoğan, who suggested that a ‘barbaric Europe’ was out to revive the Crusades. In short, for both extremists and politicians on both sides, the Hellespont forms not only a geographical boundary between Europe and Asia, but also an ideological and cultural boundary between East and West.
The Crusades therefore continue to be a source of inspiration for East and West. Some see the Crusaders as a group of Europeans who passionately defended themselves against an encroaching oppressor, while others view them as proto-imperialists who invaded their homelands. Any historian can tell you that these claims have little to do with the historical reality, but this in no way diminishes their rhetorical power. After all, every historical period should be seen in its own context. As historian Kristin Skottki put it: of course the assertions of Alt-right and ISIS are ideologically motivated, and of course they have nothing to do with the ‘real’ Middle Ages. It therefore seems to make little sense to keep explaining that the Crusades were really quite different from modern-day US interventions in the Middle East.
And yet, this is precisely what historians must do. By providing enough context, we can help people to better understand both the Greco-Persian Wars and Crusades as well as modern-day conflicts. In addition, there are many other narratives we can tell without denying the reality of the conflicts between Persians and Greeks, or between Christians and Muslims. The idea of a clash of civilizations between East and West is still a strong rhetorical tool for gaining political support. The problem, however, is that history is always more complex than politicians would have us believe. It is only by emphasizing the complexity of historical events that we can counteract the oversimplified, but highly effective rhetoric of ‘us’ against ‘them’, Christianity against Islam, and East against West.
Further reading
Van Rookhuijzen, J. et al. (ed.) 2021 (upcoming). Xerxes’ droom: de lange schaduw van zijn Griekse veldtocht (Xerxes’ Dream: The Long Shadow of his Greek Campaign) Amsterdam: Verloren)
Rietveld, S. 2021. Nieuwe Kruisvaarders. De Heilige Alliantie tussen orthodoxe christenen en radicaal-rechtse populisten (New Crusaders. The Holy Alliance between Orthodox Christians and Radical Right-wing Populists) (Amsterdam: Prometheus)
Burgersdijk, D., Henkelman, W., Waal, W. (ed.) 2013. Alexander en Darius. De Macedoniër in de Spiegel van het Nabije Oosten (Alexander and Darius. The Macedonian in the Mirror of the Near East) (Amsterdam: Verloren)
Gruen, E.S. 2010. Rethinking the Other in Antiquity (Princeton: Princeton University Press)
Houben, Hubert. 2002. Roger II of Sicily. Ruler between East and West (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
Ivo Wolsing is a PhD student at Radboud University (2017-2021). His research focuses on medieval portrayals of and perspectives on the Middle East, and how classical stereotypes were reused for this purpose.