Status Updates From Western Warfare in the Age ...

"[T]he savage treatment of defeated foot was a long-standing tradition of medieval warfare. War between elites, however, was marked by a degree of moderation and even mercy. Even in the Middle East, where a European Catholic elite confronted an Islamic nobility, a degree of contact and mutual appreciation was possible." You read that right: Crusaders were less likely to be bigots, than snobs.

"Those who summoned medieval armies could never be quite certain who would turn up or how suitable they would be for the task in hand, and this was particularly the case for crusades." - I'm really not convinced this was a bad thing, Mr France.

"[W]ar was about possession of land and rule over its people, and as few wished to rule deserts, they did not try to remove or slaughter the population." - why total war and genocide were both fairly unusual in the Middle Ages.

"The slaughter of infantry was usual, simply because there was little alternative [...I]n western Europe slavery was not an economic institution, so there was little profit in keeping them alive. In the Middle East and Spain, economic conditions were different and slavery was a viable alternative." Both Crusaders and Saracens routinely enslaved captives. :( But the Franks showed less kindness to their own people. :(