The Moors enslaved Christians and other non-Muslims in al-Andalus, or Islamic Iberia. The Moors also imported white Christian slaves from Eastern Europe and Spain. 

If the term “Moor” seems familiar but confusing, there’s a reason. Though the term can be found throughout literature, art, and history books, it does not actually describe a specific ethnicity or race. Instead, the concept of Moors has been used to describe alternatively the reign of Muslims in Spain, Europeans of African descent, and others for centuries. 

Derived from the Latin word “Maurus,” the term was originally used to describe Berbers and ethnic groups from the ancient Roman province of Mauretania in what is now North Africa. Over time, it was increasingly applied to Muslims living in Europe. Beginning in the Renaissance, “Moor” and “blackamoor” were also used to describe any person with dark skin. 

In A.D. 711, a group of North African Muslims led by the Berber general, Tariq ibn-Ziyad, captured the Iberian Peninsula (modern Spain and Portugal). Known as al-Andalus, the territory became a prosperous cultural and economic center where education and the arts and sciences flourished. 

Over time, the strength of the Muslim state diminished, creating inroads for Christians who resented Moorish rule. For centuries, Christian groups challenged Muslim territorial dominance in al-Andalus and slowly expanded their territory. This culminated in 1492, when Catholic monarchs Ferdinand II and Isabella I won the Granada War and completed Spain’s conquest of the Iberian Peninsula. Eventually, the Moors were expelled from Spain. 

By then, the idea of Moors had spread across Western Europe. “Moor” came to mean anyone who was Muslim or had dark skin; occasionally, Europeans would distinguish between “blackamoors” and “white Moors.” 

One of the most famous mentions of Moors is in Shakespeare’s play The Tragedy of Othello, the Moor of Venice. Its titular character is a Moor who serves as a general in the Venetian army. (In Shakespeare’s time, the port city of Venice was ethnically diverse, and the Moors represented a growing interchange between Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa.) Despite his military prowess, Othello is also portrayed as exotic, hypersexual, and untrustworthy—“a lascivious Moor” who secretly marries a white woman—reflecting historic stereotypes of black people. 

More recently, the term has been coopted by the sovereign citizen movement in the United States. Members of Moorish sovereign citizen groups claim they are descended from Moors who predated white settlers in North America, and that they are part of a sovereign nation and not subject to U.S. laws. It’s proof of the ongoing allure of “Moor” as a seemingly legitimate ethnic designation—even though its meaning has never been clear. 

The term Moor is an exonym first used by Christian Europeans to designate the Muslim populations of the Maghreb, al-Andalus (Iberian Peninsula), Sicily and Malta during the Middle Ages. Moors are not a single, distinct or self-defined people. The 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica observed that the term had "no real ethnological value." Europeans of the Middle Ages and the early modern period variously applied the name to Arabs, Berbers, and Muslim Europeans. 

The term has also been used in Europe in a broader sense to refer to Muslims in general, especially those of Arab or Berber descent, whether living in al-Andalus or North Africa. During the colonial era, the Portuguese introduced the names "Ceylon Moors" and "Indian Moors" in South Asia and Sri Lanka, now official ethnic designations on the island nation, and the Bengali Muslims were also called Moors. In the Philippines, the longstanding Muslim community, which predates the arrival of the Spanish, now self-identifies as the "Moro people", an exonym introduced by Spanish colonizers due to their Muslim faith. 

In 711, troops mostly formed by Moors from northern Africa led the Umayyad conquest of Hispania. The Iberian Peninsula then came to be known in Classical Arabic as al-Andalus, which at its peak included most of Septimania and modern-day Spain and Portugal. In 827, the Aghlabid Moors occupied Mazara on Sicily, developing it as a port. They eventually went on to consolidate the rest of the island. Differences in religion and culture led to a centuries-long conflict with the Christian kingdoms of Europe, which tried to reclaim control of Muslim areas; this conflict was referred to as the Reconquista. In 1224, the Muslims were expelled from Sicily to the settlement of Lucera, which was destroyed by European Christians in 1300. The fall of Granada in 1492 marked the end of Muslim rule in Spain, although a Muslim minority persisted until their expulsion in 1609. 

The etymology of the word "Moor" is uncertain, although it can be traced back to the Phoenician term Mahurin, meaning "Westerners". From Mahurin, the ancient Greeks derive Mauro, from which Latin derives Mauri. The word "Moor" is presumably of Phoenician origin. Some sources attribute a Hebrew origin to the word. 

During the classical period, the Romans interacted with, and later conquered, parts of Mauretania, a state that covered modern northern Morocco, western Algeria, and the Spanish cities Ceuta and Melilla. The Berber tribes of the region were noted in the Classics as Mauri, which was subsequently rendered as "Moors" in English and in related variations in other European languages. Mauri (Ancient Greek: Μαῦροι) is recorded as the native name by Strabo in the early 1st century. This appellation was also adopted into Latin, whereas the Greek name for the tribe was Maurusii (Ancient Greek: Μαυρούσιοι). The Moors were also mentioned by Tacitus as having revolted against the Roman Empire in 24 AD. 

During the Latin Middle Ages, Mauri was used to refer to Berbers and Arabs in the coastal regions of Northwest Africa. The 16th century scholar Leo Africanus (c. 1494–1554) identified the Moors (Mauri) as the native Berber inhabitants of the former Roman Africa Province (Roman Africans). 

Godfrey of Bouillon: 

Godfrey of Bouillon was not Jewish, but he was a leader of the First Crusade and the first Latin ruler of Jerusalem.

Godfrey of Bouillon (1060 – 18 July 1100) was a preeminent leader of the First Crusade, and the first ruler of the Kingdom of Jerusalem from 1099 to 1100. Although initially reluctant to take the title of king, he agreed to rule as prince (princeps) under the title Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri, or Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre. 

He was the second son of Eustace II, Count of Boulogne in France. He received an inheritance from his mother's family in 1076 when he became Lord of Bouillon, which is now in Belgium. In 1087 Emperor Henry IV also confirmed him as Duke of Lower Lorraine, in reward for his support during the Great Saxon Revolt. 

Along with his brothers Eustace III and Baldwin of Boulogne, Godfrey joined the First Crusade in 1096. He took part in actions at Nicaea, Dorylaeum, and Antioch, before playing a key role during the capture of Jerusalem in 1099. When Raymond IV, Count of Toulouse declined the offer to become ruler of the new kingdom, Godfrey accepted the role and secured his kingdom by defeating the Fatimids at Ascalon a month later, bringing the First Crusade to an end. He died in July 1100 and was succeeded by his brother Baldwin as King of Jerusalem. 

Early life: 

Godfrey of Bouillon was born around 1060, second son of Eustace II, Count of Boulogne and Ida, daughter of the Lotharingian duke Godfrey the Bearded and his first wife, Doda. He was probably born in Boulogne-sur-Mer, although one 13th-century chronicler cites Baisy, a town in what is now Walloon Brabant, Belgium. As second son, he had fewer opportunities than his older brother. However his maternal uncle, Godfrey the Hunchback, died childless and named his nephew, Godfrey of Bouillon, as his heir and next in line to his Duchy of Lower Lorraine. This duchy was an important one at the time, serving as a buffer between the French kingdom and the German lands. 

In fact, Lower Lorraine was so important to the Holy Roman Empire that in 1076 Henry IV (reigned 1056–1105), then King of the Romans and future emperor, decided to place it in the hands of his own son and give Godfrey only Bouillon and the Margraviate of Antwerp, allegedly as a test of his loyalty. Godfrey supported Henry even during his struggle with Pope Gregory VII during the Investiture Controversy. Godfrey fought alongside Henry and his forces against Rudolf of Swabia and in Italy when Henry captured Rome itself. 

A major test of Godfrey's leadership skills was shown in his battles to defend his inheritance against a significant array of enemies. In 1076 he had succeeded as designated heir to the Lotharingian lands of his uncle, Godfrey the Hunchback, and Godfrey was struggling to maintain control over the lands that Henry IV had not taken away from him. Claims were raised by his aunt Margravine Matilda of Tuscany, cousin Count Albert III of Namur, and Count Theoderic of Veluwe. This coalition was joined by Bishop Theoderic of Verdun, and two minor counts attempting to share in the spoils, Waleran I of Limburg and Arnold I of Chiny. 

As these enemies tried to take away portions of his land, Godfrey's brothers, Eustace and Baldwin, both came to his aid. Following these long struggles and proving that he was a loyal vassal to Henry IV, Godfrey finally gained Lower Lorraine in 1087. 

First Crusade: 

The "sword of Godfrey of Bouillon" displayed at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem since 1808 (1854 photograph) 

In 1095 Pope Urban II called for military action in order to liberate Jerusalem and aid the Byzantine Empire, which in the years since 1071 had lost large swathes of territory to the Seljuk Empire. Godfrey either sold or mortgaged most of his estates to the bishops of Liège and Verdun and used the money to recruit an army of Crusaders. He was joined by his older brother, Eustace, and his younger brother, Baldwin, who had no lands in Europe and was seeking them in the Holy Land. Others did the same, the largest being that raised by Raymond IV, Count of Toulouse, who at 55 was the oldest and most experienced of the Crusader nobles. As a result, he expected to lead the expedition, a claim boosted by the presence of Adhemar of Le Puy, the papal legate who travelled with him. Significant forces also accompanied Bohemond of Taranto, a Norman knight from southern Italy, and Robert II, Count of Flanders. 

Following advice provided by Pope Urban, most of these armies set out in mid-summer and headed for Constantinople where they could expect assistance from Emperor Alexios I Komnenos. Each travelled separately, since it was impossible for one region to feed and supply such large numbers on their own; the first to leave in spring 1096 was what became known as the People's Crusade, an army of 20,000 low ranking knights and peasants which journeyed through the Rhineland, then headed for Hungary. Most of those from southern and northern France sailed from Brindisi across the Adriatic Sea, while Godfrey and his two brothers, leading an army from Lorraine reportedly 40,000 strong, set out in August 1096 following the route taken by the People's Crusade. 

Pope Urban II's call for the crusade spurred a wave of violence against Jews across Europe, beginning with Rouen in December 1095. In the spring and early summer of 1096, members of the People's Crusade plundered and massacred Jewish communities during the Rhineland massacres. 

After the People's Crusade entered Hungary in June, a series of incidents had culminated in a full-scale battle with their hosts and the deaths of over 10,000 Crusaders; as a result, when Godfrey and his troops approached the border in September, it took several days of negotiations before they were allowed in. He finally reached Constantinople in November, shortly after those led by Hugh of Vermandois while others arrived over the next few months. Unlike the limited numbers he had anticipated, by May 1097 Alexios found himself with over 4,000 to 8,000 mounted knights and 25,000 to 55,000 infantry camped on his doorstep. This mattered because the two sides had different goals; Alexius simply wanted help in retaking Byzantine lands lost to the Seljuk Turks, while the Crusaders sought to liberate the Holy Land from the Muslims. When Alexios demanded an oath of loyalty, Godfrey and most of the Crusaders agreed to a modified version in which they promised to restore some lands to the Emperor, Raymond of Toulouse being a notable exception: he would just promise to do the Emperor no harm. 

Capture of Nicaea and Antioch: 

In February 1097, Godfrey and his army crossed the Bosporus Straits, where he was joined by Bohemund, Robert of Flanders and Hugh of Vermandois. Accompanied by Byzantine soldiers, in early May the Crusaders invested Nicaea, a city close to Constantinople captured by the Turks in 1085. Godfrey and his troops played a minor role, with Bohemond successfully commanding much of the action but as the Crusaders were about to storm the city, they noticed the Byzantine flag flying from the top of the walls. Wanting to minimise damage to what was an important Byzantine city and suspecting the Crusaders would demand a heavy ransom for handing it over, Alexios had made a separate peace with the Turkish garrison. Although the majority of the Crusader leaders accepted Alexios' right to do so, it was an illustration of the level of mutual suspicion between the two sides. 

1883 portrayal of Godfrey and other leaders of the First Crusade, by Alphonse-Marie-Adolphe de Neuville 

Godfrey continued to play a minor, yet significant, role in the battles against the Seljuks until the Crusaders finally reached Jerusalem in 1099. At Dorylaeum in July 1097, he helped relieve the vanguard at Dorylaeum which had been pinned down by a Turkish force under Kilij Arslan I, then sacked their camp. After this battle and during the trek through Asia Minor, some sources suggest that Godfrey was attacked by a bear and received a serious wound which incapacitated him for a time. 

Godfrey also took part in the Siege of Antioch, which began in October 1097 and did not surrender until June 1098 after long and bitter fighting. During the winter, the crusading army came close to starvation and many returned to Europe, while Alexios assumed all was lost at Antioch and failed to provide them with supplies as promised. When the city finally fell, Bohemond claimed it for himself and refused to hand it over to the Emperor citing the Emperor's failure to help the crusaders at Antioch as breaking the oath; after repulsing a Muslim force from Mosul led by Kerbogha, Antioch was secured. 

March on Jerusalem: 

After this victory, the Crusaders were divided over their next course of action. The bishop of Le Puy had died at Antioch. Bohemond decided to remain behind in order to secure his new principality; and Godfrey's younger brother, Baldwin, also decided to stay in the north in the Crusader state he had established at Edessa. Most of the foot soldiers wanted to continue south to Jerusalem, but Raymond IV of Toulouse, by this time the most powerful of the princes, having taken others into his employ, such as Tancred, hesitated to continue the march. After months of waiting, the common people on the crusade forced Raymond to march on to Jerusalem, and Godfrey quickly joined him. As they travelled south into Palestine, the Crusaders faced a new enemy. No longer were the Seljuk Turks the rulers of these lands. Now the Christian army had to deal with armies of North African Muslims called Fatimids, who had adopted the name of the ruling family in Cairo, Egypt. The Fatimids had taken Jerusalem in August 1098. The Crusaders would be battling them for the final prize of the First Crusade in the siege of Jerusalem. 

It was in Jerusalem that the legend of Godfrey of Bouillon was born. The army reached the city in June 1099 and built a wooden siege tower (from lumber provided by some Italian sailors who intentionally scrapped their ships) to get over the walls. The major attack took place on 14 and 15 July 1099. Godfrey and some of his knights were the first to take the walls and enter the city. It was an end to three years of fighting by the Crusaders, but they had finally achieved what they had set out to do in 1096—to recapture the Holy Land and, in particular, the city of Jerusalem and its holy sites, such as the Holy Sepulchre, the empty tomb of Jesus Christ. Godfrey endowed the hospital in the Muristan after the First Crusade. 

Kingdom of Jerusalem: 

Godfrey of Bouillon being created the Lord of the city. From the Histoire d'Outremer by William of Tyre, detail of an historiated initial S, in a British Library Manuscript in the Yates Thompson Collection (No. 12, fol. 46), 13th century. 

Once the city was returned to Christian rule, some form of government had to be set up. On 22 July 1099, a council was held in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and after Raymond of Toulouse had refused the crown, Godfrey agreed to become ruler. However, he preferred the title Advocate of the Holy Sepulchre to that of king, allegedly refusing to "wear a crown of gold where his Saviour had worn a crown of thorns. Both the meaning and usage of his title is disputed. Some of the original chroniclers used the more ambiguous term princeps, or his previous rank of duke. Later chroniclers who did not participate in the First Crusade suggest he took the title of rex, "king". 

During his short reign, Godfrey had to defend the new kingdom against the Fatimids of Egypt, who were defeated at the Battle of Ascalon in August. He also faced opposition from Dagobert of Pisa, the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, who was allied with Tancred. Although the Latins came close to capturing Ascalon, Godfrey's attempts to prevent Raymond of St. Gilles from securing the city for himself meant that the town remained in Muslim hands, destined to be a thorn in the new kingdom's side for years to come. 

In 1100, Godfrey was unable to directly expand his new territories through conquest. However, his impressive victory in 1099 and his subsequent campaigning in 1100 meant that he was able to force Acre, Ascalon, Arsuf, Jaffa, and Caesarea to become tributaries. Meanwhile, the struggle with Dagobert continued, although the terms of the conflict are difficult to trace. Dagobert may well have envisaged turning Jerusalem into a fiefdom of the pope, but his full intentions are not clear. Much of the evidence for this comes from William of Tyre, whose account of these events is troublesome; it is only William who tells us that Dagobert forced Godfrey to concede Jerusalem and Jaffa, while other writers such as Albert of Aachen and Ralph of Caen suggest that both Dagobert and his ally Tancred had sworn an oath to Godfrey to accept only one of his brothers or blood relations as his successor. Whatever Dagobert's schemes, they were destined to come to naught. Being at Haifa at the time of Godfrey's death, he could do nothing to stop Godfrey's supporters, led by Warner of Grez, from seizing Jerusalem and demanding that Godfrey's brother Baldwin should succeed to the rule. Dagobert was subsequently forced to crown Baldwin as the first Latin king of Jerusalem on 25 December 1100. 

Death: 

Cenotaph of Godfrey of Bouillon in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (1870, after a 15th-century woodcut) 

The Arab chronicler Ibn al-Qalanisi reported that "In this year [1099], Godfrey, lord of Jerusalem, appeared before the fortified port of 'Akkā [Acre] and made an assault upon it, but was struck by an arrow, which killed him". While this claim is repeated in other Muslim sources, it does not appear in Christian chronicles; Albert of Aix and Ekkehard of Aura suggest Godfrey fell ill while visiting Caesarea in June 1100 and died in Jerusalem on 18 July. 

Suggestions he was poisoned are unlikely and it is more probable he died from a disease similar to typhoid. Godfrey never married.