Louis 2nd Crusade

This historian can see that from Islam’s point of view, perhaps the Crusades were a miserable failure because their ancestors were not able to come out on top in the Conflicts that would have ensured the overall victory of the Holy Wars. It is a good possibility that the Islamic and Arab nations consider the Crusades a great failure since they were not able to expand throughout Europe.

The impact of the crusades were more negative because In document 1 states that they left a religious hatred behind them because they were very hard on them.Also because they had bad reasons and fought too much and the crusades still wanted to fight and attack each other.Many lives were lost because they fought for a while and they were destroying a lot of Muslims. In document 5 it states that Islam and Christians struggled and Muslims,christian,and

Besides having the Crusades being negative based on dying and losing their main objective, another example as to why the Crusades ended so negatively, is that many lands were demolished and robbed. In addition, in document 4 it indicates “ … the crusaders and the Venetians stormed Constantinople,, sacked the city, destroying its magnificent library, and grabbed thousands of relics that were later sold in Europe. From destruction, the Byzantine Empire as a political unit never recovered.” This is pertinent because it is clearly stated that they had destroyed buildings and when things are destroyed it’s rarely a good thing. Another thing that shows negativity is that after the Byzantine Empire was sacked, it never repaired. When something is damaged, it’s really bad for the people who have a relation to it. So when they had destroyed the Byzantine Empire, it must’ve hurt many people to see their city ruined. Furthermore in document B is states “Jerusalem was taken from the north on the morning of July 15, 1099. The population was put to the sword by the Franks, who pillaged the area for a week.

The second crusade was about how European lords worked to secure their rule over the crusader states. Muslim forces regrouped and attacked Edessa, the Teutonic knight, the knights Hospitaller, and the knights Templar joined the second crusade. King Louis VII

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.

The modern book source which proves the most useful in discussing the causes and consequences of the First Crusade is Crusades: The Illustrated History, by Thomas Madden. Madden is an extremely reliable source, as he is considered to be an authority on the Crusades, with a BA, MA, and PhD in history.

Remarkably the army made its way to the holy land and recaptured Jerusalem. However thousands of people died, and the future crusades were failures. The first crusade was an example of papal power simply because the pope was able to summon thousands of troops across all of Europe for a unified goal. No king had ever been able to do this and that was because under the tenants of feudalism the king was weak and

The Crusades were a bad place in that time because of all the blood and gore that developed upon the religions. This was the worst event to occur in religion history. These humans that were fighting for their religion never seemed to live a long, healthy life. Citizens fighted for their religion and brought random tools as weapons, like a farmer or a merchant. The Crusades killed a lot of innocent people and did not care, they even killed people surrendering. They stole and did a lot of bad things just because someone wants to bow down and pray doesn't have to start a war. This is the crusaders being a negative effect in general.Document 1 states that they take out their hatred on innocent people of their different religion but they won't hurt or kill the people of their religion. Ex. Christianity will kill Jews and Muslims, but not Christians. This is important because with this info you can obviously tell that they did not care about anyone or anything by them slaughtering, destroying, and terrorizing the cities of Constantinople and many others. Document 4 states that

The crusade had a negative effect on both the christians and the muslims. The negative impact it had was it killed innocent jews who were not a part of the crusade they would kill them because they were mad and did not trust any religion but their own.

The crusades did nothing but leave religious hate. Document 1 states that “They also left a bitter legacy of religious hatred behind them. In the Middle East, both Christians and Muslims committed appalling atrocities in the name of religion. In Europe, crusaders sometimes turned their fury against Jews, massacring entire communities.

The Crusades left a bad legacy and a cruel remembrance to many people. The Crusades did benefit us today in a few ways, but other than that they were very terrible people. Document 1 states that In the text it states, “They also left a bitter legacy of religious hatred behind them.” This is important because this shows how the Crusades were remembered. They were not remembered in a great, fun, jolly way. Not a whole lot of people liked them and I can completely understand why. Document 4 states that “...the crusaders and Venetians stormed Constantinople, sacked the city, destroying its magnificent library, and grabbed thousands of relics that were later sold in Europe. From destruction, the Byzantine Empire as a political unit never recovered.”_In a different part of document 4, it also says, “....the Fourth Crusade was reunion of Greek and Latin churches, made the split between the Greek and Latin.”This is interesting because

Religious factors in the first crusade were significant and can be argued as a reason for the campaign’s success. However, it is more down to a combination of different factors to why it was so successful, when compared to the later more unsuccessful Crusades. The time of the First Crusade, medieval Europe was a place of hardship, with frequent famine and plagues with many wanting to escape the idea of normal life. With the start of the First Crusade many responded with extreme enthusiasm and it really highlighted the religious hysteria in Europe at the time. What was to follow was a campaign built upon the foundations of Christianity, which would lead to the persecution of another religion and the deaths of thousands of Muslims, Jews and Christians alike. Religious factors are the reason for the success of the Crusade and can be seen to be the reasons for continuous successes throughout the campaign.

Western Christendom had remained largely impartial to the Islamic takeover of the Holy Lands in the 7th century, whereas the Byzantines had fought hard against the Seljuk Turks since this time and generally lost; with the most notable being the defeat at Manzikert in 1071. It took until this Papal Reform movement, subsequent investiture contest and the resulting desire for expression of Papal Authority for Urban II to finally come to Byzentine emperor Alexius I’s aid and declare a crusade in Clermont 1095. This essay aims to explore the reasons

There was one goal for each crusade, if the goal was accomplished then the Crusade was a success. In the 11th century the Crusades began with religious leaders like Pope Urban II, manipulating the population to motivate the movement. He did this in many ways both ostracizing muslims as well as telling the citizens that if they join the war there sins will be forgotten by God. This made the war sound like a very good idea to a lot of people. Though what the crusaders were doing was taking over land most of the crusaders were doing so for a religous reasons.

While the kingdoms did indeed send their armies, still there were many who had little fighting experience. This would play a large factor especially because their opposition had adopted a fighting force that had previously not been able to be completed with by the Persian or the Byzantine Empires. Apart from fighting, the next difficulty that the crusaders faced was marching from their kingdoms in Europe all the way to Jerusalem. Not only is it a journey that would take well over two thousand miles, the climates were very different. So when the Crusades reached the desert they were met with Muslim forces who instead of fighting would take their water supply and kill off any who would go wandering for nourishment.