Jean De Joinville

Although a topic of my past history classes has been the Crusades, I only come out of them with a vague understanding of the situation. So, I sought out to gain a greater understanding through the vision of the question, "Was the first crusade a success, and if so, what made it a success?" Using The Crusades: A Reader, specifically the writings and documents from pages 33-79, I will make a decision based on specific occurrences and their ultimate goal (CITE SOURCE WITH FULL CITATION).I plan on picking out important aspects of the first crusade and determine whether or not they contributed to the success or failure of it. Also, I will try to uncover the motivations and the organization that led to the execution of the plan to recapture the Holy Land. In short, the first crusade interests me the most because there were crusades afterward, signifying it must have been found successful in some understanding.

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.

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.

Robert the Monk’s history of the First Crusade, Historia Iherosolimitana (HI), was composed several years after the events it records. There is also no evidence making him an eyewitness for the anything he transcribes except for the Council of Clermont. Robert is generally accepted as a valuable source for the First Crusade as his story is based on the Gesta Francorum and he was commissioned by his abbot to offer a new more exciting account of the crusades.1 Robert’s account includes a number of themes as he describes different people the Crusaders encounter. In the history of the First Crusade, Robert the Monk uses his description of the Muslims

The Pope had all of the power and that led to mass amounts of people going to war for the Pope. In document 4 by the Islamic leader, Saladin, he states that his people should try to retake Jerusalem to get back their holy land and to please God. The people are trying to please their gods and to give their homage to their god. That would show a religious view for the Crusades and their brethren. Document 5 by the Jewish chronicler, Solomon bar Samson, shows that there was a religious aspect to the Crusades, mind it be extremism. The crusaders would see a pack of Jews on the way to the Holy Land and they would give the Jews two choices: 1. they could kill them to avenge the death of Jesus Christ or 2. They could incorporate them into their faith and acknowledge the offspring of promiscuity. Document 7, an excerpt from “In Praise of the New Knighthood” by St. Bernard of Clairvaux, tells of the two-fold war that was being fought by the Knights Templar and the Knights Hospitallers. It was a normal killing people war, and it was a spiritual war. You are protected by the armor of faith and an armor of steel. Next, I would have liked a document from Pope Nicholas IV about how the Crusades had to stop. That would have filled in the ending to the story of the Crusades.

During this essay, I will be discussing the Crusades and what led the European Christians to participate, what goals they were trying to achieve by participating.

The brief campaign of the thirteen-century Children’s crusade was not technically a crusade in the sense that medieval Europeans understood the term and lasted only a few months during the year 1212. It lacked Papal sanction and its participants marched without the customary indulgences granted to those engaged in warfare to defend the Faith. Uncharacteristic as it was, the Children’s Crusade was a revealing chapter in medieval history, as it exemplified the depths of crusading zeal along with the unrestrained behavior of which enthusiasm and faith are capable. The children’s crusade was nothing less than a destructive movement that preyed on those in its paths, much like the earlier crusades had done. It was during the late august of 1212, that rows of zealous children and the priest guiding them had stood on the dockside of Marseilles awaiting for a parting of the Mediterranean to permit passage to the holy land. The children marched unarmed, in some notion of converting the Muslims seems to have taken place of the usual crusaders zeal for battle.

he subject of the crusades is still a very controversial topic that spans across various time periods and has religious, social, and political implications. The first crusade started off as a widespread pilgrimage that ended as a military expedition resulting in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099. The crusades initiated from a call from help from Alexius for the protection of Constantinople and the recovery of Anatolia. For centuries textbooks have repeated with routine regularity, that the immediate cause, of the Crusades was the Turkish conquest of the Near East, which apparently was a very real threat to Christendom, that had to be countered by military action. With this in mind, the primary purpose of this essay is to identify the various reasons that contributed to the start of the first crusade, while disproving the fact that the first Crusade was a response to a military threat. In discovering the true cause of the first crusades it is necessary to examine it from all aspects from the start to the finish.

There are numerous accounts of the First Crusade. However the outlooks of the writers of these accounts are shown in the differing opinions and amount of focus on different events in the Crusade. The accounts of Fulcher of Chartres and Anna Comnena have different views on the relationship between the crusaders and the Byzantines, differing amounts of focus on certain parts of the crusades and the Muslims, and different views on the crusader leaders.

In recent decades the First four Crusades have become a major era of historical interest, which has led historians to try and explain these dynamic events. While much of this era has remained a mystery, recent years have allowed historians to learn more and answer some of the mysteries of the First four Crusades. Motivated by anything from the prospect of spiritual freedom to the promise of new land, the crusaders invaded and overtook cities from Muslim forces. Contributing factors such as stolen land and vengeance of mistreated Christians fed the fire that fueled the crusaders will to fight. Outcomes varied from crusade to crusade, as did the response from the Islamic state 's, all of which shaped the world we live in today.

During the 11th century, as the crusades began, Europe’s main religion, Christianity, divided into Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox. During this period of divergence in Europe, Islam flourished. Trade helped spread religion and languages throughout Asia & Africa, while Europe paled in comparison. Given the situation that Europe was in at the time of the crusades, it’s easy to call into question the motivations behind the crusades. The first crusade, supporting the Byzantine Empire, was called for by Pope Urban II, in an apparent combination of Christian Europe behind the image of the Cross. While the results and advantages for Europe springing from the First Crusade may suggest otherwise, the Crusades were called together solely to further

In The middle of the Eleventh Century The tranquillity of the eastern Mediterranean seemed assured for many years to come, but little did the people know what was ahead . This, thus embark us on a journey back into the First Crusade. In this paper I will be discussing the events that lead up to the first in a long line of crusades. I will also be mentioning the lives of some of the crusaders through letters that they wrote. The crusades were a time of confusion for most people, yet today we look back at them as a turning point.

Accordingly, Memoirs of the Fourth Crusade has been reviewed vigorously over the past century and central among these reviews is a genuine acceptance of Villehardouin s authenticity and accountability with respect to his

There are many reasons why each account differs. One of them would be that the authors’ religions are different, Fulk of Charters being a Christian, whereas Ibn al-Qalanisi was a Muslim. Another reason is that the Christian author was on the winning side, while the Muslim author was on the other side. In my opinion, the winning side has more motives to convince the reader that the crusaders were doing the will of God by killing everyone, bravely fighting against the pagan soldiers, as the Charters’ book relates, “a great fight took place in the court and porch of the temples, where they were unable to escape from our gladiators” (A History of the Expedition to Jerusalem). However, the Arab chronicle says that all they were doing was to “slaughter

The Crusades: A Short History, written by British Historian Jonathan Riley-Smith, offers a broad overview of this part of the medieval era, but he also explores how historians have attempted to explain these events in modern terms. Riley-Smith also makes sure to note all major contributors to the Crusade movement and their personalities. Numerous scholars have wondered whether this was a political or religious mission. This helps to spark the question of why people would leave their homes and their families to risk their lives invading a land that was thousands of miles away for religious reasons. In his book, Riley-Smith makes this era come alive for the modern reader. He does