Analysis Of Paul Crawford's Four Misconceptions Of The Crusades

Many have priorly stated that history repeats itself time and time again. This can be seen throughout history but, especially so during the Crusades. This paper will discuss the parallels between the First and Fourth Crusade. We will also take a brief look at the aftermath of the Fourth Crusade and how it compares to the aftermath of the Second Crusade.

The Crusades of the High Middle Ages (a.d. 1050-1300) was a period of conquest or rather, reconquest, of Christian lands taken from Muslims in the early Middle Ages. It is an era romanticized by fervent Christians as the time when Christianity secured its honorable status as the true religion of the world. The affect of the Crusades is still with us today. It sailed from Spain and Portugal to the Americas in the fifthteenth century aboard sailing ships carrying conquistadors who sought new territory and rich resources. They used the shield and sword of Christianity to justify a swift conquest of mass territory and the subjugation of the indigenous peoples; a mentality learned, indeed,

In 1095, Pope Urban II called for an army to go to the Holy Land, Jerusalem. This was what was later known as the ‘First Crusade’. A crusade is a religious war or a war mainly motivated by religion. The first crusade consisted of 10’s of thousands of European Christians on a medieval military expedition to recover the Holy Land from the Muslims. This doesn’t mean that the first crusade was just motivated by religion. Throughout this essay, I will be suggesting the main reasons of why people went on crusades and which different people went for specific reasons and why.

The Crusades were great military missions developed by Christian nations of Europe for the purpose of rescuing the Holy Land of Jerusalem from the hands of the Moslems. Jerusalem was extremely important to the Moslems and Christians at this time. Many religious events happened there, and many landmarks of both religions were located in Jerusalem. There were many Crusades some more significant than others, but in general the Crusades were very important to the spread of Christianity and religious based knowledge. The Crusades are an example of religious rebellion that is timeless and universal throughout the world.

The Crusades were a bloody war that the church deemed holy and necessary for salvation of the knights soul. The Crusades are a highly controversial and very dark stain on the Catholic church and Hierarchies past. The war was brought to the church from there Roman allies who they had tense dealings with. The where seeking aid in the fight against the muslim turks. The church decreed there act holy and justified. The people who were under the churches thumb had no objections to the slaughter that their beloved God had suposably justified.

Going against modern day religious beliefs, in 1095AD the Christians went to war to claim the holy city of Jerusalem, massacring the Muslims in a bloody attempt to worship their God. Pope Urban II’s speech at Clermont inspired by claims made by the Byzantium Emperor encouraged the Christians to partake in the First Crusade in an attempt to liberate Jerusalem. The religious and economic factors were the most relevant to cause this crusade, with some influence from desired political gain and little from social factors unrelated to religion. The immediate consequences were positive for the Christians and negative for the Muslims, but the First Crusade launched an ongoing conflict between the Christians and Muslims which had positive and negative consequences for both sides. There are a number of relevant modern sources which examine the causes and consequences of the First Crusade, but, while there are many medieval sources, they do not explicitly discuss the causes and consequences of the war. In order to fully comprehend the First Crusade, it is necessary to analyse the religious, economic, and political factors, as well as the short-term, long-term, and modern consequences.

The Crusades even caused an Empire to never fully recover! In the other piece of evidence it speaks of the Crusades even causing two religions to split up! As you can see, the Crusades did some very bad things to people and were not nice

In a perfect world, everything would go exactly the way you wanted. But that’s the problem. There is no such thing as a perfect world, and the Crusades were the exact opposite. Back in medieval times, Christians felt the need to conquer Jerusalem. At the time, Jerusalem was being protected by Muslims.

Founder of Constantinople, Constantine claimed the great Byzantine Empire and in turn inherited the new Holy Roman Empire. With the Edict of Milan in 313, Constantine proclaimed religious tolerance of Christians throughout the empire and soon the religion spread. Constantine then transformed the city of Byzantium into the new capital of the Roman Empire, which then was known and proclaimed as Constantinople. The new capital would profit from its location being closer to the east frontier, having then the advantage of better trading, and a militarily sound location being protected on three sides by water.

Patrick Geary’s “Readings in Medieval History” contains four accounts of the invasion of the Middle East by the Europeans in 1095 A.D. These accounts all cite different motives for the first crusade, and all the accounts are from the perspective of different sides of the war. The accounts all serve to widen our perspective, we hear from the Christian and Middle Eastern side of the conflict. Fulcher of Chartres claims, Pope Urban the Second urged all Christians to intervene in the “East” at the council of Claremont, saying it was a sign of “Strength of good will”. (Readings in Medieval History, Geary, page 396).

Thomas Madden’s Crusades is an exposition of the crusades, which occurred during the Middle Ages. The Crusades were a series of military conflicts of a religious character. They remain a very important movement in human history, and are hard to understand, as they include several themes and they lasted for a long time (about two hundred years, and the author covers a period of about eight centuries in his chronological work). Religion is, of course, the most recurrent theme we think about the Crusades, but is it the only factor to explain them? How does Madden, considered as one of the most foremost historian of the Crusades, expose them in his book? Is his work effective to understand this period of History? Madden has the ambition to

The Crusades hold a place in the canon of Western history as valiant wars against the infidel in the East, motivated by an unparalleled pious zeal. Whilst revisions to this history have considered more mundane and ordinary motives, such as a want for land or an attempt to reinforce the Peace of God movement, there is something to be said of the religious motivations of the crusaders. The words ‘conquest’ and ‘conversion’ seem ideologically charged – with conquest being what is done by temporal rulers to physical land and people, and conversion being what is done to the spiritual self, by someone who does not have anything material to gain from the action. However, it can be argued that these lines can be blurred; I wish to present the case of conquest being religiously charged, and the idea that any subsequent conversion is of little importance. By examining the geographical targets of various crusaders, I will conclude that they were more interested in conquest than conversion: but this was not necessarily for earthly reasons alone.

The Crusade Hypothesis Have you ever wondered if the Crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim World, or have you considered them a justified action? If you think they were a justified action why so? If you think they weren’t justified why? If you were to ask me, I would predict that the Crusades were a Semi-justified response to the Muslim World because at that point Muslims had attacked and conquered several Christian Nations at this point in history. This is the question I choose to answer and as such this essay will go over my findings, how I found them, and then some clarifications.

Late in the year of 1095 Pope Urban announced on Tuesday, November 27 that he would hold a public session to make a great announcement. This was the beginning of what was to be the First Crusade . After having painted a real grim or somber picture the Pope made his appeal. He thought that western Christendom should march to the rescue of the East. Rich and poor alike should go and they should leave off slaying each other and instead fight a great war. Supposedly they thought it was God will and that God would lead them and Take care of them. During his speech Cries of "Dues le wolt! -- "God wills it!" - Interrupted his speech. Just after the Pope ended his speech the bishop of Le Puy fell to his knees and asked permission to join the "Holy Expedition." Hundreds crowded up to later follow his example.

Therefore, he shows how the conflicting nature of the Crusades came about. For example, invading and killing a land's people in the name of Jesus Christ, the Prince of Peace.