I agree it’s a rare bad take from Pageau… though it’s one I would have agreed with until recently.

Part of the problem IMO is that even modern historians conflate “the Crusades” into a blob. You’re forced to condemn them or affirm them together, and there’s no room left for nuance. That’s true of the more critical majority; it’s also true of the defensive minority, like Rodney Stark.

Western kingdoms sending armies to defend Greek Christians of the Near East from Muslim Arab invaders seems like a Good Thing to me. And most people who defend “the Crusades” generally think that’s all they were about. But that’s only true of the First Crusade… maybe.

I guess what I’m saying is that the idea they’re defending (i.e., Latin Christians protecting Greek Christians) is nice. It’s just not what actually happened during “the Crusades.”