That is, of course, bullshit.

From its earliest centuries, many of Christianity’s greatest thinkers received a classical education before their conversion. St. Justin Martyr studied philosophy. St. Basil the Great encouraged young Christians to read Greek literature. St. Augustine spent years immersed in Cicero, Virgil, and the Latin classics before becoming one of Christianity’s greatest theologians.

Indeed, Augustine credited one pagan author with awakening his desire for wisdom.

Reflecting on his youth in the Confessions, he recalled reading Cicero’s now-lost dialogue Hortensius:

Among such as these, in that unsettled age of mine, learned I books of eloquence, wherein I desired to be eminent, out of a damnable and vainglorious end, a joy in human vanity. In the ordinary course of study, I fell upon a certain book of Cicero, whose speech almost all admire, not so his heart. This book of his contains an exhortation to philosophy, and is called Hortensius. But this book altered my affections, and turned my prayers to Thyself, O Lord; and made me have other purposes and desires. Every vain hope at once became worthless to me; and I longed with an incredibly burning desire for an immortality of wisdom, and began now to arise, that I might return to Thee. For not to sharpen my tongue (which thing I seemed to be purchasing with my mother’s allowances, in that my nineteenth year, my father being dead two years before), not to sharpen my tongue did I employ that book; nor did it infuse into me its style, but its matter.

Augustine eventually rejected Cicero’s philosophy where it conflicted with Christianity, but he never rejected the pursuit of wisdom that Cicero had inspired.

The Monks Saved More Than Christian Books

The preservation of classical learning did not end with Augustine.

As the Western Roman Empire gave way to the early Middle Ages, monasteries became some of Europe’s most important centers of learning. Within their scriptoria, monks copied not only the Scriptures but also the writings of Aristotle, Plato, Virgil, Ovid, Livy, Tacitus, Cicero, and countless other authors whose works might otherwise have disappeared.

Without those generations of copyists, much of classical civilization would have been lost forever.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• Essays on brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, tradition, and culture

• Full access to the growing archive - essays, book breakdowns, and deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Why Every Christian Should Read The Classics

Modern Christians sometimes ask why they should read Homer or Plato when they already have the Bible.

St. Basil addressed this question in his Address to Young Men on the Right Use of Greek Literature. He compared pagan authors to flowers visited by bees:

We must be conversant with poets, with historians, with orators, indeed with all men who may further our soul’s salvation. Just as dyers prepare the cloth before they apply the dye… so indeed must we also, if we would preserve indelible the idea of the true virtue, become first initiated in the pagan lore, then at length give special heed to the sacred and divine teachings… Just as the bee takes the honey from the flower and leaves the rest, so should the Christian take from the pagan writers what is useful and true, and leave what is harmful.

The Church Fathers read the great books of the ancient world with open eyes and careful judgment. They neither idolized them nor discarded them. They received what was true, rejected what was false, and allowed the best of classical wisdom to serve the higher light of the Gospel.

That way of reading is still the best guide for any Christian who wants to read the classics today..

And if you are looking for a place to put that approach into practice with others, we just crossed 45,000 readers over at the Athenaeum Book Club!!

We had no idea so many people would want to be part of this project, but here's why we think it's happening:

– People are tired of surface-level, short-form content

– They crave depth and genuine conversation with others

– They know that deep reading of great literature is our best weapon against the technological forces seeking to hijack our mental faculties

That said, we never thought we'd find such a thoughtful, intentional group of people so quickly. We hope you'll be with us for a long time!

Our plan is to grow stronger every day, and to build a deep online resource to help as many people as possible discover the beauty and significance of the Great Books and the Great Conversation.

We are about to begin Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, which we will read over the next 7 weeks. This will undoubtedly be one of our most important read-alongs so far.

The first discussion, focusing on Books 1–4, is on August 4, at noon ET. Please join us (remember, all sessions are recorded if you can’t make it live)!

Note: you don’t have to have read all of Books 1-4 by then, but the more you have read, the more you’ll get out of the session.

Thanks to every one of you for being here and making it possible for us to do this work.

To celebrate, we’re running a 24-hour discount — 25% off!

JOIN OUR BOOK CLUB!

If you’re new here, definitely join our book club discussions if you can. They take place biweekly, and have been nothing short of electric of late. And if you can’t make it, everything is recorded!

Welcome!

Few ideas have become as established in modern history as the claim that Islam was/is tolerant.

Open any history book, and you are likely to encounter some version of the same argument. While Christian Europe supposedly languished in religious intolerance, Muslim rulers welcomed Christians, protected their religious freedoms, and presided over a multicultural society where different faiths coexisted “peacefully”. This narrative has become so familiar that it is never questioned.

In this article, we’ll examine where that idea comes from and compare it with the historical record.

But first, it is worth defining what historians actually mean when they speak of Islamic “tolerance.”

Unlike the modern understanding of religious equality, classical Islamic law never viewed Christians as equal members of society. Instead, they belonged to a legal category known as the dhimmi—literally, “protected people.” Protection, however, came with conditions. Christians could retain their religion only if they accepted permanent political and social subordination under Muslim rule and paid the jizya, the poll tax prescribed in the Koran.

As Koran 9:29 commands:

“Fight those among the People of the Book who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and his Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”

That final phrase—“feel themselves subdued”—is crucial because it reveals that jizya was never about taxation. It was intended to demonstrate the superiority of Islam and the inferior status of those who refused to embrace it.

Indeed, one of Islam’s foremost jurists, Al-Mawardi (972–1058), explained that the purpose of the tax was to leave non-Muslims “in a state of humiliation“ while allowing them to continue living under Muslim authority.

This brings us to the first myth.

Myth One: Christians Were Equal Citizens

Modern writers describe the dhimmi system as an early form of religious pluralism.

John Esposito, professor of religion at Georgetown University, for example, writes that Christians and Jews enjoyed religious freedom in exchange for paying a poll tax that provided protection and exempted them from military service. Similar descriptions appear throughout contemporary textbooks, presenting jizya as little more than a medieval “administrative tax”.

The historical record tells a rather different story.

Under the Pact of Umar—a foundational document governing the treatment of Christians under Islamic rule—Christians “agreed” not to build new churches, repair ruined ones in Muslim neighbourhoods, display crosses publicly, ring church bells loudly, carry weapons, imitate Muslim clothing, or publicly express their faith.

One version states:

“We shall not build in our cities or in their vicinity any new monastery, church, convent, or monk’s cell, nor shall we repair those that have fallen into ruin.”

Another declares:

“We shall rise from our seats when Muslims wish to sit.”

Whether every clause appeared everywhere is beside the point. Muslim jurists across the centuries repeatedly cited the Pact as the legal foundation for regulating non-Muslim communities, and many of its restrictions appeared throughout the Islamic world from Spain to Persia.

Far from establishing equality, Islamic law explicitly created two classes of society: Muslims and everyone else.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Myth Two: Islam Protected Churches

Read more

Beefore we start a quick reminder:

You can still grab 25% OFF a subscription. Tomorrow it goes back to full price. If you have been thinking about upgrading, this is your last chance to save $20 (you pay $50 instead of $70).

UPGRADE NOW!

Because of your support, our publication, The Western Spirit, is now #5 in Rising History! Thank you, guys. Much appreciated.

Even though he barely ruled for a year, the Conqueror of Jerusalem, Godfrey of Bouillon, is very well known.

We have all heard of him, but did you know he had a younger brother? That’s the guy that turned Jerusalem into a kingdom, Baldwin of Boulougne.

Without him, it would have collapsed..

Baldwin was born around 1060 into the House of Boulogne. As the youngest son of Eustace II and Ida of Lorraine, it was clear he wouldn’t inherit any land. His path was set for the Church. Chroniclers say he studied for it and even held a canonry at Cambrai.

But he didn’t like it very much..

Long before Urban II called the Crusade in 1095, Baldwin left the clergy. He took up the sword and rode east with his brothers Godfrey and Eustace when the call to liberate Jerusalem came.

In 1098, while the main army pushed south, Baldwin headed east toward Edessa (Armenian city).

It looked like an odd choice at the time. Jerusalem was the prize everyone dreamed of. But Baldwin understood that the Crusaders needed safe ground if they hoped to hold anything they captured.

Edessa offered that.

Its ruler, Thoros, governed a mostly Armenian Christian population surrounded by enemies. To strengthen his position he adopted Baldwin as heir (very bold move):

Fulcher of Chartres, who rode with Baldwin as his chaplain, described the moment:

“When we had trudged a day’s march from this place [Marash] and were no more than three days from Antioch of Syria, I, Fulcher, departed from the army and with lord Count Baldwin, brother of Duke Godfrey, turned into the country on the left… [Thoros] promised that if Baldwin would help him… Baldwin, as if he were his son, would possess the city and his whole land in inheritance forever… After we had been there fifteen days, the citizens of the city wickedly plotted to kill their prince… It was said, and it was done.”

Weeks later Thoros was killed, and Baldwin became the first Count of Edessa in March 1098. The Crusaders now had their first real state in the East.

Edessa gave the Franks access to food and Armenian allies.

That changed everything..

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

While Baldwin secured Edessa, the main army stormed Jerusalem on 15 July 1099. The joy was overwhelming. Raymond of Aguilers, who saw it happen, wrote:

Read more

That doesn’t mean everyone reached the same conclusions. They certainly didn’t. But it does mean that long before the modern vocabulary of “Islamophobia” existed, some of the West’s most influential theologians, philosophers, statesmen, and presidents had already written extensively about Islam, usually in response to the events of their own time.

Now the question is this: what did they say, and why did they say it?

John of Damascus

One of the earliest Christian writers to engage directly with Islam was John of Damascus, who lived during the eighth century under Umayyad rule. Unlike later Europeans, John wasn’t writing from a distance. He lived among Muslims, worked in the Umayyad administration, and was intimately familiar with Islamic teachings and practices.

In his work On Heresies (specifically the section on the “Heresy of the Ishmaelites”), he described Islam as a Christian heresy rather than an entirely new religion. He criticized Muhammad’s claims to prophecy and traced what he saw as the origins and errors of the new faith. His writings became enormously influential throughout the medieval Christian world because they represented one of the first systematic Christian responses to Islam.

Here is a substantial excerpt:

“There is also the superstition of the Ishmaelites which to this day prevails and keeps people in error, being a forerunner of the Antichrist. They are descended from Ishmael, who was born to Abraham from Agar, and for this reason they are called Hagarenes and Ishmaelites. They are also called Saracens, which is derived from Sarah, because they say that Sarah sent them away empty-handed. These used to be idolaters and worshiped the morning star and Aphrodite, whom they called Chabar in their own language, which means ‘great.’ So until the time of Heraclius they were very idolatrous and worshiped the same things as the idolaters. From that time to the present a false prophet named Mohammed has appeared in their midst. This man, after having chanced upon the Old and New Testaments and likewise, it seems, having conversed with an Arian monk, devised his own heresy. Then, having insinuated himself into the good graces of the people by a show of seeming piety, he gave out that he had received the book from heaven. Having written some ridiculous compositions in this book of his, he gave it to them as an object of veneration.”

John went on to critique specific Islamic doctrines, including the denial of the Trinity and the crucifixion, and certain practices such as polygamy and the direction of prayer.

Thomas Aquinas

Five centuries later, Thomas Aquinas returned to the subject in his monumental work Summa Contra Gentiles. Writing in the 13th century, amid ongoing conflicts between Christian and Muslim powers in Spain, Sicily, and the Holy Land, Aquinas sought to engage Muslim thought on philosophical and theological grounds.

He argued that Christianity and Islam differed fundamentally in the way they presented their claims. In Book I, Chapter 6, he contrasted the methods of the prophets and apostles with those of Muhammad:

“The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning. Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly.”

Whether one agrees with Aquinas or not, his argument reflected the medieval world in which he lived, where Christian kingdoms and Muslim powers had spent centuries fighting across multiple theaters.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Martin Luther

The Protestant Reformer Martin Luther also wrote extensively about the Ottoman Empire as Ottoman armies advanced into central Europe, reaching the gates of Vienna in 1529.

Luther rejected the idea that Christians should fear the Turks as invincible conquerors, yet he also regarded the Ottoman advance as one of the greatest military and spiritual threats facing Europe. In his 1529 treatise On War Against the Turk, he urged Christians to prepare both spiritually and militarily, believing that the conflict was as much a test of Christian character as it was a political struggle. He viewed the Turks not merely as political enemies but as instruments of divine judgment and, theologically, as destroyers of true Christian doctrine.

In one extended passage he wrote:

“Mohammed is a destroyer of our Lord Christ and His kingdom, and if anyone denies concerning Christ, that He is God’s Son and has died for us, and still lives and reigns at the right hand of God, what has he left of Christ? Father, Son, Holy Ghost, Baptism, the Sacrament, Gospel, Faith and all Christian doctrine and life are gone, and there is left, instead of Christ, nothing more than Mohammed with his doctrine of works and especially of the sword. That is the chief doctrine of the Turkish faith in which all abominations, all errors, all devils are piled up in one heap.”

Luther also emphasized that victory over the Turks required first defeating “the Turk’s god, the devil” through repentance and reform within Christendom itself. His views were shaped by the reality that Ottoman armies had reached the frontiers of the Holy Roman Empire during his lifetime.

Miguel de Cervantes

Few writers had more personal experience of the Mediterranean conflict than Miguel de Cervantes.

Before writing Don Quixote, Cervantes served as a Spanish soldier. In 1575, while returning home by sea after the Battle of Lepanto, his ship was captured by Barbary corsairs. He spent five years as a slave in Algiers, making several unsuccessful escape attempts before religious orders finally raised the ransom needed to secure his freedom in 1580.

That experience profoundly shaped his writing. In Don Quixote, through the voice of the Captive (a character widely understood to draw heavily on Cervantes’ own ordeal), he described the world of Barbary slavery and the constant threat posed by the corsairs:

“He spoke to me in the language used throughout all of Barbary and even in Constantinople among captives and Moors—a language that is neither Moorish, nor Castilian, nor of any other nation, but a mixture of all languages, through which we all understood one another.”

Cervantes’ captivity gave him intimate knowledge of the daily realities of life under Barbary rule - the galleys, the bagnios (slave prisons), the renegades who converted to Islam, and the constant danger of being sold or ransomed. For many Europeans of his era, the conflict with the Barbary States was not theoretical. It affected merchants, sailors, fishermen, and ordinary families throughout the Mediterranean.

Thomas Jefferson and John Adams

America’s first sustained encounter with Muslim-ruled states came only after independence.

Without the protection of the Royal Navy, American merchant ships became targets for the Barbary States. In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams met the ambassador from Tripoli in London to ask why American ships were being attacked despite having done nothing to provoke Tripoli.

Jefferson later recorded the ambassador’s explanation in a letter to John Jay (March 28, 1786). That conversation became one of the most cited diplomatic exchanges in early American history:

“The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Jefferson eventually concluded that paying tribute would only invite further demands, a view that helped lead to the First Barbary War in 1801.

Alexis de Tocqueville

After studying the Qur’an and observing French involvement in North Africa, Alexis de Tocqueville reached conclusions that reflected both his philosophical interests and the colonial context of nineteenth-century France.

In a letter (widely cited from his correspondence), he wrote:

“I studied the Quran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of Muhammad. As far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism itself.”

Whether modern readers agree or disagree, the quotation illustrates that Tocqueville regarded religion not merely as a matter of private belief but as something with profound political and social consequences.

Theodore Roosevelt

Few American presidents read more history than Theodore Roosevelt.

Reflecting on the long conflict between Christian Europe and Muslim powers, Roosevelt wrote in Fear God and Take Your Own Part (1916):

Read more

While everyone is talking about AI, automation, and the future of work, people are reading less than ever before. Many adults struggle to finish a book, and even university graduates leave education without ever opening the works that shaped the civilization they live in.

The gap between readers and non-readers is one of the defining divides of our time.

For most of Western history, that would have been unthinkable.

Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton grew up reading Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, and Virgil in the original languages. John Adams spent his evenings with Tacitus and Plutarch. Theodore Roosevelt read history with an appetite that amazed everyone around him. C.S. Lewis thought every new book should be balanced with an old one.

None of these men treated the classics as museum pieces. They read them because they expected to find wisdom there, and generation after generation they did.

I’ve often been asked where someone should begin if they want to build a classical library of their own. It’s a fair question because there are thousands of books you could choose from, and no one has time to read them all.

If I had to recommend just eight, these are the books I’d put into your hands first..

1. Homer’s Iliad

Every educated person in the ancient world knew Homer.

Long before there were universities, degrees, or reading lists, Greek boys learned the Iliad. They copied its verses, memorized long passages, and grew up with Achilles, Hector, Odysseus, and Agamemnon almost as familiar as members of their own family. When Rome conquered Greece, it adopted Homer as the foundation of its education. Centuries later, Renaissance scholars travelled across Europe searching for Greek manuscripts so they could read him in the original language once again.

Few books have shaped Western civilization so profoundly.

Alexander the Great reportedly carried a copy of the Iliad throughout his campaigns, keeping it beneath his pillow beside his dagger. Thomas Jefferson urged young students to read Homer. Generations of poets, painters, composers, and historians returned to the same pages, each finding something new in a poem already thousands of years old.

Homer tells only a small part of the Trojan War. The Iliad follows just a few weeks of the conflict, centering almost entirely on Achilles and the consequences of his anger. After quarrelling with Agamemnon, Achilles withdraws from the fighting, leaving the Greek army to struggle without its greatest warrior. His decision eventually leads to the death of Patroclus, the friend he loves most, drawing him back into the war with a fury that shapes the rest of the poem.

Alongside Achilles stands Hector, the prince of Troy. He understands that facing Achilles certainly means death, yet he walks outside the city’s walls anyway because his family, his king, and his people depend upon him. Homer fills the poem with moments like these, allowing courage, grief, loyalty, pride, and honour to emerge naturally through the choices his characters.

Generation after generation found themselves returning to those same pages. Alexander admired Achilles. Medieval scholars preserved the poem. Renaissance humanists recovered it. The Founding Fathers recommended it. They all recognized that Homer had asked questions about human nature that every civilization eventually has to answer.

2. Plutarch’s Lives

If Homer taught the ancient world how to think about heroes, Plutarch taught it how to think about leaders.

Writing in the first century, Plutarch collected the biographies of some of history’s greatest Greeks and Romans, pairing figures like Alexander and Julius Caesar, Lycurgus and Numa, Demosthenes and Cicero. His purpose was never simply to record events. He wanted to understand the men behind them.

That approach transformed the way generations read history.

Shakespeare borrowed heavily from Plutarch when writing Julius Caesar, Coriolanus, and Antony and Cleopatra. Napoleon carried the book throughout his campaigns. America’s Founding Fathers quoted it constantly because they believed republics were shaped by character long before they were shaped by constitutions.

One of Plutarch’s most memorable observations appears in the opening pages. He explains that small actions reveal more about a person’s character than great battles ever could. A joke, a conversation, or a passing decision may tell us more about a leader than the victory for which history remembers him.

Two thousand years later, that insight still feels fresh.

3. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics

Few books have shaped Western ideas about virtue more than Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.

Instead of asking how governments should function or how the universe was created, Aristotle begins with a much more personal question.

How should we live?

The answer occupies him for ten books. Along the way he discusses courage, justice, friendship, generosity, moderation, happiness, and practical wisdom. His arguments are rarely abstract. They almost always begin with ordinary human experience, which is one reason the book continues to feel modern.

Some of Aristotle’s observations have become famous in their own right. He argues that friendship is more important than justice because friends naturally do what laws are forced to command. He argues that young people lack the experience necessary to judge politics wisely. He argues that excellence grows out of habit rather than talent.

It isn’t difficult to see why this became one of the foundations of classical education.

For more than two thousand years, teachers have turned to Aristotle whenever they wanted students to think seriously about character.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

4. Dante’s Divine Comedy

If one book captures medieval Christendom at its height, it is Dante’s Divine Comedy.

Written in the early fourteenth century, the poem follows Dante himself as he journeys through Hell, Purgatory, and finally Heaven. Along the way he encounters emperors, popes, saints, philosophers, poets, soldiers, and ordinary people, each revealing something about justice, mercy, freedom, and the human condition.

The scale of the work is astonishing.

Virgil guides Dante through Hell. Aristotle appears among the great thinkers of antiquity. Thomas Aquinas enters the story alongside kings and bishops. Ancient Greece, imperial Rome, and medieval Christianity all become part of the same journey.

For centuries, the Divine Comedy stood beside the Bible as one of the defining works of European literature. Artists illustrated it. Composers drew inspiration from it. Philosophers debated it. Schoolchildren learned passages by heart.

Reading Dante is like stepping into the mind of medieval Europe itself.

5. Cervantes’ Don Quixote

Few novels have enjoyed a life quite like Don Quixote.

Published in two parts during the early seventeenth century, it tells the story of an aging gentleman who becomes so absorbed in tales of medieval knights that he decides to become one himself. Armed with rusting armour, an old horse, and boundless enthusiasm, he rides across Spain searching for adventures that exist mostly in his imagination.

The humour has delighted readers for centuries.

Behind it stands the remarkable life of Cervantes himself.

As a young man he fought at the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, where the Holy League defeated the Ottoman fleet. A few years later, Barbary corsairs captured his ship and carried him to Algiers, where he spent five years in captivity before finally being ransomed.

Those experiences shaped the novel.

Beneath its comedy lie reflections on courage, honour, freedom, disappointment, and the passing of one age into another. Few books manage to be so entertaining while asking such serious questions.

6. The Song of Roland

Long before novels dominated European literature, epic poems carried the stories every educated person knew.

None proved more influential than The Song of Roland.

Written around the end of the eleventh century, the poem tells the story of Charlemagne’s nephew Roland, who commands the rear guard of the Frankish army as it returns from Spain. Surrounded by overwhelming forces, Roland refuses to sound his horn until the battle is almost lost, choosing honour and duty over his own safety.

The story became one of medieval Europe’s defining legends.

Knights heard it recited in castles. Crusaders knew its heroes. Chroniclers referred to Roland as the ideal Christian warrior whose loyalty to God, king, and companions remained unshaken even in the face of certain death.

Like Homer’s Achilles or Virgil’s Aeneas, Roland became far more than a literary character.

He became an ideal.

7. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Contra Gentiles

By the thirteenth century, Western Europe found itself in constant contact with the Islamic world through Spain, Sicily, trade, diplomacy, and the Crusades. Ancient Greek philosophy had also returned to Europe through new Latin translations, raising questions that earlier generations had never faced quite so directly.

Thomas Aquinas entered that conversation.

The Summa Contra Gentiles presents Christianity through philosophy as well as theology, drawing upon Aristotle while engaging with Muslim and Jewish thinkers whose works had become widely available across medieval Europe. Aquinas moves patiently from one argument to the next, building his case through careful reasoning instead of rhetoric.

The result became one of the greatest intellectual achievements of the Middle Ages.

Whether one agrees with Aquinas or not, it’s difficult to overstate his influence. Universities taught his works for centuries. Popes praised them. Philosophers debated them. His method shaped Christian scholarship long after the Middle Ages had ended.

8. John of Damascus’ On Heresies

Few people realize that one of the earliest Christian responses to Islam came from a man who lived under Muslim rule.

John of Damascus was born in the late seventh century, only decades after the Muslim conquest of Syria. Living in Damascus under the Umayyad Caliphate, he encountered Islam not as a distant observer but as a neighbour. That gave his writings a unique place in Christian history.

In On Heresies, John devoted a chapter to what he called the “Heresy of the Ishmaelites.” He summarized Islamic beliefs as he understood them before offering a theological critique rooted in Christian doctrine. His work became enormously influential throughout the Byzantine Empire and later medieval Europe because it represented one of the first sustained Christian examinations of Islam.

For centuries, theologians, monks, and scholars returned to John whenever they sought to understand how the earliest Christians responded to the emergence of a new religion that had rapidly expanded across the eastern Mediterranean.

Whether read for theology, intellectual history, or the history of Christian-Muslim relations, On Heresies remains one of the foundational texts of the medieval world.

Every generation inherits the same choice.

It can begin the conversation from scratch, or it can join one that has already lasted for thousands of years.

Jefferson chose Homer.

Adams chose Cicero.

Churchill chose Gibbon.

Lewis chose Athanasius.

They understood that the greatest books have already stood the test of time.

This is what pushed me to start the Athenaeum Book Club.

I’ve been building Athenaeum for over a year now, and honestly, it feels like the most important thing I’ve ever worked on. The response has been unbelievable. Every day, people reach out telling me they’ve been looking for something like this for years, a place where people sit down and read the great books seriously instead of just posting quotes from them online.

At Athenaeum, we read a new classic text every month, and we now have close to 45,000 readers following along. We have an incredible “inner circle” community actively participating in the biweekly discussions: reading, thinking, and engaging deeply with the material, together.

The appetite for the great books of Western civilization is far larger than most people think. Classics operate at a completely different depth than anything modern culture produces.

These are the books we’ve read so far (we are about to start The Brothers Karamazov):

To preserve a culture, you must continually study the books and ideas that created it.

That is why the Athenaeum Book Club was created. Together, we are reading the books that form the mind and shape the spirit — the books our ancestors read. We’re doing it honestly and openly, in dialogue with each other.

If this sounds like something you’d like to be a part of, please join our community, and consider supporting our mission with a paid membership. You’ll get:

• Live community book discussions (biweekly) and recordings

• Access to our incredible community of readers

• Regular essays to guide you through the books we’re reading

• The full library of articles, essays, and podcasts

• The ability to vote on what we read next…

Athenaeum is funded ENTIRELY by the members of this incredible community. Join us!

Join us!

Hey guys, just a quick heads up before we begin. This article isn’t about what we usually cover here - Christian heroes, the Crusades, or the long struggle between Christendom and Islam - but I think it still fits the spirit of this publication. After all, The Western Spirit isn’t just about great battles and great men. It’s also about the cities they built, the culture they left behind, and the civilization they created.

As I mentioned in our subscriber chat, I recently spent a few days in Slovenia..

I had seen countless photos of Lake Bled and Ljubljana before, but like so many places on the internet, I wondered whether they would actually live up to the hype. Thankfully, they did. If anything, Slovenia surprised me because it feels like a country that hasn’t quite been discovered in the same way as Italy, Austria, or Croatia. Everything felt relaxed, incredibly clean, and easy to explore.

We based ourselves in Ljubljana. It’s not a huge capital, which is probably part of its charm. You can walk almost everywhere, there are no overwhelming crowds, and the Ljubljanica River winds through the old town with cafés lining both banks

Every street tells a different chapter of its history, from the Roman settlement of Emona to centuries under the Habsburgs and, more recently, the work of one architect who shaped much of the city you see today.

Something else that really stood out was how European Ljubljana feels. Compared to many Western European capitals, there were very few foreigners. Aside from the occasional Roma beggar in the city centre, nearly everyone we encountered seemed to be Slovenian or tourists from neighbouring European countries. It gave the city a calm, familiar atmosphere that we both appreciated.

Before learning about that architect, though, we spent a morning at the National Museum. I always enjoy visiting museums at the beginning of a trip because they give you a bit of context before you start exploring, and this one did exactly that. Walking past Roman mosaics, inscriptions, coins, medieval weapons, and archaeological finds from ancient Emona, it became much easier to appreciate what we were seeing outside. It’s one thing to know that Ljubljana is an old city. It’s another to stand in front of objects made nearly two thousand years ago before stepping back onto streets built above the same foundations.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

That sense of history stayed with us as we made our way through the old town and climbed up to Ljubljana Castle. The walk itself is beautiful, winding through trees before opening onto panoramic views across the city’s red rooftops and church towers. The castle has watched over Ljubljana for centuries, serving at different times as a medieval fortress, a noble residence, a prison, and a military barracks. Standing on its walls, it isn’t difficult to understand why castles were always built on hills.

From up there you can see the entire valley, and any approaching army would have been visible long before reaching the city.

Looking down from the castle, one thing stood out. Ljubljana is super coherent. The bridges, the riverbanks, the churches, the public squares, and even the marketplaces all seem to belong together. I didn’t fully understand why until the following day, when we visited Plečnik House.

We booked a guided tour, and it ended up being one of the highlights of the entire trip. I thought we’d simply walk through the home of a famous architect, but instead we spent more than an hour learning about the man who, more than anyone else, gave modern Ljubljana its identity.

Before visiting, I knew Jože Plečnik had designed some of the city’s landmarks. Afterwards, I realized it’s impossible to spend a day in Ljubljana without encountering his work. If Christopher Wren rebuilt London after the Great Fire, Plečnik built modern Ljubljana.

Our guide did a fantastic job bringing him to life. Rather than pointing at buildings, she told stories about the man himself. Plečnik lived modestly, remained deeply religious throughout his life, and believed architecture should elevate everyday life rather than simply solve practical problems. He wasn’t interested in designing monuments that drew attention to themselves. He wanted beauty to become part of ordinary life, whether someone was crossing a bridge, walking through a market, or sitting beside the river.

One story has stayed with me ever since. Plečnik had a small garden beside his home, and rather than designing a grand entrance, he deliberately made the garden gate unusually low. Anyone entering had to bow their head. It was his way of reminding people to show humility before nature. Our guide explained that Plečnik believed architecture should never dominate creation but work alongside it, and after hearing that, his buildings made much more sense.

What fascinated me most was that Plečnik never tried to turn Ljubljana into another Vienna or Paris. Instead, he embraced its size and worked with what was already there. He designed elegant bridges, tree-lined promenades, churches, libraries, marketplaces, and public spaces that feel completely natural, almost as if they had always belonged. By the time we left his house, I wasn’t looking at Ljubljana the same way anymore.

Once you start noticing Plečnik’s work, it’s almost impossible to stop. Our guide pointed out buildings we’d already walked past, bridges we’d crossed without thinking, and details we would have completely missed on our own. Afterwards we continued exploring the old town, which naturally brought us to the Cathedral of Saint Nicholas.

I always enjoy visiting churches, and this one certainly didn’t disappoint. From the outside it blends naturally into the surrounding streets, but the moment you step inside you’re greeted by magnificent Baroque frescoes, marble, gold, and an interior that feels both grand and peaceful at the same time.

As I stood there looking around, I couldn’t help thinking that buildings like this have witnessed centuries of baptisms, weddings, funerals, wars, occupations, and celebrations. Long before we arrived with our cameras, generations of Slovenians had gathered beneath the same ceiling, and that continuity is something you feel throughout the country.

As much as we loved Ljubljana, we couldn’t leave Slovenia without seeing the place everyone talks about: Lake Bled. One thing we really appreciated was how easy it was to get there. The buses leave from Ljubljana’s central station, the journey takes a little over an hour, and everything ran smoothly. We didn’t need to rent a car or worry about complicated connections. We simply bought our tickets, got on the bus, and before long we were looking out over one of Europe’s most famous lakes.

I have to admit the photographs don’t exaggerate it.

The lake really is that beautiful.

The little island sitting in the middle, with its church rising above the trees, almost looks too perfect to be real. We walked around the shoreline, watched the traditional wooden pletna boats crossing the water, and eventually climbed up to Bled Castle, which overlooks the lake from a steep cliff. The view from the top is every bit as spectacular as people say it is, and I completely understand why Bled has become Slovenia’s postcard destination.

After spending time among the Alps, we headed in the opposite direction. Once again, the bus system made everything incredibly easy. From Ljubljana’s central station we caught a direct bus to Izola without any problems, and within a couple of hours the mountains had been replaced by the Adriatic Sea. One of the things that amazed me most about Slovenia is how quickly the scenery changes. In such a small country you can have breakfast beneath Alpine peaks and watch the sunset beside the sea on the very same day.

Compared to some of the larger coastal towns, Izola feels wonderfully authentic. Fishing boats still fill the harbour, narrow Venetian streets wind through the old town, and life seems to move at a much slower pace. We spent the evening walking along the waterfront before sitting down to watch the sun disappear over the Adriatic.

By the end of the trip, one thing had become very clear to me..

Read more

This week in history, on July 12, 1191, the great port city of Acre surrendered to the armies of the Third Crusade after nearly two years of constant fighting. It was one of the longest and bloodiest sieges of the Middle Ages, drawing kings, knights, pilgrims, and soldiers from across Europe, while Saladin threw everything he had into saving one of the most important cities in the Holy Land. When Acre fell, the Third Crusade was given a second chance after what had looked like a complete disaster.

The story, however, begins four years earlier..

On July 4, 1187, Saladin crushed the army of the Kingdom of Jerusalem at the Battle of Hattin. King Guy of Jerusalem was captured, the relic of the True Cross fell into Muslim hands, and the crusader army was almost completely destroyed. One Christian chronicler called it “a day of mourning and misery,” and he was not exaggerating. With no army left to defend them, the Christian cities of the Holy Land surrendered one after another until, on October 2, Jerusalem itself opened its gates to Saladin.

Pope Gregory VIII immediately called for a new crusade, and before long three of Europe’s greatest rulers answered. Emperor Frederick Barbarossa marched east with what was probably the largest crusading army ever assembled. Philip II of France prepared his own expedition, while Richard of England, who would later become known as Richard the Lionheart, gathered men and ships before sailing for the Holy Land.

Long before those kings arrived, however, the surviving Crusaders decided they could not simply wait.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

In August 1189, King Guy, who had recently been released from captivity, marched against Acre with what remained of his followers. The city was far more than another fortress. It possessed the finest harbour in the Kingdom of Jerusalem, and whoever controlled Acre controlled the easiest route between Europe and the Holy Land. Every ship carrying knights, horses, food, weapons, or pilgrims needed a safe port, and Acre was the greatest of them all. One contemporary simply called it “the key of the kingdom.”

The siege that followed became unlike any other.

The Crusaders surrounded the city while Saladin surrounded the Crusaders.

Inside the walls, the Muslim garrison defended Acre. Outside the walls, the Crusaders built camps, trenches, siege towers, and enormous trebuchets. Beyond them stood Saladin’s army, attacking the besiegers whenever it found an opportunity. Any ship trying to reach Acre had to fight through the Christian fleet, while every convoy bringing food to the Crusader camp had to fight its way through Saladin’s army.

The result was effectively two sieges happening at the same time.

The author of the Itinerarium Peregrinorum, one of the principal Christian accounts of the Third Crusade, wrote that “hardly an hour or a day passed without some kind of fighting.” Assaults on the walls were answered by sorties from the defenders, while Saladin repeatedly attacked the Christian camps in the hope of forcing them away from the city.

Disease proved almost as deadly as the sword.

Summer heat turned both camps into breeding grounds for sickness. Food became scarce. Horses died by the thousands. Bodies lay between the lines because neither side could recover them without coming under fire. Saladin’s secretary, Baha ad-Din ibn Shaddad, later wrote that suffering affected both armies, and even victories came at a terrible cost.

Then, in the spring of 1191, everything changed..

Read more

Thomas Jefferson owned a Quran. That does not mean he admired Islam.

The idea that he bought the book because he secretly wanted to become a Muslim is insane. The real story is way more interesting.

Jefferson purchased his copy of the Quran in 1765 while he was still a young law student. He read everything he could get his hands on. History, philosophy, law, theology, science, architecture, agriculture, politics, and classical literature all filled his shelves. The Quran joined his collection for the same reason the Roman histories and Greek philosophy did. He wanted knowledge.

Over the following decades Jefferson encountered the Islamic world in real life.

After America gained independence, the new nation lost the protection of the British Navy. American merchant ships now sailed alone. The rulers of North Africa quickly took advantage. Morocco, Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli had long demanded tribute payments from any nation that wanted safe passage through the Mediterranean. Pay, or face seizure of ships, stolen cargo, and captured crews sold into slavery.

European powers had paid this tribute for generations. Now the United States faced the same demand. Beginning in 1785, Algiers captured two American ships, the Maria and the Dauphin, and held their crews for ransom. More seizures followed. American sailors were imprisoned under harsh conditions, sometimes for years, while families back home begged the government to act. Newspapers printed heartbreaking stories of captured fathers and sons. Congress debated what to do, but the young country had no navy and very little money.

Jefferson found the entire system unacceptable. He believed paying tribute to avoid attack was both dishonorable and shortsighted. Each payment only invited more demands.

In 1786, Jefferson and John Adams met with Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, the ambassador from Tripoli, in London. They asked why the Barbary states attacked American ships even though the United States had done nothing to provoke them. The ambassador replied that it was founded on the laws of their Prophet. Jefferson and Adams reported the full exchange to Congress in a letter to John Jay on March 28, 1786:

“We took the liberty to make some enquiries concerning the grounds of their pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury, and observed that we considered all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Adams later described the Barbary rulers as driven by avarice and fanaticism. In their private letters that summer, the two founders debated the best response at length. On July 3, 1786, Adams wrote to Jefferson arguing that building and maintaining a navy would be extremely expensive and that buying peace through tribute might be the cheaper and more practical choice for the time being. Jefferson replied firmly on July 11, 1786:

“I very early thought it would be best to effect a peace thro’ the medium of war... Justice, honor, and respect in Europe demand it.”

Their correspondence showed a deep personal friendship mixed with sharp disagreement on foreign policy. Adams worried about costs and American weakness. Jefferson saw tribute as a trap that would weaken the young nation forever. They continued this back-and-forth for years.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Throughout the 1790s, the United States continued paying tribute and ransoms under Presidents Washington and Adams simply because it had no better option. Treaties were signed, but the demands kept growing. By the time Jefferson took office in 1801, the Pasha of Tripoli, Yusuf Karamanli, demanded $225,000 in immediate payment on top of the usual annual tribute. Jefferson refused.

Before sending any ships, Jefferson wrote directly to the Pasha on May 21, 1801:

Read more

Hey guys, I have wanted to tackle Edmund Morris’s Theodore Roosevelt trilogy for years, and I finally cracked it open.

I plan to read lots of biographies going forward, so if you enjoy this type of content, let me know and I will share more as I go through them.

I’m still early in the first book, with hundreds of pages ahead of me, but right away one big surprise jumped out and made me stop and take notes.

I knew Roosevelt focused on military strength, history, and great men doing great things. What surprised me was how often he returned to the centuries-long struggle between Christendom and Islam.

This view grew naturally out of his personal life and lifelong habits. Roosevelt came from a wealthy New York family, but he dealt with serious asthma as a sickly child. He pushed himself hard through exercise and built a rugged body. He also read constantly from a young age. His family gave him free access to books at home and in public libraries. He devoured everything from adventure stories and natural history to serious works on history and war. Family trips to Europe and even the Middle East as a boy exposed him to different cultures and sparked his curiosity about the wider world. He kept that intense reading habit his whole life. People say he read a book or more every single day, sometimes in multiple languages. He tore through classics like Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, military histories, Plutarch’s Lives, and accounts of great battles and civilizations. He wrote his own history books starting young, including The Naval War of 1812 when he was only in his early twenties.

These experiences shaped how he saw the past as a story of strong peoples, courage, and clashing civilizations. One story from later in his life really brings this to life. After his time as president, during a trip to Egypt in 1910, Roosevelt visited the famous Al-Azhar Mosque and University in Cairo — one of the oldest centers of Islamic learning in the world.

The scholars there sat teaching students on the floor. Roosevelt asked to see a scroll of the medieval travels of Ibn Battuta, the “great” Arab explorer. To their amazement, he started reciting long passages from it from memory. When he left the place, he carried a copy of the Koran under his arm. He did this to better understand the Muslim world and why it seemed at odds with the West. It reminds me of Thomas Jefferson during the Barbary Wars. Jefferson bought and studied a copy of the Quran to figure out why the Muslim pirates kept attacking American ships and taking captives.

That curiosity led to the famous exchange in 1786 where Jefferson and John Adams met with the Tripolitan ambassador in London. When they asked by what right the Barbary states made war on nations that had done them no injury, the ambassador replied:

“It was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

The quote that really stopped me reads like this:

”If the victorious Moslems had not been stopped, all Europe would probably have become Mohammedan, and the Christian religion, and all modern civilization, would have been destroyed.”

He described the whole direction of Western civilization hanging in the balance. Roosevelt viewed everything through the lens of civilizations rising and falling. He asked why some built things that lasted for centuries. He asked why some conquered and others got conquered. These questions came up again and again as he studied the past. From there he took Islam seriously as a major force. At one point he called it: ”One of the most extraordinary social and political forces the world has ever seen.”

That line stuck with me. He respected its power, its spread, and the courage of its fighters. Roosevelt gave credit to strong warriors even from the other side. He admired Roman soldiers, Japanese fighters, American frontiersmen, and Muslim conquerors because he respected people who fought for what they believed. This respect led him to look deeper at the big picture.

He examined the Crusades, the Ottoman advances, the sieges of Vienna, and all those Mediterranean wars. In each case he saw a real civilizational struggle. Battles like Tours, Lepanto, and Vienna shaped the world we know today. Another passage made his thinking even clearer. He wrote: ”The Moslem religion, wherever it has been dominant, has established a social system which has proved a complete barrier to any permanent progress.”

He cared about results on the ground. He examined which societies kept moving forward. He examined which ones built strong institutions, created wealth, and pushed science. After years of reading history, he concluded Christian civilization produced stronger outcomes than the Islamic world under its system. Here comes a longer chunk from his 1916 book Fear God and Take Your Own Part that really lays it out:

”Christianity is not the creed of Asia and Africa at this moment solely because the seventh century Christians of Asia and Africa had trained themselves not to fight, whereas the Moslems were trained to fight. Christianity was saved in Europe solely because the peoples of Europe fought the Mohammedans who invaded. From the hammer of Charles Martel to the sword of Jan Sobieski, Christianity owed its safety in Europe to the fact that it was able to show that it could and would fight as well as the Mohammedan aggressor.”

He added that wherever Muslims held total control and Christians could not resist, Christianity eventually disappeared.

He spoke openly about all of this. These days people walk on eggshells. Roosevelt called things the way he saw them. This approach fits his view of the world. Civilizations require active defense. People need courage, strength, and the willingness to fight for their way of life. That explains why he loved guys who stood up when it mattered. One of his lines sums it up perfectly: ”No triumph of peace is quite so great as the supreme triumphs of war.”

You see exactly what kind of guy he was. He looked at history as someone who knew civilization stays fragile. Earlier generations fought to keep it alive and pass it down. This point surprised me the most so far. I expected stories about the Rough Rider, the trust-buster, the president. Instead I found someone who spent time thinking about the fate of whole civilizations and the long struggle between Christendom and Islam. I stay early in the books, so my thoughts may shift as I continue. Right now Roosevelt watched history as a participant. He asked what makes a civilization tough enough to last. What about you? Any historical figures whose views on this kind of stuff caught you off guard? Let me know in the comments. Curious what you think as I keep reading.

P. S. Don’t forget to join our online book club!

The greatest achievements of our civilization were built by people who read deeply and engaged with timeless ideas.

We created this book club to keep that tradition alive.

Together, we work through the foundational texts of the Western canon — one great book at a time. From Aristotle and Augustine to Dante, Shakespeare, and Dostoevsky, we explore the works that formed our civilization and continue to shape it.

We’re currently reading Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics.

You can follow along for free, or become a member and join the discussions directly. You’ll get:

• Biweekly book club discussions (+ recordings)

• Access to our private community chat room

• Essays to guide you through the books we’re reading

• The ability to vote on what we read next

Join the Book Club!

Born in 1767, Hofer spent most of his life doing ordinary things. He ran the Sandhof Inn in the Passeier Valley, traded cattle and horses, raised a family, and attended Mass. Visitors described him as large, energetic, deeply religious, and gifted with the sort of natural authority that cannot be taught, the kind that causes people to trust a man.

Nothing about his early life suggested that future generations would remember him. He commanded no army, possessed no title, and held no position that placed him near the great events shaping Europe.

The French Revolution had shattered old assumptions across Europe, and Napoleon Bonaparte now stood at the center. Kingdoms collapsed before his armies. Borders shifted repeatedly. Ancient institutions disappeared. Entire regions found themselves governed by new rulers.

For the people of the Tyrol, these changes felt personal because their identity rested upon three things above all else: their Catholic faith, their local traditions, and their loyalty to the Habsburg monarchy. Those loyalties were woven together so tightly that attacking one often felt like attacking all three, and when Napoleon’s victories eventually reached the Alps, many Tyroleans concluded that exactly such an attack was underway..

When Napoleon Came for Tyrol

The turning point arrived after Austria suffered another defeat at Napoleon’s hands. Under the terms of the Treaty of Pressburg in 1805, Tyrol passed from Austrian control to Bavaria, one of Napoleon’s most important allies. To diplomats sitting around negotiating tables, this looked like a routine territorial adjustment. To the people living among the mountains, it felt like strangers had suddenly taken possession of their home.

The new Bavarian authorities introduced reforms that quickly generated resentment. Traditional local privileges disappeared. Administrative systems changed. Conscription threatened young men who felt little desire to fight in distant wars. Religious life came under increasing pressure as monasteries faced restrictions and long-established customs encountered growing interference from officials who viewed many local traditions as obstacles to modernization.

The conflict reached deeper than politics because Tyroleans saw their faith as the foundation of community life. Churches stood at the center of villages. Religious festivals organized the calendar. Priests often served as the most respected figures in entire regions. When government policies appeared to challenge that world, opposition spread rapidly.

Throughout the mountains, conversations began taking place in farmhouses, inns, churches, and village squares. News traveled along old trading routes and mountain paths. Priests spoke with local leaders. Messengers carried information between valleys. Gradually a network emerged, linking communities that shared the same concerns and the same determination.

Andreas Hofer found himself near the center of these developments because people trusted him. He spoke plainly. He shared their beliefs. He understood their frustrations. Most importantly, he seemed entirely free of personal ambition. Villagers saw one of their own rather than a politician seeking advancement, and that distinction mattered enormously in a society where trust was more valuable than rank.

By 1809, when Austria launched another war against Napoleon, preparations throughout Tyrol were already underway. The mountains were ready.

The Peasants Who Defeated an Empire

When the uprising began, thousands of ordinary people answered the call. Farmers left their fields. Hunters carried their rifles into the mountains. Tradesmen abandoned workshops. Innkeepers became organizers. Villages mobilized with astonishing speed, creating a resistance movement unlike anything Napoleon’s commanders expected to encounter.

The rebels possessed obvious disadvantages. They lacked formal training. They lacked artillery. They lacked the resources available to professional armies. Yet they possessed something equally important: they knew the mountains intimately.

Every path, ridge, forest, valley, and pass belonged to a landscape they had spent their entire lives navigating. French and Bavarian troops moving through the region discovered that conventional military superiority meant less than expected when confronting opponents who understood the terrain better than anyone else.

Columns came under attack from hidden positions. Supply lines became vulnerable. Communications grew unreliable. Entire detachments found themselves isolated.

The struggle reached its most famous moments around Innsbruck and the heights of Bergisel. There, the Tyroleans repeatedly confronted professional armies representing the most successful military system in Europe. Napoleon’s forces had defeated coalition after coalition across the continent. Their victories seemed endless. Yet in the mountains of Tyrol they encountered resistance that refused to behave according to expectations.

Again and again the rebels fought.

Again and again they returned.

Again and again they surprised commanders accustomed to imposing their will on opponents.

The victories at Bergisel became famous throughout Europe because they offered something people desperately wanted to believe: proof that Napoleon’s empire was not invincible. Newspapers carried reports of mountain peasants defeating professional soldiers. Observers described the uprising with fascination. Across Europe, many saw in the Tyroleans a symbol of local communities defending their traditions against overwhelming power.

At the center of it all stood Andreas Hofer, who became the public face of the rebellion despite never seeking that role for himself. His reputation spread far beyond the Alps, turning an innkeeper into one of the most recognizable resistance leaders in Europe.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Faith, Betrayal, and Death

To understand why Hofer became such a powerful symbol, it is impossible to separate the rebellion from religion. Modern accounts sometimes describe the uprising primarily through the language of nationalism, yet contemporary sources repeatedly emphasize faith. Church bells carried messages across valleys. Priests encouraged resistance. Religious processions accompanied gatherings. Crucifixes appeared alongside weapons. Participants viewed themselves as defending a Christian way of life as much as a political cause.

Hofer shared that perspective completely. He attended Mass whenever circumstances allowed. He sought spiritual advice before major decisions. He interpreted events through a deeply Catholic worldview that shaped everything from his leadership style to his willingness to continue fighting when success seemed increasingly unlikely.

For a brief period, it appeared the rebellion might succeed. Innsbruck fell into rebel hands. French and Bavarian forces suffered repeated setbacks. Confidence spread throughout the mountains. Yet the fate of Tyrol ultimately depended upon events occurring far beyond its borders..

Read more

Read more

In October 1097, around 927 years ago, the army of the First Crusade arrived before the walls of Antioch.

After marching thousands of miles across Europe and Asia Minor, many realized how impossible the situation was..

Antioch was one of the greatest fortified cities in the eastern Mediterranean, protected by enormous walls, defended by hundreds of towers, and positioned so strongly that medieval chroniclers repeatedly described it as impossible to capture through direct assault.

The crusaders were exhausted long before the siege even began, because thousands had died during the march eastward, many were starving, disease spread constantly through the camps, and most of the men there had never traveled farther than a few villages from home before suddenly finding themselves trapped thousands of miles away in hostile territory preparing to besiege one of the strongest cities in the Muslim world.

The anonymous author of the Gesta Francorum, who marched with the crusade himself, described the situation this way:

“We suffered greatly before Antioch from excessive cold and terrible famine, for many had no bread and many no horses, and the weaker among the poor died daily from hunger.”

The siege of Antioch looked nothing like the romantic image many people imagine when they hear the word “Crusade,” since what unfolded there was mostly mud, rain, starvation, fear, exhaustion, and slowly collapsing morale while men watched themselves weakening week after week beneath walls they could barely damage.

Food disappeared quickly. Horses died everywhere.

And soon the crusaders became so desperate that chroniclers describe men boiling leather, scavenging roots from the countryside, and secretly eating dead animals simply to survive another day beneath the city.

One eyewitness account records:

“There were some who cut pieces from dead horses and cooked them secretly, while others wandered through the mountains seeking herbs and leaves to preserve life.”

The crusaders realized they did not even possess enough manpower to surround Antioch properly, which meant supplies continued entering parts of the city while Muslim forces outside the walls constantly attacked crusader foraging parties and made gathering food even more dangerous.

The priest Peter Tudebode described the worsening conditions this way:

“The army of God was reduced to such misery that scarcely could anyone find enough strength to stand guard upon the walls or walk beyond the camp.”

And gradually the entire expedition began looking less like an advancing army and more like a starving mass of desperate men trapped before a city that refused to fall.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

Bohemond Captured Antioch Through Betrayal

As the winter dragged on, morale inside the crusader camp continued collapsing because desertion increased constantly and many believed the entire expedition was already doomed, including major nobles like Stephen of Blois, who abandoned the siege shortly before Antioch finally fell because he believed there was no realistic chance the crusaders would survive much longer.

And honestly, reading the chronicles today, you understand why so many men lost hope.

The crusaders were starving, exhausted, sick, and completely unable to storm the city directly.

One man, however, understood Antioch would probably never fall through brute force alone.

That man was Bohemond I of Antioch, the Norman prince whose political instincts and ambition made him one of the most important figures of the entire crusade.

While the siege dragged onward, Bohemond opened communication with an Armenian convert inside Antioch named Firouz, who controlled one of the city’s towers, and over time he arranged the betrayal that would eventually decide the siege entirely.

Meanwhile conditions inside the crusader camp became catastrophic

The chronicler Fulcher of Chartres wrote:

“Famine afflicted the army so terribly that men despaired of life itself, and many cursed the journey they had once embraced joyfully.”

By this stage the crusaders no longer resembled triumphant holy warriors marching confidently toward Jerusalem.

They were frightened, starving men trapped thousands of miles from home wondering whether they would ever see Europe again.

Then finally, in June 1098, after nearly eight months of siege warfare, Bohemond’s plan succeeded.

During the night, a small group of crusaders climbed Antioch’s walls using ladders lowered from one of Firouz’s towers, and after killing guards they opened the gates and allowed crusader forces to pour into the city after months of starvation, desperation, and near collapse.

The Gesta Francorum describes the moment this way:

“At dawn we entered the city through the mountain gate, and all the enemy fled before us while our men pursued them through the streets shouting with joy.”

Yet the victory barely lasted days before disaster struck again, because almost immediately after Antioch fell, a massive Muslim relief army under Kerbogha of Mosul arrived and surrounded the crusaders inside the very city they had just captured.

And suddenly everything reversed…

The besiegers became the besieged.

The crusaders were now trapped inside Antioch with almost no food remaining, thousands already sick or wounded, and a much larger enemy army surrounding the city from every direction.

The Crusaders Marched Out Expecting to Die

Read more

What history forgets are the men standing beside them.

The captains holding collapsing walls while kings escaped through smoke and confusion, the monks carrying wounded children through burning streets, the frontier commanders spending decades fighting wars so constant that chroniclers barely recorded half the battles anymore, and the anonymous knights dying in breaches no one remembers today despite the fact that entire cities survived because they held their ground a few minutes longer.

Honestly, once you begin reading medieval chronicles carefully, you realize Christian Europe survived partly because thousands of lesser-known men continued fighting in moments where surrender would have been infinitely easier.

Take the defense of Belgrade in 1456.

Most people know John Hunyadi, and rightly so, because Hunyadi was one of the greatest military commanders of the fifteenth century and the man who shattered the Ottoman siege threatening Hungary only three years after the fall of Constantinople, when much of Europe feared that Ottoman armies might continue advancing into the heart of the continent.

Standing beside Hunyadi, however, was a Franciscan friar named Giovanni da Capestrano, now almost forgotten despite the fact that eyewitnesses repeatedly describe him moving among exhausted defenders carrying a crucifix while Ottoman artillery smashed the walls around them and thousands of men waited anxiously for the next assault.

He was over seventy years old, not a knight, not a nobleman, not even a professional soldier, and yet contemporary accounts describe him preaching constantly, rallying peasants, organizing defenders, and helping hold together resistance many believed was already nearing collapse.

One chronicler described the scene this way:

“The friar moved among them without fear while arrows fell and cannon roared, lifting the cross before the soldiers and crying that Christ Himself watched from the walls.”

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

The same pattern appears during the long Albanian resistance led by Skanderbeg..

One of the most important was Vrana Konti, the commander entrusted with defending Krujë during some of the most dangerous Ottoman sieges of the entire Albanian resistance.

Read more

I’ve been working on some new articles for you and went down a rabbit hole in medieval archives.

What I found is incredible: actual surviving correspondence from crusaders, kings, saints, emperors, and defenders of Christendom.

So I’m starting a new series: Letters That Built Christendom

I’ll be sharing some of the most fascinating primary sources in history. Below are the most important surviving accounts from the First Crusade..

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

This is the letter that helped launch the First Crusade, as Pope Urban II called Christians in the West to take up arms for the liberation of the East (November 1095):

Most beloved brethren: Urged by necessity, I, Urban, by the permission of God chief bishop and prelate over the whole world, have come into these parts as an ambassador with a divine admonition to you, the servants of God. I hoped to find you as faithful and as zealous in the service of God as I had supposed you to be. But if there is in you any deformity or crookedness contrary to God’s law, with divine help I will do my best to remove it. For God has put you as stewards over his family to minister to it. Happy indeed will you be if he finds you faithful in your stewardship. You are called shepherds; see that you do not act as hirelings. But be true shepherds, with your crooks always in your hands. Do not go to sleep, but guard on all sides the flock committed to you. For if through your carelessness or negligence a wolf carries away one of your sheep, you will surely lose the reward laid up for you with God. And after you have been bitterly scourged with remorse for your faults-, you will be fiercely overwhelmed in hell, the abode of death. For according to the gospel you are the salt of the earth [Matt. 5:13]. But if you fall short in your duty, how, it may be asked, can it be salted? O how great the need of salting! It is indeed necessary for you to correct with the salt of wisdom this foolish people which is so devoted to the pleasures of this -world, lest the Lord, when He may wish to speak to them, find them putrefied by their sins unsalted and stinking. For if He, shall find worms, that is, sins, In them, because you have been negligent in your duty, He will command them as worthless to be thrown into the abyss of unclean things. And because you cannot restore to Him His great loss, He will surely condemn you and drive you from His loving presence. But the man who applies this salt should be prudent, provident, modest, learned, peaceable, watchful, pious, just, equitable, and pure. For how can the ignorant teach others? How can the licentious make others modest? And how can the impure make others pure? If anyone hates peace, how can he make others peaceable ? Or if anyone has soiled his hands with baseness, how can he cleanse the impurities of another? We read also that if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch [Matt. 15:14]. But first correct yourselves, in order that, free from blame , you may be able to correct those who are subject to you. If you wish to be the friends of God, gladly do the things which you know will please Him. You must especially let all matters that pertain to the church be controlled by the law of the church. And be careful that simony does not take root among you, lest both those who buy and those who sell [church offices] be beaten with the scourges of the Lord through narrow streets and driven into the place of destruction and confusion. Keep the church and the clergy in all its grades entirely free from the secular power. See that the tithes that belong to God are faithfully paid from all the produce of the land; let them not be sold or withheld. If anyone seizes a bishop let him be treated as an outlaw. If anyone seizes or robs monks, or clergymen, or nuns, or their servants, or pilgrims, or merchants, let him be anathema [that is, cursed]. Let robbers and incendiaries and all their accomplices be expelled from the church and anthematized. If a man who does not give a part of his goods as alms is punished with the damnation of hell, how should he be punished who robs another of his goods? For thus it happened to the rich man in the gospel [Luke 16:19]; he was not punished because he had stolen the goods of another, but because he had not used well the things which were his.

“You have seen for a long time the great disorder in the world caused by these crimes. It is so bad in some of your provinces, I am told, and you are so weak in the administration of justice, that one can hardly go along the road by day or night without being attacked by robbers; and whether at home or abroad one is in danger of being despoiled either by force or fraud. Therefore it is necessary to reenact the truce, as it is commonly called, which was proclaimed a long time ago by our holy fathers. I exhort and demand that you, each, try hard to have the truce kept in your diocese. And if anyone shall be led by his cupidity or arrogance to break this truce, by the authority of God and with the sanction of this council he shall be anathematized.”

After these and various other matters had been attended to, all who were present, clergy and people, gave thanks to God and agreed to the pope’s proposition. They all faithfully promised to keep the decrees. Then the pope said that in another part of the world Christianity was suffering from a state of affairs that was worse than the one just mentioned. He continued:

“Although, O sons of God, you have promised more firmly than ever to keep the peace among yourselves and to preserve the rights of the church, there remains still an important work for you to do. Freshly quickened by the divine correction, you must apply the strength of your righteousness to another matter which concerns you as well as God. For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania [the Greek empire] as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them. On this account I, or rather the Lord, beseech you as Christ’s heralds to publish this everywhere and to persuade all people of whatever rank, foot-soldiers and knights, poor and rich, to carry aid promptly to those Christians and to destroy that vile race from the lands of our friends. I say this to those who are present, it meant also for those who are absent. Moreover, Christ commands it.

“All who die by the way, whether by land or by sea, or in battle against the pagans, shall have immediate remission of sins. This I grant them through the power of God with which I am invested. O what a disgrace if such a despised and base race, which worships demons, should conquer a people which has the faith of omnipotent God and is made glorious with the name of Christ! With what reproaches will the Lord overwhelm us if you do not aid those who, with us, profess the Christian religion! Let those who have been accustomed unjustly to wage private warfare against the faithful now go against the infidels and end with victory this war which should have been begun long ago. Let those who for a long time, have been robbers, now become knights. Let those who have been fighting against their brothers and relatives now fight in a proper way against the barbarians. Let those who have been serving as mercenaries for small pay now obtain the eternal reward. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul now work for a double honor. Behold! on this side will be the sorrowful and poor, on that, the rich; on this side, the enemies of the Lord, on that, his friends. Let those who go not put off the journey, but rent their lands and collect money for their expenses; and as soon as winter is over and spring comes, let hem eagerly set out on the way with God as their guide.”

Stephen of Blois, one of the leaders of the First Crusade, writing to his wife Adele from Antioch as the brutal reality of the campaign set in (Antioch, March 29, 1098):

Count Stephen to Adele, his sweetest and most amiable wife, to his dear children, and to all his vassals of all ranks - his greeting and blessing,

You may be very sure, dearest, that the messenger whom I sent to give you pleasure, left me before Antioch safe and unharmed and through God’s grace in the greatest prosperity. And already at that time, together with all the chosen army of Christ, endowed with great valor by Him, we had been continuously advancing for twenty-three weeks toward the home of our Lord Jesus. You may know for certain, my beloved, that of gold, silver and many other kind of riches I now have twice as much as your love had assigned to me when I left you. For all our princes, with the common consent of the whole army, against my own wishes, have made me up to the present time the leader, chief and director of their whole expedition.

You have certainly heard that after the capture of the city of Nicaea we fought a great battle with the perfidious Turks and by God’s aid conquered them. Next we conquered for the Lord all Romania and afterwards Cappadocia. And we learned that there was a certain Turkish prince Assam, dwelling in Cappadocia; thither we directed our course. All his castles we conquered by force and compelled him to flee to a certain very strong castle situated on a high rock. We also gave the land of that Assam to one of our chiefs and in order that he might conquer the above-mentioned Assam, we left there with him many soldiers of Christ. Thence, continually following the wicked Turks, we drove them through the midst of Armenia, as far as the great river Euphrates. Having left all their baggage and beasts of burden on the bank, they fled across the river into Arabia.

The bolder of the Turkish soldiers, indeed, entering Syria, hastened by forced marches night and day, in order to be able to enter the royal city of Antioch before our approach. The whole army of God learning this gave due praise and thanks to the omnipotent Lord. Hastening with great joy to the aforesaid chief city of Antioch, we besieged it and very often had many conflicts there with the Turks; and seven times with the citizens of Antioch and with the innumerable troops coming to its aid, whom we rushed to meet, we fought with the fiercest courage, under the leadership of Christ. And in all these seven battles, by the aid of the Lord God, we conquered and most assuredly killed an innumerable host of them. In those battles, indeed, and in very many attacks made upon the city, many of our brethren and followers were killed and their souls were borne to the joys of paradise.

We found the city of Antioch very extensive, fortified with incredible strength and almost impregnable. In addition, more than 5,000 bold Turkish soldiers had entered the city, not counting the Saracens, Publicans, Arabs, Turcopolitans, Syrians, Armenians and other different races of whom an infinite multitude had gathered together there. In fighting against these enemies of God and of our own we have, by God’s grace, endured many sufferings and innumerable evils up to the present time. Many also have already exhausted all their resources in this very holy passion. Very many of our Franks, indeed, would have met a temporal death from starvation, if the clemency of God and our money had not succoured them. Before the abovementioned city of Antioch indeed, throughout the whole winter we suffered for our Lord Christ from excessive cold and enormous torrents of rain. What some say about the impossibility of bearing the beat of the sun throughout Syria is untrue, for the winter there is very similar to our winter in the West.

When truly Caspian [Bagi Seian], the emir of Antioch - that is, prince and lord - perceived that he was hard pressed by us, he sent his son Sensodolo [Chems Eddaulab] by name, to the prince who holds Jerusalem, and to the prince of Calep, Rodoarn [Rodoanus], and to Docap [Deccacus Ibn Toutousch], prince of Damascus. He also sent into Arabia to Bolianuth and to Carathania to Hamelnuth. These five emirs with 12,000 picked Turkish horsemen suddenly came to aid the inhabitants of Antioch. We, indeed, ignorant of all this, had sent many of our soldiers away to the cities and fortresses. For there are one hundred and sixty-five cities and fortresses throughout Syria which are in our power. But a little before they reached the city, we attacked them at three leagues’ distance with 700 soldiers, on a certain plain near the “Iron Bridge.” God, however, fought for us, His faithful, against them. For on that day, fighting in the strength that God gives, we conquered them and killed an innumerable multitude - God continually fighting for us - and we also carried back to the army more than two hundred of their heads, in order that the people might rejoice on that account. The emperor of Babylon also sent Saracen messengers to our army with letters, and through these he established peace and concord with us.

I love to tell you, dearest, what happened to us during Lent. Our princes had caused a fortress to be built which was between our camp and the sea. For the Turks daily issuing from this gate, killed some of our men on their way to the sea. The city of Antioch is about five leagues’ distance from the sea. For this reason they sent the excellent Bohemond and Raymond, count of St. Gilles, to the sea with only sixty horsemen, in order that they might bring mariners to aid in this work. When, however, they were returning to us with those mariners, the Turks collected an army, fell suddenly upon our two leaders and forced them to a perilous flight. In that unexpected flight we lost more than 500 of our foot soldiersto the glory of God. Of our horsemen, however, we lost only two, for certain.

Eyewitness battlefield dispatch from Anselm of Ribemont, describing the chaos, bloodshed, and victories of the First Crusade at Antioch (Antioch, September 10, 1098):

In the name of the Lord!

To his lord and father, Manasses, by grace of God venerable Archbishop of Reims, Anselm of Ribemont, his loyal vass; and humble servant; greeting.

Let your Eminence, reverend father and lord, know that, even though absent and not present, we are daily asking aid . our hearts from you- not only from you, but, also, from all the sons of the Holy Mother Church of Reims, in whom we have the greatest faith. Likewise, inasmuch as you are our lord, and the counsel of the whole kingdom of France is especially dependent upon you, we are keeping you, father, informed of whatever happy and adverse events have happened to us. Let the others, moreover, be informed through you, that you may share equally in our sufferings, and rejoice with us in our success.

We have informed you how we fared in the siege and capture of Nicaea, in our departure thence and our journey through all Romania and Armenia. It now remains for us to tell you a little about the siege of Antioch, the many kinds of danger we there tasted, and the innumerable battles which we fought against the King of Aleppo, the King of Damascus, and against the adulterous King of Jerusalem.

Antioch has been besieged by the army of the Lord since the thirteenth day before the Kalends of November with exceeding valor and courage beyond words. What unheard of battles you might have perceived there at a certain gateway to the west! How marvelous it would seem to you, were you present, to see them daily rushing forth through six gates - both they and ourselves fighting for safety and life! At that time our princes, seeking to enclose the city more and more closely, first besieged the eastern gate, and Bohemund, having built a fort there, stationed a part of his army in it. However, since our princes then felt somewhat elated, God, who chasteneth every son whom he loveth, so chastened us that hardly seven hundred horses could be found in our army; and thus, not because we lacked proven and valiant men, but from lack of horses, or food, or through excessive cold, almost all were dying. The Turks, moreover, supplied with horses and all necessities in abundance, were wont daily to ride around our camp, a certain stream which lay between serving as a wall. There Was likewise a castle of the Turks almost eight miles away; and these Turks were daily killing many of our men, who were going back and forth from our army. Our princes went out against them and with God’s help put them to flight and killed many of them. Therefore the ruler of Antioch, seeing himself afflicted, called the King of Damascus to his aid. By God’s providence, this King met Bohemund and the Count of Flanders, who bad gone to find food with a part of our army, and, God’s help prevailing, he was defeated and routed by them. The ruler of Antioch, still concerned about his safety, sent to the King of Aleppo and aroused him with promises of very great wealth, to the end that be should come with all his forces. Upon his arrival, our princes went forth from camp, and that day, God being their helper, with seven hundred knights and a few foot soldiers they defeated twelve thousand Turks with their King, put them to flight, and killed many of them. Our men regained not a few horses from that battle, and returned rejoicing with victory. Growing stronger and stronger, therefore, from that day our men took counsel with renewed courage as to bow they might besiege the western gate which cut off access to the sea, wood, and fodder. By common agreement, therefore, Bohemund and the Count of St. Gilles went to the coast to fetch those who were staying there. Meanwhile , those who had remained to look after the possessions, seeking to acquire a name for themselves, went out incautiously one day after breakfast, near that western gate from which they were ingloriously repulsed and put to flight. On the third day after this, Bohemund and the Count of St. Gilles, on their way back, sent word to the princes of the army to meet them, (intending) together to besiege the gate. However, since the latter delayed for a short time, Bohemund and the Count of St. Gilles were beaten and put to flight. Therefore all our men, grieving and bewailing their disgrace, as well, for a thousand of our men fell that day, formed their lines and defeated and put to flight the Turks, who offered great resistance. On this day, moreover, almost fourteen hundred of the enemy perished both by weapons and in the river, which was swollen with winter rains.

And so, when this had been accomplished, our men began to build the fortress, which they strengthened, also, with a double moat and a very strong wall, as well as with two towers. In it they placed the Count of St. Gilles with machine men and bowmen. Oh, with what great labor we established the fortress! One part of our army served the eastern front, another looked after the camp, while all the rest worked on this fortress. Of the latter, the machine men and bowmen kept watch on the gate; the rest, including the princes themselves, did not stop in the work of carrying stones, and building the wall. Why recount the trials of many kinds, which, even if passed over in silence, are sufficiently evident in themselves - hunger, intemperate weather, and the desertion of fainthearted soldiers? The more bitter they were, the more ready our men were in enduring them. Yet, indeed, we think that we should by no means pass in silence the fact that on a certain day the Turks pretended that they would surrender the city and carried the deception so far as to receive some of our men among them, and several of their men came out to us. While this was going on in this manner, they, like the faithless people that they were, set a trap for us in which Walo, the Constable, and others of them as well as of us were destroyed. A few days after this, moreover, it was announced to us that Corbara, chief of the army of the king of the Persians, had sworn to our death, and had almoreover, it was announced to us that Corbana, chief of the army God, however, who does not desert those who place their trust in Him, did not abandon His people, but on the Nones of June compassionately gave to us the city of Antioch, which three of its citizens betrayed. We, however, devastated the city, and on that same day killed all the pagans in it, except some who were holding out in the castle of the city.

Rare surviving letter from ordinary crusaders, written as they marched east toward Jerusalem (Antioch, October 1098):

To the primates, archbishops, bishops, and other rectors, and to all the faithful of the lands of Christ anywhere; the clergy and people of Lucca (send) greeting full of peace and gladness in the Lord.

To the praise and glory of the Redeemer, our Lord Jesus Christ, we are truly and faithfully making known to all (the news) which we received truly and faithfully from participants in the affairs tbemselves - at what time, with what great triumph, the most mighty right band of Christ gave complete victory over the pagans to our brethren, His champions, after trial and perils. A certain citizen of ours, Bruno by name, known and very dear to all of us, in the year preceding this, went with the ships of the Angles even to Antioch itself. There, as a partner in work and danger, sharer of triumph and joy, be fought along with the fighters, starved with the starving and conquered, also, with the conquering; and when the complete victory had already been achieved, and he had rejoiced three weeks there with all, be returned to us, after a happy voyage. Placing him in our midst, we received from him the pure and simple truth of the matter - lo! in his own account, as follows:

“When we who were voyaging by sea bad come to Antioch, the army, which bad gathered together from everywhere by land, bad already surrounded the city in siege, though not very well. On the following day, our princes proceeded to the sea, for the sake of visiting us. They urged us to get together an abundant supply of wood for the construction of war engines, which we did at great expense. On the third day, moreover, before the Nones of March, that is the first Friday, our princes decided to erect a fortress at the western gate of the city. This fortress, a very short ballista-shot away (from the city), is now called by the name of the Blessed Mary. There, on that same day, in an attack of the Turks, in which they killed 2,055 of our men, we killed 800 of the enemy. From the third day, moreover, when the fortress had been erected, until the third day before the Nones of June, our men endured many hardships, and, weakened by hunger and the sword, they toiled there at great cost. However, on this day the city was captured in the following manner: Four brothers, noble men of Antioch, on the second day of June promise to surrender the city to Bohemund, Robert Curtose, and Robert, Count of Flanders. These, however, with the common assent of all our princes, at nightfall conduct the whole army to the wall of the city, without the knowledge of the Turks. And in the morning, when the citizens of Antioclio open the gates to receive the three named princes alone, according to promise, all of our men suddenly rush in together. There is the greatest clamor: our men obtain all the fortified places, except the very high citadel; the Turksthese they kill, those they hurl to destruction over the precipice.”

This is the official letter sent after the First Crusade, announcing to the Pope that Jerusalem had fallen into Christian hands (Laodicea, September 1099):

To Lord Paschal, pope of the Roman church, to all the bishops and to the whole Christian people, from the archbishop of Pisa, duke Godfrey, now, by the grace of God, defender of of the Holy Se ulchre, Raymond, count of St. Gilles, and the whole army of God, which is in the land of Israel, greeting.

Multiply your supplications and prayers in the sight of God with joy and thanksgiving, since God has manifested His mercy in fulfilling by our bands what He bad promised in ancient times. For after the capture of Nicaea, the whole army, made up of more than three hundred thousand soldiers, departed thence. And, although this army was so great that it could have in a single day covered all Romania and drunk up all the rivers and eaten up all the growing things, yet the Lord conducted them amid so great abundance that a ram was sold for a penny and an ox for twelve pennies or less. Moreover, although the princes and kings of the Saracens rose up against us, yet, by God’s will, they were easily conquered and overcome. Because, indeed, some were, puffed up by these successes, God opposed to us Antioch, impregnable to human strength. And there He detained us for nine months and so humbled us in the siege that there were scarcely a hundred good horses in our whole army. God opened to us the abundance of His blessing and mercy and led us into the city, and delivered the Turks and all of their possessions into our power.

Inasmuch as we thought that these had been acquired by our own strength and did not worthily magnify God who bad done this, we were beset by so great a multitude of Turks that no one dared to venture forth at any point from the city. Moreover, hunger so weakened us that some could scarcely refrain from eating human flesh. It would be tedious to narrate all the miseries which we suffered in that city. But God looked down upon His people whom He had so long chastised and mercifully consoled them. Therefore, He at first revealed to us, as a recompense for our tribulation and as a pledge of victory, His lance which had laid hidden since the days of the apostles. Next, He so fortified the hearts of the men, that they who from sickness or hunger had been unable to walk, now were enbued with strength to seize their weapons and manfully to fight against the enemy.

After we had triumphed over the enemy, as our army was wasting away at Antioch from sickness and weariness and was especially hindered by the dissensions among the leaders, we proceeded into Syria, stormed Barra and Marra, cities of the Saracens, and captured the fortresses in that country. And while we were delaying there, there was so great a famine in the army that the Christian people now ate the putrid bodies of the Saracens. Finally, by the divine admonition, we entered into the interior of Hispania, and the most bountiful, merciful and victorious hand of the omnipotent Father was with us. For the cities and fortresses of the country through which we were proceeding sent ambassadors to us with many gifts and offered to aid us and to surrender their walled places. But because our army was not large and it was the unanimous wish to hasten to Jerusalem, we accepted their pledges and made them tributaries. One of the cities forsooth, which was on the seacoast, bad more men than there were in our whole army. And when those at Antioch and Laodicea and Archas heard bow the hand of the Lord was with us, many from the army who had remained in those cities followed us to Tyre. Therefore, with the Lord’s companionship and aid, we proceeded thus as far as Jerusalem.

And after the army had suffered greatly in the siege, especially on account of the lack of water, a council was held and the bishops and princes ordered that all with bare feet should march around the walls of the city, in order that He who entered it humbly in our behalf might be moved by our humility to open it to us and to exercise judgment upon His enemies. God was appeased by this humility and on the eighth day after the humiliation He delivered the city and His enemies to us. It was the day indeed on which the primitive church was driven thence, and on which the festival of the dispersion of the apostles is celebrated. And if you desire to know what was done with the enemy who were found there, know that in Solomon’s Porch and in his temple our men rode in the blood of the Saracens up to the knees of their horses.

Then, when we were considering who ought to hold the city, and some moved by love for their country and kinsmen wished to return home, it was announced to us that the king of Babylon bad come to Ascalon with an innumerable multitude of soldiers. His purpose was, as be said, to lead the Franks, who were in Jerusalem, into captivity, and to take Antioch by storm. But God had determined otherwise in regard to us.

Therefore, when we learned that the army of the Babylonians was at Ascalon, we went down to meet them, leaving our baggage and the sick in Jerusalem with a garrison. When our army was in sight of the enemy, upon our knees we invoked the aid of the Lord, that He who in our other adversities had strengthened the Christian faith, might in the present battle break the strength of the Saracens and of the devil and extend the kingdom of the church of Christ from sea to sea, over the whole world. There was no delay; God was present when we cried for His aid, and furnished us with so great boldness, that one who saw us rush upon the enemy would have taken us for a herd of deer hastening to quench their thirst in running water. It was wonderful, indeed, since there were in our army not more than 5,000 horsemen: j and 15,000 foot soldiers, and there were probably in the enemy’s army 100,000 horsemen and 400,000 foot soldiers. Then God appeared wonderful to His servants. For before we engaged in fighting, by our very onset alone, He turned this multitude in flight and scattered all their weapons, so that if they wished afterwards to attack us, they did not have the weapons in which they trusted. There can be no question how great the spoils were, since the treasures of the king of Babylon were captured. More than 100,000 Moors perished there by the sword. Moreover, their panic was so great that about 2,000 were suffocated at the gate of the city. Those who perished in the sea were innumerable. Many were entangled in the thickets. The whole world was certainly fighting for us, and if many of ours had not been detained in plundering the camp, few of the great multitude of the enemy would have been able to escape from the battle. And although it may be tedious, the following must not be omitted: On the day preceding the battle the army captured many thousands of camels, oxen and sheep. By the command of the princes these were divided among the people. When we advanced to battle, wonderful to relate, the camels formed in many squadrons and the sheep and oxen did the same. Moreover, these animals accompanied us, halting when we halted, advancing when we advanced, and charging when we charged. The clouds protected us from the beat of the sun and cooled us.

Accordingly, after celebrating the victory, the army returned to Jerusalem. Duke Godfrey remained there; the count of St. Gilles, Robert, count of Normandy, and Robert, count of Flanders, returned to Laodicea. There they found the fleet belonging to the Pisans and to Bohemond. After the archbishop of Pisa had established peace between Bohemond and our leaders, Raymond prepared to return to Jerusalem for the sake of God and his brethren.

Therefore, we call upon you of the catholic church of Christ and of the whole Latin church to exult in the so admirable bravery and devotion of your brethren, in the so glorious and very desirable retribution of the omnipotent God, and in the so devoutedly hoped - for remission of all our sins through the grace of God. And we pray that He may make you - namely, all bishops, clerks and monks who are leading devout lives, and all the laity - to sit down at the right hand of God, who liveth and reigneth God for ever and ever. And we ask and beseech you in the name of our Lord Jesus, who has ever been with us and aided us and freed us from all our tribulations, to be mindful of your brethren who return to you, by doing them kindnesses and by paying their debts, in order that God may recompense you and absolve you from all your sins and grant you a share in all the blessings which either we or they have deserved in the sight of the Lord. Amen.

Source 1: Bongars, Gesta Dei per Francos, 1, pp. 382 f., trans in Oliver J. Thatcher, and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source Book for Medieval History, (New York: Scribners, 1905), 513-17

Source 2: Dana C. Munro, "Letters of the Crusaders", Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European History, Vol 1:4, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1896), 5-8

Source 3: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 157-60

Source 4: August. C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eyewitnesses and Participants, (Princeton: 1921), 161-67

Source 5: Dana C. Munro, "Letters of the Crusaders", Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European History, Vol 1:4, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1896), 8-11

Reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

Subscribe now

“If two religions both claim to be true, then their differences matter.”

— William J. Federer

Many discussions about Islam begin with the assumption that all religions are basically saying the same thing, and that any serious focus on differences is somehow divisive or unnecessary.

That’s one reason why What Every American Needs to Know About the Qur’an became a bestseller.

William J. Federer does something modern writers entirely avoid doing: he actually opens the Qur’an, quotes it directly, and compares its teachings with the assumptions Americans grow up with.

And whether people agree with his conclusions or not, that alone separates the book from most mainstream discussions surrounding Islam.

Federer’s basic argument is straightforward..

Read more

“Education should teach men how to think and what to think. The modern world increasingly teaches neither. A culture survives when its inheritance is transmitted, and that inheritance lives principally in books.”

— Hilaire Belloc

For most people today, Belloc is either completely unknown or vaguely remembered as “Chesterton’s friend,” which is unfortunate because he was one of the sharpest historical and political minds of the early twentieth century, and many of the things he warned about ended up happening almost exactly as he predicted.

And unlike many modern commentators, Belloc did not analyze civilization through isolated headlines or temporary trends. He thought historically. He saw Europe as something organic, something built slowly over centuries through Christianity, Rome, tradition, memory, and culture. He believed that once people lost contact with those foundations, they would eventually lose the civilization built on top of them as well.

Which is more or less where we are now.

Once you read him long enough, you start noticing how much modern thinking depends on historical amnesia, which is why Belloc saw the great books as essential to the survival of civilization itself..

1) To Understand That Europe Was Built by Christianity

One of Belloc’s most famous lines comes from his book Europe and the Faith:

“The Faith is Europe and Europe is the Faith.”

His point was simple: you cannot understand Europe without Christianity because Christianity shaped Europe at every level.

Its laws, universities, architecture, philosophy, moral assumptions, calendars, art, literature, and even its understanding of the human person emerged from a Christian framework over many centuries.

Belloc spends much of his writing reminding readers that civilizations do not appear out of nowhere. They are built through continuity. Remove the foundation long enough and eventually the structure above it weakens too.

That’s one reason reading him feels so relevant now.

Most people living in the West still inherit Christian assumptions without realizing where they came from. Ideas like universal human dignity, charity, moral equality before God, the sanctity of conscience, all of these emerged from a specific tradition.

2) To See Modernity More Clearly

One thing Belloc understood very early was that modernity was not automatically producing freer or healthier societies.

In fact, he argued the opposite in The Servile State, where he warned that modern industrial systems were slowly creating populations that were materially dependent, politically weak, and spiritually detached:

“Industrial society creates a class increasingly divorced from property, from independence, and from the means of maintaining itself. Such a condition cannot remain stable. Men deprived of economic freedom eventually lose political freedom as well.”

Belloc saw a society increasingly dominated by massive economic powers, centralized bureaucracies, and populations losing ownership, independence, and stability. He believed people become easier to control when they lose strong families, local loyalties, religious structures, and economic independence.

He anticipated many modern problems long before they fully emerged.

That’s the value of older writers generally. They see things your own age struggles to notice.

C.S. Lewis once wrote:

“We all, therefore, need the books that will correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period.”

Belloc does exactly that.

He breaks the illusion that progress automatically means improvement.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

3) To Recover Historical Memory

History, for most people, has been reduced to information.

A collection of disconnected facts, dates, names, and events that people memorize briefly and then forget. Belloc saw history very differently because he understood that history is really about continuity, inheritance, and identity.

Once a civilization loses contact with its past, it eventually loses clarity about what it is, what it believes, and what it is even trying to preserve anymore. That’s why so much of Belloc’s writing revolves around reconnecting the chain between the ancient world, Christendom, Europe, and the modern West, because he understood that civilizations survive only when people still feel attached to the traditions and memory that formed them.

You see this very clearly in The Great Heresies, where Belloc argues that civilizations are often weakened less by external enemies than by internal confusion, loss of confidence, and cultural forgetfulness.

Writing in 1938, long before mass migration into Europe and decades before modern terrorism, Belloc described Islam as:

“The most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had.”

What matters about that quote is not merely the statement itself, but the broader point Belloc was making around it.

Civilizations survive through confidence in themselves. Through memory. Through continuity. Through belief in the legitimacy of their own traditions and inheritance. Once that confidence disappears, societies become fragile very quickly because people stop defending what they no longer fully believe in themselves.

And honestly, when you look around Europe today, that observation feels difficult to dismiss.

4) To Learn How to Think Historically

Modern commentary traps people inside the present moment, where every political argument, crisis, or social trend feels isolated and unprecedented. Belloc pulls you out of that mindset and forces you to think historically, which means seeing events as part of larger patterns developing across centuries rather than reacting emotionally to whatever happens to dominate this week’s headlines.

That’s part of what makes him so refreshing to read now.

There is nothing sterile about his writing. He never treats civilizations like abstract systems or theoretical models detached from human life. He writes with the understanding that ideas shape cultures, that cultures shape societies, and that societies eventually produce consequences people have to live inside, whether those consequences are good or disastrous.

A lot of writing today feels shallow because it lacks that larger framework entirely. Everything becomes reactive, fragmented, and disconnected from historical memory.

Belloc pushes readers toward larger questions.

- What actually holds a civilization together across centuries?

- What weakens it internally long before collapse becomes visible?

- What happens once people lose confidence in their own inheritance?

And perhaps most importantly, can a civilization survive after forgetting the books, ideas, and beliefs that created it in the first place?

This is what pushed me to start the Athenaeum Book Club.

I’ve been building Athenaeum for over a year now, and honestly, it feels like the most important thing I’ve ever worked on. The response has been unbelievable. Every day, people reach out telling me they’ve been looking for something like this for years, a place where people sit down and read the great books seriously instead of just posting quotes from them online.

At Athenaeum, we read a new classic text every month, and we now have close to 40,000 readers following along. We have an incredible “inner circle” community actively participating in the biweekly discussions: reading, thinking, and engaging deeply with the material, together.

The appetite for the great books of Western civilization is far larger than most people think. Classics operate at a completely different depth than anything modern culture produces.

These are the books we’ve read so far (we just started Crime and Punishment):

To preserve a culture, you must continually study the books and ideas that created it.

That is why the Athenaeum Book Club was created. Together, we are reading the books that form the mind and shape the spirit — the books our ancestors read. We’re doing it honestly and openly, in dialogue with each other.

If this sounds like something you’d like to be a part of, please join our community, and consider supporting our mission with a paid membership. You’ll get:

• Live community book discussions (biweekly) and recordings

• Access to our incredible community of readers

• Regular essays to guide you through the books we’re reading

• The full library of articles, essays, and podcasts

• The ability to vote on what we read next…

Athenaeum is funded ENTIRELY by the members of this incredible community. Join us!

Join us!

I recently had a shocking realization:

It is now not only possible, but the norm, to go from kindergarten to PhD in the West without reading a single word of Homer, Plato, Virgil, Augustine, or Dante.

This is how you erase a culture, and it’s working.

If you spend enough time online, and you read what people are saying about the West — about its culture, its history, its religion — you’ll notice that everyone has very strong opinions. But few people know much of what they’re talking about.

People talk about Christianity without ever reading Augustine’s Confessions. They talk about Western values without understanding where those values came from. People construct entire worldviews from clips and headlines.

At some point, you realize that if you don’t go deeper yourself, you’ll end up thinking the same way.

That’s where this started for me. I looked at what educated men read 100, 200, even 500 years ago, and noticed they were reading what had already endured. There was an assumption that if a book had survived generations, it had something in it worth understanding.

Reading older books allow us to understand how things developed over generations, and gives essential context to the here and now.

For instance, read Homer’s Iliad and you’ll start to see where ideas about honor and endurance come from. Then, move to Virgil’s Aeneid and responsibility becomes central. Then read Augustine’s Confessions and you’ll realize how seriously people used to take the inner life. Then, Dante’s Divine Comedy will reveal to you a world in which everything has structure and consequence.

Once you’ve read all these, you simply cannot go back to surface-level thinking. You’ll see that the West isn’t just a place or a political idea — it is something that was shaped, piece by piece, by books and ideas that faced the scrutiny of centuries.

This is what pushed me to start the Athenaeum Book Club.

I’ve been building this for the past 11 months, and it genuinely feels like the most important project I’ve ever worked on. I get daily messages from people telling me they’ve been looking for something like this for years and couldn’t find it anywhere.

At Athenaeum, we read a new classic text every month, and we now have close to 40,000 readers following along. We have an incredible “inner circle” community actively participating in the biweekly discussions: reading, thinking, and engaging deeply with the material, together.

The hunger we are seeing for returning to the great books of Western Civilization is beyond anything we ever expected. It feels like the beginning of something truly special.

These are the books we’ve read so far (we’re about to start Crime and Punishment):

To preserve a culture, you must continually study the books and ideas that created it.

That is why the Athenaeum Book Club was created. Together, we are reading the books that form the mind and shape the spirit — the books our ancestors read. We’re doing it honestly and openly, in dialogue with each other.

If this sounds like something you’d like to be a part of, please join our community, and consider supporting our mission with a paid membership. You’ll get:

• Live community book discussions (biweekly) and recordings

• Access to our incredible community of readers

• Regular essays to guide you through the books we’re reading

• The full library of articles, essays, and podcasts

• The ability to vote on what we read next…

Athenaeum is funded ENTIRELY by the members of this incredible community. Join us!

Join us!

By the first millennium BC, Assyria and later Babylon dominate the region, but both are eventually overtaken by a rising Persian power under Cyrus the Great. Around 550 BC, Cyrus defeats the Median Empire and begins building what becomes the Achaemenid Empire, one of the largest empires the world had seen up to that point.

In 539 BC, Cyrus takes Babylon, and one of the key things he does afterward is allow deported peoples, including the Jews, to return to their homelands and rebuild their temples.

After Cyrus, power passes to Darius the Great, who rules from 522 to 486 BC and reorganizes the empire into satrapies, builds infrastructure like the Royal Road, and expands Persian control even further. His campaigns bring him into conflict with the Greek city-states, leading to the Battle of Marathon in 490 BC, where Persian forces are pushed back.

His successor, Xerxes I, launches another invasion in 480 BC, winning at Thermopylae but ultimately losing at Salamis and Plataea, which marks the limit of Persian expansion into Greece.

Then in 334 BC, Alexander the Great begins his campaign against Persia, defeating Darius III and taking control of the empire by 330 BC. After Alexander’s death in 323 BC, his generals divide the empire, and Persia falls under the control of Seleucus I Nicator, forming the Seleucid Empire.

During this period, Antiochus IV Epiphanes attempts to impose Hellenistic culture on Judea, leading to the Maccabean revolt in 167 BC, which shows how Persian territories remain tied to broader religious conflicts.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

By around 247 BC, the Parthian Empire rises and eventually replaces Seleucid control in Persia, followed later by the Sasanian Empire in 224 AD, founded by Ardashir I. The Sasanian Empire becomes Rome’s main rival for centuries, with constant wars along the eastern frontier.

Under Khosrow I, who reigns from 531 to 579 AD, the empire centralizes authority, strengthens its economy, and develops culturally, while maintaining Zoroastrianism as the state religion. Christianity exists within the empire but remains a minority.

This long conflict between Rome and Persia weakens both sides over time.

And that leads directly to the next major shift.

In the 7th century, Islam begins expanding beyond Arabia. After taking key territories from the Byzantine Empire, Islamic forces move into Persia. Khalid ibn al-Walid and others lead campaigns that defeat Persian armies in battles such as al-Qadisiyyah around 636 AD.

The last Sasanian ruler, Yazdegerd III, attempts to resist but ultimately loses control, and by 651 AD the Sasanian Empire collapses completely.

From that point on, Persia becomes part of the Islamic world, first under the Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates, and later under the Abbasid Caliphate, which comes to power in 750 AD.

During the Abbasid period, especially between the 9th and 11th centuries, Persian scholars play a major role in what is often called the “Islamic Golden Age”. One of the most important figures is Avicenna, who lives from 980 to 1037 and writes extensively on medicine, philosophy, and science.

At the same time, debates emerge about the role of philosophy and reason in religion. Figures like Al-Ghazali, who dies in 1111, argue for a stronger focus on religious orthodoxy, pushing back against philosophical approaches and shaping the intellectual direction of the region.

Then in the early 13th century, another major disruption arrives.

The Mongols.

Starting around 1206 under Genghis Khan, Mongol armies begin expanding westward. By 1219, they invade Persia, destroying cities and killing large portions of the population. This culminates in 1258 when Hulagu Khan captures Baghdad, effectively ending the Abbasid Caliphate as a political force.

For a time, Mongol rule dominates the region, but by the late 13th century, the Ilkhanate rulers convert to Islam, bringing Persia back into the islamic sphere.

Persia has passed through multiple empires, religions, and ruling systems, each leaving a lasting impact.

So when people look at Iran today and try to explain it only through current events, they miss the deeper structure behind it.

Because what you’re seeing now is built on thousands of years of history, from Elam to the Achaemenids, from Alexander to the Sasanians, from the Islamic conquest to the Mongols and Timur.

Once you follow that sequence, things start to connect.

And that’s how you understand how we got here.

Look, I’ll just say it straight. The claim that “Muslims love Jesus” sounds pretty reasonable at first. It feels like a nice bridge between the two faiths. But if you look a little closer, it gets more complicated than that.

You’ve probably seen what Tucker Carlson said the other day. On April 14 he came out with “Muslims love Jesus,” and he listed some things that are technically true.

”The people in charge don't want you to know this, but Muslims love Jesus. Islam reveres Him as a major prophet and messenger of the Lord, believes He performed miracles, and states that He will return to Earth to defeat the Antichrist. That's why Donald Trump's painting depicting himself as the Son of God offended the president of Iran. It was an attack on his religion as well as Christianity.”

Islam does talk about Jesus. It calls him a prophet, says he did miracles, and teaches that he’ll come back one day. Those points are fine as far as they go. But there’s more to the picture. The Jesus you find in the Quran shares the name, but he’s part of a very different story.

In Christianity, Jesus is the Son of God, fully divine, part of the Trinity. The crucifixion and resurrection are the whole foundation of the faith. The Quran handles it differently. It says Jesus is not the Son of God. It rejects the Trinity. And it tells the story of the crucifixion another way. One verse says:

“They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but it was made to appear so to them… rather, Allah raised him up to Himself.”

Another passage is pretty direct:

“It is not befitting for Allah to take a son… He says to it, ‘Be,’ and it is.”

So when people say Muslims love Jesus, it makes sense to ask: which Jesus are we talking about? In Islam, he’s a respected prophet and miracle worker with a special place among the messengers. But that respect sits inside a bigger framework where Muhammad is the final prophet, and Jesus ends up pointing toward Islamic teaching.

You see the same thing with the idea of Jesus returning at the end times. It can sound like something we share. But in the hadith, when he comes back, he breaks the cross, kills the swine, and abolishes the jizya.

Those actions all fit inside the Islamic view of how things end. That’s why the phrase “Muslims love Jesus” feels a bit incomplete to me. It pulls out the parts we seem to have in common… the name, the miracles, the virgin birth, the return… but the deeper differences about who Jesus actually is and what he came to do stay in the background.

The next day, April 15, Tucker doubled down. He said there’s this big overlap between Christianity and Islam that most Americans don’t realize. He talked about how the Quran honors the Christian savior as a prophet and messenger, and how understanding that closeness could push back against what he called “anti-Muslim propaganda.”

But the tension we see doesn’t come from propaganda. It comes straight from the teachings in the Quran and hadith when people take them seriously. For example, one verse tells believers:

“O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are in fact allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you, then indeed, he is one of them.”

There’s also the well-known Sword Verse that says:

“But once the sacred months have passed, kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them go on their way.”

Tucker figured that if Americans really saw how close the roots are to the Bible, it would change how we look at Islam.

But if we want real understanding, we need to look at the whole picture… what each tradition actually says about Jesus and how those beliefs fit together in the larger system.

Islam has a Jesus who is honored and respected. Christianity is built around Jesus as God in the flesh, crucified for our sins, and risen from the dead. They’re two complete, distinct stories that just happen to use the same name.

A lot of people today like to reach for common ground because it feels warmer and easier. I get that. But clearer conversations happen when we look honestly at everything each faith teaches, not just the parts that overlap nicely.

You’ve probably seen it a hundred times by now, especially online. Someone posts, “Islam is a peaceful religion,” or just as confidently claims that “the Crusades were offensive wars driven by blind aggression.”

It sounds clean and morally reassuring, and it gives the impression that the person saying it has a firm grasp on history, but in reality it’s the kind of statement that only works if you simplify things to the point of distortion.

The issue isn’t that everything about Islam is violent, and it’s not that everything about the Crusades was noble or pure either, because history is never that neat or one-sided. The real problem is that both of these claims depend on ignoring where the story actually begins and how it develops over time.

What people tend to do, whether consciously or not, is start right in the middle of the timeline and then present that moment as if it were the beginning of everything that matters.

If you actually rewind the story, even just a few centuries, you end up in the 7th century, which is where things become much harder to simplify or sanitize.

This is when Islam begins expanding, and it does so with remarkable speed and consistency, not through quiet cultural exchange but primarily through organized military conquest that reshapes entire regions.

Syria falls, Egypt falls, North Africa falls, and Persia is effectively swept aside in a relatively short span of time, which is something people often gloss over because it complicates the modern narrative.

Friendly reminder: The Western Spirit exists because of readers like you. Join us and help keep this project alive and independent.

If you’ve been enjoying these essays, consider becoming a paid subscriber. For a few dollars a month, you’ll get:

• In-depth pieces on forgotten battles, brave men, and turning points in Western history

• Reflections on faith, order, tradition, and the deeper meaning behind culture

• Full access to the growing archive — essays, book breakdowns, and historical deep dives

This project exists because readers like you make it possible.

Subscribe now

These were not empty or marginal territories; they were deeply established civilizations, many of them overwhelmingly Christian, and in some cases they were central to the early development of Christianity itself.

We’re talking about places like Jerusalem and Alexandria, which were not peripheral outposts but major centers of theology, culture, and religious life for centuries before they were taken.

So one thing becomes very clear when you look at it honestly: what we now call the “Muslim world” was, in large part, previously part of the Christian world, and that transformation did not happen peacefully or accidentally.

It happened because one civilization conquered another and held that ground over time.

And importantly, the expansion did not stop once those initial territories were taken, as if it were a brief episode that then settled into stability.

Spain is invaded in 711 and remains under Muslim rule for centuries, while raids and incursions reach into France, Italy, and various parts of the Mediterranean, turning what had once been relatively secure regions into contested zones.

At the same time, the Byzantine Empire, which represents the continuation of the Christian Roman world in the East, is steadily weakened through ongoing military pressure, losing territory bit by bit over generations.

This situation persists for hundreds of years, which is the crucial detail that often gets skipped because it makes the later events much harder to frame in simplistic moral terms.

By the time we reach the late 11th century, Christians are not living in some untouched peace suddenly deciding to launch an attack; they are part of a civilization that has been under sustained pressure and has lost significant territory over a very long period.

That is the context in which things begin to shift.

The Byzantine Empire, facing serious military setbacks, appeals to the West for help..

In response to that appeal, Pope Urban II calls for what becomes the First Crusade, framing it as a mission to aid fellow Christians and recover lands that had once been part of Christendom:

“O race of the Franks, race from across the mountains, race chosen and beloved by God, distinguished from all nations by the situation of your country, as well as by your Catholic faith and the honor of the Holy Church—this message is for you, this exhortation is addressed to you.

From the borders of Jerusalem and the city of Constantinople a horrible tale has gone forth, and very frequently has been brought to our ears: that a people from the kingdom of the Persians, an accursed race, a race utterly alienated from God… has invaded the lands of those Christians and depopulated them by the sword, pillage, and fire.

They have led away a part of the captives into their own country, and a part they have destroyed by cruel tortures. They have either destroyed the churches of God or appropriated them for the rites of their own religion.

They destroy the altars, after having defiled them with their uncleanness. They circumcise Christians and the blood of the circumcision they either spread upon the altars or pour into the vases of the baptismal font.

When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels, and dragging forth the extremity of the intestines, bind it to a stake; then, with flogging, they lead the victim around until the viscera fall out.

Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow.

What shall I say of the abominable rape of the women? To speak of it is worse than to be silent.

The kingdom of the Greeks is now dismembered and has been deprived of territory so vast in extent that it could not be traversed in two months’ time.

On whom, therefore, is the labor of avenging these wrongs and of recovering this territory incumbent, if not upon you—you upon whom, above all others, God has bestowed remarkable glory in arms, greatness of spirit, and bodily strength?

Let the deeds of your ancestors move you and incite your minds to manly achievements: the greatness of King Charlemagne and of his son Louis, and of your other kings, who destroyed the kingdoms of the Turks and extended the territory of the Holy Church.

Let the holy sepulcher of our Lord and Savior, which is possessed by unclean nations, especially arouse you, and the holy places which are now treated with ignominy and irreverently polluted by them.

O most valiant soldiers and descendants of invincible ancestors, be not degenerate, but recall the valor of your progenitors.

Let none of your possessions retain you, nor solicitude for your family affairs. For this land which you inhabit… is too narrow for your large population; nor does it abound in wealth.

Hence it is that you murder and devour one another, that you wage war, and that frequently you perish by mutual wounds.

Let hatred depart from among you, let your quarrels end, let wars cease, and let all dissensions and controversies slumber.

Enter upon the road to the Holy Sepulcher; wrest that land from the wicked race, and subject it to yourselves.

That land which, as the Scripture says, ‘flows with milk and honey,’ was given by God into the possession of the children of Israel.

Jerusalem is the navel of the world; the land is fruitful above all others, like another paradise of delights.

This royal city, therefore, situated at the center of the world, is now held captive by His enemies and is subjected by those who do not know God.

She seeks, therefore, and desires to be liberated and does not cease to implore you to come to her aid.

From you especially she asks succor, because, as I have already said, God has conferred upon you above all nations great glory in arms.

Accordingly undertake this journey for the remission of your sins, with the assurance of the imperishable glory of the kingdom of heaven.

When Pope Urban had said these and many similar things, all who were present were so inspired with one mind that they cried out:

‘Deus vult! Deus vult!’ (God wills it! God wills it!)

When the venerable Roman pontiff heard that, with eyes uplifted to heaven, he gave thanks to God and, commanding silence with a wave of his hand, said:

‘Beloved brethren, today is manifest in you what the Lord says in the Gospel: “Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.”

For unless the Lord God had been present in your spirits, all of you would not have uttered the same cry.

Let this, then, be your war cry in combats, because this word is given to you by God.

When an armed attack is made upon the enemy, let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God:

Deus vult! Deus vult!’”

This is the point where modern interpretations tend to strip away all prior context and present the Crusades as if they appeared out of nowhere, driven by sheer aggression or religious fanaticism.

People will say that Christians invaded Muslim lands, which is technically true in a narrow sense, but it leaves out everything that led up to that moment and everything that shaped the decision.

To make that claim convincingly, you have to ignore centuries of prior conflict moving in the opposite direction, as well as the fact that many of these lands had originally been under Christian control before they were taken.

You also have to overlook the direct request for military assistance from the Byzantine Empire, which played a central role in triggering the response.

When you include all of that context, the picture changes in a significant way, and the Crusades begin to look less like an unprovoked invasion and more like a delayed and imperfect attempt to push back after long-term losses.

That doesn’t mean everything the Crusaders did was admirable, because war inevitably produces actions that are brutal, excessive, or morally questionable.

But acknowledging those realities is not the same as concluding that the entire cause was illegitimate, because those are two very different claims that often get blurred together.

In most other historical situations, we recognize that a group or nation can have a legitimate reason to fight while still committing wrongs in the process, and we are capable of holding both ideas at once.

If a society is invaded repeatedly over centuries, loses land, and eventually organizes a campaign to reclaim some of that territory, we do not usually describe that as pure aggression without context.

We might debate the methods, question the leadership, or criticize specific actions, but we still understand the underlying motive as a response to something real and ongoing.

For some reason, that same basic logic is often not applied when it comes to the Crusades, which suggests that something other than historical analysis is shaping the narrative.

Part of it is that modern Western audiences tend to be skeptical of their own past, often assuming that their ancestors were primarily driven by greed, ignorance, or intolerance, and this assumption influences how events are interpreted.

Another part is that simple narratives are easier to communicate and spread, especially in a culture that prefers short, emotionally satisfying conclusions over complex explanations.

So phrases like “Islam is peaceful” and “the Crusades were aggressive” continue to circulate because they are easy to remember and repeat.

The reality, as usual, is different.

Islam spread by the sword.

The Crusades, in turn, were not random acts of aggression detached from history, but completely justified events that arose out of centuries of prior conflict, territorial loss, and a specific call for assistance from an embattled ally.