Except that my original point was not that the Muslims were victims, but that in the 10th/11th/etc centuries, the Christian and Islamic world were more on par technologically, economically, and militarily. It was not that Muslims were victims of crusaders, though the Christians were indeed an invading force. Then the Ottomans were a major part in European politics and generally on par with Europe right up into the 19th century. The biggest threat until the late 19th century, was internal - from Mohammad Ali in Egypt, an Albanian who had been sent as a govenor and then tried to take over the region from the Ottomans.
By comparison, at times, they were. Jews and Muslims in Christian Europe were just as in danger as they were in the Ottoman empire. That doesnât mean that there wasnât a power differential, or that Christians and Jews were on par with Muslims in places like the Ottoman empire, but the Ottomans depended upon economic and social stability in the Balkans, where many Jews and Christians lived, because it was strategically and economically important region. They had a level of autonomy in their individual communities (known administratively as Millets) that just didnât exist in many European countries at the same time. Plus, the center would often come down hard on those seeking to punish Christians and Jews or forcibly convert them, because they were an important revenue stream for the Empire. Many of the their most elite soldiers came from the Balkans and taxation from the region helped run the empire. You can also tell how important the region was by the number of Balkan women often in the harem of various Sultans.
So, yes, history is far more complicated and everyone was an asshole then. Little changes it seems, actually. Most of our countries seem to be run by assholes, still.
